Mere Rhetoric: Video: Carter Backpeddles Unsuccessfully, MR Helpfully Lists Why

Carol Costello introduces the video: "He at times looked hurt, defiant, and charming". So we're wondering: are they still pretending to be reporters, or are they just now openly pimps for anti-Israel leftists?

Dersh at the end.

Just some back of the napkin scribbling about other parts of the video where Carter or CNN says things that are at best mildly suspicious (if you find thing that sound untrue mildly suspicious...)

(1) Carter says that he has apologized to numerous audiences over his "suicide bombings sometimes appropriate" passage. Why something is amiss: Wolf Blitzer introduces the tape by saying that Carter "apologized for the first time" and Carol Costello declared that Carter has "refused to apologize for any part of his book." She then says again that it's the first time he's apologizing for that passage - seconds before they roll tape of Carter saying the exact opposite.

(2) Carter implies that he categorically opposes terrorism. Why something is amiss: it's highly doubtful that he really does.

(3) Carol Costello describes the controversy as one in which Carter "enraged some Jewish leaders over that use of the word apartheid": Why something is amiss: we're seeing this specific misleading-by-omission line a lot. When the Boston Globe covered Carter's refusal to debate Dersh in December, they pulled the exact same stunt - stating that "a furor has erupted because of the use of the word apartheid". Since we're lazy, we'll just cut and paste what we said then:

No... the furor erupted because he published slanders about Israel that are demonstrably wrong and - literally, it appears - indefensible when challenged. The use of the word apartheid is one of those things - especially because Carter writes in his book that Israel is actually not like South Africa - but it's only a small part of it. The bigger problem is the rewriting of history that he does - and that any anti-Israel psuedo academic has to do - to make it seem like Israel isn't interested in peace.

(4) Carol Costello asks Dersh "why Carter would say one thing to a Jewish audience and another thing to a Palestinian audience". Why something is amiss: fourth graders understand intuitively why a speaker would say one thing to one audience and another thing to another audience - making it highly doubtful that Carol Costello could feed or clothe herself if she really had to ask such a blindingly stupid question.

(5) Carter insists that, until the book came out, he'd never been called a liar or bigot for his anti-Israel tirades. Why something is amiss: that's obviously not true.

Previously: Video: Jimmy Carter Has A Soft Spot For Nazis, Jimmy Carter - Not Necessarily Pro-Nazi, But Not Categorically Anti-Nazi Either, Is Jimmy Carter Just An Old-Fashioned Christian Fundamentalist, Anti-Semitic Bigot?