Frost/Nixon/Bush
Spoiler alert if you haven't already seen Frost/Nixon.
Saw it Sunday afternoon with low expectations and found it to be about five times better than I expected. Far beyond the usual Ron Howard Mayberry Mush.
To be exact: I loved every minute of it.
There's been some tinkering with the historical accuracy of the much-watched encounter (broadcast more than 30 years ago on more than 150 TV outlets). But it's only tinkering. The basic thrust is on the money. Nixon failed to redeem himself in any significant way and though, in reality, he hemmed and hawed more than did he in the flick, he basically acknowledged his wrongdoing before a world-wide audience.
One of the "aha moments" of the q & a comes when the former president of the U.S. heatedly argues that just about anything becomes legal if the President of the United States either says it's legal or just DOES whatever it is that would clearly be illegal if anyone else did it.
Strange. This is the precise argumentation put forward by several former Bush administration officials and by that other Dick, Mr. Cheney, in justifying if not celebrating the illegal and immoral acts of torture institutionalized over the last eight years. The same old Nixonite crap for far worse crimes than covering up the break-in of the DNC offices.
I have been thinking about this a lot over the last year or two and I think I have finally reached a firm conclusion. If you were to ask me if Bush-Cheney-Addington-Yoo and others should be prosecuted for violation of international law, I would say yes, of course.
I would also hastily add that it ain't gonna happen. It's going up a blind alley that will clarify nothing.
My conclusion is that some sort of Truth Commission is a much better, highly significant and politically attainable goal.
The case of Dick Nixon serves us well here. That he was never indicted, that he never did a day a jail ---in the end--- mattered not at all. He suffered a much worse fate. He was condemned to living out a full twenty years of infamy and shame. And his odious legacy will linger for many more decades to come.
I want to see Bush and Cheney and their underlings held accountable for their crimes. I think this is the best way to achieve it. If you wish to fantasize about them being frog-marched off to some court of the republic, I guess that's your right. Dream on.
Let's instead invest our energy to the establishment of this commission of inquiry whose eventual sentence would be burned into the historical record.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:32 am
Why can’t we have both?
February 16th, 2009 at 6:05 am
For fun, I cut on Air America a few weeks ago. They were talking about Nixon and Watergate!! Don’t you folks ever get over your derangements?
Nixon’s problem with the liberal press is that, early in his career, he exposed communists in the Democratic State Department, and that drove the press to hate him–yes, hate Nixon. After all, communists came closer to their elitist philosophies than did the choices of freedom by the masses.
I’ll catch the Frost/Nixon film right after watching all those of Michael Moore’s. So, don’t feel that you spoiled it for me.
February 16th, 2009 at 7:17 am
Marc, were it not for torture, I would agree with you. But, pieces like this one from Scott Horton, compel me to wish for more. I honestly don’t see how we cannot try to prosecute these folks for war crimes and crimes against humanity. They really do deserve to be frog-marched to the Hague.
However, I don’t rule out the possibility that an investigative inquiry might provide sufficient, and specific evidence such that they would be at peril of being locked up and tried were they to leave the US. That would be my second best option.
February 16th, 2009 at 10:00 am
Since it’s Presidents’ Day and I do not need a new mattress, I think I’ll check out this movie…
Andrew Sullivan had a very smart comment on the Chris Matthews show yesterday regarding the previous administration and torture, to paraphrase:
There’s the Obama administration that has an interest in promoting it’s own agenda, there’s the house (congress) which Obama can’t control on this issue, i.e. Conyers who will pursue the matter, and then there’s the courts which will bring trials concerning the Gitmo detainees who were tortured…it’s going to come to a head.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:02 pm
And what thudding Irony for Coop’s nutball friend Mr. Hitchens, who has argued low these many years to empower the White House that was doing nothing more than keeping their old bosses legacy alive?
I haven’t seen it, but the line “If the President does it, it’s legal” was thrown off with a light smile by the real Nixon, it’s bombastic in the movie (I saw the trailer). The real issue is that Ford, a stupid and unethical man, was transformed into a hero by a right leaning corporate press; just so we hurt the feelings of Woody’s America. And still they practice their gutter ethics, and still we ask the Democrats to be our big daddys, and stand up to the mean old Repubs we don’t want to offend at Thanksgiving Dinner.
Bob Woodward argues that Ford told him he pardoned Nixon for the worst reasons, that “he was my friend.” He also says letting Nixon go encouraged lawlessness in ALL the Presidents that followed. He ALSO says that pardoning Nixon was a good idea, because we couldn’t have handled the national trauma on a trial. This is conventional wisdom in the land of the free, and the home of the nuts.
February 16th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
Meanwhile, C-SPAN finds a group of historians who laud Reagan and disparage FDR (relative to 2000). They do bury Nixon deeper, however.
Reagan –Reagan!– in now in the top 10.
Bill Clinton jumps up to #15, especially thanks to his to “better than FDR” category of Economic Management. Clinton better than FDR on Economics. Not a typo!
http://www.c-span.org/PresidentialSurvey/Overall-Ranking.aspx
http://www.c-span.org/PresidentialSurvey/Economic-Management.aspx
February 16th, 2009 at 9:11 pm
He suffered a much worse fate. He was condemned to living out a full twenty years of infamy and shame.
We wish, but in fact he was feted by the establishment as a senior statesman; his only suffering was medical, and the loss of his wife.
February 17th, 2009 at 7:12 am
Give Nixon his due. When later Presidents had problems with foreign affairs, they called Nixon to the White House for his advice.
You guys have a serious problem of hating anti-communists and letting go of your hate.
February 17th, 2009 at 12:42 pm
Off topic, but Obama is doing the right thing here: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0209/18924.html
The American car culture needs a swift kick, and this could help.
Now if we could just get him to stop coddling the Bushies: http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Obama_not_Bush_now_seeking_delay_0217.html
February 17th, 2009 at 3:19 pm
DanO, the American car culture is a lot healthier than AMTRAK and rail subsidies crammed into the stimulus bill under cover of night and closed doors. What a contemptible waste of taxpayer money. What’s Obama going to do next…make AMTRAK more efficent by letting the post office manage it?
- – -
Obama shouldn’t try too hard to dig up past dirt and go on a witch hunt of a past President unless he wants to suffer the same fate in the future as well as investigations into some of his Chicago connections.
- – -
It’s too bad that Obama couldn’t meet with Nixon and learn a little about international dealings. Instead, we have a rookie where we need someone with experience. At least Obama sneaked Henry Kissinger through the White House back door for counsel.
- – -
Even a liberal thinks that Obama has something to learn from Nixon: Ghost of Richard Nixon hovers over Barack Obama.
February 17th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
Obama OKs about 17,000 more troops for Afghanistan
Next stop…Cambodia.
February 17th, 2009 at 3:59 pm
Does Obama want investigations?
Rahm Emanuel makes Bebe Rebozo look like a boy scout.
February 17th, 2009 at 6:09 pm
Hey Marc — remember way back during the Dem & Rep conventions of ’08, where you said it wasn’t worth going to either ‘cuz both were essentially in the back pocket of corporations?
You’ll love who was suckling this teat:
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2009/02/investment-manager-stanford-wa.html
February 17th, 2009 at 6:24 pm
Btw, it should be added that this whole whacky mini-Madoff Sir Swindle ‘em Stanford story was cracked open by bloggers, not the venerable MSM.
http://tinyurl.com/ce7tjr
January 17th, 2011 at 1:29 pm
Simply wanted to bring this in your consideration. This actually is really nice web site. I’ve a couple of myself. I truly like your design. I do know this really is off topic but,do you make this layout your self,or purchase from someplace?