The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Print Email
Text Size

The Obama Watch

Jimmy Carter’s Spirit of Notre Dame

By on 3.31.09 @ 6:09AM

Carter speech haunts Obama appearance at university.

Notre Dame. May, 1977.

It was here that Jimmy Carter put his presidency on the path of losing one to the Gipper.

In the midst of the controversy over the decision by Notre Dame to invite President Obama to deliver the school’s commencement address, it’s worth a look back at a similar Notre Dame appearance by an earlier and politically like-minded predecessor. Today the controversy about the school’s invitation to Obama revolves around Obama’s pro-abortion politics and the appropriateness of being honored by the famously Catholic, which is to say pro-life, university. In Carter’s case, the controversy arose not ahead of time but as a result of his remarks, and the subject of controversy had nothing to do with abortion, which Carter never mentioned.

In May of 1977, Carter was just over four months into his presidency. He was very much the popular new president. His initial popularity still holds the record for newly installed presidents, with Gallup scoring him at an impressive 71%. In comparison, President Obama at a similar point scored a 68%. Thus the controversy Carter stirred by his Notre Dame commencement address was notable, since in retrospect it put Carter on a glide path to one of the most unsuccessful presidencies in modern times, ending in his landslide defeat by Ronald Reagan four years later. (Ironically, Reagan won his nickname “The Gipper” with his film portrayal of dying Notre Dame football star George Gipp.)

Perhaps more importantly than Carter’s personal political fate the speech signaled his decision to abandon his party’s identification with the policies of military strength and American exceptionalism championed by Democrats from FDR to JFK and LBJ. Instead, Carter chose to move the country towards the more left-leaning foreign and defense policies advocated by 1972 nominee Senator George McGovern. The results were decidedly not approved of by the American public. On the day of Carter’s departure from the White House Gallup recorded his popularity had nose-dived to 34%, putting him just ahead of predecessor Harry Truman at the low-point of the Korean War (32%) and a mere ten points higher than the resigned Richard Nixon, at 24%. By contrast, even the unpopular LBJ had left with a 49% rating, and Gerald Ford, the incumbent Carter had defeated, departed with a 53% approval number.

So what did Carter say at Notre Dame, where he was invited by the university’s president, the Reverend Theodore Hesburgh? What signal did he send that wound up getting him, the country and the entire world in such trouble over the next four years and well beyond that? More to the point, how does it compare with the direction already being signaled by President Obama as he approaches his own already controversial appearance at Notre Dame?

The most notable single sentence in Carter’s Notre Dame speech was this one:

We are now free of that inordinate fear of Communism which once led us to embrace any dictator who joined us in our fear.

Carter went on to insist that it was time to govern with a “wider framework of international cooperation” because “the world today is in the midst of the most profound and rapid transformation in its entire history.”

He also added this about the American approach to the Soviet Union in the Carter era: “Our goal is to be fair to both sides, to produce reciprocal stability, parity, and security.” In other words, in Carter’s view, a view widely held among leftward-leaning elites, both the United States and the Soviet Union had genuinely competing claims. They were morally equal to each other.

The speech was the lead story in the news the next day. By the time Carter left the White House after four years of promoting moral equivalence, the world was in murderous chaos. The unintended consequences of Carter’s policies as enunciated at Notre Dame were both considerable and long lasting. Some would argue they are reverberating right up until today. The Soviets, seeing Carter as weak, invaded Afghanistan, with Carter famously “shocked” that he had been lied to over the issue by then Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev. The Soviet invasion in turn drew into Muslim-dominated Afghanistan a young Saudi named Osama bin Laden determined to fight a jihad against non-Muslims. There Bin Laden met a number of similarly enraged young Islamicists from throughout the Middle East, all determined to conduct a jihad against the invaders. As noted in Lawrence Wright’s Pulitzer Prize winning book The Looming Tower, this is where the stirrings began that eventually produced the Taliban and a group called al Qaeda, with bin Laden himself headquartering in Afghanistan. In Nicaragua the Communist Sandinistas overthrew the Somoza dictatorship on Carter’s watch and promptly imposed their own, giving both Cuban and Soviet “advisors” a free hand to use the country as a staging ground for violence in Central America that would last a decade. In Iran, the Shah was overturned by the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, turning a one-time American ally into the implacable foe now calling itself the Islamic Republic of Iran. Carter, abandoning the Shah, stretched his hand out to Khomeini at first, viewing him as a fellow man of faith rather than the world’s first prominent Islamic terrorist. Said Carter’s U.N. Ambassador Andrew Young: “Khomeini will eventually be hailed as a saint.”

He wasn’t.

If this approach of Carter’s sounds vaguely familiar these days, it should. Carter’s words at Notre Dame bear a striking resemblance to the substance if not the actual words of President Obama.

Here’s Carter, at Notre Dame, insisting America had abandoned its values in our foreign policy under his predecessors (Ford, Nixon and LBJ) and that he would restore them

For too many years, we’ve been willing to adopt the flawed and erroneous principles and tactics of our adversaries, sometimes abandoning our own values for theirs. We’ve fought fire with fire, never thinking that fire is better quenched with water.

Page: 1 2 3  

About the Author

Jeffrey Lord is a former Reagan White House political director and author. He writes from Pennsylvania at jlpa1@aol.com.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (54) |

Obama Drools| 3.31.09 @ 8:32AM

I'm sure Jimmy Earl is cheering Odumbo on to take the mantle of "Worst President" away from him. He's doing a heckuva job already.

Go Barry Sotero, go!

Indiana Alex| 3.31.09 @ 9:03AM

I think what's most interesting is not only the similarity in foreign policy, but the desire to print money as a way to acheieve economic success.

Oh, and the energy crisis will be back with a vengance as well.

mark| 3.31.09 @ 9:11AM

One has to hand it to Jimmy. He's managed to make many forget about how bad a president he was by becoming the worst ex-president in U.S history, but as noted above, Berry seems determined to give Jimmy a run for his money.

Rocin| 3.31.09 @ 10:13AM

What is it about the Great American Liberal that makes him obsessed with governing from a position of weakness?
Don't get it.

Obama Drools| 3.31.09 @ 10:23AM

It's where they want all society to be, at the bottom. Liberalism is about punishing achievement and spreading miserabilism. If liberals truly wanted to "lift" people out of poverty, blacks would be the most successful and productive people in the world.

They give them their "fish" for the day, instead of teaching them to "fish". This way they have a lock on a voting bloc that goes 90+% each election. God forbid they become self-reliant and realize they don't need that "fish" anymore.

Liberalism, like Marxism, is bringing people down to a sub-par level all cloaked in the guise of fairness and looking out for the little guy. All they want is control of the little and guy and more like him.

Rocin| 3.31.09 @ 10:32AM

Thanks, "O".
However, sounds hopelessly self defeating, and short term.
Still don't get it.

KMB| 3.31.09 @ 10:43AM

Obama drools,
You are coming close to what I think is a major premise to the authors article, which is how fitting it is to have Obama pick up where Jimmy left off.
I think one has to remember where the so called “Liberation Theology” was hatchedand embraced…yep at Notre Dame. The "father" of this nonsensical movement is none other than Fr. Gutierrez…yep you guessed correctly again- professor of theology at Notre Dame.
None of this should surprise anyone!
This “Christian Marxism” has been around a while, but really took root in the 70’s in South America. Both popes condemned many aspects of it, but it never went away in spite of the Bishops down South America way!

Rocin| 3.31.09 @ 12:29PM

Well, that explains my confusion; didn't know liberalism was just another false religion. Mea culpa.

sfpete | 3.31.09 @ 1:07PM

This redefinition of "terrorism" and refiling it into the same folder as the liberal anthropogenic model of global-warming ("man-caused disasters") effectively eliminates terrorism from the modern world in one swell foop. Now that's "change" we can believe in.

Rocin| 3.31.09 @ 1:46PM

"Swell foop" indeed.
Sums it all up, somehow

Mattmon1 | 3.31.09 @ 2:25PM

This is a great article. I recently stumbled across "welcome back Carter" shirts online that have the saying and Obama's face...I want to get one! This article really captures how the sneaky Obama avoided tough questions to get into office. Many people that voted for Barry had no idea how far left he was which is sad. But, this will teach Americans to be more responsible next time and do the research. Even Europe's more socialist members are warning that Obama is spending way too much. And, the world knows this guy will be a push-over. Also, Obama is crazy to have his face out there speaking every day while the market drops on every word. Let's face it, the far left is like 10% of the people that voted for him. The others especially Republicans that crossed over and middle roaders that expected a centrist are reeling from sticker-shock. Obama's approval rating has nowhere to go but down. One term for sure. I hope he doesn't destroy the country in meantime.

Tom Masles| 3.31.09 @ 2:45PM

It helps me some to remember we survived Carter but I have to lament the untold numbers of Americans who will die because of Obama's naivete.

Anthony| 3.31.09 @ 3:20PM

The quisling Catholic administrators at Notre Dame are already giving "Touchdown Jesus" a new look, with a face similar to Obama's. And above the new T.D. Jesus will be the words, "Yes we can" !!! Who needs Jesus when we have Obama?

Ammo Guy| 3.31.09 @ 3:24PM

sfpete, very apropos indeed - I bet you wrote your comment in a rit of fealous jage.

Marc Jeric| 3.31.09 @ 4:01PM

Tenured radicals, teacher unions, illiterate voters, slobbering media - and we got Abu Hussein from Kenya as our Community Organizer-in-Chief. Communization is proceding apace - nationalizations of banks and Detroit, billions for teacher unions and ACORN brownshirts - the left is rising to secure perpetual and total power - just like in Russia (1917), Germany (1931), Italy (1921). Yet to come are Fairness Doctrine and Card Check and ...

stmichrick| 3.31.09 @ 4:57PM

wow;

Isn't it amazing how leftist Democrats can still come to power spewing the myth that they have a more enlightened approach to dealing with our enemies?

Carter's foolish policies are outlined above. Clinton's was that we treat Islamic jihadists as a police problem (using an poorly targeted ccasional cruise missile). The result of that being an accumulated boldness in the form of their 4 well-targeted hijacked airliners.

And the electorate continues to buy it...

lynnrockets| 3.31.09 @ 5:24PM

Publik Skool Educasion at work. Any thinking individual would never vote for a charlatan like Obummer.

Dean| 3.31.09 @ 5:55PM

The reason why the liberals Carter, Clinton and Obama and those like them disarm is largely their anthropology--that is, their view of basic human nature.

They believe that people are basically good, and all that is needed for people to do right is to change their circumstances. Get them a job, provide some regular income and the like at the local level, all the way up to avoid scaring tyrants and talk nicely and fairly to them at the international level.

If on the other hand, you follow a Biblical world view, which clearly states that each human being has a possibility of, indeed a pull toward, radical evil, then you'll think differently about many things. People down on their luck here at home may well need a hand up, and we should put out our hands to do so. But they also need to shoulder their own responsibility, so that the evils of covetousness, sloth and selfishness don't get a foot in the door.

The Founding Fathers largely held the second of these two incompatible views, which is why our Constitution has a great deal to say about checks and balances. They worried a great deal about moral evil, and how to restrain it. In contrast, neglecting this point of anthropology put Communism on the ash heap of history, because they thought they could mold human nature. We succeeded and they failed.

Nations abroad need to see two traits in our national character. They need to know we are no better friend, but no worse enemy, as the U.S. Marine Corps informal motto puts it.

As my mentors used to say, the best indication of future performance is past performance. Actions, not words. So, when we hear promises from the Iranian mullahs, assurances from the ex-KGB Russians, or objections from the Communist Chinese, keep your eyes peeled and feel for your hatchet.

eugene hauber| 3.31.09 @ 7:57PM

as an old alumnus od Notre Dame, I can only say to you; SHAME, SHAME, SHAME, SHAME ON YOU.
Father Sorin would be especially agahast at the liberal policies of the university today.
Again...shame on you rev. jenkins.

P.S. God does not permit abortion in any sense of the word.

eugene hauber
class of '25

Alan Brooks| 3.31.09 @ 8:26PM

I came to say goodbye, as too many trolls have been spamming here in my (and others') names.

track down the troll and neuter him.

lynnrockets| 3.31.09 @ 8:29PM

I have a less sanguine view of liberals: I think they take our tax-payer money for 'the poor' and keep most of it themselves. They are just thieves. I think it's all about money and power with them; their concern for others is a ruse.

ruth| 3.31.09 @ 8:32PM

Alan, you're not alone: At times, my name has been hijacked, too. I'm not going to let some creep run me off. Don't go--you make me laugh.

Alan Brooks| 3.31.09 @ 8:59PM

Ruth,
alrighty, for you and Mr. Tyrrell (like Buckley, he founded a magazine)-- I'll stay.
But if you read a strange post with my name heading it, find the goddamned troll and throw him into a swimming pool-- with a shark in it.

as for Carter:
NOW always wanted a woman for President.
so you want a laugh, a mini ha ha?
well on 20 January 1977 a woman was sworn in.

but no offense to women; THEY could have done alot better!

Alan Brooks| 3.31.09 @ 9:23PM

women COULD have done alot better!

Aaron| 3.31.09 @ 9:51PM

Even Janet Reno?

ruth| 3.31.09 @ 11:17PM

I'm ticked off at Will Ferrell for his Bush Broadway Play, but do you remember the SNL skits that showed him playing Janet Reno? OMG! In one, he (Reno) was dancing to My Sharona at a party. I laughed so hard I felt sick, almost fell off the couch. Whenever Reno's name is mentioned--I think of that skit. Ferrell is one sick guy.

Alan Brooks| 4.1.09 @ 12:01AM

i'll take Janet Reno over Jimmuh-- though not in the biblical sense of taking. You'd need one heck of a dose of viagra and spanish fly to want either of them.

However, Carter did help people; like Idi Amin, Jeffrey Dahmer...

Alan Brooks| 4.1.09 @ 12:04AM

if that wasn't too gross, what about if Jocelyn Elders were Education Secretary?

ruth| 4.1.09 @ 12:14AM

Yeah, well those two wouldn't be in my top thousand, either. Even with a massive mickey finn. Shudder.

ruth| 4.1.09 @ 12:15AM

Two freaks were enough. No more, please.

ruth| 4.1.09 @ 12:29AM

Alan, I just got your joke--two cannibals, LOL!! I'm kinda slow. See, you can't go; I'd miss your jokes.

srpaquette| 4.1.09 @ 12:45AM

Catholicism is nothing more than men dictating it's will upon a society. Most catholics do not even read the bible but dutifily do their Hail Marry's, Our Father prayers as robotically as sheep to the slaughter. They think they are Christians but are more lost than ones who never went to church. Notre Dame is a prime example of a lost church with no moral compass. I used to be of that faith but woke up long ago when my family was in decline and I was sent to stay temporarily at an orphanage---catholic-run, and was introduced to bitter human closeted nuns. They beat the feeble and shy ones first, then took delight in breaking down those who remained. I bit, I mean literally bit any sister who dared lay their hand on me. Needless to say I was concidered an agitator---thank God, it saved me many beatings. I am very bitter about this so called religion, when seeing fellow children be paddled while trying to take a shower for simply peeing in the stall which as a child is hard to control, makes my blood boil to this day; I can, in my mind, still hear the wailing of those poor souls put through such anguish, not to mention the fact that they were parentless. Shame on them, and for that matter take away their tax free racket.

MT| 4.1.09 @ 1:14AM

srpaquette, sorry your life was so rough. Hope you can find joy now. Life is short--I hope you feel loved some day.

srpaquette| 4.1.09 @ 1:49AM

To: MT, Thank you for your comment. I have some joy now, and am loved by many, including myself. It did take some time however. My mother developed a sense of entitledment and assumed my hard-working dad was a dimwit, and her liberal drug addicted freinds reenforced the ideas. My mother now has only her 76 year old lesbian lover to call family, no one else cares to speak to it. No one. Anyway, my family is the House of the Lord and the angels who reside there in. I am confident that as a mere human, I'll make the grade, God willing. And GOD BLESS YOU AND YOURS, MT., Steven.

MT| 4.1.09 @ 4:15AM

Yes, God willing. May God bless you, too, Steven.

Al| 4.1.09 @ 7:57AM

I hope Notre Dame does the right thing and uninvites this ding dong. This is most certainly sending a message of acceptance of Obama's hideous abortion and stem cell stands. The invite can be rescinded with respect and regrest, and if Obama has any sense of decency (which is questionable since he should have declined to begin with knowing the differences in philosophies) he would accept it gracefully and with understanding. Instead, we have these university hacks perfectly willing to water down and distill the Church's beliefs and doctrine for the sake of publicity. Take a stand and make a pro-Catholic statement, for God's sake and stop selling out our faith!!

Mia| 4.5.09 @ 5:50PM

SRPAQUETTE:
Sadly, your horrendous experiences have left you very bitter. I'd have hoped that such suffering would teach you compassion and tolerance, but no. You've become that which you apparently hate. You judge all Catholics to "sheep" and "lost," which certainly isn't the case, and you begrudge your mother for finding her soul mate and belittle her lesbian partner, referring to her as "it." What faith do you now practice? If it's some form of "conservative Christianity," it certainly hasn't brought you peace.

Regarding Notre Dame...
This "controversy" is much ado about nothing and 100% POLITICALLY MOTIVATED. American Catholic bishops (AKA cover-up artists) have NO business casting stones. Further, the same bishops who criticize "O" would roll out the carpet for "W" (despite his waging unjust war and being pro-death penalty).

The American Catholic Church is obsessed with abortion, and for that reason, they seek to bring down any/all powerful liberals while throwing themselves at the feet of Republicans (who only claim to care when pandering for votes).

Obama should speak and accept the degree. Every other recent President has done so, and none of them accepted all the Church's teachings. The invitation was extended and accepted. ND should be gracious and welcome "O" warmly. For those who wish to challenge his views, they can ask him back for a debate. I'm sure he will accept and not call them evil or Anti-American if they disagree with him.

scythe| 4.7.09 @ 7:54PM

Obongo won't be happy until America is on her knees, on a prayer rug facing east towards Mecca.

Cookie| 4.8.09 @ 12:12AM

51 million dead babies, Mia. Just think about it for a moment. Shame on you for your lack of concern for these innocent children.

Pingback| 4.10.09 @ 11:20AM

It’s Officially Jimmy Carter’s Second Term « Infidels Paradise links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…decline. A few more such overseas tours, and Obama will have a lot more decline to celebrate. Please read Krauthammer in full here. So, where does Jimmy Carter fit in here? Jeffrey Lord at The American Spectator points out: Notre Dame. May, 1977 [ ... ] In the midst of the controversy over the decision by Notre Dame to invite President Obama to deliver the school’s commencement address,…

Pingback| 4.10.09 @ 12:59PM

Dinocrat » Blog Archive » Been there, done that links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

Dinocrat » Blog Archive » Been there, done that « Empty rhetoric, and giggles Been there, done that Jeffrey Lord takes us back to the early days of the Carter administration, where America’s newfound weakness was broadcast to the world: In May of 1977, Carter was just over four months into his presidency.…

Jimmy| 4.15.09 @ 12:58PM

To "Obama Drools":

I suggest you do some Habitat for Humanities work or something similar in the poorest areas of this country and get to know those who live in those areas. I agree that there are those that take advantage of the system. We are a product of our environment. However, there are some situations that make it seemingly impossible for the poor to get ahead. Thinking that working harder can fix poverty is not an end-all solution.

On another note, if you think about it, liberal and conservative view points should balance each other out the same as the widely used socialist and capitalist terminology. In the end, pure socialism and pure capitalism results in the same kind of conclusion. Defining yourself with only one term is polarizing and narrow-minded in my opinion. People are people and should not always decide on one end of the spectrum. If they do, then they are drones. That's why I find it damaging in this thread that only democratic leaders are criticized. I am afraid this us vs. them coming from both sides of the isle is degrading our economy.

ggfd| 11.30.09 @ 4:03AM

TOD Converter Mac,
TOD File Converter Mac

hgffg| 11.30.09 @ 10:21PM

iPod Touch Converter for Mac,
DVD to iPod Touch Converter for Mac

More Articles by Jeffrey Lord

More Articles From The Obama Watch

Obama’s Assault on the First Amendment

May 22, 2013 | George Neumayr

Anyone Still Believe Me?

May 21, 2013 | Aaron Goldstein

Obama’s Far Left Hand

May 15, 2013 | George Neumayr

That Is What We Do

May 14, 2013 | Jay D. Homnick

Obama’s Rising Inequality

May 8, 2013 | Peter Ferrara

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/03/31/jimmy-carters-spirit-of-notre

ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Headlines

Obama’s Assault on the First Amendment

George Neumayr|114 comments

Damage Control for Dummies

Matt Purple|66 comments

Time to Go for the Kill

Peter Ferrara|61 comments

Restrain the Abusive Administative State

Doug Bandow|18 comments

Disabling American Sovereignty

Iain Murray|11 comments

The Other Gosnells

Jordan Gonzalez|12 comments

Can He Unite Virginia’s GOP?

Carten Cordell|26 comments

Undoing the Brainwashing

Thomas Sowell|21 comments

The Spectacle Blog

Former IRS Commissioner Refused to Say That Targeting Conservative Groups is Wrong

Benjamin Brophy | 2:27PM

Muslims Murder British Soldier in London

Ross Kaminsky | 2:00PM

Anthony Weiner’s Campaign Video

Patrick Ryan | 1:33PM

Congressional Democrat Outraged Over IRS Scandal

Kaylin Bugos | 12:57PM

Immigration Bill Clears Key Committee

Jordan Gonzalez | 11:56AM

Nixonian

Yogi Love | 11:54AM

Moore, OK by Steve Breen

Patrick Ryan | 11:50AM

He’s Just Not That Into You

Ross Kaminsky | 11:34AM

SPONSORED LINKS

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Clip of the Day

ADVERTISEMENT

Home |About |Contributors |Advertise |Donate |Privacy Policy |Contact

The American Spectator Foundation is the 501(c)(3) organization responsible for publishing The American Spectator magazine and training aspiring journalists who espouse traditional American values. Your contributions are tax deductible to the extent permitted by law. Each donor receives a year-end summary of their giving for tax purposes.

Copyright 2013, The American Spectator. All rights reserved.