For the first time in my life, I actually agree with this moron on something.

Nice to see Peeps once again elevating the level of discourse on this site and making a substantive contribution to a discussion of the issues of the day.

Who does this moron think he is? He put the American people through one of the worst economic times since the great depression. He did nothing but stand by as Americans were held hostage in Iran, the controversy over the plagiarism, anti Semitism, and lies told in his books caused many key carter center officials to resign. They could not in good faith continue to work there because it would lead some to believe that they support his lies one of the out going stated. And now he's going to Iowa how things should be in his demented mind? LOL!

I'll leave "substantive contributions" to enlightened intellectuals such as yourself, James.

You know, conservative weenie, it's one thing to proudly support a war criminal, but the way chicken hawks disparage the only honest president for 100 years, and only Christian, ever, really serves to point out just how hopelessyour belief system is. He's been out of office for almost 30 years. Try to find something else to twist your weenie knickers - like creeping fascism. yah Peeps = thanks for sharing. Same to you.

If we truly want to give every American an equal chance to elect candidates, then we should hold a national primary day and allow the popular vote to decide the candidate. As it stands now the delegates can choose to nominate whoever they want, they don't have to listen to the will of the people anymore than the current administration does. And with the enormous amounts of cash the candidates are raising they can afford to buy national airtime in multiple media markets. Why should we make this easier for the one with the biggest warchest to get nominated.

They don't let morons become Nuclear Submarine Commanders, but any moron can write into this blog.

It's good to see the level of discourse from the right this morning is in its' usual attack mode and is using this post to sling insults instead of addressing the topic of discussion. JC is and was no moron (graduated 59th/800 cadets at the U.S. Naval Academy), however, he was an ieffective, hand wringing manager with little leadership skill. My opinion is because of his intelligence, he saw 'snakes under every rock' in regards to problem solving and was an overly cautious and indecisive President. This proposal of his for future primarys to be held in 4 regions has merit and may even the playing field a bit for those candidates whom have lessen financial backing.

The feds produce morons in Area 51 and send them to all states. Seems the feds have been working overtime.

I beg to differ in your assessment of our former President. Jimmy Carter warned us about the coming energy crisis back in the 70's but Americans didn't want to conserve and elected Mr. Optimism, Ronald Reagan, instead. Reagan did nothing to develop our energy independence, which absolutely impacts our fundamental security. Carter's views on the Palestinian situation are based on decades of experience and knowledge of the region. I object to the smearing of a man's reputation who has done so much for America and the world.

crnick - That's not necessarily true. Whether delegates are bound by the decisions of the voters varies from state to state, just as it does when it comes to the general election.

The world has gone mad! Yesterday I found myself agreeing with John Kerry about Imus and now Jimmy Carter says something that makes a great deal of sense! What the heck is going on??!!

Steve - Jimmy never rose above Engineering Officer, but in Hyman Rickover's navy - well, none of them were morons.

Peeps - I don't mind having meaningful discussions with well-reasoned people on the other side of the political spectrum. I just don't think name calling or the like adds anything to the conversation. Stating that Carter was an ineffective president gives us somewhere to go with the conversation. Calling him a moron does not. I don't disagree that he was a seriously flawed president, but he may be one of the best ex-presidents we've ever had. His charity work alone, especially with Habitat for Humanity, should preclude any 'moron' status you want to assign to him.

Also neo-con morons, GWB will never contribute to humanity on the scale that Jimmy Carter has post-presidency, unless W has a real calling to a higher power.

Amy, ya'll OK up there? Heard you've been having some really gnarly weather.

If the point is to listen to the American people, then the real fix needs to be not only in the nomination process, but in the general election. Abolish the Electoral College so every each vote will actually mean something.

I'm not going to get into a pis*ing match with you Libs regarding the "merits" of Jimmy Carter. In my opinion, he was a worthless president. I don't care if he commanded a nuclear sub - so what. He screwed up the economy, gutted the military, turned our foreign policy into a joke and sold Israel down the river. I've been waiting for this guy to just "go away" since 1980, but NO. Since then, he has been shooting off his mouth, inserting himself into affairs that don't concern him and generally (again, in my opinion) besmirching the office he once inexplicably held. He is simply an old, bitter, irrelevant, plagiarizing, anti-semitic fool.

BillyD - I somewhat agree with the sentiment of your post. However if you eliminate the electoral college then you eliminate probably 40 of the 50 states as far as campaigning goes. Canadites will spend all their time and money in New York, Pennsylvainia, Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, Florida, Texas, and California. There really isn't much incentive for them to visit recent competitive states like Iowa, New Mexico, Wisconsin, Missouri, Colorado, Nevada and New Hampshire; Thier population is not enough to warrent the time or money since all they need are pure numbers. I would tend to agree that something probably should be done, but I don't have any ideas that I think would work. Good post though, it brings up a good point that should be discussed

Bush's after life will be to serve on the board of directors of corporations he has enriched while in office. Unlike before he was president, Daddy won't have to get the positions for him and they will let him stay this time whether he has anything to contribute or not (NOT)! Expecially Halliburton.

crnick, STL - We, meaning Democrats, do not want to give everyone an equal chance to elect candidates. We want to keep the morons, (working class repubs) from ever voting again because they were responsible for the worst president and biggest crook in American history, and they still don't get it. If Carter did nothing, he would be much better than Bush, because what Bush has done is a hell of a lot worse than nothing. This country would be so much better off if Bush stayed at Crawford and never did a days work as president. The sooner he's out of there the better, no matter by what means.

The Electoral College evens out the unevenness of the popular vote, and should be continued. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be modified. The best "reform" would be to eliminate the "winner-take-all" distribution of electoral votes, apportioning them two to the winner of each State and one to the winner in each Congressional District. This way, everybody casts votes for three electors. If you want to abolish the Electoral College, the only fair way to do it would be to require that a winning candidate carry a strong plurality (>45%) of the popular vote in the country, and a majority of the States. Reforming the Electoral College seems a better way to go.

I don't know if the answer is to eliminate the electoral college, although I have read some very interesting articles on the subject off and on over the last several (seven!) years. I agree with Ryan though, that it would cause candidates to spend all of their time in those top 10 states. As it is, we rarely get candidates here, even though we share land with D.C. because Maryland is seen as such a solid blue state. That has begun to change in recent years, though, as in many other states - what I like to call the "purple-ization of America". Carter's idea has merit, although I would like to see the race start in the West. I think there is already a perception that the East Coast tries to tell the whole country what to do - mostly because D.C. is here - and I think the East Coast should go last.

If someone from Habitat for Humanity told Bush to grab his hammer and get busy, how much time would he waste looking around for DeLay?

Sorry, peeps... you're trying t osmear Jimmy Carter, He is not anti semitic. That's an old smear tactic used by Israel's supporters to silence critics and independent voices. Israel does have human rights problems with the treatment of Palestinians in Israel and in the West bank, Gaza and Arab Jerusalem. The Israelis treat Arabs and Jews in different manners. Israelis can build in Jerusalem, Palestinians can't. That's racism. Israelis can move to Jerusalem, Palestinians can't. That's racism. Israelis are building settlements on occupied territory. That's a violation of the Geneva Convention. Jimmy Carter's not a racist. Many Israeli actions and policies are racist.

I am torn re: the electoral college and the need for electoral reform. On the one hand, living in Iowa, I get to appreciate having the candidates visit here a lot, particularly since we have the first caucus. If the college were abolished, we would never see candidates, and our votes truly would not matter, and our issues would not be heard. On the other hand, as we saw in 2000 and again to some extent in 2004, it too often in recent years comes down to one state...so essentially everyone in the other 49 states is irrelevant. I like the fact that Maine and Nebraska divide their electoral votes so that even the loser in the popular election walks away with at least one electoral vote. It's really hard to say what we should do if we were to try to reform it, because we could very easily end up with a system that is even worse than the present one, and we really would not know that until after we held a presidential election.

Yeah...holy hell, peeps. The guy may have been ineffective as president, and the country indeed went throught some difficult times then, but Carter is hardly a moron. You have in the oval office now, perhaps the biggest baffoon of them all, and a person so stupid he cannot form a complete sentence any better than a 6th grader...and yet you call a Nobel Prize nominee a "moron". Damn...you're tough.

Ah, yes, the second coming of J.C. only this time in the corpus of the grinning, self-centered, fool of an a** otherwise known as Jimmy Carter.

Yeah,Sierra,and many of your Frisco pals are little more than jackbooted thugs,who would not have been out of place in 1933 Berlin.The 'smear tactics' used by geniune left-coast anti-Semitics have been to walk around with ''Palestinians-In-A-Can''at USF and force them on Jewish students,while waving placards asserting that 'Hitler Didn't Finish The Job'[San Francisco Chronicle,Apr.22,2002].Over across the bay,In Berkeley,at their UC,it was worse.Pro-Palestinian student mobs beat Jews and smashed windows at the universities Hillal House Jewish studies center,blocked highway traffic with marchers wielding PLO flags and attacked the rectory of a Lutheran minister who pleaded for the[plainly anti-Semitic] violence to stop.These anti-Jewish riots took place only a few months after the university,inside its Sproul Plaza,held,unsurprisingly,a book-burning of conservative books and works critical of Middle East terrorism.[Oakland Tribune,San Francisco Chronicle,[also see:Op-Ed Page letters for this date penned by the Chancellors of USF and UC Berkeley deploring the anti-Semitic violence and terrorizing], Associated Press May 05,2002].Sierra is one of a vast populance which peoples this region of the nation that turns a blind eye to all except what the 'Jews'are up to,shielding and excusing patent anti-Semitic behaviors by using a twisted form of reverse psychology that asserts that the mere accuasation of anti-Jewish bias is leveled merely to 'silence criticism'which is patent bull on its face.The Jews and Israel are criticized every day,ALL the time.'Dark 'Zionist'conspricies abound.'AIPAC'is at the bottom of it all,a sort of Jewish Illuminati seeking world domination.The pro-terrorist bloc of the UN whiffles out anti-Israel Resolutions by the bucketload[silent,of course,on Sudanese,Arab,Islamic Indonesian/Phillipine/Javan/Sri Lankan/,Algerian,Somalian,Tibetan,or Nepalese depredations including genocide],while the 'poor'Palestinians are being killed by both sides in a FATAH-HAMAS blood feud,hundreds of millions of international aid was ripped off by Arafat and stashed in Swiss banks,Mein Kamph by Adolf Hitler and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion are brisk best-sellers,declarations that even the PRE 1967 borders of Israel that are legitimately enshrined by the UN will not be recognized by the Palestinian government[at the moment,HAMAS],and that the Geneva Conventions ALSO explicitly forbid killing civilians seen as 'legitimate military targets'by HAMAS/FATAH,using child soldiers,conducting military operations without colour of uniform,kidnapping,[as we speak the Palis have a BBC reporter who they may have killed]rape of civilians,and torture[against their OWN people].Jimmy Carter is not a racist.He is a dupe.Many anti-Israel-policy critics are not dupes.They are racists.They are also dullwitted.Anyone dumb enough to walk around with Che plastered on their t-shirts is probably bovine enough to buy into HAMAS as a 'freedom movement'rather than the rank murderers that they actually are.

Ryan and BillyD , I agree with your assesments. I do beleive the electoral college needs to be changed or abolished. It just gives to much power to the smaller states. Also, excellant point about the candidates just campaigning in the high populace states. I like Ryan , wish I had a compromise that could work, but I like the idea of having regional primaries. I also beleive that raising money for elections should be fedrally controlled. The only reason I bring this up is to level the playing field. Honestly, do you think you can tell your child that some day they can be president. The only problem is you have to become a millionaire first before you can run for any federal elections. If the federal government caps and controls the amount of spending, this will open up the elections to more than millionaires. This is probobly not the right answer, but I really would like to see the average american have the ability to become president without raisng millions of dollars and being millionaires themselves.

Amy B you said---. "I beg to differ in your assessment of our former President. Jimmy Carter warned us about the coming energy crisis back in the 70's but Americans didn't want to conserve and elected Mr. Optimism, Ronald Reagan, instead. Reagan did nothing to develop our energy independence, which absolutely impacts our fundamental security." WOW!!! Guess what Amy you’re right Reagan didn’t use his position as “The Great Communicator” to preach to us about conserving energy. No Reagan only helped to defeat the single greatest threat (at the time) our world has ever known the Soviet Union without firing a single shot. While he was busy ending the Soviet Empire, he also lowered our taxes from 70%...let me write that again 70%!, to 28%, and working to get lower oil prices and decrease our huge poplulation of the unemployed (I know cause I was one thanks to Carter), maybe just maybe he should have been the “Great Communicator” on conserving energy as well I mean he sure had the time with all of the other unimportant things he was doing right Amy? You want to talk security? I got news for you Carter, Reagan, Bush Sr., Bill Clinton and everybody’s favorite idiot 'W' were all not aware of how severe the threat of islamo terrorists really was to our way of life until 9-11. But it seems that no matter how great Reagan was and what he accomplished, and how history plainly shows this you are simply too partisan to recognize this. I don’t like Carter never did, I don’t like 'W' and I didn’t like his too rich wow I’ve never been to a supermarket before I pay people do that for me Bush Sr. But when I read an attack on someone like Reagan that makes it look like this war was his fault or Clinton’s fault for that matter I have to draw the line. This war and not just in Iraq which I think was a total mistake, after mistake, not to mention a bad idea, is the fault of the terrorists who attacked us Amy don’t you get that? For the record I think we should stay the course in Iraq but I have never supported the decision by Republicans and Democrats alike to go there. If we do leave does anyone honestly believe these terrorists will actually leave us alone?

Gotta laugh at these repugnants who think they are all going to heaven - after all they have quite a history of supporting folks who have more than one living spouse - not to mention one who was engaged and married at the same time. Take religious advice from a repugnant - I think not, the ones I know only pretend to be religious, could not tell you anything accurate from the Bible if they were trying to actually read it. It just kills the repugnants because not one single repugnant president has ever done anything good for the working class or working poor while in office or after they are finally out of office. Sorry, folks in my opinion (and yes this is an opinion page) we allowed a whoremonger to replace a Sunday School teacher - now how religious is that as a nation? Not very, not very at all. I was a single working female under the Carter administration, did better than I ever have until Clinton became president, nearly lost everything under Reagan (by that time I was and still am married - to the same one and only husband), that pesky little S & L banking thing. I vote in every election and I never, ever vote r - even on a local basis.

The best solution would be to keep the Electoral College but on a congressional district level. Each CD a candidate wins counts for one Electoral vote and the state winner gets the extra two for the Senators. This way each congressional district counts the same, so it would discourage candidates from only focusing on coastal population centers.

The Electoral College leads to voter apathy, low turnout, and wasted votes. Here in this very Red state, a democratic vote for president has been useless. Lately, we have elected a democratic govenor, and a democratic congressman, so there is hope. However, the last three presidential elections have been so lopsided in this state, that all democratic votes were just lost. Because I am so into finding a viable 3rd party candidate, I actually voted for Nader. I knew that any vote for Gore or Kerry would be swallowed up by the huge republican majority in the state. Now tell me why I should believe that the Electoral College actually helps my vote count. That same republican majority virtually guaranteed that neither candidate would visit here. If everyote was counted in a nationwide ballot, more people would vote and some presidential candidate might actually make a stop here.

Have a national primary day, do away with national conventions as a pretense to nominate a candidate (let them meet, greet, and drink as that is the true purpose of them anyway), then let the games begin!

Thank God I'm not..weenie ... Be careful, your showing your income class....my taxes were NEVER taxed at the 70% bracket and my FEDERAL taxes have basically remained the same (adjusted for inflation) since Reagan right on through the 'Contract on America' Repubs took over and has carried right on through to the current elitist regime. What has increased are my state, local, property and sales taxes. I would appreciate you and all the well-to-do to take assessment of the majority Americans and their point of view. Afterall, you are the minority.

Mentioning Carter sure brings out the zieg heils.

How come you old fascists can't shut up about presidents who served 3 or 6 terms ago, but you refuse to discuss the biggest disgrace to ever hold the office? (GWB for those of you playing at home.)

POTUS Reagan is the major cause of most of our problems today. History will show him as one of the worest. He and his profiteers armed the Contras, Saddam and bin Laden.

Sorry peeps, Lee: Jimmy Carter was the first President to address human rights and to make it part of our discussion of foreign policy. After 8 years of Nixon/Ford/Kissinger realpolitic, this was a breath of fresh air. Jimmy Carter brokered the first peace agreement between Israel and an Arab nation. For this, he received a Nobel Peace Prize. How many Nobel Prizes have either of you received? Jimmy Carter is nobody's dupe. He wasn't my favorite President. But, he's the best ex-President this country has ever produced. Grow up, boys

Yeah, if we all listened to Jimmy, we'd all still be wearing sweaters,driving Yugo's, Russia would still be in existence, and home mortgage rates would still be at 18%, 30 year fix. What a capitalist paradise, 1976-1980 was.

The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics is gone, but Russia still exists. You'd think an expert on history and geopolitics would know that.

"Sorry peeps, Lee: " You mean Lee Holmes. I have a picture of me with Jimmy Carter, and I think he was a great president, and if not great, at least moral.

Beating Jews and terrorzing these in the hearts of large American cities is not a 'grown up'behavior.It is thuggery.Carter is non-complicant in these actions that have been carried out by the leftwing exclusively.'Grown up'behavior does not engage in the illogical reasoning that allows individuals who purport to champion human rights to support murderers,racists,child-abusers,women-as-chattel,religious-based homophobia that allows gays to be put to death,'honour-killings',female genital mutiliation,and xenophobia.Who really needs to 'grow up'here?

I am going to join the name calling. Jimmy Carter is the closest thing to a living saint in this country. George Bush is the closest thing to the anti-Christ in this country.

Lee Holmes - we can probably all "grow up" a little here.

I am going to join the name calling. Jimmy Carter is the closest thing to a living saint in this country. George Bush is the closest thing to the anti-Christ in this country.

Well Mr. Thank God, you and I will just have to agree to disagree. I always thought Reagan lived in a fantasy world of his own making and, like the actor he was, he convinced a great many Republicans to go along with his delusions. Do you really think an American President can cause communism to dissolve just by standing at a podium and saying "tear down this wall" ? Jimmy Carter may not have had the magical thinking thing down, but he certainly has accomplished a great many good things in the real world in his lifetime.

I think Presiden Carter's idea is a good one. I also wish we would do away with the electoral college. Do you realize that our Constitution says that the census counts all the residents, not just citizen residents. The House of Representatives is based on census numbers. Some states have had increased representation as a result of a high illegal alien population. The number of electors is based on each individual state's number of representatives plus its two senators. So illegal aliens, who do not have the right to vote because they are not citizens, may still influence the presidential elections.

Amy B from Portland - and others on this blog who have bashed Reagan - indulge me for a moment. I was a child of the 60's - I grew up in Madison, WI. My dad was a medical school professor at the University of WI - my mom was a "homemaker". My dad was a "Barry Goldwater republican" - my mom, a Roosevelt democrat. Actually, she was a hippie. I had an interesting childhood. I grew up with elementary school drills where we had to hide under our desks in preparation of an atomic attack. As a kid, I was terrified of nuclear war. Obsessed with it, actually. The first president I could vote for was Reagan - when I was in college. I spent my high school years hearing my dad bash Carter - for good reason. After all, I was old enough to really see where the country was at that time. America was weak - our economy was in shambles, we seemed adrift, and a country I never heard of - Iran - had captured some of our people in the US embassy. Everything changed in January of 1980 - my junior year of high school. Reagan was president - the hostages were released (I wonder why), and the country feeled alive again. For the next 8 years, I actually felt "safe" for the first time in my life. If you're old enough to remember, nobody - and I mean nobody - messed with America. If they did, they would pay the price. Not only that, this country experienced the greatest period of economic growth in history (despite the revisionist historians portrayal). My point is, Ronald Reagan did more for America than any president save for Abraham Lincoln. When I compare his legacy to Carter, Bush the First, Clinton or GW, I just laugh. When I look at the times now that we live in - in many ways more dangerous than my childhood - I wish to God (or whatever God you worship), someone, anyone, with the backbone, fortitude, insight and "protector-like" qualities of Ronald Reagan would come forward and enter the 2008 race. Sadly - tragically - that won't happen. I am more afraid now for the security and survival of this country than I have ever been. I just wish more people out there felt the same way that I do. So shame on all you people that ridicule the name of Ronald Reagan. God knows where any of us would be now if not for him.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):