Politics - 30 June 2007

2007-06-30 02:25:07 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous

don't you see how stupid and ridicoulus that is? does anybody study history or anthropology? or at least knows what democracy is(and that america is not this great model )? does anybody know what "use false ideology to support military interventions" means? does anybody get how stupid and ignorant a person have to be to belive these kind of bu***hits?

2007-06-30 02:15:28 · 16 answers · asked by Simona C 3

The 1970s are described as a period of stagflation, meaning economic stagnation coupled with price inflation, as well as higher interest rates.

Price inflation caused interest rates to rise to unprecedented levels (above 12% per year). The prime rate hit 21.5% in December 1980, the highest rate in U.S. history.

The economy suffered double-digit inflation, coupled with very high interest rates, oil shortages, high unemployment, and slow economic growth.

The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan marked the end of détente, and he did nothing.

From November 4, 1979 until January 20, 1981, a 444-day period, Carter sat with his thumb up my arrss while 63 americans were held hostage in Iran. 444 Days!

Unlike, GWB, when he ran for re-election he lost 44 states and was completely humiliated in one of the worst landslides ever.

He has spent the years after his presidency continuously putting his foot in his mouth. His support for Palestinian terrorists is pathetic.

2007-06-30 02:08:21 · 35 answers · asked by Anonymous

Interesting read:
Sorry, Mr. Franklin, “We’re All Democrats Now”

At the close of the Constitutional Convention in 1787, Benjamin Franklin told an inquisitive citizen that the delegates to the Constitutional Convention gave the people “a Republic, if you can keep it.” We should apologize to Mr. Franklin. It is obvious that the Republic is gone, for we are wallowing in a pure democracy against which the Founders had strongly warned.

Madison, the father of the Constitution, could not have been more explicit in his fear and concern for democracies. “Democracies,” he said, “have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their death.”

If Madison’s assessment was correct, it behooves those of us in Congress to take note and decide, indeed, whether the Republic has vanished, when it occurred, and exactly what to ex

2007-06-30 01:56:39 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous

Honestly guys.........who in this forum thinks Ron Paul has even a tiny chance to run? There is no publicity about him anywhere in the press or other media. The only place he is talked about is here. WHEN is he going to get media coverage?? I believe the average American has never heard of Ron Paul.

2007-06-30 01:54:35 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous

in any country..

2007-06-30 01:41:05 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous

Vermont wants to become its own state because it says America is a failure. Personally, I believe they are just a bunch of pansies who won't stand behind their country because they are liberal.

2007-06-30 01:14:47 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

What is the allure of radical Islam? Why are their numbers growing? What could possible motivate a sane person to strap on a bomb and blow themselves up?
Radical movements, like that in the middle-east today, are fueled by oppression. It is foolish to think that the middle-east is simply inhabited by an inordinate amount of crazy people. Something is driving these people to rash action. Until that something is removed, there will be no peace in the middle-east.
Is radical Islam offering the only course of empowerment to a culture that views itself as oppressed?

2007-06-30 00:57:04 · 10 answers · asked by Overt Operative 6

One of the biggest debates the we continually have here on this forum is National Health Care. I'm finding more and more information with regards to other countries who have this and how it's failing.

Here are some excerpts and a link:
Who's Really 'Sicko'

In Canada, dogs can get a hip replacement in under a week. Humans can wait two to three years

"I haven't seen 'Sicko,' " says Avril Allen about the new Michael Moore documentary, which advocates socialized medicine for the United States. The film, which has been widely viewed on the Internet, and which will officially open in the U.S. and Canada on Friday, has been getting rave reviews. But Ms. Allen, a lawyer, has no plans to watch it. She's just too busy preparing to file suit against Ontario's provincial government about its health-care system next month.

Her client, Lindsay McCreith, would have had to wait for four months just to get an MRI, and then months more to see a neurologist for his malignant brain tumor. Instead, frustrated and ill, the retired auto-body shop owner traveled to Buffalo, N.Y., for a lifesaving surgery. Now he's suing for the right to opt out of Canada's government-run health care, which he considers dangerous. Ms. Allen figures the lawsuit has a fighting chance: In 2005, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that "access to wait lists is not access to health care," striking down key Quebec laws that prohibited private medicine and private health insurance.

In the U.S., 83 House Democrats voted for a bill in 1993 calling for single-payer health care. That idea collapsed with HillaryCare and since then has existed on the fringes of the debate--winning praise from academics and pressure groups, but remaining largely out of the political discussion. Mr. Moore's documentary intends to change that, exposing millions to his argument that American health care is sick and socialized medicine is the cure.

It's not simply that Mr. Moore is wrong. His grand tour of public health care systems misses the big story: While he prescribes socialism, market-oriented reforms are percolating in cities from Stockholm to Saskatoon. Mr. Moore goes to London, Ontario, where he notes that not a single patient has waited in the hospital emergency room more than 45 minutes. "It's a fabulous system," a woman explains. In Britain, he tours a hospital where patients marvel at their free care. A patient's husband explains: "It's not America." Humorously, Mr. Moore finds a cashier dispensing money to patients (for transportation). In France, a doctor explains the success of the health-care system with the old Marxist axiom: "You pay according to your means, and you receive according to your needs." It's compelling material--I know because, born and raised in Canada, I used to believe in government-run health care. Then I was mugged by reality.

Consider, for instance, Mr. Moore's claim that ERs don't overcrowd in Canada. A Canadian government study recently found that only about half of patients are treated in a timely manner, as defined by local medical and hospital associations. "The research merely confirms anecdotal reports of interminable waits," reported a national newspaper. While people in rural areas seem to fare better, Toronto patients receive care in four hours on average; one in 10 patients waits more than a dozen hours.

This problem hit close to home last year: A relative, living in Winnipeg, nearly died of a strangulated bowel while lying on a stretcher for five hours, writhing in pain. To get the needed ultrasound, he was sent by ambulance to another hospital.

In Britain, the Department of Health recently acknowledged that one in eight patients wait more than a year for surgery. Around the time Mr. Moore was putting the finishing touches on his documentary, a hospital in Sutton Coldfield announced its new money-saving linen policy: Housekeeping will no longer change the bed sheets between patients, just turn them over. France's system failed so spectacularly in the summer heat of 2003 that 13,000 people died, largely of dehydration. Hospitals stopped answering the phones and ambulance attendants told people to fend for themselves.

http://socglory.blogspot.com/

Seriously, folks... Is THIS what we want for our country? A system that is failing elsewhere?
There have to be other alternatives, don't you think?

2007-06-30 00:35:11 · 23 answers · asked by Anonymous

Spain, France & Germany all run socialist candidates for president. In the United States are scocialists don't even call themselves socialists. They call themselves liberals. Now that liberal has become unpopular they want to be called progressives. In the United States republican candidates fight over who is the most conservsative candidate. They all want that title. Democrats NEVER fight over the title of most LIBERAL. It would be the kiss of death come election time. Why is Socialism so popular in Europe and so unpopular in the United States?

My Favorite

Liberal/Progressive/Socialist;


"We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions." --Adolf Hitler

(Speech of May 1, 1927.)

2007-06-30 00:31:38 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous