English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Watergate

Iran-Contra

Monica Lewinski

No other choices - so deal with it.

2007-05-08 08:44:23 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

22 answers

Iran Contra.

Watergate was a burglary of Democratic headquarters and a cover-up.

Iran/Contra was the secret and illegal selling of arms to Iran in order to finance death squads in Central America.

2007-05-08 08:56:58 · answer #1 · answered by tribeca_belle 7 · 2 4

Oooh, stack the deck, huh?

Watergate, while certainly bad, is nothing that others haven't done before. Indeed, "Deep Throat", the source for Woodstein, has been revealed to be nothing other than a corrupt political hack, whose illegal s against Weather Underground are excused because he helped bring down a Republican.

Iran-Contra

What a joke. Doesn't deserve any more comment than it reminds me of the events which led to Andrew Johnson's impeachment. Congress passes bill it has no right to pass, president ignores bill, voila, controversy. Yeah, there was more to it tan just that, but that's the gist of it.

Monica Lewinsky

Of course it was all about sex, wasn't it? Or maybe it was about the fact that if you had done what Clinton did, lie under oath, you would be in jail right now.

2007-05-08 09:09:54 · answer #2 · answered by WinOne4TheGipper 3 · 1 2

Iran-Contra
It bit us in the butt as always
Look at Iran now. What moron sells weapons to an enemy. Think they still have those weapons or did they give them to the Iraqi insurgents?
And since our morals are so high we sponsored "State terrorism" in Nicaragua. The same think we're crying about other countries doing now.
Monica L was a Hillary problem. Lewinsky after all is not helping insurgents. All Watergate did was screw Nixon and the Republicans

2007-05-08 09:23:59 · answer #3 · answered by ugotthat 6 · 0 2

Well lets see:

Watergate - Nixon was just the first President to get caught spying on his political opposition. Not the first or last to do it. The President handled it with honor and dignity.

Iran-Contra - Every government in the history of man has had secret dealings to further their countries best interests.

Monica Lewinsky - Not that big of a scandal until the President lied about it, the way he handled it was despicable.

2007-05-08 09:04:55 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 3

How about the XYZ affair?

A far worse scandal than the ones you try and limit people to...Deal with it.

"The XYZ Affair was a 1797 diplomatic episode that worsened relations between the United States and France and led to the undeclared Quasi-War of 1798. Jay's Treaty of 1795 angered France, which was at war with Britain and interpreted the treaty as evidence of an Anglo-American alliance. President John Adams and his Federalist Party had also been critical of the tyranny and extreme radicalism of the French Revolution, further souring relations between France and the United States.

The French seized nearly three hundred American ships bound for British ports in the Atlantic, Mediterranean, and Caribbean. Federalist leaders like Alexander Hamilton called for war, but President John Adams, also a Federalist, sent a diplomatic delegation to Paris in 1797 to negotiate peace. Three French agents, originally called X, Y, and Z, demanded a large cash bribe for the delegation to speak to the French foreign minister Charles Maurice de Talleyrand, a huge loan to help fund the French wars as a condition for continuing negotiations, and a formal apology for comments made by Adams. The Americans broke off negotiations and went home. Jeffersonians, sensing that the American delegates were to blame for the failure, demanded to see the key documents. Adams released the delegation's report, setting off a firestorm of anti-French sentiment..."


And that gets the lib thumbs down...how libs must hate history that contradicts their utopian mindset...

2007-05-08 08:56:20 · answer #5 · answered by ? 6 · 0 4

Watergate

2007-05-08 09:06:28 · answer #6 · answered by Farhad Gorgin 2 · 0 2

It's a toss-up between Watergate and Iran-Contra, but I'll say Watergate if I have to make a choice.

2007-05-08 09:25:29 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

I consider Watergate because it threatened to undermine the process of elections in the US.

Iran-Contra was bad because we were 'meddling', which America isn't supposed to do, but it dealt with other nations.

Lewinsky was only an issue because he lied. But he didn't try to corrupt the political process - he just made himself (and his wife) look bad.

And I know you didn't list any others, but the 'White Water' situation with Hillary "finding" some billing records after the fact was very bad.

2007-05-08 09:01:47 · answer #8 · answered by ? 3 · 2 2

Iran contra was the worst, watergate was just about who is winning the election and lewinski was just a publicity stunt to get rid of clinton. Iran contra was worse because we were selling weapons to a country that is consider a threat to the US.

2007-05-08 08:58:04 · answer #9 · answered by mz 2 · 3 3

Watergate

2007-05-08 08:54:10 · answer #10 · answered by Jadis 6 · 2 3

fedest.com, questions and answers