Presidential Legacies (1 Viewer)

[CurrentAffairs]

In the wake of Gerald Ford's death, I can't help but consider his legacy and those who want to already give President Bush his legacy before history has a chance to define it.

After Watergate, Ford enjoyed extremely high poll numbers. He proclaimed Watergate "our long national nightmare" and he was correct, so it isn't hard to understand why his numbers were so good. However, his poll numbers collapsed several months later after pardoning Nixon. The nation was in immediate viper mode. How could he do this? How could he pardon Nixon after what Nixon had put this country through. What cronyism, the nation shouted.

Then time went on...as must happen before anyone's legacy can be defined.

Last week was full of tributes to Gerald Ford and rightly so. It was very interesting to hear politicians, media broacasters and ordinary civilians make remarks on Ford's legacy. All of them made sure to mention, that while it was unpopular at the time, the pardoning of Richard Nixon proved to be what led our nation to heal and to put the "national nightmare" to rest. All of them said his legacy couldn't have been understood then, but was plain as day now.

For those who press so hard to define President Bush's legacy before history has a chance to unfold, I say you are woefully ignorant (innocently ignorant and I mean it with no condescension). Whether you agree with a war in Iraq or not, whether you agree with his stance on terror or not, none of us know how the last chapter in the Middle East will be written. If the region never finds it's way, never achieves a democratic stronghold and remains mired in turmoil, then the Bush legacy will be clear. It the region finds it's way, establishes peace and democracy, the Bush legacy will be equally as clear.

 

[Lightdemon]

Just trying to play devils advocate here, I'm not trying to be an ***. I just want to probe this topic and try to establish some ground work for which we can use to discuss.

Question: How did the pardoning of Nixon help heal the country.? There are a lot of things that helped in the healing process, but in what way did the pardoning of Nixon help.

Also, I want to comment on Bush's legacy. He is 6 of 8 years already, which means he has nearly lived up all of his presidenthood. That I think warrants most of what remains of his legacy, at least a majority of it. And though I agree, not one can predict the future, we can certain predict the future in a lesser degree.

 

[CurrentAffairs]

Question: How did the pardoning of Nixon help heal the country.? There are a lot of things that helped in the healing process, but in what way did the pardoning of Nixon help.

Also, I want to comment on Bush's legacy. He is 6 of 8 years already, which means he has nearly lived up all of his presidenthood. That I think warrants most of what remains of his legacy, at least a majority of it. And though I agree, not one can predict the future, we can certain predict the future in a lesser degree.

Pardoning Nixon, as has been pointed out ad nausium throught the last two weeks, saved the country from dragging the Watergate affair out further and dividing our nation even more. The pardon put an end to the entire affair and, wisely, allowed the country to move forward. We didn't know that at the time. I thought it was an awful idea at the time, but I don't now. It took many years for us to figure out the wisdom that Ford brought to the entire mess.

Which brings me to your second point. 6 of 8 years - even 8 of 8 years does not determine legacy and this was the premise of my entire thread. I think the core of this issue - that legacy requires time to pass - might have gone past you. Living out a term of office doesn't establish legacy, history does. That's why I chose to put the thread in this forum.

Just like the wisdom of the pardon wasn't fully known for a quarter century or more, so too is our involvement in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East. Because you don't like it now doesn't mean you may not come to further realize it's neccesity in the years to come.

 

[PoliticalActivist]

Out of Bush's soon be eight years as Chief Terrorist. Show me something that Bush has done in his two terms that's worth remembering him for? Hell yeah he will make history for being the first American Commanding Thief chanrged with many major War Crime violations. The two that I highly salute is John.F.Kennedy and Bill Clinton.

 

[Morty]

Out of Bush's soon be eight years as Chief Terrorist. Show me something that Bush has done in his two terms that's worth remembering him for? Hell yeah he will make history for being the first American Commanding Thief chanrged with many major War Crime violations. The two that I highly salute is John.F.Kennedy and Bill Clinton.

I agree with everything in this besides the last two words.
I find Clinton to be one of our worst Presidents ever.

 

[CurrentAffairs]

Hell yeah he will make history for being the first American Commanding Thief chanrged with many major War Crime violations.

Sorry to disappoint you, but your party has already thrown out the idea of investigating Bush for anything impeachable. They promised it to you during the campaign but it was stricken from the platform within a week after election day.

There are many threads throughout this forum dedicated to expressing your hate for Bush, but this thread was designed for something else. Care to comment on the notion that a legacy is defined by allowing history to unfold and that Bush's legacy, like Ford's, may not be determined for many years to come?

 

[Lightdemon]

Pardoning Nixon, as has been pointed out ad nausium throught the last two weeks, saved the country from dragging the Watergate affair out further and dividing our nation even more. The pardon put an end to the entire affair and, wisely, allowed the country to move forward. We didn't know that at the time. I thought it was an awful idea at the time, but I don't now. It took many years for us to figure out the wisdom that Ford brought to the entire mess.

Ok, so it was an ending of a Scandal? But I fail to see how that was actually productive. Strategic perhaps, on the part of Ford and Nixon. However, wouldn't you agree that by pardoning Nixon, putting an end to the Watergate Scandal, kind of actually ceased further investigation and debate? We have moved on, yes. But have we learned everything? No. By pardoning Nixon, the American people are left in the dark (as usual). When Ford wrote his memoirs, publication rights were quickly bought and Ford had to sign a contract saying he would not talk about his memoirs until it was finally published. And of course, his memoirs contained the pardoning of Nixon.

Which brings me to your second point. 6 of 8 years - even 8 of 8 years does not determine legacy and this was the premise of my entire thread. I think the core of this issue - that legacy requires time to pass - might have gone past you. Living out a term of office doesn't establish legacy, history does. That's why I chose to put the thread in this forum.

Just like the wisdom of the pardon wasn't fully known for a quarter century or more, so too is our involvement in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East. Because you don't like it now doesn't mean you may not come to further realize it's neccesity in the years to come.

And to this, I'm going to borrow from Napoleon (or at least I think it was him) who said, "History is nothing but the victor's side of the story."

:spin:

 

[CurrentAffairs]

And to this, I'm going to borrow from Napoleon (or at least I think it was him) who said, "History is nothing but the victor's side of the story."

My point exactly. So until we see whether Iraq ends in victory or defeat, no one can tell the story.

 

[Lightdemon]

My point exactly. So until we see whether Iraq ends in victory or defeat, no one can tell the story.

Actually, no. You missed my point in that quote from Napoleon.

Those who win the war, are the ones writing the history. It wasn't implied that the victors of the war in Iraq, be it us or them, will be recorded in our history. This quotation refers to the fact that it is our govt that is writing our history, the ones that actually wins. The ones that are actually in power.

Whether we win in Iraq, or lose, it doesn't really matter. History will be written according to the one who is writing it, which in all cases will be the victorious ones. Those that are in power. That was what that proverb meant.

What Ford did, and what became of his legacy, is a function of what was written down in the history books. How it was told, in what context, as well as what information was submitted and/or omitted. It is this history that is told. We almost never here the loser's side of history, and if we do, there's very little of it.

Now you say that it took people a long time to realize that the pardon was a very wise move, but then one can also say that it took a lot time for people to be re-educated about that facts that were hidden from them at the time of the pardon. But you see, the re-education part of this has to do with what information that is disclosed to us. And it is only the "victor's" information that you will recieve.

As for Bush, can we predict his future? Perhaps not. But his legacy will be determined on how the history books are written, and actually who is doing the writing. The result of Iraq, is probably not going to overthrow our system of representative democracy, nor is it probable that it will elminate our bi-partisan system. I doubt that any result in Iraq will create a revolution that will result in the thwarting of those that are in power in the US. Therefore, I believe that whatever the outcome, not just Bush's legacy, but the legacy of the US will be in favor of....well, the US.

 

[disneydude]

While I do agree that the complete legacy will not be known for decades...there are certain things that will be a part of it....

Whether you liked him or not, whether History likes him or not....Nixon will be remembered for Watergate....
Carter....will be remembered for the Iran Hostage situation and gas shortages
Reagan will be remembered for the AIDS epidemic
Bush 1 will be remembered for Iran/Contra
Clinton will be remembered for his sexual escapades with Monica

and Bush will be remembered for 911 and the seven minutes that he sat in complete ineptness in a class of school kids reading "My pet goat".


That is not to say that there are favorable things that each of these President's will be remembered for as well......

So to say that we cannot determine their legacy...is true to an extent....but a legacy unfolds even during the individuals presidency and it is their actions/inactions that play a part of that legacy.

 

[CurrentAffairs]

Nixon will be remembered for Watergate....
Carter....will be remembered for the Iran Hostage situation and gas shortages
Reagan will be remembered for the AIDS epidemic
Bush 1 will be remembered for Iran/Contra
Clinton will be remembered for his sexual escapades with Monica
Bush will be remembered for 911 and the seven minutes that he sat in complete ineptness in a class of school kids reading "My pet goat".

To you, maybe. I will remember each of those presidents for entirely different things. Now what?

 

[disneydude]

To you, maybe. I will remember each of those presidents for entirely different things. Now what?

Of course you can always choose to overlook certain things about each of these men....but a legacy is about the things that history will remember them for....and history doesn't remember only the positive.

 

[CurrentAffairs]

Of course you can always choose to overlook certain things about each of these men....but a legacy is about the things that history will remember them for....and history doesn't remember only the positive.

Of course it doesn't. I think you missed the point. What you remember these men for may differ from how others think. You are correct, however, in saying it requires history for there to be a legacy - positive or negative. None of us know how the last chapter will be written in Iraq. Until it's written, the Bush legacy is unknown. We may have an opinion of this president as it relates to the present day, but no one is capable of knowing how his legacy will be written.

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

I agree with everything in this besides the last two words.
I find Clinton to be one of our worst Presidents ever.

He did the most for the USA of any modern time America presidents.

 

[RightOfCenter]

He did the most for the USA of any modern time America presidents.

Prove it. Also, what do you consider modern times? How far back do we go? Teddy Roosevelt? FDR? Eisenhower? Nixon? Carter? Reagan? Or do we start at Clinton?

 

[RightOfCenter]

and Bush will be remembered for 911 and the seven minutes that he sat in complete ineptness in a class of school kids reading "My pet goat".

What did you want him to do? Run out of the room screaming? He will be remembered for 9/11 but not for the seven minutes after he found out, but the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

 

[Dyers Eve]

In the wake of Gerald Ford's death, I can't help but consider his legacy and those who want to already give President Bush his legacy before history has a chance to define it.

After Watergate, Ford enjoyed extremely high poll numbers. He proclaimed Watergate "our long national nightmare" and he was correct, so it isn't hard to understand why his numbers were so good. However, his poll numbers collapsed several months later after pardoning Nixon. The nation was in immediate viper mode. How could he do this? How could he pardon Nixon after what Nixon had put this country through. What cronyism, the nation shouted.

Then time went on...as must happen before anyone's legacy can be defined.

Last week was full of tributes to Gerald Ford and rightly so. It was very interesting to hear politicians, media broacasters and ordinary civilians make remarks on Ford's legacy. All of them made sure to mention, that while it was unpopular at the time, the pardoning of Richard Nixon proved to be what led our nation to heal and to put the "national nightmare" to rest. All of them said his legacy couldn't have been understood then, but was plain as day now.

For those who press so hard to define President Bush's legacy before history has a chance to unfold, I say you are woefully ignorant (innocently ignorant and I mean it with no condescension). Whether you agree with a war in Iraq or not, whether you agree with his stance on terror or not, none of us know how the last chapter in the Middle East will be written. If the region never finds it's way, never achieves a democratic stronghold and remains mired in turmoil, then the Bush legacy will be clear. It the region finds it's way, establishes peace and democracy, the Bush legacy will be equally as clear.

Perhaps history will be kinder to Bush than the pundits.

As for what the middle east will look like, I doubt it will change much. You'll see something like an extended, but smaller US prescense in Iraq, and a more powerful Iran, but nations have gone up and down in the middle east.

 

[Dyers Eve]

Now you say that it took people a long time to realize that the pardon was a very wise move, but then one can also say that it took a lot time for people to be re-educated about that facts that were hidden from them at the time of the pardon. But you see, the re-education part of this has to do with what information that is disclosed to us. And it is only the "victor's" information that you will recieve.

.

Do you honestly think people are that stupid?

Besides, you read CurrentAffairs, he said that during the time, he was against the pardoning, but now he realizes it was the right thing to do. Re-educated? Or live and learn?

 

[Dyers Eve]

While I do agree that the complete legacy will not be known for decades...there are certain things that will be a part of it....

Whether you liked him or not, whether History likes him or not....Nixon will be remembered for Watergate....
Carter....will be remembered for the Iran Hostage situation and gas shortages
Reagan will be remembered for the AIDS epidemicBush 1 will be remembered for Iran/Contra
Clinton will be remembered for his sexual escapades with Monica

and Bush will be remembered for 911 and the seven minutes that he sat in complete ineptness in a class of school kids reading "My pet goat".


That is not to say that there are favorable things that each of these President's will be remembered for as well......

So to say that we cannot determine their legacy...is true to an extent....but a legacy unfolds even during the individuals presidency and it is their actions/inactions that play a part of that legacy.

Wrong. He is already remembered for bringing down the Soviet Union.

Just as your analysis of Reagan's legacy is wrong, so is your analysis of Bush's.

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

Prove it. Also, what do you consider modern times? How far back do we go? Teddy Roosevelt? FDR? Eisenhower? Nixon? Carter? Reagan? Or do we start at Clinton?

Lets start with everyone after George Washington? Then he is one of the best, if we start after 1900 he is definetely the best.

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

Wrong. He is already remembered for bringing down the Soviet Union.

Just as your analysis of Reagan's legacy is wrong, so is your analysis of Bush's.

Who is remembered for that excep Gorbatchov?

 

[RightOfCenter]

Lets start with everyone after George Washington? Then he is one of the best, if we start after 1900 he is definetely the best.

Better than Woodrow Wilson who led the United States through World War I? Better than FDR who led America through the Great Depression and World War II? Better than Reagan who through militirization ended the Soviet Union? Better than GHW Bush who helped liberate Kuwait? Tell me what major world event Clinton led us through. I'd say none, yes he was a good care taker president who was leading the United States through the dot com boom, but what else did he do?

 

[RightOfCenter]

Who is remembered for that excep Gorbatchov?

Ummm....Reagan?

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

Better than Woodrow Wilson who led the United States through World War I?

Well done that.

Better than FDR who led America through the Great Depression and World War II?

He was indeed a great president, but General/President Eisenhower should have the WW2 US honour.

Better than Reagan who through militirization ended the Soviet Union?

Reagan was an actor at best, not a president. He didnt end the Soviet Union, the Soviet Union did, especially Gorbachev but also Chemenko. Gorbachev was a tragedy for the Soviet Union, and his government lead to the collapse of the Soviet Union through irresponsible financial politics.
We all know both Russia and the US had 10000 nuclear weapons ready, so the "militarization" you are talking at is irrelevant, the Soviet Union was brought down from the inside.

Better than GHW Bush who helped liberate Kuwait?

Wow, if thats what he is remembered for, he sure didnt leave much of a legacy.

Tell me what major world event Clinton led us through. I'd say none, yes he was a good care taker president who was leading the United States through the dot com boom, but what else did he do?

A president dont have to lead you through war and conflict to be a great president. Clinton took over a bust US, with an economy in recession and high unemployment. Had it not been for Clinton, the US would have been in depression when Bush took office, and if they had been who know what would have happend. I would think third world war or something similar.

Clinton brought back US confidence in themself, he revived the economy, turned the recession into progression, and made important reforms in the US, that had it not been for those Bush would have no cusion.
Had it not been for the long lasting effects of the Clinton administration that Bush is slowly ripping apart, the US would already have been in a depression a few years after Bush took office, guaranteed.

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

Ummm....Reagan?

Reagan didnt do anything to bring down the soviet union, they managed that fine on their own..

Who cares about 1 or even 100 aircraft carriers when both nations have 10000 nuclear weapons?