Other - Politics & Government - October 2007

2007-10-24 22:48:40 · 6 answers · asked by smart guy 1

2007-10-24 21:46:48 · 1 answers · asked by avi 1

Is it a good idea? I want to know your opinion. Also, could you read my opinion, and tell me if you agree with it or not. Thanks for reading and answering.

I don't believe it is, only because once recognized, they will all be able to buy a lot of weapons and in the future may go to war with each other. Also, splitting into 3 parts, makes a foreign invasion a lot more plausible of one of the parts. I also believe that the Shiites will eventually take over the Sunni area and the then the Kurd area of Iraq and rule over them, taking much of the oil profits for themselves. So, in conclusion, I see the idea of splitting Iraq into three parts as a faster way toward military conflict between the "countries".

2007-10-24 20:03:19 · 6 answers · asked by anonymous 3

It's very interesting

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70ngmWoPJwg

2007-10-24 19:01:06 · 3 answers · asked by - 6

As I have become older I find that my Grandfather was right after all "the rich get richer and the Poor get poorer. "

2007-10-24 18:53:28 · 20 answers · asked by Me123 1

2007-10-24 18:14:59 · 15 answers · asked by zclifton2 6

Health care for sick poor children? I think not.

It almost seems like the religious right ignores what the bible states! "Help the poor? Never!"

2007-10-24 17:25:18 · 16 answers · asked by mr.toadey 2

Our town is preparing to vote for new council members.
I just found out one council person wants another to be re-elected and is helping this person financially in order for that person to have the better chance to be re-elected.
There is something that smells rotten with this and it's driving me nuts to not be able to clearly put my finger on what this could be called and if there is something I should be trying to do about it.
I do have a personal interest in this since this person giving the money is related and it makes me feel sick inside, thinking there is something illegal in some way with this set-up.

Thanks in advance!!!!

2007-10-24 16:40:38 · 5 answers · asked by Mom2Boo 1

DO you believe that a protest really needs to include a woman in a government building with ketchup or whatever on her hands? Probably packets from the concession in the building. If you want to prove a point why exactly do you degrade yourself and PT lost? Any thoughts.
http://www.rosie.com is where I first saw the photo

2007-10-24 16:19:12 · 7 answers · asked by Mele Kai 6

i mean if they all scream about polution,the trees ,the spotted owl,fence lizards etc.you would think they would be out there in two seconds with buckets in hand ,right? hmmmmmmmmmm where are they?

2007-10-24 16:06:08 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous

What is, if any conservative values that you do believe in. I am a strong conservative, but I believe that we should not be so hasty with the way we use energy, I do not quite swallow the whole Global warming thing but I think that as our population grows we need to find better sources of energy and we need it NOW. I want more MPG, I want more energy efficient appliances and houses, I want CFL bulbs and tank less water heaters and on and on. Do you share any conservative ways of thinking???

2007-10-24 16:00:14 · 8 answers · asked by Ancient Warrior DogueDe Bordeaux 5

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071024/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/global_warming_health

2007-10-24 15:47:06 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous

Shouldn't it just be called the "House"?

2007-10-24 15:25:13 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous

They seem to be very much in favor of Mexican and South American immigrants, legal or not, vs the rest of the worlds legal immigrants that come to the US. So, basically, I wonder sincerely, if it was people other than Mexican and South Americans that are flocking into the US illegally, would the Democrats stand up and demand amnesty for them or treat them equal to all other nationalities that come here legally.

2007-10-24 15:00:42 · 13 answers · asked by eldude 5

2007-10-24 14:31:01 · 8 answers · asked by Jose R 6

report each and every person who had a point of view I disagreed with, just to make sure I got even?

2007-10-24 13:58:52 · 7 answers · asked by Yahoo Answer Angel 6

I mean first they said they went into iraq for weapons of mass destruction, then to topple saddams regime now to restore democracy? all the while existing in one of the most oil rich countries on earth?

Do you still have faith in the United States?

2007-10-24 12:55:07 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous

ignore it" form of logic?

Is this typical of either particular party, or is it just good old American politics at its best?

2007-10-24 11:45:40 · 4 answers · asked by Lily Iris 7

to pass in Washington DC. thanks to a lot of grass roots phone calls and Emails. This Act is a soft push, backdoor incremental method for allowing illegal aliens citizenship; for allowing felons and lawbreakers to become citizens. It is a blatant slap in the face to all hard working, tax paying Americans. It undoubtedly attempts to treat lawbreakers in a much more favorable way than those who obey the laws. Unfortunately, the front-running DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT HILLARY CLINTON voted in favor of screwing the American public.
When will this duplicitous political whore do what's right for the average American and support family values as opposed to her own selfish quest for power?


PS, so you don't think I'm bashing her because she is a woman, the duplicitous political whore senior senator from New York, Charles Schumer, also voted to pass this bill.

2007-10-24 11:40:41 · 4 answers · asked by Wayne G 5

2007-10-24 11:09:22 · 5 answers · asked by Dirk von Pelvis 1

Of course you fools probably don't care about the future, judging by your stance on global warming.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071024/pl_nm/iraq_usa_funding_dc

2007-10-24 11:02:21 · 13 answers · asked by mr.toadey 2

Or better yet, do you think the US would have ever invaded Iraq in the 1st place if it hadn't been for AIPAC? (the most powerful lobbyist group in the US)

2007-10-24 10:48:56 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous

this thought scares me.
truly...how do you envision this possibility playing out realistically?

2007-10-24 10:44:28 · 19 answers · asked by dali333 7

2007-10-24 10:14:38 · 9 answers · asked by wilhelm-ja@sbcglobal.net 1

Should we be giving them money if we have our own problems here in the United States ?

.. What do you think?

2007-10-24 10:12:36 · 7 answers · asked by βεℓℓα ツ 4

2007-10-24 09:58:09 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-10-24 09:38:21 · 16 answers · asked by Reo 5

I mean, before Global Warming and Bush came along???

Harry Reid said that the wildfires in California today were caused by global warming. (He now denies saying that. Too bad it's on tape)

Barbra Boxer has jumped on her soap-box and blamed the Bush administration for allowing the fires to get out of hand.

(If I'm not mistaken, I thought that was an issue to be handled by local governments. Hmmm maybe that means the pothole in front of my house is Bush's fault also.)

So if we vote democrat in 2008 and quit driving to work, there will be no more wildfires????

2007-10-24 09:11:15 · 18 answers · asked by Voice of Liberty 5

2007-10-24 08:29:59 · 12 answers · asked by Dovey 7

If officials said the fires are NOT terrorists why is the "Homegrown Terrorist Prevention Act of 2007" being rushed into legislature.

section 899A claus 1:

HOMEGROWN TERRORISM- The term `homegrown terrorism' means the use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual born, raised, or based and operating primarily within the United States or any possession of the United States to intimidate or coerce the United States government, the civilian population of the United States, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.

sounds great but read between the lines...the Secretary and his various deligates can easily identify an group of peaceful protestors and say "We have evidence that suggest these individuals were planning on using force to coerce the population into their idealism."
and boom--instant terrorists "BECAUSE WE SAID SO"...and once considered terrorists by the defence department, the constitution is void.

2007-10-24 08:21:25 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous