"In action how like an angel"

Dick Cheney (left) and Donald Rumsfeld (right) posed with their former boss, President Jerry Ford, in 2004, three confident and courageous leaders underappreciated in their time. President Ford, in the hour of his death last Tuesday, began to be transformed by the commentariat into The Great Healer, the right man at the right time, admirable by virtue of contrast -- real or imagined -- between his presidential style and substance and those of GW Bush. An appreciation of VP Cheney and former Defense Secretary Rumsfeld will come in the fullness of time. "There is a time for every purpose," as Mr. Cheney referenced Ecclesiastes in his eulogy last night.  (David Hume Kennerly photo)

"Even then, amid troubles not of his own making, President Ford proved as worthy of that office as any who had ever come before," said Vice President Cheney last night in a most eloquent eulogy to his long-time mentor and friend, who lay in state nearby in the Rotunda of the Capitol Building:

He was modest and manful; there was confidence and courage in his bearing. In judgment, he was sober and serious, unafraid of decisions, calm and steady by nature, always the still point in the turning wheel. He assumed power without assuming airs; he knew how to treat people. He answered courtesy with courtesy; he answered discourtesy with courtesy.

As we listened to the poetry of the words -- with ironic echoes of Shakespeare's soaring "What a piece of work is man!" -- mesmerized by Dick Cheney's modest and manful delivery, we couldn't help but think the very same could be said of the speaker himself, keeping his head when all about him are losing theirs and blaming it on him. A few more exerpts:

This President's hardest decision was also among his first. And in September of 1974, Gerald Ford was almost alone in understanding that there can be no healing without pardon. The consensus holds that this decision cost him an election. That is very likely so. The criticism was fierce. But President Ford had larger concerns at heart. And it is far from the worst fate that a man should be remembered for his capacity to forgive.

In politics it can take a generation or more for a matter to settle, for tempers to cool. The distance of time has clarified many things about President Gerald Ford. And now death has done its part to reveal this man and the President for what he was.

"President Ford meets with Chief of Staff Don Rumsfeld and Deputy Chief of Staff Dick Cheney in the Oval Office" goes the caption for this Ford Library photograph dated April 28, 1975. Missing Rummy at the eulogies last night, we later learned he had planned to participate but was unable to be there due to weather delays. The hand of God? we wondered. Don't get us wrong. We totally admire the Secretary, and used to especially enjoy the bumpy rides afforded by his combative press-conference style, but when it comes to eulogies, the VPOTUS has the smooth and soothing manner called for by the occasion.

The Vice President's words resonate for Gerald Ford, for Dick Cheney and for all confident and courageous leaders -- we include President Bush and, of course, Donald Rumsfeld in that company -- whose larger concerns for the nation's well-being remain indecipherable to contemporaries and will come into focus only through the clarifying lens of the hindsight of history.

Comments

[hnav]

Well done...

Thank you...

Happy New Year.

RIP Mr. President.

[Tara]

Great post.

President Ford put what was best for the country at that time ahead of his own political survival and it cost him the presidency in the next election.

Happy New Year to you and yours, Sissy and to all who read this wonderful blog.

[Teresa]

A wonderful piece to end the year on. Happy New Year to you and Tuck - Goomp too. *grin*

[Gayle Miller]

When Vice President Cheney was speaking in the Capitol Rotunda, all I could wish was that his health was good enough for him to run for his own term. The man can SPEAK and there is an innate goodness in him, just as in President Bush.

That's what drives the loons of the left absolutely insane!

[LanceThruster]

Darth Cheney blathered about the wisdom of pardons as he might surely be in need of one at some point. As many fawned over Ford as being decent and moderate, he was a tool of the shadow government; both in his cover-up actions on the Warren Commission, the fuzzy-headed thinking of "healing" being more beneficial to the nation than accoutability (though it certainly was to GOP criminals), as well as putting Cheney and Rumsfeld in the power pipeline that plagues us to this day.

Why, he didn't even allow for Nixon to be charged or indicted before granting him a full and complete pardon. It's almost as good a deal as Ken Lay got when he died before the appeal was heard thereby invalidating his conviction. Rethuglicans can bugger off when they talk about rule of law because their motto has always been, " It's OK If You're A Republican!" (IOKIYAR)

Ford may have been less strident than the current crop of neocons, but that hasn't affected the tone of the present day GOP in the least. Add to that their new-found insistance on "bi-partisanship" now that the Bush agenda has been kicked to the curb (though that has not stopped Shrub yet from pushing his failed agnda in defiance of the will of the electorate).

[LanceThruster]

"Mercy for the guilty is cruelty to the innocent"

Maybe if Saddam had hand-picked a second in command, and stepped down, that newly appointed leader could have pardoned him.

I'm sure, since all here are the model of consistency, you'd likely have been echoing the words of the US pResident of Vice - Dick Cheney when you praised Saddam's successor for "understanding that there can be no healing without pardon. The consensus holds that this decision will cost him. That is very likely so. The criticism will be fierce.

[Editor's note: Cut to the chase. Long, incoherent comments are not welcome here.]

[Sissy Willis]

Lance, honey . . . Long comments are anathema to a blogger who believes the soul of wit is brevity. I would never dream of reading through the second paragraph.

[Trochilus]

Poor Lance, he forgot to spit out his contempt for Sandy Berger for burglarizing our National Archives. In doing so, he may well have successfully covered up real instances of malfeasance related to terrorism on the part of the Clinton Administration. All we are left with is the fact that he stole and then later destroyed several documents. And in a mere three years he'll be back in the power pipeline that will plague us come 2008.

How will we know who he spoke to on those cell phone calls where he kept "excusing" the National Archives staffer, probably in order to cover up his description of documents, and perhaps to receive instructions on what to take out of there?

Perhaps it was the burglar who took the billing documents from the Rose Law firm, the ones which curiously only showed up years later in storage among Hillary's belongings at the White House, coincidentally just after the statute of limitations had run on several offenses?

George McGovern, who ran against Richard Nixon in 1972, and who was arguably as much a target as anyone of that cheesy burglary at the Watergate Headquarters of the DNC, went on Larry King the other night, and revealed that in 1976 he voted for Gerald Ford. When he told his wife about it that Thanksgiving, she told him that she had voted for Ford too!

So, it was more than just Republicans who thought Gerald R. Ford was a thoroughly decent man who did the right thing for the country in a very difficult time. We are all better for Gerald Ford having come into our lives.

Sisu, your kind words, including about Dick Cheney's wonderful eulogy, were spot on! Thank you.

[Sissy Willis]

Trochilus: I always count on the kindness of strangers to flush the Poor Lancers out of the underbrush. Thank you. :-)

[LanceThruster]

How wonderfully ironic as the "long, incoherent comments" were those of the man you were eulogizing. It was Gerald Ford who spoke these words (with minor revisions) as he was granting Nixon a full and complete pardon.

As far as Sandy Berger pulling a Fawn Hall in service of Ollie North, if you can't plead innocence, plead equivalence.

Ford's "decency" was cruelty to the nation, as its festering plagues us to this day. A uniform standard brings even the Sandy Burgers of the world to justice. A sliding scale of it gives us more of the criminal machinations of Shrub & Gang.

[Trochilus]

Lance,

A uniform standard regarding Berger? Oh, please! He was fully protected from revealing what he was up to by our criminal rights standards, including the right to remain very silent, which he did.

We'll likely never know the extent of the crime he committed against the nation as a consequence of the unfortunate initial reluctance on the part of the staff of the National Archives to challenge his suspicious behavior. Read the IG Report. We do know that he was designated by former President Clinton to act on his behalf to examine the terror-related record of his Administration in preparation for testimony before the Graham-Goss Joint Intelligence Committee, and for the 9/11 Commission. But we will apparently not know who he participated with – on his numerous cell phone calls -- as he stole and later destroyed documentation.

All we know is that he did unlawfully steal national security documents from the National Archives to cover up something. For that, he received a modest fine and some community service in consequence. And no doubt some friendly Federal District court judge will order that he be put back in the loop with his security clearance in about two years.

As for Nixon, he lost his Presidency, and his reputation to history. Dozens lost their careers. Regarding the details, as a consequence of the Ervin and Rodino hearings, we knew virtually everything, right down to the last minute detail, including the number of dimes Anthony Ulazowitz [sp] had in his pockets to make phone calls with!

What Jerry Ford did was to recognize that continuing that process into the pursuit of criminal charges against Nixon would have sundered the nation further. He pardoned him, and he took the hit for that act on himself.

Finally, as for your name-calling tendencies, a little thought for you, Lance, from Elbert Green Hubbard:

"If you can't answer a man's arguments, all is not lost; you can still call him vile names."

[Sissy Willis]

Thanks, Trochilus, for telling it like it is.

[LanceThruster]

I would think a vile name fits because the "arguments" *are* answered.

Maybe you'd consider "Go f*ck yourself" (spoken by the veep on the floor of congress to a sitting member of congress) a "vile" response. I guess he couldn't "answer" the arguments either. LOL

[Trochilus]

So, Lance . . . when you "think" you have answered someone’s argument, you then feel entitled to freely start call the person names? I’m just trying to follow your . . . uhhh . . . logic.

The member wasn’t making arguments; he provoked a confrotation, and was just spewing more of his usual venom. He has made a career of it, as anyonr who has ever watched a Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing can attest. So, all things considered, it seems to me the succinct advice offered, was entirely merited.

[Trochilus]

Corrections: "confrontation" & "anyone"

[LanceThruster]

Troch - So in this case the courseness was warranted. In other cases it is indicative of the lack of a compelling argument. When Atlas Shrugs, or Coulter, or Hannity, or Rush do it, it's the pinnacle of reasoned discourse (and uparalleled jocularity). However, when aimed at the objects of your fawning, it's simply bad form.

Um..OK. I get it. IOKIYAR. (I think I already made that point - well some are a little slower on the uptake).

[youhoo]

As reported by FOX news 3 hours ago.

“The Justice Department on Tuesday repeated its original position that no documents were withheld. Spokesman Bryan Sierra said the department "has no evidence that Sandy Berger's actions deprived the 9/11 Commission of documents, and we stand by our investigation of this matter."

Despite the Republican protests.

And it’s very clear, the missing 18 ½ minutes Nixon’s secretary Rose Mary Woods supposedly erased will never be recovered. I guess we don’t know everything.

[LanceThruster]

Considering I had not characterized Berger "In action how like an angel", it does not effect my point. And when calling for a uniform standard for Berger, it meant one to apply, not necessarily one that exists.

You're concerned about his documents to the 9/11 Commission; I'm concerned about them all. If you had any integrity, you would as well. I don't know anyone with enough time and energy to hunt down all government shadings and obscuring of the truth, but it's always a task needing others to consider it worthwhile too. I'm willing to cast the net regardless who it catches. If you have any pull with the Justice Dept., you need to let them know where they failed or succeeded in their investigations.

[Trochilus]

Lance,

Mr. Leahy, as well as a few others on the Judiciary Committee, have displayed a long and inglorious history of very public and highly personal attacks on a variety of individuals that have come before the Committee, whether seeking confirmation or otherwise. Defend him if you want. In response to a testy and personal provocation by the Senator, the Vice-President privately gave him a well-deserved and succinct bit of advice. That it was picked up by a reporter and made public, was not his intention. So, it was entirely unlike a Coulter column, or a Rush radio show, or Hannity or Atlas Shrugged.

But, that the advice was quite sound – figuratively speaking -- I have no doubt at all. Big time!

I agree with you whole-heartedly when you say "it does not effect [your] point," but it surely does affect you point. And, if you want to insist that I have no integrity as a way of "making" your argument, go right ahead, but you know nothing of me, or my integrity. My gentle advice to you is that if you want to persuade others of your views, drop the name-calling and insinuations. But, if you objective is just to spew bile, then carry on.

I didn’t defend Richard Nixon’s actions then, or now. At the time – 33 years ago -- I was quite vociferous about it. But that doesn’t prevent me from opining a bit from my perspective on the matter now. And that is, that the climate was then saturated with political hatred and vindictiveness. Sound familiar? Take a look in the mirror. Some (e.g., me) would even say that blaming Jerry Ford, as you did in an earlier comment, for somehow having spawned all the imaginary "crimes" you now envision as, well . . . silly.

Nixon was thoroughly humiliated, forced from the Presidency, and historically marginalized over what was essentially a minor crime committed for petty political reasons. But that wasn’t enough for some – they wanted him drawn and quartered.

Through his pardon, Jerry Ford managed to clear some of that noxious atmosphere, and in doing so, he took a political blow that ultimately cut his career short.

My point, and the point that I thought was very well stated by Sisu, was that the eulogy Dick Cheney just gave for Jerry Ford was both eloquent and moving, as well as very thoughtful to a grieving family. That is not fawning – it is fact. And I understand -- you disagree.

[LanceThruster]

A minor point. My statement was that *if* you were not concerned about getting *all* pertinent documents on 9/11 then you were w/o integrity. I did not assume that you didn't want full disclosure.

The Ford situation is one where we indeed view it through different lenses. I think at the time (I was in my early teens) that I was glad that the pardon made it pretty much go away. In retrospect, it reconfirmed the concept of an imperial presidency in that equality under the law was subverted in order to "spare" the perps and supposedly the nation the unpleasantness of investigation and prosecution. Just as with a DEA investigation, to catch some fish but not see where else the trail leads allows much misconduct to remain hidden and in that way perpetuates it.

I feel the following exchange supports my position. Cheney bristled at being questioned about his ties to Halliburton and their no-bid contracts. In case you were not aware, the value Cheney's Halliburton has skyrocketed, and the mismanagement, profiteering, overcharging, billing for services NOT rendered, and outright disappearance of funds (somewhere in the neighborhood of $9 billion - with a "b") shows Sen. Leahy's concern was well founded.

Even with Halliburton's fraudulent billing practices, lack of proper accounting, and other disreputable behaviors, they are still a preferred status contractor. Though most in here seem quite thin-skinned in regards to disparaging names, the actions of Cheney and Halliburton could indeed be characterized as "treasonous."

from: http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/4/4990

"According to congressional aides, Leahy said hello to Cheney following the taking of the Senate group photo on the floor of the chamber.

Cheney, who is president of the Senate, then ripped into Leahy for the Democratic senator's criticism this week of alleged war profiteering in Iraq by Halliburton, the oil services company that Cheney once ran.

Leahy and other Democrats have called for congressional hearings into whether the vice president helped the firm win lucrative contracts in Iraq after the U.S.-led war that toppled Saddam Hussein.

During their exchange, Leahy noted that Republicans had accused Democrats of being anti-Catholic because they are opposed to some of President Bush's anti-abortion judges, the aides said.

That's when Cheney unloaded with the "F-bomb," aides said.

According to Senate rules, profanity is not permitted in the chamber. But when the exchange occurred between Leahy and Cheney, the Senate was not in session so there was technically no foul."

[LanceThruster]

BTW, these men were sworn to protect and defend the Constitution. The crimes taking place against it are in no way "imaginary."

[Trochilus]

Okay, Lance. I can see reasoned discourse is out with you. Hey, I took a shot!

Civil discourse should matter to us all, and merely noting that the Vice President had spoken kind and richly deserved words on the passing of a former President, should not have occasioned such an uninvited intrusion of venom as you continue to spit out here. It is obvious that you and so many on the left want nothing but blood sport. Kindness is out, humor is dead; all you want is someone's jugular.

Don't get too sure the American people will long tolerate that! Polemics do not equal facts.

On a personal level, please understand that few are interested in your long-winded rehashes of the "facts" as so objectively related in the Washington Post, courtesy of David Carle, spokesman for Senator Leahy!

Likewise, I can’t imagine anyone being seriously interested in your curious discourse on the subject of treason, on which it is painfully obvious you know little or nothing.

My guess is that you could possibly be suffering from some internet version of the old adage about the guy "who just loves to hear himself talk."

I hear the one truly sad aspect of the malady is that, those who suffer from it rarely detect the eye-rolling dread others feel when they begin to rant. Most just blather on.

One last thing. The Senate rules do not apply to Cheney. He’s not a member. There's nothing technical about it. That much the WaPo got right.

[LanceThruster]

I wasn't basing it on "rules" but on all the phony concern here for civility as they cheer on the lords of loutishness.

Ford was compared to an angel, an Cheney was complimented for basically not strangling any puppies and kittens in public.

If you don't think it could be considered treasonous to provide the US military combat soldier with fecal contaminated water and then seek to punish the whistleblowers, then you're like the "good German" who will go along with anything to keep from being the nail that stands out.

And this finding was NOT from some source that your ilk instantly label as unfairly partisan, but from a military doctor who looked for the reason that multiple e-coli infections were occurring.

Wave the f\/(&ing GOP Red, White, and Blue all you want but from my perspective, if you or your company (KBR) are getting paid good money to provide sh!t tainted water for troops to bath, wash, cook, clean and brush their teeth in, then you are to be reviled for the profiteering scumbags that you are. I'll bet Dead-eye Dick's water is clean and safe, don't you?

[Trochilus]

Lance,

At least figuratively, the only fecal contaminated matter I spot is bestrewn throughout your comments, which you insist on subjecting everyone to, ad infinitum, and uninvited.

Your object is clearly not to disagree, or challenge, or even to persuade anyone of your view – you are merely attempting to intersow contempt from your seemingly endless stock of shrill and imaginary offenses.

Tell us . . . who appointed you the guardian of all political sensibilities, the imprecator of all thing Republican? Or, are you the self-appointed one, the officious meddler extraordinaire?

For someone who claims to have been a teen in the early 1970s, that would put you at over forty now. Are you just the little "big" man who never quite grew up -- the sparrer, but never the fighter? The one who swings wildly, grunts loudly, and yet never really lands?