Jimmy Carter

Barack Obama And Promotion Of Gay Rights Abroad: An Extension Of Jimmy Carter’s Human Rights Initiative!

Ronald Leave a comment

A few weeks ago, President Barack Obama took a major step forward in the promotion of human rights abroad, an expansion of the vision of former President Jimmy Carter in and out of office since the late 1970s.

Both Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced early in December that the American government would use all of the tools of American diplomacy, including foreign aid, to promote gay rights around the world.

This includes fighting efforts in other nations to criminalize homosexual conduct, and to abuse or overlook abuse against gay men, lesbians bisexuals, and transgender people.

Hillary Clinton connected gay rights to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by 48 nations after World War II. The goal is to stop nations from making it a crime to be gay.

Several nations have made strides in this regard recently, including South Africa, Colombia, Argentina, Nepal, and Mongolia. Much of Europe and China have taken being gay off the list of legal prohibitions.

But at the same time, many Muslim nations in particular still ban homosexuality and punish and discriminate against gays, including Pakistan, Afghanistan, Uganda, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia as leading examples.

And of course, Republicans in general attacked the idea of including gay rights as part of a foreign policy vision, and many of the potential nominees for the Presidency make it clear they would like to reverse the progress made in America in recent years.

So the battle for human rights for gays is far from over!

Today Is A Shared Death Date Of Two Courageous Presidents, Often Criticized In Office Endlessly!

Ronald Leave a comment

Today, December 26, is a shared death date of two courageous Presidents, often criticized in office endlessly.

These two Presidents were Harry Truman who died in 1972, and Gerald Ford, who died in 2006.

Harry Truman was incessantly attacked on all sides, by Republicans who thought he would be easy to defeat in 1948, and were surprised by his upset victory over Thomas E. Dewey; and who later bitterly attacked his strategy on the Korean War. But also, liberal Democrats were disappointed in him, seeing him as a poor replacement for Franklin D. Roosevelt, who he succeeded in 1945. So he faced the opposition of former Vice President Henry A. Wallace and the Progressive Party of 1948. But he also faced the opposition of Southern Democrats, led by Governor Strom Thurmond of South Carolina, who ran for President in 1948 as a “Dixiecrat” on the States Rights Party line, because of Truman’s brave stand ending segregation in Washington, DC, and in the armed forces, by executive order.

Truman had twenty years in retirement, and grew in stature as the years went by.

Gerald Ford, not even elected Vice President, ended up succeeding Richard Nixon, when he resigned due to the Watergate scandal in 1974.

Ford gained criticism because of the pardon of Nixon one month later, and because of the economic recession that had already begun, and was the worst economic downturn since 1939.

Ford also had to battle for the GOP nomination against conservatives who backed former Governor Ronald Reagan, who nearly defeated Ford in the Republican National Convention of 1976, and this forced Ford to drop Vice President Nelson Rockefeller, and replace him with Kansas Senator Bob Dole. He came close to the defeat of Democratic nominee Governor Jimmy Carter, losing in Ohio and Hawaii by very small margins, enough to have defeated Carter if only he had gained a few thousand votes.

Ford came to be regarded with respect and admiration, even by Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts, who in 1999 said he had been wrong to attack Ford for the Nixon pardon 25 years earlier.

Ford lived on for 29 years after the Presidency, and is looked at kindly now, much like Truman.

These were two men who had in common that they came across to average Americans as being “one of us”! May they rest in peace!

Are Progressives Going To, For A Fourth Time, Harm The Democratic Party Out Of Dissatisfaction With Imperfections Of Their Leadership?

Ronald 4 Comments

Progressives and liberals have often, by their expectations of perfection from Democratic Party leadership, brought about a result far worse–a conservative Republican takeover!

This occurred in 1968, when discontent over the war in Vietnam convinced many on the Left to bad mouth and abandon Vice President Hubert Humphrey, and the result was President Richard Nixon!

In 1980, discontent with President Jimmy Carter led to abandonment by many progressives, and the result was President Ronald Reagan!

In 2000, dissatisfaction with the imperfections of Vice President Al Gore led to the election of President George W. Bush!

Of course, Barack Obama has not followed through on all his promises and pledges in 2008. He has disillusioned many progressives and liberals who believed he would accomplish everything he spoke about in the campaign.

But that is totally unrealistic, and the fear is that if there is an abandonment of the President, we could end up with President Mitt Romney or President Newt Gingrich, the two most likely choices at this point, at least, in the Republican nomination race. Of course, anyone else except Jon Huntsman would be even worse!

When, oh when, are those on the Left going to understand, finally, that there is no perfection, but that Barack Obama is far preferable to anyone the Republican Party might run!

it is time for the discontented to get on the ship, and be thankful for what Barack Obama has managed to achieve, the most since the Great Society of Lyndon B. Johnson in the 1960s!

Rapidly Worsening Relations With Iran And Pakistan: A Concern For America And The West

Ronald Leave a comment

It is ironic that America has fought two wars in the past decade in Iraq and Afghanistan, both far from decisive, and now the reality is that the nations most to be concerned and worried about are their neighbors, Iran and Pakistan.

Iran has been clearly developing a secret nuclear weapons program, has been supporting Hezbollah and Hamas against Israel, and has become more and more belligerent as sanctions have been utilized against them. They are, in many ways, a much greater threat than either Iraq or Afghanistan ever were. And now, Iranian students have stormed the British embassy, done property destruction, and installed an Iranian flag in place of the British flag, and as the situation unfolds, it reminds one of the American embassy seizure in 1979 under the administration of President Jimmy Carter.

Pakistan, which harbored Osama Bin Laden for years, and has had connections to Al Qaeda and the Taliban for a long time, and whose secret service has worked against American interests in Afghanistan, has reacted aggressively against a NATO strike in Pakistan, part of an anti terrorist counteroffensive, by cutting off cooperation in allowing US and foreign forces to use their air space and roads in military operations in Afghanistan.

It is clear that relations with Pakistan are rapidly deteriorating, a dangerous situation since Pakistan has over 100 nuclear weapons, and in the wrong hands, could be utilized against India, or NATO forces in the area.

Why Barack Obama Will Be A Repeat Of Bill Clinton Electorally, Rather Than Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, And George H.W. Bush!

Ronald Leave a comment

A lot of political observers seem to think that Barack Obama is doomed to lose re-election, just as Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, and George H. W. Bush did in 1976, 1980, and 1992.

The author will contend that rather than that unfortunate history, Barack Obama will repeat the electoral experience of Bill Clinton in 1996!

The question, of course, is what is the rationale behind this thought of the author?

Gerald Ford–was an unelected President, coming after Watergate, challenged in the primaries by Ronald Reagan, an extremely charismatic individual, who almost took the nomination from him. Ford was unable to unite the party around him after the Reagan battle, despite dumping Nelson Rockefeller for Bob Dole for Vice President. Ford had little opportunity to convince the country that he was deserving of election, and yet ALMOST defeated Jimmy Carter, which he would have done if he had won a few more thousand votes in Ohio and Hawaii! Ford was not seen as all that capable to be President by many people, with the poor economy of the time.

Jimmy Carter–had a difficult last year in office, with the Afghanistan invasion by the Soviet Union, the Iranian hostage crisis, and the challenge in the primaries by Senator Ted Kennedy and Governor Jerry Brown. He faced a charismatic opponent in Ronald Reagan, and a third party opponent in John Anderson. He was not a warm personality, and came across as weak and ineffective.

George H. W. Bush–faced a primary opponent in Pat Buchanan, and a strong third party challenger in Ross Perot. His Democratic opponent, Bill Clinton, had a lot of charisma, and was helped by the strong showing of Perot. And Bush did not have a particularly likeable personality, more respected for his ability than his understanding of average Americans and their lives.

Bill Clinton–engendered strong feelings for and against during his first term, and had charisma dripping off him, as compared to Bush and Bob Dole, his 1996 re-election opponent. Times were good, and he looked strong in his battles against the GOP Congress run by Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich. He had no opposition for the second term nomination, and his opponent, Dole, being 73 years old, did not help his challenge to Clinton. Also, Wall Street gave more financial support to Clinton to hedge their bets, frustrating Bob Dole!

Barack Obama–well liked, even by those who do not like what he has done, but he has accomplished a lot in office, particularly in foreign affairs and national security. He has brought about substantial domestic reform despite strong opposition from the Republican party, and has loads of charisma, and tons of funding, including as with Clinton, from Wall Street, which, even if opposed as they were to Clinton and now Obama, hedge their bets and support him more than the Republican nominee, just as with Bob Dole in 1996. Also, there is a good chance of a Tea Party right wing party rebellion if Mitt Romney, the likely nominee, is the choice of the Republican party. The opposition does not have a candidate to excite the nation, so although the economy is horrible, the likelihood is that more Americans will recognize the reality that one does not overcome a near depression overnight, and will decide to stick with Obama, just as they did in the height of the Great Depression with Franklin D. Roosevelt!

Presidential Styles: Interpersonal Relationships Important In Level Of Success!

Ronald Leave a comment

The American Presidency is a complex institution, with 43 men so far having occupied that office, and the personalities of the Presidents have a great deal to do with the level of success they achieve.

Many have been shy or withdrawn in dealings with others, including the public, the Congress, and the news media, which may surprise the average person, wondering how they were able to win election. Among this group would be included Calvin Coolidge, Herbert Hoover, Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, and George H. W. Bush.

Others had great capabilities as communicators, but somehow could not translate it into warm relationships with Congress, including Woodrow Wilson, John F. Kennedy, Bill Clinton, and now clearly, Barack Obama.

Then, there were those who knew how to get what they wanted, including Theodore Roosevelt, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Lyndon B. Johnson, and Ronald Reagan, keeping close in touch with Congressional leaders, charming them with White House meetings, including the opposition party!

And then there are those Presidents who don’t quite fit any of the above descriptions, including Harry Truman, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Gerald Ford, and George W. Bush. All were unique in their skills and abilities, having some successes and some failures in office.

A recent Washington Post opinion piece called Obama a “loner” President who finds it difficult to make Congressional relationships, even with his own party, and not particularly liking people as individuals, and much better speaking to the nation as a whole. This could be seen as a shortcoming, which could undermine Obama’s attempt to win re-election!

But then, Obama’s Republican challengers, particularly Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, Rick Santorum and Herman Cain do not exactly engender a sense of warmth in dealing with others!

The Republican Party Advocating The End Of National Commitment To Education Standards: A Tragedy!

Ronald Leave a comment

The Republican Party has declared war on the US Department of Education, and in so doing, will doom American education for the long term, if they are successful in winning power, and succeed in abolishing a department first started under Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower, as part of a larger cabinet agency, the Department of Health, Education and Welfare in 1953, and created separately in 1979 under President Jimmy Carter.

When Ronald Reagan came to the Presidency, he was dedicated to the abolition of the department, but dropped the idea, but it has come under attack ever since.

The attack on the Department of Education, advocated by Republicans who wish to allow states and local districts to control education without oversight, would bring about an education system which would promote mediocrity in educational offerings in poor districts, making victims of economically disadvantaged students and disabled students.

If there are to be funds coming from the national government, and higher standards of educational attainment and greater accountability demanded, then local control will not work, as historically, no matter how many complaints there are about the national government, the corruption and incompetence of state and local governments in much of the nation is notoriously scandalous!

That is why we were caught off guard in the 1950s, when the Soviet Union was first in space, and made us aware of the need for federal involvement and investment in education at all levels, leading to the National Defense Education Act of 1958.

Not only is it essential to provide for poor, minority and disabled students, but also if Pell grants are ended, it will destroy the idea of advancing educational opportunity for low income college students, which can lead to a better economic future for them and their families.

So despite Michele Bachmann specifically calling for the total closing of the Education Department, and in fact because of the very obvious ignorance she displays in her own educational experience, federal involvement in education MUST continue unabated!

Rick Perry’s Assault On FDR’s New Deal: Unconscionable!

Ronald Leave a comment

The last time that a major party Presidential candidate went after the New Deal of Franklin D. Roosevelt with such zeal as Texas Governor Rick Parry has done in his recent book and during his presidential campaign was Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater in the 1964 Presidential campaign, and anyone who knows political history knows that Goldwater suffered the worst percentage defeat ever to Lyndon B. Johnson, who went on to expand and improve on the New Deal with his Great Society.

Hopefully, the same scenario will happen if Rick Perry is Barack Obama’s opponent, and we will see Obama improve on Lyndon B Johnson, which he certainly has more than anyone since then, certainly more than Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton!

Perry not only has called Social Security a “Ponzi scheme”, even though it has always paid out for 75 years, and is well funded to 2037, and only needs a little tinkering to sustain itself into the long range future, similar to what it received in the famous Ronald Reagan-Tip O’Neill deal of 1983.

Perry also criticizes in his book “Fed Up”, published last year, all of the government agencies created during the New Deal, including three public works agencies that created worthwhile jobs during the New Deal (the Civilian Conservation Corps, the Public Works Administration, and the Federal Emergency Relief Administration); the nation’s agency to watch over the stock market and Wall Street (the Securities and Exchange Commission); an agency which took the American South out of dire poverty and provided electricity, which private enterprise had not done (the Tennessee Valley Authority); an agency started by President Herbert Hoover to help keep business afloat during the Great Depression and continued by FDR (the Reconstruction Finance Corporation); an agency which helped keep farmers going during the worst times in agricultural history (the Agricultural Adjustment Administration); and also a denial by Perry that the New Deal lowered the unemployment rate, which in actual fact went from 12-13 million at the beginning of 1933 to a little over 6 million in 1939!

Perry has utilized misrepresentation and misconceptions, and pure lies and demagoguery, while forgetting his own poverty stricken past! Is there anything worse than pure hypocrisy and deception in the name of his corporate masters, who support his campaign for President?

The “Occupy Wall Street” Protests: Their Meaning!

Ronald 2 Comments

For the past two weeks, we have seen people of all ages committing themselves long term to an “Occupy Wall Street” protest movement, and it has now spread all over the country, and even overseas.

There is the temptation to say that this is a group of “losers”, who have nothing better to do than cause “trouble”, and among the elite wealthy, they are certainly comparing it to the anti war movement of the 1960s and 1970s, with the image of scruffy “hippies” causing a ruckus because they were “cowards”.

This protest movement, however, is of people of all backgrounds and age groups. Why are they protesting?

They are outraged at the corruption and greed of Wall Street, which caused this economic disaster in 2008.

They are outraged by the lack of bank investment in promotion of small business and mortgages after they were bailed out by taxpayers, instead sitting on $2 trillion.

They are outraged by the refusal of banks to help homeowners, and instead promote foreclosures, causing not only the loss of homes for millions of people, but also devaluing the properties of others who are able to pay their house mortgages.

They are outraged by the tremendous burden put upon young people by massive student loans that prevent them from being able to start their adult lives without massive debt, when in earlier generations, higher education was much more affordable and did not saddle graduates with unsustainable debt.

They are outraged by the lack of employment opportunities for young people, and also the inability of people in mid career to replace lost jobs due to the economic collapse.

They are outraged by politicians in Congress, and also the Supreme Court, who bend to the will of the wealthy few, with the top one percent having 20 percent of the income, double what it was ten years ago!

They are outraged by the loss of the “American Dream”, that anyone can succeed in this country, while the reality is far from that, and particularly for those of minority heritage, who have been devastated by the Great Recession of 2008.

What is it these people want? They want a return to a government of, by and for the people, not just the small percentage of wealthy! They want a return to social justice, concern about the sick, the poor, the aged, the disadvantaged! They want a return to competitive capitalism, with regulation and controls on Wall Street and the corporations in the name of fairness.

In other words, they want a return to the vision and goals of Progressivism, of the early 20th century, along with the aims of the New Deal of Franklin D. Roosevelt and the Great Society of Lyndon B. Johnson!

Our peak of national economic prosperity and advancement came in 1973, interestingly the year that the Watergate scandal was revealed for what it was. Richard Nixon had expanded the Great Society, but that stopped as he was being investigated and eventually forced out of office.

Nothing has remained the same since, and it coincides with THIRTY FIVE years of conservative government!

One might say, hey, wait a minute, weren’t there periods of Democrats in the White House? The answer is YES, but both Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton pursued comparatively “conservative” administrations, along with Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan, and the two Presidents Bush!

So the decline has occurred during the triumphant period of CONSERVATIVE government, and the American people, at least those who are willing to be open minded, realize what has happened and are demanding CHANGE back to when life improved for all Americans!

So this is the meaning of the Wall Street protests, and is the answer to the Tea Party Movement, which wishes to take us back to the Gilded Age, while the “Occupy Wall Street” movement wishes to restore the advancements of the Progressive Era, New Deal, and Great Society! Anyone who thinks this will go away is living in the same illusions as the Tea Party Movement!

The American people are determined to take back their country from the elite wealthy who have no concern other than selfishness and greed. The battle for the future is WE against ME!

The “Learned” Presidents: Men Of Great Intellect!

Ronald Leave a comment

In today’s America, we see glorification of presidential candidates who comes across as lacking in knowledge and insights, people who represent ignorance of history and science, who are seen as the “average American”, as if that is what we need in the White House! What else explains Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, Rick Santorum and others who are constantly displaying their lack of intellect?

In the past, we had our share of ignorant Presidents, but we also had a great number of “learned” Presidents, one out of three, who made the office proud with their intellect and insights. It did not, of course, guarantee success in all of their activities as President, but we could feel satisfied that we had brilliant men who represented a model of what America should strive for: intellectual curiosity and inquiry and desire for learning, something looked down upon today, a very regrettable development.

So who are the “learned” Presidents?

John Adams
Thomas Jefferson
James Madison
John Quincy Adams
James Garfield (more potentially, because of assassination within months of taking the oath of office)
Theodore Roosevelt
William Howard Taft
Woodrow Wilson
Herbert Hoover
Richard Nixon
Jimmy Carter
Bill Clinton
Barack Obama

The debate about the connection between intellect and success will go on, as it is well known that there is considerable debate about the effectiveness and success of Madison, Taft, Hoover, Nixon, and Carter, at the least. And many would debate Wilson and Clinton as well.

But this list demonstrates, if nothing else, that we have some “scholars” in the White House, and that we should want the “best and the brightest” in the Oval Office, to set a model for the nation and its future!