O'Reilly on Jimmy Carter: "He's 81 years old, and he's lost it"
On the October 18 edition of his nationally syndicated radio show, Bill O'Reilly baselessly claimed that former President Jimmy Carter "sympathiz[es] with Iran," and concluded of Carter: "He's 81 years old, and he's lost it." O'Reilly was referring to a recent statement by Carter in which he advocated that governments try to negotiate with their adversaries, arguing that "the best way to drive them toward more nuclear programs is to threaten them militarily." Carter then concluded from their point of view, Iran may have pursued a nuclear weapons program "to prevent the United States from taking military action" against them.
O'Reilly declared that Carter "has lost it" because, according to O'Reilly, Carter said that "Iran is justifiable in trying to get nuclear weapons because they're preventing military action by the USA." In an audio clip that O'Reilly aired, Carter stated: "The stupidest thing that a government can do that has a real problem with someone is to refuse to talk to them and to let them simmer and to threaten them and build up animosity and fear ... I think what the Iranians have seen now is that the only way to prevent the United States from taking military action is to have a nuclear device of your own."
O'Reilly introduced the segment by claiming that "secular-progressives become dangerous when they start to talk about the terror war," immediately added that Carter "isn't really a secular-progressive because he's a man of faith" but then claimed that Carter's foreign policy "is a secular-progressive foreign policy." As Media Matters for America has noted, O'Reilly has previously described Carter as "clueless" and "a fool," and he has also declared that if Carter "were president today, we'd all be speaking Arabic."
From the October 18 broadcast of Westwood One's The Radio Factor with Bill O'Reilly:
O'REILLY: Now, the secular-progressives become dangerous when they start to talk about the terror war. Jimmy Carter isn't really a secular-progressive because he's a man of faith. You know, the secular-progressives don't want anything to do with faith. Carter is a man of faith, but his foreign policy, which was a disaster during his presidency, is a secular-progressive foreign policy. Roll the tape on Carter.
CARTER [audio clip]: The stupidest thing that a government can do that has a real problem with someone is to refuse to talk to them and to let them simmer and to threaten them and build up animosity and fear. They don't respond positively to threats and intimidation and punishment. You know, the best way to drive them toward more nuclear programs is to threaten them militarily. We now have confirmed the policy of not people who disagree with us. So we don't talk to Syria, we don't, we don't talk to Hezbollah, we don't talk to others who disagree with us. And I think what the Iranians have seen now is that the only way to prevent the United States from taking military action is to have a nuclear device of your own.
O'REILLY: All right. So he's sympathizing with Iran. Now, he says we don't talk to people who disagree with us. Well, Hezbollah is a terrorist outfit, as Jimmy Carter has to know. They murder children. All right. Their intent is to destroy Israel, to wipe it out. Not to talk, not to negotiate. There isn't a land dispute, there isn't any dispute. What Hezbollah wants to do is kill every Jew they can kill. So it's not people who disagree with us, President Carter, with all due respect, it's killer terrorists.
It would be like having somebody who lived in Jimmy Carter's block in Plain [sic: Plains], Georgia, who go out and shoot little kids in the head. Would Jimmy Carter wanna sit down and talk with those people? No, he wouldn't.
So by saying this nutty stuff -- and Jimmy Carter has lost it. He's 81 years old, and he's lost it. By saying, "Well, Iran is justifiable in trying to get nuclear weapons because they're preventing military action by the USA." You have no military aspirations vis-à-vis Iran or North Korea. It's too big of a mess. I mean, I'm sure if we could go in and kill the mullahs and the idiot leader of North Korea, Kim Jong Il, we would, but it's not worth it. OK. So we're not gonna attack those countries.
The other right-wing media mogul you should worry about
Palin's book and Obama's bow: a media week to forget
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
They dont like O'Reilly having a best seller.
Its amazing how much hate they have for this man.
Wow. He keeps saying asinine things. It must be a conspiracy. MMFA must have planted a chip in O'Lielly's brain that makes him blurt out the most outrageous and often demonstribly false nonsense. You're on to something.
It's more likely MMFA deosn't like a guy who makes up bald faced lies (Paris Business Review ring a bell?) and invites terrorists to attack the Coit tower. Not to mention how he misrepresents Carter's quote here. So pointing out the psychology of the enemy is now sympathizing with them? Sun Zu is somewhere doing a spit take.
Anyway the real question is why people continue to buy his book.
Little Bill O'Reilly never had it, and yet there are still people who hang on every word this nutcase spews.
Like his 1950's counterpart, Tail Gunner Joe, BO needs a good boogeyman at whose feet he can lay all the evils of the world.
So, at least for BO, Secular Progressives are today's Godless Communists.
A little less hair and a little more hair grease and BO'd be an even better likeness of Ol' Joe.
Does O'Reilly really believe that Jimmy Carter "sympathiz[es] with Iran"? The 444 day hostage crisis, more than anything else, cost him re-election.
Once upon a time America voted a Honest, Devoted Christian whom shared his faith by example as President of the United States of America.
He was a Democrat. He was vilified for having a redkneck beer drinking brother, and coming from a backward small town in Georgia. He held America to a standard that the Republicans would have none of, and he was chased off the stage.
Had we listened, and followed Jimmy Carter we would not have negotiated with terrorists, we would not have lost Marines in Beruit, we would not have the reliance to foriegn oil that we have today, and likely would be self reliant energy producers.
We would have little to worry about global warming, the Middle East oil, or the corruption we have today.
Jimmy Carter walks the walk and talks the talk.
Bill O'Rielley is a bowl of crap with a stale cracker and has no place making any mention of the former President of the United States, Naval Commander in the Submarine Command, a favorite son of a small town in Georgia. A peace maker, and reliable voice for democracy that deserves and enjoys the respect of people, and their leaders all over the planet.
Happy Thoughts;
Dan Grady
the best ex-President of recent history!!!
Great post!
O'Reilly becomes more despicable by the day.
Are we genuinely surprised here?
Its right out of the neocon playbook that if a Democrat makes a point that is intelligent, insightful, and nails the issue with pinpoint precision accuracy and you can not possibly break it down with logic: you discredit them and question their sanity.
Next up on The O'Reilly Factor: Hillary Clinton has cooties!
:P
What Dan Grady said. Kudos to you sir.
Is O'Reilly referring to the Carter foreign policy that ended the Soviet Union. Yes, if you follow history, Jimmy Carter collapsed the USSR, not Ronald Reagan.
Talking with these people can't be all that bad. You only need to look at the present policy and the result to make that conclusion. At least Bush could try negotiations on a lower level. Oh... I forgot, he needs a bogey man to create fear. Sorry, my bad.
BO accuses of Jimmy Carter of saying that "Iran is justifiable in trying to get nuclear weapons," when Carter said absolutely NOTHING OF THE SORT. Jimmy Carter has presented for us the Iranian mindset, the direct result of our foreign policy (or lack of it). THIS IS NOT AN EDORSEMENT OF IRAN'S ACTIONS, BUT O'REILLY IS TOO STUPID AND TOO IGNORANT TO KNOW THE DIFFERENCE.
(Deep breath)
Jimmy Carter foresaw our current situation. He speaks the truth today, just like he spoke the truth in the State of the Union back in 1980:
"The crises in Iran and Afghanistan have dramatized a very important lesson: Our excessive dependence on foreign oil is a clear and present danger to our Nation's security. The need has never been more urgent. At long last, we must have a clear, comprehensive energy policy for the United States.
As you well know, I have been working with the Congress in a concentrated and persistent way over the past 3 years to meet this need. We have made progress together. But Congress must act promptly now to complete final action on this vital energy legislation. Our Nation will then have a major conservation effort, important initiatives to develop solar power, realistic pricing based on the true value of oil, strong incentives for the production of coal and other fossil fuels in the United States, and our Nation's most massive peacetime investment in the development of synthetic fuels.
The American people are making progress in energy conservation. Last year we reduced overall petroleum consumption by 8 percent and gasoline consumption by 5 percent below what it was the year before. Now we must do more."
How I wish we had another president that not only has a grasp on unscripted sentence structure, but could see the bigger picture and recognize the symptoms and the remedies.
and did away with CAFE standards, not only allowing, but encouraging Detroit auto manufacturers to begin to once again build evermore gas-guzzling monsters such as the modern day 3-ton SUV's for suburban mothers to take their kids to soccer practice in.
how he also did away with the FCC's fairness doctrine, giving rise to the ever-so-lovely "Billos, Coulters, Hannitys, Limbaughs, Savages, Becks, Malkins, Fox News Channel, et al, ad nauseum" of the world. By doing away with the REQUIREMENT that "news" commentary contain at least a semblance of fairness and balance, we end up with "fair and balanced" news "Fox News style". Thanks a bunch. The right-wing's philosophy is "if the truth hurts, change the truth".
If anyone remembers the years 1976 - 1980 we had the most inept president of the 20th century! We had stagflation, high interest rates, gas shortages, and the beginning of Islamic Facist! For a person with the IQ lower than a peanut to be making comments blows my mind. I think Carter needs to shut-up and not try to look good in the history books. His administration was a failure and the reason we are now involved in the war on terror! If I want a person to teach people how to be helpless and stupid I will ask Jimbo ( that is why he is a democrat)! The person in the Carter family that had brains was, Billy! At least he is dead, when can Jimmy join him?
Walter Cronkite said Carter was the most intelligent president he had known during his career. Tere can be little doubt that the current occupant of the White House is both the stupidest and most incompetent president of modern times if not in the history of our country. Carter was a nuclear engineer in the Navy Bush couldnt find oil in Texas, about like not being able to find sand in Saudi Arabia. If eithet Bush OR O'falafel had HALF of Carters brains or one tenth of his integrity the one would be ten times the president and the other just might make a decent journalist.
Your grasp of history and the it's implication on the Carter Presidency is amazing. Most of the things you mentioned were a direct result of our involvement with the Shah of Iran, which was going on long before President Carter took office in 1977, not 1976. If you're looking for someone to blame, you might try Richard Nixon, even though the problems predated his terms in office.
Stagflation, gas shortages, and recession were in full swing when Carter took office in 1997 (Check your dates). Carter's adminstration fixed the ressession. The recession was over in 1980, before Reagan took office in 1981 (Check your dates) . Reagan dropped us into another recession soon after taking the reins.
Islamist Facism, as you call it, came out of Eisenhower policy to overthrow the democratically elected government of Iran and replace it with the Shah's dictactorship, at the behest of British Petroleum (Google "Mossadeq").
Terrorism exists in its present form primarily because of Repulican refusal to moderate the Israel - Palestine conflict and because of Reagan's cut and run strategy after the bombing of the Marine barracks in Lebanon.
Please get informed.
To me, the iconic image of the Ford administraration (remember him, the guy right before Carter) was the president (Ford) battling skyrocketing inflation rates by walking around wearing a big old button which said WIN (whip inflation now). The economy was in the crapper (as is usually the case at the end of a republican administration) when Carter took office.
There's always a recession after a war. The country was all focused on killing Vietnamese for ten years then had no idea what to do with itself. America isn't happy unless it's killing someone in a foreign land. It gets all depressed when it has to have peace.
"a big old button which said WIN (whip inflation now). "
-----
I remember those. The Democrats wore the buttons upside-down to show Ford's complete lack of economic knowledge. The buttons then said NIM (no immediate miracles). The Democrats knew that it would take a while to bring things back under control, and Ford thought it could happen immediately.
>>"I think Carter needs to shut-up and not try to look good in the history books"<<
Since your criteria for an ex-president is to not try to look good in the history books, just wait for George W. Bush's post-White House years.
(p.s.: Please do continue your hateful, incoherent, ignorant ranting---it will help Democrats this November and in 2008.)
I graduated and voted for Jimmy Carter in '76 when the oil prices were already skyrocketting, and OPEC was holding production. It was Jimmy Carter who started the Oil Reserves, it was Jimmy Carter who held a fiscal responsibility and recognized that we as a nation were able to overcome the influence of oil, and the Saudi's influence.
It was big oil companies that vilified, and financed the message against Carter, and put Republican folly of price controls from Nixon, and the Middleast appeasement on the Carter Administration. We all know how good the GOP is at deflecting responsiblity. Jimmy Carter was not the kind of politician that would fight in the mud with the Republican, and lost to Reagan for it. The whole experience only made us the butt of jokes in the middle east, and lined the richest among us.
Reagan ran up the deficit, and tore down the social safety net that has filled our prison, streets, and mental health system with the mentally ill, the weakest amoung us whom we are as a society responsible to protect.
when I graduated from high school. Love bringing that up in Orange County, Ca. to this day.
In addition to the points you noted, I was amazed( even as a dopey 18 year old kid) that the adults around me were responding to the complexity of world affairs by electing a semi-retarded old B-movie actor who had a cool pompadour.
I think 1980, my first national election, was really ground zero for the repubs crusade of image over substance.
Turns out all those freedoms and advances made during the 60s and 70s were a little scary for yer average god-fearing american.
"Morning in America" smelled like a big plate of biscuits and gravy.mmmmmm..., non-threatening.
that post would have been a valedictorian candidate on freerepublic or newsbusters. Megadittos.
Just barely old enough to be a Factor Viewer.
WAY outside the demographic.
He really tries to throw that in at any point he can, doesn't he? Even when it doesn't fit the incredibly broad scope he's given it. Give it up, Bill. No-one, but no-one, is going to start using "secular-progressive" in conversation, much as you'd like them to.
How's this for 'sympathizing', Bill? Not only does Carter have the righ ideas about diplomacy, but he's wrong in one, small detail! He appears to accept the admiistration's lies, lies, lies about Iran HAVING (or being close to having) a nuclear weapon! I recently saw a live interview with Scott Ritter regarding his new book 'Target Iran' in which he asserts that Iran is ruled by the mullahs - that Ahminijhad (sic) is an idiot, figurehead president! (Sound familiar?) He says (and I've already heard it from several other sources including MMFA I believe) that neither Ahminijhad nor the mullahs have threatened to push Israel into the sea or otherwise destroy Israel. They not only recognize and are willing to recognize Israel, but they have offered to negotiate with Israel and with us. Israel is paranoid about Iran and is driving U S policy toward them. (sound familiar?) Ritter describes Iranians as a peaceful, civilized, sophisticated people who admire and like Americans and generally wish for peace. He says that they AREN'T trying to make a bomb! In fact, he further asserts that they proposed to the Ford administration - which administration included -Cheney and Rumsfeld- in the seventies, that they would like to preserve all their oil for outside sales for money they needed and would like to explore indigenous power sources including Nuclear. The Ford administration gave them a big, 'thumbs-up', and expressed that that was a really good idea. They aren't breaking any laws under the Non Proliferation treaties - which they are signatory to - the US isn't, thanks to the current administration. Ritter insists that our investigations have shown consistently that they are working on nuclear power and they are a bit stubborn and dedicated to the idea - but the idea of nuclear power - not weapons! Once again - you're gonna find this hard to beleive , I know - once again Bushco. is lying to us. Sounds like they want to take us into a war with Iran. Ritter says the plan already exists and Iran is, in fact in their sights. Furhter that their is a very strong likelihood that we will use our newest nukes, The Bushco. itchy trigger finger is just dying to show the world the power oif these newest weapons and the idea has to have something to do with oil, power and world domination - imagine that!
"The American people are making progress in energy conservation. Last year we reduced overall petroleum consumption by 8 percent and gasoline consumption by 5 percent below what it was the year before. Now we must do more." - Carter
"How I wish we had another president who not only has a grasp of unscripted sentence structure, but could see the bigger picture and recognize the symptioms and the remedies." - Pete
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well said, Pete . . . too bad our current Chimp-in-Chief can't even pronounce "nuclear" let alone negotiate that issue with another nation, and is so deep in the pockets of the oil industry and the Saudis that there's no hope of any comprehensive foreign oil reduction policy ever coming from his lips.
the current idiot-in-chief, Mr. Carter had a bit of trouble with that pronunciation as well. The similarities end there.
Let's all take a shot when O'Reilly says, "Secular progressive" to describe anyone who disagrees with him.
When Savage and Limbaugh make racist comments and compare democrats to Nazis.
When Bush uses the words "terror" and 9/11 in a speech.
When Republicans use fear-mongering to try and win.
I'll bring the cheese and crackers if you bring the vodka.
come in barrells?
Have anyone noticed that the Republicans need someone to call names. What is even more strange, our president took the time out to talk with O'Reilly as if to give him direct marching orders. Yes, "go out Mr. O'Reilly and call the Democrats names because it will make the Republican Party strong in our good oh boy fashion." What a Party.
On a more serious note, I am concerned with the reference to terrorism that O'Reilly made when he described Carter's behavior. I have not put it pass this administration's ambition to try and build a McCarthy type era. After all, we have given this president more power to do away with his enemies in more ways than any other president in America's short history.
I would not be too surprised if some of the power players on the left suddenly could not be found. What could we do. Not a thing, and as Kieth Olbermann put it "do you think this administration will do anything to set things straight" if one of our leaders were jailed. Scary Isn't it?
Unrelated, but of more concerned, is the immediate voting machine issue. Recall we lost two elections to a obvious manipulation of our vote. First things first, we must find a way to secure our vote. The polls show the Democrats winning in places the Republicans would not dream of. Lets make sure the dream does not become a nightmare.
Joseph
Let's not forget that President Carter is also the recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, because he understands that dialogue, diplomacy, and reasoned understanding of the world's problems are the answer. Bush's idea of diplomacy is to have a press conference, where he blurts out soundbites about (the generic enemy) knowing what they have to do, followed by the latest "slogan du jour". That means slogan of the day for those of you who are "Frenchophobes", or maybe that's a bit too "nuanced" for right-wingers.
Personally, I'm more afraid of religious nuts talking about the war on terror. Because it's never a war of right or wrong, it's a war of religion.
... there was a loud and domineering and seemingly self-assured kid who thrived on attention.
He made up games, and only HE knew what the rules were. Kids will follow a leader, for a while, because the nature of human beings is to get along with the crowd, and try to fit in. Kids, like magpies, will gravitate to the largest shiny object in sight, and the loud and domineering child enjoyed a good following for a while.
But kids also are acutely aware of BASIC FAIRNESS. Any leader who abandons fairness will soon lose his audience. The kid who made up his own rules, changed them regularly when it appeared the outcome would not be one he desired.
And thus it is with O'Reilly. He wants to dictate the language, and define the terms. He wants HIS terms and HIS definitions on everyone's lips, because he has gone global on his framing of "THE issues".
But his definitions are not stable. He changes them at whim. Carter is an "S-P", but he's NOT an "S-P", because he is a man of faith. WHAT?
Soon, the domineering, loud, and seemingly self-assured kid was alone in the playground, fuming that he has been undermined by a conspiracy out to get him, and make him unpopular. All he wanted was for everyone to love him, and play by HIS rules ... for their own good, of course. Please, everyone, PAY ATTENTION TO ME!
Huh? You mean Carter didn't have faith as part of his foreign policy? Really, does O'Lielly ever realize how stupid he comes off. SP??? omg. He's so divorced from reality.
Wasn't O'Reilly in college leading his division in punting when Carter was president or was that the time he started his impressive streak of winning Polk and Peabody awards? Jimmy Carter was a decent President and a man who is willing to be hoisted on his own petard and take responsibility for his actions. He also never made irresponsible decisions that lead to American deaths and leave himself in a position to lie about it like Junior Bunnypants in the White House. As noted by the more historically versed of the MMFA bloggers Carter was far more consistent in dealing with the Soviet Union than his brash talking successor ever was. O'Reilly is just another miserable excuse for a right wing talking head. WAIT A MINUTE...Now I remember...when Carter was President Bill O was leading the NBA in scoring four years in a row and being named MVP in the 1978 and 1979 Finals.