Posted on 12/27/2006 1:38:41 AM PST by beaversmom
Why should Americans view Jimmy Carter with affection or respect?
Why would anyone who remembers the devastating impact of his presidency give serious consideration to his opinions on any subject in foreign or domestic policy?
An alarming survey suggests that a plurality of the public now considers Carter an “above average” President –in stark contrast to George W. Bush, considered “below average” by an overwhelming margin. Bush, however, won a decisive victory when he ran for re-election (the first candidate to win an outright majority in 16 years – since his father’s triumph in 1988), while Carter lost to Reagan in a landslide of historic proportions – even handing Republicans control of the Senate (with a staggering gain of 12 seats!) for the first time in 26 years.
The voters rejected the former Georgia governor based on his catastrophic record, not to mention his sanctimonious, priggish, insufferable personality. In his notorious “malaise speech,” Carter blamed the people themselves, not government missteps, for the nation’s economic and energy problems. Scandals among his top aides (Hamilton Jordan and Bert Lance, prominent among them) demonstrated the appalling incompetence of the White House staff (well-documented in the critically acclaimed 1979 book, THE SHADOW PRESIDENTS, by a young political writer named…. Michael Medved). In 1979 alone, Carter participated in three of the most devastating defeats of the entire Cold War – the removal of the Shah of Iran and the installation of the murderous, Islamo-Nazi regime of Ayatollah Khomeini and the mullahs; the takeover of Nicaragua by the Sandinista Communists; and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Worst of all, Carter (with both houses of Congress dominated by overwhelming Democratic majorities!) presided over the worst, most painful economic crisis in the nation’s post-war history: complete with 21% mortgage interest rates, 12% inflation rates, and unemployment above 8%.
No wonder that the voters turned against him, handing victory to Ronald Reagan even in die-hard “blue states” like New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Pennsylvania and California (his overall electoral vote margin was a staggering 489 votes to Carter’s 49).
If Carter qualifies as an “above average President,” what would an “average” or “below average” president look like?
And what about Carter’s allegedly distinguished post-Presidential career?
He’s best known for building a few homes for Habitat for Humanity (very nice, but Newt Gingrich gets no credit for similar participation in the same charity) but his admirers want to forget about his typically disastrous role in arranging Clinton’s appeasement of North Korea – a diplomatic debacle which greatly facilitated Kim Jong Il’s nuclear ambitions. Of course, Carter won the Nobel Peace Prize for his reliably pro-Castro, anti-American comments but so have all kinds of fringe figures of the international left—including Rigoberto Minchu, anti-nuclear fanatic Linus Pauling and, yep, Yasser Arafat.
Now Carter’s at the center of new controversy with a book (PALESTINE: PEACE NOT APARTHEID) that Arafat himself would heartily applaud. The work is so rife with factual errors, plagiaristic “borrowings” and irresponsible distortions that even a long-term associate of the former President’s felt required to resign in disgust from the Carter Center at Emory University. In an interview last week on NPR, the former President described the Palestinian Authority (in which scores of innocent civilians have been dying in civilian, Palestinian-on-Palestinian political violence) as a “beautiful democracy” and twice praised their electoral process as “perfect.”
Considering the damage he’s done to his own country, his instinctive support for Third World “liberation movements” that threaten and blame the West, and an almost unparalleled record of incompetence and folly, it’s amazing that many unsuspecting Americans view this self-righteous fool as an elder statesman worthy of reverence.
Why, exactly, should we give respectful attention to the present preposterous opinions (“beautiful democracy”) of a disgraced (and possibly senile) 84-year-old who wants more than anything else to distract attention from the actual appalling record of his blessedly brief moment at the center of national power?
Cultural Crusader ping. Anyone want on or off the Michael Medved ping list, please send me an FR mail.
I don't respect Carter, I despise him.
Is there anything more scary than that?
On target.......and one of the bad guys pretending to be good guy. He was not a good guy or president.
He's a national disgrace. A petty, bitter abd spiteful little man. I can't post what I really think, because of the ban on swearing.
Michael, Michael, how can you leave out the revered VietCong Le Duc Tho's prize 1973?
yitbos
The only good thing Carter ever did was beat Ted Drunko Kennedy in the primary, and the only reason he could was because of Chappaquiddick, otherwise we would have ended up with an even bigger liberal psychopath in the WH.
I couldn't agree more. Did anyone see Carter on Jay Leno's program a week or so ago? Leno said what a nice man he was. Sorry, but Carter is a hateful person and everything you posted.
Occasionally, while driving down the Interstate, I'll drop down to 55mph just to remind myself what a fool this man truly is/was. Try it some time - you'll be amazed that America put up with this idiot for 5 minutes!
"An alarming survey suggests that a plurality of the public now considers Carter an “above average” President –in stark contrast to George W. Bush, considered “below average” by an overwhelming margin."
This demonstrates the power of media in determining public opinion. Even though their influence has been significantly diminished, the MSM still has the ability to sway public perception enough to make a difference in opinion polls, and at the voting booth.
lol! He did come up with that 55 limit didn`t he?
America has enough by 1980 though...Look at this, he won only 4 states in 1980! lol!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:ElectoralCollege1980-Large.png
I recently read that he is responsible for passing home brewing laws.
If that's indeed true I do give him credit where credit is due.
Perhaps ol Billy had a good influence somewhere.
I would bet that all those "scholars" who rated Dubya the worst president ever probably rank all Republican presidents, including Reagan, as well below average. For crying out loud these "geniuses" are libs. They will never give credit to any president who is not a lib. Considering the vast ignorance of historical matters by the American public (thanks to the brainwashing by Big Media), I would dismiss as garbage any assessment that purports to validate the worth of presidents with public polls. I voted for Carter at the time, and now know what a pompous, worthless scoundrel he was. Doubtless many Americans also believe Castro is a wonderful leader while Pinochet was evil incarnate.
There is an africanhyphenamerican AM talker in my area. All welfare, all hate whitey, all raise taxes on the rich all the time. I listen occasionally--keep your friends close and your enemies closer type thing. They occasionally get calls from "caucasians" as they charitably refer to us nonafricanhyphenamericans. The talker introduces the caller, lets the caller talk, says nothing to engage in dialogue, thanks and dismisses the "caucasian". People like Jimmy Carter should receive no better treatment. I feel like I need to go wash my hands just typing his name.
no self respecting citizen of the US gives jimmah ( Ihate Jews) carter any respect......
Gerald Ford has just died....there will probably not be the outpouring of emotions as for Ronald Reagan...but Ford was a decent man and served honourably......
when carter dies.....the secret service will probably have to guard his grave....as many would want to piss on it!!!!
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.
