I wonder if it's such a good idea for Americans to be reminded of the Carter years just now

[BurtWorm]

I notice how the Republicans have managed to get Bush boy to stay as out of sight as possible until after the election. I'm not saying Carter is anywhere near as bad as Bush boy, but I, personally, think he's acting pretty strangely around the selling of his latest book, the diaries of his presidency. A lot of digs thrown at Kennedy, for example (see link below). I'm not suggesting he shouldn't be free to sell whatever he wants to sell anytime he feels like it. But to me, it's characteristic of Carter to not give a shit about any Democrat other than Jimmy Carter.

Best post-president ever, though. Got to give him that. :applause:


http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/09/20/carter_kennedy_drinks

[CountAllVotes]

1. I remember the Carter years very well

I had to go find another job being the place I worked for was abolished by Carter (it was a Federal job). That really pissed me off. I ended up being reassigned to a job working for the U.S. Army (I lasted 6 very long months in that job).

Interest rates to buy at new car were 16.9%. I desperately needed a new car but couldn't afford to buy one with my paltry paychecks.

I also remember that Carter wasn't very well liked and being the economy sucked so bad, that is the reason he did not get re-elected. I know I didn't vote for him in the 1980 presidential election, I voted for Ted Kennedy.

:dem:

[BurtWorm]

3. Your experience wasn't isolated, I'm sure you know.

And yet, you'll find a lot of people who consider themselves progressive Democrats who seem to view the Carter presidency through rose-colored glasses.

I voted for Carter--first general election vote I ever cast, actually (although I may have voted Kennedy in the primary--I don't remember, oddly enough). I was devastated, disbelieving when it became clear that Reagan was actually going to win--was actually winning the vote among people my own age!

I don't blame Kennedy for that state of affairs, I'll tell you that.

[Synicus Maximus]

55. Those that look at the Carter peridency through rose-colored glasses

weren't there.

[wuushew]

4. Those interest rates needed to be high to kill the inflation

I find no fault with Paul Volcker. Its not like people couldn't eventually refinance those onerous mortgages.

[CountAllVotes]

7. yes they also killed the ability of person's like myself

to buy things they needed, like a new car. If you wanted to buy a house, you might as well forget it unless you had a very good job paying lots of bucks. The lower working class making $5 an hour had not a chance, none.

I did not like Jimmy Carter as president I will admit. I voted for him when he ran being I am a Democrat. However, I did not support his re-election bid I will admit.

[MajorChode]

18. If you are looking for someone to blame, look no farther than Nixon

Nixon appointed Arthur Burns to the fed with the promise of easy access to credit and implemented a system of price controls that assured stagflation in years to come. Paul Volcker got us out of that mess. Blaming Carter is like blaming chemotherapy for making you sick.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Frank_Burns#Federal_Reserve_Chairman

[MajorChode]

15. That inflation was caused by previous Republican administrations

Prior to Paul Volcker, failed economic policies of two previous Republican administrations insured inflation would go out of control. It's a popular Republican myth that Carter caused inflation and Raygun got us out of it. The reality is that Nixon caused stagflation and Carter got us out of it by appointing Paul Volcker.

[wuushew]

17. Exactly, Obama needs to be more like Carter

Volcker is the man. Obama is a sellout on the economic front.

[BurtWorm]

20. You've got to be kidding!

More like Carter? Were you around for those years?

[CountAllVotes]

21. yep that will finish off Obama for sure

if he decides to take a few tips from Carter he is a goner in 2012! ACK!

:dem:

[wuushew]

26. Are you trying to compare personalities or policies?

Obama seems to be a non-confrontational introvert so the comparision to Carter is a non-starter.

Which Carter policies are you critical of? Energy policy, international relations, arms reduction?

[BurtWorm]

31. I'm mainly critical of the way he got along with (actually did not get along with) his Democratic

allies in Congress, in Labor, in the states, on the left. I hold him responsible for turning the party so sharply to the right, for setting Reagan up (especially in terms of budget, taxes, etc.) so nicely, for his mostly right-wing, cold-warrior style foreign policy (also setting the Reagan years up nicely). And I think his leadership style generally sucked.

[Hangingon]

49. I never want to go thru the Carter years again!

[DURHAM D]

9. Who did you vote for in the General election?

I voted for Anderson - as did every liberal Democrat I know. We were pissed at Carter.

[CountAllVotes]

10. yes I did

I remember Anderson too but no, I did not vote for him. I do remember holding my nose when I voted for Carter however.

[DURHAM D]

11. It took me about 20 minutes to pull the lever.

It was the most difficult voting decision I have ever had to make.

[CountAllVotes]

13. I remember thinking I wasn't sure who I was voting for

was it Jimmy Carter or his brother Billy Carter and his "Billy Beer". Remember that? :puke:

:rofl:

[Ozymanithrax]

24. Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter, and John B. Anderson were the Presidential candidates in 1980...

Ted Kennedy ran in the primary, not the general, and the primary candidates were Jimmy Carter, Ted Kennedy, and Jerry Brown.

[CountAllVotes]

28. I know

I remember Jerry Brown running too. I saw him at the time in fact. There he was speaking at the Civic Center plaza in San Francisco screaming and shouting and wearing a pin stripped suit during my 30-minute lunch half-hour. He made quite the impression I remember!

I wrote in Kennedy. I was quite disgusted as was my father who suggested the write in Kennedy idea to me. I was pretty young at the time and writing in a candidate was a new idea to me. :think:

[xchrom]

2. 'near as bad'? what? nt

[BurtWorm]

5. Not saying. Anywhere near as bad.

But I am saying Carter was not a very good president and he's not the best Democrat in my book by a long shot. In fact he's shown an astonishing amount of disloyalty to his fellow Democrats from way, way back.

Best post-president ever, though. :applause:

[xchrom]

6. ...

:puke:

[BurtWorm]

8. He's not bad enough to make *me* puke.

But he was pretty bad.

Best post-president. :woohoo:

[LanternWaste]

30. post hoc ergo prompter hoc.

But he was pretty bad.

post hoc ergo prompter hoc.

I imagine many people here (myself included) would be more than interested in seeing your specific policies, their direct results, and a valid premise explaining (with relevance) the cause-and-effect.

[BurtWorm]

34. He lost to Ronald Reagan.

What more proof do you need that Carter sucked as a president!

[MajorChode]

36. There were several reasons why he lost to Raygun

The biggest one was George H.W. Bush's Team B plants(Wolfowitz, etc) were seditiously leaking portions of their reports to the press which claimed the Soviets had a first strike strategy, were winning the cold war, and Carter was soft on them. Team B's assessments were later proved to be complete bullshit, but the damage was done and it cost Carter the election. The end result was Raygun won, and spun up the cold war again to the tune of trillions of dollars in defense dollars, all paid for with deficit spending. Had Team B never existed (and they never should have) Carter would not have lost the election.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Team_b

Carter's biggest fault was that he was honest and told the people what they needed to hear, vs lying to them and telling them what they wanted to hear. The inevitable result was disasterous for the country and we are still paying for it today.

Carter didn't suck as president. Carter was one of the best we've ever had. The people who were behind the campaign of lies and misinformation sucked, and ultimately those who fell for such nonsense sucked. The US got exactly the president it deserved in 1980.

[BurtWorm]

38. Well, I do give dirty tricks some credit. But I deeply disagree about Carter's abilities and legacy.

I don't know how anyone could say that with a straight face, actually.

[MajorChode]

46. Everyone is entitled to their opinion

Personally, I don't see how someone can be so naive to buy into the RW smear machine against Carter. He had the misfortune to become president during a time of great economic, environmental, and foreign policy upheaval (most of which were caused by piss-poor RW policies) and he did the right things to address those problems. The end result is the RW smear machine painted him as the cause of those problems and Raygun as the savior. I choose not to buy into that myth. Carter fixed our economic problems. Carter implemented environmental policies that we still benefit from today. Carter's foreign policy successes are unmatched by any president since. You've already been provided those examples and still you want to insist that his "abilities and legacy" are tainted and as evidence you want to give some vague example of how he didn't get along with the Democratic establishment and that he lost to Raygun, when Raygun's campaign was clearly built on lies, misinformation, and bigotry.

[BurtWorm]

47. You are also throwing around unsubstatiable claims.

Carter fixed our economic problems? Personally? Which of Carter's economic policies do we have to thank for that, specifically? Which environmental policies are you referring to? The Camp David accords were certainly well done, but do you remember how well he handled the Iranian situation? Remember the SALT treaty? The creation of the mujahedeen in Afghanistan?

Look, I won't demonize Carter if you stop this silly hagiography of him. He was by almost all standards a medioocre president, to be kind. Vastly better than the imbecile we just suffered through eight years of, and better than the dunce who followed him. But by no means a stellar president. Please.

[MajorChode]

48. I guess you don't remember stagflation

and/or you don't remember that Carter was the first president to even HAVE an energy policy. Ever hear of the DOE?

How was he supposed to handle the Iranian situation? Provide them arms in exchange for hostages? And yes, I have heard of SALT. Do you think nuclear arms reduction is a bad thing? Do you actually think Carter created the mujahideen?

You can demonize Carter all you want. It's only a reflection of your own opinions which appear to be based on "unsubstatiable claims".

Cheers!

[BurtWorm]

50. How specifically did Carter end stagflation?

PS:
http://www.unc.edu/depts/diplomat/archives_roll/2003_01-03/dauherty_shah/dauherty_shah.html

INTRODUCTION
When the U.S. embassy in Tehran, Iran, opened for business the morning of 22 October 1979, there was a cable waiting in the Central Intelligence Agency station from CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia. The cable advised that President Carter had decided the previous day to admit the former Shah of Iran, Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, into the United States for life-saving medical treatment. From the perspective of the embassy staff, it was absolutely the worst thing that could happen, on two fronts: the decision would undo the progress, however slight, in improving United States-Iranian relations; and it would jeopardize the safety and security of all Americans in Iran. The embassy staff was utterly astonished, for not only had they warned Washington over the previous summer of the various dangers associated with such a decision, but some had even been told that by Washington seniors that the consequences of the shah’s admission to the United States were so obvious that no one would be "dumb enough" to allow it. Yet, with U.S.-Iranian relations still lacking real stability, and with an intense and growing distrust of the United States permeating the new Iranian "revolutionary" government, President Carter — unbelievably, from the embassy’s optic—had decided to allow the shah to enter the United States.

Was there no place else he could go? Was the United States the only country in the world with adequate medical facilities to treat the shah? Was the shah’s illness truly life-threatening at that point? Why did the president not insist on a second impartial medical opinion based on a physical examination and testing, rather than relying solely on the judgment of a physician engaged by a private citizen with a specific political agenda? Why did President Carter — seemingly against his own judgment — agree to the admission of the shah to the United States? Why did Henry Kissinger, David Rockefeller, and John McCloy so strongly urge the shah’s admission? Why did these three, who had no responsibility for policymaking or policy execution, press for a decision which had such awful consequences for the nation attached to it, consequences which were clearly apparent to all? Finally, if it was essential that the shah be permitted entry into the United States, why have not the reasons been clearly stated publicly? These issues require explanation, for this decision, founded as it was on "advice that was both flawed and incomplete" – is one of the most controversial decisions of post-World War Two foreign policy.

[MajorChode]

51. I guess you've never heard of a guy named Paul Volcker

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Volcker#Chairman_of_the_Federal_Reserve

For someone who claims to know so much about Carter, you seem to know very little.

Cheers!

[BurtWorm]

52. Volcker ended stagflation, not Carter.

But I'll give it to you that Carter at least appointed Volcker. :applause:

Now what about Carter's Iranian policy?

[MajorChode]

53. Wow! You actually think the president does everything personally?

Volcker did exactly what Carter appointed him to do. The president runs the executive branch, and the people appointed by him do things for which he is ultimately responsible. Pretty basic stuff really. Had Carter not been elected, Volcker(a Democrat) would never have been appointed and stagflation would not have been fixed. This is one of the most notable economic accomplishments of any president in generations, and you want to make it sound as if Carter had nothing to do with it. I find it quite interesting that you like to place blame on Carter for the mistakes made by his appointees, but you only begrudgingly give him credit for the accomplishments of his appointees. Then you actually want to accuse others of looking at things through rose colored glasses? Please.

I didn't mention Carter's Iranian policy. That was you. I mentioned his overall foreign policy accomplishments which were certainly positive by any reasonable person's metric. As far as his environmental policies go, his record on energy speaks for itself (which you conveniently ignored). Myself and others have listed numerous significant accomplishments in foreign, domestic, and economic policies, and the best you can do is list a one sided account of what happened in Iran and point out that Carter lost the election, therefore he must have been a bad president (which if one were to follow that ridiculous logic means that Raygun and Bush must have been great presidents). So long as you insist on minimizing or simply ignoring Carter's numerous accomplishments while trying to steer the conversation into your very narrow field of 20/20 hindsight view, I don't know that we have much more to talk about.

Have a nice day.

[BurtWorm]

54. Memory serves. Carter stunk.

I was sorry he wasn't reelected--even stunned that he wasn't, given his opponent. But I had no delusions about his effectiveness as a leader.

(Are you going to give Reagan credit for reappointing Volcker?)

[MajorChode]

56. Yet another history lesson

Raygun tried to pressure Volcker into reversing his policies and further sandbagged him with failed economic policies like increasing defense spending while cutting taxes which only exacerbated inflationary forces. Raygun used to ask his advisors if he could do away with the fed so he could fire Volcker. Volcker didn't give in to Raygun. By the time Volcker's first term was up, it was clear to everyone that his policies worked and he was so immensely popular on Wal-Street and everywhere else that Raygun had no choice but to reappoint him, so no I don't give Raygun any credit for reappointing Volcker. He didn't have any other choice. Raygun ultimately fired him after his 2nd term. He was the best fed chairman this nation has ever known and Raygun fired him.

[LanternWaste]

29. I imagine a few individuals place a heavier priority...

"in fact he's shown an astonishing amount of disloyalty to his fellow Democrats from way, way back..."

I imagine a few individuals place a heavier priority on their own sense of ethics than on towing a party line. Not very popular or trendy I admit in the post "thou-shalt-speak-no-ill-of-fellow-party-members mantra sold to us, but president Carter was never really considered a party-man by the cynical masses, simply a good man.

[BurtWorm]

32. The masses did not see Jimmy Carter as a good man, believe me.

Not until after his presidency did his reputation grow. Deservedly, I might add.

[CountAllVotes]

35. Habitat for Humanity

that was a big winner for Jimmy Carter post-presidency. It is still going on today best I know an it was/is a good thing! :thumbsup: I believe he has done more good post-presidency than he actually did as President.

[otohara]

12. Explain Your Remark

But to me, it's characteristic of Carter to not give a shit about any Democrat other than Jimmy Carter.

[CountAllVotes]

14. He sure hated Ted Kennedy

He was the man I loved even way back then (((Ted))) - not Mr. Peanut as Carter was known as at the time.

This is the kind of crap that got Carter not re-elected.



:dem:

[RaleighNCDUer]

22. You do understand that his problem with Kennedy stemmed from

Kennedy mounting an opposition campaign to a sitting Democratic president?

If Kennedy had not done that, he'd have been a shoe-in in '84, assuming Carter would have won in 80 having not been weakened by internal dissension.

[BurtWorm]

23. Ask yourself why Carter had internal dissension.

He was a very dissatisfying president.

[RaleighNCDUer]

27. So dissatisfying -

he confronted the energy crisis as it was just beginning - where would we be today if we'd followed up on his policies?

He brokered the ONLY lasting peace in the Middle East - tens or hundreds of thousands of Israelis and Egyptians are alive today because of it.

He started the process of de-colonializing America by relinquishing control of the Panama Canal zone. As I remember he also had a number of overseas military bases closed.

Against that you got what? Billy Beer?

[BurtWorm]

33. I'll give him the energy policy and the Begin-Sadat accords.

The Panama Canal thing was already in the works.

I blame him and Zbigniew Bzrezsinski for starting the mujahedeen ball rolling in Afghanistan and for getting the cold war up and hysterical again, after detente.

And I really blame him for losing the WH in 1980.

[blindpig]

40. And he initiated the war against the Left in Central America.

All the penance in the world will never wash away that blood.

[CountAllVotes]

25. Kennedy considered him to be a "country bumpkin"

and that sort of stuck to Mr. Peanut. ;)

I'm glad Ted was there and I voted for him as did many others I know, including my late father who was no liberal by a long shot. He had a six pack of Billy beer however.

[BurtWorm]

16. Tell me which Democrats he's demonstrated giving a shit about.

Maybe you're not aware of his cool relationship with the Clintons or the Kennedys or Tip O'Neill or the Democratic Congress in the years from 1976-1981?

[CountAllVotes]

19. Carter truly hated Tip O'Neill too

I guess you had to be around during those times to appreciate how truly crappy things were.

:puke: again.

[McCamy Taylor]

37. America likes Carter. They feel bad about voting him out. Make them worry that they will feel bad

if they vote the Dems (and later Obama) out.

If I were Obama, Carter would be my best buddy. He is so clean he squeaks.

[BurtWorm]

39. Except on Afghanistan and the mujahedeen.

He's a little grimy on that score.

PS:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=9174020&mesg_id=9180600

[leftynyc]

41. Where is your proof

that America likes Carter? I think it's just the opposite - they remember carter not fondly at all and the further he stays away from Pres Obama the better. Carter has a problem with his own party and was notoriously always at odds with the Democratic leadership of Congress as well as with Ted Kennedy and Bill Clinton. This was a terrible time for his face to be all over TV.

[BurtWorm]

42. He told John Stewart recently that he was the Tea Party of his day

and didn't mean when he was running for the nomination; he meant when he was actually in the White House! He saw himself as an enemy of the powers that were--powers that happened to be Democratic at that moment. The Republicans were reeling from Watergate and the Ford years. They were as bad or maybe worse off than the GOP after Bush boy. Carter was such a fucking navel gazer he didn't see what effect he personally was having on the electorate. He demoralized the Democrats. He inspired the far right Republicans.

Carter is the very last person Obama should emulate or be seen to be influenced by. He has nothing positive to teach Obama about being president.

But about being ex-president, there's no better teacher in the land. :applause:

[leftynyc]

43. Complete agreement

An excellent former President - those that just kick back and play golf look bad in comparison and I doubt there would be a Clinton Global Initiative if Carter hadn't shown the way. But there is nothing about his presidency that Pres Obama should emulate.

[BurtWorm]

44. You'll probably appreciate this little item from his new book

From a list of similarly enlightening items collected by the Daily Beast:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-09-21/jimmy-carters-white-house-diaries-speed-read/

No Fan of New York

On March 24, 1980, after losing out in the New York Democratic Primary to Ted Kennedy by a vote of 59-41 percent, Carter blamed the loss on the popularity of Kennedy’s brothers and his overall lack of Jewish support. However, Carter also took a firm jab at the state of New York, saying, “It’s a unique state, with a habit of sucking at the federal budget tit more than anyone else in the country.”

[leftynyc]

45. I always thought he was smart

Smart enough to know that NY historically gives much more to the feds than it gets back. And now you know why NY voted for Kennedy. He sounds like a fucking republican.

Edited to add: And his home state of Georgia is historically one of the parasite states that takes in far more money than it gives out to the feds.

[mdmc]

57. disagree,,