# The final departure or Mr Gerald Ford



## Desk Jockey (Aug 19, 2005)

Mr Ford, the 38th President, shuffled off this mortal coil at 11:45 EST Tuesday night.

 NYT article

Though I am, and will remain ardently till my last breath, a Democrat, I will mourn his passing. He brought peace to the citizens of this republic in a generally painful time and for that alone should he be honored.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

I always thought he got a really bad deal RE the buffoon thing. I always respected him.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

President Ford was certainly under rated with regard to the positive impact of his actions as President upon our national experience. He was a capable leader of good character, whose actions reflected what was right, versus what would have been convenient or politically expedient. May he rest in peace.


----------



## medwards (Feb 6, 2005)

He was a kind and decent man. I feel very fortunate to have known him.


----------



## Artisan Fan (Jul 21, 2006)

He strikes me as someone who was full of integrity. We need more of his type now.

He will be missed.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

He was my CIC between the tragedy of President Nixon and President Carter. I found no more, or less fault and praise in him than any leader and great appreciation for his gracious leadership in 3 piece suits.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

I was very, very young during his time. I have to say, it seems history has shown the value of a calm and unprepossessing man after a crisis. He lived a life that we should all aspire to.


----------



## JLibourel (Jun 13, 2004)

Gerald Ford was the only president in my adult lifetime that I was genuinely sorry to see leave office. He always impressed me as a very decent man, as others have commented.


----------



## Concordia (Sep 30, 2004)

I was quite young when he served as President, and it was easy in those days not to like him. The Nixon pardon, of course, and some other things. Nine-year-olds are very intolerant of those who fall short.

I've mellowed a bit over time; one could still argue about the pardon, but there is no question to me that his view of the post-Watergate situation makes a lot more sense now. A really unselfish act, considering the grief he took at the time, and the weakness of his own political position.


----------



## pendennis (Oct 6, 2005)

I was fortunate to have met him, and he was a man of exceedingly great character. His pardon of President Nixon was probably the bravest thing he did.

At a time when politics very nearly tore this country apart, President Ford very bravely kept the helm of this country true, by leading us out of a political and economic malaise. A more modest and common man could not be found. God rest his soul.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

A kind and decent man. May he rest in peace. FORE!!!


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

A small tribute from a treehugger. President Ford met with Ansel Adams. A blunt speaking Ansel used his time to beg for Park Reforms. Ford, a former park ranger and eagle scout responded with enthusiasm and proposed the Bicentienial land Heritage Act, a 1.5 Billion dollar effort that would have effectively DOUBLED our combined National Park, Recreational Areas and Wildlife Refuges and their restoration and maintenance over a 10 year period. Fearing passage would ( rightfully so) cast Ford as the greatest environmental president since T.R. ( who met with John Muir) the Democrats TWICE defeated it's passage. I withold comment on the dismal records of every president since, Democrat and Republican.


----------



## crs (Dec 30, 2004)

Kav said:


> A small tribute from a treehugger. President Ford met with Ansel Adams. A blunt speaking Ansel used his time to beg for Park Reforms. Ford, a former park ranger and eagle scout responded with enthusiasm and proposed the Bicentienial land Heritage Act, a 1.5 Billion dollar effort that would have effectively DOUBLED our combined National Park, Recreational Areas and Wildlife Refuges and their restoration and maintenance over a 10 year period. Fearing passage would ( rightfully so) cast Ford as the greatest environmental president since T.R. ( who met with John Muir) the Democrats TWICE defeated it's passage. I withold comment on the dismal records of every president since, Democrat and Republican.


People near proposed parkland often do not want it to be parkland. About five years ago I interviewed to be editor of a newspaper in one such area. The publisher told me that the "governor wants to turn this into some kind of wilderness preserve, when the people around here want jobs and landowners who pay property taxes." Possibly the politicians who opposed that act were representing the wants of their constituents rather than being motivated by spite.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

pendennis said:


> I was fortunate to have met him, and he was a man of exceedingly great character. His pardon of President Nixon was probably the bravest thing he did.


While I am not sure if the following qualifies as having met the Man, it does illustrate the type of person President Ford was. It was my privilege to command an Air Force honor guard, welcoming the Presidents arrival at our Base. As busy as he was, President Ford took the time to come over and shake my hand, commending the honor guard's performance, and then proceeded to speak to and shake the hands of several members of the Guard. President Ford was indeed a very unpretentious and gracious Chief Executive.


----------



## jackmccullough (May 10, 2006)

You'll never convince me that Nixon and Ford didn't have a deal when Nixon appointed Ford VP.


----------



## KenR (Jun 22, 2005)

jackmccullough said:


> You'll never convince me that Nixon and Ford didn't have a deal when Nixon appointed Ford VP.


Whether they did or not, I think the pardon was the right thing to do. The Clinton impeachment hearings seem in hindsight to have been mainly driven by a foolish partisan desire to screw the other side. A Nixon impeachment would have done nothing to help the country other than to give the Nixon haters some revenge.


----------



## pendennis (Oct 6, 2005)

eagle2250 said:


> While I am not sure if the following qualifies as having met the Man, it does illustrate the type of person President Ford was. It was my privilege to command an Air Force honor guard, welcoming the Presidents arrival at our Base. As busy as he was, President Ford took the time to come over and shake my hand, commending the honor guard's performance, and then proceeded to speak to and shake the hands of several members of the Guard. President Ford was indeed a very unpretentious and gracious Chief Executive.


I met then-Representative Ford at a seminar in 1967, several years prior to his ascendancy to Vice President; he was a very humble person, considering his seniority in the House at the time. He seemed very warm and sincere, no airs about him. His formal persona did not change that opinion of him.

A couple of years later, I stood as part of a US Navy unit at the Tomb Of The Unknown Soldiers on Memorial Day when Richard Nixon was President. I was within six feet of him, but his public persona was completely opposite that of Gerald Ford. Just an observation.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

jackmccullough said:


> You'll never convince me that Nixon and Ford didn't have a deal when Nixon appointed Ford VP.


You know, sometimes, we need to listen to our mothers. In a thread such as this, I think the old axiom of, "If you can not say something good about somebody, say nothing at all." He's dead Jack. Start another thread to criticize him, this one is to honourably eulogize him.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

I agree with Wayfarer's opinion about the time and place of Jack's post.

It amazes me how here and in life, people's politics (and folks on both sides of the right/left thing are guilty of it here and in life) make them believe they don't need civility.


----------



## The Wife (Feb 4, 2006)

_President _Ford was a very capable and dignified gentleman who came into office as the nascent national cynicism was about to burgeon. He thus became the convenient butt of irreverent jokes which mischaracterized him as clumsy, when he actually was an excellent athlete. Instead of being bitter about that, he bore it with grace and applied himself to the job of being president. God blessed President Ford with a long life, and his recent appearances on Fox News were inspiring. I'm gratified to read the respectful words that Ask Andy members have written here about an exemplary public servant.


----------



## crs (Dec 30, 2004)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> I agree with Wayfarer's opinion about the time and place of Jack's post.
> 
> It amazes me how here and in life, people's politics (and folks on both sides of the right/left thing are guilty of it here and in life) make them believe they don't need civility.


You're rather full of yourself these days.

I doubt Ford would have had any objection to Jack's post. Ford made an unpopular decision and was man enough to take the heat for it. As a career politician he likely did not expect unanimous praise upon his death.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

crs said:


> You're rather full of yourself these days.
> 
> I doubt Ford would have had any objection to Jack's post. Ford made an unpopular decision and was man enough to take the heat for it. As a career politician he likely did not expect unanimous praise upon his death.


CRS,

I agree with Way and associated follow-up comments and here is why: When there is a 2nd thread to discuss the specific issue of the pardon and leave this thread to a respectful discussion honoring the man, doing otherwise seems like the height of being full of oneself to me. I specifically did not want to be the one to politicize a thread memorializing an honorable and decent man.

While you are correct that we should no longer expect such politeness, and that President Ford was far to gracious to himself object, I have no problem supporting said objection.

I'm disappointed in Jack. While I disagree with him on almost every issue, he has always been a gentleman. Perhaps in Jack's case it was just a tragic and forgivable oversight.

I think his post is within bounds, but properly belongs in the other thread.

I would like to see a moderator move the post and follow-ups to the other thread.

KS


----------



## crs (Dec 30, 2004)

ksinc said:


> I think his post is within bounds, but properly belongs in the other thread.


You are correct. However, it is not as if Jack were picketing at the funeral home during viewing hours. This is merely a thread on a fashion message board.


----------



## KenR (Jun 22, 2005)

crs said:


> You're rather full of yourself these days.


Talk about needing civility.....


----------



## jackmccullough (May 10, 2006)

Nice to see that I always have Wayfarer on the alert for whatever infractions, real or imagined, I commit. It serves as a reminder of why I keep him on my ignore list.

As for the content of my post, I note that several of the posts on this thread contain comments, either positive or negative, on the political positions and choices he or other presidents made. I don't consider my comment on one of the central acts of his political career to be out of line, nor do I think that my comment would have been more appropriately posted in response to an observation comparing the sartorial styles of Gerald Ford and James Browne.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

Can I be considered for membership in Wayfarer's august company people? For a journalist you should know something about diplomacy in print, stories appropriate for the target audience and cultivating a readership. This may be merely a forum about clothing, but past great writers and journalists polished their skills in equally 'meaningless' venues. For a lot of us, Forums are ' A clean, well lighted place.' Which waiter are you?


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

crs, you have proven my point. The lack of civility contributes nothing to a discussion and if you wish to tromp on me for saying so, be my guest. To anyone that matters, you say more about yourself than about me. 

Usually, I try to show a bit of respect for the dead, especially when they have accomplished as much as someone who became President. I will feel the same when Carter and Clinton go. 

In the future, I will try not to be full of myself. In the future, you will probably continue to be uncivil. I can accept that.


----------



## crs (Dec 30, 2004)

Kav said:


> For a journalist you should know something about diplomacy in print, stories appropriate for the target audience and cultivating a readership.


I think you lack some understanding on that. Diplomacy is not a virtue. It is not our role to shield our customers from unpleasant truths or to sugarcoat the past. Take, for instance, a column that Pulitzer Prize winner Leonard Pitts Jr. wrote about Reagan just after that president died. Now Pitts is not a predicatable columnist; he won his Pulitzer for a year's work that included an angry column just after 9/11 that was roundly praised by warmongers. They found less to like about this "eulogy," for Reagan, but he wrote the truth:

https://www.aasfe.org/contests/2005winners/div4-generalcommentary.pdf


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

crs said:


> but he wrote the truth:


No. He wrote his unvarnished opinion. There is a substantial divide between that and "the truth". I find declarative statements by liberals in the media to be an obvious contradiction. By their own ideology, who are they to declare what is truth and what isn't?

Not predictable? Good Lord, you are kidding, right? I think Ted Kennedy was pissed after 9/11 too. Does that cause me to confuse him with William F. Buckley, Jr. on matters of conscience and perspective? Not exactly.

I think you lack understanding of just what legitimacy or not a Pulitzer Prize winner has in the majority of the public's eyes. Are there really any standards of any kind for winning that award? While I'm sure many distinguished and consistent intellectuals win that award, it's hardly an endorsement of principled and critical thinking. Only the Nobel Peace Prize has diminished its respect more by it's choice of receipients.

And, are you saying diplomacy is not a virtue, but journalism might be?

What is Leonard Pitts compared to a Gerald Ford or a Ronald Reagan? Absolutely nothing - not even on the radar.


----------



## Rocker (Oct 29, 2004)

Keen analysis from Pitts – thank goodness once Reagan was out of office and people such as Clinton got elected we no longer had problems with “Americans dying in thousands of AIDs” or “homeless people sleeping under freeway overpasses” and cities are no longer afflicted by addictive drugs......and we know how responsible Reagan was for all that anyway.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

I am, like all an end product of many efforts. Whatever my present personna, I was instilled with miltary bearing and courtesy by Boatswain's Mate Chief R. Williams between Nov 10 1972 and December 27 1972. Whatever my politics, pontifications or overt anger and insult to any elected official, IT ENDS when proper decorum is called for by tradition and national consciousness as a people. I may very well be on a peyote vision quest getting sunburned when Jimmy, Willie or GW passes in the future. I'll turn off my antique japanese made transitor radio, consult my compass, turn smartly on my heal and snap a buttonline salute. If somebody doesn't get it, I have niether time or further inclination to explain it further.


----------



## crs (Dec 30, 2004)

ksinc said:


> No. He wrote his unvarnished opinion. There is a substantial divide between that and "the truth". I find declarative statements by liberals in the media to be an obvious contradiction. By their own ideology, who are they to declare what is truth and what isn't?
> 
> Not predictable? Good Lord, you are kidding, right? I think Ted Kennedy was pissed after 9/11 too. Does that cause me to confuse him with William F. Buckley, Jr. on matters of conscience and perspective? Not exactly.
> 
> ...


The truth he pointed out was that not everyone was in lockstep with the deifying of Reagan. That is inarguable, I think. His point was not that Reagan should not be mourned, not that he shouldn't be given his due for the good things he did, but that it was fundamentally dishonest to pretend that the nation is of one mind out of respect for the dead.

He took his own newspaper, The Miami Herald, to task in the column, and the Herald printed it. I'm proud of my former colleagues there for doing that.

It served as a wakeup call to many in the business. Some have allowed themselves to overcompensate amid the relentless braying of "media bias," and when that happens no one is served.

I liked Gerald Ford. I do not think it dishonors his legacy to write the truth rather than pretty it up for the masses. He did what he did knowing full well that it might cost him, but unlike today's politicians, he did not operate with the next election in mind at all times. If anything, mentioning the heat he took at the time only serves to make him a more heroic figure in retrospect. I wish we had someone even remotely like that today.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

We would all be better off if more decision makers were like that, I agree. I wonder if we as a people will ever let our leaders be like that again. (Even Ford was voted out.) I guess it is probably a human instinct to hoard power over principle.


----------



## crazyquik (Jun 8, 2005)

President Ford will largely be forgotten by history, a footnote after Nixon (Vietnam, Tricky Dick, Watergate) and before Carter (peanut farmer, soaring interest rates, Iran hostages). The healing presidents are often forgotten while the divisive ones get the glory. 

Since this is a fashion forum, it's important that he was the last president to regularly wear a 3 piece suit.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

What I think some people are missing is that a civil thread that mourns someone, that by all accounts, was a good and generous spirit, is not necessarily endorsing him, his politics, or all of his actions. 

It is merely mourning. 

The objection is when someone feels they need to rhetorically trample on the flowers this thread is placing on his grave. My god, after all the accusations levelled at me by some, how can some of the very same people not see this? Just because people wish to remember a person's good points upon his death in this thread and you happen to be of contrary politics, is no reason to start hurling conspiracy accusations and what have you in some bastardized justification of "balance". 

Again, I go back to what our mothers always told us, sometimes if you can not saying anything nice, say nothing at all. Save the deconstructive political discourse for another thread.


----------



## Lushington (Jul 12, 2006)

crazyquik said:


> President Ford will largely be forgotten by history, a footnote after Nixon (Vietnam, Tricky Dick, Watergate) and before Carter (peanut farmer, soaring interest rates, Iran hostages). The healing presidents are often forgotten while the divisive ones get the glory.
> 
> Since this is a fashion forum, it's important that he was the last president to regularly wear a 3 piece suit.


The three-piece look was well-suited for one with his lineman's physique:

Ford was the Wolverines' MVP in 1935. The man could play.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Good pics of him there guys. It is always shocking to see how young people once looked when for your entire life, you considered those people "old", isn't it?


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

crs said:


> The truth he pointed out was that not everyone was in lockstep with the deifying of Reagan. That is inarguable, I think.


"The truth he pointed out was that not everyone was in lockstep with the deifying of Reagan."

???!!!

This comes out of a mind that earned a Pulitzer? And; you are proud of your colleagues for that?!

If that is the case, I'm owed three or four! 

Only the Media would be self-absorbed enough to think the Media needed to tell anyone that not everyone was in lockstep.

Further, the extension of "the truth" that he uses for justification is equally self-absorbed and self-important; as Rocker has already pointed out all too well.

I think Congress should pass a law requiring a "warning label" on newspapers so the readership fully understands just how stupid the editors and columnists think they are before they digest their "news".

-- "By unwrapping this newspaper you are acknowledging and accepting full responsibility for the fact that you are an idiot marching in lockstep to Rush Limbaugh and Brit Hume!" --


----------



## crs (Dec 30, 2004)

You're entitled to your opinion. Fortunately, though, your opinion is decidedly in the minority. And there's a good reason for that.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

crs said:


> You're entitled to your opinion. Fortunately, though, your opinion is decidedly in the minority. And there's a good reason for that.


Yes, but I try not to brag.


----------



## crazyquik (Jun 8, 2005)

Lushington said:


> The three-piece look was well-suited for one with his lineman's physique:
> 
> Ford was the Wolverines' MVP in 1935. The man could play.


He played on the national championship winning teams in 33 and 34 as well.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

I wouldn't count Ford out in future histories. People's qualities and fortuitous timing in history often age like better wines next to those gone to vinegar..


----------



## Rocker (Oct 29, 2004)

crazyquik said:


> Since this is a fashion forum, it's important that he was the last president to regularly wear a 3 piece suit.


Wow, he was even holding tobacco smoking paraphernalia in this picture - surpised that the painting hasn't been "re-touched" to correct that - someday, no doubt when the historical revisionists get done with history texts, they will move on to artifacts and this will be taken care of.


----------



## The Wife (Feb 4, 2006)

President Ford looks marvelous in his three-piece suit, holding his pipe. Thanks for the wonderful reproduction of his portrait, CrazyQuick.


----------



## Lushington (Jul 12, 2006)

Hold on. I thought this was a "mourning thread" in which posters would refrain from political commentary and write only of the passing of former President Ford and his manifest virtues. Or is reactionary dementia appropriate at all times, in all places?


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Lushington said:


> Or is reactionary dementia appropriate at all times, in all places?


Of course it is.

Yeah, keep the sniping for the other thread. No need to bash or snipe at either side here.


----------

