Unfortunately, Ford didn’t make an impression on Bush

December 28, 2006

I’ve been a little surprised by the various analyses drawing parallels between Ford’s presidency and that of George W. Bush. Other than taking office under dubious circumstances, they don’t seem particularly similar.

And yet, plenty of news items have been published like this one, from Newsweek’s Richard Wolffe and Holly Bailey, noting the “striking parallels between two administrations,” and considering Ford’s “surprising influence” on Bush.

To be sure, Bush has surrounded himself with a throng of Ford-era staffers. Cheney, Rumsfeld, Scowcroft, Baker, O’Neill, Greenspan, Hadley … the names all sound rather familiar. The Washington Post’s Peter Baker noted today, “When George W. Bush arrived at the Oval Office … it felt as if he were shooting a remake of the Ford White House.”

But the similarities seem to end there. Consider this LA Times piece about how Ford approached controversial policy discussions.

In seeking answers to problems, Ford — a veteran of more than two decades of debate in the House of Representatives — relished the give-and-take of open and sometimes heated debate. He would force the strong egos that surrounded him to make their case in person during lengthy White House sessions, where he would constantly question the most minute details. […]

Said L. William Seidman, a top Ford economic advisor, “I worked for three or four presidents, and I think more than any other president, [Ford] was determined that all views be presented to him before he made a decision. I think it’s very clear in the early days of the Bush administration, they did not have a process like that, and you had people like [Secretary of State Colin L.] Powell saying the State Department never had a chance to present to the president what would happen after the war started.”

It’s a helpful contrast.

According to Bush aides, “Bush can be petulant about dissent; he equates disagreement with disloyalty.” I’m also reminded of a Time interview with a “youngish” White House aide, described as a Bush favorite, who said, “The first time I told him he was wrong, he started yelling at me. Then I showed him where he was wrong, and he said, ‘All right. I understand. Good job.’ He patted me on the shoulder. I went and had dry heaves in the bathroom.”

Anyone care to argue with a straight face that Ford and Bush had similar leadership styles?

apparently, members of the media are. how do they come up with such ignorant thoughts?

  • Any similarity between the two administrations comes from the Ford-era zombies who came back to serve Boy George. These are two very different personalities. That this lazy, misguided article comes from the pen of Richard Wolffe should come as no surprise, as Wolffe is one of the fluffiest of Beltway fluffers.

  • Mental Hedonism is the problem with Bush and his followers. If it feels good to them, they believe it…. otherwise they stone the messenger.

  • State Department never had a chance to present to the president what would happen after the war started.

    Really? I actually never heard this one before. I knew that they didn’t have a plan for post-war Iraq, but to hear that they weren’t even given the opportunity to discuss it is startling.

    Yes, it’s true, I’ve actually been surprised by the depths of the Bush administration’s stupidity, incompetence, and arrogance. Am I forgetting anything?

    And it actually lowers my opinion of Colin Powell even more, and I was actually a supporter until it became so apparent that he either lied about the WMD, or was willfully blind to the evidence, or just naive. No matter which one it was, he knew that he had political cachet because he was perceived as an honest, intelligent, capable man and he chose to use that cachet to support one of the most misguided foreign policy decisions (in the broadest sense of the word) in our nation’s history.

    His “legacy,” since they all seem so concerned with that, is tarnished forever.

  • Not only al this, but in 2004 Ford said in an interview that the war in Iraq was a “bad choice.” No wonder he wasn’t on the Christmas party list, along with every other living Republican ex-President who might have taken Georgie-boy aside and pointed out the problems. Little Georgie’s had enough of people telling him he was a failure for everything he’s done since childhood. Being President in Bushworld means never having to be told you’re wrong.

    The Washington Post neologism contest has a real winner for describing Georgie-boy: “ignoranus” – a person who is both stupid and and asshole.

  • Actually, the State Department did have a post-war plan, which was taken from them and sent to the Pentagon, where it was not only ignored but thrown away. Oh, and their plan was realistic and had it been used might have solved nearly all the problems outside of there being an occupation.

  • “Being President in Bushworld means never having to be told you’re wrong.” – Tom Cleaver

    😉

    Boy George II and the Bushites have rejected a lot of good examples and advice from the start. That they rejected Powell’s or CENTCOM’s plans for Iraq is no surprise. That Cheney rejected Ford’s anti-Imperial White House is no surprise. That BG2 rejected every foreign policy that smacked of his dad is no surprise. These are people who are fundlamentally STUPID, know it, and fear thus allowing any opportunity for subtler minds to play them. Thus their refusal to talk to just about any foreign leader they don’t absolutely trust (or think they control) or to talk to any domestic opponent (thus allowing environmentalists one meeting on the 2001 energy policy commission versus dozens for the Texas Oil Mafia).

    When Condi says she won’t talk to the Iranians or the Syrians, it’s because she knows she’ll end up looking like and idiot (quite appropriately too).

  • Bush has a need to feel like the smartest man in the room. So of course he surrounds himself with sycophants and incompetents, there’s no other way for him achieve that goal.

    And of course he gets upset when people disagree with him, it screws up his whole self-image thing. It must hurt so bad when reality finally intrudes.

    Poor George.

  • Great comparison in the realities of the two foisted presidents. I would think that the true comparison would be the pratfalls, blows to the head, and stumble bum physical antics the two share. But this part will not be mentioned by today’s media. Really, Jerry bumped his head, and it was the given the Dean Scream treatment. Chimpy chokes on a pretzel, and it is blamed on what good physical shape he’s in.
    Our current MSM needs to prop up their president, BG2. They made him, supported him, protected (and protects) him. So any possible way they can put him in a good light, they will do it. Giving the comparison to the last Republican President that seemed to serve all of the country, the one whose scandal was to forgive Nixon, is an attempt to put the wing-nut known as Dubya back toward the center, toward the moderates of our counrty. Just another MSM lie passed off as conventional wisdom.

  • Ford was a mature man with (so far as I know) little interest in baby-sitting. The only way he could have made an impression on the Decider would have been with a razor strop. Even then, it’s questionable whether the pain so inflicted could have penetrated the Regal Moron’s bourbon-soaked and drug-addled frontal lobes. My guess is Ford knew spoiled little weenies like Bush from his football days and so wanted nothing to do with him.

  • Ed (Re #11) –
    GREAT insight.
    Jerry was a football player.
    Commander Codpiece was a cheerleader.
    Smirk reminds me of the spoiled brat (a college aquaintance) that took a dump on my life.

    • Comments are closed.