(00:00:00) and 1330 Minneapolis st. Paul It's 12 o'clock. And before we introduce Our Guest this noon hour hodding Carter will introduce Rick Lewis who has joined us for a brief word about a subject of interest to you. Rick. Lewis is Minnesota Public Radio vice president for news and information Rick. Thank you Dan. Just a moment to say that today's appearance by hodding Carter on weekend is intended in part to Mark the beginning of a major new project at Minnesota Public Radio. It is our public policy unit. It's been on the drawing board for about two years and recently was funded by a major multi-year Grant from Medtronic Incorporated NPR has historically devoted itself to thoughtful and analytical reporting on important subjects, but we always want to do better and we hope this public policy unit is part of the answer it will give us the resources. We need chiefly the time it takes to explore important issues at length and in-depth the producer for this new unit is Claire Meade Rosen of Veteran writer researcher and editor for Time Magazine and other time Publications. She is joined. My assistant producer Bill Catlin one of mpr's technical Wizards who has moved from the operations Department to take part in this project others from the news department will work with the unit from time to time producing various kinds of programming Special Report series documentaries Live Events and very likely Regional Colin programs. Like the one we're going to have today. The unit is just being organized. It may examine such things as taxation the quality of Education the environment forms of Metropolitan government all of which will probably contribute something to answering those elusive questions about the quality of life in Minnesota. And the region the unit will have the cooperation of three outstanding public policy institutions in Minnesota the Hubert H Humphrey Institute for public affairs, the Spring Hill Conference Center and the Citizens League their resources in the area of public policy research will make an important contribution to this project. Mr. Carter's appearance here today is not a direct result of the public policy unit. But we hope it is indicative of the level of discussion, which will Follow in the coming months on issues of critical importance to this state and this region. We look forward to an interesting project and also an interesting hour and I won't take any more of it. So gentlemen back to you. Thanks, Rick two and a half minutes after 12 o'clock and in a moment, we'll give out the phone numbers that you can call to put your question to hodding Carter a familiar face to many of you certainly a familiar voice hodding Carter a spokesman for the administration in the state department during the Carter Administration. And before that current biography describes hodding Carter as a crusading Mississippi newspaperman and a Democratic party reformer during the 60s and 70s hodding Carter is the son of the late hodding Carter jr. Described in current biography as the conscience of the South for early espousal of the Civil Rights. Cause quite a long career behind you born in 1935 currently residing in New York City Is At right Washington, Washington, and of course also familiar to Public Broadcasting System viewers for a regular series on PBS regarding the performance of the press and also looking into and behind the reporting of certain stories. I guess hodding Carter. One of the first questions that I want to put to you is the the event of the Presidential news conference and ask you about that event. But before we do that, I want to give out the telephone numbers that folks can call in the Twin Cities listening area. You can put your question to hodding Carter by calling us at two two seven six thousand two two seven six thousand listeners outside the Twin Cities with in Minnesota can call us toll free no charge if you call one 800 695 to 9701 800/600 297 hundred and of course for those of you outside Minnesota, you're free to call us collected area codes 6122276 thousand. I was listening to commentator David gergen. The other night on National Public Radio who said that the presidential press conference has become a sort of a set piece a theatrical event that it's very very difficult to elicit new or exciting information from a president. What's your observation of the presidential press conference these days and how our current President Ronald Reagan is using that event when no one knows better than David gergen. What a presidential press conference is one of the Masters of staging at when he was in the both this white house and indeed when he was in the Ford White House. It has become what it was not intended to be and is never regarded as being by people who like to think about Theory rather than fact it has become the best single vehicle for president to control the news agenda that I can think of he does not have to deal with the hard issues that are raised because he is after all president United States and if he doesn't answer a question, you can only push him so far he gets Opportunity to set at the beginning of each press conference atone for it by his statement. It is televised so that the player is now the reporters now become players in the drama. And if you were a decent performer, and that doesn't mean just Ronald Reagan, if you simply have a Mastery either of performance or the facts, there is no way that you're going to be tripped up it in theory ought to produce some depth of understanding of a president's position, which goes beyond what's already known in reality. What it produces is an opportunity for the president to present once more some old and well-known positions or to make statements which are desires for news value. Alright, the caller's are waiting with questions will get to the first one good afternoon hodding Carter is (00:05:55) listed like to make a call, please. (00:05:57) Well, I don't think she has a question. I think she had rather a statement. She wanted issue will get to the next. Well, I'll call her right now. Good afternoon. Hodding Carter is listening. (00:06:05) Yes, I'm calling because I've been very disturbed by the way reporters ask such a irrelevant questions and put on such a relevant things about say our president or anyone running for office especially and I'd like to know if there's some way that we can influence a change in this. I think it has contributed to the rise and fall of presidents recently. (00:06:34) I know that something George Reed he once wrote when he was pressed after he was press spokesman for for President Johnson. There's a very strong feeling among politicians and presidents that they don't really have political problems. They only have press problems and if they could only somehow handle their press problems all their other problems would go away. I don't think what's brought down presidents in recent years has been the failure to communicate through an antagonistic press the problem has been in the case of the past President Jimmy Carter that he had an economy which was gone berserk and a bunch of people being held hostage. The president before him was seen as a pleasant but relatively inept man, and the person before him was seen as at least a immoral man. If not a crook and these things had more to do with in bad questions from the Press. I used to think often that the questions that were being offered up by the reporters. Were in fact irrelevant, I was stunned more often than not however not because they were Prosecuting a persecuting me or the president was such a Zeal but that they didn't seem to be following up on the real issues that they might have been pushing before we get to the next question. This is something the consultant Frank Magid has talked about at length the iowa-based consultant who talks with news organizations for money about what they should do better with their news product and he claims that in his experience of over 20 years as a news consultant reporters are not very well informed in terms of history or geography. What's your experience here, you know as a editor as a reporter as a former journalist. I used to always take a with a great grain of salt what people said about our ability to cover matters. Except of course that when I go out of the state to talk about let's say civil rights or something else. I discovered that no matter where I was the average reporter that I dealt with didn't seem to have done any homework before coming to cover me or to talk to me about my particular subject. And after they had cover me it did not matter what the publication or what the broadcast unit. There would be at least one factual error at least in any story in this is a literal fact over all those years. So when I came to government I was not precisely stunned to discover that the Press was in fact too often unwilling to inform itself or too often uninformed now. Caveat the people who cover the state department are about as well informed as any group of reporters I've ever seen covering any beat their problem. There was less a matter of lack of information as it was a willingness to often to go with the flow of the current story. I would come in prepared to deal with 20 different issues. And I'd spend 25 minutes talking about one which was the currently fashionable issue. That's a problem for the American people. It is the result of pack journalism in writ large. All right, we have other callers will get to the next one good afternoon hodding Carter is listening. (00:09:25) Thank you. I'm on when asked about like ex CIA agent John Stockwell and others have pointed out that people who have held positions like yourself, press spokesman have really what they do is kind of manufacture news to give out to the American people and I'm wondering how accurate was information you gave out, especially like maybe during the Iran hostage crisis when Newsweek and other documents point out that actually of the embassy staff 16% were CIA and it actually was a dentist buys (00:10:00) I'd be interested to see the documentation on the notion that 60% of the embassy staff was CIA. I would be interested to find any government official who would deny that CIA is President virtually any diplomatic institution. We have a broad so I'm not going to argue that one obviously, but let's take your questions one after the other first any reporter who believes that any government official is in the business of giving out the entire story on any issue ought to be fired government is not elected to do the job of its opposition government is not elected to do the job of the press government is elected to govern and that usually means that government will pretty much operate on the principle. Not that it has to lie, but that it doesn't have to tell the whole truth. I happily work for a government that didn't believe in lying as a matter of principle. And therefore I was never required to lie. I was often required and in fact felt quite comfortable in doing it to tell something less than the full truth about something. I knew as I used to tell the reporters if they were the kind of reporters who thought they could sit at a government briefing and get the truth. Then God Save The Republic their job was to go beyond my truth and Beyond the opposition's truth and Beyond the facts presented by any number of other sources and to try to determine how the facts that they got added up to something larger, but I've say with no no embarrassment whatsoever that there were a number of times that I stonewalled on matters. There were a number of times in which I simply Slade out the Bare Bones of something and did not bother to do the opposition job. We have callers waiting will get to the next question or good afternoon hodding Carter is (00:11:43) listening. Hi. Mr. Carter. I have a few statements. I'd like you to comment that. If you would please first one has to do with the Federal Reserve board. Why does our government have to buy money from the Federal Reserve at best therefore putting our national debt to a skyrocketing proportions second statement. I'd like to say is the Council on Foreign Relations is in fact the secret government of the United States and all of our directives are handed down from them. What do you think of that? Mr. (00:12:17) Carter I have to tell you is one who love to believe that he shared power. I'm a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. And the one thing I can say for sure about its membership is that while members of it are individually powerful the Council on Foreign Relations has not seen many of its policies affected by government over the last last few years. The Council on Foreign Relations is an establishment Group, which says some fairly predictable things about foreign policy across So while the broad area and I would say has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with what the administration of Ronald Reagan does in foreign policy, and I promise you it didn't have very much to do with what the administration is Jimmy Carter did For Better or For Worse. As far as the Federal Reserve board is concerned that there are some issues that are left in my wife and some of the left of me and Federal Reserve matters are left in my life. I don't know anything about it. I'm sorry. I can't comment on it. All right. We have callers waiting. You can reach us in the Twin Cities area at 2276 thousand. There are a couple lines open now to 276 thousand in the Twin Cities area if you have a question for hodding Carter, and our toll-free line is open for those of you outside the Twin Cities with in Minnesota one 800 695 to 9701 806 five to ninety seven hundred and we'll take the next caller. Good afternoon. We're listening (00:13:42) greetings. I guess he walks right into my next question about leading things to your wife. Could you tell me? Your opinion about what you see is the most influential first ladies in history recent or past. (00:13:57) You know, one of the problems with answering that question is so much of what passes for known influence of first ladies in recent history is a function of the publicity staff at the White House what really happens between first lady and president is a lot less known than obscured by the kind of publicity. They get I would say having thrown in all of those quick roadblocks to understanding that there is no question in my mind that Rosalyn Carter was a major player in the Carter White House that she was a person who participated in the most intimate and direct way with decision-making and with the president's own conclusions. I simply can't speak with any accuracy about others, but I think that you've had a couple of rather strong women. Who have been there and the current one I believe has an influence on the president which is perhaps stronger than a lot of people understand. We haven't heard much about that. It seems to me. Well, it's because there is this notion of the clotheshorse always looking up at her husband as though she had never heard him say that speech for five thousand times before and going out and doing relatively well in some ways politically irrelevant things from everything. I hear from folks who have been close to this President. She has a great deal of influence on certain ways that he see thing sees things and as a functioning partner and they are I think she also plays A Part dis on day-to-day, tha's all right, we have others waiting with their questions will get to the next listener good afternoon hodding Carter is listening. (00:15:46) Hello. I'd like to ask a question about the economy. If I could what did mr. Cars opinion were the main factors that contributed to Jimmy Carr. Ineffectiveness in dealing with the economy compared with strong recovery that we have under President Reagan. (00:16:03) Well, you know, I'm always reminded when I'm told about the strong recovery under this administration of the feeling that you get when you get out of very very very cold water. I mean that is feel so wonderful because you stopped in effect hitting your head against the wall this Administration managed to compound the problems that it found and to bleed Us in certain ways and to unnecessary economic deprivation for millions of people, but that does not anyway negate the reality that we had a very bad economic trough and inflation under the last two years of the Carter Administration. There were several things. I think that there was a failure to fasten on a set policy and to stay with it. There was a willingness to throw out the baby and the bathwater every six months in the attempt. Do something new to turn the economy. There was a reality that there was the second oil shock which came in in time to absolutely hit in the head of the entire economic picture about the time that it was going through its normal recovery phase as it does after every kind of recession. I would say luck is not a bad word to use here because you had Luck running very strongly on the oil thing in particular against the president you had finally the real failure. I'm afraid to Simply where I came in on this to come up with a coherent program and to stay with it long enough. We have callers waiting and we'll take the next questioner right now. Good afternoon hodding Carter is listening. (00:17:46) Why is it we've the public are receiving from the press and TV deliberate lies and untruth from President Reagan. And the press and the TV seems to headline this stuff and there are no repercussions from them. (00:18:04) I'm afraid that the fault lies less than the press and the president that it does with the public and it's and the president's opposition the press in fact rather regularly reports that the president said six things which weren't wrong right mistaken TV reporters rather regularly run clips and the president saying directly contradictory things. What's interesting is that that for one reason or another seems to run off his back like water off a duck's I believe one major reason is that his opposition is incoherent is divided is incapable of speaking with a single voice on any of the issues that he seems to be perhaps at odds with reality on this has led you I suppose into a another portion of what might be a corollary to this question asked by this woman president. Megan has been described as an extremely able communicator and what in your opinion are the techniques that he uses to more or less stay ahead of as you characterize them the incoherent opposition or stay ahead of people who would try to catch up on his mistakes. I think it's not a wrap I think is a statement of reality to say that first. He is a trained a masterful performer politicians have always been performers it hardly matters that he came from acting there have been others who didn't come from acting who were great performers Franklin Roosevelt was a great performer. He is a person who understands the absolute imperative nature of taking a position a high ground and holding it to be reiterating over and over again certain themes had to stick with those themes to project the image of a man who whatever you else you may think of him as a person who knows what he thinks and is willing to It in good days and bad and finally to stay as far apart as he can as he should as a president should from the nitty-gritty implementing details of policy. So he's associated with a thematic and the drive of policy and is not associated with the individual screw-ups. We have callers waiting with questions for hodding Carter will get to the next one. Good afternoon. We're listening. (00:20:20) Good afternoon like to wish you well, thank you. All right. I have a couple questions directed toward. Mr. Carter. Okay, doesn't bother you as such. Mr. Carter like in the past three talking about telling the truth, you know as such that you really didn't fulfill your promises deep some more or less. Just I don't know how I could actually top just the partial truth. Okay that just one question and about President Carter when he was in office. I was just wondering why you risked like over 50 Marines Minds when he brought the helicopters and Turan knowing that in that certain week. They had to weather with forecast that It was really dangerous do that tonight. And the last question I like to touch on is as far as like the most influential first lady in office. I've more or less think that President Carter took her prayers and Carter's wife Rosalyn and Nancy Reagan or more or less puppets as compared to in my most what I think would have to be Jackie O knees Jackie Kennedy. It's like you touch enough for me. (00:21:21) I let's start with the ladder and move forward. I think Jackie Kennedy was probably the least relevant first lady of many recently. I didn't say she wasn't the most visible. She certainly was the adored creature of the media. But as far as affecting what John Kennedy was doing from the Boudoir to policy. I'm afraid she had very little effect now starting at the front moving back. I guess I want to repeat I never felt as a working reporter that what I was supposed to be getting from government was truth what I always thought I was getting from government. And what they were going to present me was the best case for the policies that they were trying to implement the best case for the policies. They were trying to sell and in that case what I would expect was that they wouldn't lie to me. I mean that I think I have a right to expect is a government's person will not lie to me but I would not expect the Democratic Administration to stand up there and lay out the five reasons why their tax policy ought to be rejected academically sound of those reasons might be I don't expect Administration to stand up and say look as a matter of fact, we are really failing right now and our policy in the Middle East because among other reasons Administration, usually sincerely believes that it's on the right track down the road and it having temporary setbacks, which is the way they present it. So I never I never quite literally blinked at going out and trying to put the best case forward. I want to repeat I was never asked to lie and happily I was only caught and what happened to pin total untruths about three times. They were untruths not because I had been deliberately lied to or because I lied but because the facts were wrong and they were just simply wrong the Press was right. We were wrong. No, I have never lost any sleep over that one. I only lose sleep over the notion of anybody from a private citizen to a reporter ever believing that you should stop it. What a government spokesman says and say that's the story or in fact any spokesman including a spokesman for the Press people don't tend to put out anything except the best case themselves. The president's raid on Iran. It was not one that well again with I knew nothing about it until it was over so I can speak in great hindsight only I was not a participant. In fact, very few people were the president did not deliberately wrist lives by sending in a raid at a time that he knew to be the most disastrous possible time. He thought he was picking among the last possible times to have a successful raid. The raid was one which he had resisted idea of an attack was one he had resisted for months. He in fact finally endorsed one. Former boss Secretary of State Vance opposed it vigorously when given the opportunity to do it resigned over it. And I left shortly thereafter, but I didn't leave because I thought the president had gone in and sort of cold-bloodedly. Risk, the lives of Americans in a raid that he knew was doomed to failure. He thought that there was a chance of it winning. All right, we have other callers waiting will get to the next one right now. And the toll-free number is open in case you've been waiting to call on that one eight hundred six five two 9701 806 five to ninety seven hundred will take the next question. Good afternoon. We're listening. (00:24:58) Yeah, this is Arne bang inculcate. Oh, I've been very active in politics for some years and do a lot of visiting and talking with people and I find a lot of distrust in the media by people. They seem to mistrust the media and it was wondering if you don't think that immediate people have rather abused the tremendous power that they have in reporting supposedly reporting news, but including in their reports, there are a lot of speculation or opinions and and unsubstantiated rumors and if the media isn't pretty Shouldn't wise up to the fact that they should be a little more honest in the way. They present the news (00:25:53) I guess a two answers. I give to that the first is that I can probably site use many chapters in the verse of stories that I think were gross departures from what I would have thought of as straight news or whatever as you can on the other hand. Let me tell you that compared to the Press which has been historically the pattern in this country from its founding days till now you have one which in those terms practically bends over backwards to be quote objective and fair and what have you the founders of this country would have been astonished to discover how bland depressed could be compared to the kind of stuff that they had to put up with. Compared to 50 years ago journalism in this in this country. Might as well be dictated by journalism departments. I mean as compared to the way it was practiced now, there are real problems with the press and and not least of them being too often a Mindless disregard for the sensibilities and the sensitivities of its audiences that lot of that goes with the territory of being both very large and in some cases monopolistic, but I don't think that there's a vast number of reporters out there who are systematically trying to distort the news are we limited as consumers of news by the Washington, press Corps being sort of a club or a click of the network folks and the sort of the major dailies of the nation as opposed to some of the other folks who do attend the press conferences who might work for smaller sized newspapers may have questions about other issues, but seldom have those questions heard. Well, there's no question that the this white house as with past one's this one's more. Medically and better because they are better manipulators are very conscious of who gets to ask the questions of making sure that certain people do and the president recognizes them and not others. They're also very aware politically that the biggest single effective tool that presidents have for reaching the biggest constituency as television. And therefore they cultivate that particular tool they use that tool most often and television not meaning local television, but Network so you will always see not only the wires recognized but the major Nets what recognized at those press conferences way before you will somebody from the Delta Democrat times of Greenville, Mississippi. We have callers waiting with questions. We get to the next one. Good afternoon, you're on the (00:28:21) air. Hello. This kind of really feeds right into the question has been asked but what I'm wondering is going back to the idea of staging a televised press conference. Do you think a newspaper reporter then has an advantage over say a television reporter for considering the issues more in-depth as he's able to go back and kind of consider them and then present them in a later time. Instead of that immediacy. Thank (00:28:39) you. Well, that is the great virtue of print reporting at the great strength of it is obviously both you have expandable time and space and are able to devote a great deal more attention the great strength on the other hand obviously of television and of radio is the immediacy and in different ways the impact which both medium bring to bear. It is a problem in the broadcast business. Generally that what too often get sacrificed because of immediacy is depth and length and therefore complexity. We have callers waiting with questions a couple of local lines open to to 76 thousand in the Twin Cities. If you have a question for hodding Carter will take the next listener right now. Good afternoon. Where you calling from (00:29:31) Peter Minnesota and your question, I'd like to ask. Mr. Carter how he feels about the increased use of the death penalty recently the seems to be supported by the current Administration. And in fact for the first time now at least that I can remember we see the possible use of the death penalty for crimes not involving murder. I'm referring to this bill that was passed by the Senate still has to go through the house just the other day. I personally find this trend disturbing see more and more States doing it seemed this trend at least seems to be supported fairly strongly by the Reagan Administration and I was wondering how he feels how are you? Mr. Carter feel about this increased use or potentially potentially increase use of the destiny. (00:30:15) Well, this is a little far afield from what I'm usually asked to talk about, but I'm Happy to say it of two things. The first is I think factual arguments in favor of the death penalty. Don't hold up under any kind of analysis. It's the one kind of irrevocable mistake you can make in this world is to execute the wrong person. It happens more often than you want. I don't believe in the use of Murder By The State anymore and I believe in the use of Murder By an individual finally. It is interesting that there is no connection to be found between those states that have the death penalty in those states that don't have the death penalty when it comes to certain measures of crime. And in fact, you can be argued that those that don't have the death penalty for some reason or other seam on the most part to have fewer capital offenses as so-called from those with it. All right, we have callers waiting with questions will get to the next one good afternoon hodding Carter is (00:31:10) listening. Yeah and our state currently. We have a big push on trying to help the people who are functionally illiterate my Observation is that in the younger Generations people watch TV news and they get the headlines but they don't read newspapers where they can get any in depth perception about what's going on. Do you think this is a significant change in how information is being transmitted to the populace? (00:31:43) Well, there's no question that television from childhood to adolescence has become a massive and pervasive force in the society is also no question because every newspaper Publishers Gathering the discusses this there's no question that the readership at the demographic levels above 30 and below is considerably different and less than for those older. There is a marked difference generational the between those who grew up in the television age and those who didn't when it comes to reading now is an old linear type myself who spent almost all my life in print I find that disturbing I find it disturbing going An earlier question primarily because there is no way in God's world that television is going to adequately inform the vast majority of people about what is happening to the vast majority of people there just isn't enough time on television to do it nor the inclination. Unfortunately on Commercial television to even try that is not what it sees as its function in that entertainment industry called television. It's very disturbing to me is very disturbing to me that that reading as I have a lot of children and I've watched that happen with some of them that reading as a Pastime is a lesser pesto, but on the other hand the Marines in Beirut caused local television stations to send Crews stations from all over the country where there with news team's I wonder if we learned anything more about the issues in the Middle East as a result of those Crews going there. There's a real problem and it's sort of somewhat comparable to new. Striations coming into office sending parachute teams into along existing situation almost always means that over and over again people ReDiscover the wheel you administration's are determined to ReDiscover the wheel each new team come from each locality covering something like 11 and rediscovers the wheel. I'm not sure they thing you really gets done except occasionally for instance the best television reporting. I saw a year ago out of El Salvador came out of a Washington state Seattle television team, which actually spent a lot of effort trying to put into some context and perspective what El Salvador was all about extraordinary piece of work better than anything the Nets did so always gives me hope that the old Notions of pluralism and diversity of coverage May. In fact better serve the public often. It doesn't take the next question good afternoon hodding Carter is (00:34:12) listening. Yes. Mr. Carter. I was wondering if you would comment on much of the criticism that the Press is going to receive. Recently concerning its coverage of electoral. Well the election results for the presidential elections and with that in mind then whether you feel that perhaps abolishing the Electoral College might not help remedy some of those criticisms. (00:34:37) Well, I don't think the criticisms I've seen have much to do with the Electoral College the Electoral College stands alone as a problem which may or may not someday translate into a real constitutional crisis, but happily hasn't quite yet the coverage criticisms that I've seen the most recent being in Iowa again has to do with the electronic media and television particular indulging itself in playing profit before people have actually begun to participate trying to call the results before the process is over and thereby according to its critics influencing the outcome before it has actually begun the problem is Television says we have an absolute right to do this and besides which is scientific and besides which doesn't hurt anything the critics say that it influences the outcome. Both of them stand on absolutely. No factual grounds whatsoever. There have been no studies that have are really impartial objective and sustained on whether or not there's an influence of this entry or exit polling and early results coming from that I would suggest that both sides so it because it's a it's a perplexing problem to the public to do some studies and to act from the conclusions. You know, my logical feeling is that I would be influencing the way I voted if I were told that it was all over from my side before I ever went in but I don't know it logic necessarily has anything to do with voting behavior. We have callers waiting will get to the next question or good afternoon. Where are you calling from? Hello, you're on the air. Where are you calling (00:36:14) from? I'm calling for blood Minnesota and your question. Yeah, I've got a couple questions for mr. Carter. First of all, I wish you could comment on the effectiveness of Walter Mondale at the vice president and second. If you could just comment on how effective the executive branch are how much influence they have over Congress and how much responsibility Congress should accept (00:36:37) in my adult lifetime the fashion in trying to describe the relationship between the chief executive and Congress has gone on a roller coaster roughly. It can to the fashion in describing the mindset of the younger generation at one time or another you have heard that the imperial presidency is destroyed. The Congress that Congress is now run away in this destroyed the president say that it's never possible for president to be effective. Again that Congress has finally re-establish itself as a least a twin in the tripartite system of government and has some responsibility Ronald Reagan has made a joke out of the idea. That the presidency was dead and the Congress was now in a period of ascendancy. I think that the way our government is actually structured the force of the logic of both money and size is that the executive power in this country is preeminent had has been for some time week presidents have seemed to call that into question. But that any time a strong president arising at the right moment in time comes along you find the where the power really lies whether it's Lyndon Johnson completing the process of the new deal or whether in fact it was Richard Nixon until until Watergate or Ronald Reagan now Walter Mondale, one of the things that you cannot extrapolate from performances vice president is any notion whatsoever of what a person will or will not be as president a vice president is a peculiar breed of cat. Is simply the creature of the president to the degree the president gives him any latitude. He has it the degree that he has any intelligence. He uses it but he uses it intelligently, which is to say never to counter the president. There is no way you can be vice president United States and be an opposition. So no matter who the vice president is Lyndon Johnson Walter Mondale anybody else? He is in Annex trickable e stuck with the policies of the president and I don't know how you can tell much of anything about what he's going to do from that. We have callers waiting. We'll take the next listener. Good afternoon hiding Carter's listening. (00:38:49) Hi. I'd like to elicit. Mr. Carter's response to the Reagan administration's handling of the coverage for the Grenada Invasion and more importantly the seeming lack of response or lack of outcry from the public following that Invasion and and maybe follow up with a question on whether the Press is an institution doesn't have a problem with public perception. Thank you. I'll hang up and listen. (00:39:14) The public has a very real the Press has a very real problem with some elements of public perception. It deserves. Some of them didn't deserve others. Let me leave that for a moment though income to Grenada. What was done there? If it were a precedent for the future would be very dangerous if it's an aberrational mistake, it's something else which was wrong, but really shouldn't call for too much breast feeding. I think it was an aberration. This Administration has very clear ideas about its desire to clamp down on the flow of public information and as implemented those ideas in a number of ways. I do not think what it did at the Grenada invasion was in fact indicative of much of anything. It was its first military action. It was one that it practically fell into overnight. It was one in which it really saw itself going in under about three layers of justification to of which might have excused. Not taking the press for a quick hit it was wrong nonetheless because you cannot allow those who are conducting a war in a free Society to tell you about either its progress or its outcome that is if you expect to ever have any ability to control which our government is doing during that war. Now the public reaction in the immediate aftermath of Grenada was somewhat similar to what you'd expect here was the first military success the United States that had since 1945 and the first thing you hear out of commentators and critics in the Press is you didn't bring us along which sounded like a lot of people raining on their parade. They like the parade. It was a success. They didn't want to hear John chance Lord's going on and on about why the Press wasn't there. Okay, the polls came out and the Press was a dog three months later. The poles have reversed people upon reflection or now saying it is not a good thing to have had this activity go forward without the press. And in fact, even at the height of the ante press sentiment in the wake of Grenada. The deeper poles were already revealing a dichotomy in public opinion one. They don't want to hear the complaints and to they really don't think it's a great idea to leave the press out of these kinds of activities that it's a war. The Press has a lot of problems with public opinion. I for one think that some of those problems ought to be addressed and some of them ought to be ignored the ones that ought to be addressed have to do with responsibility and responsiveness have to do with the Public's clear perception of reality which is an isolated financially secure prosperous complacent institution, which is now playing at the higher reaches of power and it's communities and in the nation as a whole Being in effect out of touch with them but I wouldn't worry about is a public telling me they don't like the way that we are doing a vigorous job of covering things. They don't want to hear about we've got to do more of that. All right. We'll take the next question good afternoon hodding Carter is listening. Where you calling from, please Watertown and your question, (00:42:40) it's two parts would mr. Carter address what he understands about the process of selecting a vice presidential candidate after a convention and considering the Democratic Convention this year would he think there's any reasonable expectation that a woman might be selected and of the women who are the women around in the Democratic party who might be considered and second as a nation. Is there any reasonable expectation that someday we might stop supporting tyrants like Marcos? So we saw Pinochet just because they're our devils and not communist (00:43:17) devils. I think I could give a speech on the ladder question immediately when I say I leave some things to my wife I ought to rush on to say that my wife is Patricia Darian who was the assistant Secretary of State for human rights in the Carter Administration and whose Central thesis is was and always will be I trust that the United States not only betrays itself. Its Heritage its ideals by its support of dogs who say they're anti-communist dogs just because they say there any communist it also is counterproductive in Practical terms as well guaranteeing that when the inevitable day comes that the peoples of those societies say no more when they throw out the dictator. They also throw us out. They also say in effect you are part of the problem and it just plain practical power terms. That's dumb that's done to align ourselves with those who are one way or the other going to be consigned to an ash Heap some time and to make sure that we go with them. That doesn't mean that we have a responsibility or a right to try to tell a hundred fifty five nations precisely how to order their Affairs. It does mean that we have an absolute responsibility to distance ourselves from those which insist upon maltreatment of their people. That means we don't give as she used to say so often we don't give the thumb screws to the torturers. We don't provide the tanks for the people who have no external enemies but use them against their own people. We don't play the game of going with any kind of tyrant so long as a tyrant says that he will kiss our feet. It's counterproductive now haven't gone into that long that long peroration. I can hardly remember the first question which selection of a vice president which of course brings up your name, which according to current biography. It says that you were one of the many names of weight which popped up when Jimmy Carter was No, they were wrong. That's wrong popped up in premise is wrong, but it popped up at I don't know what current biography says 1972 with McGovern and that was at the time it was participatory democracy reached its Zenith and on my possible nomination for vice president's the best argument. I know against participatory democracy. Luckily. He didn't stay on the floor very long. Luckily for everything not to mention the viewers of America who has it was had to wait till 2:00 in the morning to see the Presidential nominee the process I hope is better than it has been it is. I'm sure you never going to be a systematic as those who are managing the winning presidential candidates Campaign Will pretend it is usually put off to the last minute. Now if the nomination is sewed up early this time as there's every indication that maybe then the process of picking the vice president may go through more. Duration than it did in other years in which you had to pick a new nominee not a sitting president and it is possible that more careful consideration will be given to who is picked. It will not be a woman. You will not be I don't care if every candidate swore on the Bible that he would actively commit himself to looking at a vice presidential choice from ranks of women. It will not be a woman. Well, I didn't 1984. Why is that because these politicians are finally going to look at the mathematics of the choice and among the mathematics which run run against them is that there is still not a massive commitment at the second level of thinking by enough women to the idea that a woman ought to be vice president. You ought to look at the poll some time to go deeper than the do you want a woman but then go into some second level question and then obviously there Our whole groups of men who have hardly come around to the idea that a woman ought to be a political participant let alone possible president, which is what you're choosing and you choose vice president. I'd say by 88 certainly but we're not there yet callers waiting will get to the next car good afternoon hodding Carter is listening (00:47:40) Thomas Carter. I have two questions. The first question is concerning the recent debates in Des Moines and New Hampshire, which are the eight Democratic candidates. Do you believe most effectively presented their own position? And the second question is Walter to this point with Walter Mondale Walter Mondale has in certain recent statements tried to distance himself from the Carter Administration by suggesting that there are a great many decisions taken by that Administration, which he did not agree with but on other days he suggested he was The first vice president to be so very intimately involved in the decision-making process. Now those two seem to me to be somewhat contradictory and those not impossible to have it both ways. I think it'd be very difficult. I wonder which which way you think it was thank you (00:48:36) happily for the former vice president the former president lets him have it both ways. I mean in his autobiography Jimmy Carter makes it very clear on a number of issues that Walter Mondale opposed the policy up until the time that it was implemented which time he did what a vice president has to do and supported it. He also makes clear in his autobiography that Walter Mondale was in fact considered a close counselor as well as vice president in the deliberations of the Carter Administration. The vice president is of course doing what every practicing politician tries to do and that is to get the most mileage out. The situation while distancing himself from those things. It may be difficult in it. That's not new. I guess I ought to throw in a disclaimer here at this point. I'm not a Walter Mondale supporter for the president's presidential nomination. This is not a paid political advertisement when I say these things and I nonetheless believe them pretty strongly I didn't watch one of those debates. I didn't see the New Hampshire debate and so I can't answer that one. I don't like the polls that were taken right after word which were disgraced to both journalism and poles as to what the outcome was supposed to be the sample stunk and the process was worse, but there's no question in my mind about who won in Iowa. I mean George McGovern has a person who simply is the political Statesman in the race when it comes to something like that debate. He is able to add both the perspective and a certain Trinity to the process which the others lack is able to say very clearly and with few words where he stands and to say where he stands and ways I think are important that's a personal statement. And again, I want to say this very quickly I supported him after he was nominated in 72. I did not support him for the nomination 72 and can't be considered an original McGovern. I might have called this meeting with questions we get to the next one. Good afternoon. We're listening. (00:50:44) Why does mr. Reagan tell the American people that the reason for invading Grenada was because of his murder more special when in fact, he hated mr. (00:50:53) Bishop. I have always found it somewhat amusing that that we suddenly were so concerned about Maurice Bishop in one way or another under to administration's efforts were made to have him replaced by our government some more over than others. But no question to straight administration's would have been quite happy to see him go. It was convenient for the administration to have that murder in the sense that it gave a chance ultimately for us to do what have been advocated in private councils and number of times which was to clean out. What was a fairly easy place to clean out of those who are concerned were considered to be dangerous to our security interest in the area. I think this is going to come back to bite us bite this Administration and bite us because in fact Bishop as Bishop remains very popular in Grenada, and you aren't going to be able to disassociate this from the future political reality. They're seven minutes before one o'clock and we have callers waiting with questions for hodding Carter will get to the next one. Good afternoon. We're listening. Where are you calling from? (00:52:14) Memphis a message and your question. I want to know like when 1980 said that that the car because Carter reinstate the draft, but then now you reinstate the Trap and he said you want to evolve that you want reinstated. Could you explain can you explain why it why you did (00:52:36) it? I'm sorry. I didn't know I'd been talking about the draft question hasn't Arisen the registration the reinstitution of registration. I didn't always err, but I'm sorry. I don't know precisely what the question is (00:52:52) - like by talking about kids like in cases of war that saw it on or off in the final of - so this is the finding summer Towing challenge them. (00:53:06) I see a question about registration. Well, we'll we'll let you off the hook on that one because you're not the you're not the Selective Service System in your private citizens who will let you off. Well write that matter of fact, I won't go off the hook. All right. Might as well. Just go ahead I might as well go ahead. And since I think I know where he's going with the question and I expect he reflects the majority view on this. I think the most dangerous single thing that faces us nation after the reality of a permanent militarization of the society is the permanent militarization of society with the professional Army that one of the few ways. I know to flush the system out regularly is to see to it that a large body of private citizens are required to share the burden of This Magnificent to million-person trillion dollar effort and that the more we create a praetorian guard to inherit this massive military budget budget the more likely we are to use it and the more that we see to it that those who make the laws and the decisions have people who are serving in the Armed Force of this country the less likely we are now you'd have to have a far better draft system than we had that we abandon which was inherently unfair in the way. It was applied. But I will tell you the future of this country one of the few times. I begin to agree with conservatives who tend to see the fall of the Roman Empire constantly is when I regard our military and see this permanent large praetorian guard made up of people who have no other stake in the society. We have callers waiting with about four minutes to go and we'll take the next one. Good afternoon. We're (00:54:53) listening good afternoon. I'm concerned about my general ignorance of Foreign Affairs seems to me that commonly available source of information provide episodic coverage and little analysis of ongoing Foreign Affairs. I'm wondering what mr. Carter would regard as being the best source or sources of Foreign Affairs information. And also wondering as to whether those sources need not be non-american. (00:55:19) Thank you. Well know there's some extraordinarily good things for reading which are non American depending on what your language capacities are mine stank so that it has to be English for me for the most part. But let me let me just say something general about the question of informing yourself about difficult issues whether its foreign policy or anything else foreign affairs. Nobody should delude himself or herself into believing that it's possible to spend a few minutes a day with some publication or some show or some broadcast and come away understanding much of what transpires in the world or get much depth of understanding. You got to work harder at it than that and those who quit keep thinking there must be some quick fix to understanding or just wrong. So I'm not going to recommend a source of information. I wouldn't for the moment tell you there's a source of information which is the best thing. I've just say you're going to have to work very hard at going to multiple sources of information both foreign and domestic but in any case domestic and there are plenty of them ranging from daily newspapers, which circulate nationally to weeklies to certain kinds of broadcasts both public and Commercial web. Another caller will take it right now. Good afternoon. We're listening for your question. (00:56:43) Media takes on for itself given its ability to do in-depth investigative reporting and I'll raise the instance of a current affairs question here in Minnesota. The legislature has established pari-mutuel horse racing for the state of Minnesota in an attempt to establish it as a major industry and to that in the racing commission people are working overtime to establish a large racetrack in the metropolitan area and have established a deadline of March 1st for the submission of proposals for the various interested parties for for their proposal for racetrack in attempting to maintain the Integrity of the process and the void appearance of collusion between parties and so on they try to establish a rigorous secret bidding process. We've got about 30 seconds, right? Well, okay, the newspapers are planning an expose. It was able to study before the fact revealing all the details of these proposals to the public memory of this can hurt helpers a different (00:57:51) problem is I don't know enough about it to comment intelligently. Let me say that in the for the most part. I think more rather than less when it comes to coverage is a good idea and that includes investigative work. I would hope the again that you have enough diversity of outlets that one Viewpoint in the media is not going to predominate or would be the only one. All right. Thank you hodding Carter for coming by. I appreciate your time appreciate the calls from the questioners. Thanks to Dorothy Hanford to Conrad Lindbergh to read Olson to Roger Jamal for their help with this broadcast weekend is made possible by economics laboratory products and services for household institutional and Industrial Cleaning worldwide in the Twin Cities. This is Dan Olson reporting.