Politics - 2 September 2006

Do you think whoever the gop chooses, Mirza's nomination will play an influence?

myspace.com/soxfan773

2006-09-02 16:42:18 · 6 answers · asked by Sammy 3

2006-09-02 16:39:33 · 12 answers · asked by tom science 4

for instance...do libertarians believe that government has the right to imprison a person?

2006-09-02 16:39:07 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous

Answer if you hate george w. bush

2006-09-02 16:38:52 · 29 answers · asked by jimmie 1

2006-09-02 16:35:36 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous

And I guess I would be perfectly within my rights to do so. You just cannot argue with the "love it or leave it" point of view, can you?

Sure, you could say that there are safeguards in place to ensure that I didn't do it - the constitution and all - but all I'd have to say was "love it or leave it" and there wouldn't be a thing you could do about it, because that would be my mantra, and my mindless supporters would agree with me.

What do you reckon? Shall I go for it? I might even get myself a nice big crown and a throne while I'm at it. Love it or leave it, suckers!

2006-09-02 16:33:45 · 16 answers · asked by Big E 3

2006-09-02 16:30:16 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous

Imagine you are in a ship and cath sight of the shore. By chance, it's in the direction of a cloud wich looks like a dragon. On that exactly moment, the ship crash against an iceberg and sinks into few minutes. So the tripulation has no time to send a mayday.
In this situation, only you and other five people get to get away in the unique safeboat existing.
But, when you have to choise the direction to go, nobody agree with the idea of going to the direction of the strange cloud (wher you asure to see the shore). Five against one - it should be a cowardliness, not to be the fact of you are taking a pistol. And now? Do you draw the gun and force your colegues to row to where you want or do you acept the decision of maiority of going to the other way (to the deep blue sea)?

2006-09-02 16:24:47 · 7 answers · asked by Leão do Cerrado 2

2006-09-02 16:23:11 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous

I see that comment so much on this site. My own view is that most critics of the USA are criticising because they love their country and the principles upon which it was founded, and are upset by the ways in which the constitution is being raped by GWB on an almost daily basis.

"Love it or leave it" hardly seems like a ringing endorsement of free speech, does it?

2006-09-02 16:19:37 · 13 answers · asked by Big E 3

i think we can agree we all want them home alive in one piece so then it boils down to purpose.

rumsfeld told us he knew exactly where the WMDs were. then we were told this was about freeing repressed iraqis. now we hear a civil war is coming.......the US has two options- send more to die or cut and run.

2006-09-02 16:16:32 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous

The US has changed the laws about pre-emtive nuclear stikes in the name of the war on terror. Bush no longer has to go to Congress to initiate a war he only has to sit through a 20 min advisory meeting that will allow him to use nukes on a non nuclear country Mini nukes are being sold as safe for civilain populations and as bunker busters for underground nuclear facilties.

If the US takes this bold step - will Russia and China just siot back and hope they are not next? Or will the international back lash happen in a very real very military stike against the US ?

In short how safe will the world be if the US attacks Iran using nukes? Would not other countries be justified in attacking the source that used such weapons? What would stop them it would be the Americans putting all nations of the world in a them or us situation - How long will China Russia and others ponder that before the US is only a histroy class with no need for geography?

2006-09-02 16:14:50 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous

Quite obviously, not everyone here shares the same educational background and experience. Is the definition of a relevant political word like "conservative" relevant or useful to our younger, less educated participants? I would be happy to post the definition. I have not the slightest fear of any English word!

2006-09-02 16:13:06 · 10 answers · asked by voltaire 3

Freedom to speak about any subject, freedom to congregate without surveillance, freedom to use electronic communications.. All for supposed Terrorism. When are we going to wake up to what is actually happening?

2006-09-02 16:12:03 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous

notice the last three republican presidents have done this, and then they threaten voters with dems raising taxes at election time

if the voters hate to have taxes raised, why do they ignore the massive debt republicans create?

2006-09-02 16:03:51 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-09-02 15:47:41 · 3 answers · asked by Anonymous

Just in case ... this is Westminster we talking about ... before someone does a cpoy and paste on the American system!

2006-09-02 15:45:37 · 11 answers · asked by Part Time Cynic 7

In 2001 the law changed that required Congress to aporve wars to allow the President to strike any nation he feels like in the name of war on terror - the law has also changed to allow Bush (for example) to a nuclear stike on a country that is not a nuclear power after a 20 min advisory meeting.

To me this all adds up to the US striking Iran in the name of a war on terror.

The problem is Iran borders Russia and the world that doesn't really believe the 9/11 story likely won't believe the No choice they will try to sell for Iran's being nuked.

So my question is will the US do a pre-emtive stike using bunker busting mini nukes it says is "safe for civilian populations" and if so what reaction will this bring from Russia and China or Venezuala or North Korea all of whom either have or are developing nukes.

2006-09-02 15:29:14 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous

If you do, why?

2006-09-02 15:18:48 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-09-02 15:13:06 · 24 answers · asked by Jaycatski 1

Or should we just trust them to do the right thing for the best interest of all Americans?

2006-09-02 14:59:43 · 13 answers · asked by Dastardly 6

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6876549/

2006-09-02 14:49:57 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous

Why or why not?

2006-09-02 14:30:28 · 29 answers · asked by prune 3

A pilot with a cruise missile that indiscriminately kills 100s of women and children whilst hundreds of miles in the air, and therefore has no sense of foreboding and empathy with the innocents he has just killed.. OR..

A Muslim fighter who seeks to send a message of terror by manually cutting the neck and head of his captive and therefore directly has the blood of his victim on his hands.

Both Individuals are killers with BLOOD on their hands. Which is worse?

2006-09-02 14:25:42 · 25 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-09-02 14:21:57 · 13 answers · asked by kobacker59 6

We need oil. What do Hollywood celebrities think fuels their private jets? How do they think their cocaine gets to them?

2006-09-02 14:01:40 · 24 answers · asked by Turd Ferguson 2

why are they so ignorant?

2006-09-02 13:51:11 · 14 answers · asked by Manbearpig 1

I mean, shouldn't they have been busy representing the people who elected them? The great majority of the Public did not think Congress should have been wasting time on Clinton's affair.

Weren't there more important issues for the GOP to focus on? I mean, there's health care, national security, social security, and a broad range of other important issues that they chose to neglect.

Exactly who does the GOP Represent? Have they ever done anything productive for this country?

2006-09-02 13:46:24 · 25 answers · asked by conservativeguyfromnc 2

2006-09-02 13:42:09 · 27 answers · asked by Anonymous

there was a question on here written by a black gentleman, saying that we should protest against illegal immigrants. Am I not getting this or does he think he is white?

2006-09-02 13:36:04 · 19 answers · asked by elisa p 1