I remember being quite upset [about the pardon] at the time, but was surprised that my parents (who hated Nixon) didn't seem to object. But to this day, I'm still a bit upset about it. Sure, without the pardon, the Nixon case would have occupied the newspapers and congress for a while, but surely it would still have been mostly in the background, just as most investigations only come to the forefront when there is something new. In any case, I don't think Nixon should have been pardoned until it had been determined exactly what laws he had broken.I think he's right to still be upset about it. If Nixon had been forced to stand trial for his crimes, future presidents like Bush might not be so confident that theirs would also go unpunished. I also think there was a deal - perhaps unspoken, perhaps not. One NPR interview with a former insider from the time said that Ford, soon before Nixon's resignation, was asking "theoretical" questions about the scope of presidential pardon powers - and that Nixon's awareness of Ford's probable pardon was one of the factors that clinched his decision to resign.
Whether the deal was explicit or not, the pardon was a terrible move, and I fail to see why the media are falling all over themselves to glorify a lackluster caretaker president whose most important major decision was a bad one. I guess it's because the current president is such a disaster that there's some nostalgia for ANY former president.
4 comments:
Kent,
It's great to hear from you again. I have been horrible at returning Emails and such - it's just 1 of my top 100 flaws to my personality.
I love your Blog site and your format. I am so behind the times. Just don't have the time to look through what's out there I guess.
You know, I don't remember exactly how I felt the day I heard about the pardon. God and His sense of humor. What was He thinking when He came up with Menopause?? My only memories of Ford was all the hubbub about him making his own breakfast, the two attempts on his life, and the years of falls, trips, slides and golf balls.
Your friend is probably right. It did seem to change the Nation, but I think it went back a little further to Johnson and Nixon that really set the tone of what came after. Ford was just the man in the middle. But, this bumbling idiot that we still have to endure for 2 more years has set us up to pay for his mis-steps, uneducated arrogance, underestimated policies, and just about everything that tries to come out of his mouth - for decades if not lifetimes to come.
Yes, Ford shouldn't have pardoned Nixon, and it's the usual nonsense to hear Ted Kennedy and other libs about how he brought healing to the nation.
BUT...Really, think about it. The Watergate break in and coverup were only slicely less substantial than the Bill and Monica story. Think about what was going on at the same time or about then...Chile, Vietnam, Indonesia...promoting the bogus drug war. Just a few sins that come to mind off hand. Breaking into an office...a little disembling...so what!
Pat, you're right about going back a little further. Johnson's use of the phony Gulf of Tonkin incident to whip up support for the Vietnam war is directly comparable to our current bumbling idiot's lies about Weapons of Mass Destruction.
Peter, it's true that the Watergate stuff paled in comparison to some of the other things the Nixon administration were up to. But Watergate was far more substantial than the Bill and Monica thing. The break-in itself was a subversion of the political process, and the revelations that followed, from the attempts to discredit Daniel Ellsberg, to the misuse of government agencies like the FBI and IRS were of a far greater magnitude than anything Clinton did.
I meant to say that the Watergate breakin and coverup were slightly MORE supstantial than the Bill and Monica affair, not less.
Post a Comment