<p>It is unusual and disorienting to find that I admire the gist of your rival posts. </p>
<p>I’m with Alexandre
“To you, being able to relax and enjoy good food and a laid back environment is either retirement or vacation. To me, it is life.”
So true!</p>
<p>I’m with fundingfather,
“The question that I have for those who so admire and long for the European lifestyle is why not live it?[…] Move to a smaller house. And, pertinent for this forum - don’t send your kids to private colleges/universities.”
Don’t hold your breath waiting for that one FF.</p>
<p>CC Americans tend to admire the European lifestyle (I do), they do not necessarily want to have to live it in fact, (Xuniversities, Xhomes, Xautos, Xtv, et al).</p>
<p>" “Move to a smaller house. And, pertinent for this forum - don’t send your kids to private colleges/universities” Don’t hold your breath waiting for that one FF. "</p>
<p>Well you wouldn’t have to hold your breath very long. You are talking with Alexandre, who is after all a huge proponent of public schools. He is being very consistent.</p>
<p>To show that I don’t mind my own thread being sidetracked. I would add, sell your big car, drive slower and walk more, and visit your public library.</p>
<p>Amy Carter went to college is living in Alanta, last I heard. I remember when she caused a fuss because she read a book at a state dinner.</p>
<p>None of the Bush boys were raised in the White House, so I didn’t think of them as successes or otherwise.</p>
<p>As for Europe as a place to live, I know some nice people who like to live there, but I like the states.</p>
<p>When the words values and the presidency are used in the same sentence, Jimmy Carter is the only possible subject. I am encouraged by the number of times that his name appears on this list. It is not often that we can accurately use the word statesman; we are usually reduced to discussing our leaders as politicians.</p>
<p>My definition of “Family Values” is slightly different than the self serving definition touted by certain political groups to help bolster their agenda. My definition would involve health care for all (not a health care industry) because families should consider it their right, care and protection for the environment because it is what future generations (our kids) will rely on, quality affordable education (because it is our future), tolerance, compassion, and peace (because war tears families apart). In other words it would make this country a better place for all people (families included) by promoting these general values while allowing each family choose their own personal values by which to live.</p>
<p>My definition does not necessarily include participation in organized religion. I feel that spirituality can be found in many places and does not necessarily involve a structured environment or beliefs. In fact many organized religions use their doctrines to preach hate in my opinion . </p>
<p>If I had to choose, I would probably have to go with the Carters for many of the reasons cited in preceding posts. Jimmy Carter has proven that he is a decent, caring person.</p>
<p>I would also have to consider the Kennedys because they have remained a family in spite of the tragedy, scandal, and betrayal that they have had to endure.</p>
<p>Obviously, the current occupant of the White House gets a failing grade when discussing family values that matter to me.</p>
<p>Mr. B, my own personal take on Carter is that he is a great man but was a bad President. Almost the photographic negative of the current occupant of the White House, Carter was <em>too</em> sensitive to the pros and cons of various decisions and the negative consequences to real people no matter what he did; a thoughtful man, a moral man. As a leader, you sometimes need to be able to let some chips fall where they may and still get a good night’s sleep without agonizing over it…note the difference between that and truculently leading with your chin.</p>
<p>Since I brought up Carter’s mistakes I feel I should mention some things I thought he did right. Boycotting the olympics and blocking the trade of wheat to protest the invasion of Afghanistan was the right thing to do and I believe history will show it had a greater impact than is recognized today. Susan Ford did seem to be a very decent young woman and I didn’t mean to exclude her with my 30 year time frame. Her household was probably better prepared for the task than many and being appointed probably had an advantage to the family.</p>