While conducting a recent radio interview with Robert Nedelkoff, who since 1997 has worked on behalf of the Richard Nixon Foundation at the National Archives in College Park, Maryland, a caller asked us if we were trying to “rehabilitate” the 37th President of the United States. We were discussing the new movie - Frost/Nixon – from the standpoint of historical accuracy.
My initial comment to the caller was that it would be rather difficult to rehabilitate anyone during a 12-minute radio segment, but of course, I understand what he was trying to say.
Richard Nixon remains a complex, fascinating, controversial, and formidable figure nearly 15 years after his death – and 35 years after the whole agonizing period of Watergate. To some he personifies absolute evil. They see him as a sinister caricature reminiscent of the work of political cartoonist Herblock.
To others – especially as the years go by and we learn a lot more about all the other presidents – he is remembered for the totality of his life and work. Watergate was an unforgettable episode – and certainly a sad chapter in his life and our history – but Mr. Nixon was far from the one-dimensional character defined by his past and present detractors.
There was a lot of talk while Mr. Nixon was president about an “enemies list.” But this does not discount the clear fact that Richard M. Nixon did, in fact, have many enemies - probably more per capita than any president before or since. A lot of people hated the guy’s guts for a generation and worked tirelessly for the day when they would see him leave the national political stage.
And – as he told David Frost in those now-famous interviews – he “gave them a sword” to use against him, one they gleefully used with “relish.”
Richard M. Nixon still has enemies. The names and faces have changed with the passing of many old foes – but there never seems to be a shortage of people who keep the anti-Nixon flame burning.
No, I am not trying to rehabilitate Mr. Nixon. Certain things can never be undone. But he did find a way to restore himself with a sense of personal persistence and resilience that is quite rare. History will continue to analyze, judge, and interpret who he was and what he meant to our national narrative. But there is no way to change the basic fact that the man was on five national tickets – a feat only equaled by Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
Was Richard Nixon worse than all the presidents before and after? Of course not – he had his flaws and faults and they were played out before the nation’s eyes in a way that hadn’t happened before.
But it has happened with regularity ever since.
The more historians dig through the archaeological crust covering the machinations and motives of all those who lived and worked at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, the more we learn of things not known back in the day. Occasionally, something pops up that begs the question: “Had the people known about this back then, would this president have survived?”
Ten years ago we impeached Bill Clinton for complications due to an illicit sexual affair. He was not thrown out of office – nor did he resign. But he did lie under oath and in a very real sense disgraced the presidency. Yet, he remains a significant political player and will now have the ear of a secretary of state. The whole impeachment – the scandal – the embarrassment – the ugly stuff is long forgotten.
Why is that? And – why is it that Mr. Nixon’s shortcomings must be forever rehearsed and punished?
What if the public at large had known about John F. Kennedy’s shenanigans when he was president? Several years ago, JFK confidant and admirer – the late Hugh Sidey of Time magazine – suggested in an on-camera interview that had Kennedy not been assassinated, and had he won re-election in 1964, our 35th president might very well have had to step down before his second term was finished.
Sidey indicated that some of JFK’s “extra-curricular” activities might have brought him down (there was a lot of “there – there” behind the scenes and under the covers in that so-called “brief and shining moment”). From being hyper-medicated (courtesy of Dr. “Feelgood”) while discussing matters with his Soviet counterpart, to a sexual addiction that led him to risk a dalliance with at least one possible East German agent, he lived on the edge of disaster. I mean, seriously – can you imagine if George W. had done that stuff – or Richard Nixon?
Actually, you can’t – because they understood marriage vows – but I digress.
This is not the stuff of tabloids – all one has to do is go to the nearest bookstore or library and read biographies even written by JFK admirers. Suggesting that Jack Kennedy had flaws and a propensity for high-risk behavior is not reserved for some “lunatic-fringe” - it is very much the widely understood and accepted version of his life and work.
I think any reasonable observer will note that along the way about 35-40 years ago something began to change in this country. It had to do with how stories were covered and reported. In fact, the modern era of what we now take for granted as “investigative journalism” was born against the backdrop of the event that gave rise to a now-familiar suffix attached to any and every potential political scandal – Water-GATE. Continued... |