Wow, very interesting trip! Maybe someone has already asked you this, and I missed it, but here it is.

According to news reports "Former President Jimmy Carter, Mrs. Carter and their son Jeff wanted to pay their respects to President Yasser Arafat." "They laid a wreath of red roses at his grave."

Why?

Arafat recognized Israel September 9, 1993:

Israel-PLO Recognition

and transformed the PLO from a terrorist organization. He established the Palestinian National Authority which became the ruling authority of Palestine recognized by both the US and Israel. After he died in Paris, the French military Honor Guard held a funeral for him at a military airport near Paris and President Jacques Chirac of France stood alone beside Mr. Arafat's body for about 10 minutes today in a last show of respect. His funeral in Egypt (he had three funerals) was attended by an impressive array of world leaders:

Arafat's funeral: Who was there

Here he is only known as a pariah but elsewhere he is perceived differently.

Jeff, why do people who care so much about global warming do so much flying? Do they not have internet and web conferences in the mideast? Your dad could use those smiley emoticons to indicate hugs for terrorists.

I will volunteer to decrease the use of my car and decrease my electric use to create carbon offsets to your and your father's trips. I know you can get enough others to do the same. Since 15 of the 19 9/11 highjackers were Saudi Arabians, Bush's hugs on them could be used as offsets for whatever Woody was talking about regarding hugging.

since Roosevelt met King Ibn Saud in February '45. We will probably continue to do so for obvious reasons. The problem is, the kingdom is restless.

-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

"Your dad could use those smiley emoticons to indicate hugs for terrorists."

I am so happy that folks like you are on the Republican team. I'd be embarrassed if you were a Dem and posted that for the world to see.

THANK YOU President Carter and All in support of Dialogue,

Impelled, compelled, and propelled by my faith as a progressive Christian of The Beatitudes and angry over what my government was supporting and media was not reporting, I journeyed five times to the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

I met with and LISTENED to 4 democratically elected members of Hamas in Bethlehem, scores of NONVIOLENT Palestinian Muslims in 'Holy' Land refugee camps, and met a few 21st-century prophets; Jeff Halper, Naim Ateek, Mordechai Vanunu.

I and many American's are deeply grateful for President Carter's efforts and hope our 'leaders' will wake up and follow his lead.

Education is The Way to Compassion; and Compassion is The Way to Change.

Eileen Fleming, Reporter and Editor WAWA:
http://www.wearewideawake.org/
Author "Keep Hope Alive" and "Memoirs of a Nice Irish American 'Girl's' Life in Occupied Territory"
Producer "30 Minutes With Vanunu" and "13 Minutes with Vanunu"

Did anyone else just have a warm tingly feeling suddenly overcome them? Could we actually be seeing light shining from the end of that tunnel we've been traveling through? Eileen, keep the faith. Many, many Americans feel just as you do!

Cheers,

Kevin "Hack" King
(anyone want two dogs???)

Thanks for the update.

It’s doubtful that anyone will be able to get these folks to agree to live in peace.
Standing on the sidelines watching them kill each other hasn’t worked either.

At least you guys tried.

Wulf

Why is it that some people just can't get along? Look at you and me; we ain't neeever had no problems. I truly don't get why the Middle East can't coexist. Heck, East and West Germany are even sharing a tax base! Peace there probably won't happen in our lifetimes.

Cheers

Kevin "Hack" King
(anyone want two dogs???)

....

Israel controls all supplies to Gaza having encircled it completely with the wall and is now starving the 1.4 million people there, for which they blame Hamas. The latest UN report claims that calorie intake in Gaza is less than sub-Saharan Africa.

I'm sorry Jeff, but this makes little sence to me. Israel is systematically starving the palestinians in the Gaza strip? Its the Jews that are doing this?

If this is true, well, I'll be the first to condemn it, but, I will wait til I am more learned on this subject before I opine any further. I will say, I find it hard to believe, and I suspect it not to be true.

So, a little over four hours later.. have you become more learned on what's going on with the Palestinians in Gaza? We await your condemnation.

You've scared off Richard!

___________
Diagnosing Denise

They claimed to be national resistance fighters and he would demand for them to tell us how it was a national resistance cause to fire rockets at women and children. They were hard-line and told us if they stopped, the conditions in Gaza would fall off of the news and Gaza would be forgotten.

So in firing 7000 missles and killing innocent women and children, they could get on the 6 o'clock news? Hmmm, I wonder how hosting a former, disgraced, Nobel Prize winning, formerm, one term president is doing for their cause now? Are they getting the attention they want, or is it something or someONE who is looking for attention?

Gees, Jeff, your father has proven that he is worth more than all of the terrorists. Getting the attention he so richly thinks he deserves.

Do you ever feel like other people get the attention you deserve? Do you ever wish that you had chosen to serve in the Peace Corpse, military, Secret Service, or anything else that would give your words more weight? Does the world seem unfair because it gives so much attention to a guy just because he was a former President who chose not to simply give speeches for money or work for corporations after his one little term?

What do you suppose our current 1600 Penn. occupant will do after retirement? How about his wife? Will they continue to stimulate thought?

remember, Richard. You are special. People like you. Dog gone it, you're worth something to someone.

Smile, don't worry, be happy

Kevin "Hack" King
(anyone want two dogs???)

Now breathe deeply, let those brain cells get the O2 that they need.

Now exhale, and re-read your post.

Because you seem to think that Jimmy is to be admired, because he isn't making money from his speeches, (as if someone would pay him to speak, other than people like Castro or Chavez).

I really wonder which is worse, running around and giving million dollar speeches, or selling out your country by selling out your office's prestige, to foreign despots and terrorists.

So breathe real deep. The truth is out there.

You simply have abandoned reason for the sake of 100% supporting any idiot who is called a republican or a "conservative."

Hitler also made cars for the general population so he is a Saint!

"I really wonder which is worse, running around and giving million dollar speeches, or selling out your country by selling out your office's prestige, to foreign despots and terrorists."

I imagine you had no problem with selling arms to terrorists to pay off terrorists (Iran Contra). My guess is you did not chide Don Rumsfeld as he shook hands with Saddam Hussein. I believe the ABSOLUTE WORST thing a President can do is sell out the office while he occupies it. I could never imagine in my wildest nightmares a president turning the US Justice Department into a GOP attack machine. I could have never imagined Republican attorneys in the US DOJ quitting or being fired out of disgust for what the DOJ had become. I could have never imagined a president thumbing his nose at the law and checks and balances with signing statements, selective classification and declassification. I would have never imagined refusals to testify before Congress, aids resigning; aids convicted of obstruction; wars waged on justifications which melted away like cellophane.

But you know what is hardest of all to imagine? People (down to about 18% of voters now) STILL trying to convince us that we are seeing any abstract form of leadership and successful policy now, under the current White House inhabitant.

So, Richard, as the NAVY VETERAN, CHRISTIAN, CHAMPION OF THE MEEK, NOBEL PRIZE WINNING, INTERNATIONALLY RESPECTED former President travels the world, you can make yourself feel better by imagining he does it all JUST TO TICK RICHARD HOBBS OFF

Good night Richard. I'll be back to wrestle with you some more after church,

Kevin "Hack" King
(anyone want two dogs???)

I imagine you had no problem with selling arms to terrorists to pay off terrorists (Iran Contra).
Actually, my recollection was Reagan was never found responsible for that. The truth of the story is that the Democrats in Congress, decided they were President, and they handcuffed Reagan. Reagan was responsible for foreign policy, not Congress, and he was attempting to help the anti-communists in Nicaragua (sic). Am I surprised the Democrats would attempt to thwart a Republican who is fighting communism in our own Hemisphere? No. Thats the real story, Democrats supporting Communists/socialists around the world in direct opposition to American interests.

My guess is you did not chide Don Rumsfeld as he shook hands with Saddam Hussein.
Nope, and its rather silly of you to bring it up. (Are you sure our Government is giving you control over a multi-million dollar piece of equipment?) Diplomacy means we sometimes meet with foreign despots, and yes, shake their hands. Sadamm, rightly or wrongly, was believed to have been a means to stop Iran's influence over the Middle East.

So, if your logic is correct, then I guess you're now in support of Israel bombing Iraq's nuclear facility in 1983. At least they didn't shake Sadamm's hand.

I believe the ABSOLUTE WORST thing a President can do is sell out the office while he occupies it. I could never imagine in my wildest nightmares a president turning the US Justice Department into a GOP attack machine.

Rhetoric, nothing but rhetoric. I don't see Bush selling out his office. I see him squandering a wonderful opportunity to advance the conservative agenda. He didn't sell nights in the Lincoln bedroom. He has failed to understand the dynamics of having a President, who can communicate effectively through the lights of a media who will distort everything he does, whether its right or wrong.
His nomination of Harriett Myers at the bequest of Harry Reid was the final straw for me. I don't think he truly understands what a President is supposed to do in a politically polarized place like D.C. He looks weak because he tried to compromise, which pisses both sides off.

I could have never imagined Republican attorneys in the US DOJ quitting or being fired out of disgust for what the DOJ had become. I could have never imagined a president thumbing his nose at the law and checks and balances with signing statements, selective classification and declassification.

Yawn, not an issue. Find something else to pander about. All Presidents have dissenters in their administration.

I would have never imagined refusals to testify before Congress, aids resigning; aids convicted of obstruction; wars waged on justifications which melted away like cellophane.

At least they aren't being found dead in a Federal Park, with a bullet lost in the brush, and a handgun strangley laying next to the body.

But you know what is hardest of all to imagine? People (down to about 18% of voters now) STILL trying to convince us that we are seeing any abstract form of leadership and successful policy now, under the current White House inhabitant.

Bush is neither a conservative nor a liberal. He runs the gambit. He's all over the place.
In trying to be all things to all people, he has offended everyone. Which is why John McCain is so bad.

So, Richard, as the NAVY VETERAN, CHRISTIAN, CHAMPION OF THE MEEK, NOBEL PRIZE WINNING, INTERNATIONALLY RESPECTED former President travels the world, you can make yourself feel better by imagining he does it all JUST TO TICK RICHARD HOBBS OFF

Thanks Hack, at least I understand now why Jimmy does these things, because other than ticking me off, I can not imagine a single reason why he would go to such lengths to betray his country and bolster terrorist despots around the world. Maybe if I write him, and tell him that it really ticks me off, if he stays and Plains and just keeps his mouth shut while hammering nails on his habitat for humanity homes, that he might stop selling out his country.

Good night Richard. I'll be back to wrestle with you some more after church,

I hope its not a Black Theology Church like Obama's. Because I see little of the teachings of Christ in a Church that has so much hatred in it.

“I can not imagine a single reason why he would go to such lengths to betray his country and bolster terrorist despots around the world. Maybe if I write him, and tell him that it really ticks me off, if he stays and Plains and just keeps his mouth shut while hammering nails on his habitat for humanity homes, that he might stop selling out his country.”

Typical right-wing claptrap, probably fun to write and then e-mail to your acquaintances but totally lacking in any basis in reality except for pleasure of making a purely partisan attack. But, like you implied, few people actually know anything about the area so regurgitating the Bush administration’s and their mindless sycophant’s talking points is probably safe for you.

However, if you feel up to discussing the matter on a serious level then I would like to introduce just a few facts:

Former chief of the Mossad and former head of Israel's National Security Council Efraim Halevy has called for talks with Hamas:

Halevy: “Hamas is not al Qaeda and, indeed, al Qaeda has condemned them time and time again. Hamas may from time to time have tactical, temporary contact with al Qaeda, but in essence they are deadly adversaries. The same goes for Iran. Hamas receives funds, support, equipment, and training from Iran, but is not subservient to Tehran. A serious effort to dialogue indirectly with them could ultimately drive a wedge between them.”

Here’s a link to an article reprinted from the WSJ where Mr. Halevy expresses widespread doubts about the viability of the Bush administration's latest plan for dealing with the Palestinians because he believes the Bush strategy amounts to political fantasy.

What if Israel Talked to Hamas?

Former Shin Bet director and General Security Services Chief Ya'akov Perry and Israel's Minister of Transportation, former Israeli Defense Forces Chief of Staff Likudnik Shaul Mofaz both have said that it is in Israel's security interests to engage in talks with Hamas over a bilateral cease-fire and the release of Israeli captive Shilat.

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell (remember him, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff led the U.S. to victory in the first Persian Gulf War) has also endorsed this view:

Colin Powell: Quartet should find way to talk to Hamas

In January, Israeli security cabinet minister and former head of the Israeli secret service Ami Ayalon called for talks with Hamas:

Israeli Minister Calls for Third-Channel Talks with Hamas

So let me ask you this: Do you think that the former chief of the Mossad and former head of Israel's National Security Council and the former Shin Bet director and General Security Services Chief and the former Israeli Defense Forces Chief of Staff and the Israeli security cabinet minister and former head of the Israeli secret service and the former US Secretary of State are trying to “betray their country” or that they are trying to “bolster terrorist despots” or that they are “selling out their country”?

Or is it a more likely explanation that Richard Hobbs simply doesn’t have the remotest clue as to what he’s talking about?

Hmmm, maybe Jeff, maybe.

But your father's reprehensible behavior since leaving office is replete with examples of his continued efforts at being "relevant".

I have no desire to debate the Israel/PLO problem with you online. I don't find it that interesting, and I sincerely believe that Israel has much to answer for many of the things that it has done. However, with the absolute hatred that the Arabs/Hamas has for Israel, well, how far can the debate go?

Your father naively attempted to bring the parties together in hopes that he could go beyond the religious hatred. It ain't going to happen. Until Hamas and all other Arab nations comes to terms with Israel's right to exist, no Peace is going to be found in the Middle East.

The Palestine problem is horrific, but its the Arabs fault, more than the Jews'. When your father gives 'credibility' to the Hamas terrorists, then, well, I see no benefit in that effort.

Tell the old man to go back farming peanuts. The only thing I think he knows anything about.

You pulled out of the debate just when I was sure that we were going to come up with the definitive solution to the troubles in the Middle East and solve all of the problems there. I guess the conflict will continue then.

because we love to read Jeff's informed and educated responses to your myopic view of the Palestinian-Israeli situation.

You know something, Richard, for someone who purports to be an attorney you show an almost frightening degree of ignorance of the most basic foundations of law.

Your ignorant statement "Reagan was responsible for foreign policy, not Congress, and he was attempting to help the anti-communists in Nicaragua (sic)."

The Constitution of the United States (that document you loathe above all others) says otherwise. The United States Constitution divides the foreign policy powers between the President and Congress so that both share in the making of foreign policy. LINK

One way that Congress can make foreign policy is through funding restrictions and denials. This was the case when Congress passed, AND REAGAN SIGNED, the Boland Amendment back in 1982, which basically prohibited the United States of America from providing military assistance to the Contras in Nicaraugua.

As we all know, senior officials in the Reagan administration, 14 in all, assisted in violating this law in the Iran-Contra affair. 11 officials were convicted, including Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger. George H.W. Bush later pardoned most of them.

Your claim that only the President makes foreign policy is ridiculous, but sadly we've come to expect such idiotic statements from you.
___________
Diagnosing Denise

Just wondering where that might have been. Was it on the back of one of those books of matches?

I'll not belabor the point, other than to suggest that you might want to read the case histories from our Supreme Court, who I was taught in law school were the final arbiteurs of the interpretation of the words found in our Constitution.

In the case of record, the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of U.S. v. Curtiss-Wright,

"found in favor of the government, reasoning that while the Constitution may not explicitly say that all ability to conduct foreign policy on behalf of the nation is vested in the President, it is nonetheless given implicitly and by the fact that the Executive, by its very nature, is empowered to conduct foreign affairs in a way which Congress cannot and should not."

The debate might be whether congress has fought tooth and nail over the years in thwarting Presidential powers, which arguably it has tried to do. They do this by "de-funding" certain executive branch policy decisions, etc., but I still contend, that the Executive Branch of our Government has the sole responsibility in foreign relations. The Legislature is to advise and consent to such policies, but they have no constitutional authority over that subject, except to the degree that they frequently attempt to do so through legislative mandates and again, de-funding or restricting the Presidential authority through their powers.

If you consider this "STUPIDITY", well, then I guess I'm guilty as charged. I'll return your retainer for my services.

My apology for being too lazy to cite the original supreme court case. I just wiki'd and then copied and pasted from there. I have better things to do then to teach you the law. Since, my stupidity in telling the truth, stands in the way of your political goals.

"Where did you go to law school?" Like that makes you somehow more worthy or intelligent....NOT
By the way, blogging world, our pal Richard went to John Marshall....the place that takes idiots and dweebs and is only provisionally accredited it sucks so bad. So take what he says with a grain of salt.
"I have better things to do than teach you the law".....good thing because I doubt you are remotely qualified to teach law.
You give lawyers a bad name through this kind of attitude you ambulance chaser.

Consider this the one and only time I reply to you Sickie.

The defintion of Facists is a government that minimizes the individual and promotes state controls.

Your moniker implies that you are sick of facism, yet you promote that very type and style of government with your very liberal policies, such as national healthcare, et. al.

So I find your name dollar, err, whoever you happen to be today, to be comical.

I'm glad that you have "checked" me out. As I've said repeatedly on this blog, that I judge a man by the company he keeps. Considering your kind is NOT the kind I keep company with, then I'm happy for others to use that as a means to judge my character.

At least this ambulance chasing elitist,--without credentials, has the gonads to at least give my real name. What does that say about someone who hides behind a name like Sick of Fascists?

I think mommie is calling you to come up from the basement, to eat your beans and weenies. You don't want to miss out on dinner now do you? Or else she won't let you stay up late tonight to watch T.V.

you cannot get away with that very, VERY thumbnail definition of fascism. From the study of Germany, Italy, Indonesia,Spain and various Latin American countries conducted by Dr. Lawrence Britt, there are 14 defining characteristics of a fascist governments and they are as follows:

1-powerful and continuing nationalism
2-disdain for the recognition of human rights
3-identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause
4-supremacy of the military
5-rampant sexism
6-controlled ass Memdia
7-obsession with national security
8-religion and government are intertwined
9-corporate power is protected
10-labor power is suppressed
11-disdain for intellectuals and the arts
12-obsession with crime and punishment
13-rampant cronyism and corruption
14-fraudulent elections

The only wonder is why we ALL aren't "Sick of Fascists" Spin on that for awhile. Keep the faith.
Democracy is not a spectator sport.

Again from the WikiPedia on Fascist Economies:

Fascists blamed capitalism for the Great Depression, and fascists promoted their ideology as a "third way" between capitalism and Marxian socialism. Their policies manifested as a radical extension of government control over the economy without wholesale expropriation of the means of production. Fascist governments nationalized some key industries, managed their currencies and made some massive state investments. They also introduced price controls, wage controls and other types of economic planning measures.Fascist governments instituted state-regulated allocation of resources, especially in the financial and raw materials sectors.

Other than nationalization of certain industries, private property was allowed, but property rights and private initiative were contingent upon service to the state.For example, "an owner of agricultural land may be compelled to raise wheat instead of sheep and employ more labor than he would find profitable."

If this isn't Hillary and Barack's economic plan, then I don't know what it is. Nationalized Healthcare, increased capital gains taxes, subsidized farming, to include ethanol, and a huge centralized and federal government, which lowers the importance of the individual.

Hillary said it best, "We must stop thinking of the individual and start thinking about what is best for society."

So, I stand by my comments, Fascist regimes goals are more akin to the Democratic Party's platform, than anything the Republicans are doing.

Richard,

I'm only going to wade into this discussion for this single issue because it keeps coming up. I hate to be the one to inform you but, Wikipedia is NOT a source of authority. It may seem authoritative but, as the creation of any cretin with a keyboard and an internet connection, it is not scholarly work and, therefore, not worthy of citation as proof in an argument.

-------------------------------
If you and I are always in agreement, one of us is likely armed and dangerous.

Swmbo,

I'm not so terribly sure that you are correct. I certainly would not use it in a real brief, however, I've found that the collective wisdom and contributions of millions of people, adds a flavor that I have found both intriguing and unique.

For example, any political event interpreted on Wiki, is often cited with additional authority to give some means to check the article. In addition, if its not sufficiently cited, the article will state it as well and even state whether the definition is too subjective or political.

I use wikipedia for several reasons, but not the least of which is the ease of use and the succinct and brevity of its articles. If I find it lacking in some fashion, I search further.

Out of curosity, how do you define "authority". And, have you found Wikipedia to be incorrect? Its a continuing work in progress, so I'm sure there are errors, but it seems to be a wonderful, self-correcting and evolving resource. Can you recommend any other resource that fits this bill, that is "credible".

If you are searching for the answer to such questions as What Color is Best, Whether Democrats are Socialists or Marxist or Facsist, then it might not be the best resource.

Did I mention it was free? Oh, yeah, its free.

Next time research your Doctor's a little better.

During the 2004 election cycle, an email chain letter began circulating, attributed to one "Dr. Lawrence Britt, a political scientist," who had apparently written a 14-point article listing the defining characteristics of fascist regimes. There was something to the email, and we'll get to it in a minute, but first let's address a few misconceptions. First of all, there is no "Dr. Lawrence Britt." The author of the 14-point fascism inventory, Laurence Britt, is a former corporate executive who wrote and published a dystopian novel about right-wing extremism, titled June 2004, during the height of the Lewinsky scandal.

Fascism Anyone? was an article for Free Inquiry magazine
Written by Laurence W. Britt.

Wulf

let's try this one on for size then.

"Since Mussolini, there have been many conflicting definitions of the term fascism. Former Columbia University Professor Robert O. Paxton {author of The Anatomy of Fascism} has written that:

Fascism may be defined as a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victim-hood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion."[15]

Paxton further defines fascism's essence as:

...a sense of overwhelming crisis beyond reach of traditional solutions; 2. belief one’s group is the victim, justifying any action without legal or moral limits; 3. need for authority by a natural leader above the law, relying on the superiority of his instincts; 4. right of the chosen people to dominate others without legal or moral restraint; 5. fear of foreign `contamination."

Whew...I feel almost Denise-like after that exercise. I could site former Vice-President Henry Wallace and others. Sorry for the Lawrenced Britt snafu. Don't hold it against me too much. Keep the faith.

Democracy is not a spectator sport.

Just keeping you honest.

Hey at least this time you found a real Ph.D. to quote.

Wulf

Although the other version was certainly intriguing!

On a serious note, it's scary how many of these 14 characteristics seem to apply to the Bush presidency. Here's the link:

http://www.oldamericancentury.org/14pts.htm

I didn't think anyone else in Fayette County knew what POAC was. Keep the faith.

Democracy is not a spectator sport.

I thought it only had one too many m's in media.

Do they offer a senior discount for number 6, the controlled ass Memdia?

Keep the faith.

Democracy is not a spectator sport.

I rarely post here because of the small group of viscious people on this board.
I dont get it...
Isnt this place meant to be an opprotunity for discussion about what is going on in OUR community?
Why all the personal attacks?
If someone has an oppinion contrary to yours do you attack them in other places(real life)? I bet not!
So why do you do it on this board?
OK rant complete, You can now go back to your childish name calling and rock throwing.

Got your attention, didn't I? Welcome! It is sad that people can't use this excellent blog like a lunch counter or coffee table and simply talk to one another with a basic level of respect. If you search around you will see that I've thrown many a punch here. I don't turn the other cheek when people seem to show up here simply to bully others.

Slider, you speak truth. I always try to find the origin of the fire; like a forensic medicine class. In this particular blog, I found a gas can located at the Richard "I should have gone to Harvard" Hobbs post of 04/24/2008:

"I wonder how hosting a former, disgraced, Nobel Prize winning, formerm, one term president is doing for their cause now?"

To have a first hand account of this trip available and then insult the man by referring to his father this way is, I've found, Richard Hobb's modus operandi. I honestly believe it comes from a low self esteem and lack of contentment which makes attention given to folks like the Carters seem like a slap in the face. Use Richard for the laughs he provides, and like Mainstream suggests, enjoy the informative answers he illicits from Jeff C.

Cheers

. Kevin "Hack" King
(anyone want two dogs???)

You make it so easy on me Hack, when you are pulling too many G's without your air mask on.

You made two observations: 1.) The "Origin of the Fire" was my comment about Jimmy Carter. 2.) And Jeff C's answers are informative.

Lets start with the second: Jeff's Comments are often insightfull and interesting. I may not agree with him very often, but he usually has some lengthy diatribe to support his contentions. Working at the Carter Center does have its perks. However, I'm sorry to say, that this particular Blog was sadly not one of his best. I got the feeling he was pressed for time, and didn't put much effort into it. He just cited several people involved in the events and how people were reacting to his father's visit. What intrigued me and caused me to become the "Origin of the Fire" were two of Jeff's comments. Number 1, that Hamas attempted to explain why they killed innocent women and children--to get media attention. and 2.) That Israel was directly responsible for starving the Palestinians.

This again drew my passionate opinions about his father into high over drive. Because the irony seemed rather poignant. Here the Arabs were killing innocent people for media attention, and Jimmy was proudly going there as a result of their efforts. They are getting a "two-fer". Media attention for killing innocent people, and Jimmy reacting to it, by bringing the media there to give them the attention their killing was designed to do.

But, as to the part about the literal starving of the Palestinians by the Jews, well, I just said this is getting too ridiculous. Everything else in that article went down the toilet.

So, I guess if you think my comments about Jimmy are unwarranted, well, thats your opinion. Jeff knows my opinions of his father. We've discussed it many times, and he's not thin skinned at all about it. He knows how many American feel about his dad. He's shown more grace in how he handles those comments than many of the other bloggers do.

Jeff has chosen to give his opinions on a public forum about acts being down by his very controversial father. He'd be a fool, which he isn't, not to expect a huge backlash from many bloggers on this site. Which, I can't help but believe, he enjoys. It beats preaching to the choir on the Huffington Post or Democratic Underground.

I'm still waiting for the invite to come over and drink the last stash of Billy Beer he has sitting in his basement. Talk about stale beer, argh.

Better here than in real life I suppose. It also helps one to develop a thicker, more rino-like skin when you are the recipient.

the personal attacks are uncalled for, and perhaps I shouldn't have gone there...sorry to have offended you. I was carried away by what I viewed as an exceptionally insulting post.

I didn't go to law school, Richard. Not enough money in the profession. How much did your folks pay for a ringer to take the bar exam for you?

Now then, to bidness: Like a true dewy exclusivist, you dredge up the Curtiss-Wright decision. Fair enough. On the face of it, that decision would make legislation such as the Boland Amendment and the Church Amendment unconstitutional. Why, oh why, were they not challenged? Well hoooo-haaa, it seems that Curtiss-Wright is in direct conflict with Youngstown Steel's "checks and balances for the President" and "work within congressional limits" dictums!

Classic Supreme Court showdown, no?

Not surprisingly, conservatives whined and moaned about Borland, etc, but never mounted a Constitutional challenge because there is ample evidence that Curtiss-Wright would be found to be just a tad overreaching and the Supremes would likely reign in the so-called Unitary Executive. Even a Court that is overtly hostile to the Constitution such as the current Roberts court indicated that the Unitary Executive has some limits (Padilla case, anyone?).

In any event, your meandering diatribe conveniently overlooks one crucial element: Whether or not you feel that the President has the power to unilaterally conduct foreign policy, the President cannot exceed statuatory law. The Boland Amendment, absent a challenge in the courts, was the law of the land at the time and all presidents (err, those not named "Bush") are charged to uphold the law of the land.
___________
Diagnosing Denise

I did drive by Whatsamatta U one time. I do know that the constitution was written when someone operating like a nitwit king was very much on the framers' minds.

Hey Rocky, watch me pull a rabbit out of my hat. Keep the faith, CU.

Democracy is not a spectator sport.

My husband and I were up til the wee hours - our son took his girlfriend to her prom for MHS. He drove downtown to the Biltmore Hotel, which was nerve-racking for us since he's never driven in Atlanta without one of us before, but he had navi and no problems. Man, is it hard to let go sometimes!!

We get to do it all over again this Sat. night when they go to his prom at Fernbank for FCHS, but they're doing the limo thing with a bunch of friends, so he won't have to drive again.

When he got home, he told us he went through TWO Fayette Co. law enforcement road blocks. He noticed most drivers were prom-goers, and several were getting 'breathalizered.' He said he didn't because he didn't have any problems answering the officer's questions. Glad to know they were out there keeping our children and roads safer last night, and I bet they'll be out again this weekend. Thank you for doing a great job, guys! Keep it up!

So, Hack, what time is the nap this afternoon?

My daughter has a very responsible friend who organized a party bus which was actually pretty cool. And the driver read them all the riot act on zero tolerance for alcohol or misbehavior. A great night was had by all except two very tired parents. I hope the sermon has some energy today. I'd hate to get caught napping. Congratulations, and I hope you have a safe weekend next prom as well!

Cheers, and your son would love two labs.

Kevin "Hack" King
(anyone want two dogs???)

did your daughter go to the McIntosh prom last night? I'm sure she is a great daughter, and sounds like she is surrounded by great friends as well, and is very important at their age.

I'm glad to hear the party bus driver read his charges the riot act regarding alcohol and misbehavior. I certainly hope my son's group gets that driver next weekend.

The labs sound adorable, but we don't have our backyard fenced in so we wouldn't be the best family to adopt them right now.

So, now that it's rainy, this is the perfect time for that nap!

To be totally correct, Chippie has two great sons. You also met her husband at the Fayetteville Starbucks that time with me.

I yam what I yam....Popeye

for the kind words. Your daughter is such a sweetheart, too. Did you know she gave my sons a gift on their recent birthdays? She gave the oldest a bag full of uncooked pasta! I thought that was hilarious (she apparently gets her sense of humor from you). The youngest received a bag full of candy, which he promply ate the majority of that evening - if his teeth fall out, I'm calling you, deal?

How is your sister? I hope she is having some very good days. If our family can do anything for you, just let some of us know. Otherwise, we're keeping your family in our prayers.

both Eagle Scouts..
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

You have great sons, as well. Has your youngest earned his Eagle yet? If not, I'm sure he probably doesn't have much more to do to complete all those requirements.

Have you replaced your white truck yet? I'm so thankful you and your oldest didn't get seriously injured - it's a good thing you were paying such close attention to that big, stinky truck!

BTW - does PoP have a labyrinth on site? I saw it listed as being a local one available to the public. Do you know anything about it?

Enjoy this beautiful day!

No, not yet.

I'm driving my dad's Dodge Dakota until July. (I don't like Chrysler products)

We use to but it was taken up when we built the Life Center.

-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

Thanks for that info.

Do Dodge, Chrysler & Plymouth vehicles still have a very distinct engine sound when they start up? That's what I remember of my parent's Plymouth & Dodge autos, plus they liked to have their radiator hoses replaced every time our family went on a trip!

Ah yes, Dodge radiator hoses! I recall driving the snifflewife and snifflespawn down to Daytona Beach in my then-new Dodge Dynasty and on the return trip getting to within 300 yards of my home and having the radiator hose rupture spectacularly. Quite a flume of steam erupt from under the hood...the kids were MOST impressed.
___________
Diagnosing Denise

How good to hear from you. The Middle East is a complicated place as you well know. I’m sure you can remember when Arafat was considered (rightly) to be a terrorist along with the PLO. Then the wheels of history turned and your tax dollars supported Arafat before he died just like your tax dollars go to partially support the PLO and the Palestinian Authority now.

I read where AIPAC had come out and blasted the meeting with Hamas. I was staying in the King David hotel in Jerusalem at the time. You are probably not old enough to remember when the future Prime Minister of Israel Menachem Begin bombed the King David and killed 91 people: 28 British, 41 Arab, 17 Jewish, and 5 others. 45 other people were injured. It was the deadliest terrorist bombing in the Middle East until the 1993 Beirut barracks bombing.

You might however recall that in July of 2006 Israelis including former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former members of Irgun attended a 60th anniversary celebration of the bombing, which was organized by the Menachem Begin Centre. It was quite controversial.

This is your best argument. Comparing the "terrorists" actions taken by the Jews prior to their "liberation" in 48. I'm aware of many of the things that were done in the name of creating an independent nation called Israel. I'm however, not up to speed in the total history of who did what to whom etc. That was a bit before my time.

But, I do believe that this argument is one of the best to make if you were attempting to diminish the actions of Hamas et. al. I doubt though, that it will have much effect, outside of the academic blogesphere.

Remember when Hamas breached the wall on the Egyptian side. It was soon sealed up.

-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

Not trying to be confrontational. But I am curious as to what amount of communication/approval, IF ANY, Mr. Carter gets from the POTUS in charge. Whether you agree or not with the current Administration, it would seem some protocol would be followed. Just curious.

All that aside, sounds like a cool trip.

There is some controversy now as to whether the trip was cleared with the State Department:

Carter: Rice did not advise against Hamas meeting

He called and Condi was out of town and he spoke to one of Rice’s people who never asked us not to go or to meet with Hamas. These trips are always cleared in advance and follow-up trip reports are always filed with the State Department after the trips. We filed an itinerary with the State Department people before we left and there was no controversy. We had contacts with US government people during the trip (which I was present at) in which we talked about the upcoming meetings and there was never any request that we not meet with Hamas.

I've never been to that part of the world.

Thanks for your comments..

All that said, I'm still not voting for Obama... I don't care how much change he promises.

I lead a boring life.

_______________________________
We Will Stand

"What Is The Best Thing That You Know?"

This is a message to me.

What do you think?

_______________________________
We Will Stand

Are you asking me what I think is the best thing you know? (Since someone had put the question to you?) Or are you asking me what is the best thing that I know?

It's a little like asking what is my favorite number.

I am tempted to answer that I know my wife, and, therefore, she is the best thing that I know.

But the answer could run deeper, I suppose.

GK Chesterton observed that the question of origins basically comes down to two alternatives: Mind precedes matter, or matter precedes mind.

I think the former is true, and it makes all the difference regarding how we view just about everything.

So my "favorite fact" is that mind precedes matter.

This is for me.

"What is the best thing that you know?"

Your wife is a good answer is it the first thing that comes to mind?

Sorry, didn't see you had already answered earlier. Remember this is for me.

_______________________________
We Will Stand

I am asking the question for you and me and SOME others. If you were asked "What Is The Best Thing That You Know?" Who and what means more to you than anything.

Again this is for me.

_______________________________
We Will Stand

__*_____________________________
We Will Stand

I just heard it from someone you admire and my answer was the same as his. I thought you were familiar with it.

Sorry for the confusion.

I liked what he said- was curious what he was like.

_______________________________
We Will Stand

.... and hide your dad's passport from him. He accomplished nothing.

----------------------------------------------
Barack Obama is the personification of a wolf in sheep's clothing.

The Perverse Worship of a man

is standing in the way of human evolution. Go JeffC, I am proud of you and your father.

Welcome home Jeffc and thank you for the synopsis on your trip. Your dad's meeting with Hamas created quite the firestorm over here but the press NEVER goes into any amount of detail regarding the reasoning for the meeting or the importance of internationl diplomacy, especially in the Middle East where this particular war has raged for decades, if not centuries.

Our current administration has little need or desire for international diplomacy, as seen by their mishandling of Iraq and their bullying of Iran. And it continues with their cowboy-diplomacy of the Israeli-Palestinian situation.

This part of your post made me ill:

"They were hard-line and told us if they stopped, the conditions in Gaza would fall off of the news and Gaza would be forgotten. (Israel controls all supplies to Gaza having encircled it completely with the wall and is now starving the 1.4 million people there, for which they blame Hamas. The latest UN report claims that calorie intake in Gaza is less than sub-Saharan Africa.)"

Thank your dad for bringing attention to the ongoing struggles over there, for both the Palestinian and Jewish people. There must be dialogue with ALL the parties, including Hamas, to jumpstart another Road map for Peace.

Do you agree or disagree with Obama's pre-conditions he announced shortly after Carter's trip started that must be met before any negotiations take place with Hamas?

I'm sure that someone somewhere is going to mention that Hamas was elected by popular vote, but so was Hitler and that really isn't justification alone to have an open dialog with anyone.

Are you talking about this precondition:

Obama: "We should only sit down with Hamas if they renounce terrorism, recognize Israel's right to exist, and abide by past agreements."

Yes, I believe this precondition should be met first, however, Carter is not President so he is, and was, free to meet with whomever he chooses. I also believe Israel should "renounce terrorism, recognize Palestine's right to exist, and abide by past agreements."

Personally, I think it is a delicate diplomatic 'dance' for any Administration to meet with hostile governments/states/elected leaders, however, I also believe that it has become necessary that our government engage in diplomacy with other countries instead of turning away from and isolating them completely or worse, opting for war like we have done in Iraq.

Here is an article that we'll never read in the mainstream media. It offers another perspective on Carter's trip. We need to understand ALL sides of the conflict if we are to have unbiased opinions regarding the Arab-Israeli situation.

CARTER'S VISIT WITH HAMAS - A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE

There is a decided anti-Israel slant to the article.

But then there is this paragraph, with which I emphatically agree:

No one can question Carter's passion for peace, his intellectual and political sincerity, his ethical values or his integrity as a man of principle and profound faith. Since he left office, he never refrained from involving himself in sound causes, as he never slowed down his mission for a safer and better world.

Carter as a private citizen representing only himself as every right as far as I'm concerned to meet with anyone he wishes. I think he was foolish to do so, but hey, that's his choice.

I asked this a week or so ago and no one answered: why does Obama put those restrictions on any potential meeting with Hamas but doesn't with Iran, a country who openly rejects Israel's existence?

I saw the article you linked to...I read that this morning as I was refreshing my memory on the Six Day War in 1967. That led to back to the 1950's and the Suez Canal. That led to post WWII reconstruction. That led back to........I gave up and decided the memory could stay not refreshed entirely.

asked this a week or so ago and no one answered: why does Obama put those restrictions on any potential meeting with Hamas but doesn't with Iran, a country who openly rejects Israel's existence?

The silence has been deafening both times I asked this. seems like a simple question.

It's OK to say that you might disagree on JUST THIS ONE issue with your Obama, isn't it? I'd just like to hear which part some of his supporters agree with: the not meeting with Hamas part or the meeting with Iranian apocalyptic mullahs? Or, do you agree with both positions?

Not many here support Obama!

One of the problems with this blog----no democrats or reasonable people.

Obama is still in the running mode, and as it has been made abundently clear, he must be very careful with what he says. My take on this is that Hamas has been declared a terrorist organization and he can hardly propose a meeting with them, while Iran is a sovereign country that we are in wizzing contest with. For my part, neither one has declared that they reject the United States' right to exist.

Are you sure? I thought Hindenburg prevailed and later, when on his death bed, Hindenburg appointed Hitler as Chancellor only because of the political strength of the NSDAP (Nazi) party.
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

Being appointed by the chancellor who was elected by popular vote is considered to be a routine "democratic election." Hitler was the leader of the largest party in parliament and it's a similar concept as how the US does Speaker of the House and Senate Majority Leader.

The guy who did win and appoint Hitler, Hindenburg, was as a big proponent Nazism too.

Thanks for the clarification.
------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

From your perspective, who wants conflict and who wants peace.
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

Our trip was a follow up on the election observation undertaking we were involved with and which is routine for all elections we monitor. The Carter Center has been active in the Middle East for years and years and our meetings with Hamas was just a tiny part of the whole trip, although by far the most controversial and news worthy (which I understand completely).

Hamas wants peace with conditions. By labeling them with the broad brush of being terrorists and isolating them, a disservice is done to the peace process because they might be negotiated with by Israel into accepting some sort of accommodation with Israel. They have repeatedly called for a cease-fire with some conditions which do not seem insurmountable to me. They say they will not recognize Israel but they will accept a peace agreement negotiated by Abbas (which would be a two-state solution, acceptance of which would be de facto but not explicit recognition). Is it absolutely necessary for Hamas to explicitly recognize Israel if a peace agreement can be worked out which all sides agree to, including Hamas? Put another way; is it worth not negotiating a peace deal between Israel and the Palestinians just because Hamas won’t explicitly recognize Israel even if Hamas is willing to abide by terms of the deal?

Israeli policy is clearly under the influence of the neocons in the Bush administration, Cheney, Abrams, Hadley, et. al. who do not want a peace deal at this time if it requires the return of confiscated Palestinian land. I do not wish to debate the issue of whether the land was taken fair and square. The fact is that under international law, the land belongs to the Palestinians and Israel cannot legally take it through war. This is not in dispute and everyone agrees to this even the Israeli Supreme Court. The Bush administration is clearly split with the neocons on one side and Condi and the State Department on the other. At the Annapolis Conference, Olmert promised to stop building settlements: “Not one more brick”. Since then, over 9000 new settlement units have been begun and the number of road blocks inside Palestine has increased. There is just no way that Israel is doing this without the complicity of the Bush administration. It would be unthinkable.

The neocons are setting the stage for a bi-national solution instead of a two state solution. The bi-national solution would involve both sides living in Israel/Palestine with apartheid (there’s that word again) by law so that Israel can maintain its Jewish identity (otherwise they are outnumbered). This seems a very dangerous game to me because it requires the Jews to discriminate against the Palestinians forever to perpetuate the Jewish character of the state. This is not something that has ever happened historically, quite the contrary. Historically, Jews have been in the forefront of fighting discrimination just like they did here in the South during the 50’s and 60’s. Israelis are well aware of this and overwhelmingly favor the two state solution. The Olmert government, like the Bush neocons, hold onto about 30% of the population and they govern in Israel by coalition.

The Bush administration’s Annapolis sham has zero chance of reaching a peace deal before President Bush leaves office in my opinion. I can’t even decide which side President Bush is on, his NSC neocons people’s side or his State Department people’s side. When he talks he supports the State Department and Condoleezza Rice, when he acts he supports Elliot Abrams and the neocons. What I suspect is that the stalemate lasts until President Bush leaves office and then the Israeli government falls too and a new election is held there.

The only certainty is that the Israeli people and the Palestinian people want peace and that the politicians in Palestine, Israel and here have pursued ineffective and counter productive policies.

Here is a thoughtful article in the Jerusalem Post from the Israeli Council on Foreign Relations:

Why we hosted Carter