There’s guaranteed one big lie in any Ford obituary, the lie that he was America’s only unelected president, as if some fellow by the name of George W Bush didn’t steal the elections back in 2000 (and arguably, again in 2004). But then again, most mainstream news media have ever since that Supreme Court robbery been at pains not to point out Bush’s illegitamicy, so it’s hardly surprising.
Amongst the various leftist / liberal blogs I follow (links to your right folks) most focus on Ford’s pardoning of Nixon, understandably. That was a watershed moment, when it became crystal clear you could be a crook and president and get away with it, as long as you’re a Republican. I therefore disagree with Steve Gilliard when he says that:
1975 was a difficult year. The US military was dysfunctional, American society was shattered, there was a real question if the US could have survived the trial of Richard Nixon for his various crimes.
Once he had slunk off, to everyone’s relief, there was no great appetite for punishment among Congress.
But, by pardoning Nixon, he helped save the GOP, by not exposing the criminal nature of that enterprise. It was allowed to reform as a right wing party, catering to small business and backwoods rednecks. The Dems never really pressed the advantage they could have had by exposing Nixon and his crimes.
Such bloodletting ends more like the movie Z than in heroic triumph. Nixon was a crook, he was stained by his actions. A trial may have led to more disorder. Nixon lived in ignominy afterwards, Ford with his golf game.
In a world of two bad choices, maybe Ford made the least bad choice
Why? Because Nixon’s unpunished crimes paved the way for Reagan’s arguably greater crimes, which in turn paved the way for Bush to steal the 2000 election and start an illegal war that killed over 650,000 people so far. Yes, it would’ve been difficult to prosecute an ex-president and it would’ve been hard on the country, but only a naif thinks that’s why Ford did that. He could care less: he pardoned Nixon to save his own party and perhaps himself as well: who knows what would’ve come to light once a prosecutor started digging. (Is it wrong to think Gilliard’s view is very American in its preference of a cheap fix to a real resolution, prefering to let corruption fester as long as appearances are kept?)
Nixon needed to be prosecuted so that others couldn’t follow in his footsteps; instead the corruption went deeper and deeper.
Meanwhile, Richard Estes of American Leftist remembers Ford for another bad, criminal decision, one that would cost the lifes of an estimated 300,000 people: allowing Indonesia to invade East Timor.
In other words, Gerald Ford may look good if you compare him to his predecessor Nixon or to such horrors like Reagan or Bush, but he’s still a villain, responsible for covering up corruption at home and genocide abroad. It only goes to show that even “decent” American presidents have to be moral monsters to do their job.
Read more about:
Gerald Ford, East Timor, US politics