From- www.talkingpointsmemo.com The text of a letter former President Carter sent to Zell Miller over the weekend ... You seem to have forgotten that loyal Democrats elected you as mayor and as state senator. Loyal Democrats, including members of my family and me, elected you as lieutenant governor and as governor. It was a loyal Democrat, Lester Maddox, who assigned you to high positions in the state government when you were out of office. It was a loyal Democrat, Roy Barnes, who appointed you as U.S. Senator when you were out of office. By your historically unprecedented disloyalty, you have betrayed our trust. Great Georgia Democrats who served in the past, including Walter George, Richard Russell, Herman Talmadge, and Sam Nunn disagreed strongly with the policies of Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, and me, but they remained loyal to the party in which they gained their public office. Other Democrats, because of philosophical differences or the race issue, like Bo Callaway and Strom Thurmond, at least had the decency to become Republicans. Everyone knows that you were chosen to speak at the Republican Convention because of your being a “Democrat,” and it’s quite possible that your rabid and mean-spirited speech damaged our party and paid the Republicans some transient dividends. Perhaps more troublesome of all is seeing you adopt an established and very effective Republican campaign technique of destroying the character of opponents by wild and false allegations. The Bush campaign’s personal attacks on the character of John McCain in South Carolina in 2000 was a vivid example. The claim that war hero Max Cleland was a disloyal American and an ally of Osama bin Laden should have given you pause, but you have joined in this ploy by your bizarre claims that another war hero, John Kerry, would not defend the security of our nation except with spitballs. (This is the same man whom you described previously as “one of this nation's authentic heroes, one of this party's best-known and greatest leaders -- and a good friend.") I, myself, never claimed to have been a war hero, but I served in the navy from 1942 to 1953, and, as president, greatly strengthened our military forces and protected our nation and its interests in every way. I don’t believe this warrants your referring to me as a pacificist. Zell, I have known you for forty-two years and have, in the past, respected you as a trustworthy political leader and a personal friend. But now, there are many of us loyal Democrats who feel uncomfortable in seeing that you have chosen the rich over the poor, unilateral preemptive war over a strong nation united with others for peace, lies and obfuscation over the truth, and the political technique of personal character assassination as a way to win elections or to garner a few moments of applause. These are not the characteristics of great Democrats whose legacy you and I have inherited. I contacted President Carter's office for comment and his press spokesperson Deanna Congileo told me that the letter was a private communication and that President Carter would not be issuing further comment. -- Josh Marshall
I really like Jimmy Carter. But I suppose I have a problem with the use of the phrase, "loyal democrat" like 50 times in that letter. This goes back to the team sports concept behind politics that I dislike more and more. We're never allowed to think for ourselves...to support the other side, even if we believe they're right, because we have a capital D or R by our name. I think that's a problem. I'm not defending Zell's stance here, because I don't think I agree with him...but I am defending the right of any politician to say, "you know what...i think my party got this one wrong...i agree with the other guys." I think if more people did that, I'd have a lot more respect for politicians, in general. Certainly we all laud McCain for it.
How is pointing out the record of the second worst president in recent times myopic? It's just a recititation of facts. I've got to agree with MadMax that why should being a "loyal" member of any party mean you have to goosestep alongside them when you disagree with them? I thought independence in politicians, most notably McCain, was loved by the left! Oh, that's right, I forgot. Republican who fights against his brethern, that is courageous. Democrat who fights against his brethern, he's a turncoat and he's "angry" and seething with rage. Sure.....right.
I understand your point because I felt a twinge of that while reading it also. But I wonder how the article would have read if Miller's attack had not included character assassination (which, I might add, is NOT restricted to the Republican Party as Carter elludes to). I like to see Carter finally showing some backbone though.
Oh come on Max! McCain is so loyal to his party that he glady bends over for the man who raped him in 2000. He's loyal to a fault. It's one thing to point out policies that you disagree with. It's another to betray your constituants (sp), the very people who put you in office.
ok...forget mccain. forget i mentioned him. i still don't think we should create a political environment that more closely resembles rabid team sports than a place for honest debate and discourse. where the label we wear means we have to shed our own mind and integrity to keep wearing it.
Agreed. But that's what having a valid third party is good for. If you don't agree with your party then leave and become an Independant, or join another party. I'd like to think that having a valid 3rd party would keep the other 2 in check.
i disagree. what if the 3rd party isn't the side you're agreeing with on a particular issue? what if the "other" party...the "opposite party" endorses a position that you support? Do you just pretend that isn't the case? the idea that you can't vote your vote your conscience because the "other guys" support it, too, is troublesome to me.
McCain would never speak at the DNC, he doesn't vote 99% Dem on the issues. The reason Democrats like McCain is that he has honor, intergrity, and class. These are the things that we see lacking in Bush and other prominent Repubs.
And those are the things we see lacking in Zell Miller. For those of you bothered by the "party" labels, remember this. John McCain is supporting Bush in large measure because he is a loyal Republican. McCain would understand perfectly well what Carter was pointing out. And the idea that being an ardent and loyal member of a political party in this country is somehow "wrong" bothers me a great deal. There is plenty of room for differences in the Democratic Party. A lot more room than the Republican Party, which is a weakness in Democrats. Republicans, despite being smaller, percentage-wise, than the Democratic Party for decades, have, in no small part, had success in elections because of the loyalty to the party by it's members. If Democrats were half as loyal, they wouldn't be in the fix they are in today. And another thing, for those of you who find party loyalty somehow offensive... this is a democracy. It's OK to belong to a party and it's OK to support it's principals if they mirror your own. The reason Carter is so upset is obvious. He spelled it out very well in his letter. The difference between Miller and some "average joe" on the streets is that Miller is a United States Senator. He styles himself a Democrat, but what he did at the convention was a betrayal of his party, which time and again helped his political career. If he believes what he expressed at the Republican convention, and I think he molded his speech to fit what was wanted of him by Rove and company, but if he really believes that, he should do the honorable thing and declare that he is a Republican, not go around pretending to be a Democrat for the advantage of the Republican Party. I think Carter, in this case, was "letter perfect."
Well since the Bush tax cuts help the rich over the poor or middle class, and Zell is siding with Bush, Carter makes a good point.
But is it equitable for that "evil" top 20 percent you Bolsheviks tar and feather on a regular basis to pay more than 60 percent of the tax bill? It's immoral and confiscatory. It is voter-inspired, legal theft for the purposes of wasteful redistribution.
Bama, why should anyone pay the least attention to what you say when you call someone who disagrees with you a "Bolshevik?" Not only call him/her a Bolshevik, but lump them into a group... "you Bolsheviks", as if there is any such group here.
