Politics - 22 October 2007

2007-10-22 05:40:06 · 19 answers · asked by sally sue 6

feel it might infringe on their rights and privacy.... yet... they are all willing to sign up for Universal Health Care and hand the government all of their medical history? Correct me if I am wrong... but don't people value the whole doctor/patient confidentiality thing anymore? Psychiatric counseling falls under health care too.... now the government gets to know EVERYTHING about someone with any type of issue. And libs can't wait to sign up! What is up with that?

2007-10-22 05:39:47 · 20 answers · asked by That Guy 5

So others can spend all day thinking up ways to bash them? OH YEAH, they do have several books out, and guess what? Nobody spends all day reading their books figuring out ways to bash them. So who's the bigger people?

2007-10-22 05:33:55 · 16 answers · asked by jrldsmith 4

"Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, one of the main architects for the war in Iraq, admitted for the first time that Iraq had nothing to do with the September 11 terrorist attacks, contradicting public statements made by senior White House and Pentagon officials whose attempt to link Saddam Hussein and the terrorist organization Al-Qaeda was cited by the Bush administration as one of the main reasons for launching a preemptive strike in March against Iraq."

What are your thoughts?

2007-10-22 05:32:54 · 31 answers · asked by Liberal City 6

I didn't either until Bush leaked it to the press for political reasons...

2007-10-22 05:28:29 · 31 answers · asked by The President 3

On video camera, he told reporters the buildings were coming down before they did.

2007-10-22 05:23:54 · 17 answers · asked by Waas up 5

When in fact I am agnostic.

2007-10-22 05:23:29 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-10-22 05:18:51 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous

Even the guests the right wing talkies bring on their shows are starting to admit there is anthropogenic GW. Now they have switched their tune to saying "ya, humans are doing it but there's nothing anyone can do about it". I even heard a guy on Glenn Beck the other day who said GW would be good for the economy.

At what point will people cave in?

People constantly cite what they think are errors in Al Gore's movie, yet they ignore the fact that the overall message of the movie, that anthropogenic GW is happening, was not in dispute. What is it with republicans and their obsession with bashing science?

2007-10-22 05:16:26 · 22 answers · asked by Earl Grey 5

Honestly, they sound down right silly, like talking with a person unaware of advances in the sciences the last 100 years...

2007-10-22 05:13:09 · 29 answers · asked by alphabetsoup2 5

“On CNN the other night Anderson Cooper was worrying about the homicide rate in Philadelphia. The City of Brotherly Love is the murder capital of the nation, and CNN had dispatched a reporter to interview the grieving mother of a young black boy killed while riding his bicycle in the street. Apparently, a couple of cars had got backed up behind him, and an impatient passenger in one of them pulled out a gun and shot the kid. Anderson Cooper then went to commercials and, when he returned, introduced a report on how easy it is to buy guns in Philadelphia and how local politicians are reluctant to do anything about it. This is, again, an argument only the expert class could make. In the 1990s, the number of guns in America went up by 40 million, but the murder rate fell dramatically. If firearms availability were the determining factor, Vermont and Switzerland would have high murder rates. Yet in Montpelier or Geneva the solution to a boy carelessly bicycling in front of you down a city street when you’re in a hurry is not to grab your gun and blow him away. It’s the culture, not the technology.” —Mark Steyn

2007-10-22 05:08:47 · 40 answers · asked by Jasmine 2

I thought I had seen it all when it comes to politician's duplicity -but this EU constitution/treaty fiddle really takes the cake!
Brown and cohorts cannot really think we are all silly enough to believe that by dropping a few unimportant details and changing the name, the constitution is suddenly transformed into a bit of EU housekeeping.
At least Blair was clever enough to wait until the French and Dutch had rejected it so he never had to face the electorate.
Brown is either a fool or a liar, and I don't think he is a fool.
It's bad enough for us, but how must the French and Dutch feel?
They were actually asked and said NO. Now they see the same nonsense being served up again - and their politicians are about to sign it! This time WITHOUT asking them.
The EU sometimes complains that it's unpopular with the people - "they just don't understand all the great things we do for them" and similar self serving rubbish.
Can't think why, can you?

2007-10-22 05:08:44 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

What is free about it, just that you don't have to pay money for a quick fix, getting second-rate care?
Do most people understand the REAL price in Universal Health-Care? Your freedom to choose?
My good friend is English, her daughter has illnesses, yet she waits in at least a 3 week line to be seen by ANY doctor, never the same one, either. No, she doesn't pay anything, but her daughter remains sick. Her son has had a hole in his heart since birth, and constantly in and out to hospital, and seeing doctors. He remains unhealthy, and always seen by different doctors. Their docs are so mixed-up, paper work a mess, jammed up to the hilt. Is this the kind of Health-Care you want for your children?
My other English friend, and his two kids didn't get to see a dentist for two years because the system is so jammed.
Do you want this kind of Dentistry controlled by your government for your kids? What about for yourself?

2007-10-22 05:06:07 · 36 answers · asked by xenypoo 7

Is abortion an issue of politics (such as overpopulation, birth-control, exercising women's rights, in the case of a rape, etc.) or is it an issue of the heart (as in, are you conscious of the consequences of your actions, should you have an abortion)?

2007-10-22 05:03:02 · 11 answers · asked by Edward Inkling 2

Serious question:if ,as the Libs and dems say,the vast majority of Americans are opposed to the war,where are the marches etc such as those we had in the 60's?
Are they basing thier actions and political stance on skewed polls?

2007-10-22 05:02:37 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous

Is it right for conservative republicans to force their values on the rest of us? I say no!!!

2007-10-22 04:42:59 · 24 answers · asked by Anonymous

Just wondering because if cons were to acknowledge gravity, it would put to question many of their beliefs about the world.

2007-10-22 04:40:41 · 16 answers · asked by The President 3

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=58248

"After unceremoniously removing all of its Christmas trees in the middle of the night last year, the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport this season will dispense with any religious symbols and just celebrate "winter."

Hmm, so why is it that the so called "secular progressives" (They're really secular oppresives) can attack Christmas, but not attack the Muslim foot baths?

This just goes to show you that there is a war on Christianity. (Funded and supported by the liberals such as the Aclu F.Y.I.)

GOD BLESS AMERICA!

2007-10-22 04:38:44 · 39 answers · asked by Anonymous

"Clinton’s treatment of Socks cuts to the heart of the questions about her candidacy. Is she too cold and calculating to win the presidency?"

2007-10-22 04:37:15 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous

The MAJORITY of Americans, are still pro-choice. Don't you realize that if you try to make abortion a wedge issue, your going to lose the presidential election badly ?

Even Bush was smart enough to never talk about abortion until AFTER he was elected....

2007-10-22 04:36:37 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous

9 ‘These you may eat of all that are in the water: whatever in the water has fins and scales, whether in the seas or in the rivers—that you may eat. 10 But all in the seas or in the rivers that do not have fins and scales, all that move in the water or any living thing which is in the water, they are an abomination to you. 11 They shall be an abomination to you; you shall not eat their flesh, but you shall regard their carcasses as an abomination. 12 Whatever in the water does not have fins or scales—that shall be an abomination to you.

Leviticus 11:9-12 (New King James Version)

--

Well there be a Constitutional Amendment to ban the sale of Shirmp and Lobster and Clam Chowder, for it is abomination to the lord their god?

2007-10-22 04:32:32 · 31 answers · asked by Spartacus 3

Hussein had a big mouth, for sure, and yes, following the Iran Iraq war, he gassed 1,500 Kurds, but, um, how DOES this make sense, help me understand this one...

2007-10-22 04:31:13 · 31 answers · asked by alphabetsoup2 5

... winner since Rush and OReilly put so much pressure on the editors to at least mention this brave soldier somewhere in their paper?

Is it traumatic for the editors to have to print the article?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/22/us/22medal.html?em&ex=1193198400&en=539cfc9168609d6a&ei=5087%0A

2007-10-22 04:21:30 · 13 answers · asked by junglejoe 2

In other words, I might disagree with my President on the war and how its going, but I keep my mouth shut and don't go on TV and start bashing the Ottoman empire for something that happened 100 years ago,

I for one just am joe q citizen and will probably go on yahoo answers and say my little stupid opinions and probably fight with pnac and ret roch cop and them every day, but no one from other countries is going to see it or care what i have to say,

now, when elected officials start doing stupid things like this, it hurts our foreign policy and our national interest and puts us troops in harms way

agree or disagree, politics stops at the waters edge (as it applies to elected officials)

2007-10-22 04:19:17 · 9 answers · asked by Spartacus 3

I don't expect they can be as specific as Republicans, but let's try.

-They don't like SS reform and are against private accounts. They killed it last year, but they expect to keep the vigil against an ownership society until the system runs out of money.
-They dislike the President’s policy in Iraq, but they can’t agree what to do differently.
-They like Kyoto. They would not pass the treaty, but they would talk about it more, ironically creating even more hot air.
-They like nationalized health care in general, but not any of the details.
-They think 4.7% unemployment is too high, but they have no plan to do anything about it, a wise strategy since unemployment below even 5% is hard to sustain.
-They oppose Arabs investing in American infrastructure, but oppose profiling in any other way.
-They all hate President Bush. Howard Dean hates all Republicans.

Any Dems want to be more specific or make corrections? What is it that most Dems favor of that most Republicans are against? In other words, why should anyone follow the Democratic leadership for any reason other than a vague sense of curiosity about where such people might wander?

2007-10-22 04:18:05 · 14 answers · asked by The Slick Meister 2

2007-10-22 04:14:57 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

I gotta go with Coulter.

2007-10-22 04:06:06 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous

can I become President? The Republicans in the dabate last night seem to think so...my policy is...Hillary sucks.

2007-10-22 04:03:27 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous

Yes you are.

OR, you haven't needed healthcare in a long time.

Ask anyone who practices medicine, any nurse and above all, any patient and you shall learn.

There WILL be universal healthcare in the US soon because there is no choice.

2007-10-22 04:01:58 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous

NO GUNS HERE

what are the chances of their homes not getting robbed?

2007-10-22 03:55:49 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous