Politics - 9 October 2007

2007-10-09 09:17:16 · 24 answers · asked by Zelda Hunter 7

Ron Paul is winning the black vote in New Hampshire,and is rising amongst Republicans,Independents and Democrats.

Is this an indication that voters are beginning to shift away from the same old formulaic candidates that have done such a wonderful job of putting the screws to the United States?

By the way,I'm not a Paul supporter,just amazed at how he's getting more popular the closer the primaries gat.

http://reason.com/blog/show/122900.html

2007-10-09 09:12:32 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20071009/pl_afp/usattacksintelligenceleak

Why would BushCo© leak the last Al Queida video and cut off a good intel source? Are they really with us or against us?

2007-10-09 09:11:37 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous

Not Clinton, hippies.

2007-10-09 09:05:39 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous

Ronald Reagan, conservative hero, got our country into multi- billion dollar debt. Bill Clinton balanced the budget. Bush has gotten us back into multi-trillion dollar debt. Which one of these guys was fiscally conservative?

2007-10-09 09:04:31 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous

My stances on Abortion and Capital Punishment are (in no particular order) considered Liberal for one and Conservative for the other. I have been called some pretty bad names in Answers. Care to take a shot at who calls me the most and worst names?

2007-10-09 09:03:27 · 27 answers · asked by KDCCPA 5

The purpose of Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week is as simple as it is critical: to confront the two Big Lies of the political left: that George Bush created the "war on terror" and that global warming is a greater danger to Americans than global jihad and Islamic supremacism.

Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week is a protest against the censorship that has come to America, and whose chief enforcer is the progressive left.

Get truth:
http://www.terrorismawareness.org/

Learn the truth about the Middle East and Israel:
http://www.terrorismawareness.org/what-really-happened/

Are you keeping appraised as to the reality?

2007-10-09 09:00:47 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous

Earlier I posted a question that had to do with Air America's newest group to bash . . . . CHRISTIANS .

Yeah , they have a new show called 'THEOCRACY ALERT' . A show featuring Atheists , and Christian Bashers . Quite frankly , I'm tired of this new-wave attack on Christians . And Air America making it sound like a WARNING / Ala Theocracy ALERT , is quite disgusting as well .

Wouldn't it be better for AMERICA and AMERICANS that the left-wing focus some of that anger on RADICAL ISLAMISTS ?
You know , the ones HELLBENT ON KILLING US ALL .

Just a thought .

2007-10-09 08:59:36 · 31 answers · asked by Anonymous

I doubt the "progressives" who placed Stalin, in power, didn't expect him to murder millions of people.

Before you jump on Soros and Michael Moore's bandwagon, maybe you should find out where they are taking you before you sign on.

Oh, you don't believe giving up your freedom, allowing the govt to re-distribute wealth, taking from the successful to give to people who don't try, etc will snowball into a dictatorship nightmare? Of course, trust in government will prevent that from happening. Right!

2007-10-09 08:57:33 · 13 answers · asked by ? 7

Amalgamation of america with the declaration of independence and the bill of rights took place when.Is it 1775 or 1875?

2007-10-09 08:56:30 · 7 answers · asked by christian i 1

I'm a conservative who knows that Bush is not conservative.

That being the case, why is it a favorite Liberal arguement to use Bush's spending as an excuse for Hillary's proposed expenditures and endless pandering?

Two wrongs don't make a right, do they?

2007-10-09 08:53:38 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous

Whenever criticism is leveled at Hillary's promised spending libs cite Bush's spending on the war, saying it is wrong.
Does the war spending make Hillary's promised spending "right"? Or, are libs just ducking a legitimate debate?

2007-10-09 08:47:22 · 29 answers · asked by Anonymous

Look... if bright lights, loud music and long sleepless nights is torture then most teenagers would be put in jail for what they have done to their parents... I get that... but when autopsies are telling us that a substantial number of people are dying of heart attacks, asphyxiation and blunt force trauma... wouldn't you agree it's time to look into our methods? Also.. one more thought. They admit the methods they use are the very same methods we use on our own soldiers (that volunteer) to prepare them if they are ever caught behind enemy lines.. and they justify it that we use it on our soldiers so it must not be torture... doesn't just the fact that our enemies would use it contradict this? So wouldn't you agree it's worth looking into our methods.. as opposed to just "assuming everything is fine"?

2007-10-09 08:46:51 · 12 answers · asked by pip 7

I'd be interested to meet them both just to see what they're like as people, not just heartful conservative supporters. I like their political, economic, and moral ideals they speak of. (Although, I enjoy listening to Limbaugh much more than Hannity, whose show I've practially stopped listening to because he repeats the same talking points over and over.)

Anyway, I would think Limbaugh would actually be nicer than Hannity, believe it or not. I've heard Hannity is a jerk once you get to know him. But, that's just hearsay, and maybe I'm wrong.

Thank you!

2007-10-09 08:45:17 · 8 answers · asked by BlanketyBlank 1

Why the name calling? What's so un-american about disagreeing with someone else's views?

2007-10-09 08:40:42 · 23 answers · asked by mstrywmn 7

It would appear that when Democrats want to rally their leftwing base, their sure-fire method is to throw them some "red meat" by bashing the troops.

This phenomenon is occuring more and more frequently, and I think it is despicable.

"Tricky" Dick Durbin compares the troops to Nazis, Soviet gulags and Pol Pot:
http://www.theneweditor.com/archiveSenDurbinComparesUSSoldierstoNazisKGBPolPot.html

"Don't Know Jack" Murtha falsely accuses Marines of murder:
http://www.usvetdsp.com/murtha_tls.htm

Hanoi John Kerry implies the troops are "dumb":
http://thehillchronicles.com/?p=155

The list goes on and on. This should serve as a reminder to all Americans who's side the Democrats are really on (i.e. not ours!)

2007-10-09 08:40:10 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous

Many of those who bash Fox News are constantly calling it a propaganda machine. I guess all the other networks are considered conveyers of truth. Please enlighten me.

2007-10-09 08:38:16 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous

Without Rove around to tell Bush when to shut up, his latent stupidity is evident every time he opens his mouth....like they say in Texas...'dumber than a box of rocks'

Link:http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20071009/pl_afp/usattacksintelligenceleak

2007-10-09 08:33:37 · 18 answers · asked by spay&neuter-all-republicans 3

2007-10-09 08:29:00 · 22 answers · asked by Freethinker 3

2007-10-09 08:27:23 · 28 answers · asked by Anonymous

Just where is Hillary getting the money for all of this from?

Could it be from John Q. Public?

2007-10-09 08:27:15 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-10-09 08:25:17 · 20 answers · asked by Fedup Veteran 6

Which of these issues is more worth talking about to you, healthcare accesibility for sick children or the mega-rich losing their tax cut?

2007-10-09 08:23:22 · 12 answers · asked by Earl Grey 5

2007-10-09 08:22:48 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous

There have been a number of articles recently that portray President Bush as someone who strayed from the path of true conservatism. Republicans, these articles say, need to return to their roots.

Well, I don't know what true conservatism is, but while doing research for my forthcoming book I spent a lot of time studying the history of the American political movement that calls itself conservatism - and Mr. Bush hasn't strayed from the path at all. On the contrary, he's the very model of a modern movement conservative.

For example, people claim to be shocked that Mr. Bush cut taxes while waging an expensive war. But Ronald Reagan also cut taxes while embarking on a huge military buildup.

People claim to be shocked by Mr. Bush's general fiscal irresponsibility. But conservative intellectuals, by their own account, abandoned fiscal responsibility 30 years ago. Here's how Irving Kristol, then the editor of The Public Interest, explained his embrace of supply-side economics in the 1970s: He had a "rather cavalier attitude toward the budget deficit and other monetary or fiscal problems" because "the task, as I saw it, was to create a new majority, which evidently would mean a conservative majority, which came to mean, in turn, a Republican majority - so political effectiveness was the priority, not the accounting deficiencies of government."

People claim to be shocked by the way the Bush administration outsourced key government functions to private contractors yet refused to exert effective oversight over these contractors, a process exemplified by the failed reconstruction of Iraq and the Blackwater affair.

But back in 1993, Jonathan Cohn, writing in The American Prospect, explained that "under Reagan and Bush, the ranks of public officials necessary to supervise contractors have been so thinned that the putative gains of contracting out have evaporated. Agencies have been left with the worst of both worlds - demoralized and disorganized public officials and unaccountable private contractors."

People claim to be shocked by the Bush administration's general incompetence. But disinterest in good government has long been a principle of modern conservatism. In "The Conscience of a Conservative," published in 1960, Barry Goldwater wrote that "I have little interest in streamlining government or making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size."

People claim to be shocked that the Bush Justice Department, making a mockery of the Constitution, issued a secret opinion authorizing torture despite instructions by Congress and the courts that the practice should stop. But remember Iran-Contra? The Reagan administration secretly sold weapons to Iran, violating a legal embargo, and used the proceeds to support the Nicaraguan contras, defying an explicit Congressional ban on such support.

Oh, and if you think Iran-Contra was a rogue operation, rather than something done with the full knowledge and approval of people at the top - who were then protected by a careful cover-up, including convenient presidential pardons - I've got a letter from Niger you might want to buy.

People claim to be shocked at the Bush administration's efforts to disenfranchise minority groups, under the pretense of combating voting fraud. But Reagan opposed the Voting Rights Act, and as late as 1980 he described it as "humiliating to the South."

People claim to be shocked at the Bush administration's attempts - which, for a time, were all too successful - to intimidate the press. But this administration's media tactics, and to a large extent the people implementing those tactics, come straight out of the Nixon administration. Dick Cheney wanted to search Seymour Hersh's apartment, not last week, but in 1975. Roger Ailes, the president of Fox News, was Nixon's media adviser.

People claim to be shocked at the Bush administration's attempts to equate dissent with treason. But Goldwater - who, like Reagan, has been reinvented as an icon of conservative purity but was a much less attractive figure in real life - staunchly supported Joseph McCarthy, and was one of only 22 senators who voted against a motion censuring the demagogue.

Above all, people claim to be shocked by the Bush administration's authoritarianism, its disdain for the rule of law. But a full half-century has passed since The National Review proclaimed that "the White community in the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail," and dismissed as irrelevant objections that might be raised after "consulting a catalogue of the rights of American citizens, born Equal" - presumably a reference to the document known as the Constitution of the United States.

Now, as they survey the wreckage of their cause, conservatives may ask themselves: "Well, how did we get here?" They may tell themselves: "This is not my beautiful Right." They may ask themselves: "My God, what have we done?"

But their movement is the same as it ever was. And Mr. Bush is movement conservatism's true, loyal heir.

2007-10-09 08:07:44 · 15 answers · asked by amazed we've survived this l 4

My family can't go a couple of days without food on 'em

2007-10-09 07:56:29 · 15 answers · asked by scottanthonydavis 4

2007-10-09 07:56:05 · 5 answers · asked by rockstarnomad 2

http://www.yahoo.com/s/701633

Why can't they control their leaks ?...What's worse is they keep denying it ! Then when the leak is proven, they just stonewall some more... It is getting seriously ridiculous now.

It's almost like they don't want to capture Bin Laden...

2007-10-09 07:55:02 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous

Karl Marx is like the Nostradomus of political predictions.

In laymen's terms, Marx believed that a capitalistic society would eventually corrupt and move towards socialism with the end result being communism.

The middle class is dwindling -- few go to the rich side while majority go to the poor side.
Billary "knows" what's best for each individual of a free society.
She wants to make everyone have healthcare and 401k's.

How are the Democrats not seeing this? How does a supporter of Billary not see this?

2007-10-09 07:50:28 · 22 answers · asked by Glen B 6

How many times how we heard the headline, "violence in Iraq increases..." or "American deaths increase for the four straight week..."
Now we see that the violence in Iraq is decreasing the body count dropping and the media in nowhere. I watch NBC nightly news and they have to set aside a special time each week for the "lighter side of the news."

How can we make decisions on anything if we only see the fantastic and the outrageous? Should the good news continue to be underground? I understand that there will be people that will ignore good news when it doesn't fit their agenda but at least we all would hear about it.

We really need to get the whole picture and our media has failed us.

2007-10-09 07:44:20 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous