His incompetence led to the Ayatollah Khomenei in Iran and the marxist Sandinistas in Nicaragua. His approval rating was 21% in 1980. Did I mention Iran hostage crisis, double digit inflation, gas rationing?
2007-01-16 01:23:54 · 7 answers · asked by elias 2 in News & Events ➔ Media & Journalism
You fail to mention that the double-digit inflation was a temporaty re-alignment of the economy that finally put an end to the massive damage caused by the failed policies of previous (most notably the Nixon and Ford with his brilliant program of sending out little metal "WIN" buttons as a solution to economic difficulties) Administrations. And, one thing Carter detractors always seem to ignore is that the high interest rates greatly benefited investors, including pension funds (rmember them?) and all commercial and personel note holders.
Yes, there was gas rationing. That rationing broke the back of OPEC, which was playing us like a cheap fiddle. That is no longer the case, thanks to Carter. The rationing also put a greater emphasis on conservation and the advancement of technologies that have produced vehicles with fuel economy levels unimaginable at the time.
He did blunder with regards to Iran and trying to clean up the mess, once again, created by previous Administrations. However, not one hostage was injured. In fact, the Iranians fell all over themselves to return one of the hostages who became ill. Why? Because Carter, made it clear that if any hostage was harmed, he would destroy Teheran. This he did quietly, without public fanfare. He didn't back down. He didn't reward the Iranians for their actions, as Reagan did for purely political reasons. That's called "diplomacy." And, without the interference by the Reagan campaign who gave the Iranians an incentive to prolong the situation, the hostages would have been home a lot sooner.
You also fail to mention the grain embargo aginst the Soviets, which had far more impact on the decline and fall of the "Evil Empire" than all of Reagan's public posturing.
Then, there were also the Camp David Accords that produced, for the first time, a lasting peace between the Arab states and Israel, a peace that has lasted right up to today, regardless of the attempts of the Bush Administration to destroy it.
All in all, Carter will be seen by history as one of our greatest and most honorable Presidents. He didn't abandon principle in favor of political gain, as has been the case with those who have come after him. Nobody can argue that he made mistakes. All Presidents do. On the other hand, nobody can reasonably argue that he ever took a position that he didn't firmly believe was in the best interest of the country or that he abandoned his positions simply because they were unpopular or politically uncomfortable.
.
2007-01-16 02:15:01 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Khomeini was a done deal anyway. There was no way we could continue propping up the Shah without tossing in thousands of troops. After Vietnam, that wasn't going to happen just 4 years after the fall of Saigon.
The gas crunch came during Ford's time but you are right about the growth of inflation during Carter's time in office. He completely misread the importance of strong action on the hostage crisis.
But that was 27 years ago. Why punch an old man? I feel he's pretty much ignored.
2007-01-16 01:40:45 · answer #2 · answered by iwasnotanazipolka 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
specific and no. actuality study there's a fringe group on the properly suited who're in actuality an ignorant bunch of paranoid racists that are obtainable protesting and spreading hate. regrettably, the Birthers are archives that this fringe is better than optimal persons understand. in spite of if, this fringe keeps to be the minority and there are way greater true conservatives obtainable who're in actuality protesting against Obama on assurance and ideology. regrettably, they don't seem to be doing sufficient to call out the loopy racists of their very very own social gathering. So, on an identical time as i don't disagree with Carter, i think of of he's portray too large a photo and making it appear like this fringe represents greater conservatives than it fairly does.
2016-10-31 06:15:55 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Time has a way of adding soft focus to people/events. He IS a very smart man who is a great philanthropist...
2007-01-16 01:29:58 · answer #4 · answered by jake78745 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Its his political party .
2007-01-16 03:17:27 · answer #5 · answered by ? 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Because he is a lib, like all the news papers and tv.
2007-01-16 01:30:26 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
that is so old news now we are worried about our current president and his screwups
2007-01-16 01:29:42 · answer #7 · answered by becky w 5 · 2⤊ 3⤋