Gerald Ford's Legacy: Cheney and Rumsfeld

Gerald Ford is gone, but he lives on in two of his key appointees: Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney. Their impact on America today is greater than Ford's, who died Tuesday at 93.

Ford appointed Rumsfeld his chief of staff when he took office after Nixon's resignation in 1974. The next year, when he made the 42-year-old Rumsfeld the youngest secretary of defense in the nation's history, he named 34-year-old Dick Cheney his chief of staff, also the youngest ever.

Those two Ford appointees worked together ever since. The Bush White House assertion of unchecked presidential power stems from the lessons they drew from their experience of working for the weakest president in recent American history. "For Dick and Don," Harold Meyerson wrote in The American Prospect last July, "the frustrations of the Ford years have been compensated for by the abuses of the Bush years."

Ford also named a new head of the CIA – a former Texas congressman named George H. W. Bush. Thus you could also credit also Ford with launching the Bush dynasty.

It was during Ford's presidency that the last Americans left Vietnam – that photo of them struggling to get into that chopper on the roof of the Saigon embassy remains our most powerful image of American defeat, and it shadows our current debate about how to get out of Iraq.

Ford did leave one positive legacy, as Meyerson reminds us: his supreme court appointee, John Paul Stevens. Few remember it today, but when the Court majority appointed Bush president in December, 2000, Stevens wrote a blistering dissent, damning the other Republican appointees for their blatant partisanship. And this year Stevens wrote the majority opinion in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld declaring that the military tribunals at Guantanamo violated the Geneva Convention.

But we wouldn't need Stevens if we didn't have Rumsfeld, Cheney and Bush--that's the legacy of Gerald Ford.

Comments (58)

1. I guess the other post on Ford was not harsh enough in the light of his death less than 24 hours ago.

   Posted by CPT at 12/27/2006 @ 11:39am

2. Gotta go with ya on that, CPT....

   obviously the idea of showing a little class is unknown to many "Nation" writers or its posters.

   On Ford, his successor Carter said "he wisely chose the path of healing during a deeply divisive time in our nation's history."

   CRABWALK said he deserved a "pauper's funeral" for it (John Nichols thread).

   Yet let Carter pass away and some right-winger MENTION anything other than the "Camp David Accords" or his new book on Palestinian (like "staflation" or the hostages)....and they'll DEMAND "some dignity and time to pass for a former President you vicious neo-cons!"

   Posted by Mask at 12/27/2006 @ 12:03pm

3. Gee, fighting about Ford vs Carter--it's like choosing between Heckel and Jeckel.

   Posted by donescobar at 12/27/2006 @ 12:45pm

4. Can't you two find anything better to do than whine about 'the nation' writers? Your knee-jerk responses are beyond laughable (Mask, I exempt you from that last dig, as, contrarian though you are, you at least put some thought into what you write, and appear to have some command of our language).

   As for you, (the alleged) Capt Queeg - there you are, sucking off of the government tit, spending MY tax dollars pissing and moaning about how hard it is to be you on a web site you profess to hate. Maybe you shoud quit robbing us real Americans and go back to bamboozling the impressionable.

   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

   Ole Gerry wasn't a bad guy, it seems, though he probably played one too many games in the interior line at Michigan w/o benefit of helmet. Maybe the best athlete we had as president, that being said, he was a crappy golfer, as certain attendees of the (former) Bob Hope Desert Classic in Palm Desert will attest. Probably won a lot of watermelon seed spitting contests, though. Not sure what he accomplishe as president, really, but at least he didn't leave a ring around the office, so to speak, as did his predecessor. Or will the COWH.

   For what it's worth, I think that he really believed that he was doing the right thing in pardoning Nixon and it took stones to do that when a large segment of the country wanted Nixon's on a spit, roasted over open flame. People say that pardoning Nixon doomed him in '76. I say 'no.' It was when he fell on his face exiting Air Force One, allowing Chevy Chase to turn him into a parody.

   As for Rumdud and Darth, well, time will show to the world the dark places that those two have been. Talk about a waste of taxpayer money.

   Posted by skeletonman at 12/27/2006 @ 12:47pm

5. So Jerry Ford was a "weak" president - presumably because he compelled his subordinates, like Bush Sr., Rumsfeld and Cheney, to comply with the U.S. Constitution and U.S. law as written by Congress, instead of making up unconstitutional and illegal policies, and keeping said policies secret under the guise of 'national security'.

   Posted by samcrossett at 12/27/2006 @ 12:48pm

6. sorry, that should be 'accomplished,' not 'accomplishe'

   my bad

   Posted by skeletonman at 12/27/2006 @ 12:49pm

7. Posted by SAMCROSSETT 12/27/2006 @ 12:48am

   I can't see the posts you're referring to, thanks to this site's indispensable ignore feature, but I can presume that there is some Neanderthal commenting who considers anyone who isn't actively murdering "others" a weakling. It's a vain effort to try to awaken in something like that any kind of understanding of the rule of law or the difference between right and wrong.

   Posted by fromredbird at 12/27/2006 @ 12:55pm

8. SKELOTON

   Sucking off the govt tit?

   ok....try it for awhile and see if you think it is that.....talk about laughable statements.

   Posted by CPT at 12/27/2006 @ 12:59pm

9. Red, thank you for your kind attention to my post. See the above article which refers to Ford as the "weakest president in recent American history". Indeed, Jerry Ford had to work with a Congress so dominated by the opposition party that his vetoes were over-ridden on several occasions. What remains to be seen is how effective a 'strong', i.e. criminal and treasonous, president can be when his unconstitutional and illegal actions are opposed by a duly elected Congress that does not rubber-stamp them or participate in covering them up.

   Posted by samcrossett at 12/27/2006 @ 1:06pm

10. Jon - You're aptly named! Let's get this straight...Ford BAD, James Brown GOOD???? Puhleeeeeeeezzzzzzzz.

    Posted by woodyee at 12/27/2006 @ 1:21pm

11. I scanned the post too quickly and didn't recall that. I guess I've been conditioned by the ranting of the deadender Republicans here.

    I don't have high hopes for the Democrats or the courts being very aggressive in opposing Bush's effective cancellation of major sections of the Constitution.

    Posted by fromredbird at 12/27/2006 @ 1:22pm

12. Posted by CPT 12/27/2006 @ 12:59am

    I served, Ace. USNR, Active Duty 1985-1989, left as an O-3. I worked my ass off, too. Qualified in my warfare specialty (surface) in 6m and 2w - faster than anyone ever had to that point in the US by-God Navy.

    We had a term for slugs who sucked off the government tit (which might be loosely defined as jerking off while on duty): 'no load.'

    If the shoe fits, wear it.

    Posted by skeletonman at 12/27/2006 @ 1:38pm

13. SKELOTON

    Ever heard of Xmas leave????

    Posted by CPT at 12/27/2006 @ 2:00pm

14. Skeletonman

    See my previous arguments with Will C.....no sucking here....dont hate me because i can manage my time more efficently than most.

    Posted by CPT at 12/27/2006 @ 2:03pm

15. Ford said, I gotta pardon Richard Nixon, because Americans are not vengeful people - he said. Americans dont like the idea of someone being behind bars for crimes. Thats what he said. Ford and his henchmen are killers who should be justly sent to Hell to be burned alive forever by God.

    Republican Conservative Authoritarians tried to impeach Bill Clinton over a blowjob, and now they dont want any investigations that would distract their idiot. Their idiot also didnt want anyone to investigate the biggest terrorist attack ever on American soil, because he said it would distract our intelligence agencies. Make them all swear to tell the truth.

    Posted by LiberalPride at 12/27/2006 @ 2:15pm

16. My Nixon history is a bit hazy but didn't about 30 of Nixon's admin get convicted?

    Wasn't Nixon named an "unindicted Co-conspirator?"

    Wasn't it a bit much to have such a potential criminal pardoned...even before he was charged?!!!

    Posted by freedomplease at 12/27/2006 @ 2:20pm

17. SKELOTON

    Ever heard of Xmas leave????

    Posted by CPT 12/27/2006 @ 2:00pm

    Sure. You seem to be on 24/7/365 Christmas leave, that's all.

    Posted by skeletonman at 12/27/2006 @ 2:22pm

18. Skeletonman

    See my previous arguments with Will C.....no sucking here....dont hate me because i can manage my time more efficently than most.

    Posted by CPT 12/27/2006 @ 2:03pm

    Oh, barf.

    Try running an ER alone with a heart attack needing thrombolytics and transfer to a cath lab, 4 "hood ornaments" (pedestrians hit by an automobile [the same one in this instance]) with head injuries and a femur fracture, a couple of people with niggly complaints that think they have first priority and a sick kid or so and then come talk to me about time managment.

    I hear that recruiting is just a gas these days, how do you fit it time to kvetch here?

    Posted by skeletonman at 12/27/2006 @ 2:30pm

19. Skeletonman

    See my previous arguments with Will C.....no sucking here....dont hate me because i can manage my time more efficently than most.

    Posted by CPT 12/27/2006 @ 2:03pm

    Oh, barf.

    Try running an ER alone with a heart attack needing thrombolytics and transfer to a cath lab, 4 "hood ornaments" (pedestrians hit by an automobile [the same one in this instance]) with head injuries and a femur fracture, a couple of people with niggly complaints that think they have first priority and a sick kid or so and then come talk to me about time managment.

    I hear that recruiting is just a gas these days, how do you fit it time to kvetch here?

    Posted by skeletonman at 12/27/2006 @ 2:32pm

20. crappy internet, sorry for the double

    Posted by skeletonman at 12/27/2006 @ 2:33pm

21. Nation article | posted December 21, 2006 (web only) View From the Future Rebecca Solnit

    "This explains why, for example, former President Bush the Younger, extradited from Paraguay and found guilty in 2013, was never imprisoned but sentenced to spend the rest of his life working in a Fallujah diaper laundry.

    Impeachment alone is way too lenient for this criminal.

    Posted by fromredbird at 12/27/2006 @ 2:47pm

22. SKELETON

    One day i will show how to manage your time better....

    Posted by CPT at 12/27/2006 @ 2:56pm

23. Katrina vanden Heuvel

    KATRINA, TIME FOR YOU TO TURN UP THE HEAT ON THE DEMOCRATS IN CONGRESS AND IF THEY REFUSE TO HEED THE CALL FOR WITHDRAWAL FROM THE QUAGMIRE THAT IS THE IRAQ WAR, THEN PULL THE PLUG ON THEIR MAJORITY IN NOVEMBER 2008.

    Posted by POSEIDON at 12/27/2006 @ 3:27pm

24. Posted by MASK 12/27/2006 @ 12:03am | ignore this person

    MASK, what are you and CPT whining about now? Sure, some respect should be paid to a deceased past president, but don't kid yourself, The Witch Ann Coulter and Slush Slimebaugh will be working overtime once Jimmy Carter kicks the bucket. I don't see how anyone can condemn The Nation's writers and bloggers without denouncing the Ann Coulters, the Bill O'Really's and the Slush Slimebaughs of the world. These people have said and done things that make Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad look like a choir boy............

    Posted by POSEIDON at 12/27/2006 @ 3:44pm

25. RESE,

    If it makes you feel any better, I killed Gerald Ford as well. That natural causes stuff, just a cover story...............

    Enough already!

    Posted by POSEIDON at 12/27/2006 @ 3:47pm

26. Rio,

    Wasn't it YOUR God that conjured up that blizzard?

    Does that mean God hates American servicemen / women at Christmas?

    Perhaps God just hates the American occupation of Iraq.

    Posted by freedomplease at 12/27/2006 @ 4:10pm

27. Posted by RESE 12/27/2006 @ 3:59pm | ignore this person

    The problem you have is that no one can bring any type of credible case. Blogging about politicians commiting mass murder will get you nowhere fast. If you have ironclad evidence, bring legal proceedings to bear. This is a waste of time, not to mention computer bandwith................

    Posted by POSEIDON at 12/27/2006 @ 5:46pm

28. Posted by RIO BRAVO 12/27/2006 @ 5:33pm | ignore this person

    what drivel. did you miss the turn for the church? you are in the wrong place with this religion jive. go find some religious website to regurgitate that mess. you have never been a christian in the slightest way on this site. you make me puke.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 12/27/2006 @ 5:56pm

29. "No and No, and again No."

    Posted by RIO BRAVO 12/27/2006 @ 5:33pm

    That's not what jerry falwell says about the weather and god. (The fags did it).

    And I know he's a more righteous man than you, cause he has more money.

    " He is no respecter of persons."

    Ain't that the truth.

    Eric

    Posted by Malcontent at 12/27/2006 @ 7:19pm

30. Why does most of what I see on my computer read like THE WATCHTOWER? New name for this mag: THE NATION UNDER GOD But then, to be human is to be guilty. Happy 2007 in the global Penal Colony.

    Posted by donescobar at 12/27/2006 @ 8:02pm

31. what drivel. did you miss the turn for the church? you are in the wrong place with this religion jive. go find some religious website to regurgitate that mess. you have never been a christian in the slightest way on this site. you make me puke.

    Posted by JOHANNESROLF 12/27/2006 @ 5:56pm | ignore this person

    I disagree with Rio's politics, but he wasn't the one who brought religion into this by saying that Gerald Ford deserved to burn in hell forever.

    Posted by green2006 at 12/27/2006 @ 8:59pm

32. Posted by POSEIDON 12/27/2006 @ 3:44pm

    POSEI...you're comparing Jon Wiener with Coulter and Limbaugh?!?!?!?

    Okay....HE might not appreciate it though.

    Posted by Mask at 12/27/2006 @ 10:25pm

33. This is really grasping at straws. If we take this logic another step further, Cheney and Rumsfeld are the legacy of LBJ. After all, he escalated the Vietnam War after 1964. If it weren't for the war, he probably would have sought re-election in 1968 and won because of peace and prosperity in an election year. No Nixon, no Ford.

    Posted by green2006 at 12/27/2006 @ 11:29pm

34. no matter who commenced it, I'm against it.

    let me explain what is wrong with the religious onslaught in these pages. whenever someone says, I'm right because it says so here in my BOOK, and all of the rest of you will be damned for eternity 'cause you don't follow my BOOK, that is generally the end of discussion. what else is there left to say? the BOOK trumps everything else.

    in the case CPT, Liberty, Rio etc the book trumps even humanity and kindness. nothing but the book matters. the trouble with them they are too much in love with the smiting of their enemies. which includes just about everyone who is not of their BOOK. no matter what the discussion, it's always "our BOOK says so" a mentally lazy excuse to be sure. and that is indeed one of religion's aspects, that the adherents no longer need to think. just keep pounding the BOOK. opiate of the masses.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 12/28/2006 @ 10:45am

35. Cheney/Rumsfeld are Ford's legacy? Did Ford appoint them to the current administration?

    By similar logic, the legacy of 60's liberals is David Horowitz.

    Ford's real legacy: getting us out of Vietnam. How soon the Left betrays.

    Posted by BlueSpark at 12/28/2006 @ 10:50am

36. I am not one of those who praises ex president Ford, now that he has passed on to the big white house in the sky. He was a creep. his worst moment, pardoning Nixswine. he robbed the american people of justice. if Nixon had been subjected to a trial and a complete airing of his crimes, the nation might have been spared the farce which was Clinton's impeachment. Clinton should have been censured by the congress, no more. his crime was a bagatelle, whereas Nixon's were legion.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 12/28/2006 @ 10:50am

37. How soon the Left betrays.

    what an asinine statement. by the time Nixon resigned ground troops were long gone from Vietnam and the end was inevitable.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 12/28/2006 @ 10:53am

38. Johannes, I think you need to reread what I wrote. Nothing I said is contradicted by anything you said.

    Talk about asinine.

    Posted by BlueSpark at 12/28/2006 @ 12:33pm

39. "how soon the left betrays" is not an argument or even an assertion, it is merely a smear.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 12/28/2006 @ 12:47pm

40. well in re the appointment of stevens, ca't really say that was much of an improvement. While the Hamdan decision did declare the GITMO tribunals illegal it still left a lot to be desired. The decision still made it possible to circumvent international human rights law standards, and gave the detainees considerably little compared to the constitutional rights they would and should be garunteed specially in light of the consistent demonization and dehumanization of the detainees to the point where its difficult for most people now to even consider the very real possibility that these people may infact be completely innocent. Even simply through thier statements the president and his administration has managed to circumvent the very cardinal rule of this country - that one is innocent until proven guilty. These people, in how they were labeled, in how thy were portrayed by the administration, lost that protection and were guilty even before they locked - let alone after any trial. The possibility of a fair trial for these detainees is incredibly remote, howver we shoud atleast attempt to afford them every protections that people in this country have always had! - the Hamdan decision for all its glitter and glam did none of that!!

    Posted by FR at 12/28/2006 @ 1:19pm

41. But you addressed it as if it were an argument. So what gives? I notice also that you gave up on addressing the substance of my response. I'll assume you take the point.

    Here we have a lefty trying to destroy the legacy of a man for no good reason. See, here's the problem I have: when the right-wingers throw around hateful nonsense, it serves a political purpose--they benefit from it. Attacking Gerald Ford with hateful nonsense [why is it nonsense? for one thing, Cheney and Rumsfeld are philosophically opposite on the relevant issues] serves only one purpose: it drives the left further into political irrelevancy in this country. For most people, an attack on Gerald Ford is just plain mean. The article exists just to be hurtful. Hatred of Bush and his policies and his appointees is rational, I agree, but what is not rational is dragging everyone into the shadow of that hatred, including presidents who served decades ago. Rumsfeld and Cheney were here to fashion Iraq policy because of Bush, not because of Ford. The author is willing to destroy Ford just to make an anti-Bush point. That is a betrayal.

    Blaming Ford for the current mess, the day after he dies, is just plain hateful to no good end.

    The situation you describe with respect to Vietnam and Ford is the situation we find with Bush and Iraq [i.e. we've lost]. But Ford did not choose to ramp up troop levels like the presidents before him, or like Bush now. Our exit from Vietnam was a decision made by Ford.

    Posted by BlueSpark at 12/28/2006 @ 1:33pm

42. Blue, when a public person dies, we are left with a justified reckoning, good and bad. if you don't want to hear the bad, fine. but to smear "the Left" because someone was critical of Ford, is just vile. the groundtroops were long gone by the time Ford ascended to the presidency. check your facts.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 12/28/2006 @ 1:44pm

43. Pardoning 'Nixswine' was unconscionable and unpardonnable.

    Posted by brantl at 12/28/2006 @ 2:40pm

44. Brantl, look for the same kind of pardons to come from this so-called pres.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 12/28/2006 @ 2:42pm

45. Saying that Rummy + Cheney is the legacy of Ford is itself a smear and it is nonsense. It is certainly not "a justified reckoning." If lefties want to attack people, it should be for a good reason. This article just keeps us wandering in the wilderness.

    Also, I pointed out before that your "troops" claim does not contradict what I have said, and yet you repeat it.

    Posted by BlueSpark at 12/28/2006 @ 3:34pm

46. But Ford did not choose to ramp up troop levels like the presidents before him, or like Bush now

    Spark, he did not really have that choice as ground troops had been withdrawn by his time. there is no denying that.

    I do agree with your point that Ford cannot be tarred by the misdeeds of his former staff. there is plenty to be pilloried for in his own regard, and this is a fine time to do so.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 12/28/2006 @ 4:26pm

47. I don't want to talk about accountability -- for "mistakes" ha ha ha

    I want to talk about punishment: maximum, for all who have aided and abetted the Repube criminals, their criminal propoganda, activities, attitutes way of being. It has got to be punished on their persons, property, posterity. For every sh!t faced expert son of a bitch that showed up on televion, every sponser of Fox news, right-wing slobbermouths on CNN MSWNBC, and especially everybody who has linked the name of Jesus Christ with this war in their minds they should die with cancer of the face to match their soul in hell.

    Wherever holiness is recognized, they are regarded with hate:

    pure -- unalloyed, as they have treated prisoners

    perfect -- perfected by practice

    complete -- there is no limit to justification, given what they have destroyed

    perpetual-- implacable, renewed each morning in prayer

    forever -- of a quality beyond time

    They have made hate the truth. Therefore the truth is hate.

    Ford wasn't even a yugo.

    Posted by jones at 12/28/2006 @ 11:07pm

48. But Ford did not choose to ramp up troop levels like the presidents before him, or like Bush now

    I agree, that's what I meant. He didn't do what he could have (and was sharply criticized by the right for not doing so). Here's a man who extended an olive branch to military deserters, who officially ended our involvement in Vietnam, who allowed thousands of Vietnamese refugees to come here, who opposed the current war and the policies of the current administration, and who supported equal rights for gays, and this author decides to undermine it all by blaming him for the current mess. It's counterproductive nonsense.

    Posted by BlueSpark at 12/29/2006 @ 1:31pm

49. Blue, who opposed the current war and the policies of the current administration,

    he did so silently. he could have gone public in early 2004 and possibly changed history. I am not sure how admirable that was.

    for another view of the extended olive branch I will quote from a letter in today's NYTimes:

    with Mr. Ford's amnesty program only a paltry 21,8000 men out of 350,000 who were eligible were granted clemency.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 12/29/2006 @ 1:52pm

50. with Mr. Ford's amnesty program only a paltry 21,8000 men out of 350,000 who were eligible were granted clemency.

    Ah, but that was because so few applied for the amnesty. That wasn't Ford's fault.

    Posted by BlueSpark at 12/29/2006 @ 3:36pm

51. he did so silently. he could have gone public in early 2004 and possibly changed history. I am not sure how admirable that was.

    Oh, I agree, but the point is that he opposed the very war he is being blamed for in the present article. Had he been president we would not have gone into Iraq in the first place, Cheney and Rummy notwithstanding.

    Posted by BlueSpark at 12/29/2006 @ 3:38pm

52. Now it comes out that Ford thinks the rabid right-wingers (Reagan, Cheney, Bush I, Bush II, and Rumsfeld among others) Have ruined the Republican party. How true. They made it easy to leave.

    Posted by don parry at 12/29/2006 @ 7:55pm

53. I'm tired of reading about how "courageous" it was of Gerry to pardon Richard Nixon. Noam Chomsky would barf at the bewildered herd, especially the educated, who know so much that isn't true and so little that is and believe this media spin. Due process and the legal system is for everyone, and it took a lot of class to pardon him, alright---- UPPER CLASS!! As for being harsh "in light of his death nearly 24 hours ago", there's enough REVISIONIST history out there already. Why not tell the truth about Ford -- the good, the bad, and the oh so ugly -- from the START? This is the man who brought us Rumsfeld and Cheney. But really he isn't. Have all of you forgotten that some 15 people -- two presidents, one CIA director, and at least a half dozen cabinet members all came from Halliburton, Bechtel, Carlyle, Enron, and Chevron? Gerald Ford had as much to do with that pardon as Bush did with the decision to go to war in Iraq. Its the Project for the New American Century that calls the shots, and presidents like Bush and Ford just listen to their handlers. We all need to get beyond what we read in the newspaper. -- eightball

    Posted by eightballace at 12/29/2006 @ 9:20pm

54. Mr. Wiener, Gerald Ford was a good and decent man thrust into a position he never desired. Perhaps it is difficult for you to show even the slightest shred decency in your lamentable comments. Had Mr. Ford been a Democrat I have no doubt that you would have been singing his praises for extricating us from Viet Nam (where I might ad, I served). However as with most left wing radicals you demonstrate you liberalism by downing anyone who has a different point of view. If you don't respect the person holding the office at leats respect the office.

    Posted by few at 12/30/2006 @ 11:49am

55. Just a fact question: was it really the U.S. Embassy from which the helicopter was taking off that day in 1975?

    Posted by Michael Abr at 12/30/2006 @ 3:37pm

56. It seems everyone forgets that the beloved Pres. Ford was a key member of Chief Justice Earl's (Warren) commission who re-looked at Pres. Kennedy's assassination and told the "big lie." His legacy is somewhat akin to the current "big lie", alias WMD's in Saddam's Iraq.

    Posted by woolies at 12/30/2006 @ 5:42pm

57. While we are reflecting on the Ford legacy let us not forget that it was President Ford and his Secretary of State Henry Kissinger who quietly gave President Suharto of Indonesia permission to illegally use U.S. supplied arms to invade East Timor and begin the genocide that continued there over the next twenty odd years. United Nations Ambassador Daniel Patrick Moynihan was instructed to block any attempts by the U.N. to prevent the aggression, orders he carried out successfully. Reasonable estimates indicate that as many as 200,000 of a population of 700,000 were killed with the rest terrorized and living under appalling conditions. Members of the Ford Adminstration and later the Carter Administration quietly cheered on the sidelines as they believed the Indonesian invasion to be in the interests of the U.S. The Carter Administration actually stepped up military aid to Indonesia at the height of the atrocities. The Clinton Administration continued military aid and training to Indonesian forces through 1998 in violation of congressional restrictions placed on aid to Indonesia. The U.S. could have acted to stop the slaughter at any time. These crimes against humanity are well documented in "The Chomsky Reader" pp. 303-311 and in an updated version in Chomsky's "Rogue States: The Rule of Force in World Affairs," pp. 51-61. There will doubtless be no mention of these events by the mainstream press as they heap honors upon our latest deceased King!

    Posted by kenwodtke at 12/30/2006 @ 11:30pm

58. Although I am a great admirer of Jimmy Carter and a life-long Democrat, I am firmly convinced that our nation and world would be far better off today if Gerald Ford had won the close 1976 election. Ford would have fared no worse, and probably much better than Carter as President. He may have even been able to finesse a better resolution to the Iranian problem and may have avoided the hostage crisis. Detente would have continued and flourished, and we would have avoided the Olympic boycott, reimposition of draft registration and tough talk about the Soviets. Above all, though, WE WOULD NOT HAVE HAD RONALD REAGAN! In 1980 V.P. Dole would have been the heir apparant, and by the time Reagan would have been in a position to run, he would have been too old. Imagine a 1980s without Reaganomics, Iran/Contra and the rise of the New Right!

    Posted by jmelderge at 12/31/2006 @ 3:46pm