Politics & Government - 15 April 2007

I'm leaning toward Edwards.

2007-04-15 06:21:14 · 13 answers · asked by Colin 5 in Elections

2007-04-15 06:18:17 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Other - Politics & Government

I have to define ERA, but do not know what it stands for. In relation to the Supreme Court, what does it most likely stand for?

2007-04-15 06:15:41 · 3 answers · asked by -__ 3 in Government

And by own citizens, I mean citizens living and working stateside?
I say yes, what say you? And no bloviating please!!!!

2007-04-15 06:15:30 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Other - Politics & Government

The costs of Iraq and Afghanistan aren't even included in the $481 billion the Pentagon demands for 2008, a 10 percent raise over this year. Total these figures up and Bush is asking for roughly $745 billion in defense spending, a higher number, when adjusted for inflation, than the entire cost of the Vietnam War.

Just pause and consider the size of that number. Three-quarters of a trillion dollars and Osama bin Laden is still at large, the Taliban are regrouping in Afghanistan and the US military is stuck in a civil war in Iraq.

"We have the largest Pentagon budget since World War II, but we are losing to an opponent in Iraq that spends less over an entire year than what we spend in one day," says Winslow Wheeler, a longtime defense expert at the Center for Defense Information.

2007-04-15 06:12:54 · 14 answers · asked by adsf 1 in Politics

51% of the Federal Budget goes on financing wars, mainly in the Middle East, on Clusterbombing and killing mostly innocent civilans. I was shocked to discover this. I wondered how you feel that your taxes is spent on the anhialation of countless thousands of innocent civilans who's only wish in life is to live in peace? Meanwhile the Arms Industry is laughing all the way to their Offshore Bank, Bush included.

Check This out..http://www.warresisters.org/piechart.htm

2007-04-15 06:11:57 · 18 answers · asked by Eric 1 in Military

2007-04-15 06:10:16 · 29 answers · asked by andy r 3 in Politics

The globalism, is going to change the method of the organisation of the states, particullary, the best normative answer is the international structure,
But globalism is evolving faster and faster creating so a lot of problams particullary in the control of the multinational corporate activitys.
But globalism must be consired just a negative phenomen, or there are a lot of good things that it is going to bring us in the future?

2007-04-15 06:09:12 · 5 answers · asked by Erdijani_Star 1 in Politics

because he wasn't to pussified to stand up to militant Islam

2007-04-15 06:08:37 · 21 answers · asked by Deer Slayer 2 in Politics

I hope you are not the sheep or the chicken

Who are the dogs

Who would H. Kissinger be?

2007-04-15 06:08:27 · 1 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

Here is an article that I found very interesting concerning Immigration reform.
http://www.journalnow.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=WSJ%2FMGArticle%2FWSJ_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1173350620968&path=!localnews!localgov!&s=1037645509123

2007-04-15 06:05:18 · 13 answers · asked by RENEGADE. 3 in Immigration

Why do so many people find Hillary Clinton so popular and worthy of being president?

2007-04-15 05:58:27 · 27 answers · asked by azohawk 3 in Elections

documents, e-mails and such?

2007-04-15 05:57:15 · 1 answers · asked by Ford Prefect 7 in Politics

In order to make that responsibility explicit, in 1798 President John Adams initiated the Logan Act, which forbids any American -- "without authority of the United States" -- to communicate with a foreign government with the intent of influencing that government's actions in any "disputes or controversies with the United States."

2007-04-15 05:54:04 · 15 answers · asked by AFIN 3 in Government

Let's see some responses accompanied by evidence, not just pre-formed opinions not supported by evidence.

I have heard that Israel's defense forces do not care at all about the sexual orientation of their soldiers. Can anybody confirm or refute this claim?

In ancient Greece, the most formidable fighting force was the Spartans. Military training was not in groups but was one-on-one. A boy was committed to an experienced warrior, who spent years teaching him, training him to fight, fighting at his side. Adversaries knew that fighting a Spartan would be challenging because the two men always fought together. They understood each other's abilities and psychology thoroughly because they lived together for years, and slept together as lovers. They were bonded in every way, and could predict each other's reactions. Together 24 hours a day for years, they knew each other's strengths and weaknesses. In combat they fought as a single warrior unit. Being gay did not weaken them.

2007-04-15 05:53:34 · 15 answers · asked by fra59e 4 in Military

- 9/11
- The new world order/ Illuminati
- Area 51
- The teletubbies (would you believe)

2007-04-15 05:52:22 · 22 answers · asked by ziggyemovon 1 in Government

2007-04-15 05:50:20 · 20 answers · asked by It is what it is 4 in Elections

Democrats are questioning whether any White House officials purposely sent e-mails about official business on the RNC server — then deleted them, in violation of the law — to avoid scrutiny.
White House officials said the administration is making an aggressive effort to recover anything that was lost. "We have no indications that there was improper intent when using these RNC e-mails," spokeswoman Dana Perino said.


House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers (news, bio, voting record) said the new documents "were not a complete response to our subpoena request,"
"I expect that the attorney general, as the nation's chief law enforcement officer, will be respectful of his obligations under the committee's subpoena and respond in full by Monday," said Conyers, D-Mich.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070414/ap_on_go_pr_wh/fired_prosecutors

2007-04-15 05:48:16 · 8 answers · asked by andy r 3 in Politics

2007-04-15 05:43:55 · 8 answers · asked by The Cult of Personality 5 in Politics

never received a letter from the council prior to it being built, asking if we had any objections.
Presuming we should have, is it to late to do anything about it?

2007-04-15 05:43:34 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Law & Ethics

I was Bush's last Defense Secretary! I did not give him a penny-should I feel guilty?

2007-04-15 05:41:17 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

2007-04-15 05:37:27 · 23 answers · asked by DeuceRider 3 in Politics

I haven't seen much progress made in the past 4 years,can anyone tell me what has changed? Also if all bush does is want to stay the course,is anything gonna be different a year from now. Congress has approved 100 billion dollars for bush but bush wants to veto it because of a withdrawl. Why does bush blame the democrats for not supplying the troops,when he is the one that wants to veto the bill? That 100 billion could be used for better things,bush is lucky they have offered him that and havent impeached him by now.

2007-04-15 05:35:41 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

These tax rate schedules are provided so that you can compute your estimated tax for 2005. To compute your actual income tax, please see the instructions for 2005 Form 1040, 1040A, or 1040EZ as appropriate when they are available.
________________________________________
Schedule X — Single
If taxable income is over-- But not over-- The tax is:
$0 $7,300 10% of the amount over $0
$7,300 $29,700 $730 plus 15% of the amount over 7,300
$29,700 $71,950 $4,090.00 plus 25% of the amount over 29,700
$71,950 $150,150 $14,652.50 plus 28% of the amount over 71,950
$150,150 $326,450 $36,548.50 plus 33% of the amount over 150,150
$326,450 no limit $94,727.50 plus 35% of the amount over 326,450

Schedule Y-1 — Married Filing Jointly or Qualifying Widow(er)
If taxable income is over-- But not over-- The tax is:
$0 $14,600 10% of the amount over $0
$14,600 $59,400 $1,460.00 plus 15% of the amount over 14,600
$59,400 $119,950 $8,180 plus 25% of the amount over 59,400
$119,950 $182,800 $23,317.50 plus 28% of the amount over 119,950
$182,800 $326,450 $40,915.50 plus 33% of the amount over 182,800
$326,450 no limit $88,320.00 plus 35% of the amount over 326,450

Schedule Y-2 — Married Filing Separately
If taxable income is over-- But not over-- The tax is:
$0 $7,300 10% of the amount over $0
$7,300 $29,700 $730 plus 15% of the amount over 7,300
$29,700 $59,975 $4,090 plus 25% of the amount over 29,700
$59,975 $91,400 $11,658.75 plus 28% of the amount over 59,975
$91,400 $163,225 $20,457.75 plus 33% of the amount over 91,400
$163,225 no limit $44,160.00 plus 35% of the amount over 163,225

Schedule Z — Head of Household
If taxable income is over-- But not over-- The tax is:
$0 $10,450 10% of the amount over $0
$10,450 $39,800 $1,045 plus 15% of the amount over 10,450
$39,800 $102,800 $5,447.50 plus 25% of the amount over 39,800
$102,800 $166,450 $21,197.50 plus 28% of the amount over 102,800
$166,450 $326,450 $39,019.50 plus 33% of the amount over 166,450
$326,450 no limit $91,819.50 plus 35% of the amount over 326,450

2007-04-15 05:33:51 · 3 answers · asked by GREAT_AMERICAN 1 in Politics

NO. But many would call us freedom fighters.

2007-04-15 05:33:47 · 20 answers · asked by Villain 6 in Politics

due to having a new attorney?

2007-04-15 05:32:23 · 6 answers · asked by Jen 1 in Law & Ethics

Democrats: Middle-class tax relief a priority
Story Highlights
• Democrats vow push to keep middle class from paying tax intended for wealthy
• Change would cost at least $50 billion a year at a time of budget deficits
• Bush proposes another one-year fix in his 2008 budget submission to Congress
• White House budget director: "It's a harder issue than it seems"
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- As millions of Americans rush to file their annual income tax returns before the April 17 deadline, Democrats promised to push to keep middle-class families from paying a tax originally intended for the very wealthy.
The alternative minimum tax, initially intended to ensure that the rich could not take so many deductions and credits that they paid no federal income taxes, will hit some 23 million taxpayers next spring when they file their 2007 income tax returns unless Congress takes action.
"This tax now affects schoolteachers, firefighters, police officers. It was never intended to be that way," said Rep. Rahm Emanuel, an Illinois Democrat who sits on the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee in the U.S. House of Representatives.
"Middle-class families making between $75,000 and $100,000 are now more likely this year to pay the tax than those making more than a million dollars," Emanuel said in the weekly Democratic radio address Saturday.
Congress has been enacting a series of temporary measures to keep more middle- and upper middle-income taxpayers from paying the AMT, and President Bush proposed another one-year fix in his 2008 budget submission to Congress.
House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel has said he will push for permanent AMT relief for those taxpayers who were never meant to pay it. The problem is a cost of at least $50 billion a year to the federal Treasury at a time of war outlays and big budget deficits.
About 4 million taxpayers paid the AMT in 2005, according to the latest available data from the Internal Revenue Service. That number could grow to 30 million in a few years.
White House Budget Director Rob Portman told Reuters last week he would like to see a long-term fix to the AMT, but acknowledged the difficulty.
"It's a harder issue than it seems," he said.
House Democrats want a solution that does not add to the deficits, and that will mean raising revenue by closing tax loopholes and possibly raising taxes on others, which would make it hard to win support from congressional Republicans.
"We will work with our Republican colleagues to identify bipartisan solutions that help middle-class families avoid this tax that was never intended for them," Emanuel said. "This is the one thing on which Democrats and Republicans should agree."
Emanuel also said reforming the AMT, which forces people to calculate their taxes under two different sets of rules, would be a major step forward in simplifying the tax code.
Copyright 2007 Reuters. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.







These tax rate schedules are provided so that you can compute your estimated tax for 2005. To compute your actual income tax, please see the instructions for 2005 Form 1040, 1040A, or 1040EZ as appropriate when they are available.
________________________________________
Schedule X — Single
If taxable income is over-- But not over-- The tax is:
$0 $7,300 10% of the amount over $0
$7,300 $29,700 $730 plus 15% of the amount over 7,300
$29,700 $71,950 $4,090.00 plus 25% of the amount over 29,700
$71,950 $150,150 $14,652.50 plus 28% of the amount over 71,950
$150,150 $326,450 $36,548.50 plus 33% of the amount over 150,150
$326,450 no limit $94,727.50 plus 35% of the amount over 326,450

Schedule Y-1 — Married Filing Jointly or Qualifying Widow(er)
If taxable income is over-- But not over-- The tax is:
$0 $14,600 10% of the amount over $0
$14,600 $59,400 $1,460.00 plus 15% of the amount over 14,600
$59,400 $119,950 $8,180 plus 25% of the amount over 59,400
$119,950 $182,800 $23,317.50 plus 28% of the amount over 119,950
$182,800 $326,450 $40,915.50 plus 33% of the amount over 182,800
$326,450 no limit $88,320.00 plus 35% of the amount over 326,450

Schedule Y-2 — Married Filing Separately
If taxable income is over-- But not over-- The tax is:
$0 $7,300 10% of the amount over $0
$7,300 $29,700 $730 plus 15% of the amount over 7,300
$29,700 $59,975 $4,090 plus 25% of the amount over 29,700
$59,975 $91,400 $11,658.75 plus 28% of the amount over 59,975
$91,400 $163,225 $20,457.75 plus 33% of the amount over 91,400
$163,225 no limit $44,160.00 plus 35% of the amount over 163,225

Schedule Z — Head of Household
If taxable income is over-- But not over-- The tax is:
$0 $10,450 10% of the amount over $0
$10,450 $39,800 $1,045 plus 15% of the amount over 10,450
$39,800 $102,800 $5,447.50 plus 25% of the amount over 39,800
$102,800 $166,450 $21,197.50 plus 28% of the amount over 102,800
$166,450 $326,450 $39,019.50 plus 33% of the amount over 166,450
$326,450 no limit $91,819.50 plus 35% of the amount over 326,450

2007-04-15 05:30:53 · 2 answers · asked by GREAT_AMERICAN 1 in Politics

2007-04-15 05:30:29 · 7 answers · asked by DeuceRider 3 in Politics

"Another cause for large scale debt has been the corruption and embezzlement of money by the elite in developing countries (who were often placed in power by the powerful countries themselves). These moneys are often placed in foreign banks (and used to loan back to the developing countries). Many loans also come with conditions, that include preferential exports etc. In effect then, more money comes out of the developing countries than is given in. This depresses wages even further due to the spiraling circle downwards to ensure that enough exports are produced."

http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Debt/Causes.asp

Even global organizations like the World Bank, IMF, WTO, G8, and others are keeping poor countries in debt on purpose. That's why there have been large mass protests around the world

http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/FreeTrade/Protests.asp

But of course the American media never reports on this

2007-04-15 05:29:31 · 1 answers · asked by Anonymous in Other - Politics & Government

Are they that simple minded???.....Or do they know better and are trying to fool the masses ??? What do you think ???

2007-04-15 05:26:35 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics