12/27/2006
Former President Gerald Ford is Dead at 93
Gerald Ford, the 38th president of the United States and the only president to have never been elected, has died at 93. He will most likely be remembered for reuniting a country ravaged by the Watergate scandal and the Vietnam war.
Sworn in just minutes after Richard Nixon was airlifted into exile, Ford told the country, "My fellow Americans, our long national nightmare is over. Our Constitution works. Our great republic is a government of laws and not of men. Here the people rule."
Ford's later pardon of Nixon is widely thought to have cost him the 1976 election to Jimmy Carter.
Said Ford: "The political lesson of Watergate is this: Never again must America allow an arrogant, elite guard of political adolescents to by-pass the regular party organization and dictate the terms of a national election."
Ford was also the first unelected vice president, chosen by the man he would replace after Spiro Agnew left office in disgrace over tax evasion and money laundering.
Allow me to digress for a moment, for although this might be a footnote in his general biography, it should certainly be of interest to readers here.
Ford might have died on September 22, 1975, when an attempt was made on his life by Sara Jane Moore outside the St. Francis Hotel in San Francisco, less than three weeks after a similar assassination attempt was made by Lynette "Squeaky" Fromme in Sacramento.
This time Ford's life was saved by Oliver Sipple (see photo), a former Marine who lunged at Moore, deflecting the intended bullet. Sipple was instantly commended but the incident inspired curiosity about the former soldier and it was revealed by Harvey Milk that he was a gay man, a fact that was not known by either his employer or his family. The resulting attention (Harvey Milk, who wanted to show that gay men were not all child molesters and perverts, anointed him a gay hero, inspiring a widely-syndicated write-up from noted columnist Herb Caen) freaked his mother enough to cause her to disown him. At the time Sipple pleaded with reporters: "I want you to know that my mother told me today she can't walk out of her front door because of the press stories...My sexual orientation has nothing to do with saving the President's life."
Sipple battled the "outing" in court for the next nine years, a battle that was never won. It may have cost the man his sanity. Sipple was found in his San Francisco apartment in February 1989 next to a bottle of booze. Alcoholic and obese, he had been dead for two weeks.
Gerald Ford did not attend the funeral and instead sent family and friends a letter of condolence. He was criticized by some who said that were Sipple heterosexual he would have been treated differently. Ford told journalist Deb Price in a 2001 interview: "As far as I was concerned, I had done the right thing and the matter was ended. I didn't learn until sometime later — I can't remember when — he was gay. I don't know where anyone got the crazy idea I was prejudiced and wanted to exclude gays."
ADDENDUM: A reader sent in this snippet, clipped from another Deb Price column on Ford, written five years ago:
"Former President Gerald Ford believes the federal government should treat gay couples the same as married couples, including providing equal Social Security and tax benefits. Ford's views, expressed in an exclusive telephone interview, make him the highest-ranking Republican ever to endorse equal treatment for gay couples. 'I think they ought to be treated equally. Period, Ford declared. Asked specifically whether gay couples should get the same Social Security, tax and other federal benefits as married couples, he replied, I don't see why they shouldn't. I think that's a proper goal.' Now 88, Ford was a longtime Michigan congressman and Republican leader of the U.S. House before being appointed vice president and then rising to the presidency in 1974 after Richard Nixon's resignation. From his office in Rancho Mirage, Calif., Ford comfortably discussed a range of gay issues. He said he supports federal legislation to outlaw anti-gay job discrimination: 'That is a step in the right direction. I have a longstanding record in favor of legislation to do away with discrimination.'"
Ford was only in office for 895 days, but lived longer than any U.S. president. His wife, Betty, issued a brief statement from their home in California: ''My family joins me in sharing the difficult news that Gerald Ford, our beloved husband, father, grandfather and great grandfather has passed away at 93 years of age. His life was filled with love of God, his family and his country.''
Former President Ford Dies at 93 [nyt]
Former President Gerald Ford dies [ap]
Posted 1:29 AM EST by Andy Towle in Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, News, Oliver Sipple, Republican Party | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
"If you are a public figure and you are gay, you are a public figure and you are gay."
Anybody even considering a profession in theatre, art, communications, film or media should heed this warning. Once you enter the public domain, your personal life, your personal sex life is open for public discussion and revelation. Mr Patrick NYC, i have but one sentence for you:"Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?"
Posted by: warren | Dec 27, 2006 2:01:31 PM
Warren I have one question for you, are you mad at my statement or the reality of it? The truth is that the media is a feeding frenzy, like it or not, if you are in the spotlite you are going to be put under a microscope. I do not care for it, but I am inudated with the facts of who Paris is fucking, Britney does not wear any panties and the likes of who is adopting what poor child.
I don't make the rules Warren, but I am aware of them. As for questioning my 'decency' or trying to lump me with Macarthy, who tried to ruin peoples lives, you sir are the one who has none, nor a clue.
Posted by: patrick nyc | Dec 27, 2006 2:20:28 PM
Patrick Angel
Your NOT getting it....you wrote that since the 80's YOU have agreed with outing anyone who is in the public eye. That frenzy you refer to, it's acceptable to you to be part of it? You're just another shark? And yes, I am questioning your decency, because it is indecent to out people unless they have pursued an agenda against gay people. I believe this is the same opinion of Andy's if I read the Advocate article right. Just because your tired of Britney, Paris and Madonna seems an odd justification. Turn your TV off. I am sad to say, sir, you are and remain clueless.
Posted by: warren | Dec 27, 2006 2:33:02 PM
Warren either you did not read, or choose not to address my whole statement.
"As for outing people, I still hold the same stance I did when Out Magazine started doing it in the '80's. If you are a public figure and you are gay, you are a public figure and you are gay. If you are a public figure who is Female, Black, Jewish or any other minority they never question that. Why is it only the gay factor?"
The whole outing debate does nothing to address the fact that despite gay people being part of every religous, racial and nationality, they are seperated by the gay factor. It's not that I am in favor of outing people, except the likes of homophobes like the Rev. Haggard, it's the fact that being gay is treated like a dirty secret, one that is reinforced by those in the public eye who deny it like it is something that is wrong. Tom Cruise and John Trovalta, party of two, your table is waiting.
I faced many obstacles when I came out to a very religious Roman Catholic family in the early '80's at the age of 21. It was my choice, not an outing, and I paid a very heavy price, but staying in the closet and lying was a far heavier price to me. I'm not saying all have to follow my path, but whether you choose it or not, the public has a way of turning your life upside down. That was my point, one which I still feel you have missed.
"Just because your tired of Britney, Paris and Madonna seems an odd justification. Turn your TV off. I am sad to say, sir, you are and remain clueless."
I don't watch TV for news, I read the NY TIMES, WASHINGTON POST, then I check out Towleroad, BBC and a few other web sites, all of which have coverage of Ms. Spears, Hilton and that other tragedy Nicole 'someone feed me' Ritchie. I don't feed on it like a shark, I avoid it as much as I can, like the plague.
Posted by: patrick nyc | Dec 27, 2006 2:50:01 PM
Patrick NYC, you say:
"It was my choice, not an outing..." and "I'm not saying all have to follow my path..."
You're speaking out of both sides of your mouth. You hail 'choice' at least two times, yet you also seem to advocate outing any person at any level of public notoriety.
Sipple was not a 'public person' by choice. His heroic actions thrust him into the public light. Then an outside party decided to throw him up, unwillingly, onto a big gay pedestal at a time when being openly gay was not compatible with political service.
Yes, Cruise and Travolta are in the public eye. Any if they are, in fact, gay, then they are assholes for publicly proclaiming to be straight and creating false relationships/families to further that lie.
People like Haggard live in the closet and actively lie to THEMSELVES and influence public perception and law against us. That is the sort of person who deserves to be "outed."
Sipple did not deserve to have someone reveal something personal about him that could (and did) destroy his career AND life. You can call it a "dirty secret." But the fact is, it was a private issue for him to deal with on his own terms.
Shame on anyone, in any time, to advocate outing private people like Sipple to push their own agendas.
Sipple was gay and he served his president AND his country admirably, only to be ruined because of someone's agenda. He likely would have come out one day on his own. Instead, he was pushed out and it did ZERO for our community.
PS: The magazine that set up shop in the 80's to out people was not Out. It was Outweek. I don't recall if it is actually the precursor to the current Out. But it was a different magazine with a totally different mission.
Posted by: Patrick W. | Dec 27, 2006 3:10:35 PM
Thank you Patrick. That was precisely my point. Outing, always brings up discussion, and it's healthy to review one's motives. Yes, OutWeek is probably best remembered for sparking the "outing" controversy. This began in Michelangelo Signorile's "GossipWatch" columns, in which the fiery writer railed against then-closeted public figures like David Geffen and Liz Smith for what he considered their complicity in a culture of silence around AIDS and gay rights. Out magazine, originally created by Michael Goff and Roger Black was far less political but did deliver stunning fashion spreads.
Posted by: warren | Dec 27, 2006 3:21:44 PM
Private people working for the government have been outed for years. People in the armed services were discharged and their families and employers notified. People arrested in anti-gay stings by the police were outed and their names and adresses printed in papers. This doesn't make it right--I still believe private individuals should not be outed. However--it will still happen. I think it's too bad that Sipple, unlike so many others, was not able to move on with his life. Many others went through similar things and were able to come out stronger. The Sipple story is very sad on many levels.
Posted by: Daniel | Dec 27, 2006 3:27:15 PM
As Daniel mentions, we don't really know what caused Sipple's ultimate downfall. He may have been on a downward path before being outed and he may have chosen to retain too much bitterness at others after the fact, but in the end he was ultimately responsible for his own actions. This does not condone Milk, but Sipple certainly had the choice to not become a drunk, etc.
Posted by: Anon | Dec 27, 2006 3:53:39 PM
Mark M
great point
Tied into it...the Pentagon in response to declining enlistment numbers is reported to be considering increasing the number of NON-americans in the millitary with the promise of citizenship for their service.....Hiring mercenaries.....YET Gay full US citizens are drummed out of the millitary every day.
A side note.....one symptom of the fall of rome was the hiring of foreign mercenaries to fill the legions.
Another side note....foreign born and raised soldiers have no real motivation to uphold the constitution...they can become the dictatorial arm of a tyrant to kill and squash american citizens.....
Anyway; if the pentagon would get rid of "don't ask, Don't tell" we wouldn't even have to discuss such
Posted by: jimmyboyo | Dec 27, 2006 3:57:54 PM
so is Ford's son Steven gay or not?
Posted by: pete | Dec 27, 2006 4:56:17 PM
Andy, at the time of his presidency, I can remember as I was in the Air Force and it was widely rumored that one of his sons was gay. I think Steve, but not sure.
Posted by: James Poppinga | Dec 27, 2006 5:55:01 PM
This outing thing is a lot like the chicken and the egg.
Gays are afraid to come out because society disapproves. Society disapproves, in part, because many gays hide and contribute to the idea that being gay is shameful and embarrassing.
I sympathize with those who are in the closet. I was in the closet longer than I have been out of it. But I know how destructive it was for me, so my sympathy only extends to those who are struggling with the issue. At some point, you must do what is right and leave your comfort zone.
I've heard the tired excuse "It's nobody's business but mine" all too often. It's a copout. Why? Because I used to say the same thing and believe me, my only motivation was fear and cowardice.
Does that mean I advocate outing? No, I don't. But I'll do what I can to stigmatize the closet, because far more harm is being inflicted by the closet than by misguided gays who out others.
Posted by: mark m | Dec 27, 2006 6:52:19 PM
I sympathize with those who are in the closet. I was in the closet longer than I have been out of it. But I know how destructive it was for me, so my sympathy only extends to those who are struggling with the issue. At some point, you must do what is right and leave your comfort zone.
Which is no one's business but your own.
You inadvertently pointed out the main issue, Mark; being closeted is destructive to you. No one else.
The reason the gay community is so obsessed with outing is because we want trophies. And because we want trophies, we justify outing, just as Harvey Milk did to Sipple.
Personally, I think that a community that claims one's sex life is private and has nothing to do with their ability to perform one's job or live their life would be the last one to be demanding that everyone's be made public because it supposedly affects their job and how they live their life.
Posted by: North Dallas Thirty | Dec 27, 2006 7:42:01 PM
but see that is precisely the problem. Being gay is NOT about who you f**k. It's about more than sex. If I have a picture of my partner on my desk, it's not an advertisement saying LOOK I AM HAVING SEX WITH THIS MAN. That is how some straights see it, and apparently based on your post, Dallas, that's how you see it as well.
Sorry but that isn't how the straight world works and gay men who are out are trying to make the same true of the gay world.
So as long as you subscribe to the idea that being gay is about what goes on in the bedroom, you are part of the problem.
Posted by: mark m | Dec 27, 2006 8:26:48 PM
Mr Sipple was living in San Francisco fer bloody sakes.
It wasn't like he had a blu-collar job in Altoona, Pa. It's a pity that he couldn't get over his mom's behaviour, her loss, his poor coping skills.
The Ford boys were cute & Susan Ford was a Patti Reagan prototype. Strange that they all disappeared from the scene.
Posted by: zab | Dec 27, 2006 8:38:27 PM
Gerald Ford was a model of civility -- a true uniter, not a divider. One of his most famous quotes can be a guide to me (and possibly this blog) in 2007: "One can disagree without being disagreeable."
Posted by: thisjoeinsf | Dec 28, 2006 5:17:08 AM
Ladies, ladies, ladie, let's all think for a second. When any of us came out, may it have been 1975 or 2005, would we have liked someone to announce to our families and friends (and if someone who may have chosen to be or was unwillingly thrust into the spotlight) without our permission that we are gay? It is taking a choice, a decision we all as gay men will never forget as the day we were "reborn", out of our hands. It shouldn't matter if the person was a celebrity or an homophobic evangelist, their "position" plays no part in that equation. Many people here who support outing others because it makes coming out still an issue and assumes that being closeted is "ok", are speaking with emotion (anger) and not logic. Yes, be angry that these evangelists are gay, that the homophobic RNC members are closeted, but DO NOT mistake your anger at our closeted "peers" for logic in that someone in today's "open" culture should be outed. There are MANY negative consequences to being gay today, as much as we might like to think not (and no, having people still in the closet is NOT the cause of those problems and outing them WILL NOT solve that dilemma). Teenagers are still being thrown out of homes and families for being gay, men and women are still losing thier jobs and even taking their own lives for being gay. These problems will not be solved by forcing them out of the closet. Of course Sipple has resources even then, perhaps not nearly as extensive as today, but Sipple could have made the choice himself to get help. Obviously he wasn't able to, as he wasn't able to get past the emotional loss of losing the comforts of his life that apparently he believed defined him as a man. The choice to be "reborn" was taken out of Sipples hands, castrating him and making him feel less of a man and more of a public pinata. So ladies, in summation, as a social psychologist "in training", outing someone (regardess of any apparent social progress in homosexual acceptance) is never any one elses choice except the individual whose life it effects.
Posted by: Cory | Dec 28, 2006 10:51:08 AM
"So as long as you subscribe to the idea that being gay is about what goes on in the bedroom, you are part of the problem."
Ah yes, the typical gay leftist view; your sexuality should determine your career, your lack of religious views, your political affiliation, and your breakfast cereal.
Given that, I suppose it should be no surprise that straight people actually believe that gays all think, act, and respond the same. Furthermore, that leads to the next logical point that, since gays are completely different than straight people, they can be treated differently.
Personally, the fact that I'm gay has only to do with whom I prefer to have sex, and nothing else. And, quite frankly, I am tired of gays like you who use their sexual orientation as excuses for other behaviors to which it is totally unrelated.
Posted by: North Dallas Thirty | Dec 28, 2006 12:12:47 PM
North Dallas, you lose me as soon as you say "typical leftist" because I believe it's just a way of shutting down the conversation.
Being homosexual is about who you have sex with in the same way that being heterosexual is about who you have sex with. It is certainly not a minor issue. If there is a ban on who you have sex with it certainly effects your life. If you want to live openly and it's illegal that is not an option--it opens you up to blackmail, violence etc... If you have a partner and you cannot be with that person openly it definitely effects the relationship and your life. Who you have sex with is not a minor issue even if you only have sex with strangers at rest stops or pay prostitutes in the hopes they'll keep quiet.
Posted by: Daniel | Dec 28, 2006 1:03:08 PM
Sipple was apparently disabled before he saved Ford, so this may have contributed in large part to his isolation and self-harm. As a vet he may have also suffered from psychological issues. Was his outing the camel back breaking straw? We'll never know.
Posted by: Anon | Dec 28, 2006 1:52:57 PM
Anyone seen Leland?
Posted by: Anon | Dec 28, 2006 1:53:33 PM
Generalissimo Franco is still dead!
Posted by: Anon | Dec 28, 2006 2:29:49 PM
Fair enough, Daniel; I apologize for the "gay leftist" part.
However, the simple fact of the matter is that it's not illegal to be gay. Even before the Lawrence decision, gay sex wasn't illegal in the overwhelming majority of states -- and, being from Texas, I can tell you that where it was, the enforcement of the law was nonexistent. Lambda would not have pushed a case in which two individuals with criminal records and convictions for violent acts were arrested after the jealous ex-boyfriend (and abuse victim) of one of them made a fake call to the police to tell them the apartment was being burgled by an armed intruder if it had had a better one. But it didn't.
Finally, this:
"If you want to live openly and it's illegal that is not an option--it opens you up to blackmail, violence etc..."
Since gay leftists like Mike Rogers have openly tried to blackmail people based on their alleged sexual orientation, that is not a valid concern. If gays are so concerned about blackmail, they shouldn't practice it themselves.
Outing is always wrong. It's as simple as that.
Posted by: North Dallas Thirty | Dec 28, 2006 5:10:33 PM
"Personally, the fact that I'm gay has only to do with whom I prefer to have sex, and nothing else. And, quite frankly, I am tired of gays like you who use their sexual orientation as excuses for other behaviors to which it is totally unrelated."
My homosexuality defines my sex life. Being gay, however, is my identity. And no, it does not have to correspond with any ideology (leftist or otherwise) than of my own choosing.
But who I fall in love with is what makes me gay... and I don't fall in love with women. I fell in love with a man and we've been partners for 10 years. I don't want marriage rights because I want validation for what I do with my dick. I want marriage rights because as a gay American, I am entitled to the same benefits that straights get.
I'm fine with your opinion Dallas. And if you wish to continue putting your homosexuality into the box of who you have sex with, that's fine.
But in Texas until fairly recently, gay sex was illegal, so as you define yourself, you were a lawbreaker in those days.
Posted by: mark m | Dec 28, 2006 6:41:07 PM
Thanks to Andy for sharing Sipple's story. For those interested in other fascinating stories about LGBT history, check out some of the books that are available. As for those so cold about Sipple's fate, perhaps Santa will bring you a heart for Xmas next year, though North Dallas, apparently, is satisfied only having a dick.
Posted by: Leland | Dec 28, 2006 11:45:59 PM
But NDT, are there any cases when outing, while morally wrong, is still justified or even deserved? It seems wrong to compare Sipple's tragic situation to that of a Haggard or even a McGreevey in any respect. One was thrust into the spotlight against his will, as a "reward" for doing an utterly unrelated right thing, while one based his livelihood on the disenfranchisement of homosexuals while boning some rent-a-stud and the other used his impending outing to sidestep political maleficence and get an Oprah booking. To use the same metric in all three of these cases seems to, in a way, deny the basic humanity and individuality that the blanket statement, "Outing is wrong," seems to try and protect. Is there no room for situational evaluation?
Posted by: QuakerJono | Dec 29, 2006 1:43:28 AM