“Cynical Publius,” a practicing lawyer and retired Army colonel who writes under that name at The Federalist, couldn’t stand the Carter record airbrushing flooding in the media yesterday and was moved to post this on his lively Twitter/”X” account:
I promised to myself that I would not comment further on Jimmy Carter’s death, but it bothers me to see so many otherwise sensible conservatives spouting the “Bad President, good man” line that the Democrat/Media Complex has been spinning for 40+ years. Thus, I feel the need to drop some truth bombs, propriety at time of death notwithstanding. Yes, he hammered a few nails on some houses for poor people. But that alone does not make one a “good man,” when the rest of the track record is so awful. After Carter lost in spectacular fashion in 1980, he did not do what every other President before him did and retire to a quiet, private life. He could have farmed peanuts in Plains with Rosalynn. Instead, he bitterly engaged in active and public efforts to undermine the policies of the elected Republicans who came after him. He INVENTED the jealous, manipulative ex-President model that Obama put on steroids in 2016. Jimmy Carter flew around the world for decades, un-asked by America, on self-appointed missions of national importance, almost always involving gleefully interacting with raging antisemitic terrorist and/or Communist leaders, always working against the official policies of the ACTUALLY ELECTED Presidents. Carter’s hatred of Israel bordered on pathological, and reeked of a sort of cloaked antisemitism that has become quite fashionable today. Somehow Jimmy Carter convinced himself that he was such an important and historic figure that he stood outside and above the U.S. systems of election and governance, even though no one other than the Yassar Arafats and Hugo Chavezs of the world asked him to do so. Jimmy Carter was a bitter, angry narcissist who cloaked his lifelong, seething rage at the indignity of being body-slammed by Ronald Reagan (someone he considered lesser than himself in every regard) with that genteel “Southern gentleman” accent, vague scripture references and the occasional hammered nail. He purposely and vengefully wreaked havoc on America’s official foreign policy for decades and he INVENTED the concept of a meddling ex-President poisoning American political discourse. (In that regard, Obama has been Carter v.2.0—we have Carter to thank for that.) Literally every aspect of the man’s self-serving public life was harmful to America, he knew that, and he did it all anyway because narcissists always operate like that—they cannot help it, and they can never admit fault. Carter’s “good man” image was a carefully constructed and nurtured illusion, one that he gladly worked with the corrupt media to maintain. So please consider these factors before pronouncing “Bad President, good man.” Sometimes truth needs to be said even when some find that truth untimely.
The assessment of the post-White House work of former Presidents should regard their activities in the context of that position. Building houses for the poor and raising money to wipe out diseases in Africa deserve bonus points, but first and foremost, an ex-President’s post White House activities need to be evaluated according to how he used or abused that status. Carter actually claimed that he was the best ex-President ever, showing the back of his hand to such competitors as John Quincy Adams, Herbert Hoover, and especially William Howard Taft, who went on to serve as the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. (Ethics Alarms protested Carter’s self-back-patting at the time.)
Cynical Publius’s post is harsh , but timely, appropriate and accurate.
Ethics Alarms 
Cynical’s post follows nicely on Steve-O’s comments. I don’t disagree with any of them.
jvb
Carter was an accomplished person who felt less than. Very few people, whether successful or horrid have ascended to the lofty position of president. Jimmy Carter did not go quietly in the night but rather chose to build his legacy by touting his saintliness. Carter not unlike others, including Kissinger, acted for the US on their own accord, but to my knowledge, only one person has been prosecuted for it. Carter is an animal of his surroundings… he is the scorpion to the frog… it was in his nature and now his nature is being touted when it should not be. He is dead and that does not change anything good or bad that he did during his lifetime it just stops future actions beyond decay.
This is an issue many individuals have. Instead of sticking with facts about an elected official, actress, or actor, much of society glorifies the individual to a not reality level and then wonders why we seem to only go in circles instead of finding resolutions to issues. This is a prime example of glorifying a newly elected president, where people believe he is on a God level, an angel from God instead of reality; he is just a human with many flaws.
Here’s another viewpoint of Jimmy Carter…
Consider the Israel tunnel vision source as you watch it.
Can’t really disagree with (too) Cynical Publius, but I consider his diatribe at the time of former President Carter’s death to be verging on unethical, if not actually making it there. He is doing precisely what he accuses Carter of doing: inappropriately instigating rancor at a time for respectful reflection — if not for Jimmy, then to respect the grief of his family (something many of us know all too well). It’s one thing to be honest (that’s ethical) but an entirely different thing to engage in a negative rant at the time when funeral plans are being made. Of course, (too) Cynical Publius doesn’t have to praise Carter. “I come to bury Carter, not to praise him.” (Excuse me, Will). Or maybe that should be my line, followed by “But Publius says Carter was ambitious, and Publius is an honorable man…O judgment! thou art fled to brutish beasts,And men have lost their reason.”
After all, this is not the critically acclaimed science fiction book which has a “truth-teller” for deaths (Kevin and Patrick were both fans of the book and had promised each other to execute that role if one were to speak at a memorial for the other). Rather, it is the death of a President, with both political and personal flaws, but one deserving of respectful reflection, at least for the benefit of his family. Hit it hard later, if you will, and rail against all those who catalogue Pres Trump’s flaws when he dies, as that would (no doubt will) also be wrong.
I concur, VM, except in this sense: the media hagiographies, like what I saw on PBS, border on disinformation. When Nixon died, there were lots of restrained appreciations, but no full-throated, “Mark my words, history will rate X as an unfairly maligned POTUS who was really an American hero!” stuff like yesterdays fantasies.
Conservative gadfly Mat Margolis wrote today in part…
When a historical figure passes away, it’s almost inevitable that there will be a concerted effort to paint him in a favorable light — after all, the old adage of “don’t speak ill of the dead” prevails. However, the attempt to rewrite Jimmy Carter’s legacy following his death has reached such absurd, almost Orwellian heights, as if others are trying to erase history and pretend that Carter wasn’t one of America’s most ineffective presidents.
Like clockwork, media outlets have rushed to elevate his presidency, attempting to reframe his time in office as the golden age of moral leadership. The most egregious example of this revisionism comes from Washington Monthly, which published a piece under the headline “The Surprising Greatness of Jimmy Carter.” This misguided attempt to elevate Carter goes beyond historical distortion — it risks rewriting history in a way that undermines the true facts of the 20th century. The article features a simian depiction of Reagan next to a towering image of Carter, who arrogantly rests his elbow on Reagan’s head.
👏.
well done. I should have included the title of the book: Speaker for the Dead, which was a sequel to Ender’s Game. Two books Kevin and Patrick both lovef
Everything is reminding me of lost friends and relatives lately. The “Ender’s Game” books were a special favorite of the remarkable Susan Larson Cook, who starred in several of my productions at GULC and TACT is a stand-out lawyer and one of my favorite people. She disappeared from my life shortly after her marriage, and I have been unable to track her down. I have too many stories like that, and I’m feeling nostalgic tonight. That way madness lies.
There’s got to be someone nearby I can have dinner with…