Politics - 11 September 2007

2007-09-11 10:20:23 · 5 answers · asked by mrlebowski99 6

Rep. Dennis Kucinich, Democratic presidential candidate and no stranger to contrarian views, was the sole congressman Tuesday to vote against the House's Sept. 11 commemoration resolution. Tuesday's nonbinding resolution was a relatively short document. It had 12 "whereas" clauses (Snip) "to save our nation from being destroyed from the lies that took us into Iraq, the lies that keep us there, the lies that are being used to set the stage for war against Iran"

2007-09-11 10:20:19 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous

Shouldn't it be a right?

2007-09-11 10:15:15 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous

or that at the very least he attempts to mislead the american people and insults our intelligence.
What I am looking for here is current events if possible, but also a very detail analysis of the scenarios where you claim he lied or that he tried to hoodwink the people into supporting something that he knows they dont want.

2007-09-11 10:06:15 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous

I went to visit my old neighborhood and noticed that every bad area including that one is soaked with Democrats . What is the reason ?

2007-09-11 10:01:08 · 17 answers · asked by Sin nombre 6

2007-09-11 09:58:08 · 50 answers · asked by habib 1

2007-09-11 09:57:08 · 31 answers · asked by Anonymous

President Bush today asked that " All Americans honor the selfless men and women of our Armed Forces, the dedicated members of our public safety, law enforcement, and intelligence communities, and the thousands of others who work hard each day to protect our country, secure our liberty, and prevent future attacks."

What will Ann Coulter do to honor "‘The Witches of East Brunswick"?

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/09/20070904-6.html

2007-09-11 09:55:22 · 17 answers · asked by wyldfyr 7

The terrorists don't care if the next President is black, white, pink, purple, male, female or shemale. They have vowed to destroy the USA. So, even if we withdraw from Iraq we will be battling terrorism for a LONG time.

2007-09-11 09:55:21 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous

Do you think it's really intelligent and classy for the President of the United States to tell another world leader that we are "kicking a$$ in Iraq"? I'm referring to the comment made to Australian Deputy Prime Minister Mark Vaile by Bush...

2007-09-11 09:55:05 · 7 answers · asked by nakedtruth 3

Reagan/Iran arms deal:

*** Advance video to 4:00 minutes and watch ***
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxQ9DqDaXBU

Video shows Bush 1 paid millions and armed Iran to keep US hostages an additional 76 days to affect outcome of Reagan election..

2007-09-11 09:44:46 · 16 answers · asked by Chi Guy 5

would it be better or worse? why?

2007-09-11 09:33:30 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous

http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/newsid_1610000/newsid_1612600/1612653.stm

EXCERPT FROM WEBSITE:
The way America has got involved in conflicts in regions like the Middle East has made some people very angry, including a group called al-Qaeda - who are widely thought to have been behind the attacks.

In the past, al-Qaeda leaders have declared a holy war - called a jihad - against the US. As part of this jihad, al-Qaeda members believe attacking US targets is something they should do.

When the attacks happened in 2001, there were a number of US troops in a country called Saudi Arabia, and the leader of al-Qaeda, Osama Bin Laden, said he wanted them to leave.

**Anyone who truly believes that the MSM is not biased to the left is truly ignorant.**

2007-09-11 09:28:01 · 18 answers · asked by Still Beautifully Conservative 5

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070911/ts_nm/afghan_usa_iran_dc

GOD BLESS AMERICA

2007-09-11 09:14:58 · 23 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-09-11 09:13:45 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070911/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iraq

2007-09-11 09:10:17 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous

I hear the local Mcdonalds in Washington D.C. is hiring.

2007-09-11 09:07:09 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous

Have any of them flat-out broken ties with Moveon ?
Have any of them refused any further association with Moveon ?

and

Have you decided to never have any association with Moveon ?

Of course I'm referring to Moveon's NY Times ad . Petraeus or Betrayus . And I'm asking because although Moveon is not officially sanctioned as a Democratic Party organization , I think it's fair to say you won't find any Republicans within that organization . And the Democrats have already imbibed in the benefits they reap from Moveon . So I'm not blaming the Democrats for the ad , I'm just wondering if they've publicly distanced themselves from any further association ..

So -- Did Any Democrats Disavow the Actions of Moveon ?

2007-09-11 09:06:01 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous

Why did they elect a dumb hick to be a senator in NY?

2007-09-11 09:05:31 · 8 answers · asked by mbush40 6

Bush did BUT it's not OK for Bush to do it? I know libs just hate to deal with those little details like facts... but here it is:

Is CNN OK for you.... and your boy Billy good enough sources?

http://www.cnn.com/US/9812/16/clinton.iraq.speech/

The president said Iraq's refusal to cooperate with U.N. weapons inspectors presented a threat to the entire world.

"Saddam (Hussein) must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons," Clinton said.

"Along with Prime Minister (Tony) Blair of Great Britain, I made it equally clear that if Saddam failed to cooperate fully we would be prepared to act without delay, diplomacy or warning," Clinton said.

Whats that kids? Without delay, DIPLOMACY or warning?

"In halting our airstrikes in November, I gave Saddam a chance -- not a license. If we turn our backs on his defiance, the credibility of U.S. power as a check against Saddam will be destroyed," the president

2007-09-11 08:59:48 · 36 answers · asked by Mr. Perfect 5

No bad language please.

I would give him a swift kick between the legs first and then pluck all of his beard hairs one at a time before I handed him over to authorities.

2007-09-11 08:59:32 · 18 answers · asked by Hello 4

2007-09-11 08:52:41 · 24 answers · asked by Page 4

There is no point in staying in Iraq when our borders are wide open. We know muslims are boiled up all over the world. So being in Iraq will not stop them from getting to south america, or mexico, and moving right on up to a open, and inviting border.

So WHY is Iraq more important than our borders?
How will 30,000 patrolling iraq stop another attack, but secure borders wont?

2007-09-11 08:38:35 · 11 answers · asked by vote_usa_first 7

I would think that libs would hate the UN. They cause wars, stand by while entire tribes are wiped out and refuse to do anything when food earmarked for starving civilians is comondeered. Libs are supposed to be for peace and feeded the poor of the world right??

2007-09-11 08:37:51 · 17 answers · asked by Ethan M 5

Petraeus based much of his assessment on the claim that violence in Iraq is dropping. That just isn't true:

Petraeus is using "funny math." According to the Washington Post, Petraeus and the Pentagon are using a bizarre formula for measuring violence in the country. For example, deaths by car bombs don't count. And assassinations count only if you're shot in the back of the head—not in the front.4

Iraqis believe the surge has failed. According to a massive new ABC/BBC poll, every single Iraqi polled in Baghdad, the primary target of the "surge," said it had made security worse. Iraqis themselves overwhelmingly think the situation in Iraq is deteriorating, in terms of security, political cooperation, the economy, and other measures. Overall, 70% think the escalation worsened rather than improved security conditions.

2007-09-11 08:36:33 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous

The slaves are dead, so we cannot do anything to settle things right with them. Slavery for reparations are impossible, because there are no slaves to make reparations to.

Most of the blacks growing up in the Jim Crow era are gone as well.

Younger blacks haven't experienced significant racism to warrant reparations.

But what about older blacks? There are some folks in their 50's, 60's, 70's and older who are still alive, and who experienced institutional racism. We can do something for them.

I think we should:

1) As a nation, present a formal apology (something more than what Clinton tried).

2) Provide reparations for institutional racism by way of special tax breaks to those of black ancestry, with increasing returns the older a person is (because the oldest suffered the worst).

Tax cuts, not payments. I think it would work and I think it's fair.

I also think we will have future regrets if we do not act before too much time has passed.

Thoughts?

2007-09-11 08:33:09 · 30 answers · asked by Anonymous

this is a great controversial issue. tell me what you think. Who do you think should win the upcoming election.

2007-09-11 08:30:31 · 11 answers · asked by Blackcashews 3

2007-09-11 08:27:20 · 16 answers · asked by Page 4

2007-09-11 08:27:18 · 18 answers · asked by ? 7

Democrats and Republicans are tearing this country apart? Do you believe that we need to finish the fight in order to end this war? Do you believe that we really need another Democrat or Republican as President or should America find a new way?

2007-09-11 08:20:35 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous