Forty years after Watergate, we need Woodward and Bernstein

BizPac Review ^ | November 15, 2012 | Michael Dorstewitz

[cap10mike]

In June, the Washington Post celebrated the 40th anniversary of the biggest scoop in journalistic history — Watergate. Looking back on it, the Post has every right to crow. The story was so huge that every political scandal since has been labeled with the word “gate” tagged onto the end of it. However, the Post should also consider the adage, “You’re only as good as your last story,” because there’s a bigger one out there for the taking, if it only had the courage to pursue it. That story is, of course, the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya.

[Unrepentant VN Vet]

We don’t lack for reporters with integrity!

Right.

I suppose they work right down the road from Santa's workshop, in the same building as the Easter Bunny.

.....don't mind my bad attitude. Once upon a time, I was considering majoring in Journalism, but lost any fine illusions I ever had about that deal after the '60 elections.

Oh, yeah.....then there was always the 'Nam and the "marvelous" journalism practiced on that subject....

(I don't even need to bother with the /sarc, do I?)

[G Larry]

Why did you ignore my explanitory line?

“It’s just that the MSM won’t hire any of them, so 75% of the public never hears them!”

Fox, NY Post, Wash. Times, Several conservative magazines and on-line publications hire them.

The issue is exposure and consumption.

[mo]

Good luck wid dat!!!The guys Woodward and Bernstein were working for are in the White House!!!!

[TheConservativeParty]

They killed Andrew Breitbart.

[cap10mike]

Anyone but the lapdogs we have.

[cap10mike]

Ain’t that the truth. Allow four good Americans to get murdered through the White House’s disinterest and they aren’t interested. Throw in a couple of steamy nights of illicit sex and all at once they want more. They should all be working at the National Inquirer.

[cap10mike]

Yep. “All the News that’s fit to print” has become “All the news that fits.”

[cap10mike]

By “we need Woodward and Bernstein,” the author didn’t mean them per se, but rather what they represent — dogged determination to find the truth. There’s no question but that the WaPo has always been a liberal newspaper. But we need that same dedication no matter who it favors or incriminates.

[a fool in paradise]

1972, Democrats lost and they sought to overturn the election by impeaching the Republican president.
1980, Democrats lost and they sought to overturn the elections (also 1984) with investigations into the Iranian hostage release and Iran-Contra.
1988, Democrats lost and they sought to overturn the election with “Brought to Light” investigations into Bush’s CIA activities.
2000, Democrats lost and the sought to overturn the election first with crackpot “Bush knew” conspiracy theories (even Hillary made the claim from the floor of the Senate) and then with talk of “war crimes” and “torture”.

PUSH BACK AT THE RATS

It was not the GOP who created this era of hostility in American politics.

[cap10mike]

We need journalists dedicated to finding and disclosing the truth, let the chips fall where they may.

[cotton1706]

“By “we need Woodward and Bernstein,” the author didn’t mean them per se, but rather what they represent — dogged determination to find the truth.”

Oh, I’m well aware of what they meant. And Woodward and Bernstein were not virtuous reporters out for the truth. They were ambitious reporters working for a liberal paper who wanted to take down Nixon because they were liberals. And they coverered for their asses and their sources, not out of their belief in the freedom of the press, but to keep their own power and influence.

[MissMagnolia]

There would be dead people already instead of “hearings”.

[A'elian' nation]

Forget Woodward and Bernstein. We need Judge Sirica.

Threatening miscreants and traitors with iron bars in their face has a way of getting the truth out.

[GOPJ]

Yeah, but there was a time when we thought the media was more like a knight in shining armor - defending what was right and just against what was wrong and corrupt.

Now we know the truth - the MSM is a Chicago Street gang - fifty of them at a time - kicking one person in the groin... and that one person is some hapless conservative American.

[GOPJ]

Yep. “All the News that’s fit to print” has become “All the news that fits.”

You're right - all the news that fits the liberal elite agenda...

[PieterCasparzen]

One example of the 1960's - 1980's, and who initiates what regarding "Democrats" and "Republicans"...

A study published in 1966 by the Council on Foreign Relations concluded that American citizens were more open to talks with China than their elected leaders. In 1971, Kissinger (a member of the Council) took a secret trip to Beijing to approach Chinese leaders, which led to Nixon's trip to China in 1972. Diplomatic relations were normalized by Carter's Secretary of State, another Council member, Cyrus Vance. Most people are under the impression that "Nixon" "opened up China", when, in effect, the true origins of the policy were outside of the U.S. government - who knows exactly where and how - and then the policy was officially adopted by the U.S. government from then until now.

The effects of "experts" employed outside the government are far greater than those of elected politicians. That's not to say every elected politician doesn't put his own "personality" on policies, but that major policy and strategic directions originate in the minds of various elites that are not elected. Mind you, these "elites" are not all working in the same direction as "conspiracy theorists" propose, and they certainly don't "control" every little minute event or every single person, but they do represent planning and coordination amongst a few influential events here and there (like revolutions, the introduction of popular ideas, etc.) as well as a small percentage of the population that is very influential. It is also very easy for investors on this "inside track" to make tremendous amounts of profit if they so choose, of course, since they frequently know extremely valuable "insider" information, however, in general, this policy generation, IMHO, has all the earmarks of simple arrogance.

Of course, the Woodwards of the world, etc., as well as their employers, are just a piece of the puzzle.

What throws a good kink in the works nowadays, of course, is that almost anyone can place information into the worldwide public square, in essence, having 1/2 the capability of an investigative reporter. The other 1/2, of course, is having access to non-public information as a result of investigation. Ergo, the O'Keefe's of the world...

[cotton1706]

“Most people are under the impression that “Nixon” “opened up China”, when, in effect, the true origins of the policy were outside of the U.S. government - who knows exactly where and how”

Well, I believe our China policy did origniate with Nixon. He did have a brilliant mind. Keep in mind we were at war with Vietnam at the time and had a Cold War with the Soviet Union. Communists don’t trust each other so Nixon started talks with the Communist Chinese to scare the hell out of the Soviets, who then eased up their support of Vietnam to shore up their support against China. And Nixon had an admiration for the Chinese. He’d met Chiang Kai Shek when he was either in Congress or as VP. Nixon’s foreign policy was brilliant (except for Taiwan and the Panama Canal in my opinion). He saved Israel during the Yom Kippur war. He told his generals to “send everything that flies, dammit!”

[WilliamofCarmichael]

Thank you for the information. My feeling at the time was that anything we could do to disturb the U.S.S.R. was fine with me. I was no fan of Red China however. Every crime of the "agrarian reformers" against the Chinese people was a contemporaneous event for me.

I recall the MSM Watergate frenzy.. it seemed to me that employees of the MSM including the famous duo spent their days throwing stuff against the wall caring not if it stuck but delighting in the acts themselves. If some stuff stuck.. well great! the important thing to them was the attacks on Nixon. Period.

I would like to be able to ask them to name one thing that Nixon did -- or was merely accused of doing -- that JFK and LBJ did not in fact do.

I know the differences vis-a-vis the Nixon press vs. the JFK and LBJ press: the Nixon press asked tons of questions; the JFK and LBJ press asked none --

with the possible exception of LBJ and Bobby Baker. But after JFK was assassinated, there was no longer a JFK and RFK to pursue LBJ and Bobby Baker, the press lost interest, and LBJ was the president; by a strange coincidence -- golly gee -- there was no longer any MSM interest in the scandal and LBJ's close association with Bobby Baker. I think Baker wound up serving a short time in prison and everything was forgotten.

[lentulusgracchus]

Nixon, like so many other politicians, became convinced that his re-election was somehow necessary for the survival of the free world. The New Left simply capitalized rather completely on his mistake.

And in the process, the Left's successes have tended to prove Nixon right, haven't they?

People forget how close we came to tempting the Soviets to attack West Germany with our weakness in the 70's. Fortunately, SecDef Harold Brown and Jimmuh himself saw the danger and started turning (some) things around .... although Jimmuh did stupidly cancel the B-1 bomber program, that Bob Dornan and Ronald Reagan had to go out and rescue from the junkheap.

But considering the way things have gone, we'd be infinitely better off today if Nixon had completed both terms and been succeeded immediately by Ronald Reagan.

[lentulusgracchus]

It was not the GOP who created this era of hostility in American politics.

Exactly right. Newt Gingrich wasn't in Congress yet in 1974 (I think he got elected in 1976 iirc -- I should know, since he ran in my old Ga. congressional 3rd district before I moved away in 1975), but he placed the blame with the Democratic "Watergate Class" of 1974 and 1976, who came into office with hidebound liberal moral and intellectual smugness and promptly began to break down the old collegiality by e.g. reducing the number of GOP seats on congressional committees and changing procedures to limit Republican comments and amendments.

Gingrich knew what he was talking about, and his willingness to buck marshmallowy RiNO's like House Minority Leader Bob Michel of Illinois who just took all the guff and abuse is what got him the Speaker's chair, that and the Contract with America.