In the past big spending and large deficits were liberal. Today they are the GOP policy. The GOP in the past said we should not engage in Nation Building. Today we have Iraq! Time does have a way of changing things!

Heh, dunno where you get this stuff. Ford was trying to keep the Vietnam war going, at least by proxy, by pumping another 700 million or so into it. Ford was willing to pass a constitutional amendment to overturn Roe v. Wade and let the states decide, which is what most pro-life people want. If you think he was an "anti-war/pro-choice" republican in 1975, you're crazy.

What are you trying to do with this, shame people for differing with a beloved president? No offense, but he wasn't beloved. I didn't think much of him at all, beyond pardoning Nixon.

I'm wondering after you have been eternally shamed on your other "this place sucks" blogs, why you'd come and complain about the place again. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result each time. Or was that idiocy... works either way here...

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result each time. Or was that idiocy... works either way here...

Probably a bit of both . . .

Weren't you going to sue Stardock or something for defamation of character?

And yet you remain.

Ballsy, at least. Stupid, but ballsy.

"One of the most controversial issues of our time and one in which we share a keen interest is the question of abortion. I have grave concern over the serious moral questions raised by this issue. Each new life is a miracle of creation. To interfere with that creative process is a most serious act. In my view, the Government has a very special role in this regard. Specifically, the Government has a responsibility to protect life--and indeed to provide legal guarantees for the weak and unprotected. It: is within this context that I have consistently opposed the 1973 decision of the .Supreme Court. As President, I am sworn to uphold the laws of the land and I intend to carry out this responsibility. In my personal view, however, this court decision was unwise. I said then and I repeat today--abortion on demand is wrong. Since 1973 I have viewed as the most practical means of rectifying the situation created by the Court's action a Constitutional amendment that would restore to each State the authority to enact abortion statutes which fit the concerns and views of its own citizens. This approach is entirely in keeping with the system of Federalism devised by the founders of our Nation. As Minority Leader of the House of Representatives, I co-sponsored an amendment which would restore this authority to the States, and I have consistently supported that position since that time. My position has been based on three fundamental convictions: --I am against abortion on demand. --The people of every State should have the Constitutional right to control abortion. --There is a need to recognize and provide for exceptional cases. I should also point out that the Republican Platform which I support is fully consistent with these views. I recognize that this abortion question is a matter of deep personal and moral conviction. Honorable people may disagree, but all of us must be concerned about an increased irreverence for life within advanced societies. Americans have benefited greatly by our rich spiritual heritage. The sound, sensible lessons of goodness imparted by religious teachers and devoted parents have done more than anything else to prepare our children for life. A second issue of mutual concern is the future of non-public schools. Traditionally, those schools have made a vita"

Letter to Archbishop of Cincinnati, September 10th, 1976. No idea what you are talking about when you call him pro-choice. That doesn't sound very pro-choice to me. He just wanted the states to be able to make it illegal as they choose without federal imposition.

Heh, yeah, maybe Ford could sue from beyond the grave for TheGuyPC calling him a liberal. How is your anti-Stardock crusade coming, anyway?

"Another major threat to every American's person and property is the criminal carrying a handgun. The way to cut down on the criminal use of guns is not to take guns away from the law-abiding citizen, but to impose mandatory sentences for crimes in which a gun is used, make it harder to obtain cheap guns for criminal purposes, and concentrate gun control enforcement in high-crime areas."

From the state of the Union address, 1976. Hardly liberal or even mainstream Democrat thinking on gun control. I'm just wondering, did you make this crap up, or did you just copy what you saw some other empty-headed drone saying?

I guess this one will be abandoned, too. Can you really put these out of your head and not think about how they leave you looking like an idiot, TheGuyPc? You just drop a big steamer and then go about your day, probably dropping steamers elsewhere?

...or will you realize how goofy this one is, too, and beg for it to be removed. Then maybe threaten to sue when people laugh at you and turn it into a party, ensuring that it will steam on for ages? Maybe edit it into some snide remark to cover your goofiness?

Then maybe threaten to sue when people laugh at you and turn it into a party, ensuring that it will steam on for ages?

Maybe we should keep this one going for awhile, Baker . . . just for gicks and kiggles.

I dunno... he's got a viscous legal eagle in the family, supposedly. It's true for debate as in everything else, if you can't beat them, litigate. We could find ourselves out in the street, holding a tin cup, all because we couldn't resist calling ThatGuyPc an IDIOT.

BTW, how is it that FOX can claim to OWN the highest ratings....yet bitch about the "Mainstream" media. I've never understood that one. But hey, I'm not smart enough to figure out how to sign up for a blog account here either right? It figures. PC

What inquiring minds want to know is....."what's he using to figure with"?

Well, guys...you have to understand.....Ford did give the Washigton Post an interview in which he expressed displeasure with the Bush Administration and its current policy in Iraq. That puts him in a new light....maybe he'll even be a new hero for the Left.
They'll probably work real hard and do anything they can to paint him as a rogue Republican. The fact that everything they'll say is altered or revised history, completely made up or simply spun in their direction will be irrelelvant. Reality takes a backseat to ideology when you're a devout leftie.

Ford was just kind of a steward, really, and did his best with what was one of the most difficult times in recent American history. The double whammy of Watergate and the fall of Saigon kind of overshadowed any good he may have done in his time in office. It's kind of sad that the most anyone can remember of him was that he fell down a lot and that Chevy Chase got a lot of laughs on SNL for imitating him.

You know what I want to know? How long did the Post wait before they published his comments disagreeing with Bush? He'd wanted them kept quiet until he died. They just couldn't wait, could they?
I mean, Jesus, was his body even cold before the story hit the streets? Had his last breath dissipated? They must have had a mole in the room there somewhere with a hotline to the editor's desk.

That's just tacky. But then, that's the Post.

In the past big spending and large deficits were liberal. Today they are the GOP policy. The GOP in the past said we should not engage in Nation Building. Today we have Iraq! Time does have a way of changing things!

In the past, the DNC opposed the draft. Now they demand it. They say that we should not intervene in the sovereign affairs of nations such as Iraq, and they mount a HUGE publicity campaign to DEMAND it in Darfur. Hypocrisy doesn't carry a party label, col.