The MacNeil/Lehrer Report; Carter's Inauguration

ROBERT MacNEIL: Good evening. A year ago Jimmy Carter was a lonely stranger telling voters, "I intend to be President." Tonight he is -- the thirty- ninth President of the United States. Typically, he did some things a little differently today. The new President and his wife Rosalynn walked in a chilly wind all the way from the Capitol to the White House. Around the inauguration itself is a festival of fireworks, concerts, a square dance for ten thousand people, and the more familiar parades, parties and inaugural balls. But all that was suspended for a few solemn moments at noon today when Carter faced Chief Justice Burger and repeated the oath of office first taken by George Washington:

CHIEF JUSTICE WARREN E. BURGER: I, Jimmy Carter, do solemnly swear...

JIMMY CARTER: I, Jimmy Carter, do solemnly swear..

BURGER: ...that I will faithfully execute...

CARTER: ...that I will faithfully execute... BURGER: ...the office of President of the United States...

CARTER: ...the office of President of the United States...

BURGER: ...and will, to the best of my ability...

CARTER: ...and will, to the best of my ability...

BURGER: ...preserve, protect and defend...

CARTER: ...preserve, protect and defend...

BURGER: ...the Constitution of the United States...

CARTER: ....the Constitution of the United States...

BURGER: ... so help me God.

CARTER: ...so help me God.

BURGER: Congratulations.

MacNEIL: Those thirty-five words are prescribed by the Constitution, but there are no laws governing what the new President says next, in his inaugural address. Jim?

JIM LEHRER: President Carter, of course, chose to make a speech. It was just under fifteen minutes long, and he read it from the text without a fumble or a deviation. Like most inaugural addresses of the past it spoke mostly of goals and values rather than of methods and specifics. The biggest response from his audience at the Capitol came when he spoke of nuclear weapons, saying he hoped to take steps toward eliminating nuclear weapons from the face of the earth. Carter aides said the speech was mostly Carter-written and shaped, with some help from a speechwriter, novelist Patrick Anderson. Whether it was a good speech, a bad speech, inspiring, dull, memorable, forgettable, or whatever depends on the individual, and tonight we have three politically savvy individuals with different perspectives to offer their reactions and comments. Feel free to match yours against theirs. Robin?

MacNEIL: Yes, Jim. First we have Roger Wilkins, a member of the editorial board of the New York Times. Mr. Wilkins, what`s your overall impression of Carter`s speech?

ROGER WILKINS: It wasn`t Kennedy and Sorensen, but I thought it was an awfully good speech. There was a clear definition of how he intends to depart from the past. I thought it gave you a pretty good sense of Jimmy Carter and Jimmy Carter`s sense of America.

MacNEIL: Did the departure from the past strike you in terms of style, or actually was there some content in which you saw departures?

WILKINS: Oh, no, it was, I think, content. The spiritual content was clear and, I thought, easy, natural -- not dragged in by the heels. And I thought his vision of the world and America`s place in the world marked a real departure.

MacNEIL: Let`s get more specific. We`ve asked you to select two segments from today`s inaugural speech, and your first choice deals with Carter`s special vision of America.

PRESIDENT CARTER: Two centuries ago our nation`s birth was a milestone in the long quest for freedom, but the bold and brilliant dream which ex cited the founders of this nation still awaits its consummation. I have no new dream to set forth today, but rather urge a fresh faith in the old dream.

Ours was the first society openly to define itself in terms of both spirituality and human liberty. It is that unique self-definition which has given us an exceptional appeal -- but it also imposes on us a special obligation, to take on those moral duties which, when assumed, seem invariably to be in our own best interests.

MacNEIL: Why did you choose that passage?

WILKINS: Well, because every Presidency is defined in terms of what`s going on at the time; Roosevelt, the Depression; Kennedy, the end of the cold war; Johnson, the struggle for civil rights and against poverty. This man`s task, really, is to heal America, to knit it back together after Vietnam, Watergate; and I thought it remarkable for him to say, I don`t have anything new to tell you. What we had before, what we`ve dreamed of before -- our old ideas -- are good enough, and let`s rededicate ourselves to them. Let`s heal it, let`s patch it up; let`s make it better. I think it takes some guts to say, I don`t have something new for you; let`s just take that water that`s in the vessel already.

MacNEIL: Good. The next passage from Carter`s speech which you selected deals with foreign affairs and America`s strength in the world. You think it`s a real departure from past inaugurals, you told us. Let`s take a look at that.

CARTER: The world itself is now dominated by a new spirit. Peoples more numerous and more politically aware are craving and now demanding their place in the sun -- not just for the benefit of their own physical condition, but for basic human rights.

The passion for freedom is on the rise. Tapping this new spirit, there can be no nobler nor more ambitious task for America to undertake on this day of a new beginning than to help shape a just and peaceful world that is truly humane.

We are a strong nation and we will maintain strength so sufficient that it need not be proven in combat -- a quiet strength based...(applause, cheering) ... a quiet strength based not merely on the size of an arsenal, but on the nobility of ideas.

We will be ever vigilant and never vulnerable, and we will fight our wars against poverty, ignorance and injustice...(applause)...for those are the enemies against which our forces can be honorably marshaled.

MacNEIL: Those words will be listened to very carefully overseas, because they were the first of the new President to the rest of the world. Why did you pick those particular ones, and what do they mean to you?

WILKINS: I thought it was a remarkable departure. For the past thirty years our foreign policy has been obsessed with the threat from the Soviet Union; we have focused on the Soviet Union, western Europe and Japan. You had to wrestle with the Department of State to get it to focus on the southern hemisphere of the world and the poverty and the rising expectations and the unrest that are there. And for this new President to address himself to that part of-the world first, before moving to the Soviet threat -- and if you remember those ringing words in the Kennedy inaugural: We will

face any foe, bear any burden, pay any price; it was beautiful, but it was bellicose. It was aimed at the Soviet Union, appropriate, perhaps, for the time -- but for this man to look at the southern hemisphere of the world and say, we`re worried about poverty, we`re worried about injustice, and yes, we`ll be strong, but it`s a quiet strength; that`s a real departure in American foreign policy, I think.

MacNEIL: Let`s get another view now. Thank you. Doris Kearns Goodwin is the author of Lyndon Johnson and the American Dream a book based on her experiences as ato House e low and a special assistant to President Johnson. At present she`s professor of government at Harvard. Doris, you also chose the first piece Mr. Wilkins chose, in which Carter talked of his fresh faith in the old dream; did you have the same reactions he did?

DORIS KEARNS GOODWIN: Half way. I thought the idea that Carter expressed and that Roger agreed with, that we should affirm the old dream, was absolutely right and something a lot of Americans are looking for today; not a new dream, but a remembrance of what this country was founded on and what it could be. What I hoped for following that was a more specific understanding of what that dream really was, what he hoped it could be and how he was going to bring that about. I`m an inveterate idealist, but these things can be more specific.

MacNEIL: So you were disappointed at the lack of fleshing out ?

GOODWIN: You know, it`s not rhetoric, I don`t think, we want in an inaugural. People go back and look at the past Presidents and try and pick up which phrases we remember; we don`t, if you really think about it, remember the phrases alone. We remember that they represented a vision of what that person wanted to do for the country that he then did. Roosevelt did something with those hundred days; Lincoln did an extraordinary thing with the nation and the abolitionists and the Civil War -- and their speeches reflected that. What I was hoping for today was a little more sense of Carter`s knit-together vision of what he hoped for from America.

MacNEIL: That`s pretty high-priced competition.

GOODWIN: But he said he wanted to be great.

MacNEIL: Okay. Lets take a look now at the other pieces you selected. In the first, which comes at the close of Carter`s speech, Carter is spelling out what he hopes history will remember his administration for:

CARTER: Within us, the people of the United States, there is evident a serious and purposeful rekindling of confidence, and I join in the hope that when my time as your President has ended, people might say this about our nation:

That we had remembered the words of Micah and renewed our search for humility, mercy and justice; that we had torn down the barriers that separated those of different race and region and religion, and where there had been a mistrust, built unity, with a respect for diversity; that we had found productive work for those able to perform it; that we had strengthened the American family, which is the basis of our society; that we had insured respect for the law, and equal treatment under the law, for the weak and the powerful, for the rich and the poor; and that we had enabled our people to be proud of their own government once again.

MacNEIL: What do you feel about how Carter wants to be remembered?

GOODWIN: This part of the speech I liked, because I think what it showed was that the President understands -- we call him now the President, I realize as I just said that -- that he understands the importance of having only a few goals that he can actually accomplish during his Presidency. It`s so easy to think, "I`ve got four years, I`ve got eight years. I can do a hundred things." That was Lyndon Johnson`s problem; he wanted to do too much with too little time. Here Carter`s mentioned strengthening the family -- I think that`s an extraordinary goal, much more radical than he realizes; if we really strengthen the family it`s going to mean a lot of changes of policies. Equal justice under law -- those things I think can be priorities if he really makes them and focuses all his attentions around them.

MacNEIL: That`s an interesting point, though, about not having a sense of infinity about the length of your presidency.

GOODWIN: Oh yeah. There are so many ceremonies that the President is occupied with -- he goes on trips, he entertains people, he handles the Girl Scout of the Year, the Beauty Queen of yesteryear; his days...

MacNEIL: Metaphorically.

GOODWIN: (Laughing.) ...his days are...(laughing)...his days are taken up with so much things that he has to really know. And the reason why the crisis Presidents are remembered, I think, is, crisis helps a President to focus on the most important things to the nation at that time. They`re lucky. himself. He has to make that focus himself.

MacNEIL: Okay. You picked this next excerpt because it surprised you. It`s a part of Carter`s speech in which he begins by talking about freedom around the world and ends with some words on nuclear disarmament. Let`s take a look at it.

CARTER: Because we are free we can never be indifferent to the fate of freedom elsewhere. (Applause, cheering.) Our moral sense dictates a clear cut preference for those societies which share with us an abiding respect for individual human rights. We do not seek to intimidate, but it is clear that a world which others can dominate with impunity would be inhospitable to decency and a threat to the well-being of all people.

The world is still engaged in a massive armaments race designed to insure continuing equivalent strength among potential adversaries. We pledge perseverance and wisdom in our efforts to limit the world`s armaments to those necessary for each nation`s own domestic safety, and we will move this year a step toward our ultimate goal -- the elimination of all nuclear weapons from this earth. (Applause, cheering.)

We urge all other people to join us, for success can mean life instead of death.

MacNEIL: There`s s, lot in that passage. What particularly struck you?

GOODWIN: What struck me was that while I had been hoping for a vision on the domestic side, that he almost reached and didn`t quite, I think on the foreign side he really was reaching for a vision of a set of relationships with other peoples in the world that could make us proud of America again, and that we could deal with those other nations the way we wanted to deal with ourselves. You know, you think about it -- when we`re growing up, our generation -- I`d love to think that out there people thought of America with idealism, with faith and with trust, and. that they once again believed that we were the beacon of some sort of revolution. I think he was reaching for that there. And the fact that he ended with something specific, a pledge about nuclear weaponry, showed he really meant it. That`s what I was hoping for, really, from all the themes in his speech that he outlined.

MacNEIL: Thank you. Jim?

LEHRER: Now for a Republican view; with me here in Washington is Bill Brock, the new National Chairman of the Republican Party. He was formerly a U.S. Senator from the State of Tennessee. Senator, what was your general reaction to the speech?

BILL BROCK: I was surprised a little bit, because there were virtually no specifics at all. I think a couple have been mentioned; the one that comes to mind was the reference to a strength so specific, I think, that we need not engage in combat -- or something to that effect. But virtually all of the speech was an appeal for hope, it was a statement of ideals which I think all of us share, and in that sense it was an effort to heal.

LEHRER: Looking at it from your perspective, of course, which is as head of the opposition party, would you characterize that as a partisan speech or a non-partisan speech, or can you classify it one way or another?

BROCK: I think it was about the most non-political speech I`ve heard in a long time, as well as being non-partisan. The values that are established in the speech are values that we all share; the problem is going to come in the implementation of those values in specific program terms.

LEHRER: All right, Senator. Now let`s go to your excerpts; the ones you chose were quite different from the others. The first one you cited is Carter`s passage on America`s limitations.

CARTER: For myself and for our nation, I want to thank my predecessor for all he has done to heal our land. (Applause.)

LEHRER: Well, Senator, they`re a little out of order. That was your second one, actually. It doesn`t need a lot of explanation, but why did you choose that one? Tell us.

BROCK: I thought it was not only appropriate, but very gracious, because President Ford has brought a sense of decency and a sense of respect to the White House; I think he has left a base on which Governor Carter will be well served to operate, and I think Governor Carter was trying to point that out -- that there is a continuum in the political process that`s very important, and Gerald Ford the man has contributed mightily to that continuum.

LEHRER: There seemed to be, Senator, a very -- at least on the surface, what was apparent from looking at it on television, let`s say -- a real warm feeling about all of this today, when you saw the Carter`s and the Ford`s together. Do you think that was genuine on both men`s parts?

BROCK: I sensed it. I was watching the President very carefully -- President Ford -- I know him pretty well and I think he did feel an emotional impact there. At least, I sensed that, and I hope he did because I think it was important, the drawing together; we are one country. We must understand that, and I think that`s what Governor Carter was trying to say, and the whole tone of the speech. It was a speech in which he referred to the old dream; but the values, the heritage, the basic component parts of our national survival and system are intact, and they`re very important to us.

LEHRER: Roger Wilkins said a moment ago that it was a healing speech, and by saying that at the top, then, you`re saying, really, that what he has really acknowledged was that he was picking up the healing process where Gerald Ford left off?

BROCK: I think so, and I think the fact that he made reference to it indicated that he understood the contribution that President . Ford had made to that and the need for a continuation; and that`s a very healthy thing.

LEHRER: Senator, through the magic of technical problems we do not have the excerpt, the other one you chose. There are tape problems; but I`ve got it here. Let me just read it real quickly.

"We have learned that `more` is not necessarily `better,` that even our great nation has its recognized limits and that we can neither answer all questions nor solve all problems. We cannot afford to do everything, nor can we afford to lack boldness as we meet the future. So together, in a spirit of individual sacrifice for the common good, we must simply do our best."

Icy apologies to the new President for my reading, but that`s basically it. Why did you choose that one?

BROCK: Because I think it`s so true, and I think people understand that. You always hear these things with your own ears; we all have mental filters that we use. But I took it, at least partly, as a warning to his own Congress, where he has a two-to-one majority and where there is quite a temptation to just want to jump in and do everything, now that they`ve got a President and a Congress -- the excitement there, the desire to pass all kinds of fantastic, grand programs. What he was saying, and it`s very right -- more isn`t necessarily better, there are limits to the capacity of the American people to pay, there are limits to what we can afford to do; we`ve got to prioritize ourselves, our programs and our resources. And I think it was Mrs. Goodwin who made some reference to the fact that we had to focus. What he`s saying -- and he`s right -- is that we must be very careful; we`re going to have to focus on a few objectives in order to accomplish them, not try to do all things because then we would accomplish nothing. And I think that was a valid point that he`ll have a lot of support on, at least on my side.

LEHRER: Somebody suggested today that that is also a line out of Governor Jerry Brown`s bag, too, because that, of course, was the theme of Governor Brown`s whole campaign against Jimmy Carter.

BROCK: It sounded more like Jerry Brown, or, as a matter of fact, it sounded more like Gerald Ford than Jerry Ford does sometimes. (Laughing.)

LEHRER: All three of you now -- Mrs. Goodwin, you mentioned earlier the question about-memorable moments or memorable themes that come out of inaugural speeches. What would you say, Mr. Wilkins, will be the thing that will be remembered, if anything, about this particular inaugural address?

WILKINS: I`m not sure that I can pick out, any particular words or phrases. The one that strikes me, though, is. I suppose there was a sense of confidence as he talked about the rest of the world, and so that phrase, "quiet, strength," giving you a sense that maybe America has reached a kind of maturity where we don`t have to be flexing our muscles all the time; and there will be a gentleness about our presence in the world. I think that sticks with me more clearly than anything else.

LEHRER: Mrs. Goodwin, any lines that you think we can look forward to in the future of seeing implanted on the side of government buildings?

GOODWIN: I`m not sure that there will be any line that we`ll see, and I`m not even sure that that`s the important thing. I was reading today in the paper that when Nixon made his inaugural he actually had a line that Lincoln had used -- "the better angels of our nature" -- and we`re certainly not going to remember Nixon for that line taken out of context from Lincoln. The important thing is whether the speech indicates that the President has thought about what he cares for, for this country and his four years in office; and that test we haven`t seen yet. Whether Mr. Carter has done that I`m not sure, from the speech. He may have, sand if he does, we`ll remember the speech; is he doesn`t the speech will be long forgotten, as Nixon`s was in `69.

LEHRER: Is it possible that it could be remembered almost in an emotional way, in terms of a warm glow or the lack of it, that it gives or the feeling of confidence or whatever that it gives the millions of Americans who watched it today?

GOODWIN: You know, I do think what was accomplished today was that Mr. Carter had given before an appearance to a lot of people of arrogance and a lack of humility; today I thought he came across just the opposite -- humble and decent, and really reaching to be a good President. That is an important first focus that the American people are going to have on him, not that that will be remembered twenty years from now, but it will help him in the next three months ahead; and that`s what he`s got to go for right now -- his first hundred days.

LEHRER: What are your feelings about it in terms of memorability, if that`s a word, and it probably isn`t -- Senator?

BROCK: I`m not so sure that I`m an instant historian. I remember how people reacted to Lincoln`s Gettysburg address with some disdain when it was first delivered, so I don`t know that I should comment, except to say that I don`t think Governor Carter wrote this speech with a view to history. I think he wrote it with a view of trying to say something to the American people; and I think the point was well taken that he did demonstrate a humility. I think when you raise your hand and put the other hand on the Bible, you just must be absolutely awed by the prospect -- it must involve an enormous impression of humility and inadequacy for any person that does that; and that`s awfully, awfully important in a President because you must recognize the ability to make mistakes. If a President has that, a lot of other things can be protected against -but arrogance is dangerous.

Lam: Well, nobody asked me what I would have selected, but it was that one line -- he acknowledged that he might make mistakes, which is very unusual, wouldn`t you agree, Mrs. Goodwin and Mr. Wilkins, that Presidents, in inaugural addresses or any other time, seldom acknowledge that they might make a mistake?

WILKINS: I think that`s right. I think what we saw today was the best Jimmy Carter. It was back to all of those themes and attitudes that took him successfully through the primaries, particularly that stuff about, "I want to be close to you American people, and together we`ll do this and your strength will make up for my weaknesses." But we`ve heard the good Jimmy Carter before; we`ve also seen a little performance, and the performance hasn`t always lived up to the good Jimmy Carter, so I`m a little skeptical. I suspect that he`s right, he can make mistakes.

LEHRER: Are you skeptical, too, Senator?

BROCK: I hate to be skeptical because I think I was like a lot of other Americans, saying a prayer for the President today and for this country because we all have to live in this country of ours and we`ve got to live or die together, and we`re going to make it happen or not together. So I pray for him, and I hope he does well. I think his problem is maybe in the Congress; it`s going to be a very different Congress and a very difficult one for him to live with, and he`s going to need a lot of humility and a lot of other things to be able to cooperate with the kind of majorities that his own party has there. There is an arrogance in the Congress that is absolutely incredible. But I don`t know -- I wish him well.

LEHRER: Thank you, Senator. Robin?

MacNEIL: Thanks, Jim, and good night. Thank you very much. Jim Lehrer and I will be back tomorrow night. I`m Robert MacNeil. Good night.