i would think that is worse then having an affair, right?
2006-07-21 07:40:12 · 18 answers · asked by david c 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
by far.
and its not the only thing he lies about....
2006-07-21 07:46:42 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Nope. Lying about extra-marital bj's is the worst lying a president can do.
To be fair that incident was under oath though. Bush hasn't lied about Iraq under oath AFAIK. There's his presidential oath I guess. That oath was to protect the constitution but we all know how that went.
EDIT: Folks saying "But they did find WMD's!" are kidding themselves. Grandpa, the stuff the Iraqis use to make IED's are good old fashioned conventional explosives--often old artillery shells. If that's WMD then we need to invade rural Kentucky, too, because some of those good old boys have TNT. The ammo dump you're talking about was one of those things we left unguarded while we manned the oil fields. Who's call was that? Your man Bush.
The other stuff they found--the old gas canisters--were no longer usable and had been stored since the first Gulf war. My bet is that the Iraqis themselves had lost track of that particular stash but it doesn't matter. Everyone knew that Saddam had gas before and we were bound to find some somewhere. Did we invade to find one stockpile of old gas canisters? Is that the threat to the U.S. and the world that this war was started for?
GW and company aggressively shaped the intelligence they received to meet the outcome they desired. Intelligence agencies may have had some bad information but the result of the administration's analysis was a foregone conclusion. They were going to invade Iraq.
2006-07-21 14:50:17 · answer #2 · answered by Song M 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well in order for a president to be lying about wmd's there cant be any found. Since March 2003 over 200 chemical weapons have been found. So is it worse than the media lying to us about them
2006-07-21 14:45:13 · answer #3 · answered by STURGIS 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
"...i would think that is worse then having an affair, right?".
But then he(Clinton) lied about it.
As usual, the question is based on a false premise. Bush did not lie about WMDs in Iraq.
2006-07-21 14:45:12 · answer #4 · answered by opusthepenguin_1999 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. The worst lie is swearing an oath to see that the laws are faithfully executed and to support and defend the constitution.
Then willfully violating federal laws, ignoring constitutional requirements, and calling the constitution "just a g*d*mn piece of paper".
Lying about what weapons might exist in another country when you have absolutely no proof just just stupid. A deliberate and willful breach of your oath of office is criminal.
2006-07-21 14:43:22 · answer #5 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hindsight is 20/20. Where were you in 2003 when the whole world was led to believe that this was a dangerous threat. Sadam himself allowed the misinformation about his military power to fool people. Clinton was fooled as well. So the term liar isnt appropriate.
2006-07-21 14:44:37 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Here we go again! And exactly what do YOU call the 450,000 tons of Saddam's high explosives that were found in Iraq, some of it later stolen out of ammo dumps by terrorist insurgents before it could be fully secured, and that is now being used against our troops in the form of IED's?
2006-07-21 14:52:29 · answer #7 · answered by senior citizen 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Republicans would say no. The worst lie you can tell as president is "I did not have Sex with that woman". See the difference Sex and Death. Which one do you think is worse?
2006-07-21 14:44:05 · answer #8 · answered by DEEJay 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it is. but unfortunatly its not quite as interesting. Think about it, what do u think the undereducated mass cares about more, or should i say understands more? the president having an affair or weapons of mass destruction and oil prices etc. its sad but its true
Sex sells, even in politics
2006-07-21 14:55:07 · answer #9 · answered by simi_oju69 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is worse than having an affair.
Getting a blow j*b in the oval office didn't kill 2,555 men and women - not to mention ten's of thousands of innocent Iraqi men and women.
But you know what I think is worse than even that?
To CONTINUE lying!
How many boys, girls and innocent civilians will have to die to cover up his continuous lying?
2006-07-21 14:48:49 · answer #10 · answered by Temple 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
of course it would , luckily our president did not lie about this . For one intelligence are the ones that make the reports , bush just read them and took action . 2. they did find numerous weapons
2006-07-21 14:56:45 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋