Printable View
[QUOTE=Papa Benito]He led us out of the traumas of Watergate and Viet Nam. He could work amiably with all, including Congress, yet still was able to veto 66 spending bills. He pursued foreign policy with a consensus. He favored limited government. He saw the best in people.[/QUOTE]De mortuis nil nisi bonum.
He took a nice fall and if I recall gave Chevy Chase a career boost.
Without attempting to demean President Ford during this time of mourning for many people I do wish to post a different perspective.
Not sure how he could be considered a great or even excellent president. He may have become one given time but even that is an unknow. He only had 2 years in office, did not have time or the opportunity to develop either a domestic or foreign policy.
However, he was the kind of politician that both sides could talk with and respect because he was a centrist. I voted for him and not Carter-at the time I was a Republican.
He is and will always be known as the president who pardoned Nixon--who's actions were clearly criminal. I have strong opinions about that!
And based on an enlightening article in interview Bob Woodward had with President Ford in 2005, Ford admitted that his real reason for giving Nixon a pardon was that he was his 'great' friend. He obsiously used the reason that it was 'for the good of the country- to heal us all' to sell his decision (refer to the Washington Post article by Bob Woodward this week-as reprinted in my local paper)
Suerte.
Stowe
[QUOTE=Stowe]
Not sure how he could be considered a great or even excellent president. He may have become one given time but even that is an unknow. He only had 2 years in office, did not have time or the opportunity to develop either a domestic or foreign policy. [/QUOTE]Just change the name here to read: John F. Kennedy.
[QUOTE=STOWE](refer to the Washington Post article by Bob Woodward this week-as reprinted in my local paper)[/QUOTE]Just because you read it in the Washington Post doesn't make it so - the same goes for it coming from Woodward's lips or finger tips.
[QUOTE=Stowe]
He is and will always be known as the president who pardoned Nixon--who's actions were clearly criminal. I have strong opinions about that! [/QUOTE]So?
Absolutely no good for the country would have come from having Nixon in the dock, being worked over by eager lawyers each out for their pound of flesh. The pardon was a Solomonic act, which is now admitted even by the most virulent of Nixon-haters.
I disagree. Nixon was a criminal and all his pardon indicated that being connected to the powerful lets criminals get away with criminal acts.
Everyone should face punishment for their criminal-everyone regardless of how rich or powerful they are.
I think this country would have survived his trial unless you think this country is so frail, so weak, to have collapsed under such an inquiry.
I supported Nixon back then but having learned more over the years have realized just how dangerous he was. I would definitely question the statement that "admitted even by the most virulent of Nixon-haters". There is absolutely no way to prove that so it leaves it a nothing more than a subjective claim.
And while I agree that one cannot believe everything they read (and I absolutely do not) I think it is safe to say that Bob Woodward is above reproach-I would like proof that he is some left-wing commie out to take down any/all Republicans. Of course, just the fact that he is part of the media automatically makes him a left-wing commie Democrat to many Republicans.
Ahh, the Republican propaganda machine over the last 20 years has done such a good job of brainwashing. In all honesty I am greatly impressed with that Republican machine-that all taxes are bad, all regulation is bad, big government is bad (yet they want THEIR big government to make constitutional amendments to regulate marriage, burning the flag, control what happens in the bedroom, a woman's right to choose). A bit hypocritical to me.
Show me that Woodword is such a person and I will definitely re-evalute my observation. His first book about Bush was fairly supported of the President.
Have to agree that the Kennedy situation was the same regarding the length of time in office- but why bring that up, I didn't? Kennedy took office through an election so he was prepared with a staff and a foreign & domestic policy which Ford did not have the opportunity to do. While it is just my opinion, Kennedy was more successful in his 2 years than Ford's primarily because of the Cuban missile crisis.
Interesting discussion.
Suerte.
Stowe
Reagan was the best president since WW2.
Reagan was the best before ww2 remember FDR and Truman let Russia take over half the world. This was the biggest mistake of all. Reagan corrected it while giving us an economy that Bush and Clinton rode.
[QUOTE=Stowe]I supported Nixon back then but having learned more over the years have realized just how dangerous he was. I would definitely question the statement that "admitted even by the most virulent of Nixon-haters". There is absolutely no way to prove that so it leaves it a nothing more than a subjective claim.
Ahh, the Republican propaganda machine over the last 20 years has done such a good job of brainwashing. [/QUOTE]I guess Karl Rove and the other evil Republican brain-washers have gotten to Teddy Kennedy too.
[quote=Teddy Kennedy]At a time of national turmoil, America was fortunate that it was Gerald Ford who took the helm of the storm-tossed ship of state. Unlike many of us at the time, President Ford recognized that the nation had to move forward, and could not do so if there was a continuing effort to prosecute former President Nixon. So President Ford made a courageous decision, one that historians now say cost him his office, and he pardoned Richard Nixon.
I was one of those who spoke out against his action then. But time has a way of clarifying past events, and now we see that President Ford was right. His courage and dedication to our country made it possible for us to begin the process of healing and put the tragedy of Watergate behind us. He eminently deserves this award, and we are proud of his achievement.[/quote][url]http://www.jfklibrary.org/Education+and+Public+Programs/Profile+in+Courage+Award/Award+Recipients/Gerald+Ford/Remarks+by+Senator+Edward+M.+Kennedy.htm[/url]
Of course, Stowe displays the dangerous thing about haters - their passion and anger clouds their judgment.
Hunt.
Aren't you a bit hypocritical? Are you not the person who has got into a flame war with someone you posted as being a fag, a gay? If that isn't hate, what is? That was a personal and inflamatory attack, something I try to avoid by sticking to the issue. But I guess if you are unable to stick to the issue (and have nothing to support your position) you attack. As you did with me in your last post by avoiding a discussion and posting an inflammatory accusation as in: "Of coure, Stowe displays the dangerous thing about haters - their passion and anger clouds their judgment".
You just made an ass out of yourself with you last post. At least I can state that I have been open minded and flexible enough to have been both a Republican (until I was 38) and a Democrat, changing my party when they went in a radical direction - either party. I suspect that such flexibility and open mindedness are not in your parlance. Thus, the fact that I will not stick with a party regardless of their actions / positions (my party right or wrong mentality) indicates that "passion and anger" does not cloud my judgement.
And as usual you either did not read my post or did not wish to understand it-or could not understand. I supported and respected Ford until I read that he let his friendship take precedence over right or wrong. And I would have felt the same way if Nixon had been a Democrat and a Democrat would have pardoned him.
Unlike some people, I believe EVERYONE should be held accountable for their crimes regardless if they are a Republican or Democrat. Obviously, Hunt you do not.
Funny that you should post something that Kennedy stated since I suspect you absolutely detest him. Remember him and Chapaquitic? You will even use a Democrat to protect Nixon (or perhaps any Republican??). Again, the my party right or wrong mentality that the Demos had in the 60's and early 70's.
Just because Kennedy stated his acceptance of the pardon does not make it the word of God or right! I do not care if the Pope pardons him, he got away with a crime. My point was that a crime was committed and Nixon got off. I don't give a damn what Kennedy thinks!
Based on your position regarding the Nixon situation (and many others) any time a President commits a crime he should be pardoned since to hold him accountable will cause undue pain on the country. So in essense, that would make the President untouchable-all powerful. I am sure you did not feel that way with Clinton and Lewinsky?
I have said my piece on this issue. We have completely different points-of-view on this and most issues. That's what keeps things interesting.
Suerte.
Stowe
Posted on Dec. 31, 2006
By Chris Hedges.
Editor's note: The former New York Times Mideast Bureau chief warns that the radical Christian right is coming dangerously close to its goal of co-opting the country's military and law enforcement.
The drive by the Christian right to take control of military chaplaincies, which now sees radical Christians holding roughly 50 percent of chaplaincy appointments in the armed services and service academies, is part of a much larger effort to politicize the military and law enforcement. This effort signals the final and perhaps most deadly stage in the long campaign by the radical Christian right to dismantle America's open society and build a theocratic state. A successful politicization of the military would signal the end of our democracy.
During the past two years I traveled across the country to research and write the book "American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America." I repeatedly listened to radical preachers attack as corrupt and godless most American institutions, from federal agencies that provide housing and social welfare to public schools and the media. But there were two institutions that never came under attack—the military and law enforcement. While these preachers had no interest in communicating with local leaders of other faiths, or those in the community who did not subscribe to their call for a radical Christian state, they assiduously courted and flattered the military and police. They held special services and appreciation days for all four branches of the armed services and for various law enforcement agencies. They encouraged their young men and women to enlist or to join the police or state troopers. They sought out sympathetic military and police officials to attend church events where these officials were lauded and feted for their Christian probity and patriotism. They painted the war in Iraq not as an occupation but as an apocalyptic battle by Christians against Islam, a religion they regularly branded as "satanic." All this befits a movement whose final aesthetic is violence. It also befits a movement that, in the end, would need the military and police forces to seize power in American society.
One of the arguments used to assuage our fears that the mass movement being built by the Christian right is fascist at its core is that it has not yet created a Praetorian Guard, referring to the paramilitary force that defied legal constraints, made violence part of the political discourse and eventually plunged ancient Rome into tyranny and despotism. A paramilitary force that operates outside the law, one that sows fear among potential opponents and is capable of physically silencing those branded by their leaders as traitors, is a vital instrument in the hands of despotic movements. Communist and fascist movements during the last century each built paramilitary forces that operated beyond the reach of the law.
And yet we may be further down this road than we care to admit. Erik Prince, the secretive, mega-millionaire, right-wing Christian founder of Blackwater, the private security firm that has built a formidable mercenary force in Iraq, champions his company as a patriotic extension of the U. S. Military. His employees, in an act as cynical as it is deceitful, take an oath of loyalty to the Constitution. These mercenary units in Iraq, including Blackwater, contain some 20,000 fighters. They unleash indiscriminate and wanton violence against unarmed Iraqis, have no accountability and are beyond the reach of legitimate authority. The appearance of these paramilitary fighters, heavily armed and wearing their trademark black uniforms, patrolling the streets of New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, gave us a grim taste of the future. It was a stark reminder that the tyranny we impose on others we will one day impose on ourselves.
"Contracting out security to groups like Blackwater undermines our constitutional democracy," said Michael Ratner, the president of the Center for Constitutional Rights. "Their actions may not be subject to constitutional limitations that apply to both federal and state officials and employees—including First Amendment and Fourth Amendment rights to be free from illegal searches and seizures. Unlike police officers they are not trained in protecting constitutional rights and unlike police officers or the military they have no system of accountability whether within their organization or outside it. These kind of paramilitary groups bring to mind Nazi Party brownshirts, functioning as an extrajudicial enforcement mechanism that can and does operate outside the law. The use of these paramilitary groups is an extremely dangerous threat to our rights."
The politicization of the military, the fostering of the belief that violence must be used to further a peculiar ideology rather than defend a democracy, was on display recently when Air Force and Army generals and colonels, filmed in uniform at the Pentagon, appeared in a promotional video distributed by the Christian Embassy, a radical Washington-based organization dedicated to building a "Christian America."
The video, first written about by Jeff Sharlet in the December issue of Harper's Magazine and filmed shortly after 9/11, has led the Military Religious Freedom Foundation to raise a legal protest against the Christian Embassy's proselytizing within the Department of Defense. The video was hastily pulled from the Christian Embassy website and was removed from YouTube a few days ago under threats of copyright enforcement.
Dan Cooper, an undersecretary of veterans affairs, says in the video that his weekly prayer sessions are "more important than doing the job." Maj. Gen. Jack Catton says that his being an adviser to the Joint Chiefs of Staff is a "wonderful opportunity" to evangelize men and women setting defense policy. "My first priority is my faith," he says. "I think it's a huge impact. You have many men and women who are seeking God's counsel and wisdom as they advise the chairman [of the Joint Chiefs] and the secretary of defense."
Col. Ralph Benson, a Pentagon chaplain, says in the video: "Christian Embassy is a blessing to the Washington area, a blessing to our capital; it's a blessing to our country. They are interceding on behalf of people all over the United States, talking to ambassadors, talking to people in the Congress, in the Senate, talking to people in the Pentagon, and being able to share the message of Jesus Christ in a very, very important time in our world is winning a worldwide war on terrorism. What more do we need than Christian people leading us and guiding us, so, they're needed in this hour."
The group has burrowed deep inside the Pentagon. It hosts weekly Bible sessions with senior officers, by its own count some 40 generals, and weekly prayer breakfasts each Wednesday from 7 to 7:50 a. M. In the executive dining room as well as numerous outreach events to, in the words of the organization, "share and sharpen one another in their quest to bridge the gap between faith and work."
If the United States falls into a period of instability caused by another catastrophic terrorist attack, an economic meltdown or a series of environmental disasters, these paramilitary forces, protected and assisted by fellow ideologues in the police and military, could swiftly abolish what is left of our eroding democracy. War, with the huge profits it hands to businesses and right-wing interests that often help bankroll the Christian right, could become a permanent condition. And the thugs with automatic weapons, black uniforms and wraparound sunglasses who appeared on street corners in Baghdad and New Orleans could appear on streets across the U. S. Such a presence could paralyze us with fear, leaving us unable to question or protest the closed system and secrecy of an emergent totalitarian state and unable to voice dissent.
"The Bush administration has already come close to painting our current wars as wars against Islam—many in the Christian right apparently have this belief," Ratner said. "If these wars, bad enough as imperial wars, are fought as religious wars, we are facing a very dark age that could go on for a hundred years and that will be very bloody."
Stowe,
Just about all, if not most, world leaders commit (war) crimes, the difference is some get hung for those crimes and some don't. Alot of people right now are talking about Bush and Impeachment, but what is the Democratic leadership doing? Are they trying to impeach him? NO. It would set a dangerous precedent for future US leaders, a future that COULD see them actually being prosecuted for their crimes.
Badboy
Not sure of your point. I think you missed my entire point.
To my knowledge Bush did not commit a crime. True, he was probably unethical and misleading regarding the war but he did not commit a crime that anyone knows of. So I am not in favor of impeachment for the very reason you stated.
Clarify the intent of your post with regards to my position that EVERY criminal regardless of position should pay-assuming a crime was committed.
Suerte.
Stowe
Take a Xanax, amigo. You obviously need one (or two).
Nixon's dead. And I don't think you can dig him up and abuse his corpse. So chill out. When you find yourself in a minority of one, try to stifle the temptation to accuse everybody else of being wrong and stupid. ;)