General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWell past time to set the record straight on the Carter presidency
I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but this needs to be said again. We've all heard the myth of Carter being a lousy President and Reagan being such a great one, but pretty much everything about this is exactly wrong. Here's all sorts of bullet points here, but I'll cover the big ones:
1) Carter caused stagflation, Reagan fixed it
This is perhaps the biggest lie and is so misinformed it's pathetic, but still keeps getting repeated. The reality is stagflation was caused by the failed monetary and fiscal policies of Fed Chairman, Arthur F. Burns and Nixon's interference and failed policies. Carter replaced him with Paul Volcker who economists of all stripes credit with fixing stagflation. He was so successful Reagan was forced to reappoint him, and Reagan's fiscal policies were so disastrous even Republicans in congress eventually reversed them. Still this myth persists and it's 180 degrees from reality.
2) Carter was soft on defense, Reagan was strong on defense
This myth began with the leaked lies of Team B which was an effort created by Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and Bush Sr. We now know virtually everything they produced was a lie, but somehow this myth persists. Carter began to cut the defense budget because he knew the Soviets were swirling the bowl. He knew this because the CIA was providing him with accurate intelligence we now know was in fact completely accurate. That didn't stop the ratfucking of Carter or Reagan exploding the defense budget completely needlessly, all based on the lies of Team B. This is arguably the greatest example of the disastrous consequences of politicizing our intelligence community and we never learned from it.
3) Carter rationed fuel and caused long lines at filling stations.
Fuel rationing and lines at the pump started under Nixon. Carter was the first president to even have an energy policy and had we followed it the US and the entire world would be a much better place today. Carter understood energy better than any other president and was truly a visionary foiled by a public who can't see beyond the next election.
The reality is that Carter was by far the greatest president of my lifetime. Anyone who disputes this is probably basing their opinion on pure unadulterated bullshit. One of the saddest parts about his last trip around the sun is he won't get the credit he so richly deserves in his lifetime.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
hlthe2b
(112,799 posts)
RKP5637
(67,112 posts)
walkingman
(10,328 posts)works quite well. Most people that weren't around back then do not realize that Carter was the clear favorite going into the election. The failed attempt to rescue the Iranian hostages was blamed on Carter and the worst President in my lifetime not only won but began the destruction of America.
Reagan was a "Howdy Doody" looking SOB who is the second coming for evangelicals and anti-government people.
True Blue American
(18,579 posts)That Senior Bush went to Iran, negotiated to keep the hostages until Reagan was sworn in. Bush was a former head of the CIA. He also negotiated and signed NAFTA, but everyone blamed Clinton.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_H._W._Bush
former9thward
(33,424 posts)No evidence Bush went to Iran. Your link says nothing about it.
Bush did the primary work of negotiating NAFTA but Clinton did the hard work of pushing it through Congress. He also signed it, not Bush.
True Blue American
(18,579 posts)The act was negotiated and signed by Bush. It was ratified after Clinton was in office. He had to implement it. Clear you did not read Wikipedia. Google it.
But Clinton got the blame. And workers blamed him.
BTW, I met 2 of those hostages and stated facts. One was my neighbors brother.What do you think was the start of Iran Contra? How many went to jail?
MichMan
(16,625 posts)From the Wikipedia source you referenced
Before sending it to the United States Senate, Clinton added two side agreements, the North American Agreement on Labor Cooperation (NAALC) and the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC), to protect workers and the environment, and to also allay the concerns of many House members.
Clinton signed it into law on December 8, 1993; the agreement went into effect on January 1, 1994.[27][28] At the signing ceremony, Clinton recognized four individuals for their efforts in accomplishing the historic trade deal: Vice President Al Gore, Chairwoman of the Council of Economic Advisers Laura Tyson, Director of the National Economic Council Robert Rubin, and Republican Congressman David Dreier.[29] Clinton also stated that "NAFTA means jobs. American jobs, and good-paying American jobs. If I didn't believe that, I wouldn't support this agreement."
It was ratified by the House and the Senate with a lot of broad support. Bush started it, true, but if President Clinton had refused to sign it, it would not have ever gone into effect.
True Blue American
(18,579 posts)That made him bad.?
MichMan
(16,625 posts)Last edited Mon Feb 20, 2023, 11:02 AM - Edit history (1)
Amendments were fine and indicate that President Clinton was an integral part of NAFTA
You said according to Wikipedia, that Clinton had to implement it because it was originally agreed to by Bush prior to the ratification process . We must have different interpretations of the Wikipedia article I guess.
former9thward
(33,424 posts)As soon it was signed manufacturing companies began moving to Mexico. Mexico has created a hundred mile wide strip at the U.S. border where manufacturers are located and send finished product to the U.S.
OAITW r.2.0
(31,491 posts)allocation.
He saw the future where we could become energy independent, but Reagan/Bush had other plans to keep us tied to ME oil....and the wars that followed.
moonshinegnomie
(3,852 posts)OAITW r.2.0
(31,491 posts)for the US economy om 1973.
Justice matters.
(9,382 posts)
peppertree
(23,129 posts)How? With his energy conservation and production incentive policy - plus the March 1980 credit controls, which deflated both the oil and gold frenzies.
While it did cause a short, sharp recession (the recession deepened under Reagan), it made the "Reagan recovery" possible.
Roy Rolling
(7,419 posts)Carter broke the back of OPEC with energy efficiency standards and conservation. A long term thinker.
Doc Sportello
(7,964 posts)This false narrative about Carter, especially compared to Reagan, has frustrated and angered me for years because it is so untrue and so unfair to a truly great man. Reagan was a phony backed by extemely wealthy autocrats who used him to do their bidding during his time as governor and President. Afterward they paid for his name to be put onto schools and other buildings as part of this hagiography. And the media has gone along with it ever since to their everlasting shame.
Truman was demonized during and after his presidency but historians and cultural factors like James Whitman's one-man show have helped change history's view of him. Hopefully this will happen with Cater as well.
halfulglas
(1,654 posts)One man show on Truman.
Doc Sportello
(7,964 posts)You're right, it is James Whitmore, who also happens to be one of my favorite character actors of all time. Not only that but they made a movie of his show and I saw it at the theater. Maybe I shouldn't post that soon after waking up.
csziggy
(34,189 posts)First, his energy proposals would have reduced CO2 and greenhouse gases starting in the 1980's so the threat of climate change would be greatly alleviated. Second, we likely would not have gotten involved in the Gulf Wars and "protection" of oil wells in the Middle East. The cascading events that pissed off Bin Laden would not have happened so the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center and 9/11 wouldn't have happened. The War on Terror wouldn't have happened.
The world would be a completely different place. (I would love to see an alternate history series based on this concept.)
jaxexpat
(7,794 posts)History hates Republicans.
DENVERPOPS
(13,003 posts)they actively try to whitewash history and re-write it with fictional bullshit.
These "New Republicans" may be through with our History, but History ain't through with them.....not by a long shot....
wnylib
(25,355 posts)The rule by corporate America.
old as dirt
(1,972 posts)https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/04/02/failing-register-draft-women-court-consequences-men/3205425002/
The Catonsville Nine original 5/17/68 footage
Deemed too dangerous for broadcast in May 1968, the iconic footage of nine Catholic activists burning draft files might have been lost forever if not for Pat McGrath — a dogged and sympathetic reporter, who has struggled to ensure its preservation. Read the full story on Waging Nonviolence: https://wagingnonviolence.org/2013/05/how-the-catonsville-nine-survived-on-film/
Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)In retrospect it was certainly a mistake, but it's important to remember the consequences in which you speak weren't implemented until well after the Carter presidency. It's important also to remember Carter pardoned all those who evaded the Vietnam draft.
old as dirt
(1,972 posts)...this might be a good time to repeal it.
DRAFT REGISTRATION
WHEREAS, the U.S. military has not fully addressed gender-based violence within its ranks,
with 7,816 reports of sexual assault reported in FY2020, rendering potential conscription of
people and putting them in harm’s way against their will; and
WHEREAS, the activation of a draft would threaten the rights to bodily autonomy and
individual choice of all people eligible to be drafted; and
WHEREAS, Selective Service registration continues to be required of all eligible in the U.S.
within 30 days of their 18th birthday, despite historical opposition by Americans to the
instatement of the draft; and
WHEREAS, harsh penalties are currently issued to those who refuse draft registration for
reasons of conscience, which can include denial of employment with federal executive
agencies, denial of citizenship to immigrants, and denial of access to state programs in some
states including state jobs, state educational programs and funding, and even driver's
licenses and state-issued non-driver IDs; and
WHEREAS, punishments issued to draft non-registrants could disproportionately affect those
unaware of draft registration requirements, and draft exemptions or deferments may be
more likely to go to those with the privileged backgrounds and resources to seek and obtain
them (such as medical records and professional examinations and reports to support claims
for medical exemptions); and
WHEREAS, a large number of U.S. women oppose mandatory registration for the U.S.
military draft (52% of women according to a 2016 poll), and most Americans oppose a
military draft (58% of Americans according to the same 2016 poll); and
WHEREAS, gender equality with respect to Selective Service could be achieved by ending
Selective Service registration entirely; and
WHEREAS, compliance with the draft registration system is low, likely below 50%;
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the National Organization for Women calls for an end to
mandatory Selective Service registration in the United States, emphasizing voluntary service
that would allow all people the right to choose for themselves whether they desire to serve in
the military; and
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that it is recommended that NOW will include these
recommendations in their lobbying of the U.S. Congress as appropriate, encouraging support for the Selective Service Repeal Act of 2021 – H.R. 2509 and S1139
https://now.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/RESOLUTION-TO-THE-NATIONAL-ORGANIZATION-FOR-WOMEN-ON-ENDING-MILITARY-DRAFT-REGISTRATION.pdf
halfulglas
(1,654 posts)It displeased both sides at the same time. There were those who thought it should forever be a crime and every one of them should be punished. It also displeased so many of those who fled to other countries to evade it that they were some conditions attached to it and it wasn't a sweeping unconditional welcome home but he was trying to be a peacemaker.
Buzz cook
(2,831 posts)Not that I want to say anything positive about Ford. It was conditional on public service, but it was a pardon.
Wolf Frankula
(3,812 posts)"The real objection to conscription is moral." declared that Grade B movie star. Anti-drafters voted for him, (Not Me. I voted for Carter,) Ronzo's butt hadn't settled into the pretzeldential chair before he went back on his word.
Wolf
rampartc
(5,835 posts)
bucolic_frolic
(54,020 posts)The Democratic Congress post-Watergate failed to follow his lead. Clinton had his hands tied by Newt. Obama had the Great Recession crisis to deal with and was a centrist not an idealogue, Biden is very practical and understands the levers of power and what is possible. Jimmy Carter was sandbagged by GOP tricks, who were backed by oil companies and evangelicals. The themes he set down keep resurfacing so he really was on to something great.
treestar
(82,383 posts)over and over again, based on nothing but that's what everyone thinks.
Reagan's bullshit conned people, but they wanted to be conned. They didn't want to face up to facts about energy and still don't, and now it is expanded to climate change.
paleotn
(21,526 posts)A more expensive, but advanced replacement for aging Minuteman and Titan II ICBMs. Congress balked however and Reagan got the credit. Carter canceled the B-1, but why not? Other than a tactical role, the eventual B-1 Lancer was of little strategic value during the Cold War. It's still a "nice to have" but unnecessary even in a tactical role. The bomber leg of the nuclear triad has been obsolete since the late 60's and Carter rightly recognized there was no need to waste money there.
He completed the SALT II treaty, but kept the Trident and cruise missile (the nascent Tomahawk) programs. Now 2 linchpins of American nuclear defense. True to his "squid" roots, he hung on to the Trident missile, now the bedrock of America's nuclear deterrent. Adversaries know where our bomber bases are, they know where our land based ICBMs are housed, but have no idea where our boomers are lurking. In short, seriously work towards peace and disarmament, but still keep your powder dry just in case.
Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)The reason why it was developed was because the B-52 fleet wasn't able to penetrate Soviet air defenses far enough to launch cruise missiles to strike the interior of Russia. Carter correctly determined this was no longer necessary based on sound intelligence. After Regan revived the program the costs skyrocketed and it was such an utter piece of shit they didn't use it during the first Gulf War. It was only after throwing billions in modifications that it became even remotely viable.
paleotn
(21,526 posts)even the supersonic B-1, was impossible against modern SAMs and interceptors. It was a waste of time and money. Bombers didn't become viable again as nuclear deterrents until the B-2. But even that is debatable compared to the effectiveness of SLBMs and ICBMs. Those are still unstoppable, giving potential adversaries no choice but to accept mutually assured destruction. A nuclear first strike is simply unwinnable, thus the nuclear peace that's lasted generations.
Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)You just had to get close enough to deploy an air launched cruise missile. The Soviet air defenses were getting sophisticated enough to reach out and detect aircraft farther away, so the B-1 was designed to fly fast at low altitudes in order to get close enough to launch. Without this capability the bomber part of the nuclear triad was useless against the interior of Russia. The idea of flying a bomber directly over a target wasn't an option until the development of stealth bomber designs which were in the design phase even before the Carter presidency. Carter knew this was a far better idea than the B-1.
Justice matters.
(9,382 posts)1 "error" could trigger the sixth mass extinction on the surface of this "small" planet (and cause mutations in the deep seas...).
x 10K 
DENVERPOPS
(13,003 posts)is one Narcissistic Psychopath, Like Trump or Putin.................
DENVERPOPS
(13,003 posts)constantly referring to Jimmy Carter as a know nothing, retired Peanut Farmer.......when in reality, he was a retired, qualified U.S. Navy Nuclear Sub Commander...............
The U.S. so called "Media" is just a mouthpiece for the Republican Party. Print, TV, Radio, etc etc.
80+% of all Media in the U.S. is owned/operated by uber rich Republicans. The worst being Fox News and The entire RW radio networks.
Jimmy Carter is one of the finest human beings I have ever met, and had the opportunity to talk to.....................
paleotn
(21,526 posts)like freaking parrots instead of actually doing the work of research and engaging one's brain. Hasn't changed a bit.
Carter's biography didn't even take that much effort. Annapolis class of 46. 2 years surface ship duty. 4 years diesel-electric submarine duty. Survived his interviews with Rickover to join the nuclear Navy as an engineering officer. ADM. Hyman Rickover's "interviews" of perspective nuclear submarine officers were terrifying. The stuff of legend. Surviving Rickover was even tougher than earning your dolphins. The man knew his shit and I'd go on patrol with him in command anytime.
TreasonousBastard
(43,049 posts)Nuclear School thing.
Years ago I worked with a guy who went through it. Howie was Kings Point, not Annapolis, but our merchant marine had been so outsourced already that he fulfilled his military service in the Navy.
A select group went through nuke school and the bottom student each week had the orders already cut (except for his name) to a minesweeper in some
inhospitable country. After the first Saturday and they found out it was for real, they all busted their asses. Each week they had fo learn, or remember, a semester's course. First week was advanced algebra and calculus-- then it got difficult. By the time the survivors were through this, they were well on the way to a masters in nuclear engineering on top of the usual naval stuff. So Carter was well educated to command a nuclear sub.
Too bad his father died and he felt oblgated to run the peanut farm. He could have eventually become Chief of Staff, at least
But he made up for it being President.
markie
(23,834 posts)President Carter was prescient in his push for Solar Energy...
On June 20, 1979... "In the year 2000 this solar water heater behind me, which is being dedicated today, will still be here supplying cheap, efficient energy…. A generation from now, this solar heater can either be a curiosity, a museum piece, an example of a road not taken or it can be just a small part of one of the greatest and most exciting adventures ever undertaken by the American people."
"....in 1986 the Reagan administration quietly dismantled the White House solar panel installation..."
randr
(12,617 posts)That is when he started getting the stink eye
Tarzanrock
(1,250 posts)Jimmy Carter is the President who won the Cold War. Reagan falsely took the credit, but it was Carter's "tough" policies which defeated the Soviet Union. It was President Carter who imposed the hard economic sanctions and the even harder grain embargo on the Soviet Union. It was Carter who imposed the Olympic boycott. It was President Carter who sought and actually implemented the even much sturdier defense posture by stationing medium range nuclear missiles in Europe aimed at the Soviet Union. It was the four years of hard economic sanctions and the Carter Administration's foreign policy of the stationing of the Pershing I and Pershing II class nuclear missiles with the new advanced MIRV warheads [A multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle (MIRV) is an exoatmospheric ballistic missile payload containing several nuclear warheads, each capable of being aimed to hit a different target in the Soviet Union] in Europe which brought Brezhnev and the Russians to the bargaining table which Reagan falsely took the credit. The actual and all too real threat of a first strike nuclear annihilation from European based American Pershing missiles with MIRV nuclear warheads imposed by President Carter which is what won the Cold War and defeated the Soviet Union.
heckles65
(630 posts)is the re-commissioning of four WW II battleships that shouldn't have been built in the first place. They fit into a modern navy like brown shoes with a tuxedo.
peppertree
(23,129 posts)At the time, Amerada-Hess ran the largest refinery in the free world: the one in the U.S. Virgin Islands.
The shutdown lasted for over two weeks, and was total - and since Hess distributed to other gas station chains besides its own, the shortages were severe.
Images of panicked motorists lining up for gas came to define the Carter administration - and among Repugs, still do to this day.
Well - it turned out that CEO Leon Hess was a top backer of George H.W. Bush's 1980 campaign - which Bush announced that very week.
Amerada-Hess came under federal investigation for the stunt - but the probe was (of course) quietly dropped when Reagan took office.
The rest, as they say, is history.
Polybius
(21,509 posts)Reagan was way too pro-military spending. I liked the way Carter kept us out of wars and was a true peace President.
AncientOfDays
(253 posts)I think Carter was the most underrated President in modern times if not in our history. I was, however, not strong enough/prepared enough to counter the GOP propaganda machine.
At this point, it appears Biden learned from Carter and is able to counter that GOP propaganda.
calimary
(89,034 posts)All cosmetics and scripts and sets and props - like he had in Hollywood. Gimmicks and window dressing and schtick. And very effective salesmanship.
But you can’t make a real difference of any quality and nobility if your main concern isn’t about helping people. Really, tangibly helping people. Helping the little guy instead be f the power brokers and the wealthy - basically, the people who don’t need any help because they’re already doing just fine, thank you.
speak easy
(12,595 posts)Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)The reason spikes in oil prices don't cause stagflation today is because monetary policies are different.
Nixon ordered Arthur Burns to lower interest rates prior to his re-election to create a false sense of economic prosperity. When Burns resisted, Nixon propagated bad press against the Fed and threatened legislation to negate their effect. Burns relented which set in motion the train wreck which took many years and aggressive actions to correct.
speak easy
(12,595 posts)is that they don't go up 400% in a month, and stay up. That sort of shock will not only cause inflation, but economic dislocation , and ultimately recession, what ever the prevailing monetary policy may be. OPEC had an iron grip on oil in the 1970s. It could and did set prices at will.
Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)Prices back then didn't go up 400% in a month. It was about 200% and then took years to get to 400%. Virtually the exact same thing happened in 1999.
speak easy
(12,595 posts)roamer65
(37,814 posts)The Federal Reserve was not shackled by Bretton Woods after it.
Bretton Woods was the post-WW2 agreement that the US dollar would be backed by a gold exchange standard, with the other major currencies then pegging to the dollar.
It also gave Burns the ability to satisfy Nixon’s easy money demands by putting the printing presses into overdrive.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nixon_shock
GoCubsGo
(34,663 posts)Many of the who like to blame Carter for stagflation were pushing his predecessor's "Whip Inflation Now" campaign long before they ever heard of Jimmy Carter. I'm old enough to remember the "WIN" buttons the GOPers passed out. That was the beginning of their "Blame the Democrats for our fuck-ups" campaign, as well. They're still at it. 40 years later.
As for greatest president in a lifetime, for now, I'll agree with you on that. However, the current guy is sure giving him a run for his money. It's kind of fitting that Joe was the first Senator to endorse Jimmy for President. Hopefully, the public won't make the same idiotic mistake next year, but I'm not optimistic about that. They've only gotten more stupid since 1980.
Butterflylady
(4,584 posts)Reagan was a puppet and poppy Bush was a liar. They are the main reason I became a democrat. Hey, I was young and stupid but I could see right thru them.
keep_left
(3,158 posts)...often called the "Malaise" speech, even though that word is found nowhere in it. The speech has undergone a rehabilitation since July 1979, and the ridicule of the reactionaries to it seems absurd today. Historian and writer Morris Berman has identified the "Crisis of Confidence" speech, and the reaction to it, as a crucial turning point in postwar American history.
If more Americans had really listened to and heeded that address instead of ridiculing it, the country would be in a much different and better place.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100217660503#post1
(See also my responses below the linked post).
Here's where you can download the Carter address in several formats.
https://web.archive.org/web/20090721024329/http://millercenter.org/scripps/archive/speeches/detail/3402
Ladythatvotesblue
(247 posts)Is a good and decent man. He loves our country.
A democrat that believes in God, understands that God gave us a brain to learn and understand (science). God gave us a heart to help us help each other, to have compassion, and love for one another. Truly a spiritual man, a family values man, a hero of sorts in my book, because he is and has done all that a decent person can do. Lives his life dedicated to helping those who needed a hand. Took the high road in his life.
God bless him and his family. I love him too.
flashman13
(2,012 posts)During the Iranian hostage crisis, saint Reagan, while running for president, negotiated with the Iranians behind Carter,s back and thus undermined Carter's ability to deal with the crisis. Nixon also negotiated with the North Vietnamese behind LBJ's back. Treasonous Republican presidents are not a new phenomenon.
DENVERPOPS
(13,003 posts)HW Bush turned to the U.S. enemy nation of Iran to create a situation to corruptly tear votes away from Carter, and towards Reagan.
HW Bush and his cronies unlawful actions with Iran, were Seditious at Best, And more realistically Treason……
I was intently watching this happen, just prior to the 1980 Presidential election, and was the reason that I became Hyper Active Politically, which has continued to this day……….I could write books about the 1980 election, and the entire period that Reagan was "occupying" the White House, but in reality, the U.S. government was truly being run by HW, and his CABAL.
The title of my book would be: WHILE THE NATION SLEPT
By the end of the so called Reagan Years, over 100 members of his CABAL, headed by HW, had been indicted for a plethora of Major crimes.
HW, in the first days of his Presidency gave them all Pardons. (Sound Familiar)
JudyM
(29,567 posts)Reprehensible republicans.
DENVERPOPS
(13,003 posts)is over 80+% owned by wealthy Republicans and Republican owned/operated corporations..........That.is.where.it.is at, Judy......
Years ago, I talked to a well known and well respected European Journalist. I told him I was glad that our news was not censored.
He couldn't stop laughing..............A week later, we sat down and he had prepared a presentation for me of what our media had told us, and what the rest of the worlds legitimate media had reported about ten major news stories.......
He started out with our Invasion of Panama (under Reagan?) The propaganda of what the U.S. Military and U.S. Government had done down there was 180 degrees from reality......It was beyond shameful what we had actually done.....
All ten major news items he displayed were the same.........
I checked some of his information and found it to be pretty truthful.........
And that is all I am gonna say about that the topic of Our Media..........
JudyM
(29,567 posts)
I believe it, what he showed you, what an eye-opener, I can imagine based just on what we‘ve been able to see. We’ve got to get sharper on our messaging to cut through all their crap. Why our wealthiest Dems don’t get together to offer an alternative, I don’t know, though of course there’s a cynical theory about that…
Seriously, if I had millions to throw around, it’d be a high priority.
Thank you for saying this. A stunning but not well-known fact about the terrible Reagan, who, until Dumpy was the worst in U.S. History.
republianmushroom
(22,122 posts)
Martin68
(27,046 posts)effort on those lies. I used to go through the fund-raising mail my right wing parents received every day. It sickened me - but they swallowed it hook, line, and sinker. Carter served his country honorably and well - as a naval office on submarine duty, as governor of Georgia, and as president - and as an example for the country after his term in office.
andym
(6,052 posts)Carter knew at the time he appointed Volcker that Volcker's hawkish inflation policies could cost him dearly politically, because the economy would take a hit from the increased interest rates in the short-term. However, Carter did the right thing by taking the long-term view.
Mr.Bill
(24,906 posts)US uniformed military killed by enemy fire - Zero.
Only President in my lifetime to achieve that.
Ellen Forradalom
(16,186 posts)than his contemporaries did.
Reagan supporters got the momentary thrill of saying “f the ayatollahs.” Forty years later, the ayatollahs are still in power and America is poorer, deprived of adequate health care, education, and thriving local economies. You got played, Reaganites.
Samrob
(4,298 posts)a copy of the report his energy policy was based on. If only we had listened to him and maybe even Anderson we would not be a slave to the foreign oil giants and our oil conglomerates here at home now.
Carter made some mistakes and acknowledged them but none were so grave as Reagan's headstrong march against most all Federal regulations. We are still paying the price.
Buzz cook
(2,831 posts)Having a Latin America policy that didn't involve murdering nuns, priests, and children.
DeeDeeNY
(3,901 posts)
crickets
(26,168 posts)The media has a prime opportunity to cover many of these important points about Carter's presidency and legacy. It's a shame they'll likely decline to bother.
albacore
(2,744 posts)If those hostage rescue helicopters had sand screens installed on their intakes....
... the course of history would have been changed for the better. FAR better.
No screens.... hostage rescue mission fails. Mission failure + October Surprise = Ray-gun.
Ray-gun was the beginning of the end for our country. And the end for people all over the world.
Carter was the only Dem Presidential vote that I didn't have some misgivings about. (I've NEVER voted Repub for anything, of course)
ShazzieB
(22,205 posts)That tells me volumes about both men. If I didn't already hate Reagan on principle, I'd hate him just for that.
Another thing Carter did that most people seem to have forgotten about was to set this country on a trajectory that would have let to us converting to the metric system if Raygun hadn't put the kibosh on that as well. If Carter had gotten a second term, that effort might have gotten far enough along to make retreating a little harder, but alas, that did not happen. As a result, we Americans are still measuring things in pounds, miles, feet, and inches, unlike most of the rest of the world, and we still have to convert Celsius to Fahrenheit and vice versa every time we try to discuss the weather with people in other countries.
snot
(11,494 posts)I'll never forgive Ted Koppel and the rest of the MSM for the way they hounded Carter, night after night for his inability to resolve the Iran hostage crisis – a situation he did nothing to create and could do little or nothing to end – it even turned out that the Reagan campaign had secretly negotiated with the Iranians NOT to release the hostages until after the election.
thomski64
(838 posts)..deliberate sabotage by that network. of
President Carter, on behalf of those conspiring to keep the hostages there until the election..
Stargleamer
(2,610 posts)We had ample majorities in both the House and Senate. I read that he favored a piece-meal approach to improving health care that went nowhere. And as a result here we are without something so essential to our well-being.
niyad
(129,525 posts)Stargleamer
(2,610 posts)It does say Carter wanted a phased-in piecemeal approach, and that as a result we squandered an opportunity for Universal Health Care.
Remember that Carter was a conservative Democrat, compared to the likes of Ted Kennedy, etc.
For what it's worth, I knocked on doors canvassing for Carter in 1976 (to no avail as he still lost California), and was rather disappointed in him during his term.
moondust
(21,196 posts)In 1976 I think a lot of voters wanted to send a message for politicians to clean up their act.
Did it work?
The presidency of Ronald Reagan in the United States was marked by numerous scandals, resulting in the investigation, indictment, or conviction of over 138 administration officials, the largest number for any president in American history.
And he was re-elected in a 49-state landslide, followed by election of his VP.
I guess a lot of voters don't really care about corruption in politics. Perhaps Reagan corrupted everything with his neoliberal "greed is good" approach.
Baitball Blogger
(51,699 posts)I share your post on another social site?
MichMan
(16,625 posts)Most presidencies can be defined by circumstances that are often outside their control. That goes with the territory as one usually gets the credit when they are favorable and the blame when they don't. Just how it is.
Don't recall an incumbent sitting president facing a primary challenge in my lifetime however. Wasn't really necessary.
This was a pretty interesting look back at the presidency and especially the convention. One thing I didn't know about before was the mass replacement of the cabinet.
https://www.npr.org/2019/01/17/686186156/how-ted-kennedys-80-challenge-to-president-carter-broke-the-democratic-party
The Jungle 1
(4,552 posts)Yet we never hear about that.
Reagan tripled the deficit and we never hear about that.
BlueMTexpat
(15,657 posts)at the results of the Presiential election.
But I still didn't comprehend how awful the next eight years would be! 
Our infamous "M$M" - especially ABC and its constant daily looping in of Iranian militants during the hostage crisis - REALLY screwed us all.
Fritz Walter
(4,369 posts)That's how you get them to sing louder!
Or -- in our case -- that's how you get us to get out the vote!
Oh, and by-the-way, Ronnie RayGun never received a Nobel Peace Prize. Unlike Ted Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Jimmy Carter, Barack Obama and even Vice-President Al Gore.
President Carter was recognized "for his efforts in finding 'peaceful solutions to international conflicts, advancing democracy and human rights, and promoting economic and social development.' " Source: the White House.
