Nib #80 Jimmy Carter’s Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Speech

Forty-six years ago this week, Jimmy Carter gave the worst Oval Office speech in American history. “A Crisis of Confidence” — better known today as the “Malaise Speech” — is not only worse than older readers will remember. It’s worse than younger readers can probably imagine.


Most of speech’s problems were political: the message, the messenger, and the moment were catastrophically out of sync. And yet, somehow, the writing itself was almost as bad.


Remember the setting. It’s summer 1979. Stagflation, gas lines, another recession looming. President Carter, his approval rating now in the low 30s, had already given three major speeches about a seemingly intractable energy crisis. The fourth - scheduled for the evening of July 5 — Carter canceled at the last minute. Then he vanished. No, seriously. He left the White House for a 10-day emotional and spiritual retreat at Camp David, where he met with Important People about What Was Really Wrong With America.


On July 15, he returned to Washington to finally reveal his plan to revive the country. This is the first time Americans heard from their president since he disappeared in the middle of a crisis. Everyone is waiting with baited breath. And Carter opens his speech:


“Good evening. This is a special night for me.”


Say what?


“Exactly three years ago, on July 15, 1976, I accepted the nomination of my party to run for president of the United States.”


Carter talks about his convention speech, three years earlier. Then Carter talks about all the other speeches he’s given since! Then he talks about the speech he just canceled — and how great it was going to be! Then he talks about his Me Time with celebrities at Camp David:


“It has been an extraordinary ten days, and I want to share with you what I’ve heard.”


In the first seven paragraphs of his speech, Carter uses some version of the words I or me 21 times!


He spends the next three minutes quoting his Camp David guests. And what do you know, almost all of their thoughts aren’t about the energy crisis at all. They’re about… Jimmy Carter! Eight hundred words into a speech about a national economic crisis, the president has only talked about two subjects: himself and what other people say about him.


Finally Carter gets around to his big takeaway from all his deep conversations and soul-searing. He was right all along:


“These ten days confirmed my belief… but it also bore out some of my long-standing concerns…”


Eight of Carter’s next nine independent clauses feature the word I as the subject:


“I know… I've worked… I have… I have… I want… I want… I do… I do…”


This guy, huh?


After nine minutes exonerating himself from blame for the country’s problems, Carter hones in on the real culprit: the American people!


“The threat is nearly invisible in ordinary ways. It is a crisis of confidence. It is a crisis that strikes at the very heart and soul and spirit of our national will. We can see this crisis in the growing doubt about the meaning of our own lives and in the loss of a unity of purpose for our nation.”


The Nib can’t even. Note the threat Carter diagnoses is “invisible in ordinary ways” — that is, to people less perceptive than Carter.


He laments people’s doubts about “the meaning of their lives” and “loss of unity of purpose.” But he just spent nine minutes congratulating himself for his personal virtue and focus. 


At this point it’s clear, the malaise speech is not even about malaise. It’s about how much better a person Jimmy Carter thought he was than the selfish, venal, mouth-breathing ingrates he was trying to lead!


No surprise, then, that when Carter finally gets around to the policy substance of the speech — the energy crisis — almost every solution he proposes involves giving President Carter more power. The one exception? Urging the 224,999,999 Americans who didn’t just helicopter up to the mountains on a whim for some Me Time to stop using so much energy!


Finally, if you had any doubt, yes: even Carter’s peroration is obnoxious!


“In closing, let me say this: I will do my best, but I will not do it alone.”


What the &$#@ is the matter with this guy? "I will not do it alone"? How vain, how arrogant, how out of touch did Carter have to be to not say, “… but I can not do it alone” there? 


Vain, arrogant, and out-of-touch enough — after a half-hour, self-congratulatory harangue of his countrymen — to then say, three sentences before signing off: 


“Whenever you have a chance, say something good about our country.”


The lesson this week is very simple. Read the Malaise Speech, and then never write like that.


Until next week… keep writing!

Nib #121 The “One Sentence” Trick

May 1, 2026
Good writing is downstream from clear thinking. The vast majority of times writers get stuck mid-composition, tugging at their hair and chewing pencils wondering what to write next, the real problem is they’re not sure what they think . The fix here is not grammatical or stylistic, but logical. The next time you find yourself in this situation, try the One Sentence Trick. Very quickly, summarize your whole argument in a single sentence. Then summarize each component part — each angle, each bit of evidence, each rebuttal of the other side, and then your conclusion. Essentially, you’re reverse engineering your outline here. If any of these summary sentences proves hard to write, you’ve found your problem. Chances are you’ve thought and/or written yourself into a corner. In such cases, the best way out is not through, but back. Return to the outline, to the previous sentence, or the previous paragraph and start reading. Somewhere along the way, you just took a wrong turn. Find the wrong turn, and you’ll quickly get back on track. The key is cultivating the discipline and humility not to push on to try and “get there from here.” You’ll waste words and time. Back up, find the hitch in your logic, and you’ll be back in the flow in no time. Until next week… keep writing!

Nib #120 Say Something a Little Bit Different

April 24, 2026
Congressional leaders tend to think of big policy debates as binary affairs — support Bill X or oppose Bill X. If they had their way, every elected official, pundit, or spokesman on their side would repeat the exact same two-sentence talking point. They call this “message discipline.” Except that’s not what message discipline is. Message discipline is when each spokesman sticks to his or her best message over the course of a debate. It does not mean that 300 different spokesman all parrot the same message. If Ted Cruz and Susan Collins — or for that matter, Elizabeth Warren — both support something, you don’t want them making the same case for it. You want them making distinct cases tailored to the audiences they can best reach. Young congressional communicators: don’t work forward from the messaging of the speaker or the committee chairman or that one pundit you like. The people who you’re trying to reach may not trust those guys! Instead, work backwards from your boss’s audience and make the case that will appeal to them . When it comes to strategic communications, intentionally saying something a little bit different is a lot more effective. Until next week… keep writing!

Nib #119 Whom, Whomever, Whomsoever

April 17, 2026
If you look up the words whom , whomever , and whomsoever in the dictionary, you’ll find them. It’s probably best to leave them there. Don’t get the Nib wrong. Relative pronouns are great. Direct objects, too. And in isolation, whomsoever is a peach of a word. But in most real-world writing, sentences requiring whom — and especially whomever and whomsoever — tend to be wordy, fussy, and distractingly pedantic. The Nib endorses William Safire’s old rule of thumb: “If whom is correct, recast the sentence.” Until next week... keep writing!

Nib #118 Persuasive Generosity

April 10, 2026
 In a public debate, whether in person or in writing, remember: your strategic audience isn’t your opponent. It’s the undecided, persuadable people witnessing your back and forth. This is why it’s so valuable to be generous and charitable in your tone and arguments. No, a softer touch isn’t likely to move hardened, convicted advocates on the other side. But it absolutely might help reach undecided readers and listeners. Trial lawyers don’t try to convince opposing counsel. They’re focused on the judge or the jury. In the same way, conservatives and liberals on the Senate floor aren’t debating for each other’s votes, but for the support of undecideds watching at home. In your writing, then, don’t be afraid to tailor your arguments, acknowledge the other side’s best ideas, concede unessential points, or refrain from taking tempting pot shots. Especially if your opponents are strident and censorious, a charitable tone can go a lot further than answering in kind. Respect and generosity in persuasive writing isn’t weak, it’s persuasive — which, remember, is the whole point. Until next week… keep writing!

Nib #117 "Good Friday” by Christina Rossetti

April 3, 2026
Easter, the most beautiful thing, has understandably inspired some of the world’s most beautiful writing, including this: "Good Friday” by Christina Rossetti Am I a stone, and not a sheep, That I can stand, O Christ, beneath Thy cross, To number drop by drop Thy blood’s slow loss, And yet not weep? Not so those women loved Who with exceeding grief lamented Thee; Not so fallen Peter, weeping bitterly; Not so the thief was moved; Not so the Sun and Moon Which hid their faces in a starless sky, A horror of great darkness at broad noon – I, only I. Yet give not o’er, But seek Thy sheep, true Shepherd of the flock; Greater than Moses, turn and look once more And smite a rock. Happy Easter! And until next week… keep writing!

Nib #116 The One Word Writers Should Never Use

March 27, 2026
There are lots of words young writers should generally avoid. But there may only be one word that young writers should always avoid: impactful . The problem with impactful is not that the word has no meaning, but that it doesn’t mean enough . Writers always have better options. For starters, there are more precise adjectives that really mean what impactful only hints at, like compelling , arresting , or efficacious . But even those are only minor upgrades. Better still, writers and editors should take the very presence of impactful as a signal that the whole sentence needs reworking. Rather than telling your readers something is impactful , show your readers the impact it makes. Don’t say, “The firefighter’s decision to search the attic was impactful.” Say, “The firefighter’s decision to search the attic saved the lives of two young children.” Don’t say, “The president hopes this will be an impactful speech.” Say, “The president hopes today’s speech convinces Congress to support his budget proposal.” If you want your writing to have an impact, try not to write the word impactful again. Until next week… keep writing.

Nib #115 Writerly Time Management

March 20, 2026
“I would have written a shorter letter, but I did not have the time.” - Blaise Pascal Young writers should take Pascal’s literary koan to heart. Composing first drafts may be the most daunting part of the writing process. But it’s also the least intellectually taxing. The draining, time consuming part of writing — the part that actually makes writing good — is the editing and revision. This is why writers’ procrastination is so pernicious. Good writing takes time — specifically, time after the first draft is already written. One of the simplest ways to level-up your work is build lots of back-end editing time into your schedule. Until next week… keep writing! 

Nib #114 Fatty Phrases

March 13, 2026
One of the quickest and easiest ways to improve your writing is to cut the fat off of loose, wordy phrases. Here are four common examples: in order to for the purposes of due to the fact that at this point in time Young writers often think these phrases make their writing worldly and authoritative. They don’t. Authoritative writing is precise and concise. As you edit your drafts, be on the lookout for elongated phrases whose meaning can be conveyed in a single word. Instead of “in order to” just say “to.” Instead of “for the purposes of” just say “to.” Instead of “due to the fact that” just say “because.” Instead of “at this point in time” just say “now.” Trim that fat. Weed that garden. Eliminate unnecessary words. Until next week… writing!

Nib #113 Avoid Posturing Preambles

March 6, 2026
Young professionals sometimes mistake persuasiveness with authority. You see it in name-dropping, resume padding, and overuse of jargon. In writing, this self-inflating tone is often expressed in posturing preambles. If you’ve ever read a letter or oped or speech that prefaces points with commentary about the status of the author, you know the vibe: “I stand before you…” “Let me be clear…” “I will not apologize for…” “I do not say this lightly…” Phrases like this are meant to subtly assert authority. To the audience, they usually signal insecurity. It wastes words, breaks the flow, confuses the issue, and annoys the audience. The way to impress people with your skills as a writer is to persuade them on the subject you’re writing about. The best way to do that is to remove your self from the equation. Focus on the audience and the issue. Don’t set up your points with these “Look at me!” introductions. Just make your case. If you sell your ideas well, the audience will buy you too. If you try to sell yourself, they’ll usually buy neither. Until next week… keep writing!

Nib #112 Three Tips for Pronoun Clarity

February 27, 2026
Pronouns are always for the audience. Strategically swapping them in for nouns makes your writing more reader-friendly. Unless it’s not clear what noun you’re swapping out. Good writers always make sure their pronouns’ antecedents are obvious. Here are three common mistakes writers make with pronouns, and how to fix them. 1. Multiple Possible Antecedents Consider the sentence: “Senator Jones met with Governor Smith after he was elected.” Who does “he” refer to here - Jones or Smith? It could be read either way. So the writer will want to rework the sentence to clarify: “After Senator Jones was elected, he met with Governor Smith.” 2. Distant Antecedent Sometimes a pronoun’s antecedent is syntactically clear, but too far away for the reader to remember: “The appropriations package, negotiated over several weeks and amended repeatedly amidst backroom horse trading, passed just before midnight after leadership intervened. It alienated coalition members.” Readers could easily think “it” refers to the package, the amendments, the horse trading, or leadership’s intervention. Better to be clear, even if it requires more words: “The appropriations package, negotiated over several weeks and amended repeatedly amidst backroom horse trading, passed just before midnight after leadership intervened. The final text of the bill alienated coalition members.” 3. Beginning Sentences with Pronouns The most common location of unclear pronouns is at the start of sentences. Any time you open a sentence with a this or a that or a those , make sure the antecedent is obvious; otherwise, a single word can gum up multiple sentences. Until next week… keep writing!