Politics & Government - 10 May 2007

Hello everyone,
recently my mother was fired from her job, a large telephone service carrier. After her father's death a couple of years ago, her doctor, which the company paid for, diagnosed her with depression and said that she couldn't work. After the first diagnosis and a few months out of work, her job ordered her back to work, but the doctor said no and she was fired. After filing a complaint with the union, she got her job back. Now after about a year, she again was diagnosed with depression and ordered not to work. Months later, her job, against the doctor's orders, called and ordered her back to work within a week, then she was fired again. She is in the process of trying to get her job back again. I wanted to know if she can/should take legal action against her former employer. She was twice fired from the company after she was diagnosed with depression and told that she was unable to work. Does the Rehabilitation act cover depression? Her Doctor says to sue. Can we?

2007-05-10 08:32:50 · 5 answers · asked by kham83 1 in Law & Ethics

Each soldier wears an undershirt, long-sleeved camouflage shirt and long pants, thick socks and then heavy combat boots, then on top of that they wear heavy body armor, some are now wearing armor over their upper arms and groin too, then they have the kevlar helmet, then they have their rifles or machine guns (some of which can be really heavy), then they have to carry all their own ammo (which is also heavy), their sidearms, and all their gear on their bodies and in their heavy packs. And then they have to spend long days on their feet in 120+ degree heat and be able to maintain focus and fight the enemy.

Isn't there a serious danger of just passing out from the heat, and even if they don't, can't their combat performance be diminished and their exhaustion increased from all this heavy gear in such heat? Is it possible that being lightly equipped (like the insurgents in Iraq are) might be an advantage?

Thank you, answers from military personnel are greatly appreciated.

2007-05-10 08:30:46 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Military

A militant Islamic group in Iraq recently issued a fatwa, or religious edict, to the Assyrian Christian residents of the Baghdad suburb of Dora: Convert to Islam within 24 hours, or face death. At the same time, Muslim neighbors were instructed, over the loudspeakers of local mosques, to confiscate the property of Christians and enforce the edict.

Meanwhile, christian and Jewish American soldiers stand by and do nothing. Just like they've been ORDERED to do. bush is no christian, he is a bought and paid for puppet for the saudi arabian empire, and this entire war has been for their benefit.

2007-05-10 08:28:41 · 2 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

Smoking is just as harmful as any other drug. Why do we continue to allow it? It no only is harmful to do but it harms the people around you....

2007-05-10 08:28:27 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous in Other - Politics & Government

My lawyer who was working and was hired by my POA whose powers have since been revoked,is now asking to verify authenticy of my emails to him (the lawyer). ie. he wants to know whether I, his client, is actually writing the emails to him. What are the laws governing the authenticity of emails and their acceptibility in the Indian courts for any pending cases?

This is a serious matter and would like to get replies from those who know and can cite laws pertaining to the admissibility and authenticity of emails.

Thank you.

2007-05-10 08:28:07 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Law & Ethics

I evaluate all points of view with an open mind. If I am legitimately wrong, I want to know, pronto !... but I do feel liberals and their party (the dems ;() are doing more damage to America than our foriegn muslim destroyers and their aspirations........How could you ever make me vote for a democrat when homeland security is my top concern ? I`m all ears at this point.....

2007-05-10 08:22:53 · 23 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

Just wondering.

2007-05-10 08:20:26 · 24 answers · asked by Anonymous in Other - Politics & Government

Fox News, MSNBC and CNN are all ignoring Ron Paul and Mike Cravel even though many are asking about them. Is this proof that there is no left or right control of media and it is actually one evil entity? Our media is telling us our options for president? Pick your poison.

2007-05-10 08:14:54 · 12 answers · asked by jeb black 5 in Politics

Both from history, ancient (for argument pre 1500) and modern times, living or dead. What made them so great?

2007-05-10 08:13:15 · 4 answers · asked by Mordent 7 in Politics

bring it on

2007-05-10 08:13:09 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

I HATE and do not want war, but if war is the "last" resort why play with the attitude of "humane, fair or sypathetic"? I feel this conflict is a Vietnam and Korean echo, no real commitment just a finger shaking at the world. Again I HATE war but if war is the last resort "all" should fear that decsion against them. Believe it is the last resort and finish or get out. Disagree?

2007-05-10 08:10:54 · 15 answers · asked by edubya 5 in Politics

ok apart from the fact he's not american but then that didn't stop people talking about Arnold running for president. Bush could give support and Bill was his best friend and they love him in the states. He's had previous experience running a country....

2007-05-10 08:10:19 · 16 answers · asked by gmasta_flash 3 in Politics

I was just invited to a 'change of command' ceremony by an aquanitance. I am obviously a civilian and I don't know what it is.

2007-05-10 08:07:10 · 12 answers · asked by funnyhaha 2 in Military

WASHINGTON - President Bush, under growing political pressure, agreed Thursday to negotiate with Congress on a war-spending bill that sets benchmarks for progress in Iraq.

The turnabout in Bush's position came as Republicans expressed anxieties about the war and the House was expected to pass legislation that would cut off funding for U.S. troops as early as July.

Bush said he would veto the measure. "We reject that idea. It won't work," the president said, speaking to reporters at the Pentagon after a briefing on Iraq and Afghanistan.

The bill being voted on Thursday is opposed by nearly all Republicans and unlikely to survive in the Senate. But House Democratic leaders say the measure shows they refuse to back down in challenging Bush on a deeply unpopular and costly war.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (news, bio, voting record), D-Nev., told reporters he has felt a shift in the administration's approach to Democrats.

"It's very clear that the people around the president recognize there are some problems," said Reid, D-Nev. "And I think I have felt with my conversations with administration officials that there is a right admission that things are not going very well."

Senate Democrats said they anticipate a vote on a war bill by next week, although Reid said it remains unclear what the Senate bill might look like.

"There are 150 scenarios as to how this matter is going to be handled," said Reid. Finding a bill the Congress will pass and the president will sign is "extremely difficult," he added.

Bush pressured Iraqi leaders to move swiftly on a number of long-pending measures, including legislation to share Iraq's oil wealth, hold provincial elections and update the constitution.

"They have got to speed up their clock," the president said. Washington is unhappy that Iraq's parliament plans to take a two-month vacation this summer in the midst of the war.

Bush's willingness to put benchmarks in a war-funding bill represented a shift by the president.

"One message I have heard from people of both parties is that benchmarks make sense and I agree," Bush said. He said his chief of staff, Joshua Bolten, would talk with congressional leaders "to find common ground" on benchmarks.

White House officials decided Bush, after refusing to discuss his negotiating stand, should change course and declare what he is for since he been emphatic about what he is against.

The Democrats' bill in the House would provide the military with $42.8 billion to keep operations going through July, buy equipment and train Iraqi and Afghan security forces. Congress would decide shortly before its August recess whether to release an additional $52.8 billion for war spending through September.

A dozen or so members in Congress are attempting to strike a bipartisan compromise. Few have come forward with concrete plans — perhaps out of reluctance to champion a proposal until they know it can succeed. None of the proposals put in plain view have picked up steam.

"We'll see what happens," said Rep. Bud Cramer, D-Ala. "A lot of us are coming together across the aisle. We're under the radar now, but we're meeting."

Many Republicans have grown nervous on the war.

Two Republicans — Reps. Frank Wolf (news, bio, voting record) of Virginia and Michael McCaul (news, bio, voting record) of Texas — circulated a letter along with Democrat Mark Udall (news, bio, voting record) of Colorado urging their colleagues to co-sponsor legislation that would put in place recommendations from the independent Iraq Study Group.

One of the 79 suggestions from the bipartisan group in December was reducing U.S. "political, military or economic support" for Iraq if the Baghdad government could not make substantial progress toward providing for the country's security. The report suggested an urgent diplomatic attempt to stabilize Iraq and allow the withdrawal of most U.S. combat troops by early 2008.

Bush said Congress should give his buildup of more than 20,000 troops a chance to work.

Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander, is to report to Bush in September on the effectiveness of the buildup.

"Why don't we wait and see what happens," the president said. "Let's give this plan a chance to work. Let's stop playing politics."

Bush said the House Democrats' plan to pay for the war only through July was "haphazard, piecemeal funding."

Of the five brigades of additional forces being sent to Iraq, Bush said three are already settled there, the fourth has just entered Baghdad and the fifth will arrive in mid-June.

"Al-Qaida is responding with their own surge. Al-Qaida is ratcheting up their own campaign of high-profile attacks," Bush said.

Rep. Tom Davis of Virginia was one of 11 GOP lawmakers who met with Bush and his top aides Tuesday afternoon.

"We asked them what's Plan B," Davis said. "We let them know that the status quo is not acceptable." Davis said the president responded that if he began discussing a new strategy, his current one never would have a chance to succeed.

2007-05-10 08:06:55 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

Only months after the euro-launch, Saddam's Iraq announced it was switching from selling oil in dollars only, to euros only -- breaking the OPEC agreement. Iran, Russia, Venezuela, Libya, all began talking openly of switching too -- were the floodgates about to be opened?

Then aeroplanes flew into the twin-towers in September 2001. Was this another Houdini chance to save the US (petro)dollar and the biggest financial/economic crash in history? War preparations began in the US. But first war-fever had to be created -- and truth was the first casualty. Other oil producing countries watched-on. In 2000 Iraq began selling oil in euros. In 2002, Iraq changed all their petro-dollars in their vaults into euros. A few months later, the US began their invasion of Iraq.

The whole world was watching: very few aware that the US was engaging in the first oil currency, or petrodollar war. After the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, remember, the US secured oil areas first. Their first sales in August were, of course, in dollars, again. The only government building in Baghdad not bombed was the Oil Ministry! It does not matter how many people are murdered -- for the US, the petrodollar must be saved as the only way to buy and sell oil -- otherwise the US economy will crash, and much more besides.

2007-05-10 08:06:28 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070510/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iraq

2007-05-10 08:06:09 · 11 answers · asked by Duane T 4 in Politics

2007-05-10 08:05:10 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Military

help for debate team

2007-05-10 08:02:52 · 4 answers · asked by nicholas s 1 in Law & Ethics

Coming from a country where we have very few firearms incidents, and every one is national news when it happens, I can't really understand the resistance in the US to gun control.

The second amendment of the US Constitution gives the citizens of the US the right to bear arms, and is usually the thing quoted in any argument against gun control. However, this right was drafted in the context of raising and maintaining a civil militia. In modern terms, the US National Guard. So, the constitution allows the bearing of arms in the National Guard. In UK terms, this would be the Territorial Army. Why is this then used to argue the allowing of arms, and military arms, for general civilian use?

Quoted from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

Second Amendment to the US Constitution:
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"

2007-05-10 08:01:09 · 6 answers · asked by Valarian 4 in Law & Ethics

My picks are Ronald Reagan on the Republican side and Harry Truman on the Democratic side.

2007-05-10 08:01:07 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

naturalized citizens to become President of the United States?

Why or why not? Please explain.

2007-05-10 07:58:13 · 20 answers · asked by ken erestu 6 in Politics

the way i see is a society trying to protect "freedom" with guns...
if none of the companies produce bullets or guns in the world. they will be nothing to shoot with. therefore no more killing

THINK ABOUT THAT! but more that think lets Act.

wow? you may ask.... PASS THE VOICE..... make this comment to all ears some one with power may listen!

2007-05-10 07:57:52 · 18 answers · asked by el_putaz 1 in Politics

In this instance; the pemanent cure for all telemarketers.

2007-05-10 07:57:33 · 11 answers · asked by Amy V 4 in Law & Ethics

Thanks scottdman2003!

Anyone know?

2007-05-10 07:57:18 · 8 answers · asked by bossbackocd 3 in Politics

I have to go to jury selection next week for a case that is expected to last 7 weeks. If I go dressed like a thug, (i.e. backwards hat, baggy clothes, etc,) will that make me less likely to get selected?

2007-05-10 07:57:06 · 23 answers · asked by RameelRaymundo 2 in Civic Participation

Bush says now that he will accept benchmarks as long as it does not include any withdrawal of troops based on the benchmarks. So where is their incentive??? What is the point? It's stay the course light.

2007-05-10 07:56:16 · 5 answers · asked by World Peace Now 3 in Politics

I see a lot of dialog in this forum about how great the Canadian health care program is. I have two Canadian friends who migrated to the US because they paid the equivalent of a 60% income tax rate in Canada, and, in their opinion had better choices for health care and better return on their health care dollars in the US than they did in Canada.

One was a doctor and the other was a surgical nurse. They earn more per year than many Americans, and that may have been a factor. I don't know if the same tax ratio would be applied to a lower income individual.

I am curious as to how many of you would be willing to pay much higher taxes at that rate to have guaranteed health care. It isn't free (as is often implied in this forum) because the tax payer subsidizes it. However, everyone is entitled to good medical care in Canada. The US subsidizes medical care for only the poorest people.

2007-05-10 07:52:49 · 18 answers · asked by Buffy Summers 6 in Law & Ethics

Every major country plays games with the rules, many minor countries do as well. What's accomplished by continuing the charades?

2007-05-10 07:52:22 · 30 answers · asked by Scott K 7 in International Organizations

I am 24 years old. Live in Missouri. Got a speeding ticket 44 in a 30. First ticket i have ever had. Will this affect my insurance?

2007-05-10 07:51:03 · 22 answers · asked by aj 2 in Law Enforcement & Police

2007-05-10 07:47:46 · 42 answers · asked by Ringo G. 4 in Politics