Politics - 30 July 2007

Either say i support Bush or say you dont and the reason

2007-07-30 17:33:47 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous

Should our governement legalize the most popular drug ever?
Only honest opinions, please no rhetorical answers with information that has never been proven by ANY respectable medical association. Every year, hundreds of millions of tax-payer's dollars goes into arresting and trying people in marijuana-related offenses, while real criminals are out committing crimes. Also, marijuana is an excellent cash crop which could produce great revenue for investors. Every year tobbacco and alcohol kill hundereds of thousands. Marijuana? 0... I can't understand why anyone would criminalize marijuana while drunks kill innocent people in car accidents every day. In fact, 700,000 U.S. citizens are arrested every year on marijuana related charges, when policemen could be doing something legitimate. You decide....

2007-07-30 17:26:22 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous

They will do anything to help the enemy kill our troops.

2007-07-30 17:06:12 · 22 answers · asked by a bush family member 7

Several minutes ago I posted this question:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Aqdyiwgk6O3e3nNnnGcENd7Y7BR.?qid=20070730202250AAGT2DF

And a bunch of you were quite upset about me making it a party issue. So the question is how was it a party issue?
It's just a link to a news story.

2007-07-30 16:53:28 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous

Do you think the U.S.A. people know actually how much they are costing us tax wise

2007-07-30 16:45:00 · 15 answers · asked by miiiikeee 5

just list em

2007-07-30 16:32:25 · 17 answers · asked by surfer girl 1

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,262700,00.html

Is this part of a progressive trend?

2007-07-30 16:22:50 · 27 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-07-30 16:22:15 · 35 answers · asked by wallyshields 2

Running with the most unlikable Presidential candidate in History will hard to overcome. The apparent success that we are now having in Iraq will not help.

2007-07-30 16:17:19 · 16 answers · asked by wallyshields 2

like your feedback also; men and women, After 9/11 the USA decided go into the heart of the Arab-Muslim world, house to house, and make clear that we are ready to kill, and to die, to prevent our open society from being undermined by Muslim unity. There could have been other countries we hit. But we hit Saddam for one simple reason: because we could, and because he deserved it and because he was right in the heart of that world. And don't believe the nonsense that this had no effect. Every neighboring government - and 98 percent of terrorism is about what governments let happen - got the message. If you talk to U.S. soldiers in Iraq they will tell you this is what the war was about. Being part of an empire, which is what we are is about having balls and showing that we won't stand for it. Please tell me what you think?

2007-07-30 16:12:33 · 32 answers · asked by brady m 2

2007-07-30 16:05:42 · 18 answers · asked by wallyshields 2

Do you think the US leadership understands the subtle distinction between fighting an insurgency versus fighting insurgents?

It may seem a trivial difference, but if it is unrecognized, the US is doomed to defeat in Iraq. Those who wish to not repeat history should (have) read "A Savage War of Peace" by Horne or any of Trinquier's commentaries on the French experience in Algeria.

2007-07-30 16:01:10 · 7 answers · asked by The ~Muffin~ Man 6

I was watching CNN the other night ..... G Bush and the new prince of England were at camp Davie and I swear Bush was wearing a Bomber Flight Jacket..... now the last time he wore a similar Jacket he was prancing around a carrier deck in front of a victory banner, that was I think 4 or 5 years ago , ...... Does this mean we are going to "Shock and Awe" another country ?

2007-07-30 15:57:54 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-07-30 15:44:50 · 30 answers · asked by wallyshields 2

In Iraq?

2007-07-30 15:42:46 · 13 answers · asked by wallyshields 2

Before Bush leaves office in 2009 or when Hillary & Bill take over the White House once again?

2007-07-30 15:29:21 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous

Some Democrats especially in the media are acting like the war is now winnable. Now that things are starting to go better they are seeing a connection between the war in Iraq and Terrorism.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_073007/content/01125109.guest.html

2007-07-30 15:25:55 · 19 answers · asked by wallyshields 2

Sometimes those credits just seem impossible to achieve. Even with a few low grades you can end up on the Dean's list. Nothing is perfect, and a straight 4.0 student is rare.

Do you listen to those who cry, give up, and become the under achievers in life? Or do you tough it out and finish the job for a better life?

Like it or not, you can't turn the clock back. We are there, and a job must be done.

2007-07-30 15:23:37 · 2 answers · asked by George 3

"blame America first"?

2007-07-30 14:55:24 · 14 answers · asked by Stephanie is awesome!! 7

What are your thoughts?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/30/opinion/30pollack.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

2007-07-30 14:53:50 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous

Rep. Sen. Ted Stevens is being investigated regarding the oil industry by the FBI and IRS. Another republican is under investigation. I thought this was the BETTER party? I thought YOUR politicians weren't corrupt?

Truth is, politicians are politicians, regardless of party, and by having this belief yours is better than the other is a flat out lie...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070731/pl_nm/stevens_search_dc

2007-07-30 14:38:06 · 17 answers · asked by linus_van_pelt_4968 5

John Edwards made millions as a trial attorney in malpractice cases. Now while no one should blame attorneys soley for the incredible increase in the cost of healthcare, physicians nevertheless order a significant number of tests as the practice "defensive" medicine. We should first look at the record breaking profits and CEO bonuses from companies like United Healthcare when he discuss the rising cost of healthcare. However, John Edwards needs to comeforth and explain how someone who was prostituting the system can is now qualified to fix the system. That doesn't mean patients who have been wrongfully harmed shouldn't have legal rights it just means attorneys shouldnt get 1/3 to 1/2 the judgment. Trial attorneys just have to be accountable for a small portion of the healthcare crisis.

2007-07-30 14:32:44 · 16 answers · asked by Ponch 3

If so, then why do liberals get their panties in a bunch whenever scientists voice dissenting views to the THEORY of global warming? Isn't it healthy to openly debate ALL theories, in order to arrive at proper conclusions? Especially one in which the liberals are wanting to spend OUR tax dollars on legislation based on this THEORY???

Why are they trying to silence the opposition, especially where science is concerned?

2007-07-30 13:55:27 · 24 answers · asked by Sleeck 3

In a time when unions are outraged with Democrats for their pro-immigration policies, big labor has launched an unprecedented lobbying campaign to force workers into unions. Labor unions are supposed to protect workers’ rights, yet union bosses want Congress to pass a law that actually robs workers of their democratic right to a private ballot.

In March, the House kowtowed to the unions and passed the so-called “Employer Free Choice Act.” Today the battle comes to the floor of the Senate. Union bosses will learn that the Senate isn’t going to roll over so easily.

I was a card-carrying member of the AFL-CIO Metal Lather union in my youth, and I understand the role that unions can play. But unionization is increasingly facing organizing challenges. Unions have seen a steady decline in membership, from 16.1 percent in 1990 to 12 percent in 2006. Right now they’re less interested in seriously defending workers’ rights than they are about simply holding onto their power. It seems obvious that big labor wants to rebuild its membership rolls — and its bank account — through a forced unionization process called “card check.”

What is card check and why is it so bad? The bill now before Congress would overturn a 72-year law that guarantees workers the right to cast private ballots in union organizing elections. Card check has always been an option, if employers voluntarily choose to recognize a union that way. But this bill mandates the recognition of a labor union as the exclusive employee representative if only 50 percent plus one of the workers signs a card expressing interest in a union. It’s automatic. No discussion, no hearing from both sides on the issue, no election.

What about the views of the other 49 percent? It’s very likely they would not even know an election is taking place. Union organizers only have to solicit cards in secret until they achieve a majority. That’s not a free and fair election. By voting in union-organizing elections, you are consulted about a decision that will require you to pay potentially thousands of dollars a year in union dues and may require you to support union actions, including strikes. Yet under this so-called “Employee Free Choice Act,” it is possible for nearly half of the workers to have no voice at all.

This isn’t about workers’ rights. This is about intimidation. Consider the pressure you would be under to sign a card if your coworkers asked. Workers and their families can be harassed at home, at church, at the shopping mall. A former union organizer testified before the House Education and Labor Committee that many workers “signed the card simply to get the organizer to leave their home and not harass them further.” Pressure often escalates to include threatening phone calls, vandalism, stalking, and even violence. In one 2004 case, a worker in High Point, North Carolina, who dared to oppose the United Auto Workers’ card check campaign, needed 24-hour security posted at his home.

The only protection workers have to exercise their freedom in union elections is the private ballot. A choice made under duress is no choice at all — it’s coercion.

A private ballot allows workers to make a decision without the union organizers, coworkers, or the employer looking over their shoulder. An employer wouldn’t know if you voted for the union, and the union wouldn’t know if you voted against the union.

Ironically, the bill’s supporters agree that secret ballot elections for unionization are a good thing — in Mexico! In August 2001, eleven cosponsors of the House card-check bill sent a letter to the Mexican government urging the adoption of secret-ballot elections as a basic right for Mexican workers for the very reasons we should protect this right here in America. Go figure.

Let’s be very clear that no one is denying the right of workers to organize unions. Unions, in fact, won more than half of the federally supervised organizing elections held in the last year. The right to join a union by secret ballot is time-honored. It is a right I exercised when I chose to be a card-carrying member.

But the right to decide by private ballot is fundamental in our democracy. Without it, union organizing is just legal conscription.

The Senate must stand up for American workers by defeating this bill.

2007-07-30 13:39:53 · 8 answers · asked by mission_viejo_california 2

That geogre bush is screwing up.

2007-07-30 13:24:04 · 22 answers · asked by Flintstoner 4

----I keep seeing Hilary as "Moe" in the three stooges, slapping the hell out of Edwards and Obama; and Edward's $300. haircut all frizzed up like Larry's.

2007-07-30 13:23:09 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous

Sounds like a good weapon against Islam.

2007-07-30 13:12:32 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-07-30 12:55:55 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous

for corruption and bribery?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070730/ap_on_re_us/stevens_investigation

2007-07-30 12:47:00 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous

I believe that the Democratic Party has a greater influence (at the moment). Reason is because the number of registered Democrats has increased. I strongly believe that Bush's presidency has something to do with the reason why Democrats are presently dominant.

In the 1980 presidential race, Democratic and Republican counties on average had about the same number of voters. By 2000, however, the average Democratic county had three times as many voters as the average Republican county, according to study of election results.

It seems like the Democrats have control the over the media, social welfare, freedom of speech rights, and a mist of other things. I am not applying this to be a bad thing, but what are your thoughts?

**Note: What ever happened to free thinkers?

2007-07-30 12:33:49 · 12 answers · asked by Liberal City 6