Politics - 16 September 2007

as it has been to the left. Jefferson cared more about his money than own voters. As long as libs get votes then nothing else matters

http://abcnews.go.com/US/HurricaneKatrina/story?id=1123495&page=1

Amid the chaos and confusion that engulfed New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina struck, a congressman used National Guard troops to check on his property and rescue his personal belongings -- even while New Orleans residents were trying to get rescued from rooftops, ABC News has learned.

On Sept. 2 -- five days after Katrina hit the Gulf Coast -- Rep. William Jefferson, D-La., who represents New Orleans and is a senior member of the powerful Ways and Means Committee, was allowed through the military blockades set up around the city to reach the Superdome, where thousands of evacuees had been taken.

2007-09-16 04:59:05 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-09-16 04:55:37 · 5 answers · asked by Padmini Gopalan 4

Has it become obvious yet that ANY measurable success we have in Iraq equals failure for the left? Ever since John Kerry woke up in early 2004 and decided to be an anti-war candidate, all the left has done is insist on withdrawl, failure, retreat, and insisted that Iraq can't be won. Just this week General Petraeus gave a report indidcating measurable success as a result of the surge, and what do democrats do? They call him a liar! So should it be any real surprise that any success or progress we make in Iraq only makes democrats look bad? Kinda makes you wonder why ANYBODY would support a political party that WANTS our country to fail.

2007-09-16 04:54:02 · 19 answers · asked by ? 5

2007-09-16 04:34:36 · 23 answers · asked by Miss Kitty 6

2007-09-16 04:31:42 · 20 answers · asked by St. Toad 4

Uncle Osama invited the West to embrace Islam or face endless war, what should be do? Is our civilisation worth fighting for or is it so bad and so corrupt that we should take his advice?

2007-09-16 04:26:30 · 7 answers · asked by Firefly 1

Who will the Dems target next, in their quest to make Bush look bad? Will it be this guy?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070916/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/attorney_general

Seems if Bush won't do what the Dems want, they will continue to target his administration with bogus accusations and character assasinations. Like Scooter Libby. All the while they allow their own members like William Jefferson to run amok.

2007-09-16 04:21:52 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-09-16 04:18:47 · 28 answers · asked by Darth Vader 6

John Adams(the 2nd US President) said "Our Constitution is for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the governing of any other". Was he speaking to the throngs of irreligious, atheists, satanists and hedonists that are swelling our society attempting to choke off the rights off a few fervent moral and Christian people? Was he worried even in the 18th century that society would move away from Jesus and embrace all things Jesus warned us about? Are our founding fathers turning in the graves knowing how many are turning their backs to God and thus morality??? Waiting for the atheist secularists to claim Washington , Franklin and Thomas Jefferson as one of their own. Please. Do atheists, satanists, hedonists and secularists take credit for moral and societal decay we are currently experiencing? Is your irrational hatred of Bush espoused from your irreligious lens you see the world in?

2007-09-16 04:16:16 · 10 answers · asked by aCeRBic 4

all the expanded powers bush gave himself?

2007-09-16 04:10:29 · 20 answers · asked by ? 6

You would think with the Iraq issue at a critial juncture, stay the course or withdrawal, that Bush Sr. would be voicing his support of Jr's policy to help unify the nation behind it.

That is, of course ,if he believed Jr was making the right decision.

2007-09-16 04:06:57 · 28 answers · asked by Perplexed Bob 5

And will a mostly conservative evangelical US military still want to fight for a lib commander in chief like Hillary?

2007-09-16 04:05:11 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous

August 21, 2007
Congress Approval Rating Matches Historical Low
Just 18% approve of job Congress is doing

by Jeffrey M. Jones
GALLUP NEWS SERVICE
PRINCETON, NJ -- A new Gallup Poll finds Congress' approval rating the lowest it has been since Gallup first tracked public opinion of Congress with this measure in 1974. Just 18% of Americans approve of the job Congress is doing, while 76% disapprove, according to the August 13-16, 2007, Gallup Poll.
That 18% job approval rating matches the low recorded in March 1992, when a check-bouncing scandal was one of several scandals besetting Congress, leading many states to pass term limits measures for U.S. representatives (which the Supreme Court later declared unconstitutional). Congress had a similarly low 19% approval rating during the energy crisis in the summer of 1979.
Americans' evaluations of the job Congress is doing are usually not that positive -- the vast majority of historical approval ratings have been below 50%. The high point was 84% approval one month after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, when Americans rallied behind the federal government. Since then, Congress' approval ratings have generally exhibited the same downward trajectory seen in those for President George W. Bush. Currently, 32% of Americans approve of the job Bush is doing as president, a far cry from the record-high 90% he received in September 2001. Bush's current job approval rating is just three percentage points above his lowest.
There was a slight interruption in the downward trend in congressional approval ratings at the beginning of this year when party control changed hands from the Republicans to the Democrats following last fall's midterm elections. In January 2007, 35% of Americans approved of Congress, a significant increase from the 21% who approved of Congress in December 2006. That December rating tied the lowest in the 12 years the Republicans controlled Congress from 1995 to 2006.
But that "honeymoon" period for the new Democratically controlled Congress was brief, as its job ratings dropped below 30% in March 2007 and have now fallen below where they were just before the Democrats took over.

2007-09-16 03:59:57 · 11 answers · asked by mission_viejo_california 2

You like oil? Fine, pay for it, don't steal it.
Republicans seem to act like it's a basic injustice that people should control the resources in their own land.

2007-09-16 03:56:15 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous

Why is it that Democrats always vote to raise taxes to support their social programs, and the Republicans are the ones paying for the programs?

2007-09-16 03:49:05 · 18 answers · asked by mission_viejo_california 2

2007-09-16 03:48:02 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous

Why don't people understand the fact that the Iraq war is not a war for oil.

However, it's part of the equation.

And why don't people understand the fact that at the end of the day, it's either the United States or the Islamofascists who have control of Iraq's oil supply?

Surely, we wouldn't want the Islamofascists to have control over it. They could tie up the world's economy.

You see LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, BOYS AND GIRLS, if the CRAZY PSYCHO LIBERAL ENVIRONMENTALISTS would let us drill for oil and shale, and have nuclear power, this country wouldn't have to worry about getting oil out of Iraq.

The U.S.A. has more oil than Saudi Arabia!

Continuing to rely on oil from the Middle East is a national security issue.

You think the liberals will ever see reality one of these days?

GOD BLESS AMERICA!

2007-09-16 03:41:10 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous

So as long as the imperialists are in the Pentagon and not the White House, you're cool?

2007-09-16 03:39:21 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous

left America at peace and left with gas at .86 a gallon.

Bush has DESTROYED every single one of those things just like SLUMLORD who sucks every drop of blood out of a property and then tosses it away like a piece of garbage.

I think it's time we put another CLINTON in office.

GB and his idiot supporters are all treasonous AND irreverent to America's future!

Ignore all Bush supporters!

2007-09-16 03:34:13 · 17 answers · asked by easy_game_101 2

Or just somebody telling the truth.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article2461214.ece

2007-09-16 03:25:44 · 27 answers · asked by Anonymous

I think it's his unwillingness or inability to consider the contrary view - he simply cannot and will not tolerate dissent. Unfortunately, those around him know it, and, as a result, never question his approach. They're reduced to being cheerleaders for his policies. Fortunately, we can see the light at the end of the tunnel. I just hope W can hold it together for the next year and not screw things up any more than he already has. Obviously, the next President is going to be left with one hell of a mess to clean up.

2007-09-16 03:23:16 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous

Would they still demand the the Electoral College be done away with?

2007-09-16 03:23:04 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous

but to allow her family to lead the charge for disgruntled family values. Why is it that Dems can't see that Guiliani is truly the middle of the road candidate that we need. He's probably gay and likes gun control. But yet were going along party lines to elect a real unaccomplished loser... PLEASE EXPLAIN!

2007-09-16 03:20:02 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-09-16 03:13:13 · 16 answers · asked by alphabetsoup2 5

Iraqis tell Washington to monitor its own progress
15 Sep 2007 11:46:56 GMT
Iraq in turmoil
BAGHDAD, Sept 15 (Reuters) - Iraqi lawmakers said on Saturday Washington was covering up for its own mistakes in Iraq by setting them artificial benchmarks to meet and then ticking them off like scorecards.

Frustrated by criticism from the U.S over their slow progress towards political goals meant to foster national reconciliation, Iraqi leaders said Washington would be better served by dxamining its own progress in the unpopular war.

"The Americans always try to pretend the responsibility for cleaning up this mess isn't theirs and tend to shift blame onto Iraq, Iran and Syria for everything that goes wrong," said veteran Kurdish lawmaker Mahmoud Othman.
"But they should stop this nonsense and admit that most of the accountability rests on their shoulders," he told Reuters.

I so agree.
And yourselves?
(Give YOUR reasoning withOUT criticizing my question OR that I agree.)

2007-09-16 03:10:07 · 6 answers · asked by rare2findd 6

...that people who disagree with the Administration or military leaders are being called "traitors?" What happened to "I disagree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it?"

2007-09-16 03:09:23 · 12 answers · asked by Elaine P...is for Poetry 7

Richard Mellon Scaife, billionaire media mogul who financed the never ending effort to bring down Bill Clinton for adultery, is getting divorced from his second wife, Ritchie. The reason? She caught him having an affair.

Not the first time either, since Scaife was seeing Ritchie for years in the 80s, while still married to his first wife.

In the past few years, Scaife has had his wife arrested for tresspassing at their house, and then had her arrested after as scuffle over ownership of their pet labrador retriever.

This is the guy who brought you The Arkansas Project, dolling out money to anyone who would alledge an affair with President Clinton. He was the financier of the "Great Conservative Conspiracy of which Hillary Clinton spoke.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07259/817950-85.stm

2007-09-16 03:05:04 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous

.....how come they don't understand why we hate ABORTION ????

Aren't they both about the same thing - the murder of innocent lives to an unjust cause?

And isn't whether or not the cause is "just" or "unjust" simply in the eye of the beholder?

2007-09-16 03:04:08 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous

[ “I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil,” he says. ]
"Alan Greenspan claims Iraq war was really for oil"
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article2461214.ece

The liberals were right all along!
Why didn't the Republicans ever get it?
Do you still want to continue spilling your blood and tax dollars for oil? Is your SUV more important?

2007-09-16 02:55:47 · 19 answers · asked by ideogenetic 7

Isn't this about as absurd as negotiating with Al Qaeda?

Al Qaeda needs to be defeated, not placated. Unfortunately, the current administration is not capable of doing that. The current adminstration has managed to grow Al Qaeda's resolve and deminish ours.

It's a sad time for America.

2007-09-16 02:37:42 · 10 answers · asked by Overt Operative 6