Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006

Subject: BS: President Gerald Ford passes at 93
From: Devilmaster
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 12:21 AM

Betty Ford just confirmed to the AP

Subject: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 2006
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 12:22 AM

We knew it was coming, he was the oldest living (former) president ever.

Gerald R. Ford, age 93, died on December 26, 2006.

He lived in interesting times, with all that that implies.

Please DON'T whine about this being "above the line." It belongs there.

SRS

---

All obits should always start above the line. We move the non-music ones when we see them.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 2006
From: SINSULL
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 12:25 AM

Can I whine about the fact that he pardoned Nixon?

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 2006
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 12:28 AM

From the San Francisco Chronicle (link):

Gerald R. Ford, who picked up the pieces of Richard Nixon's scandal-shattered White House as the 38th and only president in America's history never elected to nationwide office, has died, his wife, Betty, said Tuesday. He was 93.

"My family joins me in sharing the difficult news that Gerald Ford, our beloved husband, father, grandfather and great grandfather has passed away at 93 years of age," Mrs. Ford said in a brief statement issued from her husband's office in Rancho Mirage. "His life was filled with love of God, his family and his country." The statement did not say where Ford died or list a cause of death.

Ford was an accidental president, Nixon's hand-picked successor, a man of much political experience who had never run on a national ticket. He was as open and straightforward as Nixon was tightly controlled and conspiratorial.

He took office minutes after Nixon flew off into exile in 1974 and declared "our long national nightmare is over." But he revived the debate a month later by granting Nixon a pardon for all crimes he committed as president. That single act, it was widely believed, cost Ford election to a term of his own in 1976, but it won praise in later years as a courageous act that allowed the nation to move on.

The Vietnam War ended in defeat for the U.S. during his presidency with the fall of Saigon in April 1975. In a speech as the end neared, Ford said: "Today, America can regain the sense of pride that existed before Vietnam. But it cannot be achieved by refighting a war that is finished as far as America is concerned." Evoking Abraham Lincoln, he said it was time to "look forward to an agenda for the future, to unify, to bind up the nation's wounds."

Ford also earned a place in the history books as the first unelected vice president, chosen by Nixon to replace Spiro Agnew, also forced from office by scandal. He was in the White House only 895 days, but changed it more than it changed him.

Even after two women tried separately to kill him, the presidency of Jerry Ford remained open and plain, and — to greatest satisfaction to a nation numbed by Watergate — not dishonest.

Even to millions of Americans who had voted two years earlier for Nixon, the transition to Ford's leadership was one of the most welcomed in the history of the democratic process — despite the fact that it occurred without an election. After the Watergate ordeal, Americans liked their new president — and first lady Betty, whose candor charmed the country.

They liked her for speaking openly about growing up problems of young people, including her own daughter; they admired her for not hiding that she had a mastectomy — in fact, her example caused thousands of women to seek breast examinations.

And she remained one of the country's most admired women even after the Fords left the White House when she was hospitalized in 1978 and admitted to having become addicted to drugs and alcohol she took for painful arthritis and a pinched nerve in her neck. Four years later she founded the Betty Ford Center in Rancho Mirage a substance abuse facility next to Eisenhower Medical Center.

In a long congressional career in which he rose to be House Republican leader, Ford lit few fires. In the words of Congressional Quarterly, he "built a reputation for being solid, dependable and loyal - a man more comfortable carrying out the programs of others than in initiating things on his own."

When Agnew resigned in a bribery scandal in October 1973, Ford was one of four finalists to succeed him: Texan John Connally, New York's Nelson Rockefeller and California's Ronald Reagan.

"Personal factors enter into such a decision," Nixon recalled for a Ford biographer in 1991. I knew all of the final four personally and had great respect for each one of then, but I had known Jerry Ford longer and better than any of the rest. So Ford it was. He became the first vice president appointed under the 25th amendment to the Constitution. On Aug. 9, 1974, after seeing Nixon off to exile, Ford assumed the office. The next morning, he still made his own breakfast and padded to the front door in his pajamas to get the newspaper. Said a ranking Democratic congressman: "Maybe he is a plodder, but right now the advantages of having a plodder in the presidency are enormous."

It was rare that Ford was ever as eloquent as he was for those dramatic moments of his swearing-in at the White House. "My fellow Americans," he said, "our long national nightmare is over. Our Constitution works. Our great republic is a government of laws and not of men. Here the people rule."

And, true to his reputation as unassuming Jerry, he added: "I am acutely aware that you have not elected me as your president by your ballots. So I ask you to confirm me with your prayers."

For Ford, a full term was not to be. He survived an intraparty challenge from Ronald Reagan only to lose to Democrat Jimmy Carter in November. In the campaign, he ignored Carter's record as governor of Georgia and concentrated on his own achievements as president.

Carter won 297 electoral votes to his 240. After Reagan came back to defeat Carter in 1980, the two former presidents became collaborators, working together on joint projects.

Even as president, Ford often talked with reporters several times a day. He averaged 200 outside speeches a year as House Republican leader, a pace he kept up as vice president and diminished, seemingly, only slightly as chief executive. He kept speaking after leaving the White House, generally for fees of $15,000 to $20,000.

Ford was never asked to the White House for a social event during Reagan's eight years as president.

In office, Ford's living tastes were modest. When he became vice president, he chose to remain in the same Alexandria, Va., home — unpretentious except for a swimming pool — that he shared with his family as a congressman.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 2006
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 12:28 AM

Hey, all things considered, he probably saved us a lot of grief. And when you look at George W. Bush, Nixon wasn't really so bad, now was he?

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 2006
From: SINSULL
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 12:36 AM

Right - Nixon only attempted to overthrow the Constitution.

One of Ford's "attempted assassins" was Squeaky Frome (sp?), one of Charles Manson's followers. I believe she said "Bang Bang, You're dead" but never fired.

Those were strange times.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 2006
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 12:38 AM

Me again, sorry to be back so many times in a row. Here is a chronology for those younger Mudcatter's who might not understand why Ford was such a balm to the country. Only problem with this timeline is that if he died in California then he died on Dec. 26, not Dec. 27.

SRS

---

Dates in the life of Gerald Ford

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

July 14, 1913: Leslie Lynch King Jr. born, Omaha, Neb. After his parents divorce and his mother remarries, he is adopted by his stepfather and takes his name: Gerald R. Ford.

1935: graduates from University of Michigan, where he had been a star football player.

1941: graduates from Yale University law school.

1942-46: in U.S. Naval Reserve, including service aboard aircraft carrier in the Pacific.

Oct. 15, 1948: marries Elizabeth "Betty" Bloomer Warren. They have four children: Michael Gerald, born 1950; John Gardner, born 1952; Steven Meigs, born 1956; and Susan Elizabeth, born 1957.


Nov. 2, 1948: elected to U.S. House of Representatives after defeating incumbent in Republican primary. In Congress for nearly 25 years, including stint as House minority leader.

1963-64: serves on Warren Commission that investigated assassination of President Kennedy.

Dec. 6, 1973: confirmed as vice president after resignation of Spiro Agnew.

Aug. 9, 1974: becomes president after resignation of Richard Nixon.

Sept. 8, 1974: gives Nixon an unconditional pardon.

Oct. 17, 1974: goes before a congressional committed to discuss pardon; first sitting president to testify under oath in such circumstances.

Nov. 23-24, 1974: summit in Vladivostok, U.S.S.R., with Soviet President Leonid Brezhnev. They reach tentative agreement to limit the number of nuclear weapons.

April 30, 1975: Saigon falls, ending the Vietnam War.

May 12, 1975: The White House announces the new Cambodian government had seized an American merchant ship, the Mayaguez, in international waters. Two days later, U.S. forces raid a Cambodian island and recapture. All crew members are released safely by Cambodia, but some 40 U.S. servicemen are killed.

July 30-Aug. 2, 1975: Ford among leaders of 35 nations meeting in Helsinki, Finland, on European security. Ford, Brezhnev report progress on strategic arms issues.

Sept. 5, 1975: Charles Manson follower Lynette "Squeaky" Fromme arrested after aiming a semiautomatic pistol at Ford in Sacramento, Calif.

Sept. 22, 1975: Activist Sara Jane Moore arrested after firing a gun at Ford in San Francisco. In both attempts, Ford was unhurt.

July 4, 1976: Ford is president as nation pauses to mark its Bicentennial.

Nov. 2, 1976: defeated by Jimmy Carter in quest for a full term as president.

Jan. 20, 1977: Leaves office; Carter is inaugurated.

April 1978: Ford and his children stage "intervention" to persuade his wife, Betty, to seek treatment for abuse of medication, alcohol. The successful treatment leads to founding of Betty Ford Center.

Oct. 27, 1999: Ford and his wife presented with Congressional Gold Medals.

August 2000: Suffers small stroke while attending the Republican National Convention in Philadelphia.

May 21, 2001: Wins John F. Kennedy Profile in Courage Award for pardoning Richard Nixon.

Sept. 14, 2001: Former presidents Ford, Carter, Bush and Clinton attend prayer service at National Cathedral in Washington after the Sept. 11 attacks. The Rev. Billy Graham is among the speakers.

June 11, 2004: Joins President Bush and former Presidents Carter, Bush and Clinton at the funeral in Washington of former President Reagan.

Nov. 12, 2004: Attends groundbreaking ceremony at the University of Michigan for the new home of the Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy.

January 2006: Spends 12 days in a California hospital for treatment of pneumonia.

August 2006: Undergoes treatment at the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota, receiving a cardiac pacemaker and angioplasty.

Dec. 27, 2006: Dies at age 93, according to his wife, Betty.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 2006
From: GUEST,Dale
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 12:48 AM

Maybe not one of the best presidents, but a good and honest man. He and Jimmy Carter were the only two in my memory that I would care to sit down to a conversation with.   They would treat you with respect. That counts for a lot.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Joe Offer
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 02:22 AM

I don't think a Nixon trial would have done the country any good, so I'm glad Ford gave him a pardon. Nixon left the presidency in well-deserved shame, and that was enough.

Gerald Ford was a decent, reasonable man who cared for his country more than he cared for any particular ideology. I wish we had more politicians like him and Jimmy Carter. I think he WAS one of the better presidents of my lifetime. He did his job, qand served his country. May he rest in peace.

-Joe Offer, born in Michigan-

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Slag
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 03:05 AM

So Gerry bogeyed the 19th hole! We saw it coming.

Dick Nixon hand-picked Mr. Ford (Oddly the same name as that theater of the absurd where Lincoln [ whose secretary's name was Kennedy {which is Irish for "Ugly Head"} and whose VP was Johnson] was de-selected in his booth by a man named Booth) to which Ford said "Pardon Me?" and to which Millhouse ( that's Tomlin-ese for "Tricky Dick") replied "No, No, No! Pardon ME!"

All of which unfortunately lead poor Mr. Ford to believe he actually was a President of the people. This lead him to run for said office at the end of his appointed term. Unfortunate because the "Reagan Phenomenon" was just beginning to gain mommentum. And unfortunately most Republicans cannot see beyond the scope of expediency and short-range weather forecasting.

This not only set Reagan back four years he could ill afford but in an understandable gut-reaction against the blatant move to subvert justice by Ford's egregious pardoning of Nixon (kinda reminds me of Clinton's "pardoning binge") Jimmy ( "Mr. Peanut") Carter was swept into office. In my humble but very accurate opinion, Carter was the stupidest person to ever occupy that position but that is mass for another Super Nova.

By the time Mr. Reagan reached the Office of President he was in his prime and perhaps a little beyond. Enter the nutcase ( did anyone ever determine Hinckley's party affiliation???) who decided to win Jodie Foster's undying love by assasinating the President. No theater, no clever name juxtapostion, just a Squeaky, cowardly street shooting. Dutch was taken down a few notches by that experience.

Toward the end of his second term we all knew that he was not functioning up to his own par. I believe the early signs of Alzheimers was there but with Nancy's help he made it through. Meanwhile Gerry was trying to make par without injuring too many spectators.

In fairness I suppose that Ford was about as adequate as any other politician for the office. He was average. But he never would have been there but for Nixon's foibles and follies and felonies. Dick needed an Ace-in-the-Hole and he got one in Ford, the incidental President, the ad hoc President with but one real mission---Pardon Nixon.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Barry Finn
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 03:06 AM

I'd have to agree with Dale & Joe. He was a decent man, thogh he was somewhat less as a president. I didn't think he did much in the way of forewording our nation but at least he did nothung to help drag it down farther than it had already been "drugged". That's the best I can say, his worst was, & here I have to disagree with you Joe, he pardoned Nixion instead of tried him. I believe if he had Bush today wouldn't have been as cocky to have tried to sell us a war.
Still his heart, like Carter's was always in the right place & not in someone's pocket.

Barry

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Barry Finn
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 03:21 AM

I'll tag this on to my above post after reading Slag's.
Reagan put the nation back in the saddle again, back about 60 years with his 'trickled down economics'. We were a nation on horse back again with hin at the reigns. Carter on the other got our hostages (yes it was really him) out with out the blood letting that's been seen since. As for being an idiot, he the only pres that's been awarded the Noble Peace Prize for peace. If he'd been allowed to run the peanut factory that he was voted into he'd have been a shoe in for a 2nd term & would've done the country as great a service as he's done since then for the world. It's a shame that the dems weren't stronger in those times when the slam of spin took Ronny out of the 'B' flicks & put him on Prime Time. He was nothing but a Contra cartoon.

Barry

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Slag
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 04:50 AM

I'm debating on whether to debate with a semi-literate. Your grammar and spelling are atrocious, Mr. Finn. You misquote me and present such simplistic nonsense that I doubt you could even begin to understand what I am communicating.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: catspaw49
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 05:18 AM

Let's not forget he was another of those stellar members of the Warren Commision either. Ford was nothing if not obliging and perhaps it would have been better had he been nothing. There is no doubt in my mind that we owe the likes of Dubya to the fact that there was no trial of Richard Nixon. Ford established a terrible precedent for the Office that will continue to hold power over the quality of men who have it.

That it was a Nixon plan is very probable but it was the obliging and loyal Ford who put it in motion. Although there is much to be said for loyalty, it is a poor substitute for duty.

Spaw

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: GUEST,Number 6
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 07:53 AM

Correct spaw. Very good.

Why do you think Nixon chose him as VP.

biLL

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: katlaughing
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 09:04 AM

Slag, before you slag off on anyone about their grammar or spelling consider there are several on this forum who have various degrees of dyslexia; their written word has nothing to do with their intelligence, like Einstein. It is quite easy to read Barry Finn's postings and understand exactly what he means.

As to Ford, I agree with Barry and Spaw.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Sorcha
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 09:11 AM

Well, at least it gives 'them' something else to talk about for a while.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: kendall
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 09:23 AM

There is no doubt in my mind that if Ford hadn't pardoned Nixon, the congress would have been tied up conducting a vendetta instead of running the country.
Ford and Carter; both good men, both not so good presidents.However, neither one was as bad as Harding, Grant or Pierce.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: katlaughing
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 10:24 AM

None of them were as bad as Dubya.

the congress would have been tied up conducting a vendetta instead of running the country.
you mean like they tied themselves up over Clinton...

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: SINSULL
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 10:36 AM

Sorry. Nixon was the worst criminal (political criminal) this country has ever seen and Ford let him walk. He was a traitor. The pardon was so broad that had it been discovered (Hyperbole here) that Tricky Dicky had been murdering little boys and hiding their bodies in the Rose Garden or god forbid banging pages, he could not have been tried.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Ron Davies
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 12:25 PM

Slag--Carter "the stupidest"?   Proof please. Character assassination of the poster does not qualify.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: SINSULL
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 12:27 PM

Have to admit Ron after Carter was attacked by a vicious swimming rabbit, I had to wonder.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 12:27 PM

That's not true Sinsull. Ford gave Nixon a pardon for crimes against the United States. If Nixon were guilty of "murdering little boys" or spitting on the sidewalk, he could have been prosecuted.

At the time I felt strongly that the pardon was a huge mistake. I wanted to see Nixon get what was coming to him. In retrospect, I think Ford did the right thing. It was good to see Nixon live out his life as a tired old man with the shadow of his deeds always present.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: wysiwyg
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 12:28 PM

OK, let's find some more dead people to diss. How very thoughtful!

~S~

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 12:34 PM

If Ford craved a continued career as president all he needed to do was to let Nixon stand trial. Perhaps he did want to be president longer, he did run, after all. But in pardoning Nixon he did what he felt needed to be done at the time, for the greater good. Most of us didn't understand that, and it did cost him that second term. Unlike those who run now, Ford knew that being president shouldn't be a popularity contest.

SRS

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Ron Davies
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 12:36 PM

Also, when attacking somebody else's literacy, don't forget to look in the mirror--"juxtapostion" (sic), "assasinating" (sic), "this lead him" (sic). Otherwise you may just undercut the impression you are seeking to leave.

Glass houses....

Waiting eagerly for the proof I'm sure you have. And don't bother to cite the botched attempt to recover the hostages in Iran. Our current Mr. Bush nd his "intelligence services" can more than hold their own with this incident.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Joe Offer
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 12:44 PM

"Ford let him walk." I dunno, I would think the very worst punishment possible for Nixon was to be forced out of the White House in shame, his tail between his legs. A trial would have made him a martyr in the eyes of many. It would have given him a chance to defend his "legacy," just as Saddam has tried to do in his trial.
And it would have torn the country apart.
Better that Nixon was pardoned and forgotten.
-Joe-

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Ron Davies
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 12:53 PM

"and his intelligence services"

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: SharonA
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 05:03 PM

I graduated high school the year that Nixon resigned and was, virtually immediately, pardoned by the man he'd appointed (to do so?). One of the legacies Ford left was a generation -- mine -- disillusioned by and disgusted with the government that, for the previous 12 years, we'd been taught to respect. In the face of the Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal, it was difficult to absorb that teaching in the first place, but Ford taught me my first lesson of my college years about cronyism in the nation's capital.

Perhaps if he had waited for more than just a month before declaring that he "could not govern" unless Nixon was pardoned (it's not as if he gave the alternative much of a chance!), it would at least have looked less as if he'd been put in office only to perform that one act. I think that, if he really felt as strongly about the pardon as a "healing" measure as he said he did, he should have waited until he'd been elected to office.

By then, of course, Nixon might have been put on trial, but I disagree with the contention that that would've torn the country apart. I think that letting the nation see that even its president was not above the law would have done more to heal it. Besides, a person is supposed to be innocent until proven guilty around here, so giving Nixon a pardon before a trial seems like an unfair condemnation of the man under our justice system!

By all accounts, Gerald Ford was supposed to have been a nice guy, and probably had no malicious intent in pardoning Nixon, but in my opinion, granting that pardon was more foolish than courageous.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Deckman
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 05:29 PM

There once was a President named Ford,
Who always appeared to be bored,
When Nixon he pardoned
My thoughts they did harden,
And most of us were quite floored!

(bad doggeral) Bob(deckman)Nelson

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 06:17 PM

The oddest thing, to me, was that Nixon appointed a rather likeable (if not terribly effective) man like Ford to be VP. At the time it was widely felt that Agnew was Nixon's shield against impeachment (much as Cheney is for Bush). The most notable quote of the eara , IMO, was from LB Johnson, who commented that Ford had spent too many years playing football without a helmet.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 06:34 PM

I am in complete agreement that Ford was wrong to pardon Nixon.

Because it was politically expedient (even if you prefer to call it "healing the nation"), didn't mean it was the right thing to do.

He also lied about it.

As he lied about not planning to run for president.

As he lied about there not being a quid pro quo.

Just because he died, doesn't change the facts. Yet, people always feel they have to say nice things about corrupt politicians, even when they die.

And sometimes, even before they die, as was the case with the Redeemed Nixon (tm).

Nixon should have been brought to trial. His offenses were the most egregious that ever came to public light about a sitting president. We owed it to ourselves and our constitution to see it through to the end.

Not do the politically expedient thing, which was to pardon him. That was no act of courage, regardless of his Kennedy courage award*.

*Courage like cheating on one's wife, leaving a woman to drown in the car, getting your nephew off the hook for rape, having your marriage annulled after having children, just so you can remarry in the Catholic church, etc etc in the Kennedy "courage" tradition?

Not that I'm cynical about the Kennedys, or anything.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Bobert
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 06:45 PM

Okay, he was better than most of his crooked Repuib pals, like both Bushes, Reagan and Nixon but he was still a crook... I didn't buy his BS explanation for pardoning Nixon at the time and to this very day don't buy into any of the revisionist's attempt to sanitize this repugnant chapter on American history... He was wrong then and no matter hjow much ink the revisionists spill, he'll always be wrong... If Bill Clinton wasbn't above the law over a danged blow job than Nixon shouldn't have been for all the ****very illegal**** crap he did... Cant' have it both ways...

Bobert

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Greg B
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 06:55 PM

Even some of Gerald Ford's sharpest critics at the time now concede
that the pardon of Nixon was an act of tough-minded courage that
allowed the nation to move on. One of them, on NPR today, said that
after watching the OJ Simpson and Monica Lewinski media circuses,
Ford's foresight was impressive.

Can you imagine if it hadn't been Ford--- if Spiro Agnew had
succeeded Nixon?

They blame him for losing the election due to the pardon, but as
Bob Dole pointed out, the economy was in a mess during the '76
election in which he ran with Ford, as well.

And let's face it, Watergate was still in the forefront of people's
minds.

What I find interesting is the lavish praise being heaped upon Ford.

I can't help wondering if the disillusionment with Dubya doesn't
make people sentimental for a nice guy, a clear thinker, and a
proponent of a more genteel form politics in which he could be
close friends with, for example, Tip O'Neil and get work done
in Congress.

It seems to me that people who blame Ford for their disillusionment
seem to forget who started the situation--- Nixon and his CREEP
henchmen. It also seems to me that, 30-odd years later, those who
are unable to revise their disillusionment aren't a bit 'stuck' and
perhaps are looking for an excuse to remain so--- after all, if you
remain firmly opposed to everything, then you can avoid claiming
any real responsibility.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 06:58 PM

Lest we forget, Ford was the man who gave Rumsfeld, Cheney et al the chickenhawk neocons their first big government gig--just as Saigon was falling.

Which is why the Dubya Chickenhawk Brigade insisted upon invading Iraq: they wanted to prove how right they were about Vietnam.

And we now we know.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 06:59 PM

Gee Greg B, thanks for parroting what they just said on NBC and CNN...

Just because they are saying nice things about the Nixon pardon on TV doesn't make the pundits right, now does it? It just makes it the propaganda line of the day.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 07:02 PM

And Greg, you are also forgetting someone else who "started it"--JFK & LBJ are the ones who got us into Vietnam.

What is just bizarre about the reporting about Ford right now is how little they are mentioning Vietnam.

Ford is the US president who presided over the fall of Saigon, and the economic crisis that occurred because of the war.

Guess they don't want us to know what's really coming...as if we don't already know.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Ron Davies
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 07:07 PM

"Nixon was the worst criminal"---if you don't think that using a despicable propaganda campaign to START an unneccessary and unjustified war--and another such campaign to be elected in 2004-- tops Nixon-- including as political criminal, you need to do a little more reading. Start with obituaries of "Coalition" soldiers--and Iraqis.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 07:19 PM

There is a very long list of murderers who have inhabited the White House though, Ron. Not just Dubya.

Nixon rises above them all--he both unnecessarily oversaw the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of people in SE Asia, AND committed unprecedented political crimes to insure he kept his hold on power.

Of the two presidents, Dubya and Nixon, I think it's really easy to tell which one history will view with the most contempt: the one that paved the road to hell, so Dubya could so easily lead us all down it and into Iraq, the gutting of the Bill of Rights, etc.

Had Ford not pardoned Nixon, and had Nixon stood trial, I sincerely doubt the neocons would be getting away with what they are getting away with today.

And as to the Warren Commission, Ford is known to have doctored the report to "prove" the single shooter theory he preferred (source: 1997 Assassination Records Review Board report).

Ford's death is conjuring many a ghost, and many a ghostly echo of the current administration's footsteps in the halls of power.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 07:40 PM

WARNING: folk-related content!

And I'll bet no one on PBS or the History Channel mentions that Squeaky Fromme's first claim to fame was as a folk dancer who even performed at the White House. Wry grin.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: michaelr
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 08:10 PM

Wizzy -- being dead is no protection from having truth told about you, nor should it be. De mortuis nil nisi bene is a load of crap.

Cheers,
Michael

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Peace
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 08:19 PM

I recall Gerald Ford in an address to the nation. He said, "Remember, I'm a Ford, not a Lincoln." Would we had some wit in the White House now.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 08:22 PM

Aye.

I'm left with this strange longing to know: what would Hunter do?

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Cruiser
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 10:13 PM

Slag stated:

"I'm debating on whether to debate with a semi-literate"

Slag-Off Slag.

This is an Internet forum not an English Class. You owe Mr. Finn an apology.

I understand you are a welder. I was an expert welder and well educated. I doubt you were both and I still do not criticize your writing, although I easily could, as others already have.

Be fair.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Greg B
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 10:35 PM

Though I hesitate to debate with people who style themselves
only as 'Guest,' I'd point out that some of the better thinkers
around turn up on CNN and NPR...though maybe not Fox.

Another interpretation regarding Cheney and Rumsfeld is that they
observed Gerald Ford, and how his decent and genial style failed
to sustain him in the halls of power, and resolved to adopt a more
polarizing and confrontational style.

And if you look carefully, you'd see that Ford did precisely what
the left are calling on Dubya to do...disengage from a futile effort
to determine the outcome of a guerilla-powered civil war.

You can't at once castigate Ford for the 'fall of Saigon' and
then turn around and advise Dubya to cut the losses in Baghdad.

Unless, of course, you're the type who has established that
everything that 'they' do is wrong, and 'you' know the better way,
only that they won't elect you even if you do come out of the pub
three hours earlier than usual.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Cruiser
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 10:39 PM

Mr. Ford was a political coward for giving Nixon a pardon. That action was a simple case of he gave me a job so I will help him now. Ford was that simplistic. He was a bad president and it is nonsense that he brought the county back together and healed the Nation's wounds.

BTW, I voted for Nixon.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Slag
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 10:47 PM

Yes R%on, we all make speed errors and some misspelllings in our posts but when you see it occurring with great regularity and coupled with misquotes and mischaracterizations and rank dismissal of cogent arguemnt then in MY considered opinion there is either stupidity or outright dishonesty afoot. Your bias preceeds you and makes your response unnecessary. I'll just assume you disagree and we can let it go at that.

Jimmy's stupidity? How about his shock! Shock! that Communist Russia was NOT honest? How about his non-response to an act of war against our embassy in Tehran. Oh wait! There WAS that "Debacale in the Desert"! I don't know who masterminded that strategic wonder but it ultimately had Carter's stamp of approval on it. Wasn't Carter an ex-military man? Something about the Navy and a submarine? Maybe he should have sent a sub in, instead of a chopper.

Speaking of egregious pardons, his first day in office he pardoned all the sniveling little draft dodgers, cowards and traitors who left the country or went into hiding rather than do their duty or take an upfront, in-your-face stand against the Viet Nam Police Action!

And he was awarded the No-balls Peace prize? For making Peace???? Really? We are still benefitting from that one. That's the only Nobel prize that is entirely subjective and without merit (in Carter's case, that is).

He nearly single-handedly destroyed this nation's economy along with many of the world's economies with his insane fiscal policies and double digit inflation. There are very few of either party who would disagree with that statement. It's a fact.

Yes and his personal prowess and bravery were fittingly demonstrated when he shrieked out and struck out with a wooden oar at the poor little jackrabbit which was trying to clamber aboard his dinghy to keep from drowning. How did that end? Did he have the Secret Service agents shoot the rabbit? I forget. It was icing on the cake.

Those are just some of the "high"lights of this man's tenure in office.

More on Trick Dick and Ford later!

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Barry Finn
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 11:36 PM

There you go again Slag, shagging my name because of my shortcomings rather than taking on the issue. So whose dishonesty is afoot here?
It seems that the distaste in your mouth is of your own doing & yes we can let it go at that.

Jimmy's pardons were a perfectly well timed blessing to a nation that was split & did a lot to heal.

As for that "Debacale in the Desert". I remember it well. My sister & my future Brother-in-law were both in that desert at the time & what had the potential for being a blood bath as the war against our embassy in Tehran would have been under todays logic came to be a lesser note in history than had we invaded. If only Jimmy were in office 6 yrs ago.

"No balls" peace prize. Really. Let's see another state's man in this nation take on the tasks & risks he's taken & see how many can walk in his shoes. We haven't got one person that that we can put in office that holds a candle to him!

And as for "all the sniveling little draft dodgers, cowards and traitors who left the country or went into hiding rather than do their duty". You must be joking! Where were you? Where are you coming from?
In this day & age that's what you think & care about? That's how you still feel? No wonder there's an awful taste left in your mouth. Please tell me again about my short comings. Wow!

Good-bye Slag

Barry

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Slag
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 01:49 AM

Mr. Nixon was a great disappointment to me. He, in essence, turned his back on the people of Taiwan when he made his overture to Mao Tse Tung and Red China. That and he was far less aggressive in Viet Nam than he lead the voters to believe he would be. From the day he made his "You won't have Dick Nixon to kick around anymore!" statement, he was dead meat as far as the US press was concerned. The press hunted, stalked, baited and relentlessly harrassed the man. No wonder he was paranoid. And he was paranoid!

That group of genius operatives known as the "Plumbers" were a reflection of his paranoia. By all accounts Nixon was not a stupid man and I would like to believe that about him but the Plumbers were still using lead to make their joints water tight. Nixon's great sin was trying to be loyal to this loyal but misdirected crew and he ended up obstructing justice. Exit Mr. Nixon and good riddance. Exit the Plumbers and good riddance.

I took a wait-and-see attitude toward China. I still have a wait-and-see attitude toward China. If our infussion of capital and American Debt into their economy can corrupt and hopelessly ensnare their version of Communism, so be it. It beats ICBMs at 30,000 paces. What about Taiwan? Wait and see. It may all work out yet.

Well, did affable, Good Ol' Gerry heal or hurt our nation? Like I said before. He was OK. He was average. A relatively smart fellow, a jock, a nice guy. I'd rather have him for me than against me. Do we want average? Is Mc Donald's successful? Is that what you want? Hugh Grant and Julie Roberts? Yeah, why not?

Let's just ignore the termites gnawing away at the foundation of our nation. Whatever happens, will happen. Life is so much easier when you have no firm convictions, no real "right" or "wrong". Just what the majority believes. Hey, that's what democracy is, isn't it? Just give me a lobotomy and sink me into the middle of that great Bell-Shaped Curve!

Does anyone remember that issue of National Lampoon Magazine that had the centerfold of Gerald Ford with the ice cream cone stuck into the middle of his forehead and that great big old grin on his face? Or is that before your time?

Yeah, I really miss those days. Good ol' Jimmy swattin' them rabbits, Gerry trippin' down the gantries, the smell of tear gass.

What was I doing when all those brave kids were headed off to Canada?
I was in Tech School at Shepard AFB. My lottery number came up #8. Too late! I was already in and serving my country.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: catspaw49
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 06:52 AM

And if your number had been 350? Yeah, I'm sure you'd have gone along and enlisted huh? Doing your duty and all that...............Wouldn't want to risk being labeled a sniveling coward and traitor..............Yeah, sure.....You'd have been there anyway. It's just kinda' odd you should mention your lottery number.

Spaw

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Greg F.
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 10:26 AM

Ford Had Problems With Bush Iraq policy
28 Dec 06

WASHINGTON - Former President Gerald R. Ford questioned the Bush administration's rationale for the U.S. invasion and war in Iraq in interviews he granted on condition they not be released until after his death.

In his embargoed July 2004 interview with The Washington Post, Ford said the Iraq war was not justified, the Post reported Wednesday night.

Ford "very strongly" disagreed with the current president's justifications for invading Iraq and said he would have pushed alternatives, such as sanctions, much more vigorously. "I don't think I would have gone to war."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061228/ap_on_re_us/ford_iraq.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Rapparee
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 10:39 AM

The editorial cartoon in today's "USA Today" was quite telling:

George Bush on the left, saying "I am a uniter, not a divider" and under it the words "Talks the Talk" while on the right is Gerald Ford, quietly holding a taped-together map and the worlds "Walks the Walk" under it.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: beardedbruce
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 10:58 AM

Greg F.


"I don't think, if I had been president -- on the basis of the facts as I saw them publicly -- I don't think I would have ordered the Iraqi war," Ford said in a part of the interview broadcast on CNN's "Larry King Live" Wednesday.

"I would have maximized our efforts through sanctions, through restrictions, whatever, to find another answer," the former president said. "

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: beardedbruce
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 11:05 AM

and

""He made it very clear that he did not agree with the reasons President Bush laid out for the war, namely the belief that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq or that there was some obligation that the United States or the president had to expand democracy."

The Washington Post published other excerpts from the interview.

"(Defense Secretary Donald) Rumsfeld and (Vice President Dick) Cheney and the president made a big mistake in justifying going into the war in Iraq," Ford said.

"They put the emphasis on weapons of mass destruction. And now, I've never publicly said I thought they made a mistake, but I felt very strongly it was an error in how they should justify what they were going to do."

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 11:15 AM

Yes, we should have made up a different reason why were were going on a war of choice against another nation. What a state of affairs.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Rapparee
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 04:55 PM

Yeah. Shoulda followed the Constitution and asked for a declaration of war. But then, the Constitution is so, so, passe -- just a hinderance, you know.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 06:25 PM

"Find anothr answer." Hmm...What was the question?

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 09:10 PM

Regarding Bearded Bruce's response to Greg F. at 10:58am, the operative word int that sentence is 'publicly', that is, the information available to the population at large. It is an implied admission that he did not have all the information that Pres. Bush et. al. had. Therefore, one may also infer that he might have gone to war had he had that information, although he would not used WMD as justification for it.
See, too, BBs posting at 11:05am.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 09:28 PM

Dammit, without the WMD threat there was no remotely conceivable reason to invade Iraq.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Seamus Kennedy
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 10:54 PM

Slag - it's 'led', not 'lead' that's the past tense of 'lead'.
This recurring error on your part is most annoying.

Seamus

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Ron Davies
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 11:01 PM

No, John, one may not infer that Ford would have gone to war in Iraq, unless one is desperate to somehow justify Bush's tragically stupid move. It is unclear what Ford would have done--though it's likely he would not have rejected out of hand any evidence that did not support the decision to invade--nor made it clear that he did not want to see any evidence that contradicted that proposed course of action. In contrast to our present Chickenhawk in Chief, he had an idea of what war was really like, and would likely have weighed all data before reaching a decision.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Slag
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 11:05 PM

Yeah, Seamus. Thanks! You are right. And I also have a nasty habit of hitting the "q" at the same time I hit the "a" but I almost always catch those. So sorry to annoy you with technical concerns instead of just content. Led on, Mc Duff !!

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Peace
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 11:17 PM

Guys, the day this becomes a spelling site is the day it will have three posters left, and them three what ain't left will kick each other out.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: GUEST
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 11:22 PM

Ain't that the troof.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Sorcha
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 11:27 PM

OK, he's dead. Deal with it. Is he buried yet? Getting tired of the hoopla. Typical media feeding frenzy til the next thing comes along.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Ron Davies
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 11:36 PM

What, Seamus, you're criticizing Slag?--who wants us to know he's too good to debate anybody not up to his standards?

Slag--

"We all make speed errors and some misspellings in our posts". Fine, but some of us make an attempt to correct them-- sometimes even before we post. Imagine that. You might want to try it sometime.

However, if you want to come across as a semiliterate, that's your choice.

But if you do, please be so good as to refrain from criticizing others on the basis of literacy.

Thanks so much.




"Debacale (sic) in the desert". You don't read very carefully, do you? (among your other sterling qualities). Amazingly common among Bushites. I've already pointed out that Bush and his "intelligence" agencies can more than hold their own with that incident.

Re: Russia---how about Bush's statement's on looking into Putin's soul?

Bush: 16 June 2001: " I looked the man in the eye. I found him very straightforward and trustworthy." (This about a former high-ranking KGB agent). "I was able to get a sense of his soul" Yeah, right.

In contrast to your, to put it bluntly, stupid slander, mine is a direct quote-- from a press conference as I recall.

In the naivete sweepstakes, Bush wins hands down.



Carter "nearly destroyed the US with his insane fiscal policies".
(congratulations on spelling "fiscal" right).

Wrong again. Have you ever heard of a little group called OPEC?--who may just possibly have played a role in the inflation of the 70's.


Also, how many unnecessary wars of choice did Carter start? Our current "leader" wins that contest too.

Well, let's see. So far, you have indicated that you are a poster who attacks other, more contributing members of Mudcat, attacking on an extraneous issue--on which you yourself are sorely lacking. And that you specialize in unsubstantiated attacks. It seems you have a virtually perfect record of falsehoods and misquotes. You're not one of our delightful "politics-only" posters, are you? What kind of music do you like?

As has been noted, you owe an apology to Barry--not that we expect you to do it---your kind rarely does. (You're welcome to prove me wrong).

Try again. And please do some reading before you do--hoping that's not an unreasonable request. You do read, don't you?

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Ron Davies
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 11:42 PM

"statements"

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Peace
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 12:01 AM

This place can get downright testy at times.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Peace
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 12:04 AM

I was hoping that would be interpreted as understatement.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: number 6
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 12:04 AM

At this point in the thread I agree with Sorcha's post ....

"OK, he's dead. Deal with it. Is he buried yet? Getting tired of the hoopla. Typical media feeding frenzy til the next thing comes along."

Amen

BiLL

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Slag
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 01:25 AM

I don't tink Ron liks me any mor. Im so sorry Ron.
Let me c if i can cover sum of the isues u hav brot up.

Second: You seem to be fighting Barry Finn's battles. Who put the bee in YER bonnet?.

The issue with Mr. Finn was his MISCHARACTERIZATION and incorrect quotations of statements I made. Pretty much what you are doing in your above post. It's easy to win arguments when you substitute your own words for those of your opponent and then proceed to refute them. At that point, the lack of grammar, et cetera, does begin to move to the foreground. Maybe we should have our little debates scored by a highschool English teacher. Then we would know who really won. Oops, sentence fragment.

You know, some sites even have "Spell Check"!

I'm certainly glad I got that second "s" out of "desert" (De-bakkle of...).

Your misuse of the parenthetical after, "You don't read very carefully, do you? (among your other sterling qualities). " obviously negates any point you were trying to make.

"Bushites don't read very carefully." A nice assertion Ron, yet you offer no proof. YOU wouldn't be biased, now would you? If you are going to criticize someone (or paint an entire group with a single stroke), don't do the same thing you are criticizing. Bad form.

In regards to Bush's intelleigence agencies, they were pretty much on the same page as the majority of other intelligence gathering agencies around the world concerning WMDs. Saddam's actions certainly did nothing to allay the perception that he had them. In fact there is evidence that his multiple WMD programs were on-going as late as the beginning of the war. And yes, it's debatable, but that means there is credible evidence on either side of the question.

re: "Re: Russia---how about Bush's statement's on looking into Putin's soul?" I never responded to that statement one way or another! Who are you debating here? Strawmen abound! And for the record, that was probably one of the dumber things Bush has said. It's just about on par with Carter's revelation of the duplicity of the Kremlin.

Recheck you facts on Carter's fiscal policies. OPEC's manipulations were only one factor in the American economy and it wasn't even on par with the phoney "Oil Shortage" of the early 70's. Historically Carter is seen to have been very weak in the economic arena.

With regards to Carter's inaction and failure to confront the Embassy situation, this did nothing but embolden the Anti-American sentiment in this part of the world and it has led (Pb) directly to the tensions we face there today. I won't harp on this one though, because it can only be rank speculation as to what would have or could have happened if other courses of action had been pursued. What is, is (depending on how you define the word "is", that is).

You need to calm down a bit there, Ron. All I'm saying is that I was not very favorably impressed with Mr. Ford's Presidency. Sorry! He was selected for what he would do for Nixon and that subverted justice, to my way of thinking. So he swept a little dirt under the rug. Well, if you get enough dirt under there it starts stinking. Nixon would have been a good place to have begun some seriously needed house cleaning. Ahh, what's the use. You Nixonites are all the same.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: beardedbruce
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 10:33 AM

" It is an implied admission that he did not have all the information that Pres. Bush et. al. had. Therefore, one may also infer that he might have gone to war had he had that information,"

:No, John, one may not infer that Ford would have gone to war in Iraq, "
"In contrast to our present Chickenhawk in Chief, he had an idea of what war was really like, and would likely have weighed all data before reaching a decision. "


Ron, are YOU stating the Ford would have IGNORED any information that might have led him to support the war, and ONLY decided in a way which YOU approve of?


I guess Ron has a problem with the word "MIGHT", since he ignores it so readily.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 12:06 PM

I guess that one of Bush's greatest achievements is making former mediocrities look good in retrospect.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 03:52 PM

The hype over Ford's "private views" (I guess Woodward's shopping for another Pulitzer) over Iraq is a non-starter. Ford showed the same cowardice by not speaking out honestly--and publicly--that he did when he pardoned Nixon in order to put distance between Nixon and the Republican Party.

I've been watching all the cable news (including C-SPAM) this week, and there are also "intimations" of the quid pro quo.

Future historians will be able to prove the quid pro quo, of that I have no doubt.

They will also show that Ford's decision to intervene and short -circuit the constitutional process regarding impeachment has done more damage to the constitution than was orginally thought. Ford's divine intervention in the impeachment process, which as I said was all about political expediency and NOT this revisionist bullshit "healing the nation" crap we keep hearing repeated every news cycle right now (along with the idiotic Betty and me love story), paved the way for the subverting of the constitution we have seen since 9/11 by both parties, ie the undermining of the constitution with the Patriot Act, the executive branch putting themselves above the law with the support of the courts (which has been relentless since the Nixon administration), the Supreme Court intervention to stop the Florida vote count in 2000, the abrogation of Congress' oversight responsibilities and usurpation of it's constitutional powers by both it's own members and the executive branch, blah blah blah.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 03:56 PM

PS He was a horseshit president.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: GUEST,Cruz
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 04:29 PM

29 Dec 06 - 03:52 PM

I agree and I stated what you wrote much more parsimoniously.

Too bad you don't become a member like me (who did not sign in, who is Internet lazy, who is....)

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: GUEST,3:52 PM
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 04:36 PM

"I agree and I stated what you wrote much more parsimoniously."

Apparently you consider restrained writing to be of superior value to my shoot from lip, can't be arsed to edit sort of style.

Bully for you.

You also admitted voting for Nixon.

And the rest of us are made sorry your judgment doesn't equal your writing ability.

"Too bad you don't become a member..."

Yawn.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: GUEST,Cruz
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 04:43 PM

Geewillikers!

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Slag
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 05:09 PM

GUEST @ 3:52 does make a point I agree with, (oops! Sorry, Ron.) ... a point with which I agree. Both party's idealogues continue to try to make political hay of the situation(s) and prop up their positions. It's "Blah, blah, blah."

I know, we all go there from time to time but at some point it DOES just become noise. Let's plant Mr. Ford and move on (not " dot org").

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Greg B
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 06:02 PM

Guest you blithering idiot---

>The hype over Ford's "private views" (I guess Woodward's shopping for >another Pulitzer) over Iraq is a non-starter. Ford showed the same >cowardice by not speaking out honestly--and publicly--

Clearly you know nothing, NOTHING about the standards of conduct
of former US Presidents. They make it a rule to keep their opinions
to themselves regarding the sitting president once they've left
office.

For good reasons: First, job is difficult enough without having a
former president, or two, or six publically second-guessing
what the current pres is doing. Second, the ex-President is
privy to certain information upon which he'd base his sideline
opinions, information which he is not free to share, perhaps
even in the form of an 'informed opinion' and certainly not
to publically justify that opinion.

Former Presidents take on the proper role of 'elder statesmen'
and can be extraordinarily effective in those roles.

They are, like good grandfathers are to parents, careful not to
undermine the ability of the sitting President to do his job, but
available for trusted counsel and consultation when asked.

They do these thing because they, themselves were accorded the
same respect when they were in the office.

>that he did >when he pardoned Nixon in order to put distance between >Nixon and the
>Republican Party.

Gerry Ford was not stupid. He knew there'd be fall-out and if
he wanted the Party distanced from Nixon, he'd have let the trial
play out and let the Party position Nixon as a 'bad apple.' Ford
was not particularly calculating--- if he said he did it to allow
the country and the administration to move on, that has to be
accepted at face-value.

>I've been watching all the cable news (including C-SPAM) this week, >and there are also "intimations" of the quid pro quo.

Where did you see this? The NPR report indicated that all Alexander
Haig was able to go back to Nixon with was that a pardon was not
out of the question, before the resignation. Not that it was
guaranteed.

>Future historians will be able to prove the quid pro quo, of that I >have no doubt.

Well, if you have no doubt...

>They will also show that Ford's decision to intervene and short >-circuit the constitutional process regarding impeachment has done >more damage to the constitution than was orginally thought.

Huh? Do you know the Constitution? Once Nixon resigned he was
no longer president and COULD NOT BE IMPEACHED. It was NIXON
who 'short-circuited' the process, not Ford. If he'd not been
pardoned, Nixon likely would have been prosecuted for 'conspiracy,'
which is notoriously hard to prove. And it likely would have been,
at best 'conspiracy after the fact.'

>Ford's divine intervention in the impeachment process, which as I
>said was all about political expediency and NOT this revisionist >bullshit "healing the nation"

I don't think many people are saying 'healing.' It clearly didn't
heal the nation's relationship with the Republican Party. After
all do you really think Jimmy Carter could have won an election
without Watergate? What it DID do was spare us a continuation of
the Watergate hearings ad nauseum.

>crap we keep hearing repeated every news cycle right now (along with
>the idiotic Betty and me love story),

What is your issue with the guy? So he loved his wife and stuck
with her through thick and thin. Last time I checked, that was a
good thing.

>paved the way for the subverting of the constitution we have seen
>since 9/11 by both parties, ie the undermining of the constitution >with the Patriot Act, the executive branch putting themselves above >the law with the support of the courts (which has been relentless >since the Nixon administration), the Supreme Court intervention to >stop the Florida vote count in 2000, the abrogation of Congress' >oversight responsibilities and usurpation of it's constitutional >powers by both it's own members and the executive branch, blah blah >blah.

How about bird flu. Did Gerry Ford invent that too?

I fail to see the linkage. Gerald Ford exercised his CONSTITUTIONAL
powers to give a presidential pardon which, as it turned out, was
in the interest of the nation, to a president who had disposed of
himself rather neatly.

The notion of 'executive privilege' was really cemented by the
FDR administration, in their intervention in the economy during
the Depression.

How the silly Patriot Act relates to the Ford administration
eludes me--- especially as that administration seemed to be the
one to actually REDUCE US involvement in an undeclared war. As
I recall Ford didn't fight Congress on their reluctance to
continue to finance intervention in Viet Nam.

If you're talking about 'executive privilege' note that Nixon---
like Thomas Jefferson before him--- didn't prevail with that
argument.

In short, I find your arguments neither lucid nor cogent.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: TRUBRIT
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 06:54 PM

'I'm debating on whether to debate with a semi literate - your grammar and spelling are atrocious.....' - I think that is what you said....'your grammar and spelling are atrocious.....'

You know, I doubt that Mr. Finn needs me to fight his battles for him but having talked to him, I find him to be a charming, careful, thoughtful, very intelligent man....one's ability to spell in this insane world we live in seems to me to be very unimportant. I have an 18 year old son who tests 'in the top 95th percentile' of everything .,............whatever the hell that means ---- and he can't spell to save his life. But he can THINK even though severely dyslexic.......!

I haven't run this through for spell check but I have to point out that I am a summa cum laude graduate in English in an American school (earned in 3 years, not 4) and I couldn't personally give a shit if anyone can spell as long as a) they can think and b) they have human compassion.

Whatever happened to decent politeness and humanity. Go Barry!!!!!

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 07:10 PM

Those of you who disagree with my discussion are looking through your blinders of anti-war or anti-bush sentiment. If you look at the syntax of Pres. Ford's statement with an open mind either inference is valid.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: cobra
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 07:16 PM

"Slag - it's 'led', not 'lead' that's the past tense of 'lead'.
This recurring error on your part is most annoying."

Err, Seamus, never knew you were from the Malone Road. Why don't you call Sleg by his prapper name?

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 07:42 PM

The standards of conduct of former presidents?

Yup, know all about it. However, I believe such "gentlemen's agreements" are very bad for democracy.

As to the already resigned/can't be impeached argument...how original, that one.

My answer: the quid pro quo.

The quid pro quo means Nixon was willing to resign immediately (handily avoiding the impeachment), in exchange for Ford giving him a complete pardon so he could also avoid criminal prosecution.

Dandy little deal, that one.

Without Ford's pardon, the criminal proceedings would have begun, as they should have.

And before you go lecturing people in public about the Nixon pardon and the constitutional process regarding impeachment, you might consider Article I, Section 3, clause 7.

Don't know what that is?

Look it up, jackass.

"What it DID do was spare us a continuation of
the Watergate hearings ad nauseum."

Oh please, you are an adult citizen of the United States, aren't you? Were you so fucking traumitized you couldn't stand to see due process run it's course, and all branches of government live up to their constitutional mandates?

Poor fucking baby. People like you, who worship at the foot of your tv sets and swallow the propaganda hook, line and sinker make me sick. It is people like you that are standing by, watching our government go down the toilet.

Of course, your tv propaganda induced amnesia never heard phrases like "historic precedent" and "Imperial Presidency"?

What a whiny, ill informed idiot you are.

I bet you loved the movie "Love Story" too.

Kiss, kiss.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Ron Davies
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 08:02 PM

Hey people, when will you realize that it's not worth talking at all to some character who refuses to give a name or a handle? Of course his paranoid world-view is faintly amusing--(why do I think it has to be a male?) Just let him enjoy his soliloquy--and the rest of us will carry on discussing the topic.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 08:14 PM

And BTW Greggie boy, there is a historic precedent for impeachment after resignation.

In 1876, Secretary of War General William Belknap, accused of accepting a bribe, resigned just hours before the House was scheduled to consider articles of impeachment. The House went ahead and unanimously impeached him, and by a vote of 37-29 the Senate rejected the argument that Belknap's resignation should abort the case. The Senate proceeded with the trial, but Belknap was narrowly acquitted. A number of the Senators who voted for acquittal explained that they felt they lacked jurisdiction because of his resignation. (Incidentally, Belknap is the only cabinet member ever impeached.)

By contrast, when in 1926 Illinois District Judge George English, impeached for various acts of wrongdoing, resigned from office six days before the scheduled commencement of his trial in the Senate, the matter was discontinued. The same was true, of course, when Richard Nixon resigned just prior to adoption of articles of impeachment by the House.

The Belknap precedent aside, is there any logic to impeaching and trying an official who is no longer in office? One answer might be the value of establishing a precedent that certain misconduct is (or is not) impeachable. But there's a more direct, practical reason why Congress might choose to proceed even after a resignation. As we have seen, one potential punishment of impeachment is disqualification from future office. Suppose an embattled president resigned, with an eye towards running in the next election. To preclude this possibility, Congress might choose to go ahead and impeach, try, and convict the President, and disqualify him from holding future office.

Evidence suggests that the Framers of the Constitution concurred in this conclusion -- they did not regard resignation as automatically precluding impeachment or conviction.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: GUEST,from Area 51
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 11:11 PM

OK fellow denizens of the Milky Way Galaxy (another Human redundancy). Please help me to understand content of this rope. And please Ron Davies, forgive me for not being as well versed in the proper use of the English grammar and spelling as you are well versed.

Am I to understand that former President Ford, Gerald ( 1 ea.) came to the idea on his own accord to pardon the former lying, cheating, dirty speech talking President of the United States, Richard Milhous Nixon? He came to this idea in order to heal your injured nation? This pardon prevented facts about the crime or crimes that the Nixon (2 ea.) person may have been involved in from coming to public knowledge?

How does this "heal" a nation? How does the element plumbum become lead and not led? Where is Barry going? And is Mr. TRUBRIT now the sole arbiter of all that is true and correct in this rope?

You people of Earth are most incomprehensible to we extra-terrestrial emagrie's. I do tend to agree with "Blah, blah, blah" as this does make sense in my native language.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Seamus Kennedy
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 12:43 AM

Cobra, if I'm not mistaken, it's Malewne Rewd.
But since it's all Taig now anyway, it's a moot (mute?, mewt?) point.
Oops! One nearly got away.
It's Nar, not now.

Seamus

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Ron Davies
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 09:17 AM

Slag--


1) I'm not fighting Barry's battles for him. He can and does do that nicely, thank you. However, if you are careless, have the decency to not criticize somebody else for the same failing.

You are careless.


2)   Very interesting to know your chosen conspiracy theory. It seems every crackpot on Mudcat has at least one--and you've fallen right into place. Perhaps you can enlighten us as to why there was no oil shortage in the 70's.

3) The economic history of the 70's in the US is actually quite interesting, I find.

Here's a thesis--it may be considered "thinking outside the box"--no doubt one of your favorite cliches. Since it's not a conspiracy theory, you may not be able to follow it. If so, my condolences.

A good argument can be made , in referring to economic developments, that the greatest power of the US president is to appoint the chairman of the Fed.

In the 70's, this is what happened.

Nixon appointed Burns, who believed in easy money. Since Nixon was trying to have guns and butter (hope that's not too technical for you), and the oil crisis--which was real, by the way--was in full swing, interest rates and inflation soared. In 1979 Carter replaced William Miller, his first choice to head the Fed, with Paul Volcker, who believed in tightening the money supply to tame inflation. This in turn worsened unemployment--so in 1979-80, Carter had the worst of all worlds--since the oil crisis was still on. But Volcker's medicine was the right one for inflation--and if Carter had been re-elected, he would have reaped the benefits. Instead Reagan did--through no merit of his own. In fact inflation peaked in 1981 at 13.5%. And Carter was vilified (look it up) by giant thinkers like your good self--who, unsurprisingly, don't seem to grasp the power of the Fed, nor the lag time in policy changes.

Also, re: foreign policy--if you don't think the Camp David accords, brokered by Carter--which have resulted in a lasting peace between Egypt and Israel, were worthwhile, you need to adjust your priorities. Perhaps you'd prefer continued war between these 2. If so, you are in a minority. Thinking people all disagreee with you.

One more thing: as I recall, you claim to be a conservative--that is, one who believes in letting market forces work. Carter deregulated the airline industry--and oil and gas produced in the US. This should be fine with you, right. Or are you just a conservative when it doesn't hurt you?

Hoping you can write a coherent sentence this time, I eagerly await your reply.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Ron Davies
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 09:24 AM

"disagree"

"This should be fine with you, right?"

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 02:43 PM

Lordy, what have we come to that we find it necessary to correct our own spelling and punctuation in a separate posting! Has argumentation gotten so petty?

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Ron Davies
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 02:55 PM

If it's all the same to you, John, I like to avoid charges of hypocrisy--since I actually prefer easily decipherable posts--and even grammatically correct ones--- I try to correct my own mistakes--soon.

You're of course free to do whatever you want--but somehow I think you knew that.

By the way, do you disagree at all with my depiction of US economic developments in the 70's---or do you by some chance just like to snipe at trivia?

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Ron Davies
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 03:01 PM

"hypocrisy" should have been the end of the sentence. So sorry if this bothers you, John.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 03:58 PM

Ron, I have noticed that some of the posters--not just at this topic--attack other posters as being, in essence, illiterate, and therefore not credible in their opinions because of making simple spelling errors and such in haste. When I read your post, I missed your minor errors, and actually felt sad that you felt the need to correct it defensively. Now I have re-read that posting, and understand better.

As to the content, you make some interesting points that I haven't previously thought about, and on first blush probably disagree with most. I definitely disagree about high inflation being Pres. Reagan's fault; economies don't turn on a dime--if you will excuse the pun.

Pres. Carter did a well in brokering the Israel/Egypt treaty. In fact, it is probably the only good thing he did, imnsoh opinion, during his term in office.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Slag
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 04:05 PM

John, Ron and all. Yes. regardless of anything else, one must admit that Carter was sincere in his efforts and that he did try. He (and this may be his worst fault, as a politician!) is an honest man.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Ron Davies
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 04:15 PM

John--you still don't read very carefully.

Exactly where did I say high inflation was Reagan's fault?    What I said was that Reagan got credit for Volcker's successful campaign against inflation--and that Carter, who put Volcker in to do the job, got no credit--and in fact is still attacked by many people who have no idea about economics and the role of the Fed. I hope that does not include you.

I did point out that inflation peaked in 1981--which illustrates the point I made about lag times.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Ron Davies
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 04:22 PM

Slag--still eagerly waiting for you to tell us why there was no oil shortage in the 70's.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: GUEST
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 04:23 PM

Ron - still waiting for you to find the preview button.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Ron Davies
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 04:27 PM

Guest--still waiting for you to have the guts to stand behind anything you say--but hell hasn't quite frozen solid enough yet, I'm afraid.

Enjoy your soliloquy.

Real life is calling me. Bye.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: GUEST
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 04:44 PM

Bye. 100.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Slag
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 06:18 PM

Ron, is there that much less oil in the world today! Quite a bit but no one is crying "Shortage!" just now. The so-called shortage of '71-'72 was a matter of collusion and price-fixing. What is it that you think OPEC does? And then, God bless the oil co.s,; they start a TV campaign telling the American consumer that the wordl is running out of oil. No more cars, no more plastics for medical equipment, Gosh, just no more life as we know it. The reality was they were setting the stage for a huge price gouge. It worked so well that many other "take-for-granted" commodities started having "shortages". I mean, after all , there was only so much to go around wasn't there? And it was about this time Bunky Hunt decided there should be a silver (Ag, that is) shortage. That was ripe because of the shift away from silver backing in '64 of US monies.   It was a phoney oil shortage, that's P-H-O-N-E-Y. Phoney and Uncle Sugar knew it and if they didn't collude directly, they certainly saw where they could benefit indirectly both as individuals and in the increase of control and power of the government itself.

No president stands alone in this country. FDR came close but that was a different situation altogether. Any leader is only as good as the men he puts into key position. He gives those men direction and goals and they provide the feedback and there needs to be a certain amount of flexibilty for that to work, otherwise all you have is a rubberstamp cabinet and advisers. To be honest, I'm a little rusty on Paul Volker (God I hope I spelled that right?). If I've nothing better to do in the nest few weeks I may read up on him a little. Just to let you know, I am no big fan of the Federal Reserve System either but that's grist for a different mill.

If you want me to be fair in this respect for Carter, i.e., that he was no better than his men and that he was the "focus" of the criticisms for his adminstration if not directly responsible for the misteps then give George Bush his due. Apply the same standard.

Beyond the give and take of the information and the limitations of the forum itself, Ron, you need to lighten up some. You don't make yourself look very civil. Its a BS section and each thread has a topic. Try to stay on topic and I'll do the same. I think this thread had something to do with Gerald Ford, didn't it?   Happy New Year to ya!

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 12:23 PM

Carter did have another major accomplishment--the requirement that automakers produce a greater proportion of higher-mileage cars provided the only balance-of-trade benefits we've enjoyed in God knows how long. As I recall, these restrictions were eliminated by George W. "Addiction-to-Oil" Bush.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Ron Davies
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 01:47 PM

Slag--

You must enjoy hair-splitting. There's a future in teaching philosophy for you.

OPEC decided to cut production. That caused a shortage. Obviously they co-ordinate together--or at least did in the 70's.

But the shortage--caused by their decision--was real. Sorry if you don't like it.

At least you acknowledge the existence of OPEC--and don't think it's just Big Oil causing an artificial shortage--or do you?

Inquiring minds want to know.

I'd also like to know precisely what if anything you disagree with as to my economic history of the 70's. Are you one of the giant brains who think Reagan whipped inflation all on his little lonesome? Or are you willing to give credit to Carter for putting Volcker in as head of the Fed?   Or is this all too complicated for you?

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Ron Davies
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 01:56 PM

Slag--

You attacked Carter--intemperately, I believe.   I happen to believe Carter did a much better job--in bad circumstances--than you and other giant intellects give him credit for. Besides being the only genuinely good man the US had as president in the 20th century. (And the 21st is starting out dreadfully.) And you have come up with precisely zero evidence to support your slander.

By the way, I'm a registered Republican--just one who believes in examining facts when reaching a conclusion.

It would be appreciated if you would moderate your language--and be willing to support what you say with evidence.

I stand ready to support everything I say with facts--not your style, it appears.



Or--if you can't stand the heat.....


Thread creep?---well who brought up Carter to begin with? Not I, friend.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Ron Davies
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 02:17 PM

Slag--you did not bring up Carter first (Nor did I). But you sure as hell attacked him. Don't whine when asked to defend your position.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Cruiser
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 05:35 PM

Carter is a good, intelligent man. That is why he did not make a good politician and president. Being an honest brilliant nuclear physicist does not automatically confer status as a dishonest political scientist or puppet president.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Ron Davies
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 05:40 PM

But he was a better president than his current reputation implies--and does not get credit for many accomplishments--he's particularly trashed by those who worship Reagan-- (for reasons known only to them).

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: GUEST
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 05:46 PM

I know their reasons. To demonize anyone to the left of Attila the Hun.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Slag
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 06:59 PM

Ron, it may be anecdotal but I was working in the oil industry in the mid 70's. I worked for Dowell, Haliburton's compaetition. This was in the Bakersfield area. Exploration and development of new wells was and remains today an on-going process. When the new wells were brought in they were immediately capped, that's CAPPED and the oil was not pumped out of the ground. In the Elk Hills reserves (note the word "reserves") they were actually pumping oil back into the ground. Granted, much of this was the Naval Reserve but the same went on (goes on) on the private leases. My fiance onws portions of three wells in Texas and derives a small royalty check from each. In all it amounts to about $150.00 a year. Why? The government won't let them take the oil out of the ground. I repeat: THERE WAS NO OIL SHORTAGE. Period! Rather, our country's strategy is to use the rest of the world's oil before it continues to use our own at any appreciable rate.

In regards to Mr. Carter's spurring Detroit to produce more efficient vehicles. It was a real success. Japan benefited greatly.

And as far as Carter personally, well, there you have me, my friend. It is sort of personal but I won't go there. Let's just say that it touches a nerve that has little to do with his blundering or this thread. I'll try to reign in on my personal animosity toward him. I will repeat, however ( I don't know if it was in this thread or another!?) that while I believe Mr. Carter is a sincere and honest man I don't believe politics and especially the Office of President were suited to his talents. I hear he swings a mean framing hammer. Or oar.

And please note: You, I and just about everybody else who has an opinion on our Nation and its leaders would probably quail at the enormity of the job and its inherent responsibilities were we or they thrust into it. Who, in their right mind would want it? Not me. I'm with Johnson on this one, "If nominated, I will not run. If elected, I will not serve." That man certainly had a way with words.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Barry Finn
Date: 01 Jan 07 - 06:53 AM

SRS was the first to mention Carter but only using him as a time line in history. Joe was the first with an opinion about his term. In my defense of Carter & my high high opinion of him I was demonized by Slag. I still hold my opinion of Jimmy(read through the thread) as do others, & even to this day he works to better the planet he lives on. While Slag you took a very negative personal tone towards me & still you say "It is sort of personal but I won't go there". You've got balls. You worked the oil fields & invested in them & when they won't produce you get pissed at others because your invested support of the industry didn't pay off. No wonder it's personal. When the government doesn't want to dip into it's reserve it's still a shortage, it doesn't matter if it's caused by the US, OPEC or because it can't be mined or pumped fast enough, it's still a shortage. Was it Jimmy's fault you're not getting your fair share? It seems that you've been everywhere. How & where did you work with oil that you're so informed & where were you & when did you serve during the Vietnam war (that's another fact you used in defence of your self in another thread). Seeing as you are attacking other folks in other threads calling them "janitors" when they've used the same reasonings, I'm calling you here on this thread to do the same as you're asking others to do on other threads. Try not to go your personal attack route this time please.

Barry

Barry

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Ron Davies
Date: 01 Jan 07 - 07:17 AM

Slag---


There was in fact a shortage in the 70's--the time period in question. Caused primarily by OPEC--which at that time was much more united than it is now.   By the 70's the US had passed its peak of oil production. This is well documented.   I would hope you would recognize this. Ever heard of Hubbert? (sp)

So it is understandable that the government would now (in the 21st century) want to keep some US oil in the ground--against a future emergency.

I would think you would be in favor of deregulation of the domestic oil and gas industries--which Carter did in the 70's. Or do you question that he did this?


And I'd like to hear you acknowledge that Carter put in Volcker---probably the single most important move in the 70's to bring inflation under control. When the Fed tightens, it takes a while for those moves to be registered in the economy--which is why the 1981 inflation rate reached 13.5%. But a few years later it was down to about 3%. Due to Volcker's strategy, not anything that Reagan did.

If you have information to the contrary, I'd like to hear it.

But thanks for moderating your language.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Slag
Date: 01 Jan 07 - 02:08 PM

Well, just as an example of why it is a vain enterprize to debate with, say Mr. Finn. When you mischaracterize and misrepresent statements it is not an honest discussion. Who said I was pissed at the oil economy? It bothers me not one bit. I do fine with what I have. It might bother my fiance some but she's not sitting around wringing her hands. She has offers several times a year to sell her interest. Yawn. You assume facts not in evidence.

You refer to another thread about a statement in which I called someone a "janitor". That is a complete mischaracterization of what I wrote. I ASKED a QUESTION of someone's unstated employment. I said I didn't know whether they were a janitor or a senior analyst. Why didn't you say I called them a "senior analyst"? It's to no point and no avail to debate with someone who won't be honest. Which brings me back to my original question as to whether I should engage you in debate in the first place. I was right in my assessment. Futile and fruitless.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Barry Finn
Date: 02 Jan 07 - 02:26 AM

& you've been asked a question. You served where & when & you worked oil how & why? Are you only here down below the BS line, I don't see you debating or even contributing above in the music line?

Barry

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Slag
Date: 02 Jan 07 - 02:40 AM

Not that I feel you are worthy of an answer but for others who may have been following this little discussion. I served four years in the USAF 1969 to 1973. And as I clealry stated earlier I worked for Dowell, a well servicing division of the Dow Chemical corp. Why? Gee? Let me think? Oh yeah, I remember! I needed a job and a little money wouldn't hurt either.

So who are you?

The Inquistion? Am I required to make so many "Music Posts" before I am allowed to express an opinion in the BS section? I suggest you do a more detailed search of the music threads. When I nail you outright for dishonesty, you demand answers on totally unrelated subjects? I hope your fan club is getting the full view of you. I've pretty much seen all I want to see.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Ron Davies
Date: 02 Jan 07 - 08:54 AM

OK Slag--

I may have to take back my compliment to you on moderating your language. You're just as aggressive as ever. And for some strange reason, have forgotten--gee, how could that happen?--to respond to my connection of Volcker and Carter.

So sorry if you don't like the Fed. It's possible that it affects you anyway.

And yes, as Barry notes, politics-only posters are not something this site is looking for. And it's painfully obvious that Barry has contributed far more to Mudcat musically than you have.

And you could try to do something to address the imbalance.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 02 Jan 07 - 09:54 AM

"In regards to Mr. Carter's spurring Detroit to produce more efficient vehicles. It was a real success. Japan benefited greatly."

Yep. But this was due to Detroit's unwillingness (I can't believe inability) to respond to consumer pressure.The relatively high-mileage autos produced in the US didn't even rise to the level of awful.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Jan 07 - 10:07 AM

I admired the man, felt his standing through a difficult period was never appreciated. Rest in Peace.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Slag
Date: 02 Jan 07 - 04:38 PM

Thanks GUEST. In the long run, maybe that is the best post. Oh, and for Ron and Barry, I was humming "Amazing Grace" to myself as I typed this.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Jan 07 - 11:13 PM

By MIKE FEINSILBER
The Associated Press

WASHINGTON (July 2) - Thirty-three years ago, Gerald R. Ford took pen in hand and changed - ever so slightly - the Warren Commission's key sentence on the place where a bullet entered John F. Kennedy's body when he was killed in Dallas.

The effect of Ford's change was to strengthen the commission's conclusion that a single bullet passed through Kennedy and severely wounded Texas Gov. John Connally - a crucial element in its finding that Lee Harvey Oswald was the sole gunman....

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/JFK/ford.html
(Ford made sure Americans didn't get the truth about the JFK assassination, and he was rewarded with a "place in history." He's on the express train to hell right now.)

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Greg B
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 12:21 PM

And reading on in the same AP story---

''This is the most significant lie in the whole Warren Commission
report,'' said Robert D. Morningstar, a computer systems specialist in New
York City who said he has studied the assassination since it occurred and
written an Internet book about it.

Well, gee--- I mean he should know. He is after al a 'computer
systems specialist.' I hear they're real smart cookies.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 01:27 PM

Look at the Zapruder film on googlevideo. You see the bullet hit JFK between the shoulder blades. Computer geek or garbageman could see that one, but Ford said it hit him in the head, then passed through to do the damage to Conally. A big, big lie. JFK was shutting down the Rockefeller/Rothschild/Warburg/Saxe-Coburg/Mellon/Morgan owned Federal Reserve, and he got whacked for it. The people on the Warren Commission served the interests of private bankers over the interests of the people of the U.S. Ford violated his oath to the constitution and took us a giant step towards dictatorship. An especially warm place in hell for him.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Ron Davies
Date: 04 Jan 07 - 10:44 AM

"felt his standing through a difficult period was never appreciated"--interestingly, that could be said of both Carter and Ford. Who knows, maybe Carter's term will be appreciated before he dies.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: voyager
Date: 05 Jan 07 - 09:52 AM

My family toured the Capitol Rotunda to visit Gerald Ford lying in state. When we left the building I signed the guess book -
'With Respect and Appreciation'.

And That's How We Feel About His Term in Office
voyager

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Jan 07 - 01:37 PM

Guns & Butter
Wednesday, January 3, 2006, 1:00pm

"The Ford Presidency"
Interview with Webster Tarpley, author of The Unauthorized Biography of George Bush. The Ford Presidency is analyzed, from Gerald Ford's participation on the Warren Commission; the Watergating of Richard Nixon; Ford's appointment to the Vice Presidency upon Spiro Agnew's resignation; his ascension to the Presidency with Nixon's resignation; the selection of Ford's Vice President; and the stolen 1976 Presidential election.

KPFA 94.1 FM Berkeley 1pm PST, and streaming and archived at www.kpfa.org

http://sanfrancisco.tribe.net/event/Guns-Butter-Webster-Tarpley-On-The-Ford-Presidency/san-francisco-ca/da3f31f0-67ee-4ad1-aeeb-

I haven't had time to listen to this yet, but I heard Tarpley talk for 5 minutes on Ford a week or so ago. Ford was just a flunky of the banking interests, same as most of the other federal politicians in the U.S. Especially interesting was how Ford played the blushing bride part when Reagan was about to be nominated for President. I recall the interviews at the time, with the talking heads asking Ford if he'd accept the Vice-President job under Reagan (would've been the first time a former Pres became VP). Ford indicated he would, then at the last minute he backed out and the only alternative Reagan had was Bush (he hated Bush, "voodoo economics"). So that was how Ford helped get the Bush dynasty going.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Greg B
Date: 05 Jan 07 - 02:41 PM

I listened to the program.

It's rather amusing.

Tarpley sounds just like Alan Ginsberg--- no I mean exactly.
Except Ginsberg, even in his wildest flights of fancy, made
much more sense.

If Ginsberg wrote a peyote-and-alcohol-fueled-stream-of-conciousness poem consisting of the names of politicians interspersed with paranoid
conspiracy-theory political terms randomly packed into run-on sentences and then recited it, it's what it would sound like:

http://www.kpfa.org/archives/index.php?arch=17987

Really worth listening to for its amusement value, not so much
for the content but rather for the sound. It's a surrealistic
tone-poem caricature of itself.

The only thing is, Ginsberg was only half-serious, and this
guy clearly takes himself very seriously.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Greg B
Date: 05 Jan 07 - 04:44 PM

Oh, God, I just finished listening to this nut! That was
fun.

He has this theory that there is some kind of 'uber' government
that is pulling the strings on the executive branch--- who gets
into offic next and what there character is and what they'll do.

He's so far to the left that he's come full circle, and claims
Nixon was 'framed' for Watergate by guys WITHIN THE ADMINISTRATION
who were executing a coup d'etat (he uses that word a lot) and who
conspired to get a Gerry Ford like character in the White House
so they could control what happened next, and then traces the whole
Bush dynasty back to those guys, bandying about names like Cheney
and Rumsfeld and using their involvement in the Bush administration
as a basis for it.

Phew!

And I though Rush Limbaugh was nuts!

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Jan 07 - 11:14 PM

I'm listening to him interviewed on another network right now. He makes sense.

Nixon started to balk at what the international financiers wanted him to do (almost all U.S. presidents in the last century have acted on behalf of the international financiers). So when Nixon balked, the Watergate burglars were sent in to get caught intentionally (went back 4 times before the security guard caught them). Then the Washington Post govt propaganda machine started shaping the story...set up Bob Woodward to write the stories, and the testimony of John Dean and Alexander Butterfield put Nixon in a position where he had to resign.

Then later, Ford was told he had to pardon Nixon because Nixon had only 2 options 1) pardon and oblivion, or 2) spill the beans on the true nature of the intelligence agencies and how they had been used by the financiers to bring him down (a coup d'etat. Nixon wasn't stupid, he knew how he'd been had. That's why the Post and other papers reported he was acting "crazy"...if he ever did detail the true events, the financiers wanted the public to doubt him).

So Ford pardoned Nixon to protect the cover of the CIA, FBI, etc., not to "heal the country." These intelligence agencies he protected are the same military-industrial agencies that are now openly running the country under the Dept of Homeland Security. Keeping the lid on the coup was the short-term benefit to the pardon of Nixon, and the LONG-term benefit was to undermine confidence in the office of the presidency. Things have gone downhill for the office since then...each president more foul or barbarous than the last.

Subject: RE: Obit: President Gerald R. Ford, Dec. 26, 2006
From: Sorcha
Date: 05 Jan 07 - 11:56 PM

So, is he for real dead and for real buried yet? There just has to be a new story soon.

How about the American sailor rescued off Chile?