Apart from discussing the wisdom of the Nixon pardon, I don't see a lot of interesting chatter on the web today about former President Gerald Ford, who passed away yesterday. Everyone seems to be using the occasion to advance their particular political cause: Whatever you believe in, his successes or failures were proof of it. I almost suspect this is the last time anyone will have any reason to talk about Gerald Ford.
Most historians say that pardoning Richard M. Nixon (a) cost Ford the 1976 election and (b) was a decision made strictly on the basis of what he believed was right and proper for America. I think I agree with the first one, though I suspect that greater damage was done by the popular media image of Ford — inflamed by Chevy Chase's impressions on Saturday Night Live — of the man as a stumbling idiot. I thought the characterization was unfair but as so often happens with these things, the "victim" sure didn't do a lot to counteract the caricature. And I'm skeptical about the second point. Maybe it was a matter of pure conscience but maybe it was just an attempt to contain the ongoing embarrassment to the Republican party and some of Ford's crony pals, as well. It could even have been both.
Bob Woodward is out today with this article, based on an interview with Ford that was conducted in July of '04. In it, the former Chief Exec says that "very strongly disagreed" with Bush's handling of Iraq, including the fact that we invaded at all. That would be a courageous stance for Ford to take if he'd said it for publication two and half years ago…but what was the point of embargoing it until after his death? Especially since that death could have occurred next year or the year after? It's like Ford was saying, "I feel strongly about this but not strongly enough to have to listen to the criticisms of me for criticizing a current Republican president." If there was any reason for Ford to say it, he should have said it then.