Posted on 12/30/2007 11:49:15 PM PST by america4vr
More than a quarter-century after completing his term of office, James Earl Carter is still to be found in the thick of debates about national policies on a range of issues: nuclear arms, Iraq, North Korea, and, especially, the conflict between Israel and the Arabs. A steady stream of books and articles continues to issue forth from his pen, and he travels the world on self-selected diplomatic missions. No other former President has chosen to play a similar role. But then, Carter’s whole political career has been out of the ordinary. In order to understand the man today, it is necessary to see him in the light of his past.
In 1976, when Carter tossed his hat into the ring for the presidential nomination, the Democratic party was still deeply riven by the long, bitter debate over the war in Vietnam. Carter’s response was to soar above these divisions, downplaying both ideology and issues. Instead, he put himself forward as a man of piety and character who would restore a high tone to government in the aftermath of Watergate and related scandals. Before the rise of politically-oriented televangelists, Jimmy Carter made his personal experience as a “born again” Christian into a key tenet of his platform. “I can give you a government that’s honest and that’s filled with love, competence, and compassion,” he pledged.
When the scramble for the Democratic nomination began, Carter was widely seen as a long shot. But by the time the primary season was half over, he had left the other, better-known Democratic contenders in the dust. That he was able to compete with them at all—that is, to raise money and enlist volunteers—owed to the national exposure he had received for his inaugural address as governor of Georgia in 1971.
(Excerpt) Read more at commentarymagazine.com ...
The national tragedy the election of Jimmy Carter was must be seen from the perspective in which it was as a result of a nation still reeling from the fallout, consequences of Watergate and President Nixon's resignation.
Had there been a viable Republican candidate running against the unknown ex-Governor of Georgia, things might have turned out differently.
Initially, President Ford, the only unelected President in history to occupy the White House said he would not run as a candidate in 1976 realizing his unattractiveness as a candidate especially after his pardoning of Nixon. His eventual loss as a result of the happenstance of history gave Jimmy Carter a victory that a genuine Republican candidate, say, Ronald Reagan would otherwise might very well have deprived him of.
Excerpts
*******************************************************
One remarkable instance grew out of Carter’s strong opposition to the use of force to reverse the Iraqi occupation of Kuwait in 1990. Not satisfied with issuing a torrent of statements and articles, he dispatched a letter to the heads of state of members of the United Nations Security Council and several other governments urging them to oppose the American request for UN authorization of military action. In this letter, writes Carter’s admiring biographer Douglas Brinkley,
he urged these influential world leaders to abandon U.S. leadership and instead give “unequivocal support to an Arab League effort, without any restraints on their agenda.” If this were allowed to occur, Carter believed, an Arab solution would not only force Iraq to leave Kuwait but at long last also force Israel to withdraw from the occupied territories.
The U.S. government under President George H.W. Bush learned of Carter’s missive only from Prime Minister Brian Mulroney of Canada. Brent Scowcroft, Bush’s National Security Adviser, called it “unbelievable” that Carter would “ask . . . the other members of the Council to vote against his own country. . . . [I]f there was ever a violation of the Logan Act prohibiting diplomacy by private citizens, this was it.” Later, Carter justified his action by noting that he had sent the letter to President Bush, too—as if this disposed of Scowcroft’s point. And even that was only a half-truth. As Brinkley reports, the copy to Bush was dated a day after the letter was sent to the others.
Despite Carter’s appeal, the Security Council voted 12-2 to authorize military action, with only Cuba and Yemen taking Carter’s side. But this was not the end of the ex-President’s efforts. Just days before the announced deadline for Iraq to withdrawal from Kuwait, Carter wrote to the rulers of America’s three most important Arab allies in the crisis—Egypt, Syria, and Saudi Arabia—imploring them to break with Washington: “I urge you to call publicly for a delay in the use of force while Arab leaders seek a peaceful solution to the crisis. You may have to forgo approval from the White House, but you will find the French, Soviets, and others fully supportive.” This time, he did not share a copy of his appeal with his own government even after the fact.
******************************************************
In addition to his efforts as a letter-writer, Carter, much like Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton, has materialized at the scenes of various crises over the years in the hope of making a difference—usually to little effect. His arrival in Yugoslavia during the Bosnia war in the mid-1990’s is memorable mostly for the praise he garnered from president Slobodan Milosevic, who hailed him as “the first American” in a while to have “understood the situation in our country,” as well as for Carter’s erroneous forecast that “the prospect for ending the crisis through [U.S.] military means” was “almost hopeless.” (A NATO bombing campaign some months later brought it to an abrupt halt.) A similar appearance in Haiti was notable for his approval of the human-rights record of the military strongman Raoul Cedras, reminiscent of his encomiums to Tito, Gierek, and Ceausescu.
It pleases me that the documentary about him opened and closed with nary a peep.
“No other former President has chosen to play a similar role”
Well, Bill Clinton is going to up the ante in this game. He’s found a way around the 22nd Amendment.
Absolutely the worst president ever.
Carter is so awful in so many ways that when I meet people who like him I have to resist the urge to ask how they can figure out how to get out of bed in the morning. He is the perfect hero for people who think all you need to do to be a wonderful person is to champion someone who doesn’t have money—that’s the only requirement. Doesn’t matter if they respond to that with bloody leftist revolution, killing Jews, whatever. It’s a bizarre idea about “caring”.
BFLR.
beware the killer rabbit
I never thought that I would consider any President worse than Clinton, but I have come to the conclusion that Carter was.
Now, his fans like Chris Matthews would rush to correct me, and ask "How could someone who became president of the US HATE it?" (Matthews would be laughing at this point.)
Carter, like Gore, Kerry, Kennedy and most liberals, sincerely loves the US for what it COULD be, what it has the POTENTIAL to be, but what it has so far FAILED to be. They seem to believe that the US will be what it should be when it leads the world in perfecting a kind of democratic-socialist ideal. That is, people get to vote for their representatives, all of whom are philosophically socialists. See, the dirty secret of so many liberals is that they love money. Capitalism for themselves, but socialism for the masses, seems to be their guiding political philosophy--look at how many of them are rich, or who worship rich people.
To Carter and his ilk, this country came close, so very close, under FDR. The WPA and other government sponsorship of the arts is just one example of what America COULD be to them--this wonderful, benevolent monster government that COULD control your life but will only do so when you need a helping hand. (The difference between a real Dem and a real Republican is that Republicans believe in the helping hand, but for dire emergencies, while Dems think that's cruel, and that hand should be available whenever you ask.)
But FDR came and went, and Americans got into that dirty money thing, wanting their own home, wanting to keep the money they earned. Selfish.
So Carter sees himself and his pals as trying to turn this ship of government, and it is slow going.
But if his whole post-presidency life has been devoted to correcting the direction of country so far off course, how could he NOT hate this country?
he and the family are cruising the Caribbean
CAPTION from the Front page of Today's Key West Citizen:
Former President Jimmy Carter and his wife, Rosalynn, tour the Harry S Truman Little White House Sunday evening during a brief cruise ship stop in Key West. The Carters and a trolley full of family also visited Ripley's Believe It or Not Museum and Jimmy Buffett's Margaritaville. The Carters last visited Key West in 1996.
.
He should be a permanent resident there.
.
Worst Democrat - Carter
Worst Republican - Nixon (I know some here think he was great but I don’t)
Easy question. Make it harder next time.
The article title is wrong. Not only was Jimmy Carter the worst ex-President, he was also the worst president. He’s only been ex-President since leaving office.
Whatever scorn history will heap on Richard Nixon, I say unapologetically, he was still a heck of a better President than Carter could ever be.
He is a huge phoney as well. Ask anyone who has ever had to work with the idiot. My friend is an old school dem and was aghast at his arrogance and selfishness. My friend swore him off as a hypocrite after looking forward to working with Jimmuh.
And the jerk rammed a set of shoddy, non spec “habitats” on the lefty community adjacent to ours. Slammed them right in the heart of the highest priced area of that town, ignored codes,and of course, whined when the word got out that we were all bigots.
What a turd.
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.