Posted on 07/09/2005 7:03:09 AM PDT by Pappy Smear
As there was no Free Republic in 1980, I was wondering about Carter's boycott of the 80 Summer Games in Moscow. Agree or disagree? Set aside for a moment that it was Carter. On the plus side, it certainly hurt them economically, and I think his gist was the human rights angle, which certainly has merit.
However, I can see it from the point of view that it is just athletics, and we should have let the team go, and try to beat some Rooskie butt.
I was only 14 at the time, and certainly not up on international affairs, maybe a more seasoned Freeper would care to chime in?
Sometimes doing the right thing does not pay.
It's not as if Americans were going to flock to Moscow in droves anyway. It had minimal effect on the Soviets. Now NBC, on the other hand...
The Soviets and East Germans were on undectable drugs anyway, so it wasn't really a competition.
IOW, Carter's Olympic ban really only hurt the kids who would have competed.
It came down to a choice between boycotting the Olympics or the entire Cabinet mooning Russia on live TV. Carter took the Democrat way out and put the onus on our young men and women who had worked all their lives for their one chance at achieving a dream of a lifetime.
You ask us to put aside the fact that it was Carter. Impossible, impossible, impossible. I just can't disassociate myself from that fact. It is difficult to think of a worse US President. I guess one could make an argument for James Buchanan or Warren Harding, but it's tough. Carter was just sooooooooo bad.
All it did was punish America athletes for Soviet misconduct. Impossible to put aside that it was Carter because it was such a typically idiotic Carter move, things like that are why Carter was an awful president and lost re-election.
When the Olympics banned South Africa while allowing every single Communist dictatorship, I decided to boycott them permanently.
Can you imagine the athletes who busted butt for years to prep for their one shot on the main stage and have it pulled from you at the last minute by some do-gooder politician. Unconscionable imho.
There are holes in that argument.
Carter is was better than any other Democrat in pandering to rhetoric over substance. The Olympic boycott hurt nobody other than fans and the athletes and had zero influence with Russia. Typically, Carter punished the US for something another country did. Sound familiar?
Thinking that boycotting the 1980 Olypimcs games, stopping grain shipments would have a meaningful effect on the Soviets moving into Afghanistan all the while helping arm the Mujahedeen was all a political ploy to be a nice democrat without spending political capital to stand up to commies.
His party was a bunch of commie loving democrats, so he proved himself to be a feckless leader, which in fact he was.
Carter's prime objective in office seemed to be depressing the bejesus out of the country. The boycott of the Olympics, while American hostages were being held in Tehran, was a ridiculous gesture that only struck another blow to national pride. At the time, I felt terrible for the young men and women who had been training for the Olympics only to have Carter pull the rug out from under them.
The boycott accomplished nothing except sinking the nation even deeper into a funk. The best you can say about Carter is that he was the night before the new American morning of Ronald Reagan.
better, is was... sorry = WAS NO BETTER
Slim, I have just reported you to the moderators. What you just posted is beyond the bounds of good taste. Now if you would just go and punch the 27th hole in the 3rd column, I could maybe agree with you.
Would Reagan, if he was in Carter's position, done the same thing? And if so, would those who chastise Carter for the boycott, done the same thing if it were Reagan that did it. The difference is, Reagan would have done even more than the boycott, while Carter thought that would have been enough.
The Olympics is about politics, always has been, always will be. To think otherwise is naive.
I'm still amazed that Carter ran this country for four years. And I remember that Reagan's election wasn't obvious until the last weekend before election day.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.