It’s Work, But It’s Really Cool Work at Times

November 1 marks the 23rd year of the Indiana Chamber’s Annual Awards Dinner and my 15th year of involvement. BizVoice magazine profiles of the winners, planning and compiling videos for the event; scripting some of the proceedings and working with the media interested in talking with the guest speakers are among some of my responsibilities.

It’s a great deal of work, but it’s also very enjoyable. Getting to know the award winners and helping tell their stories is about as good as it gets in the world of journalism. And interacting with the keynote presenters is something special.

Here are some of the names from the past 14 years: Steve Forbes, Alvin Toffler, the late Tim Russert, Bob Costas, Mary Matlin and James Carville, Martin Luther King III, Newt Gingrich, Tom Brokaw and Terry Bradshaw. On the entertainment side, the satirical group The Capitol Steps has appeared twice and there was another Washington favorite in Mark Russell.

There are a few stories regarding those speakers that I can’t share. But it is fair to say most (nearly all) have been interesting and accommodating in brief one-on-one discussions and in their interactions with the media.

Speaking of media, we’re hearing from more than a few journalists who are especially excited about this year’s speakers — the Watergate duo of Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein. Although a youngster at the time of Richard Nixon’s escapades and their investigative reporting, I have to admit I’m looking forward to meeting them and hearing their stories about the lessons learned in the ensuing 40 years.

Yeah, it’s work, but I’m not complaining.

Watergate Reporters Reflect on Audacity of Nixon

How awful were Richard Nixon’s actions as President? Apparently, he was bad enough to unify Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward on the same joint byline for the first time in 36 years. In this piece for The Washington Post, America’s most famous journalistic duo reflects on Nixon’s dubious legacy.

Also, get tickets now for our Annual Awards Dinner on November 1 to hear more from Woodward and Bernstein, who will be on hand to discuss the 40th anniversary of Watergate — and I’ll be interviewing the two for our September/October edition of BizVoice, as well. For now, here’s an excerpt from the aforementioned Washington Post article, but read the entire story for their list of five reasons why Nixon was worse than we thought.

As Sen. Sam Ervin completed his 20-year Senate career in 1974 and issued his final report as chairman of the Senate Watergate committee, he posed the question: “What was Watergate?”

Countless answers have been offered in the 40 years since June 17, 1972, when a team of burglars wearing business suits and rubber gloves was arrested at 2:30 a.m. at the headquarters of the Democratic Party in the Watergate office building in Washington. Four days afterward, the Nixon White House offered its answer: “Certain elements may try to stretch this beyond what it was,” press secretary Ronald Ziegler scoffed, dismissing the incident as a “third-rate burglary.”

History proved that it was anything but. Two years later, Richard Nixon would become the first and only U.S. president to resign, his role in the criminal conspiracy to obstruct justice — the Watergate coverup — definitively established.

Another answer has since persisted, often unchallenged: the notion that the coverup was worse than the crime. This idea minimizes the scale and reach of Nixon’s criminal actions.

Ervin’s answer to his own question hints at the magnitude of Watergate: “To destroy, insofar as the presidential election of 1972 was concerned, the integrity of the process by which the President of the United States is nominated and elected.” Yet Watergate was far more than that. At its most virulent, Watergate was a brazen and daring assault, led by Nixon himself, against the heart of American democracy: the Constitution, our system of free elections, the rule of law.

Today, much more than when we first covered this story as young Washington Post reporters, an abundant record provides unambiguous answers and evidence about Watergate and its meaning. This record has expanded continuously over the decades with the transcription of hundreds of hours of Nixon’s secret tapes, adding detail and context to the hearings in the Senate and House of Representatives; the trials and guilty pleas of some 40 Nixon aides and associates who went to jail; and the memoirs of Nixon and his deputies. Such documentation makes it possible to trace the president’s personal dominance over a massive campaign of political espionage, sabotage and other illegal activities against his real or perceived opponents.

In the course of his five-and-a-half-year presidency, beginning in 1969, Nixon launched and managed five successive and overlapping wars — against the anti-Vietnam War movement, the news media, the Democrats, the justice system and, finally, against history itself. All reflected a mind-set and a pattern of behavior that were uniquely and pervasively Nixon’s: a willingness to disregard the law for political advantage, and a quest for dirt and secrets about his opponents as an organizing principle of his presidency.

Long before the Watergate break-in, gumshoeing, burglary, wiretapping and political sabotage had become a way of life in the Nixon White House.

Presidential Debates: The Numbers Game

Gearing up for tonight’s VP debate? Well, you’re certainly not alone.

And according to Nielsen (the ratings system, not Leslie the slapstick actor), 52.4 million concerned Americans tuned in to watch John McCain and Barack Obama engage in some good old verbal pugilism last Friday. However, the debate didn’t even crack into the top 10 of all time.

Check out some of these stats regarding debates of yesteryear. Looks like Carter vs. Reagan (1980) claims the most viewers, while the famous Nixon-Kennedy battles of 1960 still own the top three spots in percentage of households.

You’re probably saying, "Surely tonight’s event will rank near the top in VP debates, right?"

Well, you might be right — but don’t call me "Shirley."