  |
 |
| |
|
|
|
 E.J. Dionne Jr.: Bookending the Acrimony of 2006Posted on Dec 28, 2006By E.J. Dionne MIDDLETOWN, R.I.—The tributes to Gerald Ford’s great achievement in bringing a divided and disappointed country together seem oddly appropriate at the end of a tumultuous political year in which an Era of Angry Feelings led to a major shift of power in Washington. It is said there is now a new longing for the civility and warmth that Ford represented. There is a certain truth to this, but having reviewed thousands of e-mails sent my way this year by readers, it’s also clear that many Americans are deeply invested in political battles that they see as too important to admit easy compromise. True, citizens who e-mail columnists are more engaged in public life and care so passionately that they invest time to offer their views—often in learned detail. I love these folks and thank them. I appreciate their commitment, which is why, once a year, I like to thank not only those who wrote generously and warmly, but also the many dissenters represented succinctly by the reader who simply called me an “idiot.” Many critics offered useful challenges. “Perhaps, Mr. Dionne, you would also support the right of conservatives to appear without harassment, verbal and physical, at our nation’s leading so-called institutions of higher learning controlled by your ... fellow leftists.” I do: It is wrong—and illiberal—to block those with whom you disagree from university platforms. In response to a column on evangelical pastor Rick Warren, a reader from Portage, Wis., wrote: “Evangelical churches I have been associated with have been reaching out to people throughout the world since before you were born. Missionaries don’t just run around in funny clothes and wave their Bible in the air. They teach basic health and sanitation, provide basic medical care. ... The very idea that evangelicals have been negligent in these areas is simply liberal prejudice.” Judging from my mail, many liberals and Democrats who once liked Sen. John McCain have been pushed away by his opening to the right over the last year or so—but conservatives are responding positively. “McCain is soon to be Maverick non grata”—nice line—“amongst the circles of smug, rich white liberals that you run in,” one reader wrote. “But don’t worry. We’ll support him if he becomes our nominee.” Many conservatives are frustrated with the Bush administration and the outgoing Republican Congress. Their views were captured by one reader who offered: “Conservatism, like Christianity, has not failed. Neither has ever been tried, especially by this administration.” A columnist’s e-mail trove is not a scientific sample that would pass the muster of social science. But it does offer clues as to where the politically active invest their energies. Judging by how many people offered their views on nominations to the U.S. Supreme Court, the conventional wisdom is entirely right in seeing this as a blockbuster issue. When I wrote critically of Samuel Alito’s evasiveness during his Senate confirmation hearing to become an associate justice, the floodgates opened. One reader after another suggested that Alito had been no more evasive than Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg during her hearings in the 1990s. “Gosh, E.J.,” a friendly critic from South Carolina offered, “how many times do you have to be reminded? We won, you lost. I didn’t hear you moaning over Ginsburg’s evasions or whining about how (Stephen) Breyer would move the court to the left. Turnabout is fair play. Relax, maybe your gang will get back in one day.” Indeed. Also striking was how angry liberals were at the performance of Democratic senators on the Judiciary Committee. One reader, representing many others, complained that “all they did was read from redundant and sterile scripts and badger him with the same questions ad nauseam. They have become like the ‘pods’ in ‘Invasion of the Body Snatchers.’ ” And thanks to the reader who wrote: “I would like to congratulate you for identifying yourself as a liberal. Many in your crowd are running from that word these days.” It’s a sign of weakness to embrace only poll-tested and focus-grouped labels. Finally, a great many readers were frustrated that I have been rather consistently critical of President Bush—though a few wanted more criticism. So please permit me to end the year in the conciliatory spirit of Gerald Ford. Speaking on Wednesday morning, Bush declared that Ford “came along when we needed him most” and that Americans came to know him “as a man of complete integrity who led our country with common sense and kind instincts.” President Bush is entirely right.
E.J. Dionne Jr.’s e-mail address is postchat@aol.com.
Previous item: Ellen Goodman: Ready, Steady, Go Next item: Robert Scheer: Silencing Saddam Elsewhere: . CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. Add Your Comment |
|
Email
Print
Share
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Ma.gnolia
Newsvine
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Yahoo
Jump to Comments
Copyright © 2008 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved.
By David Fredericks, January 3, 2007 at 12:09 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
It’s natural to make saints and sages of our fallen heroes. Hence all the pomp and circumstance attending the death of Gerald Ford.
Report thisThat an imperious administration, composed of Ivory leaguers, establishment wealth, and members of secret societies, dedicated to war, revenge, torture, secrecy, and contempt for the hoi polloi, should pay tribute to the simple virtues of forgiveness, forthrightness, and ordinariness, is hypocrisy—non pareil!
We are now living through another dangerous era of public deception and reckless self-interest. It’s agents are the same people that Ford elevated to high status and include Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfield. As we salute Ford mostly for his selfless stand in pardoning Nixon, it should be understood that Ford and Nixon were thick as thieves. Ford was Nixon’s best friend—a man who could be counted on not to seek public retribution, no matter how many or how terrible the crimes of his friend: The pardon did not have to be asked for.
Given President Ford’s overall actions and opinions, I’d like to continue to believe that he was mostly a decent and honorable man. Still, the public should not be blind to the truths of that era. or the background of the men who now offer up epigrams and eulogies to Ford’s memory.
By Skruff, January 3, 2007 at 10:10 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Americans came to know him “as a man of complete integrity who led our country with common sense and kind instincts.”
Are you F**king Joking?
Ask the citizens of East Timor about this “man of complete integrity”. Oops, you can’t, most of them are dead!
What about the Chileans? the rule Augusto Pinochet, the fierce anti-communist dictator who ruled Chile with an iron fist from 1973 to 1990, died Dec. 10, 2006 owed much to the support of his two-year-older mentor Gerry Ford.
Yeah, Ford was no Lincoln… maybe a Pinto!
I expect this type of whitewash from mainstream media, but the murder of over 200,000 men women and children should not be “overlooked.
Report thisBy David, December 29, 2006 at 7:36 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Jeebus,
I just read that President Pissant is skipping Gerald Ford’s state funeral. If Bush gets any smaller, he’ll disappear, which I’m beginning to think would be ok, as long as he takes Dick with him. Would that Ford could arise and finish out Bush/Cheney’s misbegotten administration.
Report thisBy David, December 29, 2006 at 7:29 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
President Blind Hog found an acorn, but it was an acorn worth finding. I fear that is probably his limit. He still seems to fail to get anything else, and is in that regard our most steadfast President, at least in my 64 years.
Report thisBy lawlessone, December 29, 2006 at 3:17 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Bush, in eulogizing Ford, referenced the quote about the “long nightmare” finally being “over.”
How ironic. And, don’t I wish. We have 2 more years for Bush to haunt our days and dreams.
[more irreverence at resistence-is-possible.blogspot.com]
Report thisBy WCG, December 29, 2006 at 9:28 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
So one reader said, “Conservatism, like Christianity, has not failed. Neither has ever been tried.” Sounds like a quote (just changing the key word) from an old Communist. No, they’ve all been tried and they’ve all failed. Time to move on.
Report thisBy jon eden, December 29, 2006 at 2:35 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Thank you E J. You are a bit of a beacon--if not helping guide us (an impossibility,) at least helping us remember that sanity, and not this psychotic storminess, is the norm.
Jon
http://StudentsForTheEarth.org
Report this