Politics - 24 June 2007

Or will they fire him after his President job is over???

Realistically speaking Bush 43 simply stood in for his father Bush 41

2007-06-24 07:21:35 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous

The Foreign Policy of an imbecile,
The Foreign Policy of someone who doesn't understand world dynamics,
The Foreign Policy that uses terrorism as a mantra for hate,

An uninformed Foreign Policy.

2007-06-24 07:02:28 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous

I know plenty of people who can't stand that man.

2007-06-24 06:56:17 · 18 answers · asked by Liberal City 6

Considering that he is nationally recognized and has considerable public relations and marketing skills he might be able to pull it off. Here's a slogan for starters- We're aiming High cuz' Sim's our Guy!

2007-06-24 06:29:04 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous

He was just on the news squawking about Fred Thompson and putting boots up people's ***.

2007-06-24 06:13:57 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous

It is the truth! On May 9th Bush signed a directive that grants him almost dictatorial powers in case of a national emergency that would, of course, be declaired by him and him alone.
The national Security and Homeland Presidential Directive (NSPD-51) allows the president to assume responsibility for ALL Government functions in every area, State, local,national,.To handle this he created the new potion of the National Community Corrdinator without Congress authorizing the position.His actions superceeds the National Emergency Act! Does anyone else wonder why this man isn't being impeached? In addition to all of his illigal actions, he refuses to back down even when many of his own Republican Party are demanding the resignation of Attorney Alberto Gonzales! Can we put up with this megalomanic for another 18 months?

2007-06-24 06:04:59 · 20 answers · asked by Pamela V 7

I'm trying to understand how ANYONE can defend this:

"The Office of Vice President Dick Cheney told an agency within the National Archives that for purposes of securing classified information, the Vice President's office is not an 'entity within the executive branch' according to a letter released Thursday by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform."

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Cheney_tells_agency_that_Vice_Presidents_0621.html

And this:
"Dick Cheney, who has wielded extraordinary executive power as he transformed the image of the vice presidency, is asserting that his office is not actually part of the executive branch and does not have to comply with an executive order on safeguarding classified information.

So in other words we have 4 branches of gov. : Executive, Legislative, Judicial, And Cheney. Funny how he doesn't think he has to comply - THIS document would indicate otherwise:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/bush/eoamend.html

What do you all think of this?

2007-06-24 05:53:37 · 21 answers · asked by CelticPixie 4

Only US senator not barking when Bush demand congress to bark

Ony US Senator who wanted the Idiot censore!!!

Imagine if the other 99 Idiots in the Senate has R. Feingold's American values = No Bush, No corruptions = Conservatives don't have to push SUVs to work.

2007-06-24 05:50:39 · 8 answers · asked by Mr. USA U 2

2007-06-24 05:50:06 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

We went in there not because of UN resolutions, oil, WMDs, a humanitarian mission to "spread democracy" or to protect Israel. We went in to spread US influence in the mideast, and one of the things we were planning on happening was a weakening of Iran.
However, the war has had the opposite effect. Iran's influence is now spread throughout Iraq and into parts of Lebanon. Shouldn't it have been clear that this would happen? Shouldn't it have been clear that allowing Iran to reopen relations with the Iraqi Shi'ia community would bring tons of money into Iran, not to mention political power? Were the architects of the war so idealistic that they thought that Iraqis would assume western values overnight and start praying to Washington DC instead of Mecca just because we got rid of Saddam?

2007-06-24 05:44:18 · 9 answers · asked by I'll Take That One! 4

2007-06-24 05:32:55 · 31 answers · asked by Anonymous

Created after ww2 Israel had occupants that already had been living their for generations . The land was called Palestine for a reason .
Ever since Israel was created it has caused nothing but trouble and even been called a terrorist State by the United Nations . So again I ask for what purpose was Israel created .

2007-06-24 05:22:33 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-06-24 05:11:35 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous

are you capable?

2007-06-24 05:10:57 · 33 answers · asked by Anonymous

Our form of government relies on taxes, from the model of democracy which arose in New England in the 17th century and beyond. It occurs to one that the incredible economic strength our nation gives each and every one of us provides so many intangibles that create our personal wealth. Our education system, defense system, our infrastructure, our roads, hospitals, and countless things we all enjoy, and need, to lead full and productive lives. Isn't the cry of smaller gov'mt, cut taxes, and so on just a little disengenuous, and, well, selfish? We all share the burden, and the success, of a stable and well funded government. Without it, we would be a backwords place, seems to me Republican's "neocon" talk speaks to narrow minded selfishness, populist easy to understand rhetoric, that simply ignores the great strides we the people have created, and, appeals to our most selfish instincts.

2007-06-24 05:03:09 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-06-24 04:47:21 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous

I'd like to address the USA on this one specifically (as if you're not 90 percent of the respondents in here anyway) because I realize in the days of founding fathers your constitution was written so that the CHURCH actually governed politics.

But how can you be sure the tables aren't turned and GOVERNMENT manipulates religion to control it's people?

Do you really think government and religion should be linked?

Do you think it's possible religion was corrupted by government?

If yes, then how can you still support their being linked?

I think religion has always played a part in governing politics in one way or another, not just in the USA as a democratic society, is it possible that the two being intertwined is actually a detriment to it's people....because of the fact it can all be manipulated?

2007-06-24 04:46:02 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous

U.S. has the legitimate right to self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter. The U.S. would have no obligation to obtain prior authorization from the UN Security Council,
Congress agreed to go to war
Iraqis lived under a brutal regime that protects its own interests ahead of its people, is a regime with no conscience.
US allowing it to continue letting innnocents continue to suffer under this rule is a nation without conscience.
a crime against humanity consists of acts of persecution or any large scale atrocities against a body of people, as being the criminal offence above all othersmurder, extermination, torture, rape, political, racial, or religious persecution and other inhumane acts reach the threshold of crimes against humanity only if they are part of a widespread or systematic practice.
No conscience when these thing are said about Bush
all cowards can do is write it. blog it, but it does not make it so.

2007-06-24 04:44:07 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/02/02/elec04.poll.prez/index.html

Don't do your victory dance so early, libbies

2007-06-24 04:21:54 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous

Oh and if you can answer the question without mentioning the Clintons and Sandy Berger, great. I hope I am not asking too much from some of you. I just want the legal reason he says he does not have to turn over the documents.

2007-06-24 03:58:47 · 12 answers · asked by david 1

To put it in perspective, if any democrat was in office as president of the United States; and did the right thing to finally confront the elements who’s purpose is to destroy this great country. He / she would have do deal with the exact politics as the current Adm. Bill Clinton knew this when he was president, and in all honesty just didn’t want to go down that hard road. To think, Islamic fascist would not have us in their cross hairs if it were not for Bush is just absurd. Why do these extremist religious fundamentalist countries hat President Bush? He did what the president of the USA is required to, under his duties of the constitution. So yes he acted and confronted them. Honest debate can be had on how his Adm. Is handling it, but for all these democrats that seem to have this delusion of grandeur from arm chair quarter backing they have all the right answers is just and I am sorry for using this word but just plain stupid. How would any democrat deal differently with Iran’s part is Iraq? Hindsight is indeed 20/20. I may very well have to put aside some very strong personal beliefs come 08 and make my vote for the best chance we have as a nation to rebuild our standing in the world, will that be republican or democrat? I am not sure yet, I personally shall take a very hard a close look at the whole. I hope every American will do the same.

2007-06-24 03:50:01 · 26 answers · asked by Working Stiff 3

Is this just another example of a misguided press?? A slow news day? Pandering to minorities?

2007-06-24 03:31:05 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous

instead of trying to supress his voice like the Liberals and many Democrats?

2007-06-24 03:26:23 · 16 answers · asked by wallyshields 2

Verse 4:34 from the Koran

"Men have authority over women because God has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because God has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them. Then if they obey you, take no further action against them. Surely God is high, supreme."

Doesn't this verse support domestic violence for "disobedience" among other things?

2007-06-24 03:25:49 · 8 answers · asked by A Person 5

most ex-cons vote for the Democratic Party?

2007-06-24 03:19:47 · 13 answers · asked by wallyshields 2

Would they have done so on the day it was discovered he was sh*gging his secretary? What's he done since to merit this ovation? Not sh*gged another one?

2007-06-24 03:17:07 · 13 answers · asked by A True Gentleman 5

I logged on to see if there was any intelligent discussion at this hour hoping to avoid the Fox News brigade and the 101 Chairborne chickenhawk squad. I guess cons are too lazy to go to church now too. Hypocrites.

2007-06-24 02:52:05 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous

Was it the US Government?

2007-06-24 02:47:43 · 3 answers · asked by Montgomery B 4

Do you hate or like Bill Clinton, why?
Same question, but for Hilary.

2007-06-24 02:06:22 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-06-24 02:05:01 · 5 answers · asked by topink 6