Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA
The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Gerald Ford dead

13»

Posts

  • DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    edited December 2006
    Malkor wrote:
    moniker wrote:
    mcc wrote:
    ElJeffe wrote:
    What social benefits would have been realized by prosecuting Nixon that outweighed the social benefits of not prosecuting him? How would the nation have been made a better place?
    Well, it would have demonstrated to future presidents that if they willfully break the law, there will be some consequences other than public embarrassment followed by an enormous government pension for the rest of their lives.

    There's a slight chance that as a result, the presidents since would have been a bit less cavalier about breaking the law.

    Or to be better at covering up their crimes.

    I think it might be kinda hard to run a country when the former elected leader is being held in prison waiting for trial. They probably could have gotten away with it then, but the country would literaly shut down with today's news media.

    NPR had a story yesterday about how at Ford's first press conference (3 weeks after taking office) 2/3rds of the questions were about Nixon.

    Unless the Nixon thing ended and ended quickly the government would have accomplished nothing until it did. As one or two important things were happening at the time that wasn't acceptable.

    DevoutlyApathetic on
  • The Green Eyed MonsterThe Green Eyed Monster i blame hip hop Registered User regular
    edited December 2006
    Does it cross anybody else's mind that the reason they were asking so many questions is because they were being actively denied information -- openly, blatantly, and actively denied -- and as journalists in what is ostensibly an open and free democracy, they were unsatisfied with this?

    The Green Eyed Monster on
    wisdom wrote:
    if knowledge is power and power corrupts, be smart, be evil
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited December 2006
    Malkor wrote:
    moniker wrote:
    mcc wrote:
    ElJeffe wrote:
    What social benefits would have been realized by prosecuting Nixon that outweighed the social benefits of not prosecuting him? How would the nation have been made a better place?
    Well, it would have demonstrated to future presidents that if they willfully break the law, there will be some consequences other than public embarrassment followed by an enormous government pension for the rest of their lives.

    There's a slight chance that as a result, the presidents since would have been a bit less cavalier about breaking the law.

    Or to be better at covering up their crimes.

    I think it might be kinda hard to run a country when the former elected leader is being held in prison waiting for trial. They probably could have gotten away with it then, but the country would literaly shut down with today's news media.

    NPR had a story yesterday about how at Ford's first press conference (3 weeks after taking office) 2/3rds of the questions were about Nixon.

    Unless the Nixon thing ended and ended quickly the government would have accomplished nothing until it did. As one or two important things were happening at the time that wasn't acceptable.

    God knows our system isn't about people paying for thier crimes. it's about taking the easy way out.

    nexuscrawler on
  • GimGim a quietly erotic life Registered User regular
    edited December 2006
    C-SPAN is hilarious right now. It's almost nothing but retrospectives in the vein of "No, really, he actually mattered!"

    On a related note, I could listen to Henry Kissinger talk all day.

    Gim on
  • Der Waffle MousDer Waffle Mous Blame this on the misfortune of your birth. New Yark, New Yark.Registered User regular
    edited December 2006
    Tach wrote:
    ElJeffe wrote:
    I wonder if there's ever been a US president who, upon his death, did not spawn a gigantic wave of savage glee from a significant portion of the more fucked-up segment of society.
    Washington?
    The man who was given an iroquoian name meaning "burner of villages"?

    Der Waffle Mous on
    zaku.png
    Steam PSN: DerWaffleMous Origin: DerWaffleMous Bnet: DerWaffle#1682
  • MalkorMalkor Registered User regular
    edited December 2006
    Goumindong wrote:
    Malkor wrote:
    moniker wrote:
    mcc wrote:
    ElJeffe wrote:
    What social benefits would have been realized by prosecuting Nixon that outweighed the social benefits of not prosecuting him? How would the nation have been made a better place?
    Well, it would have demonstrated to future presidents that if they willfully break the law, there will be some consequences other than public embarrassment followed by an enormous government pension for the rest of their lives.

    There's a slight chance that as a result, the presidents since would have been a bit less cavalier about breaking the law.

    Or to be better at covering up their crimes.

    I think it might be kinda hard to run a country when the former elected leader is being held in prison waiting for trial. They probably could have gotten away with it then, but the country would literaly shut down with today's news media.

    This makes no sense.

    MSNBC CNN and the rest of the news services would eternal joygasms. Anything and everything the new leader would try to get done would be overshadowed by the constant coverage of the trial. Think of O.J. Simpson and JonBenet Ramsey combined 24 hours a day, with breaks to run down the developments of the last half hour and to tell us what the last leader had for breakfast and how his last bathroom break went. There'd be a small ticker at the bottom of the screen telling us that the new President reformed healthcare and retooled the social security system. The internet would finally literally asplode.

    Although back then news coverage wasn't as all encompassing and ubiquitous, it still would have kept attention focused away from the little things like 'Nam and the recession.

    Malkor on
    14271f3c-c765-4e74-92b1-49d7612675f2.jpg
  • The Green Eyed MonsterThe Green Eyed Monster i blame hip hop Registered User regular
    edited December 2006
    Malkor wrote:
    MSNBC CNN and the rest of the news services would eternal joygasms. Anything and everything the new leader would try to get done would be overshadowed by the constant coverage of the trial. Think of O.J. Simpson and JonBenet Ramsey combined 24 hours a day, with breaks to run down the developments of the last half hour and to tell us what the last leader had for breakfast and how his last bathroom break went. There'd be a small ticker at the bottom of the screen telling us that the new President reformed healthcare and retooled the social security system. The internet would finally literally asplode.

    Although back then news coverage wasn't as all encompassing and ubiquitous, it still would have kept attention focused away from the little things like 'Nam and the recession.
    So that's another one for the "people are too stupid to govern themselves" camp.

    The Green Eyed Monster on
    wisdom wrote:
    if knowledge is power and power corrupts, be smart, be evil
  • SenjutsuSenjutsu thot enthusiast Registered User regular
    edited December 2006
    ElJeffe wrote:
    What real effect could it have had? I don't mean Nixon being in jail (which would have been extremely unlikely even if he'd been prosecuted) versus him not. I mean on a large scale. What social benefits would have been realized by prosecuting Nixon that outweighed the social benefits of not prosecuting him? How would the nation have been made a better place? It's not enough to say "Justice would've been served." Please explain what that would get us, that we're otherwise lacking.
    It seems to me that the general consensus is that Watergate led to a widespread loss of faith by the American people in the Presidency in specific and politicians in general. In the long term, I think pardoning Nixon re-inforced that tendency in the public mind; politicians are corrupt, and even when their misdoings are revealed and widespread outrage exists, cronyism ensures that they'll never really face any consequences. One corrupt politician is the same as another, it doesn't matter who you vote for they're all the same, They never have to worry because they all scratch each other's back, etc, etc.

    In the long run not setting that precedent, but instead demonstrating that even the president is held to the same standards as everyone else, would have done far more good for the perception of politicians and politics, I think, than any short-term spectacle stemming from his trial.

    Senjutsu on
    Sarksus wrote: »
    I'm gonna get a PhD in incest.
  • Eliot DuboisEliot Dubois Registered User
    edited December 2006
    I can't blame Ford for pardoning Nixon, I mean, we do in America hold the President above the law. It's not right by any means, but I don't think any country wants to prosecute their leaders, it just looks bad. It's not like Nixon wasn't punished enough living with the shame that he brought about.

    We would like to believe that in America, no man is above the law, but we all know that there are plenty of people out there that are.

    Eliot Dubois on
    laliban.jpg
  • TankHammerTankHammer Atlanta Ghostbuster Atlanta, GARegistered User regular
    edited December 2006
    celery77 wrote:
    Malkor wrote:
    MSNBC CNN and the rest of the news services would eternal joygasms. Anything and everything the new leader would try to get done would be overshadowed by the constant coverage of the trial. Think of O.J. Simpson and JonBenet Ramsey combined 24 hours a day, with breaks to run down the developments of the last half hour and to tell us what the last leader had for breakfast and how his last bathroom break went. There'd be a small ticker at the bottom of the screen telling us that the new President reformed healthcare and retooled the social security system. The internet would finally literally asplode.

    Although back then news coverage wasn't as all encompassing and ubiquitous, it still would have kept attention focused away from the little things like 'Nam and the recession.
    So that's another one for the "people are too stupid to govern themselves" camp.
    24-hour news networks have ruined news.
    Wars are entertainment, mass-murderers are celebrities and people over-react to every social issue that can be imagined. Add in a built-in political bias that some of these networks exhibit and you have a wonderful cocktail of retarded behavior/thought process.

    Personally I don't hold any grudges against Gerald Ford or Ronald Regan. I don't see the point. I don't see either as inhuman monsters, they haven't come nearly as close to screwing this country as Bush has and at least they could make speeches without sounding like they were reading a children's book from a teleprompter.

    I think the criteria we should look for is the character of the individual and their ability to act on their own moral resolve. This whole super-loyalist approach to the political parties is the exact thing that is going to end up destroying this nation one day.

    TankHammer on
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited December 2006
    Senjutsu wrote:
    In the long run not setting that precedent, but instead demonstrating that even the president is held to the same standards as everyone else, would have done far more good for the perception of politicians and politics, I think, than any short-term spectacle stemming from his trial.

    Do you really think that if Nixon had gone to trial, he would've been sentenced to prison, or anything else even remotely commensurate with what would happen to "everyone else"? At worst, he would've been sentenced to house arrest for a few years and maybe lost his pension. At worst. Do you think that would've had the sweeping effects on the public's opinion of politicians that you suggest?

    ElJeffe on
    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
  • SenjutsuSenjutsu thot enthusiast Registered User regular
    edited December 2006
    ElJeffe wrote:
    Senjutsu wrote:
    In the long run not setting that precedent, but instead demonstrating that even the president is held to the same standards as everyone else, would have done far more good for the perception of politicians and politics, I think, than any short-term spectacle stemming from his trial.

    Do you really think that if Nixon had gone to trial, he would've been sentenced to prison, or anything else even remotely commensurate with what would happen to "everyone else"? At worst, he would've been sentenced to house arrest for a few years and maybe lost his pension. At worst. Do you think that would've had the sweeping effects on the public's opinion of politicians that you suggest?
    I don't think the punishment is nearly as important as being held to trial in the first place.

    Senjutsu on
    Sarksus wrote: »
    I'm gonna get a PhD in incest.
  • YarYar Registered User regular
    edited December 2006
    at least they could make speeches without sounding like they were reading a children's book from a teleprompter.
    I think this is just your experience bias. Ford was widely characterized as a child-like ignoramous. Chevy Chase became a celebrity by pretending to be Ford and falling down all over the place. Remember the Simpsons when Ford moves in?

    Yar on
  • SenjutsuSenjutsu thot enthusiast Registered User regular
    edited December 2006
    Yar wrote:
    at least they could make speeches without sounding like they were reading a children's book from a teleprompter.
    I think this is just your experience bias. Ford was widely characterized as a child-like ignoramous. Chevy Chase became a celebrity by pretending to be Ford and falling down all over the place. Remember the Simpsons when Ford moves in?
    Homer. Do you like beer. And Nachos.

    Senjutsu on
    Sarksus wrote: »
    I'm gonna get a PhD in incest.
  • Dublo7Dublo7 Registered User regular
    edited December 2006
    Man... I cannot believe what just happened.

    I was in a Ghost Recon game on Xbox live, and the host wanted to have a minute silence for that Ford guy.

    I said "Uhhh what are we doing?"
    *kicked*

    I just don't understand what is going on anymore.

    Dublo7 on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • edited December 2006
    I was at college during the two minute silence for 9/11 or WW2 victims or something last year. And me and my friends didn't notice everyone being silent and carried on having this really loud conversation about something I can't remember. Everyone stared, I guess they thought we were making some kind of protest.

    bongi on
  • GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    edited December 2006
    Malkor wrote:
    Goumindong wrote:
    Malkor wrote:
    moniker wrote:
    mcc wrote:
    ElJeffe wrote:
    What social benefits would have been realized by prosecuting Nixon that outweighed the social benefits of not prosecuting him? How would the nation have been made a better place?
    Well, it would have demonstrated to future presidents that if they willfully break the law, there will be some consequences other than public embarrassment followed by an enormous government pension for the rest of their lives.

    There's a slight chance that as a result, the presidents since would have been a bit less cavalier about breaking the law.

    Or to be better at covering up their crimes.

    I think it might be kinda hard to run a country when the former elected leader is being held in prison waiting for trial. They probably could have gotten away with it then, but the country would literaly shut down with today's news media.

    This makes no sense.

    MSNBC CNN and the rest of the news services would eternal joygasms. Anything and everything the new leader would try to get done would be overshadowed by the constant coverage of the trial. Think of O.J. Simpson and JonBenet Ramsey combined 24 hours a day, with breaks to run down the developments of the last half hour and to tell us what the last leader had for breakfast and how his last bathroom break went. There'd be a small ticker at the bottom of the screen telling us that the new President reformed healthcare and retooled the social security system. The internet would finally literally asplode.

    Although back then news coverage wasn't as all encompassing and ubiquitous, it still would have kept attention focused away from the little things like 'Nam and the recession.

    Yes, i dont see how this would end national productivity.

    BTW "Back then" during the Simpson trial and JonBenet Ramsey thing, news was nearly as bad, and what, with the MJ trial we didnt have the same thing?

    Your shitty arguement that doesnt actually connect why news coverage will end national productivity is entirely unconvincing.

    Goumindong on
    wbBv3fj.png
13»
Sign In or Register to comment.