Politics - 19 October 2006

The economy is as strong as it ever was. Unemployment is at an all-time low. There are more people who own their own homes than ever before. The country has withstood any further attacks after 9/11. There's so much to be proud of these last 6 years.

Is the war not going as well as we thought and the Foley scandal really enough to unseat the people that have put all those positives into place?

2006-10-19 06:37:19 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous

When I say negative things about surveillance cameras in public or the government expanding its right to monitor us on the internet, I get the same response from a lot of people. "If you're not doing anything wrong why would you care?" or "I have nothing to hide."

I have nothing to hide either. I am not against these things because I am trying to protect criminals. I am against them because they're wrong. This is susposed to be a free country. The governemnt should trust its citizenry enough that it doesn't need to monitor its every action.

With the speed that technology is advancing, I don't think people are aware of how quickly things will change. Soon it will be possible to track where a person is at all times, very easily, every manufactured item will have tracking chips in them. Insurance companies will convince their customers to have chips implanted in their arms.

Will these things help fight crime? Perhaps for a while. Until the criminals find ways to work around them.

2006-10-19 06:28:30 · 5 answers · asked by josephmarzen 1

That 1.1 of 1.4 million people are only surviving through the benevolence of the UN?

That the area is on the verge of collapse and civil war?

That the war on terror is only believed by those lacking discernment, because more terrorists are being created under these circumstances.

What makes me think this is a calculated strategy by those who wish to hold the world to ransom?

2006-10-19 06:28:12 · 24 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-10-19 06:28:01 · 3 answers · asked by Anonymous

What do you think this "suprise" is?

2006-10-19 06:26:00 · 6 answers · asked by Heatmizer 5

2006-10-19 06:20:33 · 9 answers · asked by Mr.happy 4

Don't be embarrassed about it ok? Just own up to it...;-)

2006-10-19 06:20:22 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous

did john baker's report suggest early withdrawal of the forces of the usa for iraq is going to be another vietnam?

2006-10-19 06:11:13 · 12 answers · asked by beloved_rationalist 2

zionists fund and pull strings in all of the western countries. am i wrong or right.

2006-10-19 06:10:26 · 11 answers · asked by fair-and-squire 4

You could consider the following points;
Lacking Compassion,
Violent,
War Mongering,
Disingenuous,
Religious Fanatism,

2006-10-19 06:07:02 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous

I know what it is, I think. It's taking advantage of a threat, whether soundly believed or not, for personal or party gain by exploiting said threat.

But I have two questions as it relates to George Bush and his alleged fear mongering. 1. When claiming this about him, is it the intent to imply the dangers he mentions are exaggerated, illegitimate, of low probability?

2. If you're claiming that he's doing this for that reason, but don't present an argument to support your implication, why isn't your claim also propaganda?

I know I could be attacked as being naive, or have some idiot call me a Republican hack, but I think my questions are valid.

2006-10-19 06:06:26 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

And those are the party leaders.

Serious answers only, please

2006-10-19 06:01:13 · 16 answers · asked by Smith and Jones 1

Lets face it with religous lobbying groups being some of the most powerful. And most politicians being religous, Church and state are not separated. Its about time they should be taxed like any other enterprise.

2006-10-19 05:56:54 · 16 answers · asked by BrownMorristown 2

Here's my other question about it...so far only one answer:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=ApiFL59NeTqBLhaX55ru7bHsy6IX?qid=20061019092455AAHLVNf

Repulicans in general are much more for the various free trade agreements that have devastated the middle class in this country!

2006-10-19 05:54:34 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

I take the view that he has ruined any goodwill that previously existed with our allies and our enemies.

2006-10-19 05:52:48 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous

i think so yes and once we take hold of both house bush wont have much power to do his stupid things

2006-10-19 05:51:28 · 15 answers · asked by marco 1

I've heard this analysis reported on several news networks, and I was wondering what Democrats think about the possibility that Iraq's insurgents want them to win the elections. Is this a sign that the insurgents think they can win in Iraq with the Democrats in charge of Congress?

2006-10-19 05:45:48 · 7 answers · asked by rustyshackleford001 5

Rep. Ray LaHood (news, bio, voting record), R-Ill., some members have indicated that they would terminate the page service after almost 200 years of tradition. As LaHood explained, "We should not subject young men and women to this kind of activity, this kind of vulnerability." When asked whether he was suggesting that his colleagues cannot be trusted with children, he responded, "Well, that's pretty obvious."

2006-10-19 05:41:36 · 8 answers · asked by Where's the beef? 2

I am going to withhold my bets until someone schedules a tasteful high class event like this at a $5000-a-Corndog Republican Fundraiser and Pie Social.

2006-10-19 05:38:19 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

This is just a thought. Not sure exactly where I would settle on this issue, but SOMETHING MUST BE DONE to STOP the incredible ignorance of extermination questions, pubic hair questions, and pure hatred filled blather that contains no point or question whatsoever. What do you think? Please feel free to elaborate.

2006-10-19 05:26:49 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous

Let's ban walking, because many people fall and might get hurt. Let's ban sitting because some people might fall off a chair and hurt themselves. Let's ban running for the same reason as walking. Let's ban hand shaking because someone might be too strong and hurt another. Micromanagment of children is getting too out of control as is inept lawsuits. A woman was quoted as saying "my child feels safer now that this rule is in effect", does she have an idiot as a child that gets injured from running around? It truly is a shame of the extent people will go for a false sense of safety.

2006-10-19 05:17:15 · 15 answers · asked by Enterrador 4

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/103/house/1/votes/605/
Party Yes No Not Voting

Democratic 232 24 1
Independent 1 0 0
Republican 22 151 2<<<< Total 255 175 3

2006-10-19 05:10:10 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

I read that post in forum last night. And although some of the idiots will pass, many of them will not. Like the idiots here now, asking extermination questions and pubic hair questions and the whole group of idiots that gossip and rant about their favorite shiraz and ******** like that. Have they no SELF-RESPECT?

2006-10-19 05:08:40 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-10-19 05:08:16 · 11 answers · asked by robert m 7

Wouldn't there be widespread ,and very vocal condemnation amongst Christians If someone killed in the name of their religion? Would they stand by psssively and watch it continue,and would any of them harbor the guilty ones?
Muslims have it in their hands to stop all the killing and madness. Yet ----silence from most.

2006-10-19 05:07:26 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous

huh?

2006-10-19 05:03:46 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous

Are you suspicious that all of this is a way to distract voters from the real issues, to take minds off of the war for one thing?

Do you think it is odd that this Foley naming his alleged childhood molester in public and the aftermath is a way to distract people's attention with trivial stuff?

Another one of Rove's approved and endorsed tricks?

2006-10-19 05:02:21 · 10 answers · asked by Middy S 2

I've heard people defend the new law which suspends habeas corpus. The only argument I've heard is that it is for our safety and it doesn't matter as long as you aren't a terrorist. I've heard, as long as you aren't a terrorists, then it doesn't effet you. But couldn't this apply to any civil rights they take away? If they made a law saying they would arrest anyone who used anti-American speech. It would be your right to free speech being taken away, but you would say "as long as you aren't anti-American, it doesn't effect you." And if they took away the right to bear arms to anyone who they considered against America. So in the end, you arrest anyone who doesn't agree with you, and this is not what America is about. I would like to see another argument in support of Habeas Corpus. I can understand if your agrument is that it makes us safer, but then please admit that it is at the cost of our liberties.

2006-10-19 04:57:59 · 6 answers · asked by Take it from Toby 7

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-03-14-congress-poll_x.htm

2006-10-19 04:56:11 · 9 answers · asked by Gettin_by 3

2006-10-19 04:52:47 · 10 answers · asked by rustyshackleford001 5