• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Who remembers the watergate scandal? Who remembers the Iran/contra scandal?

I do. I lived through both. I remember the nuns wheeling TV carts into our grammar school classrooms to watch the Watergate hearings. I remember Ken Starr Chamber failing to link the Clintons to Whitewater gate, but far exceeding his mandate and not stopping until he nailed the president for lying to congress about a blow job.

I seem to recall Starr help press conferences in a hall with nude statues. He had the statues draped with cloth.
The draping nude statues was done by John Ashcroft, the AG for GWB. He didn't like being photographed in front of them.
 
Both of these scandals seem almost quaint in light of the current one.
You had Republicans that actually believed in something besides the raw power to bend the country to their will.

Funny, a big GOP talking point is that the DEM's want Immigrants so they can increase their voting ranks by giving the new Immigrants free stuff:
- First, you have to be a citizen to vote. You don't get anointed with citizenship just by showing up.
- Second you don't get free stuff just for showing up either. Undocumented Immigrants pay into Social Security with little chance that they will get anything back out of that system for a long time if ever. They pay taxes as well. Undocumented immigrants, including DACA holders, are ineligible to receive most federal public benefits, including means-tested benefits such as Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), regular Medicaid, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). Undocumented immigrants are ineligible for health care subsidies under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and are prohibited from purchasing unsubsidized health coverage on ACA exchange. Emergency Medicaid is available to them. The Special Supplemental Nutrition program is also available for children and infants.

They must have established legal residency for at least 5 years to gain access to some benefits. But even after 5 years as green card holders, they don't have access to everything available to a citizen.

Finally many Latino's end up Republican voters. I am not sure it is anything like a sure bet that DEMs end up with reliable DEM voters from a pool of undocumented immigrants.

So I have no idea what the fugg the Right is talking about.....as usual. All I know is that they are trying to turn women back into property like the old days and make men of Euro-protestant decent preeminent JUST BECAUSE again, like the old days. Let's face it, what they want is the old days back again making believe that the world has simply stood still.
 
I had to ask my grandparents if they remembered Watergate. Wow, the clothes and hairstyles were crazy then.
 
I had to ask my grandparents if they remembered Watergate. Wow, the clothes and hairstyles were crazy then.
Some of the 1970s had styles that were in monumental bad taste. It was if the culture of the 1960s was warped in the new decade. Polyester clothing, hailed as a breakthrough since it needed no ironing, was one abomination. Leisure suits were ghastly in their double-knittedness. Farah Fawcett hair on white women, enormous block-the-movie-screen Afros on women. Embarassing blaxploitation films, spin-offs from the pretty good groundbreaking film "Shaft." There were so many black copies of other films' themes ("The Black Godfather"), that one black film critic I had the honor of hearing at a Telluride film festival said he expected there to be a black "Jaws." I am proud that "Saturday Night Fever" was filmed and about my old Brooklyn neighborhood, but what it did for music was awful. There were so many "disco versions" of older songs, I fully expected there to appear a disco version of Ave Maria.

As the decade ended, disco died an ignominious death in Chicago's Comisky park.


On the other hand, the decade redeemed itself for us who appreciate feminine pulchritude by popularizing the somewhat tacky but eminently noticeable slit skirt, a fashion statement previously associated with ladies of the night.
 
Some of the 1970s had styles that were in monumental bad taste. It was if the culture of the 1960s was warped in the new decade. Polyester clothing, hailed as a breakthrough since it needed no ironing, was one abomination. Leisure suits were ghastly in their double-knittedness. Farah Fawcett hair on white women, enormous block-the-movie-screen Afros on women. Embarassing blaxploitation films, spin-offs from the pretty good groundbreaking film "Shaft." There were so many black copies of other films' themes ("The Black Godfather"), that one black film critic I had the honor of hearing at a Telluride film festival said he expected there to be a black "Jaws." I am proud that "Saturday Night Fever" was filmed and about my old Brooklyn neighborhood, but what it did for music was awful. There were so many "disco versions" of older songs, I fully expected there to appear a disco version of Ave Maria.

As the decade ended, disco died an ignominious death in Chicago's Comisky park.


On the other hand, the decade redeemed itself for us who appreciate feminine pulchritude by popularizing the somewhat tacky but eminently noticeable slit skirt, a fashion statement previously associated with ladies of the night.
Good with the bad, for sure. Look at 90s fashion - bullshit. But some of the best music movements and great filmmaking began in the end of that decade.
 
I'm so glad you provided specifics as to what i got "wrong". :rolleyes:
Sometimes it's not worth it. You didn't reply to my early post for that matter.
 
Are today's republicans really just as corrupt as republicans from years gone by? I've been watching a few documentaries about both of them recently and the one thing that stands out, the lying. Before trump came along Reagan was the fire breathing mad cowboy out to destroy communism, that was his public face. Nixon too was going to put communism in its place until he went off the deep end seeing enemies everywhere, which oddly enough seems to have turned into a gop tradition. Anyway to keep the string intact W lied us into a war with Iraq over WMD's that didn't exist and yet republican voters over the years just keep voting republican even after finding out their leadership lies to them on huge scales. Why? How do you make these things ok in your minds?

Strategic Errors of Monumental Proportions
What Can Be Done in Iraq?

 
Watergate was several years before my birth.
 
The more it changes, the more it stays the same.
 
Watergate was blown way out of proportion and caught Nixon in the middle, so he did the right thing and resigned.
Nixon was a lying, vindictive pos that got hung by his own recordings.
Iran-Contra was a whole different ballgame as President Reagan undoubtedly knew nothing about the details (plausible deniability). Blame Casey and to a much lesser extent - Oliver North, a true American hero, if you need a scapegoat.
Reagan, who was already showing signs of Alzheimer’s, was likely ignorant of much, but was at least aware of discussions about trading arms for hostages.

Oliver North believed in what he did, but factually, was no hero for his involvement.
And what about the conspiracy by the democrats re: Trump and Russian collusion hoax? Nothing tops that farce.
There was never an issue of “collusion”. As Mueller made clear in his report, there is no legal statute regarding collusion.

Conspiracy was the matter investigated, and on that issue Mueller deemed the 100+ meetings between Tramp campaign members/advisors investigated by his team did not reveal information supporting any charges.

And regarding Jr’s Trump Tower meeting with former Russian government lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskay, Mueller determined that Jr’s ignorance of the law excuse wouldn’t be worth the time/resources it would take to prosecute.
Dems need to stop lying all of the time.
Take your own advice.
 
The fake Russia hoax was a far more serious crime than Watergate.
 
You had Republicans that actually believed in something besides the raw power to bend the country to their will.

Funny, a big GOP talking point is that the DEM's want Immigrants so they can increase their voting ranks by giving the new Immigrants free stuff:
- First, you have to be a citizen to vote. You don't get anointed with citizenship just by showing up.
- Second you don't get free stuff just for showing up either. Undocumented Immigrants pay into Social Security with little chance that they will get anything back out of that system for a long time if ever. They pay taxes as well. Undocumented immigrants, including DACA holders, are ineligible to receive most federal public benefits, including means-tested benefits such as Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), regular Medicaid, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). Undocumented immigrants are ineligible for health care subsidies under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and are prohibited from purchasing unsubsidized health coverage on ACA exchange. Emergency Medicaid is available to them. The Special Supplemental Nutrition program is also available for children and infants.

They must have established legal residency for at least 5 years to gain access to some benefits. But even after 5 years as green card holders, they don't have access to everything available to a citizen.

Finally many Latino's end up Republican voters. I am not sure it is anything like a sure bet that DEMs end up with reliable DEM voters from a pool of undocumented immigrants.

So I have no idea what the fugg the Right is talking about.....as usual. All I know is that they are trying to turn women back into property like the old days and make men of Euro-protestant decent preeminent JUST BECAUSE again, like the old days. Let's face it, what they want is the old days back again making believe that the world has simply stood still.

Thanks for the post, I personally know 30 + people for whom English is a second language and they voted for trump twice. I'm talking about the valley, RGV
 
I wasn't born yet for Watergate, but I've read and listened to a couple of podcasts about it. Honestly, I have no idea what the Iran-Contra thing is, but I see that I was 5-7 years old during it.
 
Some of the 1970s had styles that were in monumental bad taste. It was if the culture of the 1960s was warped in the new decade. Polyester clothing, hailed as a breakthrough since it needed no ironing, was one abomination. Leisure suits were ghastly in their double-knittedness. Farah Fawcett hair on white women, enormous block-the-movie-screen Afros on women. Embarassing blaxploitation films, spin-offs from the pretty good groundbreaking film "Shaft." There were so many black copies of other films' themes ("The Black Godfather"), that one black film critic I had the honor of hearing at a Telluride film festival said he expected there to be a black "Jaws." I am proud that "Saturday Night Fever" was filmed and about my old Brooklyn neighborhood, but what it did for music was awful. There were so many "disco versions" of older songs, I fully expected there to appear a disco version of Ave Maria.

Couple points. First, I think rap music has done more harm to music than anything before.

Second, I think the 1970's were the best decade for music in history, albeit competing with the late 60's, so lump them.

You can't really summarize what you tried IMO like that.

But, you forgot some of the terrible fashion issues, including the very wide ties IIRC.
 
Are today's republicans really just as corrupt as republicans from years gone by? I've been watching a few documentaries about both of them recently and the one thing that stands out, the lying. Before trump came along Reagan was the fire breathing mad cowboy out to destroy communism, that was his public face. Nixon too was going to put communism in its place until he went off the deep end seeing enemies everywhere, which oddly enough seems to have turned into a gop tradition. Anyway to keep the string intact W lied us into a war with Iraq over WMD's that didn't exist and yet republican voters over the years just keep voting republican even after finding out their leadership lies to them on huge scales. Why? How do you make these things ok in your minds?
Ken Star
I do. I lived through both. I remember the nuns wheeling TV carts into our grammar school classrooms to watch the Watergate hearings. I remember Ken Starr Chamber failing to link the Clintons to Whitewater gate, but far exceeding his mandate and not stopping until he nailed the president for lying to congress about a blow job.

I seem to recall Starr help press conferences in a hall with nude statues. He had the statues draped with cloth.
Ken Starr didn't exceed his mandate, new evidence came to him from Linda Tripp concerning the possibility B Clinton perjured himself before the Grand Jury in the Paula Jones sexual harassment suit. He took that evidence before the 3 judge panel that oversaw his investigations, they expanded his mandate.
 
Watergate was blown way out of proportion and caught Nixon in the middle, so he did the right thing and resigned.

Iran-Contra was a whole different ballgame as President Reagan undoubtedly knew nothing about the details (plausible deniability). Blame Casey and to a much lesser extent - Oliver North, a true American hero, if you need a scapegoat.

And what about the conspiracy by the democrats re: Trump and Russian collusion hoax? Nothing tops that farce. Dems need to stop lying all of the time.
See a trend?
 
Good with the bad, for sure. Look at 90s fashion - bullshit. But some of the best music movements and great filmmaking began in the end of that decade.

90s fashion was the best.
 
I remember my mom quoting Lowell Weikert saying that Nixon tried to steal America. Chilling.
 
Ken Starr didn't exceed his mandate, new evidence came to him from Linda Tripp concerning the possibility B Clinton perjured himself before the Grand Jury in the Paula Jones sexual harassment suit. He took that evidence before the 3 judge panel that oversaw his investigations, they expanded his mandate.
Let's remember what Starr's mandate really was: as a political attack dog to find ANY attacks on Clinton.

First, the Republicans looked for the most partisan attack dog they could find, and set him loose to find attacks on Clinton. He spend the money, did the searches, and found nothing, and said so.

So, the Republicans just repeated the process, the next time picking Starr and making his job clear to him. Find attacks.

IIRC, it was an environment where Richard Mellon Scaife put up a $50 million fun to pay for 'dirt' on Clinton. So 'investigators' could travel the back swamps of Arkansas offering people cash to say they saw Clinton sell cocaine, or whatever.

There was a whole army that called themselves the elves, of private lawyers who tried to assist with attacks on Clinton - they are the ones who got wind of Linda Tripp and persuaded her to betray Monica Lewinski. Ya, Clinton behaved badly. It wasn't impeachable, and justice was done when the abuse of power impeachment backfired on Republicans - and cost them their own new Speaker of the House when HIS actions were uncovered.
 
I remember both, although Iran Contra was very vague. It was a very complicated matter because you had the Reagan administration breaking different congressional laws and promises on several fronts. They sold arms to Iran breaking their own embargo to a 'terrorist state' which was needed parts for their war against Iraq. they did so because some members of the administration saw the same arms embargo that Reagan himself worked hard to gain international unity for, as driving Khomeini towards Russia. Then the CIA and took the proceeds of those sales, to create a slush fund to support the Contras, a Far right coalition group trying to overthrow the Sandinista govt in Nicaragua which Congress expressly forbade with the passage of the Boland Amendment, because of the contra's past record for torture, terrorism, and murder. And how did the Contra's learn the tactics of guerrilla warfare, including the targeting of schools, hospitals and other 'soft targets" you may ask? Well they were tutored by the CIA! And that outrage got the Boland Amendments passed to outlaw any further Reagan efforts to financially support to overthrow the govt of Nicaraqua.

As if all that was not embarrassing enough, one of the justifications for selling those arms to Iran, was as a quid pro quo for Iranian help in negotiating to get a terrorist group in Lebanon which whom they were cozy, to free 7 hostages, when Reagan got himself elected in part swearing he'd never to negotiate with hostage takers like Carter was accused of doing by Ronnie.
 
I remember both, although Iran Contra was very vague. It was a very complicated matter because you had the Reagan administration breaking different congressional laws and promises on several fronts.

Because you had them in an all-hands coverup of Reagan and Bush's roles. The special investigator wrote a book how his investigation was prevented by the administration, and he called Bush an unindicted co-conspirator. Bush scandalously pardoned nearly all of the criminals.

They sold arms to Iran breaking their own embargo to a 'terrorist state' which was needed parts for their war against Iraq. they did so because some members of the administration saw the same arms embargo that Reagan himself worked hard to gain international unity for, as driving Khomeini towards Russia.

Few understand it today, but radical Islam was always as of that point a far-right political movement the west used for its own purposes. It was very natural for Reagan to seek to make a deal with them. I recommend the book "Devil's Game" on the history.
 
Because you had them in an all-hands coverup of Reagan and Bush's roles. The special investigator wrote a book how his investigation was prevented by the administration, and he called Bush an unindicted co-conspirator. Bush scandalously pardoned nearly all of the criminals.



Few understand it today, but radical Islam was always as of that point a far-right political movement the west used for its own purposes. It was very natural for Reagan to seek to make a deal with them. I recommend the book "Devil's Game" on the history.
VP Bush was in this up to his neck, I personally think he knew more about the whole mess than anyone else in that administration, and did everything in his considerable power to obstruct the investigation. When you put a former Director of the CIA into the oval office, what else can you expect except this https://www.politico.com/story/2018/12/24/bush-pardons-iran-contra-felons-dec-24-1992-1072042
 
Back
Top Bottom