Basic HTML Version
INBRIEF
WHAT MADE THE DIFFERENCE
FOR JIMMYCARTER?
by
Stanley
R.
Rader
The author accompanies
Plain
¡
Truth
Editor-in-Chief Herbert :
W. Armstrong on his frequent
1
visits with heads
ot
state and '
other leading international
dignitaries.
ROME, November 4, 1976:
At
high noon yesterday, we learned
at last that Jimmy Carter of Geor–
gia was our President-elect. lt had
been a paintully long night with
conflicting and inconclusive re–
ports trickling in to us from the
United States via satellite, ltalian
television and radio, and tele–
phone communications with
Washington and Los Angeles.
For the third consecutiva presi–
dential election,
1
found myself in
a far-away land, but my interest in
the outcome was higher than ever.
Jimmy Carter, beginning his
campai~n
for the Presidency, was
literally Mr. Nobody. His political
background was certainly
sketchy. Twice a state senator in
Georgia, he was defeated once for
the governorship, but he was suc–
cessful the second time in 1970,
and he served for one term.
In 1974 he began from atar to
seek the highest otfice of the
United States - the most powerful
position in the world. Even after a
series
ot
surprising primary victo–
ríes, he was still thought of as
Jimmy-Who? On being nominated
at last by the Democratic party in
New York last July, he began his
acceptance speech by saying:
"My name is Jimmy Carter, and
l'm running for President."
Mr. Carter's opponent President
Ford was seeking a mandate from
the American people after serving
honorably and capably for more
The
PLAIN TRUTH
January
1977
than two years in the wake of the
worst political scandal and trauma
in the history of the United States.
Appointed with the consent of
Congress by the then President
Richard Nixon to replace the dis–
honored Vice-President Spiro Ag–
new, who was torced to resign,
Mr. Gerald Ford succeeded Presi–
dent Nixon a few months later
when the latter was pressured
to resign in disgrace because of
the Watergate scandal.
The campaign developed slowly
and created little excitement or
fantare in the United States. Mort
Sahls' quip of 1960 during the fa–
mous Kennedy-Nixon debates
seemed only too timely during the
first Carter-Ford televisad debate:
"Thank God they both can't win!"
After the second and third de–
bates and after hundreds of thou–
sands of miles traveled around the
United States. hundreds of public
appearances by both candidatas.
and the saturation of the airwaves
with paid-for política! announce–
ments, the general attitude re–
flectad by the American people,
according to the professional
pollsters and commentators, was
that of apathy.
As the election drew closer.
President Ford began steadily
closing the almost 30-point gap in
the opinion polls that separated
him and Mr. Carter. Better to have
someone we know is safe, sorne
saíd. than Carter whom we do not
know. Little to choose from,
others said.
But once again, the pollsters
really had not understood the
American people. There really was
a discernible difference in the two
candidatas. That difference was
that Jimmy Carter gave the ap-
pearance, and
1
assume most sin–
cerely, that he cared about the
American people - as individual
human beings, persons with indi–
vidual problems - as well as the
nation collectively, with its prob–
lems at home, the problems of in–
flation, of unemployment. of the
insecurity of the individual about
the future - problems that affect
people as individuals. as members
of a family. lt is not enough today
to think solely in collective, institu–
tional terms. One must convey
with compassion a real concern
for the benefit of others.
Yes. Jimmy Carter has made
many promises, implied and ex–
pressed, to keep. But all politi–
cians. past and present, have
promised too much and delivered
too little. Campaign oratory has
been. in the past and the present,
hypocritical, bombastic, and too
often downright mendacious.
Jimmy Carter will be watched
very carefully by those who voted
for him as well as those who were
in the opposition. After all, he did
proclaim that he would never lie.
1
want with all my heart to believe
this man.
1
do at this time without
feeling naive or foolish.
He comes from the roots of the
American people. His origins are
humble but totally respectable. He
has succeeded incredibly where
others would have feared to tread
- in the teeth of the establishment
of his own political party.
He is Horatio Alger come true.
His victory transcends the victory
of Harry S. Truman in 1948. He is
literally a modern nonbiblical
David, the slayer
ot
the behe–
mothic political establishment. He
has a golden opportunity to bind
up the nation's wounds caused by
sectionalism that predates the
Civil War, that was horribly in–
creased by it, and that was ren–
dered almost impossible to cure
when Abe Lincoln was assassi–
nated. which has been divisive,
destructiva, and has deterred the
real growth and development of
the United States.
43