http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/woodward-and-bernstein-40-years-after-watergate-nixon-was-far-worse-than-we-thought/2012/06/08/gJQAlsi0NV_story.html?tid=pm_opinions_pop Like many older Americans I remember the so called Nixon years. So, from the street level, here’s the rest of the story.
1. Not everybody loved Nixon, to be sure, but not everybody hated him either. From my reading of the era, the left liberals absolutely hated Richard Milhouse Nixon. It was visceral. He was from a small rural background and the majority of his haters were from the Eastern Urban Establishment. (Granted, we are told that such an elitist establishment doesn’t exist!!) Nixon stood against Adlai Stevenson and was an outspoken opponent of Walter Lippmann and the secret liberal bias of Walter Cronkite and other news personalities. A liberalism, which since their deaths we have discovered, was all-pervasive and determinative of practical decision-making, effectively used to block conservatives like Nixon from power. Although, much to the Left’s chagrin, Nixon was able to out maneuver them.
2nd Nixon only narrowly lost the election to John Kennedy. Many historians believe that the election was actually stolen by Joe Kennedy and the Chicago Mafia Chief. If true, and many reputable historians believe it is, then the thief of an election from the American people was a criminal overthrow of the legitimate election of Richard Nixon as President. Yet, Woodward and company disdainfully dismiss this as urban legend and right-wing conspiracy theory. So, are we to believe that the enemies list of the legitimate government of Richard Nixon was far worse than the criminal stealing of an entire Presidential election? Only blind hatred of Nixon and the desire for self-justification can overlook history in favor of deductive propaganda.
3. Nixon won an overwhelming victory in his second election. The winning of forty-eight out of fifty states in a Presidential election is again disrespectfully dismissed as insignificant in favor of the leftist liberal interpretations of Nixon’s politics. The portrayal here is as though Nixon was the criminal whole stole his second term. Strange how writers Woodward and company want to explain away the criminal activity of John Kennedy’s campaign by portraying Nixon’s 48 State landslide as something stolen!! There is absolutely no accusation in history that the 48 State landslide of Nixon’s second election was a fraud. There is absolutely no hint of credible evidence suggesting that there were any election shenanigans. But we ARE left with the Liberal bias as innuendo that if the break in had not occurred, Nixon could not have convinced the voters in 48 States to vote for him. Therefore, so the conspiracy practitioners of the Democrat party whisher, Nixon’s second ternm as President was not legitimate!!
3a. The writer of this blog believes that the undermining of our Republic began not with Joe Mc Carthy and the Communist scare of the 1950. It began with the Sam Irwin Watergate Committee of the 1970’s when the Democrat party systematically undermined the American free election system. In effect, the Watergate committee’s main objective was the eviction of a duly elected US President. He has won 48 States. His electoral victory was overwhelming. Nonetheless, the Watergate committee of Sam Irwin, Bob Woodward, and their cronies in the Democrat party, assisted by the owners of the Washington post and the New York Times, succeeded in the overthrow of the legal government of the USA by petulance and cynical political rhetoric and criminal cronyism. (Just to relieve the intensity of this blog; can you imagine that the House and Senate of the USA meet in continuous 24 hour sessions for months and that their staffs worked 16 hour days and that every news channel in the USA carried the Watergate congressional hearings everyday for 24 hours a days for months? Really!! The American people were ready to have the President resign just so that they could get back to regularly scheduled programs like I Love Lucy and the Honeymooners!!)
4. From the streets of America in those days, I remember the burning of cities on East and West coasts by violent revolutionary leftist agitators. I remember watching TV night after night as our college campus’ were ignited by arsonists, our inner cities set ablaze by the very residents who lived there, and our public buildings bombed by the likes of Bill Ayers. The country was in revolution not against Nixon the man, or Nixon the President. It was a revolution without a cause and Vietnam was the excuse. And all I could think about back then was how angry I was at the college educated rich kid perpetrators of such destruction. It was my country too but they felt it was their playground to loot, pillage and burn.
5. Then we get to Watergate. Here I will just sketch my issues. First is the “deep Throat” informant who we learn later was a trusted intelligence agency employee who regularly gave secret, private and personal information to Woodwood et.al. The whole issue here is the trusted position of the informant who was a spy inside the administration. He was not outed until he outed himself just before he died. I always rejected the idea of a spy inside our government giving information to a novelist and reporter. Personally, I find the use of the sexual name, “deep throat” a reference to oral cock sucking, to be indicative of the attitude of Woodward and his ilk.
5a. Then there is John Dean who was an attorney to the President and who willingly accepted personal immunity from Senator Sam Erwin, who was himself a Nixon hater. I think it would be very informative and enlightening if we would re broadcast the entire Watergate hearing with a special highlight on the legal counc=selor to the president, John Dean. Folks, this was the President’s lawyer. He was a personal, as juxtaposed with public, advisor to the President. This man, has the Judas ability to come out and not only reveal what he said to the President in his capacity as legal advisor; he also reveals what the President said to him, personally and privately. I mean, Nixon is talking to HIS LAWYER here and the man is taking notes with the intention of revealing this privileged information to the enemies of the president em=nemies who sole goal is to destroy John Deans client. I mean not only to hurt Nixon, but to steal his election victory, destroy his presidency, destroy his Name, Destroy his family I mean the Sam Erwin Watergate Committee has one goal and one goal only. It was to totally annihilate Richard Nixon and everyone and everything connected to him. And here, as we watch the Watergate hearings, is John Dean, Esquire., the President attorney, who is willing and gleefully participating in the destruction of his client.
TO Be Continued….
Progressive Politics 