Politics - 30 September 2006

your opinion?
should we pull out of this world and start living on moon too?

2006-09-30 11:14:50 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous

Is that the reason the extremists on this board only go for personally attacking eachother?
If you want real change,look at this video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09l8iqPmE6M

2006-09-30 11:08:02 · 11 answers · asked by justgoodfolk 7

2006-09-30 10:57:11 · 12 answers · asked by Sammy 3

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5394766.stm

Will you be visiting his site? For those of you outside the UK, David Cameron is a politician (leader of the Conservative party)

2006-09-30 10:54:23 · 12 answers · asked by what's up 1

I would go for MJ.

2006-09-30 10:48:57 · 16 answers · asked by jason_the_cool_dude 1

2006-09-30 10:26:37 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous

I have yet to see 1 republican on here condemn foley. But whos surprised? Look at the list below and see how child mollestation is common with republicans


The list of Republican sexual perverts adds another member:

STOP REPUBLICAN PEDOPHILIA

•Republican Congressman Mark Foley abruptly resigned from Congress after "sexually explicit" emails surfaced showing him flirting with a 16-year old boy.

•Republican executive Randall Casseday of the conservative Washington Times newspaper was arrested for soliciting sex from a 13-year old girl on the internet.

•Republican chairman of the Oregon Christian Coalition Lou Beres confessed to molesting a 13-year old girl.

•Republican County Constable Larry Dale Floyd was arrested on suspicion of soliciting sex with an 8-year old girl. Floyd has repeatedly won elections for Denton County, Texas, constable.

2006-09-30 10:21:09 · 10 answers · asked by ast5792 1

Is he going to Hell?

2006-09-30 10:14:19 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous

e.g. get out of iraq

The terrorists just want the west to leave them alone. So if the west did that, there would be no reason for the terrorists to commit terrorist acts.

2006-09-30 10:13:56 · 15 answers · asked by Brown Bear 2

Galloway vs. The US Senate: Transcript of Statement
"Now, Senator, I gave my heart and soul to oppose the policy that you promoted. I gave my political life's blood to try to stop the mass killing of Iraqis by the sanctions on Iraq which killed one million Iraqis, most of them children, most of them died before they even knew that they were Iraqis, but they died for no other reason other than that they were Iraqis with the misfortune to born at that time. I gave my heart and soul to stop you committing the disaster that you did commit in invading Iraq. And I told the world that your case for the war was a pack of lies.

“I told the world that Iraq, contrary to your claims did not have weapons of mass destruction. I told the world, contrary to your claims, that Iraq had no connection to al-Qaeda. I told the world, contrary to your claims, that Iraq had no connection to the atrocity on 9/11 2001. I told the world, contrary to your claims, that the Iraqi people would resist a British and American invasion of their country and that the fall of Baghdad would not be the beginning of the end, but merely the end of the beginning.

"Senator, in everything I said about Iraq, I turned out to be right and you turned out to be wrong and 100,000 people paid with their lives; 1600 of them American soldiers sent to their deaths on a pack of lies; 15,000 of them wounded, many of them disabled forever on a pack of lies.

If the world had listened to Kofi Annan, whose dismissal you demanded, if the world had listened to President Chirac who you want to paint as some kind of corrupt traitor, if the world had listened to me and the anti-war movement in Britain, we would not be in the disaster that we are in today. Senator, this is the mother of all smokescreens. You are trying to divert attention from the crimes that you supported, from the theft of billions of dollars of Iraq's wealth.

"Have a look at the real Oil-for-Food scandal. Have a look at the 14 months you were in charge of Baghdad, the first 14 months when $8.8 billion of Iraq's wealth went missing on your watch. Have a look at Halliburton and other American corporations that stole not only Iraq's money, but the money of the American taxpayer.

"Have a look at the oil that you didn't even meter, that you were shipping out of the country and selling, the proceeds of which went who knows where? Have a look at the $800 million you gave to American military commanders to hand out around the country without even counting it or weighing it.

"Have a look at the real scandal breaking in the newspapers today, revealed in the earlier testimony in this committee. That the biggest sanctions busters were not me or Russian politicians or French politicians. The real sanctions busters were your own companies with the connivance of your own Government."

2006-09-30 10:09:38 · 18 answers · asked by dstr 6

Republicans and conservatives here don't think you can politicize Foley the pedophile, but yet they greatly politicize Clinton for practicing adultery. Forget that the GOP tramps around as the party of "family values."

Hypocrisy, huh?

2006-09-30 10:01:11 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-09-30 09:51:24 · 10 answers · asked by Zori 3

2006-09-30 09:45:36 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

I dont see any difference.

2006-09-30 09:36:00 · 17 answers · asked by jason_the_cool_dude 1

How did we get such a relatively benevolent and freedom-loving upper class in the days of the Revolution?
What kind of rich person nowadays, or before around that time, or elsewhere, would write something like the Declaration of Independence?
Even if it was in their best interest to quit paying taxes to England, where did the Constitution and limited government come from?

WHAT KIND OF ARISTOCRAT IN HIS RIGHT MIND WOULD EVER SUPPORT SOMETHING LIKE THE FIRST AND SECOND AMENDMENTS?

Am I missing some incentive here, or was the U.S. Revolution and Constitution just a rare, brief and shining moment in the history of humanity?

2006-09-30 09:11:48 · 10 answers · asked by A Box of Signs 4

If the voter guides are based on church teachings about war, poverty, and social justice -- is it okay? How about if the focus is anti-abortion? Isn't the separation of church and state getting a little too fuzzy? Maybe churches should not have tax-free status and then than would be free to act politically.

2006-09-30 09:10:04 · 4 answers · asked by murphy 5

Republican Foley: What are you wearing?

Young Boy: t-shirt and shorts

Republican Foley: cool, id love to slip them off you.....
do i make you horny?

------------------------------------

So these are the values you want to shove down America's throats?

2006-09-30 09:08:31 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-09-30 09:02:26 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-09-30 08:42:46 · 18 answers · asked by tanner_1122 5

2006-09-30 08:38:45 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

China has it's Army guarding the roads to the industrial centers to keep farmers from going to work in the factorys.

With a looming food shortage China need to force people to stay on the farm.

2006-09-30 08:21:07 · 11 answers · asked by ? 2

2006-09-30 08:11:42 · 15 answers · asked by mat67 2

They can ban what they like, without infriging the human rights act
they can boycot what they like and dont pay there fines, who do these Frenchies think they are??????

2006-09-30 08:11:13 · 5 answers · asked by charliecat 2

If Clinton was President When 9-11 happened and all evidence pointed to Bin Laden but some how Clinton tied Saddam Hussian to it. Even saying he have evidence that Saddam had WMDs and a attack was enevitable. Wouldn't Republicans think he was doing it to boost his poll numbers, use the sentament of 9-11 as a blank check to attack Saddam and to " Wag the Dog?"

2006-09-30 08:07:08 · 20 answers · asked by meanblacktiger 5

For several decades, NORAD had standing orders to automatically scramble fighters immediately upon a report of any highjacking. In July of '01, "president" Bush changed that order. Under the new standing order, no scrambling was allowed without the express order from the Secretary of Defence (Donald Rumsfeld). This order stood for about 3 months...from 2 months before until a few weeks after 9/11. If this order had not been put into effect, fighters would have been scrambled and the planes would have either been escorted to the closest secure airport or shot down.

Regardless of who planned and executed the 9/11 attacks, and regardless of any intelligence available or not available, "President" Bush's order allowed 9/11 to happen.

That change of orders seems rather idiotic, doesn't it? An order for NORAD NOT to scramble in an emergency? Or perhaps it was part of the plan...after all, Bush has been shown to have a genius IQ (at least according to some).

2006-09-30 07:59:04 · 21 answers · asked by corwynwulfhund 3

I've read several articles of Muslims raiding the mostly Christian south of Sudan and killing tens of thousands. If the news is true, give me stats on how many have died and how many are left.

2006-09-30 07:54:49 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-09-30 07:51:55 · 7 answers · asked by Dr.O 5

There is little doubt that Bubba could have stopped it but didn't.

Thanks again Bubba, on behalf of a million people killed because you were too busy getting BJ's.

2006-09-30 07:46:06 · 18 answers · asked by marceldev29 4

Every chance they get, Democrats chip away at the 2nd Amendment. Whether enacting more draconian laws, or just outright stripping the law-abiding citizen of his guns, Democrats are gung-ho to deny our rights.

Democrat Ray Nagin proved to be every freedom-loving American's worst nightmare. Nagin ordered the N.O.P.D. to illegally confiscate firearms from people. During a federally declared emergency, he abused his power and abandoned the very people he was sworn to protect. He took away the victims' freedom and their basic means of self-defense during an ill-fated and perilous time.

It's no wonder the voters don't trust Demcorats on 2nd Amendment issues. Aren't you sick of Democrats and their utter contempt for our 2nd Amendment rights?

2006-09-30 07:42:33 · 16 answers · asked by college_republicans_club 2

I want to here them. Picture me as the only voter in the entire USA. Persuade me to one side another. I will choose the best argument. I will not be politically bound. Please cite sources if possible. What do you think? I would love a variety of opinions. Try not to bash current leaders of the opositte party or people answering as well. Thanks! Happy debating!

2006-09-30 07:37:31 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous