Jimmy Carter is no Hero
I was sitting at lunch with some associates sometime last year. I don't want to paint them as unlikable, but since that lunch, I have determined not to deliberately spend time with them. During a rather unmemorable portion of whatever conversation was ensuing, one of the ladies said of the former U.S. President, "Jimmy Carter, what a hero!"
Now, I don't want to appear to belittle all the truly notable ideas and pro-active stands which in some cases have actually resulted in good being done, such as Habitiat for Humanity, the "idea" of the Camp David, Israel/Palestinian accords, or the thought, however belated, that hostages might be rescuable, and that there should be consideration for individuals' human rights worldwide. All of that, however, needs to be balanced with truth and reality.
The TRUTH is that Jimmy Carter seems to be a truly compassionate and pro-active guy. The SAD TRUTH is that he was also a miserable President.
There are lots of people who do a lot of good through their drive, vision and experience. That doesn't at all mean that the person will be a successful politician, let alone a good President. Jimmy Carter was not one of the best Presidents, he was one of the worst. His poor judgement was apparently compounded by his miserable choices in cabinet positions, a bunch who similarly diminished the chances Bill Xxxxxxx (we don't use profanity on this site) might have had a shot at a relevant presidency.
Carter, at least had a relevant place in history. His miserable judgement at solving international issues generated predictable outcomes. The beauty of timing is that Ronald Reagan used seasoned judgement, unjaundiced by emotional experimentationalism (defined here as trying something simply on the basis of its' perceived moral direction) managed a similarly predictable outcome, but with a different decision process, he achieved positive resolutions. Where Carter exacerbated fuel and pollution crises by trying to manage them, Reagan actually achieved reduced pollution and environmental progress by reducing tax rates and allowing energy companies to invest in research and capital improvements. Where Carter initiated failed negotiated peace accords, Regan achieved peace by insisting on honest negotiations, backed up by the threat of force. Worked in Iran. Worked in Lybia. Worked in Ireland. Worked in Russia.
Carter, having never learned the lessons of history, feebly ascertained that enemies could be defeated with good intentions. Powerful, or fearless enemies can afford to entertain an opponent, with no intention of submission or agreement. Ronald Regan proved that it took moral backbone combined with overwhelming military strength, to defeat militarily significant adversaries.
Carter has also never admittied to himself how pitiful his job as president truly was. Had he a clue, he would meekly shy away from any attempt to counsel or chastise any other politicians, or to offer advice on any political subject. Bill Xxxxxxx, at least, seems to have learned a portion of that lesson, and he has, surprisingly, developed into a relatively wise, post-presidential statesman, his lack of official accomplishment notwithstanding.
Carter should keep his political mouth shut. He has as much integrity in politics as Michael Moore does in documentary filmmaking. Sure, they both have followings: So did Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, Saddam, and so on, and so on...
Hero? Him? Not even close.
