What we learned about the presidency, about this president, and about the press in Biden's latest Town Hall. One contrast: the press asks about the 'how' of politics; the public asks about the 'what' of governance.
This is the most thoughtful – and thought provoking – analysis of the Townhall I have seen anywhere in the media in the last few days. Even CNN’s wrap afterwards was just a bunch of pundits bloviating about their pre-determined conclusions.
It is obvious your years on the other side of the fence in the Carter White House have given you a unique perspective on the presidency. I have a long wondered why it aged holders of the office so markedly in a mere eight years; you’ve answered that question admirably.
It was entirely predictable that Biden critics would jump on his one stumble, which wasn't really a stumble at all, but more like a verbal tic. The word “commitment” is wide open to multiple interpretations, but the press corps chose the worst possible one.
Thanks for this enlightening behind-the-scenes account.
On the Carter era: one of my very early mentors in journalism, the wonderful Charles Peters of the Washington Monthly, stressed that it was worthwhile for reporters to work **ONE** time in their career in government or politics.
There's a big difference between once-and-never, in the sense that you learn things you might not otherwise understand. But there's also a difference between once-and-many, in the sense that this is a distinct, stand-alone project you're doing — rather than having the possibility of moving back and forth, and angling for one position while holding the other.
I am glad to have worked for Carter, in the campaign and for two years in the White House, while in my 20s—because of things he tried to do, in that really bleak era in politics and public life. But among other reasons was having had that experience early, and not needing to wonder "what if?" later on.
What do you think of Jonathan Alter’s new bio of Carter? I heard Alter interviewed and he said had had been expecting to find that Carter had been a mediocre president but a great ex-president. Alter was surprised to find just how much Carter had accomplished which is pathetic for a prominent journalist even if he was a young man during Carter’s presidency.
I am old enough to remember Carter’s presidency very well — heck, I am old enough to remember Eisenhower fairly well! It has always infuriated me that the press treated Carter like some hayseed, just “a peanut farmer”. Just as with Clinton, aka “Bubba”, another southerner they viewed as a hayseed, the media downplayed Carter’s accomplishments and continue to do so. They never point out that if we had stayed on the road Carter put us on to energy independence, in large part by developing green energy sources and increasing gas mileage, we would already have significantly reduced our contribution to global warming. As I am sure you know, Carter also did a lot to improve our government’s transparency and accountability. Carter was the one who created the Inspectors General.
The vast majority of Americans have no clue just how much Carter accomplished because our media is too lazy and biased to inform them. In contrast the mainstream media has made sure most Americans know that Reagan was a great President and an economic success, not the guy who nearly tripled our national debt.
Yes, good points. And I think Jon Alter's book is very good. (We have known each other since those days — I was the head of the speechwriting office, and he was a very talented college intern / staffer. ) Carter has had a lot of bad luck in his political life, but he has had the good fortune to live long enough to see his reputation rehabilitated.
I disagree that Carter’s reputation as president has been rehabilitated. Alter’s book is a rare exception to the portrayal of Carter as a failed, mediocre president but a great ex-president. The fact that a journalist of Alter’s experience held that false impression until he started researching Carter shows just how pervasive that false narrative is. It has been so pervasive I actually thought my impression of Carter as having achieved many impressive things as president was wrong. Alter’s book showed me my recollection of his time in office was accurate. Unfortunately Alter’s book hasn’t gotten nearly enough attention so I doubt it will do much to rehab his reputation.
The president says we defend Taiwan, and immediately the White House says policy has not changed. How confusing. Maybe even strategically ambiguous.
This is the most thoughtful – and thought provoking – analysis of the Townhall I have seen anywhere in the media in the last few days. Even CNN’s wrap afterwards was just a bunch of pundits bloviating about their pre-determined conclusions.
It is obvious your years on the other side of the fence in the Carter White House have given you a unique perspective on the presidency. I have a long wondered why it aged holders of the office so markedly in a mere eight years; you’ve answered that question admirably.
It was entirely predictable that Biden critics would jump on his one stumble, which wasn't really a stumble at all, but more like a verbal tic. The word “commitment” is wide open to multiple interpretations, but the press corps chose the worst possible one.
Thanks for this enlightening behind-the-scenes account.
Appreciate it!
On the Carter era: one of my very early mentors in journalism, the wonderful Charles Peters of the Washington Monthly, stressed that it was worthwhile for reporters to work **ONE** time in their career in government or politics.
There's a big difference between once-and-never, in the sense that you learn things you might not otherwise understand. But there's also a difference between once-and-many, in the sense that this is a distinct, stand-alone project you're doing — rather than having the possibility of moving back and forth, and angling for one position while holding the other.
I am glad to have worked for Carter, in the campaign and for two years in the White House, while in my 20s—because of things he tried to do, in that really bleak era in politics and public life. But among other reasons was having had that experience early, and not needing to wonder "what if?" later on.
What do you think of Jonathan Alter’s new bio of Carter? I heard Alter interviewed and he said had had been expecting to find that Carter had been a mediocre president but a great ex-president. Alter was surprised to find just how much Carter had accomplished which is pathetic for a prominent journalist even if he was a young man during Carter’s presidency.
I am old enough to remember Carter’s presidency very well — heck, I am old enough to remember Eisenhower fairly well! It has always infuriated me that the press treated Carter like some hayseed, just “a peanut farmer”. Just as with Clinton, aka “Bubba”, another southerner they viewed as a hayseed, the media downplayed Carter’s accomplishments and continue to do so. They never point out that if we had stayed on the road Carter put us on to energy independence, in large part by developing green energy sources and increasing gas mileage, we would already have significantly reduced our contribution to global warming. As I am sure you know, Carter also did a lot to improve our government’s transparency and accountability. Carter was the one who created the Inspectors General.
The vast majority of Americans have no clue just how much Carter accomplished because our media is too lazy and biased to inform them. In contrast the mainstream media has made sure most Americans know that Reagan was a great President and an economic success, not the guy who nearly tripled our national debt.
Yes, good points. And I think Jon Alter's book is very good. (We have known each other since those days — I was the head of the speechwriting office, and he was a very talented college intern / staffer. ) Carter has had a lot of bad luck in his political life, but he has had the good fortune to live long enough to see his reputation rehabilitated.
I disagree that Carter’s reputation as president has been rehabilitated. Alter’s book is a rare exception to the portrayal of Carter as a failed, mediocre president but a great ex-president. The fact that a journalist of Alter’s experience held that false impression until he started researching Carter shows just how pervasive that false narrative is. It has been so pervasive I actually thought my impression of Carter as having achieved many impressive things as president was wrong. Alter’s book showed me my recollection of his time in office was accurate. Unfortunately Alter’s book hasn’t gotten nearly enough attention so I doubt it will do much to rehab his reputation.
Fair point. I do intend to write something more substantial about Carter as soon as I can.