Former President Jimmy Carter is not what you would call a friend to the Bush Administration. In recent years, Carter has been highly critical of everything Bush has done, regardless of whether it actually did any good. Lately, Carter's been teeing off on Vice President Dick Cheney, saying he's been a disaster as VP. Of course, given Carter's past and present, I'd say he's an expert on all things disastrous, but even experts can be wrong.
This got me wondering why Carter went from being a quiet humanitarian to a public moonbat. Part of it is how Democrats treat losers, and let me tell you, it's not well. When a Democrat fails, the modern party barely recognizes they exist, only dragging them out on special occasions. Need proof? Anyone heard from Michael Dukakis or Walter Mondale recently? Carter was pretty much persona non grata in Democrat circles after getting his butt handed to him by Ronald Reagan in 1980.
Then came Bill Clinton. With Clinton calling on Carter for high profile gigs and advice, Carter had a second chance, and he wasn't about to let it go unused. And since the modern left is all about hating Bush, he latched onto it and hasn't let go since.
At the heart of Carter's Bush-hate is a combination of Bush's support of Israel and Carter's knowledge that he wasn't that great a President. Carter's hatred of Jews is legendary, almost as legendary as his blunders as President. Some, like the botched attempt to rescue our Iranian hostages and stagflation, are well-known. Others, like his complete capitulation to the Soviet Union and overseeing crooked elections while promising everything was fine, aren't, or aren't remembered that much anymore. But to someone like Carter, each failure weighs on his psyche, so he projects his anger onto people like President Bush and Vice President Cheney.
It may give him an outlet for his anger, but it doesn't heal it. That's where the Democrats are failing Carter the most. Instead of giving him the help he needs to get past his failings, Democrats use Carter as an attack dog and then defend him as a statesman and humanitarian. Maybe it's me, but I don't think you can be that much of a statesman or a humanitarian with hate in your heart.
Put simply, not much of what Carter says these days can be taken seriously because it's not coming from an intellectual or moral core. The only things Carter's drawing on are hate and personal embarrassment, and neither one adds any weight to his arguments. It may get him fans on the faux left, but it will leave him empty and, thus, more susceptible to the hate and personal embarrassment within.
And it only gets more depressing from there, kids.