Decision ‘08

In Praise Of: W. Mark Felt

For political junkies, there can be few stories bigger than the unveiling of Deep Throat. Hundreds of thousands will re-read their dog-eared copies of All the President’s Men, looking for the clues, the contradictions, the truth, and the fiction, and we will all anxiously await the inevitable Deep Throat book by Woodward and Bernstein, collectively or separately.

Before I delve too deeply into the arcana, though, I want to state unequivocably that Deep Throat is an American hero. His legacy is secure; though some will vilify him for various reasons (he only did it because he was selfish; he wanted the FBI director job and acted out of spite; and God knows what else), let it be said that he performed a great service for this country.

Richard Nixon was a great man, a man of accomplishment, intellectual heft, and fierce tenacity; he was also easily offended and carried a giant chip on his shoulder, two dangerous qualities for a man with such power. If one wonders where today’s progressives get their deep paranoia, look no further than Richard Nixon; he lowered the bar in multiple ways. First, he lowered the bar for the presidents themselves - only after Nixon could Bill Clinton lie to a grand jury and excuse it by saying ‘it was just about sex’. Nixon also lowered the bar for the public; how could one’s faith in the institution of the presidency not be weakened when the occupant lies, cheats, breaks into offices, and obstructs justice? Doesn’t it make it easier to believe that Bush would lie about Iraq, when Nixon lied - for what? To punish his enemies? To dig up dirt? To settle scores? Certainly not for the greater good of the country.

It is in this climate that the contribution of Felt must be considered. Although Watergate was one of our darkest hours, there is yet some daylight; after all, a President fell, an FBI man leaked, a reporter kept his source confidential despite enormous pressure to reveal his identity (and he told his editor, too), and through all of this, the Republic stood. No shots were fired; the government functioned, and Americans got by.

Would the world have been worse off if we had never had a Deep Throat? That is a question that cannot be answered. Some behavior is unacceptable at any level, though; when that behavior takes place in our highest office, it must be rooted out and punished…and Felt made that task immeasurably easier. For that, he deserves the thanks of a grateful nation.

UPDATE 8:57 p.m. central: Many thanks to the great Tim Blair for the link. I’m noticing a trend here that’s a bit disturbing. A lot of people are minimizing the impact Deep Throat and the Washington Post had; that sounds a little disingenuous coming from us bloggers, who after all, did plenty of crowing after Rathergate and Easongate. Remember where that ‘-gate’ suffix came from?…

However, for a quite persuasive viewpoint quite different from my own, look to Power Line and Edward Jay Epstein. Essential reading…

And many thanks to the lovely and talented La Shawn Barber for the link, as well…

UPDATE 2 10:58 p.m. central: The reaction from some Coalition members:

PoliBlog says ‘it’s a generational thing’…

Instapundit barely notices…

Prof Bainbridge is not convinced that we know who Deep Throat is even now…

Viking Pundit is dreading the inevitable ‘Meet the Press’ appearance (’…hell, I could win a Pulitzer too if I had a deputy director of the FBI feeding me critical information’)…

Alexander McClure says it’s time for some good ol’-fashioned Nixon-bashing from the MSM…

And State of Flux says, well, nothing about Felt, but has some nice words about the Coalition, so read it anyway, won’t you?…

12 Responses to “In Praise Of: W. Mark Felt”

1 Andy Says:
June 1st, 2005 at 12:49 am
Excellent points. I may quibble about noble intentions (check out Powerline’s Deep Epstein), however, each and everytime the bar is lowered, it hurts We The People. It wouldn’t be so bad if the MSM was truly objective and unbiased, actually it would be great in terms of holding one to account. But given the unholy alliance between the MSM & DNC, it IS bad.

Nonetherless, we are where we are today and we’ve got to deal with it.
2 Mark Coffey Says:
June 1st, 2005 at 1:17 am
Andy, the Epstein essay is excellent and should be required reading…and in some ways, it goes against my take. I would argue, though, that it was the press, or the government, or any other one thing that brought down Nixon…it was the combined stress brought on by the situation in its entirety…
3 Tatterdemalian Says:
June 1st, 2005 at 3:58 am
Watergate was unquestionably the greatest event in the history of the media, greater even than Vietnam. It ensured that, for better or for worse, reporters would forever more be taken seriously.

This, unfortunately, has led us to where we are today. Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein were MADE, in a way no other reporter has since, by Watergate. They earned their props not just through hard work and dedication to the truth, but because they posessed those qualities at a time when they were desperately needed, a time when the President of the United States was breaking the law with impunity. But, as with every field, for every few men of integrity like Woodward and Bernstein, there are hundreds of others who only took one lesson from Watergate: “Take down the President, and you get rich and famous overnight.”

That’s where the -gate suffix came from. When it was used again for Irangate, it became media’s way of announcing that they intended to take down the President, for reasons that grew steadily more ridiculous with each new administration. Who cared if Clinton got a BJ in the White House? The news media, that’s who… all the reporters desperate to become the next Woodward, but either unable to dig up any real dirt, or unwilling to make the effort necessary.

The “Rathergate” and “Easongate” stuff is the blogosphere’s sarcastic comeback to the media’s own abuse of power. We’re announcing that, just as the media has taken down Presidents, we are taking down anchormen, and for much the same reasons.
4 Mark Coffey Says:
June 1st, 2005 at 4:05 am
Tatterdemalian, don’t get me wrong, I was right in the middle of the celebration…but I must say that we (yep, I include myself, definitely) are getting a bit full of ourselves when we do the victory dance over Dan Rather, yet, with a few exceptions, we feign ignorance (not you, of course, your comments prove you know better) of the importance played by Woodward and Bernstein’s reporting.

You know what’s really starting to bug me a bit, though? We’re treating the media like it’s the enemy. More on that in a later post…
5 Knemon Says:
June 1st, 2005 at 4:24 am
In defense of Nixon -
If Deep Throat has to be seen in the context of Watergate & Nixon’s misdeeds, then those misdeeds have to be seen in *their* context: the near-disintegration of the country. Unpopular war, riots in the streets, unprecedented social upheaval, a whiff of “failed state” in the air …Milhous
(a)didn’t start it,
(b)fixed it and then
(c) got restrospectively blamed for it

(Oliver Stone, surprisingly, treats Nixon pretty fairly on this count in the eponymous film.) Sure, the bastard broke the rules in letter and spirit a hundred times over, and he should have resigned even earlier than he did, but dammit, he was a great (not good) man and a great president. Which I think you acknowledge in your post. So nevermind. This is a minor obsession of mine.

For the love of Pete, he and Ike are the only presidents to ever end wars without winning them … the left should love them for that alone.

Now, on another topic - congratulations, MC, it’s been building for some time, but you have really arrived! My wife and I came upon your site shortly after the election - I think from a blind link from Instapundit? (or someone) just labeled “groan” or something (a reaction to the blog’s name, not what you were saying) … we made the site our startup page shortly thereafter, and I try to drop in with a comment or two every other day.

I keep coming back because you handle the issues of the day with almost zero (let’s say 3%) partisan “hooray for us” guff - and I’ve never seen you try to pull the RINO card on someone who disagrees with you - yet you still put out the “Weekly Jackass.” The best of both worlds.

I’m too lazy to throw my hat in the ring myself, so I think of this as my “blog away from blog.” Keep it up.
6 Mark Coffey Says:
June 1st, 2005 at 4:55 am
Thanks, Knemon, it’s the repeat visitors that make it fun…what good is a 7,000 hit day if 6,980 of those people never come back again? I appreciate the support, and as for the partisan ‘hooray for us’ guff, I think I was heavier on that in the early days…I try (not always successfully) to lay off the triumphalism as much as possible…In any event, once again, muchas gracias…

Oh, and Oliver Stone - yeah, you kinda got the feeling he sorta liked the man (though he probably would never admit it) - or at leasts felt empathy towards him…
7 Knemon Says:
June 1st, 2005 at 5:03 am
On the commentary track Stone says, at a sort of creepy moment (drunk, imminent-resignation Nixon fiddling with the tape recorder in a darkened study, I think), “He really reminds me of my father in this shot.”

So, some issues there?
8 Andy Says:
June 2nd, 2005 at 1:53 am
Mark, thanks.

I think we all commenting here, so far, are just trying to be objective about the whole matter. While the expose was crucial in stopping Nixon, I cringe when I see the MSM get all lathered up reliving the “glory” of riding to the constitution’s rescue, moreso by people unworthy of being called journalists.

The thing that gets my goat is when anyone discredits their office, it is the office that suffers, to which I echo Tatterdemalion.

(Dig it! The French muck it up, the Dems takes the handoff and finally the GOP has to come in and put the broken pieces back together again /END PARTISANSHIP)

Now if the MSM would just as heartily put their shoulder to the grindstone and help restore dignity to the office, that would indeed be something to celebrate/congratulate. But fear not, the pendlum swings for everyone and I do detect the beginnings of the MSM backswing.
9 Mark Coffey Says:
June 2nd, 2005 at 1:58 am
Don’t ask for whom the pendulum swings, eh? (Jeez, it’s not swinging for me, is it?)…I hear ya…good points all…
10 Tatterdemalian Says:
June 3rd, 2005 at 5:00 am
It’s definitely disturbing to see the media as the enemy. But then, it’s also possible that they are the enemy. They have already proven their power to defeat the President (Watergate), and even the US Armed forces (Vietnam), and at least one anchorman has recently attempted to use a blatant forgery to directly influence a presidential election.

Seriously, do you really think Mapes, et. al. were unaware of Microsoft Word, or even the capabilities of word processors in general? These are experienced, highly paid reporters, and I doubt they still use typewriters for everything. If they had just used the Courier New font instead of Times New Roman, nobody would have thought to challenge the documents’ authenticity, except maybe one or two experts who would be written off as “paranoid cranks” (as, indeed, they tried to portray the experts they ran the memos by prior to broadcast).

I think that CBS, at least, has been forging stuff for some time. They have developed techniques to age and blur documents, but this one time they got a bit sloppy, and decided to use the forgeries anyhow, figuring “we’ve been fooling these ignorant masses for years, nobody will think to call us on it now. And even if they do, the implications will be too disturbing for anyone to face.”

I honestly don’t think we can really trust CBS at all any more, and the other networks are suspect as well. How can we tell that the documents they base their newscasts off of aren’t just better forgeries? I can’t - I know only just enough about the history of fontography to know that there were no typewriters that could precisely emulate TrueType fonts in 1973 - and those who could, aren’t likely to want to bother to do so without involving enough money to make it worth their while. It’s pretty frightening, considering that nearly everyone relies on the media to learn everything they don’t directly witness, and how dangerous misinformation can be in a world where 19 deluded men can kill over 3000 people.

Where can we get information from? A somewhat more reliable source is starting to present itself: the blogosphere. Not any one blog, mind you; I certainly wouldn’t trust Kos as far as I could throw Michael Moore. But if both Kos and Charles Johnson are saying the same thing happened the same way, it’s pretty likely to be true. With news aggregators, it becomes pretty easy to get a good sample of a variety of points of view, and by applying some elementary logical reasoning, develop a pretty accurate picture of what is really going on in the world.

You can fool some of the blogs all of the time, or all of the blogs some of the time. Good luck fooling all the blogs all the time.
11 Mark Coffey Says:
June 3rd, 2005 at 12:37 pm
P.T. Barnum lives, eh? Well, you make some good points. Hopefully, I’ll have time this weekend to put up a followup post…
12 Andy Says:
June 3rd, 2005 at 11:33 pm
When you do that followup post, I’d like to see how you like Felt now as opposed to when the news broke.