On a New Yorker story

Well, this is not a diary and, if I were not a New Yorker subscriber, I would not have bothered to respond to such a sparse come-.on. It is not nice to tease.

That said, the article is informative, not as tedious as many New Yorker pieces and provides a new perspective.

I have long thought that Bernstein was the better reporter and do not trust Woodward. He is a grand stander and a self promoter.

Since Nixon once answered a letter I sent him, I’ve been ambivalent about his fall. Since I learned that both he and McGovern supported a guaranteed family income, I have felt that he was set up because he had to be removed. Had McGovern won, he would not have been able to effect such a program. Nixon could and the financiers, nor Capitol Hill, could put up with that. Formally liberating the dollar from the bands of gold threatened to reduce the currency to a mere utility. All the people gambling with it as a scarce resource could not have that. They could not give up the levers of the economy. Bad enough that the expanded electorate would challenge the established hegemony.

Watergate overshadowed so much else that happened. One might say it was the beginning of a grand deception which has now culminated with deception being all there is.