By Paul Beston on 5.21.07 @ 2:22AM
It's hard to keep your mouth shut when you have all the answers.
Even though he was a monumental failure as president of the
United States, Jimmy Carter just can't resist giving grades to his
successors and critiquing U.S. policy, two areas in which he should
be disqualified from commenting.
This weekend Carter let loose with yet another verbal attack on
President Bush, when he told the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: "I think
as far as the adverse impact on the nation around the world, this
administration has been the worst in history." Carter went on to
claim that Bush and his administration had represented "an overt
reversal of America's basic values as expressed by previous
administrations," by which he meant Bush's father, Ronald Reagan,
and Richard Nixon, among others. Those familiar with Carter's
quarter-century out of the White House know that during the 1980s,
Carter consistently criticized Reagan's policies as out of line
with American ideals. Carter never got over the bitterness of
losing to Reagan in 1980, resenting that he had to turn over the
White House to a man who lacked his profound moral wisdom and knew
more about ponies than he did about peanuts.
Reagan's polices culminated in the longest economic expansion in
American history up to that time and the conclusion of the Cold War
in America's favor. He was a rebuke to Carterism on multiple
fronts: that peace through strength was the right approach, as
opposed to peace through accommodation; that American free
enterprise system could be reborn if its energies were released
instead of repressed; and that a laugh is often more effective than
a lecture.
Douglas Brinkley, author of a book on Carter's post-presidency,
calls this latest outburst "unprecedented," claiming that "This is
the most forceful denunciation President Carter has ever made about
an American president. "When you call somebody the worst president,
that's volatile. Those are fighting words." Brinkley sounds barely
able to contain his excitement -- apparently being Carter's
biographer wasn't excitement enough -- but this is hardly the first
time that the peanut president has lashed out at his successors. He
has had it in for George W. Bush since the beginning, before he
even took on Osama bin Laden, and his criticism has always had a
nasty, distinctly un-presidential edge. Last year, for example, he
accused "Bush Jr." of conducting the Iraq war based on manipulated
intelligence. And he wasn't a whole lot kinder to Bill Clinton.
Not wishing to confine his nut cracking to American politics,
Carter even opened up an offensive against British Prime Minister
Tony Blair, describing Blair's support of Bush as "Abominable.
Loyal. Blind. Apparently subservient." Interesting -- that sounds
an awful lot like Carter's stance toward Moscow during his one-term
presidency. When he gave the commencement address at Notre Dame in 1977, he
infamously declared: "Being confident of our own future, we are now
free of that inordinate fear of communism which once led us to
embrace any dictator who joined us in that fear. I'm glad that
that's being changed."
So were the Soviets. In Peter Schweizer's book, Reagan's
War, he cites many examples of how this attitude was
appreciated in Moscow, from Carter's heavy breathing for an arms
control agreement to his desire not to interfere with Soviet
incursions in Central America and Africa.
Carter has been known as America's greatest ex-president for
years, though voices on the Right have long chipped away at
that mythology, culminating in Steven Hayward's 2004 book,
The Real Jimmy Carter. Carter's disastrous
presidency might have led lesser men to crawl into a hole and hide
the rest of their lives. To Carter's credit, he started over with
Habitat for Humanity and attempted to do some good in the world.
But he couldn't stop there; he had to develop his Carter Center --
a think tank for failed ideas -- and he had to conduct his shadow
presidency, shadowing, that is, each successive occupant of the
Oval Office by playing the role of globetrotting, hectoring
busybody and apologist for tyrants. To some extent all of his
successors share in some of the blame, as they were under no
obligation to be so nice to him (George W. Bush, in particular, has
bent over backwards to be kind to Carter).
Carter's self-righteousness, one of the fatal flaws that sank
his presidency, seemed only to deepen after his fiasco in the White
House. In the years since, it has often seemed that his very
failure as president is the key to the moral authority he claims --
as if, in other words, it was the world that failed him, and not
the other way around. Those who see his post-presidency as a quest
for redemption are half right -- but Carter is not trying to redeem
himself, only the rest of humanity.
Jimmy Carter couldn't carry George W. Bush's water bucket, let
alone Tony Blair's. It's a special kind of egomania he possesses,
one that seems to grow in inverse proportion to both his advancing
years -- when some men might speak in lower tones -- and to his
record as president, about which others might not speak at all.
Paul Beston is associate editor of City
Journal.
topics:
Bill Clinton, Law, Iraq, Africa, Communism