Replies

Woodward's mistake was his assumption that the story that comprised his one and only career accomplishment in journalism would still hold the public's interest 30+ years later. What he failed to recognize is that three things occurred simultaneously every day that passed since the Watergate story broke: 1) people who lived through that period in history died; 2) people who were too young to remember it grew up, and new people were born; and 3) large numbers of people have immigrated to the U.S., most of whom have no idea what Watergate was, and many of whom can't even spell the word "Watergate" anyway.

I would venture to guess that at least 75% of the people living in the U.S. today couldn't even correctly identify the decade in which this story unfolded.

And if you think that's cynical, just realize this . . . within a couple of decades, a substantial number of people aren't even going to remember what year the date "9/11" refers to.

For some of us, Watergate is where Bill Richardson took himself to interview Monica for a job at the UN so Bill could stash her out-of-town until things died down.

You'd think Bill Richardson would have more important things to do, like keep an eye out for corruption in the Oil For Food program there at the UN, or make sure that the weapons inspectors were able to do their jobs in Iraq.

But no, the friggin US Ambassador left New York, flew to Washington DC, took a cab to the Watergate to interview a 23 year old woman with no discernable clerical skills. But Clinton cared more about getting Bin Laden than Bush did.

MY *$$!

Can't wait to see the campaign if old Richardson ever gets the nod as VP on the Dem ticket, especially if Hillary's on top(sic).

Pinz