Watergate

Stanley Kutler, a University of Wisconsin historian who wrote "The Wars of Watergate," a harsh critique of Nixon, must walk around with a knot inside his stomach. Reliving the past to learn from previous mistakes is fine, but judging Nixon and not forgiving the man is just plain counterproductive. Kutler's unforgiving attitude tells more about Kutler than it does about Nixon. Years ago, Kutler was one of those throwing the first stones at Nixon; now he wants to be the last. In the same article, James David Barber, a political science professor at Duke University, states that Nixon's drive for rehabilitation reflects the dangerous belief that Americans will forgive anything.

I read with interest Ellen Goodman's typical anti-Nixon column (Op-Ed Page, April 22). Naturally, she dwells on Watergate. I wish she had expounded on the predicament that the United States and the free world would be in if former President Richard Nixon had not gone to China. Certainly one must wonder about Goodman's conclusion that she would not vote for Nixon's "admission into the circle of elder statesmen." Nixon earned that status a number of years ago. His most recent book, "1999: Victory Without War," underscores that fact.

As his first act as President, Bill Clinton should pardon George Bush. Even though Bush should not have interfered with the prosecution of Caspar Weinberger and the others, it is in the best interest of the country to do so. After the two-year Watergate soap opera, Gerald Ford decided to pardon Richard Nixon in 1974. This brave act cost Ford the election, but saved the country from further embarrassment and stagnation. Today with all the problems facing our country we can ill-afford to duplicate Watergate.

It's an affront to every American who loves his country to polarize the Iran-contra scandal into Democrats who are gleefully rubbing their hands together versus Republicans who acted unwisely but for morally proper causes. The current mess has nothing to do with political parties. Every American, regardless of his political persuasion, should feel shame, anger and frustration that a small group of people attempted to implement their policies by circumventing the law as well as the will of the people.

The Conrad cartoon of Aug. 6 includes the name of my client, Maurice H. Stans, among a list of individuals in the Nixon Administration who were depicted as having served behind prison walls. Mr. Stans has never served a day in jail or prison in his life. He had never even been charged with any violations in Watergate, much less ever been convicted of any crime in connection with Watergate. ROBERT H. FINCH Pasadena Editor's note: Stans was indicted in 1974 and later acquitted of 10 counts of perjury and conspiracy in the so-called Vesco case.

Re "Watergate Revisited With More Than the Expletives Deleted," Parsons column, June 16, 2002: It must have been while wearing a red clown nose and big floppy shoes that Nixon apologist, I mean the executive director of the Richard Nixon Library & Birthplace, put the Watergate scandal "in context." John Taylor hilariously asserts that the break-in, cover-up and the firing of a special prosecutor were the result of President Nixon trying to end the Vietnam War. Then, as if firing a verbal seltzer at us, Taylor says something about the president not being able to fight a war "if his government can't keep secrets."

Having the likes of Nixon deliver a "papal" blessing to that miserable excuse for a new vice president represents the kiss of death for the Indiana senator. It is a fitting tribute from a man whose party gave us the Great Depression, Watergate, Contragate and all the other scandals we have come to associate with the Republicans in this century. Now, the final nail has been driven into the coffin. Say good night, Dan. SID GRUBER North Hollywood

The transcript of Richard M. Nixon's testimony to members of the Watergate grand jury shows the former president as combative, frequently arguing with prosecutors, sparring over questions and challenging their fairness. As he did in public statements, Nixon insisted that illegal activities of which he was accused had precedents in previous administrations. On the second day of his testimony, for example, prosecutors asked about White House efforts to use the IRS against political opponents, particularly Democratic National Committee Chairman Lawrence F. O'Brien, whose office in the Watergate building had been the target of the burglary which began the scandal.

Maybe you or one of your readers can explain why the USC Trojans have a horse as their mascot? My God, haven't any of these people read Homer? A horse as a source of pride for the Trojans is analogous to Nixon moving into the Watergate apartments or Napoleon vacationing at Waterloo. Wouldn't they as soon forget? From the Trojan perspective, the horse should forever be a reminder of their greed, vacuity and egregious arrogance. On second thought, that's everything USC stands for. D. HART Van Nuys

Two weeks after the 1972 Watergate break-in, President Nixon suggested making a "shambles" of the GOP headquarters and blaming it on Democrats, the San Francisco Examiner reported. Nixon, who made the suggestions to chief political aide Charles W. Colson, suggested that the vandalism take place during the Democratic convention. The July 1, 1972, conversation was captured on more than 200 hours of tapes released by the National Archives in November.