Jimmy Carter: An endangered mind
By Miguel Guanipa (08/24/06)
It was like reading an exposition by Pee Wee Herman on the 'Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle'
There sat Jimmy Carter, regaling us with his searing commentary on the inadequacies of the current administration in serving the needs of the working man and managing a global war on terror. This is a man during whose tenure the country struggled under the heavy yoke of 70 % marginal tax rates and 16% inflation, while reeling in agony as student proxies of the new Iranian regime held 66 American diplomats hostage for 444 days; so much for caring for the working man and dealing effectively with terrorists.
The only thing Jimmy Carter did not do during his recent interview with Der Spiegel was go into John Kerry mode and recite the “If only I was president right now” line. Other than that he had plenty to say that would amply qualify him for a free membership at the Jack Murtha honorary ward for ex-statesmen stricken with dementia.
His own son Jack Carter promptly dissociated himself from his father’s inane ramblings, perhaps sensing as other democrats have, that the country is getting tired of fire-brand political maneuverings; to wit some Democrats have acknowledged that unless they undergo a profound change in the way in which they view the world around them, they will not regain substantial political ground any time soon.
Republicans should welcome this unorthodox spate of self-introspection by a few other Democrat hopefuls that has lead them to an amazing discovery: one sure way to re-energize their party is by seeking more ways to appeal to (or at least stop ignoring) that middle of the ground electorate who can not digest the fringe left convictions the likes of Jimmy Carter proudly embrace.
The problem is, if most Democrats are to remain true to themselves, they will impulsively resist any attempts to undertake such a transformation, fearing they may morph into the sort of public servant who endorses somewhat more conservative values, such as less government infringement in private enterprise, repudiation of the kind of morality which stems from the Hollywood elite domain, and an unyielding reverence for the sanctity of human life. In other words: lest they become Republicans.
For starters, they should avoid people like Jimmy Carter who claims to represent the views of “the vast majority of Democrats in this country”, in spite of the fact that he may not be entirely wrong in his assessment after all.
What Jimmy Carter represents is a kind of extremism that is mostly kept under wraps by more temperate souls in the Democratic Party. He is the incarnation of what lurks in the innermost being of virtually every democrat, who is also not mentally imbalanced enough to shout it from the rooftops.
Not all democrats are part of this lunatic fringe – although in Jimmy Carter’s case he happens to fit that profile to a T- but far too many of them prefer to shoot from the hip; except for so called moderate democrats, who prefer to pontificate in more non-committal pleasantries; but everybody knows what they are really thinking.
In the end, Jimmy Carter epitomizes the Democratic Party’s inability to contribute to the future election in any other way than by broadcasting their own negative opinions of the president’s performance. The question is: why don’t they tell us what they can do rather than how bad the president is doing? We already know they don’t like the president; what voters want to hear is why we should like them instead.
In the meantime, Republicans should probably give Jimmy Carter a bigger soap box. The man is a shinning example of why Democrats will probably not achieve half the goals they have set for themselves come November.
(Printer friendly version) Email: Miguel Guanipa
