Why The Bush Administration Should Care About Watergate

When remembering Presidents of the United States, the ones who standout are the ones associated with scandal. The most infamous example of this is President Nixon, whose time in office will forever be tainted by Watergate. It is easy to condemn Nixon’s actions, however it would be in the best interest of Americans to learn from his mistakes as they have proven that the abuse of executive power will always have deep-rooted social, moral, political, and economic ramifications on the country. If anyone in the Bush Administration had studied Watergate and the long-lasting and devastating effects that followed it, America today might be a different place. It might be a country where morality isn’t a political slogan, but a way of life. There might be less corruption and a greater respect for social and ethical values. Instead, the government has continued to abuse its privileges starting with the invasion of Iraq and culminating with Bush’s refusal to comply with a subpoena. The Bush Administration would best be served by picking up a history book, turning to the chapter on Watergate and understanding the causal relationship between the abuse of executive power and the political and economic stability of the country.

There are many events that are encompassed by the word Watergate. One of the most famous events people associate with Watergate is the burglary of the Democratic National Committee that took place at the Watergate Hotel on June 17, 1972 in Washington DC. This was the sole incident that began the long, tiresome process of government decline (Farnsworth). Two intrigued reporters, Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein of the Washington Post, took interest in the story and published several articles. The next day, the headline of the news read, “GOP Security Aid Among Those Arrested” (Washington Post). Woodward and Bernstein discovered that the burglar and Security Aid, James McCord, was employed by Nixon’s reelection campaign. As they dug deeper, the duo found a $25,000 check, addressed to Nixon’s reelection campaign, in the bank account of Maurice Stans, a suspect in the burglary of the Democratic National Committee (Washington Post). In November 1972, Nixon secured his second term of presidency, in a landslide victory against Democratic Sen. George McGovern (Farnsworth).

Woodward and Bernstein followed to uncover actions of the government that the American people had never fathomed possible after Nixon’s re-election. In one of the groundbreaking stories it was discovered that Attorney General John Mitchell managed a fund allocated to spy on the Democrats, and subsequently he resigned. Nixon aides had run a campaign of immoral, dishonest wrongdoings during Nixon’s reelection. The White House continued to ignore the articles printed by the Washington Post, claiming it was biased and deceptive. Archibald Cox, a special prosecutor appointed by Nixon’s Attorney General, had started an investigation. A second parallel investigation was also in progress led by Sam Ervin, a North Carolina Senator who was the head of the Senate Watergate Committee (Washington Post).

While giving testimony to the Watergate Committee, Alexander Butterfield, an aide to the President, revealed that Nixon had a secret taping system for the phone calls and conversations held in the Oval Office. Nixon obviously refused to reveal the tapes, so Ervin and Cox issued multiple subpoenas in order obtain the tapes (Washington Post). Nixon claimed executive privilege and then came the saga known as the “Battle for the Tapes” (Gerald R. Ford Library & Museum). After the news became public Nixon ordered the tapings in the White House to cease. Lawyers from the Senate Watergate Committee and the Special Prosecutors office denied that executive privilege was applicable because of the relevance the tapes had to the case (Gerald R. Ford Library & Museum).

On October 12, 1973, the US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Nixon was required to turn over the tapes to the presiding judge, John J. Sirica. Nixon looked for ways to avoid surrendering the tapes, and in desperation tried to compromise by offering transcripts of selected tapes. Archibald Cox refused and stood his ground. This led to the “Saturday Night Massacre” in which Nixon ordered Attorney General Richardson to fire Archibald Cox (Gerald R. Ford Library & Museum). Attorney General Richardson preferred to resign rather than comply with Nixon’s command. Richardson’s ex-assistant was then given the task to fire Cox and consequently resigned. Finally, Solicitor General Robert Bork accepted Nixon’s command and fired Cox. Soon after, Leon Jaworski was named the new Watergate Special Prosecutor. The public was enraged and at this point the Senate was seriously considering Nixon’s impeachment. Conceding to the mass appeal, Nixon relinquished some of the tapes (Gerald R. Ford Library & Museum).

An eighteen and half minute gap is found in one of the tapes. Nixon’s assistant refuted intentionally deleting the conversation. Alexander Haig, Nixon’s Chief of Staff, said that “some sinister force” deleted the eighteen and a half minutes of tape (Farnsworth). On April 16th, 1974 Special Prosecutor Jaworski subpoenaed 64 tapes concluding that the edited transcripts were not sufficient. Nixon refused to release them. On July 24, 1974 the Supreme Court voted in favor of the United States and upheld the subpoena in an 8-0 vote (Farnsworth).

The trial was an important morale booster because the system of checks and balances that our forefathers implemented was not undermined by corrupt power. Very literally, the legislative branch of the government checked the executive branch, by upholding the subpoena regardless of the exaggerated claim of executive privilege (Farnsworth). For a brief time, Americans once again believed in our system of government. It proved that no one is above the law, no matter the power in the seat the hold. To this day, there are many people who still remember the events of Watergate and the downfall of Richard Nixon, therefore skeptics of the government regardless of the momentary victory.

On August 5th, 1974, Nixon released three tapes that clearly show him ordering the FBI to desert the pending investigation of the Watergate break in. Potentially, Nixon could have been indicted for obstruction of justice. Impeachment was inevitable, as three of the impeachment articles had already passed. Nixon resigned on August 8th. He stated, “We must press on, however, toward a goal of not only more and better jobs but of full opportunity for every American and of what we are striving so hard right now to achieve, prosperity” (Farnsworth). In Nixon’s resignation speech, he took ownership of his actions, “I would say only that if some of my judgments were wrong, and some were wrong, they were made in what I believed at the time to be the best interest of the Nation” (Farnsworth). Gerald Ford was sworn in as 38th President of the United States. In his inauguration speech Ford said, “My fellow Americans, our long national nightmare is over. Our Constitution works; our great Republic is a Government of laws and not of men. Here the people rule” (Gerald R. Ford Library & Museum).

Nixon became the poster child for the abuse of executive power. Nixon was not impeached because he resigned before impeachment was possible, and he was not indicted because President Ford pardoned Nixon and granted “a full, free, and absolute pardon… for all offenses against the United States which he, Richard Nixon, has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from July (January) 20, 1969 through August 9, 1974” (Farnsworth). Nixon was only focused on keeping his presidency intact, subsequently the state of the economy disintegrated. Inflation had hit one of the all time highs and there were very few results that President Nixon could produce, with all his attention in a different arena of politics (Time). During Nixon’s presidency, 40 government officials were indicted or jailed, creating an unstable and corrupt government starting with the President himself (BBC).

George W. Bush is following the same path as Nixon because President Bush has abused executive privilege on several occasions, after understanding the implications of Watergate. President George W. Bush has admitted to secretly allowing the National Security Administration to eavesdrop on phone conversations without a warrant. This resulted in a direct violation of the fourth amendment, and a claim of executive privilege. President Bush has also attempted to redefine torture so that techniques such as water boarding, fake executions, and sleep deprivation fall under the category of enhanced interrogation techniques. This action was also considered executive privilege, as acting Commander in Chief, President Bush does not adhere to the same rules. President Bush has been accused of invading Iraq solely because of the opportunity of oil that the country presents. There have been many inquiries to support this claim such as the contracts that allow Iraq’s oil fields to be controlled by foreign parties (Kucinich). On another occasion, Bush ordered a senior advisor to disobey a congressional subpoena of testimony, overruling congress and claiming that the information was an issue of national security (MSNBC).

The exploitation of executive privilege is apparent in the case of Richard Nixon and George W. Bush. Personal gain was the first priority for both of these egocentric presidents. Nixon did not want to be indicted or go to jail so the vast majority of his attention was spent on defending himself. Bush became focused on oil, and the attention of the Bush Administration drastically changed from defending our country to a war for control of oil. The repercussions of their action are equally apparent as is their blatant misuse of power. The economy during the Nixon Administration was weak as inflation was extremely elevated (Time). The government was corrupt and not trusted by the American people in either administration.

The dictionary defines history as “acts, ideas, or events that will or can shape the course of the future” (Dictionary). Any administration following Nixon’s can benefit from understanding his mistakes and appreciating the effects of them. Unfortunately, the Bush Administration’s rampant abuse of executive power has created social, political and economic problems that will be prevalent for years to come. It has also set a negative precedent by making it acceptable for future governments to make mistakes analogous to Nixon’s without facing the consequences. One can only hope that there is a Barnes and Nobles book store in the vicinity of the white house, or that the incoming president sees the Watergate scandal not as the black mark on history, but rather as an opportunity to realign the government with America’s fundamental values.

Works Cited:

British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). 1974: President Nixon to resign from office. October 2008 http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/august/8/newsid_
2492000/2492685.stm.

Farnsworth, Malcolm. Watergate: The Scandal That Brought Down Richard Nixon. October 2008 http://www.watergate.info/.

Gerald R. Ford Library and Museum. The Watergate Files. October 2008 http://www.ford.utexas.edu/museum/exhibits/watergate_files/index.html.

Dictionary.com. History. Random House, Inc. October 2008. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/history.

Kucinich, Dennis. A Resolution. Washington DC: United States House of Representatives. 9 June, 2008.

Microsoft National Broadcasting Company (MSNBC). Bush orders Miers to defy House subpoena. 12 July 2007. October 2008 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19704513/.

Time Magazine. Nixon's Other Crisis: The Shrinking Dollar. 18 June, 1973. October 2008 http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,910678,00.html.

Washington Post. The Watergate Story. October 2008 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/watergate/.

Blog 4: Splotch #3

Splotch #3, 2000
Sol LeWitt

LeWitt was a renowned conceptual artist and this piece, Splotch #3, is on display on the roof of the Metropolitan Museum of Art. In 2000, when this sculpture was created, it was doubtful that LeWitt had this picturesque location in mind for the placement of his art. Yet, clever placement is what makes this particular piece so striking. The contrast of the muted and dull buildings in the background and the Technicolor world that LeWitt created in the foreground, serves to prove LeWitt’s original point of livelihood, further than he may have originally intended.

When looking at this sculpture, the first thought that comes to mind is a child. The work is reminiscent of a toddler who has let loose with the Play-Doh. The vivid colors are prevalent and the shapes aren’t defined, contrary to many of LeWitt’s other work. He uses six colors: the complimentary colors are grouped together to elicit an emotion of delighted shock and the analogous colors seem faded in comparison. The various shapes of the peaks seem random, but the first thing that catches the eye is the tallest bright yellow crest. The dimension of this piece is 3’ by 12’, which is underwhelming when put in context with the other works in the series.

Splotch #3 is a reminder that adulthood doesn’t have to exclude happiness, joy, and youthfulness. The word “splotch” indicates the tone of the piece right away. In the background there are dreary buildings that stand taller than the images that LeWitt created yet, the focus immediately jumps right back to center concentrating on the exhilarating colors. To explain precisely what this piece means undermines the foundations of conceptual art. Interpretations and critical thinking are exactly what the artist is directing you to do.

Images Cited:
Green, Tyler. “Sol LeWitt on the Met's Roof.” 18 May 2005. 27 October 2008 http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2005/05/sol_lewitt_on_the_mets_roof.html.

Blog 3: Color Archs in Four Directions

Color Archs in Four Directions, 1999
Sol LeWitt

Sol LeWitt isn’t known for one particular art piece, but rather for the legacy he left behind. One of the pieces LeWitt created is called “Color Archs in Four Directions” (The Artists). This piece is colorful, lively, and plainly simple. To fully appreciate this artwork, one must remember that conceptual art is left up to the audience to interpret so the deeper meaning behind the uncomplicated image, is for the audiences’ appreciation. However, one could see an image with lines, and no deeper meaning.

After LeWitt’s death in 2007, some people questioned his validity as an artist, especially concerning his minimalist pieces such as Color Archs in Four Directions. “In a famous essay from 1967, Clement Greenberg noted that minimalism, like Pop Art, thrived by exploiting ‘the shrinking of the area in which things can now safely be non-art’” (Kimball). With this piece LeWitt expanded the genre of what is considered art because archs are excessively easy to draw, but it was the meaning behind the work that made it art. Minimalist can considered to be a “breath of fresh air” by using clean cut lines and definitive shapes but “what you see is what you see" famously put by Frank Stella. LeWitt tried to disprove that idea, by making work extremely straightforward with suggestions to a profound meaning.

LeWitt’s inspiration came from Edweard Muybridge, who was known for his work with still photos to capture movement of a being. One could say that aspects from Muybridge’s stills could be applied to Color Arches in Four Directions, because of the flowing colors in the panels, but the distinct separation of the black lines. The bright colors in LeWitt’s piece can be construed as happiness, but the stark contrast lines beside the color serve to sybolize the opposite. The shapes of the line in each panel differ, but the reflection of the pattern continues to stay the same, showing that different perspectives can be shown simultaneously. With this work, LeWitt has opened the doors and expanded the term “art” to encompass so much more.

Works Cited:
Kimball, Roger. "Was Sol LeWitt an artist?." 10 April 2007. 27 October 2008 http://www.newcriterion.com/posts.cfm/was-sol-lewitt-artist-4508.

Images Cited:
The Artists. "Color Arcs in Four Directions, 1999." 27 October 2008 http://www.the-artists.org/posters/posters.php?item=1662018.

Blog 2: Sol LeWitt

Sol LeWitt was one of the most influential artists in the Conceptual Art movement. “In the catalog for his 1978 retrospective at New York’s Museum of Modern Art, Bernice Rose, Curator of Drawings, says that his innovative work drawing directly on walls ‘was as important for drawing as Pollock’s use of the drip technique had been for painting in the 1950s’” (Crownpoint). He based his work on grids and shapes and can be classified as a minimalist but his work embodies non-conventional beauty. He was camera shy and turned down awards in fear of being photographed in the paper which was a stark contrast to his bold works that are revered well into the 21st century.

Sol LeWitt was born in Hartford, Connecticut in 1928. In 1949, he graduated Syracuse University with a Bachelors of Fine Arts. Sol LeWitt then won the prestigious Tiffany award, only given to artist who show promise but are not globally acclaimed. This award granted LeWitt to monetary stability to travel through Europe, and study his craft. He was then drafted into the army in 1951 and sent to fight in the Korean War. In 1953, he studied at the School of Visual Arts, as an emerging graphic designer. He dabbled in painting, but was actually intrigued with Russian Constructivism, which embodied symmetry. He then discovered “Eadweard Muybridge's photographs, [which are] sequential pictures of people and animals in motion, which he came across one day in a book that somebody had left in his apartment. From all this he saw a way forward. It was to go backward” (International Hereld Tribune).

After inspiration had struck he decided start from the basics and focused on concepts. LeWitt published, “Paragraphs on Conceptual Art” in 1967, this was his breakthrough piece, the first globally recognized of his works. One of LeWitt’s first museum exhibitions was at the Museum Haus Lange in Krefeld, Germany in 1969. After producing several significant conceptual art pieces such as Arcs in Four Directions and Run I-IV, LeWitt passed away on April 9th, 2007. He was pivotal in creating an era that encouraged thinking, ideas, and concepts.

Works Cited:
San Francisco Museum of Modern Art. "Sol LeWitt: A Retrospective." 27 October 2008 http://www.sfmoma.org/exhibitions/exhib_detail/00_exhib_sol_lewitt.html.

Crown Point Press. "About the Artist – Sol LeWitt." 27 October 2008 http://www.crownpoint.com/artists/159/about-artist.

Brown, Kathan. "Sol LeWitt." 27 October 2008 http://www.magical-secrets.com/artists/lewitt.

Kimmelman, Michael. "Sol LeWitt, Master of Conceptualism, Dies at 78." 9 April 2007. 27 October 2008 http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/09/arts/design/09lewitt.html?_r=1&oref=slogin.

Images Cited:
Cunningham, Bill. "Sol LeWitt, Master of Conceptualism, Dies at 78." 9 April 2007. 27 October 2008 http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/09/arts/design/09lewitt.html?_r=1&oref=slogin.

Blog 1: Conceptual Art

The phrase “conceptual art” was formed when the classification of art was expanded outside of what was conventional. The idea behind conceptual art is to make the audience think deeply about what the artist is trying to convey. It seems to be something that people either greatly enjoy, or find horribly distasteful. These thoughts are provoked by that artist and are not a byproduct of the piece but the focus. Conceptual art is hard to define because of the broad specifications that fall under the category.

Conceptual art is the idea that art does not have to be aesthetically pleasing but art should rather be described as a provocation for argument. “The artwork is a process rather than a material thing, and as such it is no longer something that can be grasped merely by seeing, hearing or touching the end product of that process” (Schellekens). It then forces the audience to consider the role of the artist in the piece, and their role as an outsider. Because conceptual art is such an all-encompassing genre, the medium in which is can be expressed is limitless, but does in include such things as photography, film, bodies, events, and performances.

Similar to other genres, conceptual art is still produced today. However, the artistic movement of conceptual art began in 1966 and ended in 1972. During that time period, rebellion and protest were predominant with the rise of feminism and the Vietnam War being prevalent in people’s lives. It should come as no surprise that the artist would then protest the idea of art conforming to stringent standards. Some of the most famous artists of the time include Sol LeWitt, Michael Craig-Martin, Joseph Kosuth, and Marcel Duchamp, all known for their work in conceptual art.

Works Cited:
Schellekens, Elisabeth. "Conceptual Art." 7 June 2007. 27 October 2008 http://www.science.uva.nl/~seop/entries/conceptual-art/#ConArtWhaIt.

The Artists. "Modern & Contemporary artists and art." 27 October 2008 http://the-artists.org/Movementviewcfm?id=4F46309A-96D2-4C1A-9D2ECE2243C365B3&sub=2.

Tate Museum. "Conceptual Art." 27 October 2008 http://www.tate.org.uk/collections/glossary/definition.jsp?entryId=73.