Once again: calling those who remember the "vibe" during Watergate!

[OneGrassRoot]

I am too young to remember Watergate, yet old enough that I have no memory retention (I know you guys have discussed this many times). :eyes:

Seems like the shit has really hit the fan...congressional hearings being announced left and right, the media actually doing its job (well, more than it has the last six years).

Was this the vibe when Watergate hit? Was it a convergence of several things, or was the Watergate incident itself the focus and it was simply a snowball effect once the trials started?

Hope that made sense...

[NYCGirl]

1. I understand what you mean, and yes, this does feel similar. Hope it doesn't

take another two years for the other shoe to drop!

[EFerrari]

2. I was a teen but paying a little attention. Iirc, Watergate stayed

mostly below the radar for a long time. And then, it wasn't. :shrug:

But there is one big difference, imho. Nixon wasn't an insider, he was hired help. Junior is an insider even if he's an idiot frontman who can't form a sentence.

[BOSSHOG]

3. It was palpable. Watergate was like a heavy fog

over the nation. It was riveting drama, with no DU to tend to one's aggravation. I vividly recall when Nixon announced that he would resign. Unbelievable.

[OneGrassRoot]

6. Would you say it's palpable now? Just wondering...thx n/t

[BOSSHOG]

17. Not yet, but

I believe, as if planned, the bush administration's total disregard for anything that is good and true and correct, has been so overwhelming as to be accepted as borderline status quo. I think we are slowly getting beyond that. Nixon was the godawful evil force of the universe in 74. Something new at the time. We've had more then 30 years to "get used to" republicans being republicans. But I'm confident that it is wearing thin.

Thanks for asking.

[RaleighNCDUer]

54. I wish I could recall that.

I was in boot camp, and the day he resigned the DI just came in hand told us the chain of command had changed.

Didn't see a paper or newsclip for another month after that.

[BOSSHOG]

67. I voted for

the son of a bitch absentee ballot in 1972 from boot camp. My first vote. The Watergate hearings were quite intriguing. The world stood still for a few days. Love for it to happen again.

[Bjornsdotter]

4. Lots of the same feelings

....and as with Watergate is took a long time to build.

Cheers

[mitchtv]

5. I remember this,

It became impossible to find anyone who admitted voting for Nixon. Start asking

[OneGrassRoot]

11. LOL. I'm noticing less and less B*sh stickers in Raleigh. n/t

[EFerrari]

12. I knew NIxon was in trouble when my aunt put away the autographed

headshot.

But that was in the summer of 1974 -- the 33%ers don't let go very easily because their reptilian brains take change as a survival threat.

[glitch]

79. :) thanks for the chuckle nt

[Raven]

7. I think it was a low rumble

for quite a while and then people started cracking...John Dean, "Deep Throat" the Saturday Night Massacre, Martha Mitchell making midnight phone calls ...it just kind of rumbled along and then blew up or fell apart like a house of cards. I have this sense that we are almost at the point when the rumble is going to become a roar but, that might be just wishful thinking. When Watergate first broke it was described as a two-bit burglary....

[wryter2000]

28. Saturday night masssacre

That was amazing.

Compare it to the firing of all the prosecutors under Bush. How much air time is that getting? Have you seen any of the prosecutors' testimony on the teevee? Is there any public outrage at all (except for in liberal outlets)?

[Raven]

36. Well, as I recall

it would be as if Bush fired Fitzgerald. Archie Cox was the Special Prosecutor whom Nixon fired and then Eliot Richardson quit in protest. God! This is really bringing back memories. My ex and I were on the Watergate Tapes. My ex worked for the Chairman of the DNC whose phone was tapped. All they got from us was a lot of talk about who was going to pick the baby up!

[JitterbugPerfume]

52. and we all suspect who THAT baby was!

:)

[wryter2000]

85. I know none of the prosecutors are as big as Cox

But, good grief, there are eight of them.

Remember who Nixon finally got to fire Cox? Robert Bork. :scared:

[malaise]

40. Great comparison

This is building slowly.

[tulsakatz]

8. I remember Watergate.........

...mostly I remember the televised testimony everyday. And it was pretty bad for Nixon, mostly because of the missing minutes on the audio tape.

But in the end, Nixon was shamed into leaving knowing that if he didn't, he would be impeached and he didn't want to leave office like that.

Now Bush, on the other hand, I don't think he even has the sense to know that he should be ashamed!! So it's hard to see exactly how all of this will end.......

[goclark]

30. I remember Watergate and the hearings were truly Popcorn time

Every second was filled with new shocks and real statesmen doing their job.

It was a History Lesson of the highest class.

Can't wait to see Senate Hearings on Floodgate by BushCons.

[tulsakatz]

74. I remember that too!

It was the first time I began to respect John Dean!!

Of all of the people who testified, Dean seemed to be the only one who had any integrity!

And it really was a good history lesson.

[potisok]

9. Lots more sheeple actively angry at that time as I remember.

[aquart]

14. "Sheeple" is a Coulter-like way to refer to our fellow Americans.

You might want to consider that.

[mark414]

24. according to who?

they ARE sheeple

[Beelzebud]

76. Oh nonsense. Annthrax 's audience are the sheeple...

I've said sheeple since before I knew who Annthrax was.

[wryter2000]

20. Welcome to DU

:hi:

You're 100% right. It seems that no matter what new outrage comes out, the sheeple find a way to make it acceptable. That may be the Faux Snooze syndrome.

[potisok]

25. Thank you for your kindness and consideration and welcome

[aquart]

10. No vibe. Lots of frustration.

But, yeah, there was a snowball effect.

One thing you MUST keep in mind: If Butterfield hadn't dropped the nuclear bomb about Nixon taping his own conversations, Nixon might well have skated. BushCO has tried to make sure there are no such records of their own crimes. Bush stopped using email as soon as he took office. (Like the criminal he is.) It was a shock to the Libby people that they hadn't erased their messages as well as they thought.

If no one talks, and why should they, then the country and the entire world can KNOW they are criminals, but we will have absolutely no factual evidence to prove it.

Remember, for Clinton they had to practice collusion and trick him into a perjury trap to get anything at all. Are we prepared to do that? Fitz, I am damn sure, isn't.

By adhering to the law, which they do not, we are at a disadvantage. BUT it's a disadvantage that will fall on THEIR heads as long as we keep making it clear that we are trying to get at the truth and they are obstructing with all their conscienceless might.

Democracy is slow. Fascism, or any tyranny, is fast because only one opinion matters. We have become used to the speed of tyranny.

[EFerrari]

13. Exactly: "we have become used to the speed of tyranny."

:applause:

[wryter2000]

15. I watched all the hearings

I was on LOA from work.

Sadly, this doesn't have quite the same feel as Watergate even though the crimes are much more numerous and much more serious. The difference is the big media aren't covering it as they should. Compare it to how they covered Whitewater under Clinton. How many times did we see the sleazeball investigator with his damned coffee cup getting into his SUV? Is anything remotely like that happening now? And, that was just Whitewater, which went nowhere.

The other thing that's missing is integrity on the other side. There were plenty of Nixon apologists, but eventually even they deserted him. I remember one R in the House from California actually breaking down in tears when he figured out that his President had been lying to him. These R's don't give a damn (except for a few and only very spotty there).

Unless the hearings get much, much more publicity and some bombshells hitting the fan, the whole thing will drag along until * leaves in 2009. I'm hoping that finally, finally, finally the disgraces at Walter Reed and VA hospitals wakes people up.

[EFerrari]

23. I watched them that summer, being very pregant at the time.

Another difference is, it felt like the whole country was "listening" in some way then.

That feeling of national concern seems much more fragmented now -- probably, purposefully because we're easier to manipulate and pick off that way. It's a shame, really. It used to feel like people could reasonably disagree but still come together when it mattered.

I don't see that happening any more on a national level.

[catmandu57]

26. That's the way I'm feeling

This doesn't have the same feel, not yet anyway. It's not getting the coverage it should, if and when it does I think the anger is going to bring it to a fast end.
I'm wondering if libby's wife is going to be martha mitchel.

[annabanana]

16. Not exactly. . The was ONE MOMENT when everything

changed. One moment when the whole thing started to tip irrevocably in the right direction. It started with the words "I was hoping you weren't going to ask me that" when the existence of the White House tapes was revealed.

Because our media wasn't bound up with military hardware sales, they were free to dig, clarify and push for answers. Each new question spawned dozen more in an avalanche of disclosures. Because we had always believed that our government would honestly strive for the best for the Country, we were truly shocked to discover that the process had been subverted.

[aquart]

19. Yes! I'd forgotten that line.

[hedgehog]

18. If Cheney resigns, you'll know something is happening.

I don't see impeachment on the horizon since the next election is rumbling down on us. Each day Bush is in office is another vote for the Democratic Party. Any push to impeach Bush will have to come from the Republicans or else the Democrats will be accused of playing politics and getting payback for Clinton's impeachment. On the other hand - should Bush start a war with Iran - all bets are off!

[brazos121200]

21. There was a differenct atmosphere then.

When the scandal broke in March of 1973 the media and Repub Party pretty well stood beside the Nixon Admin. But when the Saturday Night Massacre occurred in October of that year, you knew it was just a matter of time before Nixon would be impeached or resign. The Repub Party was different then and still had a modicum of decency, there were actually Republican Senators like Goldwater and Baker who would hold Nixon' feet to the fire.

As the investigations made it clear that what the Administration had been up to was impeachable, most Repub members of congress got on board and would have supported impeachment if it had gotten to a vote. As it turned out, Nixon realised his fate was sealed and so resigned before he could be booted out. There was no mood of fear to impeach among the Democratic members of Congress as there is now. I don't know what has gotten into this party.

[shain from kane]

29. I would say that the Saturday Night Massacre was the turning point, when men much more honorable

than Nixon were given the boot. Death to kings, and Nixon was acting like a king.

Joseph Wilson and Valerie Plame are not being treated in same manner, because they are being seen as partisan. Outrageous as it may seem.
Cox, Richardson, and Ruckelshaus were part of the government that was investigating the crimes. If Patrick Fitzgerald had been fired, there would have been an explosion.



Edited to add paragraph.

[EFerrari]

34. True, very true. And it took a while for that event to become

shared in the public consciousness, iirc which I may not, being 18 at the time.

[brazos121200]

43. The Saturday Night Massacre sent a shock wave

through the nation. To have the attorney general resign rather than obey the President, and then to have his assistant do the same thing was unthinkable to many people at that time. Nothing like this has ever happened and few believed that a President of the United States could be so petty and vindictive. It was Robert Bork, the harbinger of the new Repub party of the future, who would finally obey the President and fire the special investigator Archibald Cox.

[demnan]

22. Not yet

we had a decent media then and the Democrats (hell, even the Republicans) were not so scared. Personally I think its going to take a lot more time in the streets protesting before we get what we want.

[Blackhatjack]

27. It took a long time for Watergate to become the national story....

Woodward and Bernstein had to fight like crazy to keep it alive, and without 'deep throat' it likely would have died on the vine.

The press was very slow to pick up the real story, even when it was spoon fed.

John Dean's revelations played a pivotal role.

In the end, everyone came together against Nixon and the Republicans paid Nixon a visit at the White House and told him it was time to go.

[brazos121200]

35. The difference between then and now is that

then there were patriots in the Nixon administration like Dean and Mark Felt who were willing to do the right thing even if it meant going against the Repub administration. Today, I don't think there is anyone in the Bush Administration who would be willing to tell what they know to save democracy in this country. Decency and honor has been rooted out of the Repub party and today the only thing that matters to them is power, and to WIN.

[malaise]

42. Another difference

is there was no cable for diversion.

[OneGrassRoot]

That's huge. There should be something required.....

when hearings start, they should be televised just like B*sh's speeches. Still, that leaves hundreds of other channels.

Maybe a movement could be started to make the hearings required as part of high school civics classes. Do they still teach civics?

Dammit, there should be SOME WAY TO MAKE THIS REQUIRED VIEWING/READING! :mad:

Oy, I need to take a break or my head's gonna explode....

[CTyankee]

31. It was the Butterfield revelation that was the tipping point

Also the Saturday Night Massacre. The Senate Watergate Hearings were such great theater and had so many memorable characters that it was our daily soap opera. Does anybody remember "Call back Kalmbach"? We got a big laugh out of him!

What we have to remember is that during Watergate the Dems had had both House and Senate for longer than we have at this present moment. Also, the Vietnam War protest was much greater than those against Iraq. The Pentagon Papers had big impact AND the Washington Post was so unhappy about the NY Times getting that scoop that they were invested in the Watergate story more heavily.

So there were differences and similarities between these two times. I was working for the ACLU at its national headquarters in NYC at the time and I remember the brilliant debates over the terms of impeachment and the standard of proof that the large ACLU Board would engage in. The ACLU was the first large national organization to call for Nixon's impeachment. I remember getting hate mail at our office (dog poop in plastic baggies mailed back in business reply envelopes).

[OneGrassRoot]

41. Wow...thank you for sharing that n/t

[OneGrassRoot]

32. So, here's what I'm gathering from all you wonderful people:

(thank you so much for responding)

First, there is no FEAR in B*shco which is different from Nixon.

There isn't as much "ooomph" (for lack of a better word) for whatever reason in the Dem Congress.

Finally, the populace is fragmented in many ways. Perhaps the deluge of information, 24-hour cable, works against getting the word out. It's too easy to overwhelm. Hard to get clarity. Whereas during Watergate, you had the big three TV networks and the print media had a substantial impact.

Hmmmmm....the Internet is such a fabulous resource. Geesh, you would think that, given the many video clips of these crooks lying over and over again, some sort of cohesive message could be conveyed to the "viewing audience." Maybe if someone with national credibility (?) provided every media outlet with the same compilation video, with absolutely nothing which could be disputed, and they all (except Faux, of course) played it repeatedly, something solid would stick with the general population as to how vile these thugs are.

I know what some are thinking...just as someone on this board said elsewhere earlier today, "naivete is so cute." LOL

[malaise]

33. Very similar

Convergence is the word. There was convergence of so many things between 72 and 74. I remember sitting glued to live coverage on TV in those good old days.

[EFerrari]

39. Convergence, synthesis, fusion. A frustrating sequence for people

who pay attention.

[malaise]

57. Yep

We political junkies sure paid attention.

[twilight_sailing]

37. I'd have to say no.

The public isn't into it.

[tibbiit]

38. The vibe was the same

We didnt have the internet.
The shit hit the fan the same way yet america still voted in Nixon in a landslide. It still took another 3 years to get out of vietnam after nixon reelected... and the right wingers then didnt stop and say gee you guys were right... they said the same shit as now. Dont expect anyone to e4ver say we were right.

Dont expect things to go fast or to change.
The rightwing fucks have always been the best spinners, they always have projected their shit on the middle-left, and they always have had the media whores whoring for them.

Nothing will change even if we do win. It will still be ourfault for failure not bush.
Sorry im a pessimist but Ive watched this shit for many years now and its not going to change at all. The best thing to do for peaceof mind is move to canada before the rest of the world oneday has to come to bomb us in america.
tib

[OneGrassRoot]

48. Geez, I need to make myself a Bloody Mary after reading that....

but thanks for your thoughts. :hi:

[CTyankee]

56. Hee, hee! That's what we used to drink, Bloody Mary's. Also,

sangria was the "new" drink. I remember the hangover I had from drinking it at an "impeachment" party thrown after the House Judiciary Committee voted on the counts of impeachment.

Oh, yes. I also had a "harvest gold" crockpot, given to me by my mother in law. Hated the damn thing.

[OneGrassRoot]

58. LOL....I've never tried sangria......

:toast: I'll put that on my to-do list!

[CTyankee]

59. A drink made with Spanish red wine and citrus juice

We used to use 7 Up. Pretty vile now that I think about it. But the really nicely done sangria is very refreshing on a hot day. Just not a lot of it...

[EFerrari]

60. My MIL had an "avocado" one.

and she also made great vodka gimlets. (RIP, Lady, I miss you every day.)

[DemBones DemBones]

70. I still have my avocado green crockpot!

It's a reminder of the good old days. :hippie:

(I also have a poncho from 1965 that still "fits" -- it's almost impossible to outgrow a poncho!)

[Taxloss]

44. This has turned into a really interesting thread.

Thanks!

[rsdsharp]

45. It took about a year for Watergate to truly break.

The burglary took place in June 1972. Woodward and Bernstein covered it, and had very little impact at first. The White House tried to play it off as a "third rate burglary," but the WP kept digging, and more and more came to light: the Plumbers, the bugging of Daniel Ellsworth's psychiatrist's office, the involvement of the AG, the WH enemies list, bribe money funneled through CREP. Finally, in the Spring of 1973, the Senate hearings were convened, and played out day after day on live TV.

John Dean's testimony blew the lid off of "what the president knew, and when he knew it." The White House called him a liar. The stonewalling testimony of Erlichman and Haldeman put an ugly personal face on the administration, and people (even Nixon's supporters) started to believe something might really be wrong. Alexander Butterfield's revelation of the existence of tapes which could confirm who was telling the truth and who was lying was the bombshell. It led to Nixon refusing to turn them over, the discovery of the 18 1/2 minute gap, then Nixon turning over transcripts of selected tapes that contained the phrase "expletive deleted" so often that it became a running joke.

In October 1973, Nixon tried to end it by firing the independent counsel who was clamoring for the tapes, along with Erlichman and Haldeman. That led to the resignation of the AG and firing of the Deputy AG, both of whom had the integrity to refuse to carry out the hatchet job on the IC. Solicitor General Robert Bork had no such problems. What a shock. Somewhere about this time Agnew pled no contest to tax evasion and resigned. Nixon nominated Jerry Ford, as insurance against impeachment, but it was another confirmation that the administration was dirty.

From there it was really just a fight over the tapes, culminating in Nixon losing a 9-0 Supreme Court decision. In July 1974 Nixon took a foreign trip to Egypt, and (shades of Cheney) returned to DC very ill with phlebitis. The House Judiciary committee voted out articles of impeachment, and before the House could vote to impeach, Goldwater and other senior Republicans went to the WH and told Nixon the game was up. He spoke from the Oval office on August 8, 1974, telling the country he would resign the next day, effective at noon.

In comparison, I'd say we're about to the point where the WP articles were starting to have an impact, but before the Senate hearing convened.

[OneGrassRoot]

47. Thank you for the summary! Welcome to DU... :) n/t

[shain from kane]

51. Woodward investigated Watergate scandal; particpated in Plame scandal.

[hootinholler]

73. IIRC Poppy Bush was in the delegation to talk Dick down. n/t

[kestrel91316]

46. They had SERIOUS Senate hearings (judiciary committee?)

all over TV continuously for a LONG time leading up to Nixon's resignation in the face of impending impeachment.

We don't have anything like it now, and even if we did, the media would probably ignore it.

[KansDem]

49. I had a delivery job during the summer of 1974...

...and I remember listening to the hearings on my radio as I drove around town. I remember thinking to myself, "Damn, I hope this never happens again!" Little did I know...

[deutsey]

53. I don't think Congress has the teeth it had back then n/t

[melody]

50. A couple of differences and similarities

Watergate came only ten years after the Kennedy assassination (which many people thought involved the same cast of characters ... in fact, many of the same ones are hip-deep in this, too). Deep government skepticism was acceptable. It's now 2007 (although only six years after 9/11, with almost as many people thinking that, too, was an inside job) and we've had gawdknowshowmany brainwashing years behind us (the only mild respite being the Clinton years, but the din went on in the media anyway).

That said, JFK ... Watergate ... it all starts adding to the outrage. Bill Colby once said that one of the great dangers to the US was the American public itself getting fed up and turning against it. Seeing everything now, I can see his point.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

55. We need a "country lawyer" like Sam Ervin and an interrogater like Sam Dash.

Cheney and Rummy could supply the arrogance of Haldeman and Erlichman and Trent Lott could make the trip to the White House like Goldwater did and tell Shrub he's finished.

Then my wife and I could dance in the aisles (well, my living room) like me and my workmates did when the resignation was announced.

Unfortunately, considering the backbone required by the current crop of politicians, I fear my dancing days are over.

[galloglas]

61. The moment the tide turned was

the firing of Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox. The cause was over the matter of subpoenas.

Called the "Saturday Night Massacre", Nixon first fired Cox, then appointed Eliot Richardson who resigned, followed by another, and then they found some Toady named Bork (if memory serves) who finally sworn the "Black Oath of Allegiance" (or whatever you do when you sell your soul to the Nazis SOBs, and agreed to drop the subpoenas.

I called my Congressman (Rep. Bill Randall of MO-4) from my house that night and we spent 45 minutes discussing this on the phone.

When he returned to Washington on Monday, he was joined by others in the Democratic party (and a few GOP) who wanted the evidence, or a vote for impeachment. That ran the total up to about 25%.

That was the day the worm turned.

For my money, expect to see the House subpoena something (fairly soon) from the Bush administration, and Bush will lock his heels. That will be the start of his downfall.

[mwb970]

62. There was a LOT of media coverage of Watergate.

In fact, day after day for weeks the evening news was entirely Watergate, with no other stories even being mentioned. I got so sick of it I just stopped watching the news until it was finally over.

[Jack Rabbit]

63. Somewhere between two points

We are somewhere between the point of the Haldeman-Ehrlichman resignations (April 73), when impeachment was first mentioned (by Sam Donaldson of ABC News, IIRC) and the Saturday Night Massacre (October 73), when impeachment resolutions were introcuced.

In 1973, the Democrats were willing to lead public opinion on impeachment. Until the Saturday Night Massacre, there was little public enthusiasm for impeachment. However, during the period from then until July 74, when the House Judiciary Committee recommended three articles of impeachment, public opinion for impeachment snowballed in the face of changing White House explanations for events and contiued stonewalling. Just what did Ron Ziegler mean by "All previous statements are inoperative"?

The Republicans in 1998, with the complicitcy of major news outlets, were also willing to lead public opinion on impeachment, but failed miserably. As a result of sabre rattling about impeachment, they lost seats in Congressional elections that historically are won by the party opposing the President. That was a red light that they ran through when they recommended articles of impeachment against President Clinton.

Perhaps as a result of the Clinton impeachment, the Democratic leadership wants to be led by public opinion on this issue. They want abolutely no perception that this is a mere political vendetta against Bush.

The main defference between the Nixon imeachment of 1974 and the Clinton impeachment of 1998-99 is that few really believed that there was a constitutional crisis involved in Mr. Clinton's case. Indeed, if any body should have been removed from office for abuse of power, it was Ken Starr, the partisan and unprofessional special prosecutor who went far out of his way at taxpayers' expense to bring impeachment charges against Clinton based on a tacky tryst in an investigation about a shady real estate scheme in which Clinton and his wife lost money. On the other hand, Nixon was clearly involved in a violation of criminal statute by covering up evidence against key re-election officials, including a former Attorney General, in the Watergate break in and evidence of White House involvement in the illegal operations of the Plumbers Unit and other abuses of presidential power, such as using the CIA for domestic spying and tasking the IRS to target Nixon's opponents. This was a real constitutional crisis.

For the elaborate version of this post, please click here.

[Gregorian]

64. "To the best of my recollection..."

This feels very much the same. And why would it not, since it's the same means trying to achieve the same ends. I don't remember much to the leadup, but I've heard it was much like now where things kept sliding under the radar, and finally one caught.

I remember the hearings, and how evasive the stinkers were. I remember Oliphant cartoons. I had a friend with them plastered over every square inch of his room. We were 18.

Here's an article I nabbed off of a ten second Google. It's surprising how similar things are.

In fact, I think it was Judge Sirica who John Conyers reminds me of.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,878583-5,00.html


Edit- But to me, the feeling is exactly the same. We knew they had committed crimes, and we were anxious to see justice. And they were saying things like "To the best of my recollection.." when asked to remember things, in court. Sneaky shits is what they are. They still are.

[robinlynne]

65. Watergate was this times 100. The entire country participated. The

media participated. Right now, it is pretty much the left discussing what si going on, the right denying it, and the middle reading about Anna Nicole.

[Snap]

66. IMPEACH THE COX SACKER

I cheerfully sported this bumper sticker.

[CTyankee]

78. I remember that one! Do you remember "Re-elect the dike bomber?"

This was after Nixon bombed the dikes in North Vietnam. I saw it on a car in an A&P parking lot. Some older guy was muttering "Is this about Bella?" referring to Bella Abzug (we were in New York). I got a huge laugh out of that one!

[gordianot]

68. Almost but not quite. The media still tries to insulate Bush.

Bush II almost makes Nixon appear honest. Nixon had some political instincts, the Chimp is into sheer power displays. In the end Nixon left, Bush cannot afford to leave, when he does the law may actually come after him and he will spend the rest of his life in litigation or a prison cell (as he becomes a North American Pinochet).

At this point in his life Bush has nothing to lose, his quality of life promises to get worse.

[MiniMe]

69. We had true investigative journalists then. Now - not so much

[AnnInLa]

71. This is similar, but it seems that

the feelings were more intense....the outrage was more intense....the people were talking about it all of the time back then. Nothing had been seen like it in modern political history.

Now, however, people don't really seem to care that much, they are too busy with their own lives.....and, since Watergate, they have heard it all before, so this is nothing new. Watergate made people jaded, cynical...almost if the average person EXPECTS politicians to be crooked, liars, thiefs. There is no outrage openly expressed except by us "wingnuts" on the "extreme left."

I can only hope that, even if they don't openly express outrage, the people will show their mild displeasure in the voting booth in 2008.

With every outrage of this bush administration, I expected the people to take to the streets in open defiance, bearing torches and chanting "resign now." (Kinda like we saw in Eastern Europe), but it never happened. It never happened because of Watergate. People are more cynical, and they just don't care, as long as the bush administration's actions don't affect their families directly in openly visible ways.

[OneGrassRoot]

72. Well said. I appreciate your input. :) n/t

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

75. It's similiar in that there was a palpable hatred of Nixon on the left

Nixon's crimes pale in comparison to W's, but the biggest difference is the media. Reporters then were more concerned with the story than money or whose cocktail parties they would get invited to.

Today's media would have never gotten Nixon impeached.

[ArmchairMeme]

77. Then and now - still crooks

I remember my mother, who never had a bad word for another stood up in front of the t.v. and said, "just because they play special music when you enter the room doesn't make you a king, Dick!"

and "if the people knew how he conducted his senate campaign they would not have elected him president." She suggested that I do the research just to know what he had done. Dirty tricks was the term that comes to mind now.

[Madspirit]

80. Watergate

Watergate was at one of the most tumultuous times in our country. Many things were going on. Viet Nam, Cambodia, Kent State, Civil Rights, marches and riots, the whole country, the whole world, was changing. I don't want to put a damper on anything that's happening now because this is a great "shit hitting fan" time but it doesn't even compare to those times...the late 60s and early 70s. We were in the streets all the time. It was amazing. I could blather on about that era forever though...<g> *sniff* I miss it.
Lee

[Jim Lane]

81. Another difference: Watergate had a more specific, understandable focus

Some guys working for the RNC burglarized the office of the DNC. Nixon then tried to cover up for these criminals. They weren't criminals in the metaphoric sense of "criminal failure to prepare for Hurricane Katrina" or "criminal neglect of our wounded veterans at Walter Reed". Instead, they were criminals in an ordinary, everyday way that everyone could understand.

What's going on now, in terms of the subversion of the Constitution, is arguably more serious. The trouble is that it's harder to put into a sound bite. Bush's actions are more like Nixon's secret bombing of Cambodia, which ticked off the left but didn't resonate all that much with the public.

I predict, with regret, that there will be no impeachment.

[GeorgeGist]

82. The vibes are far worse this time...

Nixon went out with a whimper and was soon forgotten. I expect Bush/Cheney to go out with a bang that won't be forgotten.

[WinkyDink]

83. There was NOTHING until the TELEVISED Ervin Hearings. THEN it was a series of daily

revelations.

But no, the "vibe" is most definitely NOT present now.

[maine_raptor]

84. One HUGE difference in my humble opinion.

Nixon was disliked (and distrusted) by a larger percent of the public back then.

"Tricky Dick" had been his well known nickname for more than 20 years by the time Watergate broke. His 5 O'Clock shadow and sweaty upper lip were traits that enforced that image.

Contrast that with Bush; the guy you want to have a beer with and too dump to chew and watch TV at the same time. Doesn't quite have that sinister ring, does it?

Yes, we had better investigative press and a more understandable crime ("third-rate burglary") and all that, but the "villain" in the drama was far more detestable than the one we have now.

[Ganja Ninja]

86. It's not quite to that point yet.

The watergate hearings were nationally televised and we haven't had that yet. Also the watergate hearings were (outside of the war) pretty much in the national spotlight all by their self. This may get to that point but there are so many scandals it's hard for the publics attention to focus on only one of them. With the media the way it is we may never be able to get the same focus that the watergate hearings got.