The wages of sin? Well... the oval office anyway.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/04/07/ex.presidents/index.html
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
The Factors
Posts
The Fans
Blog Archive
-
▼
2008
(123)
-
▼
April
(30)
- A recession recession
- Speaking of battles
- Nationalized Healthcare...
- Jetpack Watch (Part MCXVIII)
- Momma Said Knock You Out...
- It's all about Personal Responsibility
- Meanwhile, at the Battle of "Contributing Factors"
- In Light of Recent Developments...
- Cold Civil War?
- A biased post about biased review of a biased book...
- Re: Journalistic Integrity, Media Bias, Objectivit...
- Against contempt
- We're on the right track
- Slipping between the cracks
- Victor, Victor, he’s our man…
- A Modest Proposal
- Facts and Opinions
- Balance Unlooked For
- Free Tibet?
- An Interesting Anniversary
- Hmmmm...
- Words By Which To Live
- Laugh about it, shout about it...
- Cuba libre
- ...and you must speak JAVA
- If you read it on the Internet, it must be true.
- I Lied About Surveillance and So Did Mike Mukasey
- I would like to start by saying that I haven’t bee...
- Laws of surveillance
- Laws and surveillance redux
-
▼
April
(30)
9 comments:
Jimmy Carter a "model ex-president"? Can we have a ruling on this?
Devoted his life to promoting world peace and charity. Not to mention saying the things no one else can.
He gets my vote.
Here’s at least one account of someone who doesn’t see Carter as a “model.”
Note well the allegations of his commission of the following (nearly-cardinal, in this blog’s opinion) sin: “factual errors, copied materials not cited, superficialities, glaring omissions, and simply invented segments… not only [] the lack of attribution but also [] inaccurate presentation of the historical facts involved.”
I’m not prepared to offer a defense of this position, or mount an attack on Carter’s legacy myself. I’m just pointing out that the approving consensus is hardly universal.
"When an author concedes that his chosen title is inaccurate, it calls into question the entire premise of his book..."
In an article that goes on to give heavy credence to a book titled "The Real Jimmy Carter: How Our Worst Ex-President Undermines American Foreign Policy, Coddles Dictators and Created the Party of Clinton and Kerry" which isn't partisan at all...
I'm not Carter's biggest fan. I believe someone once said he was a guy that should've skipped being president and gone straight to being an ex-president, because that's what he's good at.
I read the book. I've listened to Alan Dershowitz and passionately oppose it and Carter defend himself.
http://www2.nysun.com/article/43958?page_no=2
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=7004473
I would encourage you to do so as well and make up their own minds.
I'm wondering if anyone here has seen any commentary on this book from anyone who isn't a hardened partisan in the conflict? Or is the subject-matter so inflammatory that no one can touch it without taking sides?
Oh for the love of subtlety, Scott... the only reason I bring this up is to contest the inaccurate statement made in the original article you linked to, which said, "Even Jimmy Carter, who has by all accounts been a model ex-president through his globetrotting humanitarian work, has not been shy about accepting financial compensation for addressing audiences."
Clearly, if someone, even a "hardened partisan," doesn't think Carter has been a model ex-president, then the "all accounts" statement was overstatement.
I'm not even interested in making up my mind about Carter's legacy. I just wanted to quibble about the broad brush CNN used just then.
Is see. And you accuse me of being hyper-critical of the content of sources linked to. It's a figure of speech. At worst a cliche. As an editor I would've changed it to 'by most accounts' if I didn't strike the entire paragraph for a straight-news piece. Seems odd to single out this one thing to complain about in an entire article that has nothing to do with Carter's legacy so much as post-presidential earnings, which I'm surprised no one commented on.
Anyway... If you pull the pin on a grenade, you shouldn't be surprised when it explodes.
Pax, pax.
File it under "we're both dishing it out, but neither one of us can take it," I guess.
Anyway, back to the point of the article in general... there are some interesting observations about the relative power of millionaires and politicians (and millionaire politicians) at TCS.
Think of it as "I'm agreeing with you in my own unique way". Sort of.
I'll file that article to read later. Thanks.
Just because I can't let it lie...
More on Carter, a little more recent.
Post a Comment