Jimmy Carter

13 Former Presidents And Public Service After The Presidency

Ronald Leave a comment

With Presidents Day upon us, another interesting point of investigation about the American Presidency is the extent of public service of former Presidents.

The Presidents who remained active public figures after their Presidency, chronologically, were:

President John Quincy Adams (1825-1829), who served as a Congressman from Boston from 1830-1848, dying on the House floor during a debate over expansion of slavery into the territories gained from the Mexican War.

President Martin Van Buren (1837-1841), who after his difficult term in office due to the Panic of 1837, attempted to come back to the Presidency in 1844, failing at that venture, but running as the Presidential candidate of the Free Soil Party in 1848, the forerunner of the Republican Party.

President John Tyler (1841-1845), who renounced his American citizenship, and served for one year in the Confederate Congress before his death in 1862, which was not officially acknowledged by the United States government, due to his treason, as Americans saw it.

President Millard Fillmore (1850-1853), who after completing Zachary Taylor’s unfinished term without much distinction, came back and ran as the Presidential candidate of the American (Know Nothings) Party, an anti immigrant party, in the 1856 Presidential election, winning only Maryland in the Electoral College, and then went back into obscurity.

President Andrew Johnson (1865-1869), who served a few months as US Senator from Tennessee in 1875, serving alongside many of that body who had voted to remove him from office in the Impeachment trial of 1868, but died after those few months in the upper chamber.

President Theodore Roosevelt (1901-1909), who remained active, and ran for President on the third party Progressive Party line in 1912 against his own successor, William Howard Taft, and by running, helped to elect Woodrow Wilson as the next President. He also wrote and made speeches incessantly on every public topic imaginable!

President William Howard Taft (1909-1913), who was appointed Chief Justice of the Supreme Court by President Warren G. Harding in 1921, served nine years, and helped to plan the construction of the Supreme Court Building, which opened five years after he left the Court.

President Herbert Hoover (1929-1933), who served on the Hoover Commission on Organization of the Executive Branch of Government under appointment by President Harry Truman after World War II. Hoover also kept active in writing, and speaking up about public affairs.

President Richard Nixon (1969-1974), stayed active, writing about ten books and doing a lot of traveling around the world, and was an informal adviser to every President after him, including Bill Clinton in whose first term he passed away.

President Jimmy Carter (1977-1981) remained extremely active in his post Presidential years, writing over 20 books, forming the Carter Center to promote peace and diplomacy, and the fight against many diseases, and working for Habitat for Humanity in the construction of housing for the poor. He also had innumerable interviews and constantly spoke his mind on all kinds of domestic and foreign policy issues, and that continues today.

President Bill Clinton (1993-2001) followed in the steps of Jimmy Carter, promoting regular activity through his Clinton Global Initiative, and also promoting earthquake relief in Haiti in 2010 in tandem with President George W. Bush (2001-2009). Also, Clinton was involved in promotion of relief for victims of Hurricane Katrina in 2005 and the Indian Ocean tsunami in 2004 with former President George H. W. Bush (1989-1993). He also has been interviewed regularly and published many books and articles.

So these are the contributions, after being President, of 13 Presidents, and it is highly likely that President Barack Obama will continue that tradition, leaving office, whether in 2013 or 2017, as one of the youngest retired Presidents in our history as a nation!

Ten Other Presidential Elections That Transformed American History For Better Or Worse

Ronald Leave a comment

In addition to what are considered the ten most important Presidential elections in American history, there are also ten other elections that transformed our history, as history would have been different had the results been the opposite of what they were.

In chronological order, these elections are as follows.

Presidential Election of 1844—If James K. Polk had not won over Henry Clay, the likelihood of gaining the Pacific Northwest by treaty with Great Britain, and gaining the Southwest by war with Mexico, together the greatest land expansion since the Louisiana Purchase under Thomas Jefferson, would have been far less likely. But also the Civil War might have been delayed without the battle over freedom or slavery in the Mexican Cession territories gained from the war.

Presidential Election of 1864—An election often ignored, if Abraham Lincoln had not won over General George McClellan, who he had fired from Union Army military leadership, the Civil War, in its late stages, might have ended differently in some form, hard to determine.

Presidential Election of 1876—If the Electoral Commission and Compromise of 1877, giving Rutherford B. Hayes victory over Samuel Tilden, had not occurred, after a disputed election result in Florida, Louisiana, and South Carolina, there might have been civil war erupting all over again.

Presidential Election Of 1896—If William McKinley had not defeated William Jennings Bryan, there might have been no Spanish American War, no Filipino Insurrection, and no gaining of overseas colonies, as Bryan opposed the idea.

Presidential Election Of 1916—If Woodrow Wilson had not squeaked out a victory over Charles Evans Hughes, he had readied plans to hand over the Presidency to Hughes early, with the Secretary of State resigning, Hughes being named Secretary of State, the Vice President resigning, and then Wilson resigning. Wilson left behind a hand written memorandum to this effect, concerned about the transition of power as the dangers of World War I came closer to the possibility of American participation.

Presidential Election Of 1928—If Herbert Hoover had lost to Alfred E. Smith, the likelihood of a very different reaction to the onset of the Great Depression in 1929 might have led Smith to being the equivalent of Hoover’s successor, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and his New Deal.

Presidential Election of 1968—If Hubert Humphrey had defeated Richard Nixon, it is likely that the Vietnam War would have ended earlier, and that there would not have been a Watergate scandal, and instead a continuation of the Great Society begun by Lyndon B. Johnson.

Presidential Election of 1976—If Gerald Ford had defeated Jimmy Carter, it is likely that after 12 years of Republican control and growing economic and foreign policy challenges, that the Democrats would have retaken the White House in 1980, and there would have been no Ronald Reagan Presidency.

Presidential Election Of 1992–If George H. W. Bush had not had to deal with an economic recession and the third party challenge of Ross Perot, the second highest popular percentage third party effort in US history, it is very likely that Bill Clinton would never have been President.

Presidential Election of 2000—If the popular vote recount in Florida had been continued, and the Supreme Court had not intervened to declare the election over, then Al Gore would have become President instead of George W. Bush, and there might not have been a September 11 terrorist attack, the resulting war in Afghanistan and Iraq, and likely not a tremendous growth in the national debt from $5 trillion to $10 trillion

How much history would have been different if only the results of these elections had been other than what they were!

Richard Nixon (China) And Barack Obama (Iran): Why Not Try Diplomacy Before War?

Ronald Leave a comment

Forty years ago, Richard Nixon, a Republican President, took a bold step and went to visit and negotiate with the government of the People’s Republic Of China, better known in America as Communist China or Red China.

We had had no negotiations or dealings with mainland China since 1949, had made a career of demonizing the leadership of that nation, and had made clear that we would defend the island of Taiwan (Nationalist China) at all costs. We had also fought Chinese troops in the Korean War, and had known of Chinese support of the North Vietnamese in the Vietnam War, and were still bombing near the Chinese border.

But with all that, Richard Nixon went to China, negotiated trade and travel and cultural exchanges, and opened up our country and China to the promotion of less fear and more diplomacy and understanding in the interests of international harmony and avoidance of war.

Many conservatives bitterly condemned Nixon for going to China, and reversing his own anti Communist stand of twenty five years standing. But Nixon went anyway, and this occurred in an election year. It was statesmanlike and showed Nixon to be a pragmatic man in foreign policy.

Today, in 2012, forty years later, we are on the brink of possible military conflict with Iran, with which we have not had real dealings since the Iranian Revolution of 1979 and the fall of the Shah of Iran from power. Iran has become a very belligerent state, heavy on rhetoric and threats, similar to what China was for 25 years. In the case of Iran, it is now 33 years since the two nations, in the midst of tensions and stress, have sat down and tried to negotiate differences.

It may seem as if there is very little hope for a breakthrough with a harsh enemy who wishes us ill, but remember that was the same mentality toward China, and even more so, toward the Soviet Union, during the Cold War years, but still Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, and even Reagan all agreed to joint meetings, often in each other’s country, and made progress toward coexistence, and to avoid a direct confrontation that would benefit neither side.

So when the Republican candidates for President, conservative talk show hosts, and many others call for war on Iran, and think the idea of negotiations with Iran are fruitless, remember what Richard Nixon, the ultimate anti Communist did forty years ago this week. He went to the enemy and NEGOTIATED, and prevented any conflict with China, a dramatic and significant moment in world history!

It is time for Barack Obama to show courage and statesmanship, and since the Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has said he is ready for diplomatic talks, it is wise to take him up on it, and see if it can go anywhere. If it does not, and war results, at least we will be able to hold our heads high and say we TRIED! Is Ahmadinejad really any worse than Mao Tse Tung, Nikita Khrushchev Leonid Brezhnev, or Mikhail Gorbachev?

It is not cowardly to agree to talk and negotiate; it is cowardly to refuse to talk and negotiate, with the possibility of avoiding war that neither the United States citizens or Iranian citizens really want. And it would be better for Israel too, if war could be avoided which would likely have a very heavy toll on their citizens, in a country so small in population, it cannot afford to lose even one hundred people in an unnecessary war that MIGHT be avoidable!

Presidential Empathy And Emotional Connection With The American People

Ronald 1 Comment

There are so many talents, abilities, and skills required for a person in any occupation or field of work to have success, and the same is so for the American Presidency.

We have had Presidents who, despite many other talents, abilities and skills, were simply unable to show empathy and emotional connection with the American people. Instead, they came across as aloof, distant, plastic, and unable to relate to the “common man”!

Among those Presidents who failed to demonstrate empathy and emotional connection with the American people would be the following:

William Howard Taft
Woodrow Wilson
Warren G. Harding
Calvin Coolidge
Herbert Hoover
Lyndon B. Johnson
Richard Nixon
Jimmy Carter
George H. W. Bush
George W. Bush

Among those Presidents who had the ability to display Presidential empathy and emotional connection were the following:

Theodore Roosevelt
Franklin D. Roosevelt
Harry Truman
Dwight D. Eisenhower
John F. Kennedy
Gerald Ford
Ronald Reagan
Bill Clinton
Barack Obama

Does Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, or Ron Paul have these abilities? The answer is ABSOLUTELY NOT, and this will make it more difficult for any or them to serve in the Oval Office in a time of great human suffering due to the economic collapse since 2008.

One Term Presidencies: Seven Significant Leaders Not Appreciated

Ronald Leave a comment

Tomorrow marks one year to the inauguration of the next President of the United States, and the question arises whether Barack Obama will become another one term President.

Historically, those who have been one term Presidents and lost re-election have tended to go down in history as “losers”, “failures”, and as “insignificant” in American history.

But nothing could be further from the truth. Consider the following cases:

John Adams–one of the most significant Founding Fathers in the Revolution and Federalist Eras, but defeated by Thomas Jefferson in the first political party struggle.

John Quincy Adams–brilliant in diplomacy before his Presidency as one of our greatest Secretaries of State, and exceptional as a Congressman for nearly 18 years after his Presidency, fighting against the evil of slavery, but losing to Andrew Jackson.

William Howard Taft–much underrated President who also served later as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, but losing to Woodrow Wilson, and even ending up behind his promoter, Theodore Roosevelt, who ran on a third party line, the Progressive Party, the greatest third party performance in American history.

Herbert Hoover–acknowledged as great humanitarian as aide to Woodrow Wilson during World War I, and as Secretary of Commerce under Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge, but paralyzed by the Great Depression and slow to react to the massive crisis it presented.

Jimmy Carter–Despite major accomplishments in office, particularly in foreign policy, lost reelection to Ronald Reagan because of the Iranian hostage crisis, but pursued commitment to fighting disease and promoted diplomacy and free elections after his Presidency, and won the Nobel Peace Prize.

George H. W. Bush–very talented as Ambassador to China, United Nations Ambassador, and head of the Central Intelligence Agency before his Presidency, but despite his victory in the Gulf War, he was defeated due to the economic recession and the third party candidacy of Ross Perot, and lost to Bill Clinton.

Another one term President who chose NOT to run for re-election, of course, had a very successful term of office. James K. Polk gained the Oregon Treaty with Great Britain, giving America the Pacific Northwest states, and waged war with Mexico, gaining California and the Southwest states. Worn out by his labors, he chose not to run, and died 103 days after retirement, the shortest retirement period of any President in American history.

So the whole concept that one term Presidents do not matter is shown to be totally incorrect.

Political Attacks On First Ladies: Nothing New!

Ronald Leave a comment

The new book that claims that First Lady Michelle Obama has had problems with White House staff, that she interferes with their agenda in defense of her husband, has led to denials by her, and bitter attacks by conservative media.

Is criticism of the First Lady, whoever she is, anything new? History tells us otherwise.

First Lady Dolly Madison was always more outspoken in all ways than her taciturn husband, James Madison. She was known as the “party giver”, but that included her willingness to speak her mind!

First Lady Mary Lincoln was controversial over her expenditures, her clothes, and her mouth, and came under a lot of political attacks during the Civil War, including the fact that her brothers were part of the enemy, fighting for the Confederacy against the American government led by Abraham Lincoln.

Lucy Hayes came to be known as “Lemonade Lucy”, due to the fact that she prevented the serving of liquor at White House gatherings, and believed in women’s rights, including the right to vote, and spoke her mind regularly, causing problems therefore for her husband, Rutherford Hayes.

Edith Bolling Galt Wilson, the second Mrs. Wilson, led cabinet meetings after Woodrow Wilson suffered a stroke in 1919, and often was considered the “first woman President” during his last 18 months in office.

Eleanor Roosevelt, wife of Franklin D. Roosevelt, was the most controversial First Lady, speaking up regularly on all kinds of issues and topics, and labeled by her critics as a Communist and a Socialist. After her husband died, she remained part of the political controversies in the era of McCarthyism and the Cold War, always speaking her mind and being a political activist.

Betty Ford became a lightning rod under President Gerald Ford, speaking out as a feminist for the Equal Rights Amendment, and endorsing abortion rights, and speaking about her alcohol and breast cancer problems openly.

Rosalyn Carter attended cabinet meeting of her husband, Jimmy Carter, and also spoke out for feminist causes openly.

Nancy Reagan was criticized for her spending on White House China, and defended her husband, Ronald Reagan, against his own White House Chief of Staff, Donald Regan, who she was able to arrange to fire. She had no problem stating that she was there to help and defend her husband.

Hillary Clinton was the most involved and outspoken First Lady since Eleanor Roosevelt, and became a lightning rod particularly when she promoted a failed health care plan in the first term of Bill Clinton.

And now, Michelle Obama is making clear that she is there as an advocate of her husband, while claiming no problem in getting along with the White House staff.

So this is all nothing new!

Crossing Party Lines To Serve A President: The BEST American Tradition!

Ronald Leave a comment

Following up on Jon Huntsman’s defense of serving President Obama as Ambassador to China for two years, when one looks at American history, one sees many examples of public figures crossing party lines to serve a President of the other party, a commitment that is in the BEST American tradition of bipartisanship and service to country.

A look back reveals many examples of such bipartisanship and putting the country ahead of party, as witness the following examples:

President Barack Obama

Robert Gates, Secretary of Defense
Ray LaHood, Secretary of Transportation
John McHugh, Secretary of the Army
Jim Leach, Chair of the National Endowment for the Humanities
Ben Bernanke, Chairman of the Federal Reserve

President George W. Bush

Norman Mineta, Secretary of Transportation

President Bill Clinton

Alan Greenspan, Chairman of the Federal Reserve
William Cohen, Secretary of Defense

President George H. W. Bush

Robert Strauss, Ambassador to the Soviet Union/Russia
Richard Stone, Ambassador to Denmark

President Ronald Reagan

Mike Mansfield, Ambassador to Japan
Paul Volcker, Chairman of the Federal Reserve
Jeanne Kirkpatrick, Ambassador to the United Nations
William Bennett, National Endowment for the Humanities
Secretary of Education

President Jimmy Carter

James Schlesinger, Secretary of Energy
Lawrence Eagleburger, Ambassador to Yogoslavia

President Gerald Ford

Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Ambassador to India and to the United Nations

President Richard Nixon

Sargent Shriver, Ambassador to France
John Connally, Secretary of the Treasury
Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Ambassador to India

President Lyndon B. Johnson

Henry Cabot Lodge, Ambassador to South Vietnam and to West Germany
Edward Brooke, Kerner Commission on Civil Disorders

President John F. Kennedy

Robert McNamara, Secretary of Defense
C. Douglas Dillon, Secretary of the Treasury
McGeorge Bundy, National Security Adviser
Henry Cabot Lodge, Ambassador to South Vietnam

President Dwight D. Eisenhower

Martin Durkin, Secretary of Labor
William McChesney Martin, Jr., Chairman of the Federal Reserve
Robert B. Anderson, Secretary of the Treasury

President Harry Truman

Warren Austin, Ambassador to the United Nations

President Franklin D. Roosevelt

Frank Knox, Secretary of the Navy
Henry Stimson, Secretary of War
William Donovan, Head of the Office of Strategic Services
John G. Winant, Ambassador to Great Britain
Harlan Fiske Stone, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court

President Herbert Hoover

Benjamin Cardozo, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court

President Warren G. Harding

Pierce Butler, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court

President Grover Cleveland

Walter Q Gresham, Secretary of State
Theodore Roosevelt, Civil Service Commissioner

President Rutherford Hayes

David Key, Postmaster General

President Ulysses S. Grant

Caleb Cushing, Ambassador to Spain

President Abraham Lincoln

Edwin M Stanton, Secretary of War
Andrew Johnson, Military Governor of Tennessee

This is quite a list of distinguished Americans who served their country for a President of the other party, and Jon Huntsman, as Ambassador to China for two years, adds to that distinct list, and it should NOT disqualify him to run for President of the United States!

The Tragedy Of The Republican Party: A Split Personality Outside The Mainstream!

Ronald Leave a comment

Chris Matthews on MSNBC this evening summarized the tragedy of the Republican Party: that it has been “hijacked” by disparate groups that cause the party grief!

First, we have what Matthews calls the “Dixiecrats”, the Southern segregationists, who left the Democratic Party after the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 under President Lyndon B. Johnson.

Then, due to the school prayer decision (Engle V Vitale) and abortion rights decision (Roe V Wade) of the Supreme Court, the “Moral Majority” or “Christian Coalition” or “Evangelical Right” went over to the Republican Party in the 1970s.

Finally, conservative “hawkish” Democrats, dissatisfied with the nomination of George McGovern in 1972 and President Jimmy Carter in 1976 also went over to the Republicans as the “neoconservatives”.

The result has been a “split personality” party which has marginalized itself more and more over the years, and moved away from the mainstream of America, as the Republican Party was until the mid 1970s.

Unless Jon Huntsman can, somehow, gain a surge and make a major fight for the GOP nomination, the Republican Party is going to remain outside the mainstream of America!

Further Evidence Of Insignificance Of Iowa Caucuses, And Significance Of New Hampshire Primary!

Ronald Leave a comment

So much attention is paid to the Iowa Caucuses, but the more one examines them, one realizes how unimportant to history Iowa really is.

Only George W. Bush and Barack Obama have won the Iowa Caucuses and gone on to being elected President. Jimmy Carter fell behind “Uncommitted” in 1976. One could say that since the two most recent Presidents won Iowa, that it is an indication of the changing role of Iowa, but that is really highly doubtful!

At the same time, New Hampshire’s Primary HAS been VERY significant in picking Presidents, as Jimmy Carter in 1976 and John F. Kennedy in 1960 won the state, and Republicans Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1952, Richard Nixon in 1968, Ronald Reagan in 1980, and George H W Bush in 1988 also won the state.

The Iowa Republican Caucuses Historically: A Waste Of Time!

Ronald 1 Comment

The Iowa Caucuses, which have existed since 1972 for the Democratic Party and competitively for the Republicans since 1976, have been largely a “waste of time” as far as picking future Presidents, and even Presidential nominees.

At least, the Democrats have chosen Jimmy Carter, Walter Mondale, Bill Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry, and Barack Obama, with Carter, Clinton and Obama going on to the White House.

But the Republican Caucuses have been much less successful and representative of what happened. Only Bob Dole in 1996, and George W. Bush in 2000 and 2004 have gone on to be the nominee, and only Bush being elected and reelected. There was no actual vote between Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan in 1976, and Reagan lost in 1980 and ran unopposed in 1984, and the same for George H W Bush in 1988 and no opposition in 1992.

The point is that the Iowa Caucuses gain an inordinate amount of attention, but only maybe a bit more than 100,000 people participate, far fewer than a primary in percentage of voters, and therefore, it has never been seen as a reliable barometer of who a future Presidential nominee or winner might be!

So don’t tend to think that the results in Iowa will matter, as the New Hampshire primary has ALWAYS been a much better barometer for the fortunes of Presidential candidates, since it emerged in 1952.