Politics & Government - 8 February 2007

I keep being accused of being anti and non American because I simply say it as I see it.

Are things that bad that Patriots can no longer question the failed actions of this administration, without the Lemmings personally attacking you?

I think the time has come to move on.....

2007-02-08 03:28:38 · 25 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

2007-02-08 03:28:24 · 24 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

As we have seen most of the decision are more destructive than constructive. Like sealing and demolition which has made thousand of people lose their bread and butter and turned few crore pati in a day. Thousands of crore worth rupees properties has been destroyed without giving a second thought. Thousand of people are resting in jails without their trials could start. Making Free all Accused in a particular case and again starting their trials. Banning a particular Area for construction work for years. Removing All Jhuggis Jhopris from the heart of Indian Capital Delhi in a chilled Winter for the sake of creating space for whom.

2007-02-08 03:27:48 · 6 answers · asked by Abid 1 in Government

2007-02-08 03:27:18 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

a little over 3 years ago the Dixie Chicks made a comment about George Bush... and at the time they were treated like traitors, cd's burned, boycotted on the radio... hell 500 years ago they would have been burned at the stake. Now they are poised to win a grammy, and the comment they made 3 years ago would be considered minor compared to what is said freely by even members of congress about Bush. Has anyone apologized to the ladies from Texas ?

I find it repulsive that people can flip flop in their ideals so quickly, I found nothing wrong with what they said in the first place it was their opinion... but to shun them for it at the time was just wrong... and now its the norm anyway

2007-02-08 03:26:31 · 10 answers · asked by Dylan m 3 in Politics

http://washingtontimes.com/national/20070207-123706-5963r.htm

Nancy Pelosi apparently does not care at all about Global Warming like she says as she now wants a 757 with a crew of 16 instead of the "little" Gufstream with a crew of 5 that was used by the former Speaker. This 757 will cost you and me $300,000 per trip and she says she'll use it two to three times a week. It will bellow out 10,000 lbs more CO2s than does the Gulfstream per trip. HMM so much for cutting government spending and cutting CO2 emissions. She's no different than the others. The gulfstream will actually go further on a tank of fuel and do it faster...

2007-02-08 03:25:43 · 18 answers · asked by capnemo 5 in Politics

2007-02-08 03:25:26 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Law Enforcement & Police

2007-02-08 03:24:52 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Law Enforcement & Police

Is it right for corporations to profit from prison labor?

2007-02-08 03:23:32 · 19 answers · asked by Diesel Weasel 7 in Law & Ethics

www.natvan.com The Jews want to make the holocaust a religion. You can't argue with that. That's why they will never openly debate the holocaust. They just have laws passed to imprison anyone who even questions the holocaust. They don't take them to court and sue them for slander or have any evidence. The Jews have simply had government's pass laws in many countries in Europe where if you even question one little thing about the holocaust. I don't mean to deny that something didn't happen. I mean if you even querstion it you go straight to jail in many countries in Europe. In Austria if you hurt a Jews feelings you go to jail for 2 years and if you meant it you get 3 years. This is power folks. Not one offence anywhere in the world is anyone sent straight to jail. There is always a trial. If you just have people who question something go straight to jail, then you never have to worry about evidence to a debate. This is what 300 trillion will buy you.

2007-02-08 03:23:15 · 26 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

Bush,Pelose,Kerry,Gore,Hillary.Kennedy,Etc,Etc,?

2007-02-08 03:23:09 · 2 answers · asked by Anonymous in Government

What then? Do we force them to adopt it anyway? If so, please explain how this fits in with our idea that people should be free.

2007-02-08 03:22:20 · 9 answers · asked by Bush Invented the Google 6 in Politics

I know most people hate long winded questions, but all the points of this question will take some time to present. I will try to be as brief as possible.

For the purpose of this debate, I want to make the assumption that every President of the USA since FDR has based their decisions on the welfare of the country and nothing else. I want to dismiss any notions that personal agendas were involved or personal gains were involved. Let's just assume every President including GWB has acted solely for the good of the country as best as they could. That said, let's review a bit of history;



The USA didn't start issuing paper money until sometime around the Civil War. The script was actually a promissory note backed up by gold. All gold in the USA became the property of the government, and citizens were required to surrender their gold in return for script. A rate was fixed at $35 per ounce of gold. On the international market, the USA agreed to surrender gold in exchange for its script. This make U.S. currency as good as gold in international dealings and able to compete with the British pound sterling, which was the accepted international currency up to WWII.



The USA emerged from WWII as the wealthiest nation in the capitalized world. America didn't fight the war for free. It supplied arms and equipment to its allies with an invoice enclosed and captured most of the wealth from these countries. Great Britain, for instance, didn't finish paying off its war debt to the USA until just a few years ago. With no damage to its infrastructure, a booming industrial economy, and a full treasury the USA was clearly the economic leader of the world. Its currency immediately replaced the British pound as the international trade currency and has remained so to this day.



WWII created a new threat to the world, takeover by the communist state. For the first time in its history, the USA was not able to disband its military after the conflict. Since its treasury coffers were full, it presented little problems at the time for the country to maintain a guns and butter economy through the 1950s. The 1960s, however, strained the treasury beyond its means.



The 1960s brought on a period when the USA was maintaining a large military to keep the USSR at bay, it was financing a war in Vietnam, a space program, and began a welfare program for the poor. It was during this period that the government starting printing money in excess of its gold supply. This became quite evident to the international community, and in the early 1970s France came forward and demanded gold in exchange for its U.S. currency held in its reserve. This move by France started a run on the U.S. gold supply.



This was the major challenge that faced President Nixon during his term. His solution was to take the dollar off the gold standard and make a pact, which in time has proven to be a deal with the devil.



Note: from this point on, I am going to be a bit vague with actual names. Each time I put actual names in print here on this forum, the question ends up deleted for no given reason. When I use the word commodity, I am referring to the commodity you need to make your car go. When I mention pirates, I am referring to the group of foreigners who control the international supply of this commodity.

Nixon knew quite well that something had to determine the value of the dollars. His solution was really quite ingenious and a tribute to his wisdom. For the conditions of the world at that time, it was the perfect solution. Nixon made a pact which a group of pirates whereby they would sell their commodity on the international market and demand payment for this commodity only in U.S. currency. This was the establishment of what is called petrodollars today. The commodity became the standard by which the U.S. dollar was valued.



This solution did not come without an immediate effect. Without gold backing the dollar, the pirates thought their commodity was seriously underpriced. In 1974, the pirates enacted a commodity embargo, which lasted until their benchmark price was obtained. What followed was over a decade of inflation in the USA, which lasted until the money supply, the excess money printed in the 1960s, matched the economy.



Since the commodity based value of the dollar set an artificial value of its currency, the USA was able to print far more currency than its GNP demanded. This served the pirates well, as they too feared a Soviet takeover thus losing control of their commodity. But, this agreement of mutual necessity ended with the fall of the USSR. No longer do the pirates need the military protection of the USA. Only the USA needs the pirates the support its overextended currency.



Here lays the danger today. I don't recall the exact figures, but as of 2003 there was somewhere around 2700 trillion dollars tucked away in foreign reserves. This is currency used in the international commodity market. About 5 or 6 years ago, one of the pirates, who held a grudge against the USA, starting demanding payments for his country's commodity for food program in Euros rather than dollars. This move by this pirate started other pirates to consider the same. Even the largest pirate, who lived next door to this pirate, started making motions that it too would start trading in Euros.



The USA could not lose control of the international market that set the value of its currency. The only solution was to remove the pirate who started the whole movement. The opportunity presented itself when an unrelated group blew up the WTC. Plans were made, and the U.S. military went to work.



The plan, however, to secure the international commodity market with military force hasn't quite worked out. Another neighboring pirate, much larger than the first pirate, is now trading its commodity in Euros instead of dollars. That pirate is now trying to foil the efforts of the USA, and that pirate now seems to be in the military cross hairs as well.



So, what's at stake?

If the pirates start trading in Euros as opposed to dollars, the 2700 trillion dollars plus in foreign reserves becomes worthless except for here in the USA. This puts the industrial based in the USA in jeopardy. One possible way for foreign countries to recoup the value of this currency is to buy corporate America. We could see large companies like GE and Microsoft bought up with currency that would otherwise be worthless. Such a move would virtually place all of America in slavery.



We cannot change history. Every decision make in the past made by every U.S. President suited the times. We can only take a good look at where we are today and judge the correct action to suit the current conditions.



Which brings us to the question. Is success in the war in Iraq the answer to the problem?

2007-02-08 03:20:58 · 8 answers · asked by .... . .-.. .-.. --- 4 in Politics

2007-02-08 03:19:47 · 7 answers · asked by bsc_student_08 2 in Other - Politics & Government

....performing at MIRAMAR AIR BASE this season??

2007-02-08 03:18:43 · 7 answers · asked by lipstick_insurgent 1 in Military

We have had 9/11
We have had Afghanistan
We have had Iraq,
Now we plan to attack Iran...
and maybe even Nigeria

2007-02-08 03:17:25 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

Did he not already prove beyond resonable doubt that he is a COWARD when he fled rather than fight in Vietnam?

2007-02-08 03:17:22 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

That was so those terrorists could shoot down Russian helicopters.

Now OUR helicopters are being shot down.....KARMA for bloodthirsty USA...

2007-02-08 03:16:51 · 11 answers · asked by rattlecattle717 1 in Military

civics

2007-02-08 03:16:25 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Law & Ethics

“No country with a McDonald's outlet has ever gone to war with another.”

2007-02-08 03:16:01 · 4 answers · asked by Walter D 3 in Politics

2007-02-08 03:15:34 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Law & Ethics

2007-02-08 03:12:55 · 9 answers · asked by Chi Guy 5 in Politics

Nancy Pelosi has constantly said that she will do whatever she can to stop global warming and reverse its effects, so why does she want a brand new plane? (http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D8MO0GKO0.htm)

The plane that she currently has is a Gulf Stream 5 which is perfect for one passenger who may sometimes bring along some passengers, but now she wants to upgrade to a Boeing 757! This plane has a crew of 16 people, 42 business class seats, costs $300,000 to operate on a one-way trip, and puts out over 1000 lbs. of carbon dioxide every hour.
(http://www.757.org.uk/, http://www.boeing.com/commercial/757family/technical.html.)

If Pelosi really wants to stop global warming why doesn't she just rent an apartment is DC, that way she doesn't have to fly home for the weekend?

2007-02-08 03:12:18 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Elections

i am austalian i am in london and have both uk and aus passports.
my son was recently born here and we want to go back to aus. i am no longer with the father. how do i get a passport for him. is he eligable to get his austalian passport as well as uk with my details or will it have to go back to his granfather.his granfather is english.will this be a problem?

2007-02-08 03:12:08 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Immigration

Why does the president think he can go off to texas once a month to go on vacation? Why cant the congress and all of government work 5-6 days a week like 90 percent of Americans? They make so much more money than the rest of us but they take alot more time off and usually get the plane to take them wherever they're going for free.

2007-02-08 03:12:05 · 11 answers · asked by I race cars 4 in Government

The Patriot Act is when the Government has the right to tap your phones, look through your emails, and can invade your home when your not around.what is your opinion on this?

2007-02-08 03:10:11 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Law & Ethics

2007-02-08 03:08:55 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

Please read the article at this link before answering the question.
http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2007/s1843294.htm

2007-02-08 03:08:28 · 10 answers · asked by Omniscience 2 in Other - Politics & Government

I seem to be all over the place on the issues.
First, i am for the death penalty.
I am for a womans right to choose if she wishes to have an abortion-although i feel that it is a very bad choice on her part to have a abortion and if i were a woman i dont think i would make that decision. Still, i am pro-choice and would stand by a woman who is close to me if she made that choice.
I am for the war on terror-yet think the war in Iraq is not related at all and a major mistake.
I am pro-military. I regret not joining the military when i was younger.
I am for gun rights, as long as the person doesnt have a criminal background and buys the gun legally and has it registered.
I feel our government is becoming too Big Brotherish. I want less government control over my life.
I feel the patriot act was intended as a great tool but now is being abused by those in power.
I consider myself Christian and believe in God.
What am i?

2007-02-08 03:06:50 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

and that Clinton was a bad President?

2007-02-08 03:06:08 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics