A TIFM Review: The State of the Union

Did you know that President Bush gave a speech last night? It was a pretty big deal being that it was his seventh State of the Union. Also, it was his first in front of a Democratic Congress, ready and willing to fight the President on any number of issues. So, the State of the Union was a chance for Bush to convince the American people he is right. Methinks he really didn't do that.

President Bush tried hard to not make this speech a repeat of his speech a couple of weeks ago in which he said he would increase the troop level in Iraq by about 20,000 solders in hopes to do the "hard work" and win a battle against the "war on terror." So, the first half of his speech was devoted to domestic issues. This is what I will focus on. I'll provide the comments Bush said and then, my awesome commentary.

"First, we must balance the federal budget. We can do so without raising taxes."
It is definitely a nice idea, George W. The problem with balancing the federal budget without a tax hike is that the money has to come somewhere. It is on par with taking out a sizeable loan, but not getting a better job to pay it. What gets cut? I support you fully on balancing the budget, but here is why I think you mentioned it. With your support so incredibly low, you wanted to throw out a nice little olive branch to your Republicans. "Look, I'm trying to be a conservative!" You know perfectly well with the US spending $6.4 billion a month in Iraq (number will probably rise with more troops) that it will be impossible to balance the budget without raising taxes unless you convince the Democrats to make sizable cuts to Medicare, Medicade, Social Security, and other programs. It's a bluff. Make cuts to programs that voters love to balance the budget which voters think is a good idea...talk about your election suicide. The budget will not be balanced anytime soon.

"In 2005 alone, the number of earmarks grew to over 13,000 and totaled nearly $18 billion. Even worse, over 90 percent of earmarks never make it to the floor of the House and Senate — they are dropped into Committee reports that are not even part of the bill that arrives on my desk."
Full support. But these are typically the policitian's dream. Throw our something that is retarded on the surface, but never change it.

"We must increase funds for students who struggle — and make sure these children get the special help they need. And we can make sure our children are prepared for the jobs of the future, and our country is more competitive, by strengthening math and science skills. The No Child Left Behind Act has worked for America's children — and I ask Congress to reauthorize this good law."
Honestly, the No Child Left Behind Act leaves a lot of children behind. It was modeled after schools in Texas that, to make sure no child was left behind, pushed kids toward G.E.D.'s earlier to bring up the GPA of the school. See the difference between a school doing well and looking like it is doing well? From my own experience, the "accountability" laws that are in place seem to push teachers to prepare students for standarized tests with number two pencils rather than inspiring kids to go out and learn new information. Maybe there is no perfect way, but I have yet to see the "good law" the President speaks of.

"Tonight, I propose two new initiatives to help more Americans afford their own insurance. First, I propose a standard tax deduction for health insurance that will be like the standard tax deduction for dependents."
George loves a tax break/tax deduction. I am not sure who wrote this and then put these two sentences together. How will this help someone who doesn't have health insurance be able to afford it. They still have to pay for it for the first part, right?

"To secure our border, we are doubling the size of the Border Patrol — and funding new infrastructure and technology."
Awesome. How are you find the people to double the size of the Border Patrol and fund new infrastructure and technology when you are balancing the budget without a tax raise? Hot air.

"We must continue changing the way America generates electric power — by even greater use of clean coal technology ... solar and wind energy ... and clean, safe nuclear power. We need to press on with battery research for plug-in and hybrid vehicles, and expand the use of clean diesel vehicles and biodiesel fuel. We must continue investing in new methods of producing ethanol — using everything from wood chips, to grasses, to agricultural wastes."
This was the beginning of Bush's latest attempt at throwing the environmental lobby a bone. He has done this seemingly every year, but does anything change? No. Hard to trust a man who, as Jon Stewart put it, pisses oil. If you want to reduce gas consumption by 20%, mean it. Don't just say it. I remember falling for this about four years ago when he started to talk about putting more money into hybrid cars. He did, but it was like throwing a five dollar bill at college. Sure, it's a start, but it won't do much. We need serious change in this area and I am waiting on it.

Well, that's about it on the domestic agenda. I am more and more discouraged.

Random, but truthful remark...

Scalawag is one of the best words ever.

George W. Bush is a scalawag! It's like calling him a fucknut, but without the Secret Service showing up at your door.

Saddam Hussein was a scalawag! See the subtle difference in verbs? Ah, it's so dynamic!

Use the word in your everyday speech. Call your boss a scalawag. Call your parents scalawags. Tell your unborn child that he or she will become a scalawag!

Keep the change in the sofa...

It is amazing to me that we are a relatively educated public with a wealth of evidence at our fingertips, but something like Loose Change still gets the masses going. For you two people out there who haven't seen and/or heard of Loose Change, it is the foremost authority on the 9/11 conspiracy belief that the attacks were not orchastrated by a terrorist organization desiring to strike a blow at Americans, but instead a clever inside job organized and performed by highly skilled professionals.

Sounds like a great movie, doesn't? Well, yes, and it was going to be that. When the producer and creator of Loose Change, Dylan Avery, began to research the project, he was hoping to show a group of friends who find out that 9/11 was indeed an inside story. While in the process of doing so, what do you know but he himself became convinced. Is that life immitating art or what?

So, Avery and his friends put together a little film which is free to anyone to watch where they go step-by-step over the many, MANY reasons they believe that 9/11 was not just the darkest day this country has ever faced, but also the biggest lie this government has ever told. You thought JFK was something? Listen to them.

However, between making a movie with a good plot and a "documentary," the producers failed to provide something that I believe even Stephen Colbert could have helped them with. Truthiness, or just straight up truth.

It begins early in their film when while discussing the Pentagon's attack, they conclude that the plane could not have made the maneuvers it did without being a military plane. Their proof came in a quote from Danielle O'Brien, an air trafic controller with Dulles. She said, "The speed, the maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all thought ... all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that that was a military plane" This is true. She did say that. She followed with, "You don't fly a 757 in that manner. It's unsafe." However, the second quote was not in the film. The answer is of course quite simple. The first quote makes you believe that those watching were convinced what they were witnessing in horror on their radar screens was a military plane. The second quote specifies that they felt that way only because of the way it was flying, not because they felt it _was_ a military plane.

The film goes onto discuss an event that occured involving former President George H.W. Bush's plane. It hit a light pole and crashed. The light pole caused severe damage to the plane. Meanwhile, the 757, as it heads at dangerous speeds at the Pentagon, hits five of them. Loose Change says the light poles caused no damage. They would later say that there was little, if any, wreckage from the crash as part of their reasoning that they were convinced of a missile hitting the Pentagon and not a plane. See any problem? How did they know the light poles did not cause much damage? If you can answer that, you are either pretty smart or as crazy as Dylan Avery and his partners are.

We continue. I don't want to focus entirely on the Pentagon story, but there are so many things that are just too good. The film goes on to state that there was in fact little wreckage of the plane. First, the point about if a plane _had_ hit the Pentagon, a bunch of wreckage would have been everywhere. This is a picture of a C-130 that crashed while it was attempting to land at the Tehran airport.

What plane? That is what the Loose Change producers would want you to think. If you want evidence, I will give you a link but want to specify that if you scroll to almost the bottom, there are pictures of human remains. The page is pretty big so you can avoid it by not scrolling that far down, but I wanted to make that clear. Here is the link. These pictures were pretty easy for me to find. They're pretty easy to find period.

The film (I really struggle to call it that) continues with details about an engine that could not have possibly been the two large jet engines a 757 would carry. While ignoring all the strawman arguments they make, I will move on to the picture they put up as evidence:

Bam. Not an engine, right? Nope. But it is a rotor to an engine. It is not, as they state, an entire engine in tact. I guess that hurts the theory.

But the real fun stuff, if it wasn't so sad, comes up when they discuss the World Trade Center. First, they time the collapse of both towers to ten seconds each. They're off by about seven seconds. Big seven seconds I would say. They also say that the WTC towers and WTC 7 were the first three buildings to collapse because of fire. I just realized why we don't see them when they are telling their story. You can't possibly say that without a straight face. No buildings...in HISTORY...have collapsed because of fire? What now?

They use evidence, if you want to call it that, of a B-52 hitting the Empire State Building in 1945 and amazingly, the Empire State Building still rises above buildings in New York. It's either a miracle or shows that planes didn't bring down the WTC, right? They don't even state in their narration that the building was open the next day. Little nugget of trivia.

First, a B-52 didn't hit the Empire State Building. In fact, the B-52 would not fly for another seven years. Its maiden flight took place on April 15th, 1952. Why tax day? No clue. Now, a B-25 did hit the Empire State Building. A B-52 has eight engines and was designed for long bombing runs across the planet. A B-25 was a World War II 2-engine bomber that could barely bomb Germany and make it back to Franch bases. See the differences?

My favorite part of the entire trainwreck is when, as evidence that it couldn't possibly have been the airplanes, their fuel, and the collissions, we should listen to Willy Rodriguez. The janitor. That's your argument. The janitor?

You can't make this shit up.

This is just some of the interesting stuff the 9/11 conspiracy movement tries to bring up. There is plenty more. I just had to get some of this off my mind as I watch friends try to tell me how great Loose Change is. There are several problems with these theories.

One...George W. Bush was in office for about nine months when this event happened. If you've ever studied government, you know how long it takes to get something done, like increase your department by five. Even if they had all the plans before Bush took office, it would have taken a huge amount of manpower.

Second...how many people are involved here? Let's start with the pilots. You've got the ones on 9/11 and then, the ones who saw these airplanes, or at least claimed they did, while they were flying on 9/11. Then, you have all of the people who planted bombs in the World Trade Center. Let's say...we're up to 50 people, not including the high-up parties. Alright, we have, what, 225 or so on the four planes that are unaccountable for. If they're dead, well, that solves that. If they're alive, we include them in this conspiracy with their families. A good 750 people there and 800 overall. Then, you have all of the intelligence figures involved, politicians, etc. Between 500 and 1500, depending on how many Americans we killed to keep them quiet. Now, say, there is just 500 people involved. How in the hell do 500 people keep quiet about anything, let alone the juciest lie ever told? Answer that one, Dylan Avery.

Third...if these guys are so good, and you have to admit they are because I'm quite skeptical of nearly everything and I do not doubt the official story, they made a lot of amateur mistakes to allow this to occur. Why, for instance, would you not have plane wreckage everywhere near the Pentagon, at least more than was visible? Why, for instance, would you slam the second plane in the WTC tower at an odd angle after hitting the first one straight on? Why, for instance, would you develop this story of a plane crashing in Pennslyvania?

And finally, the fourth reason the 9/11 Conspiracy movement lacks any real teeth is that you have to suspend your complete understanding of the way this country works. This country could not cover up a blow job. You really think they can kill nearly 3,000 people without everyone knowing? Please.

Would have made a great movie, though.

Spreading the Word

I have recently found myself in a few religious conversations/arguments/whateverthefuckyouwannacallit and I said something that I thought was clever, but maybe it wasn't, but hey it's my blog, so bwah. I hate sentence structure.

That wasn't the thing I said, but that is what I felt needed to be said despite the fact it was pretty clear from my previous paragraph/sentence.

I said, "...if man is God's messengers, man has done a pretty shitty job of getting the message out."

When I said it, we were discussing what God meant to people and the simple act of trying to help others reach God that so many believers partake in. I am inclined to mention all of this, not because of that discussion, but because of a news article that make it more clear of the job men has done to God's message.

Pastor found guilty of molestation

A local pastor was found guilty Thursday of molesting a teenage boy he was formerly tutoring.

The Rev. Kenneth Payne, 70, was charged with taking indecent liberties and sodomizing the 17-year-old.

Payne has preached at New Prospect Baptist Church in the Pleasant View area of Amherst County for the past 14 years.

To many, this is the same sort of story you have grown used to from religion. However, what does bother me is that I knew Rev. Payne for years. I never attended his church as a member, but I was a friend of the family, spent time at his house, and at the church. I never spoke with the man into lengths, but he knew me and I knew him. I was part of his daughter's second wedding.

Men has done a shitty job, it seems. I have always been skeptical of religion and of God. I'm not an athiest, but agnostic. I recognize the possibility of a higher power, but do not feel a need to know him/her/it, nor a need to become closer to the spiritual being.

I've grown up around religion, however, for my entire life. 45 minutes away is Liberty University and the home of Jerry Falwell, who once said that the Jews and gays were responsible for 9/11. Falwell does so much harm for Christians around the world. Here is a man who actively makes you want to not get closer to the religion. Here is a man who makes millions off hatred, fear-mongering, and lies. Jesus Christ was never morbidly obese. Take one look at Falwell, though.

It is bad enough that Falwell is who he is, but his students do their fair share. First, I have known a few Liberty kids who were excellent people so I don't want to paint with this brush too broadly. But there are two groups that interest me. The heavily self-righteous and the hypocrites. The first group can be found at the Mall or any place where they can come up to kids and pretend to be their friends, but then go at them with religion.

Now, this can be split, too. I met quite a few of these types at JMU, but the difference between them and the Liberty kids is the JMU ones knew exactly when not to go over the edge. They knew not to overextend their hand. Not interested in going to their church, cookout, concert, etc., they move on and thank you for your time. And not every Liberty kid who does this goes overboard. But many do.

And then, there is the hypocrites. The type that head across the street to Central Virginia Community College and look up porn because it's banned from their Liberty network. Funny. These great kids need to be kept from looking up porn? Guess they aren't angels.

Again, this is not to pain every Liberty student with the same brush, just painting many of them.

Back to Payne. His church, New Prospect, had several of my former friends as its members so I cannot say it was a terrible place. Again, I hung out there. However, there are certain things I cannot forget when it comes to that place. The Southern Baptists who attended the church had quite a few gossipers among them. The same thing that Paul said was a sin worthy of death. Oh, and there is a Commandment about the very same thing.

This brings us full circle. Why is God's messengers doing Him such a disservice? Everyone sins, I am told. It is what makes us human and weak. However, for a non-believer, watching these people makes it very hard to pay attention to the believers who live a just life worthy of being respected.

The more I see these people, the more I believe a better road is that which pushes you toward philosophy, specifically Plato. An unexamined life is not worth living. Seems to handle everything to me.

No Direction

This movie came out a few years ago with Sandra Bullock called 28 Days. No rage-infected crazy people in this flick, but instead a woman dealing with her addictions to alcohol and drugs. In one scene in the movie, rehab men and women try to gain the trust of a horse to force the horse to raise his back leg. A horse will not do it just on command.

However, all of those involved could not get the horse to do it and never really attempted different ways at gaining the horse's trust. Sure, they would slightly change the way they pet the horse, but choosing to go in a different direction was not in the future for these people.

I bring this up because the owner of the horse cited the dictionary to explain these people. "Folks," he said, "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results." Or something like that. I cannot find his actual quote, but it was damn close. And on Wednesday, we saw someone scream out insanity at 9:00. Unfortunately, it was not some dumbass on American Idol or whatever shitty reality show the networks are shoving down the viewers' throats. No, it was the President of the United States when he looked to get the citizens to buy his new Iraq plan.

From what I heard, it seemed the "new" plan was the "old" plan with a shiny new code of polish. It reminds me of the Madden football series. None of the games are really that different. Most of the bugs go from one version to the next. However, every new version is tweaked slightly. It is definitely easier and safer.

The world asks for serious answers to serious questions, yet the President provided the old joke of an answer. Think of a fire. You throw a lot of wood on the fire, one of two things will happen. The fire will consume it or the fire will not have enough air to burn. I believe this is Bush's thoughts. Throw 20,000 more solders to the Iraq problem and maybe, he will end it. Why not 30,000? 50,000?

Bush, I love stats, too. We spend an estimated 6.4 billion a month on Iraq and have spent $355 billion so far. The winner of a Nobel Prize in Economics, Joseph Stiglitz, has put the overall price tag at $1 trillion. And that is his conservative estimate. We have lost 22 Apache helicopters ($45-58 million a pop), 3 F-18 Hornets ($35 million), and 250 Humvees.

But here is the most troubling stat. 3,018 American soldiers have been killed as of January 9th. Over three-thousand of America's best will not be returning to their families and friends. We are approaching our fourth year since the war began. All of this comes despite great advancements in body armor and soldier placement that have been the death-to-casuality (or anyone who has been hit) to a much lower degree than Vietnam. That does not even get into the Iraqi body count which can not accurately been found, but estimated. A study in July found the number around 650,000. Yeah, the amount of zeros is correct.

The facts are pretty clear. The talking points are worthless. This war is unwinnable. Why? Because I'm not so sure what we're fighting for. Do we want Iraq to be democratic or do we want to stop terrorism because we cannot possibly have it both ways. Know what would work against terrorism? A heavy-handed dictator who puts down any terrorist violence. Shit, I think we let them kill that guy.

Everything bad that happens in Iraq will be blamed in the country on America whether we actually did it or not and I do not blame them for that. We have destroyed their villages, bombed their families, and Iraqi healthcare is worse now than it ever was under Saddam according to Joseph Chamie, former director of the U.N. Population Division and an Iraq specialist. They were amongst the top in medical care in 1990. Now, they are a third world country. Sally Struthers and that guy with the beard would be there if they were not afraid of catching a bomb with their heads. But no worries. Sooner or later, no one will be there to receive sub-standard health care as 100,000 Iraqis leave every month, mostly to Jordan and Syria.

And at the same time, we are increasing terrorism.

But the answer is more troops? Look up the definition of insanity, President. You might want to check yourself into a happy place.

From the school of..."huh?"

I am sorting through my music to come up with a list that will cut down my total music in roughly a third of what I will actually listen to on a regular basis and came upon a song by a band called The Flys. I believe they were on the Disturbing Behavior movie soundtrack. If you want to see a sultry Katie Holmes, watch that flick. Also on that soundtrack was "Flagpole Sita," a great little one-hitter by Harvey Danger.

Anyway, I really got into "Got You (Where I Want You)" when the song came out. Makes me remember high school and all that jazz. But they had a little part that I never knew until now.

See, I have EvilLyrics, a plug-in that goes well with my winamp, and automatically searches for the lyrics to the song that is being played. Well, the part in question went like this.

Suffer, Suffer,
You know you get no rubber,
Gone with a pretty girl
Changing me like no other.

Suffer, Suffer,
You don’t get no rubber,
Would you like a minute to
Put that thing on your lover?

...really changes your outlook on a song.

File Organization

I am not a neat person by nature. My room is typically a mess, the only time I make my bed is if I know for a fact someone will come over, and I am rather fine with a clutter of beer bottles and Dr. Pepper cans around my monitor. I am messy.

But when it comes to my computer and mp3s, I am fairly OCD about it. I hate when a file name for a band is slightly different. Example "Alice in Chains" vs. "Alice In Chains." Or "Beatles" vs. "The Beatles." It bothers me. For the longest time, I told myself to sit down and organize my mp3 collection. I put it off, put it off, put it off, until finally, this morning and today, I decided to get the things done I have wanted to do, but never felt the need. Like the one White Stripes song that was missing "The" (which is front of all of the other songs by said band). Or the fact when I picked up the Garden State CD, I did not organize the files by band name, but by the title of the soundtrack. So I had two Cary Brothers songs under that name, but one sitting off in God Knows Where, away from its brothers.

It was aggravating. So was the fact that I could not explain it, but I had, in my collection, three or four Avril Lavinge songs. I nearly castrated myself.

But I am better now. And as my winamp builds the media library back up after new folders for some bands, a split in my major music folder, and a crapload of new Beatles songs (thank you goes to Mother's CD collection), I am set for the future.

Now, if I can just organize that damn porn folder.

I mean...um...look, Adolf Hitler!

*poof*

Wikipedia love

I was one of those kids who fell in love with reading about the same thing for a month or so. Whether it be the attack on Pearl Harbor, the assassination of John F. Kennedy, the Civil War, or whatever, I would take books from the library to satisfy my curiosity.

Never before I was given such an easy outlet to my mini-addiction. Wikipedia, created in 2001, is always there for me. If I want to read about serial killers, I can find an entire category. School shootings, the carrier program, Beatles singles, TV show information...it is all rather neat and tidy.

I'd love to know I'm not the only crazy bastard who does this. Let me know.

What Do Sports Mean To Me?

In October 2005, the Atlanta Braves and Houston Astros met in Game Four of the National League Division Series. The Astros were up two-game-to-one in the best-of-five so the Braves needed a victory to force a fifth game and one more game in Atlanta. They failed to secure a lead and headed to extra innings; nine of them, to be exact. My heart felt like it could not handle it as the Braves failed to take advantage of runners they had been able to get on base. Ultimately, they lost on a Chris Burke 18th inning homerun, ending their season.

Flash back to February of 2002 and the greatest basketball game I have ever watched. Notre Dame headed to Georgetown for a Big East battle. What they got was a marathon quadruple overtime game that, at least at the time, was the highest scoring and longest game in Big East history before finally, the Irish pulled away when Matt Carroll scored seven of his 30 points in the final period as the Irish won 116-111.

Same school, different sport, and flashing back to a game more recently. In late September of 2006, the Fighting Irish headed to Spartan Stadium for a football game with Michigan State. What they got was a sure upset turned into an improbable comeback. The Irish, coming off a weak effort to Michigan, were looking to bounce back and look like national contenders again. Instead, they were down 17 at halftime and 16 at the end of the third quarter. What transpired in that fourth quarter was incredible. The Irish scored 19 in the final quarter, including the game-winning TD by cornerback Terrail Lambert's return off an interception. I was not capable of screaming out loud because I was the only one in the house awake, but I was definitely screaming out inside.

Why do I mention these things? Because two of those events are some of the happiest moments of my life and the other is one of the saddest. Add another sad event as the Dallas Cowboys lost to the Seattle Seahawks minutes ago on a mishandled snap on what would have been a chip shot field goal that would have put the Cowboys up with a minute or so remaining and a visit to the second round of the playoffs.

It was an easy play, done flawlessly a million times. Snap the ball, QB Tony Romo grabs the ball, puts it down, keeps it steady by holding the top of the ball with the tips of his fingers, and bam, the kicker pounds it through.

It was the last gasp of life by a Dallas Cowboys team full of more controversy than performance.

Right before the play, I stood in my living room (I could not sit at this moment) holding my shirt over my nose, almost afraid to watch. I would like to say I saw the events coming so that I sound smarter, but you can not see this happening. I was afraid Martin Grammatica, the kicker, would shank it. Or maybe the snap would be bad. Maybe the Seahawks would bring pressure up the middle and block it. Maybe the Cowboys hold and there is a 10 yard penalty. Maybe...

But it was the easiest part. Romo just had the ball slip out of his hands. He clamored to his feet and tried to run it in, but was stopped at the one and a half. Much like Jason Witten, who was stopped on the previous play setting up the fourth and inches and the need to kick a field goal.

I write this because I truly feel I failed or had been presented bad news on my personal life. Is it natural for sports to feel this way? Hell no. Sports shouldn't feel this way. I have no impact on it, but God help me, I am as depressed now as I was when I stopped seeing my last girlfriend. Sports are an escape from reality. After 9/11, it was sports that made me realize things could be okay again. It was Mike Piazza killing my team that gave New York hope. Sports give and give and ask so very little.

It's an addiction. I can't get enough of it.

And now, I wish I had never watched. I wish I could just remove ESPN and the like from my world.

But I won't. I'll be wondering who the Cowboys can get in the upcoming off season before you know it. For the moment, though, I hate football with a passion.

Um...been awhile

Yeah, that is an understatement. Going to give it the old college try again. What the hell is the college try? If it's like my college tries, then you will see me get drunk and play Counter-Strike.

Note to self: update the computer so you can play more CS.

Either way, one of my goals this year is to update my blog more often. I'll talk about movies, music, politics, sports, whatever. Don't expect much personal stuff for I have a livejournal (that I never update) for that.

Gerald Ford was laid to rest recently and it made me start to think about Jimmy Carter, the man who beat him in 1976. Much like Ford, Carter's term in office is not looked back very fondly. Carter did not pardon a disgraced leader, but he did find himself in bad situations he could not get himself out of.

First, the terrorist incident in Iran. Well, this is not very fair. America had allowed the Shah into our country which basically took sides with the Iranian Revolution occurred. They took the 52 hostages and held them until 1980 when they were released in a very fishy set of circumstances. Carter failed at getting them back with force, but his freezing of Iranian money eventually led to the hostages being released. The fact that Iran eventually took the same deal Carter had put on the table for the hostages makes me believe they just did not want to release the hostages with Carter in office.

Of course, there is also the "October Surprise" conspiracy that Reagan and his people acted with Iran to keep the hostages in captivity until Reagan took over. I doubt this occurred, but do believe Iran wanted to play a power role and get Carter out of office.

The other event that always comes up when it comes to Carter is the Energy Crisis, or Oil Crisis, of 1979. There is some real beef here. Carter seemed to not be prepared to keep this event from happening, though there was much effort. And to give Carter justice, he proposed several deregulation efforts that were not all put into play until 1981, the year Reagan took office.

My biggest praise of Carter comes from how much he cares about people whether they be white, black, poor, rich, American, non-American...it does not matter to him and it is what separates him from every President I have ever really studied. He ended containment and pushed human rights to the forefront. Every President before and since is willing to look past human rights violations, but not Carter. I just love that about the man. The Carter Center has been focused at these exact things and name another President who has been out there for Habitat for Humanity.

Here's hoping people remember what the man actually did and not what he did/could not.