Politics & Government - 18 June 2007

He has destroyed our country and our freedoms. Don't other countries see him as a direct threat? Can anyone out there protect the world from such a tyrant? Is Iran and North Korea our only hope? Help!

2007-06-18 11:58:53 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Other - Politics & Government

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070618/ap_on_go_pr_wh/white_house_e_mails

2007-06-18 11:58:15 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

my friend summoned to appear in court by national rail, for not buying a ticket, what can happen to him , he is a student, any ideas anyone

2007-06-18 11:55:36 · 3 answers · asked by asd a 1 in Law & Ethics

I work with California Dept of Mental Health and many patients want to make complaints to an agency outside of the institution's office of Patient's Rights.

2007-06-18 11:51:59 · 2 answers · asked by John W 2 in Law & Ethics

2007-06-18 11:51:45 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Elections

To whom it May concern:

Does Yahoo Answers allow users to share their knowledge, experience and opinions ?

So, why some of my answers were deleted???

I am Mexican! and proud of it!
I don't like people defaming, bashing or insulting Mexico, Mexican fellow nationals or Mexican-American U.S Citizens!
If someone do it,I will answer to that person as he/she deserves! I fight Fire with Fire!!!

However, I am very respectful with any culture, ethnicity, religion, color or flavor!
I encourage to Y.A Police to stop the Anti-Mexicanism or Anti-Mexican propaganda on Immigration in the Immigration forum!
Mexico is the most important Hispanic Ally, partner and neighbor. Get it straight! We are friends!
Stop trying to divide Mexican-Americans!!!
-United WE Stand!
God bless America!
Thx.

2007-06-18 11:47:23 · 27 answers · asked by El Alakran Mexican'O'Ian 2 in Immigration

IMMIGRATION - time to say ENOUGH!

On current demographic trends, we, the native British people, will be an ethnic minority in our own country within sixty years. To ensure that this does not happen, and that the British people retain their homeland and identity, we call for an immediate halt to all further immigration, the immediate deportation of criminal and illegal immigrants, and the introduction of a system of voluntary resettlement whereby those immigrants who are legally here will be afforded the opportunity to return to their lands of ethnic origin assisted by a generous financial incentives both for individuals and for the countries in question. We will abolish the 'positive discrimination' schemes that have made white Britons second-class citizens. We will also clamp down on the flood of 'asylum seekers', all of whom are either bogus or can find refuge much nearer their home countries.

EUROPE - back to British independence!

We are opposed to the Single European Currency, and support the overwhelming majority of the British people in their desire to keep the Pound and our traditional weights and measures. At the same time, we are for the best possible relationship with our European neighbours and believe that the nations of Europe should be free to trade and cooperate whenever it is mutually beneficial, though without being forced into a political and economic straitjacket - political unification. Accordingly, we stand for British withdrawal from the European Union. In place of the EU, we intend to aim towards greater national self-sufficiency, and to work to restore Britain's family and trading ties with Australia, Canada and New Zealand, and to trade with the rest of the world as it suits us. Following our withdrawal from the EU, the BNP will use the £43 million per day net contribution Britain at present makes to the European Union to fund many far more useful projects at home.

LAW AND ORDER - crack down on crime!

The BNP will crack down on crime and restore public safety and confidence. We will free the police and courts from the politically correct straitjacket that is stopping them from doing their job properly. The liberal fixation with the 'rights' of criminals must be replaced by concern for the rights of victims, and the right of innocent people not to become victims. We support the re-introduction of corporal punishment for petty criminals and vandals, and the restoration of capital punishment for paedophiles, terrorists and murderers as an option for judges in cases where their guilt is proven beyond dispute, as by DNA evidence or being caught red-handed.

ECONOMY - British workers first!

Globalisation, with its export of jobs to the Third World, is bringing ruin and unemployment to British industries and the communities that depend on them. Accordingly, the BNP calls for the selective exclusion of foreign-made goods from British markets and the reduction of foreign imports. We will ensure that our manufactured goods are, wherever possible, produced in British factories, employing British workers. When this is done, unemployment in this country will be brought to an end, and secure, well-paid employment will flourish, at last getting our people back to work and ending the waste and injustice of having more than 4 million people in a hidden army of the unemployed concealed by Labour's statistical fiddles. We further believe that British industry, commerce, land and other economic and natural assets belong in the final analysis to the British nation and people. To that end we will restore our economy and land to British ownership. We also call for preference in the job market to be given to native Britons. We will take active steps to break up the socially, economically and politically damaging monopolies now being established by the supermarket giants. Finally we will seek to give British workers a stake in the success and prosperity of the enterprises whose profits their labour creates by encouraging worker shareholder and co-operative schemes.

EDUCATION - discipline, standards, achievement!

We are against the 'trendy' teaching methods that have made Britain one of the most poorly educated nations in Europe. We will end the practice of politically correct indoctrination in all its guises and we will restore discipline in the classroom, give authority back to teachers and put far greater emphasis on training young people in the industrial and technological skills necessary in the modern world. We will also seek to instill in our young people knowledge of and pride in the history, cultures and heritage of the native peoples of Britain.

AGRICULTURE - quality before quantity!

We see a strong, healthy agriculture sector as vital to the country. Britain's farming industry will be encouraged to produce a much greater part of the nation's need in food products. Priority will be switched from quantity to quality, as we move from competing in a global economy to maximum self-sufficiency for Britain. We will ensure a major shift to healthier and more sustainable organic farming. We are pledged to ensure the restoration of Britain's once great fishing industry with the reimposition of the former exclusion zones around our coast.

HEALTH - first-class healthcare for all!

We are wholly committed to a free, fully funded National Health Service for all British citizens. We will revitalise the Health Service by boosting staff and bed numbers, slashing unnecessary bureaucracy and by addressing the root cause of low recruitment and retention - low pay. We will see to it that no money is given in foreign aid while our own hospitals are short of beds and the staff to run them. More emphasis must be placed on healthy living with greater understanding of sickness prevention through physical exercise, a healthier environment and improved diets.

TRANSPORT - time to invest!

Increased investment is needed in Britain's public transport system to bring it up to the highest standards in the world. The fiasco of rail privatisation with different companies running services and track leading to higher fares and lower safety also needs to be resolved. Congestion of our towns and cities must be eased by the provision of greater incentives to use rail and bus transport instead of private cars. The first step is to end the crime and squalor that puts so many people off public transport. Motorists must not be made the scapegoats for government failure. Fuel tax should be cut, motorway speed limits raised, and hidden speed cameras should be banned. Far more must be done to encourage the development and use of cleaner fuels.

ENVIRONMENT - a cleaner, greener future!

Our ideal for Britain is that of a clean, beautiful country, free of pollution in all its forms. We will enforce standards to curb those practices, whether by business or the individual, which cause environmental damage. "The polluter pays to clean up the mess" must become a fact of life, not an electioneering slogan. In towns we would work to replace the brutalist modernism of 1960s-style-architecture with a blend of traditional local styles and materials and ensure that developments take place on a more human scale.

FOREIGN AID - time to spend our money on our own people!

We reject the idea that Britain must forever be obliged to subsidise the incompetence and corruption of Third World states by supplying them with financial aid. We will link foreign aid with our voluntary resettlement policy, whereby those nations taking significant numbers of people back to their homelands will need cash to help absorb those returning. The billions of pounds saved every year by this policy will also be reallocated to vital services in Britain.

PENSIONERS - pensioners before asylum seekers!

The conditions in which many of Britain's old people are forced to live are a national disgrace. We are pledged to ensure that all our old folk are able to live in comfortable homes, and will restore the earnings link with pensions. Elderly people who have paid a lifetime of taxes and reared families should not have to sell their homes to pay for care.

NORTHERN IRELAND - an end to sectarianism!

Britain has shamefully allowed the terrorists in N.I. to come close to winning when the IRA could have been destroyed years ago. Government weakness has led to hundreds of deaths and given those same terrorists a share in government. We would end all attempts to force the people of Northern Ireland to accept foreign interference in their affairs and deal with terrorism - from whatever side - once and for all. No one with links to a terrorist organisation that refuses to lay down its arms should be allowed to enter government. We would abolish state-supported segregation in education. In the long run, we wish to end the conflict in Ireland by welcoming Eire as well as Ulster as equal partners in a federation of the nations of the British Isles.

DEFENCE - no more cuts!

Successive cuts in defence spending have left Britain's armed forces perilously weak. We will boost Britain's armed forces to ensure that they are able to deal with any emergency, and defend our homeland and our independence. We will bring our troops back from Germany and withdraw from NATO, since recent political developments make both commitments obsolete. We will close all foreign military bases on British soil, and refuse to risk British lives in meddling 'peace-keeping' missions in parts of the world where no British interests are at stake - a position of armed neutrality. We will also restore national service for our young with the option of civil or military service.

FOREIGN AFFAIRS - Britain's interests first!

Britain's foreign relations should be determined by the protection of our own national interest and not by our like or dislike of other nations' internal politics. We would have no quarrel with any nation that does not threaten British interests. We will maintain an independent foreign policy of our own, and not a spineless subservience to the USA, the 'international community', or any other country.

DEMOCRACY - letting the people decide!

The British people invented modern Parliamentary democracy. Yet in recent years the British people have been denied their democratic rights. On issue after issue, the views of the majority of British people have been ignored and overridden by a Politically Correct 'élite' which thinks it knows best. On immigration, on Capital Punishment, on the surrender of British sovereignty to the EU and in numerous other areas, democracy has been absent as Labour, Tories and Lib-Dems conspire in election after election to offer the British people no real choice on such vital issues. The BNP exists to give the British people, that choice, and thus to restore and defend the basic democratic rights we have all been denied. We favour more democracy, not less, not just at national but at regional and local level. Power should be devolved to the lowest level possible so that local communities can make decisions which affect them. We will remove legal curbs on freedom of speech imposed by successive Governments over the last 40 years. We will implement a Bill of Rights guaranteeing fundamental freedoms to the British people. We will ensure that ordinary British people have real democratic power over their own lives and that Government, local and national, is truly accountable to the people who

2007-06-18 11:46:30 · 29 answers · asked by Anonymous in Other - Politics & Government

published online, was used on a soap opera, What should I do?

2007-06-18 11:46:26 · 2 answers · asked by twizard 3 in Law & Ethics

have gone down in history as a good president.
he failed at retailating against those who attacked the USS Cole and bringing them to justice.
He worried to much about somalia/rhawanda instead of terrorism against the US.
If he didnt lie to a fed jury.
If he would have grabbed the terrorist when they offered them up and 911 wouldnt have happened.
what do you think?

2007-06-18 11:46:17 · 8 answers · asked by joe j 1 in Other - Politics & Government

2007-06-18 11:43:03 · 26 answers · asked by EMERGENCY 2 in Immigration

I think that all Conservatives and Republicans alike should all be round up and treated like many suspected communists were in the middle of the 20th century. Non of these right winged religious segregationists care about the basic and/or average individual. Their loves are Christ (lol .. such hypocrisy), Corporate $$$ and CONTROL. It's time we shed ourselves of this vial form of thought and type of people. Conservatives, like Religion, have done nothing but promote segregation for the lower classes and cultures, as well keep the majority of us poor. I can't wait for the democratic back-lash ... we're all long overdue!!! Bush should and must be tried for war crimes, the world needs to see this happening if North America is ever to regain the good reputation it had before the Bush DICTATORSHIP!

2007-06-18 11:41:59 · 25 answers · asked by AJD 3 in Politics

So, why some of my answers were deleted?
I am Mexican! and proud of it!
I don't like people defaming, bashing or insulting Mexico, Mexican fellow nationals or Mexican-American U.S Citizens!
If someone do it,I will answer to that person as he/she deserves! I fight Fire with Fire!!!

However, I am very respectful with any culture, ethnicity, religion, color or flavor!
I encourage to Y.A Police to stop the Anti-Mexicanism or Anti-Mexican propaganda on Immigration in the Immigration forum!
Mexico is the most important Hispanic Ally, partner and neighbor. Get it straight! We are friends!
Stop trying to divide Mexican-Americans!!!
-United WE Stand!
God bless America!
Thx.

2007-06-18 11:40:52 · 9 answers · asked by El Alakran Mexican'O'Ian 2 in Law & Ethics

In many developed contries, only China and Japan and U.S. have the death penalty. Not even Russia has one. I'm Japanese and against it. Here are main reasons.
1] Too many irreversible errors of misjudgements.
2] The rich can hire good lawyers but the poor can't.
3] The fairness of law tends to get lost when it's retaliatory.
4] Does nation have the right to kill its people?
5] A lack of information of the system of the death penalty.
6] A Wide range of humanity and knowledge of judges.
7] The death penalty doesn't seem to have the effects of prevention of crimes.
You can refer to "The Ultimate Punishment" by Scott Turrow for number 7.
There's saying in the Bible. "Vengeance is mine. I will repay." I don't believe in vengeance, but even if one does, why bother if the lord does that?
Arthur Schopenhauer said in "The world as will and idea" that law is for the future [prevention of crimes], not for the past [revenge] and I agree with him.

80% people are for it in Japan. Isn't it scary?

2007-06-18 11:39:33 · 32 answers · asked by Anonymous in Law & Ethics

my daughter who is 15 years old got a subpeona to go to a peliminary trial on behalf of the state of pa. the trooper that sent it to her never asked my permission to speak with her she does not want to go testify and says that if she is forced to go than she won't say anything is there some way to get her out of this??? please help

2007-06-18 11:36:41 · 9 answers · asked by ? 2 in Law & Ethics

dant. I can't stay with any party that doesn't have a spine! The amnesty B S was the last straw. If either party straps on a set of grapefruits,and takes a constitutional stand, I may choose a major party! Until then I'll be an independant an keep my guns loaded, for the inevitable revolt, that this govt. is pushing for!!!!

2007-06-18 11:36:05 · 27 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

2007-06-18 11:34:55 · 10 answers · asked by Bryant E 1 in Other - Politics & Government

2007-06-18 11:31:50 · 15 answers · asked by Good Egg 6 in Politics

Governments such as the British, French etc when it is nothing to do with them
is it because they dont want to face the truth about it so they point the finger at governments?

2007-06-18 11:30:06 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Government

If possible, tell me how their position on issues differ from people already running instead of the style and gossip crap people get into on TV.

2007-06-18 11:29:03 · 17 answers · asked by yurbud 3 in Other - Politics & Government

It would probably only be for a few years then they would have it so screwed up they would then have to head north to Canada.

2007-06-18 11:28:50 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Immigration

Deficit Deceptions
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Friday, June 15, 2007 4:20 PM PT
Journalism: President Bush has been criticized unmercifully by politicians of all stripes and media of all types for failing to rein in federal spending and letting deficits "soar." But is the criticism fair?
________________________________________ ________________________________________
The answer, in a word, is no. It's fashionable these days, for Democrats and even some Republicans to style themselves as "fiscal conservative" to advocate the end of government red ink.
Some of them mean well, to be sure. Certainly, no one wants to see a budget deficit forever — or one that expands to a point that it impairs our government's ability to function.
But we're so far from that right now it's easy to think those who push for the immediate elimination of the deficit have another agenda entirely. Unfortunately, it's hard to have a rational conversation about it. It never comes down to facts, of which there are plenty, but to fears, of which there are always more.
Let's start with facts.
Last year, the deficit hit $248 billion. Sounds like a lot, but in a $13.6 trillion economy, it's not. It's the equivalent of a $900 dollar credit card charge for someone with a $50,000 income.
As a share of GDP, the budget deficit last year was 1.9%. That's down from 3.6% in 2004 and below the long-term average of 2.5%. This year, says the CBO, the deficit will be about $177 billion, or 1.3% of GDP. If current trends continue, the deficit will be erased by 2010-2012 at the latest.
By the way, those "surpluses" in the final years of the Clinton administration were a fluke. If you don't believe it, go back and look at the Clinton administration's own forecasts. They never saw the surpluses or record tax revenues coming.
They were a creation of an unusually powerful upswing in the economy, pushed by a number of factors: Fed interest-rate cuts, the advent of the Internet and the boom in Big Box discount retailers, such as Wal-Mart. It was a perfect storm of economic growth.
Those who accuse President Bush of "spending" the surpluses and creating "soaring" deficits miss the point. Bush took office just as both the stock market and the Internet boom were collapsing, taking the economy with it. As we've noted before, the stock market alone suffered losses of more than $7 trillion. The negative wealth effect from that hit alone was enough to tank the economy.
The year 2001 was one of both recession and a major terrorist attack on our nation, which killed 3,000 people and destroyed hundreds of billions of dollars in potential output.
Let's go to logic 101: Given such a situation, what should Congress and the president do? Sharply cut spending to ensure that the deficit remains small, and risk sending the economy into a tailspin?
Or keep spending, and maybe even increase it a bit, knowing full well that any discretionary spending that was made today can be cut tomorrow?
No, we don't like pork-barrel spending. Nor do we like big government, an issue we've written much on in the past.
That said, does the spending of the past six years really constitute unusual "big government?" We would argue, no. Using the most meaningful measure of the size of government — spending as a share of GDP — we see that in fact we're today right where we were in 1996 — about 20.3% of GDP. And it's declining. This year, spending as a share of the economy is expected to fall to 19.9% of GDP.
If you look at the chart, you'll note that's actually below the average of 20.7% of GDP since 1970. Spending boom? Hardly.
Then where did the deficits come from? As we noted, the economy's decline in 2001 had a far bigger fiscal impact than first thought. Revenues in 2000 were 20.9% of GDP; by 2004, they had plunged to 16.3% of GDP, lowest since 1959. This year, revenues returned to 18.6% of GDP, above the long-term average of 18.2%.
So it was falling revenues, not higher spending, that caused the deficit. It may well be that by keeping spending within its normal range as a share of the economy, Bush kept a mild recession from becoming a very nasty one.
For those who argue the deficit is such a bad thing that we need to raise taxes to get rid of it, this too is wrong.
As Nobel-winning economist Edward Prescott has noted, workers are highly sensitive to tax rates. They work and earn more when rates fall, less when they rise. It's common sense.
That was the choice President Bush faced in 2001. Keep spending money during a time of extraordinary uncertainty, and cut taxes. Or do nothing or even boost taxes and risk the consequences. Given the current five-year boom we're in, he chose wisely.
As we noted before, an extensive analysis by the Heritage Foundation found President Bush's tax cuts each year boost real GDP by $75 billion, employment by 709,000 and real personal income by $200 billion. The benefits are huge and ongoing.
Are we Pollyannas about deficits? Not at all. Long term, we agree there's a problem. It's a result of entitlement spending. If we don't control that, we're in big trouble. In just the next 10 years, Medicare and Social Security costs will jump from 8.5% of GDP to 10.7%, as 76 million baby boomers start to retire. We have to fix that — something, by the way, Bush tried to do but got little help.
Still, we've had deficits in 24 of the past 27 years. During that time, real GDP has grown 122% to $11.5 trillion, 46 million new jobs have been created, bank interest rates have fallen from almost 20% to about 8%, 42 million new homes have been built and per capita incomes have almost tripled.
In short, none of the dire things predicted about deficits came to pass. We're the wealthiest country in history, and we're putting more distance between us and our nearest competitors each day.

2007-06-18 11:25:25 · 15 answers · asked by GREAT_AMERICAN 1 in Politics

My husband is deployed to Iraq, he loves watching movies...I was thinking of getting him netflix, but do they ship to APO...I went on their site and cant find it anywhere...has anyone ever used them over there?

2007-06-18 11:25:06 · 4 answers · asked by *Army*Wife* 3 in Military

2007-06-18 11:25:01 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Elections

places like spain, australia, new zeland, Germany etc and other citizens are trying to get into the country??

2007-06-18 11:22:29 · 39 answers · asked by Anonymous in Immigration

When I was 19 I left the UK to work in my Sister's bar in Greece, The pay was poor but the lifestyle was fantastic. Now I've returned to the UK 4 years later, are there any authorities I should tell?, because I haven't appeared on a UK record for years

2007-06-18 11:16:52 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Immigration

2007-06-18 11:14:48 · 28 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

I'm sure that the liberal elites who summer in Martha's Vineyard are deeply troubled by the lot of the underprivileged. Each morsel of Lobster Thermidore that they eat, no doubt weighs heavily upon their conscience...right?

2007-06-18 11:12:59 · 24 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

Just like the Mariel Boatlift. Send us your robbers,your rapists, your criminally insane yearning to be free.

2007-06-18 11:11:36 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Immigration

My hubby only did 18 months in the army out of a two year committment. He was discharged, but not negatively. Hubby believes that he doesn't qualify for any benefits, but has never made the effort to find out if he would.

Today, he is 100% disabled from a stroke (not related army duty). We need to find out if he could qualify for a Vet home loan or life insurance for him. [I have medical insurance for him at my work and he gets medicare, so that is not an issue]. He is 38 yrs old, had stoke when he was 32.

** Incidentally, my Dad was a WW2 vet, and NEVER partook of the Vet loan process. He went the 'standard' mortgage way and has his home. Is there anyway Dad can pass to us his Vet status for a Vet home loan? ***

* Is my hubby a "vet"?
* If so, would he qualify for a Vet home loan?
* Any Life Insurance / stroke-friendly available?
* Is my Dad's Vet status usable?

Thanks ahead of time for your help!
061807 5:10

2007-06-18 11:09:57 · 7 answers · asked by YRofTexas 6 in Military

2007-06-18 11:09:19 · 28 answers · asked by Chief Yellow Horse 4 in Politics