Politics & Government - 22 June 2006

Alot of people know that a different party would be nice--but the republicans and democrats have such a monoply that people don't want to 'throw their votes away' on someone who can't possibly win. So, instead of voting for who they want as president, they vote for whoever will beat the person they don't want in office. Instead of choosing the best, we pick the lesser of two evils. How can the American people change this??? The American sysym was designed so the common man would be in control, with these two political partys so strong, the american systym is broken.

2006-06-22 05:59:32 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Government

6 ⤊

Why do people hate lawyers so much?

2006-06-22 05:59:25 · 23 answers · asked by Joe 5 in Law & Ethics

2 ⤊

What is a financial affidavit?

2006-06-22 05:57:05 · 3 answers · asked by Vicky R 1 in Civic Participation

0 ⤊

Would you be involved in a World Education program?

How could somthing like this work? To educate the entire world would mean peace, would you be a part of it?

2006-06-22 05:56:53 · 5 answers · asked by Mandy 2 in Civic Participation

0 ⤊

Is there a real need for labor unions in todays work force.?

2006-06-22 05:56:17 · 5 answers · asked by glassma0505 1 in Other - Politics & Government

1 ⤊

How will you Vote?

They say that they will let the pepole vote on the way to get rid of the drain on the USA we like to call MEXICANS!! Beaners or Wetbacks how will you vote?

2006-06-22 05:56:13 · 10 answers · asked by jlatham11 1 in Immigration

2 ⤊

Would most Nations respect Hillary Clinton as our President?

I do think she'd make an excellent President. Someone recently brought up that a lot of the countries we have strained relationships with do not respect women in authoritative roles, especially as leaders of a country. As a result, would this cause us a problem?

2006-06-22 05:55:51 · 20 answers · asked by yogabear516 1 in Politics

0 ⤊

Do you like our presidents way of running things?

Just curiouse to see what people think about Bush.

2006-06-22 05:54:42 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Other - Politics & Government

2 ⤊

If Bush did not lie about WMD's will people that publically called him a liar, pubically apologize?

before you answer that question look at this site:

http://www.homestead.com/prosites-prs/Scan001.pdf

2006-06-22 05:54:29 · 12 answers · asked by alexg114 3 in Politics

2 ⤊

do you read while toileting?

i do
ill read anything in site...the listerine bottle, tampax instructions, people, the clorox bottle, etc

2006-06-22 05:53:52 · 32 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

4 ⤊

Now that WMD have been found will the left admit that Bush did not lie? Will they admit they made the mistake

I know this yet another sad day for liberals. Death on an Al Queda leader and now this WMD find.

2006-06-22 05:51:59 · 24 answers · asked by Neal 1 in Military

1 ⤊

I want to hire a mexican army?

It could never happen unless i had a a mininimum of like 10 zeros behind my check before I could even think about going to start somethin up.. And id probably need a base (outside of the usa preferrably)

what my question is... Will you join my side and fight the opression? and what all would I have to do so that this half baked idea could work

2006-06-22 05:51:20 · 14 answers · asked by Tasteslikekittylitter 2 in Immigration

6 ⤊

How do conservatives expect to convince people with such vitriol???

I asked "What are conservatives smoking?" and 1 answrer was this sad crap:
turboweegie
The president and his administration spent months telling the US public and the world why we were going into Iraq. How can you possibly say he didn't disclose his reasons? Do you even realize how little sense you make?

What does the alleged 'religion industry' have to do with the basic attacks against religion being done to us by the ACLU and their ilk? Preventing a very religious person from thanking God at a high school graduation is the very definition of government preventing the free exercise of religion. That's a gross violation of their right. That's what we mean by persecution.

We also have never said that the 1st Amendment doesn't apply to anybody else. But the 1st Amendment was never about you not having to hear other's religious talk. You have no right to not be offended by others' free speech, even if it is about God.
Your assessment of America is naive .

Do i just laugh again or what?

2006-06-22 05:47:50 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

1 ⤊

Did you see how many died in one three month period in 1945?

On June 22, 1945, the World War II battle for Okinawa officially ended; 12,520 Americans and 110,000 Japanese were killed in the nearly three-month campaign.

And I bet not one Marine or any other soldier was put on trial based solely on the accusations of our enemy.

2006-06-22 05:46:06 · 7 answers · asked by i_am_the_dida 5 in Military

0 ⤊

How can write a reseach paper on terrorism includig an outline?

Be specific and ellaborate

2006-06-22 05:44:09 · 3 answers · asked by cidriian_s 1 in Law & Ethics

1 ⤊

Is there an Expiration Date on your Asprin Bottle ? Wouldn't there be an Expiration Date for WMD"S???

2006-06-22 05:43:41 · 12 answers · asked by jedilogic 3 in Politics

0 ⤊

Legal question...?

You watch a movie broadcast from TV after 1 year and you record it onto your vcr. and it is legal..

You download it from the internet and considered illegal!

Ironic isn't it!

2006-06-22 05:42:34 · 4 answers · asked by LetMEtell&AskYOU 5 in Law & Ethics

0 ⤊

Pres. Lincoln long time before picked Gen. Grant head Army.McClellan & Halleck very poor.Better early picks?

Prominent military historians, such as T. Harry Williams, consider Pres. Lincoln to be a military genius. He did have some ability. However, his picks to head the U.S. Army and the Army of the Potomac were largely poor. As far as heading the U.S. Army McClellan would not fight and was terrible, and Gen. Henry Halleck turned himself into a clerk, instead of an overall commander. Ultimately, Gen. Grant was an outstanding choice to head the U.S. Army, but he was selected relatively late. Were not more competent possible generals available, and who might have they been?

As far as heading the Army of the Potomac, McClellan, Burnside, Hooker, and Meade varied from terrible to disappointing. Again were there not other possible generals available? Who might have been considered? I would be grateful for any listing of candidates. I also note that no one can actually know how someone will perform in advance, but instead of sticking with McClellan, Reynolds and Sedwick were around.

2006-06-22 05:42:30 · 1 answers · asked by Rev. Dr. Glen 3 in Military

0 ⤊

Are you worried about nukes....?

now that Iran and N. Korea are checking them out?

2006-06-22 05:39:15 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Military

0 ⤊

Why can't Cons see that their tactics in the GWOT just aren't working?

Basic facts: The Taliban now control 1/3 of Afghanistan. A Taliban-like regime is about to take control of Somalia. Iraq is heading toward a civil war. Guns and bombs aren't winning this. Why won't you admit that you were wrong on HOW to fight this war?

2006-06-22 05:38:32 · 12 answers · asked by darkemoregan 4 in Politics

1 ⤊