Once again, the conservative view that lower taxes and decreased spending increases revenue is proving factual yet again:

The new figure is considerably smaller than original estimates. In February, the White House predicted that this year's deficit would be $244 billion because of stronger-than-expected revenue collections. The deficit hit a peak of $413 billion in 2004 and was $248 billion last year.

At least President Bush got half of the equation correct -- he forgot the reduced spending portion that usually goes along with it. Conservative are rightly upset with the outsized spending bills the Congress submitted and the president signed.

It's been proven time and again, when John F. Kennedy came to office, he sought reduced taxes for everyone -- including the rich -- almost immediately (although the actual cuts were not implemented until after he died.) And that action led the country into an economic boom. Jimmy Carter raised taxes when he took office and the nation plunged into a recession that featured high unemployment, stratospheric inflation and enormous interest rates. Once Reagan was inaugurated, he pushed through massive tax cuts and the nation prospered throughout his two-terms.

Unfortunately not. America's worst president and ex-president is blaming the U.S. and the EU for Hamas' launching a coup against Fatah in Gaza:

"The United States and Israel decided to punish all the people in Palestine and did everything they could to deter a compromise between Hamas and Fatah," he said.

The statement was so malevolent and illogical as to border on insane. Carter wasn't honest enough to say he was rooting for terrorists who started a terrifying new war in the region and trashed what little democratic rule the Palestinians had. Instead, he tut-tutted the West for being insufficiently sensitive to the fact that Hamas thugs were democratically elected in 2006 in an "orderly and fair" vote.

To Jimmy Carter, every vote is "orderly and fair," regardless of the shady circumstances and regardless of the outcome (unless, of course, the outcome is favorable to right-wing candidates as in Nicaragua when Violetta Chamorro beat Daniel Ortega in 1990, but I digress). Carter has coddled dictators and thugs such as Hugo Chavez and Yasser Arafat for years and will continue to do so until he's properly called on it.

Jimmy Carter has broken every single unwritten law when it comes to ex-presidents. Generally, former chief executives retire and write their memoirs while staying above the fray. In Carter's case, he's been attempting to remake his legacy since that January day in 1981 when he handed over the keys to the Oval Office to Ronald Reagan and the hostages that were captured under his leadership were returning home.

The reason Carter is still quoted is because he says things the liberal press want to hear and print: condemnation of President Bush and condemnation of Israel. He's at it again as reported by the far-left British paper The Guardian:

Asked how he would judge Blair's support of Bush, a Republican, the former Democratic president said: ``Abominable. Loyal. Blind. Apparently subservient.''

``And I think the almost undeviating support by Great Britain for the ill-advised policies of President Bush in Iraq have been a major tragedy for the world,'' Carter told British Broadcasting Corp. radio.

Let's parse these unbelievable words. Carter calling a foreign leader who has ruled his nation through some good and bad times "abominable" and "subservient", in other words, Bush's lapdog. What gives Carter the right to say this? He was the leader of our nation during the darkest times we'd seen since the second world war. His policies led us into a recession that was devastating. The highest taxes ever, high unemployment and inflation in double-digits. It took Reagan several years to get us out of that economic rut.

The six-nation North Korea talks have resulted in an agreement that would see several nations, in concert with South Korea, sending $400-million and fuel. In return, North Korea would allow inspectors back into that nation and return to the requirements of the failed 1994 initiative.

John Mullaney covered this on this blog earlier today calling it a "great victory for President Bush." I don't see it that way.

For years I've slammed the Clinton administration for kowtowing to Kim Jung Il and his father Kim Il Sung. The original agreement was negotiated by former President Jimmy Carter and was a monumental bust. We sent them fuel and money and they continued to press forward with their nuclear ambitions. This deal is not much different. The only improvement over the Carter deal is that we are not providing them nuclear technology as he agreed to do.

I'll take a wait and see approach on this one. If Kim Jung Il allows inspectors free access to all suspected sites, I'll agree it was a success. If not, it's just the same agreement warmed over, albeit without giving them two light-water nuclear reactors.

Jimmy Carter has already solidified his place as the Worst President in History. Now he's going for the the title of Worst ex-President Ever. Today, fourteen more members of the Carter Center Board of Councilor's resigned amidst the scandal involving Carter's book on Israel and Palestine:

The resignations from The Carter Center board are the latest backlash against the former president's book "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid," which has drawn fire from Jewish groups, been attacked by fellow Democrats and led to the resignation last month of Kenneth Stein, a center fellow and a longtime Carter adviser.

"You have clearly abandoned your historic role of broker in favor of becoming an advocate for one side," the departing members of the Center's Board of Councilors told Carter in their letter of resignation.

This is nothing new. Carter has been anti-Israel for sometime now and the left wing of the Democratic party is right with him. Here's an example from Wesley Clark:

When we asked him what made him so sure the Bush administration was headed in this direction, he replied: "You just have to read what's in the Israeli press. The Jewish community is divided, but there is so much pressure being channeled from the New York money people to the office seekers."

I guess it's not going to help that the only person Bush mentioned by name in his speech last night was Joe Lieberman.

Note: whenever you hear the term "neocon" as in "neocon agenda", that's equivalent to "New York money people."