Politics - 26 October 2007

2007-10-26 10:23:31 · 8 answers · asked by James T 3

that every one connected to him is being targeted by congress?
His administration (Attorney Generals, contractors like black water, his sectaries of war) are going down in flames or being investigated, but not him nor Cheney.

What do you think about the idea of the Democrats removing those around him, and not him directly?

I understand the political move of not attacking him directly but
attacking those he is allied with, but why they not doing so directly?

2007-10-26 10:18:27 · 19 answers · asked by PeguinBackPacker 5

2007-10-26 10:17:38 · 21 answers · asked by a person of interest 5

Here's my idea. We conduct the same elections that we already have in place, but the presidential election will actually determine which candidate will get which state. There'll be one president for the red states, and one president for the blues states. And, every 4 years, each state will have the option to switch sides if they so choose. What do you think?

2007-10-26 09:57:11 · 29 answers · asked by teenhamodic 4

Does it bother you that Gore's film cannot be shown in UK schools without the teacher first telling their students that 11 statements made by Gore's are either false or, unproven? and the teachers must preface the film by informing the students that it is largely a political piece?

but, here in our nation, the film is presented as though it is based upon proven facts and the students are not made aware of Gore's political agenda?

2007-10-26 09:48:41 · 18 answers · asked by wider scope 7

Specifically gay marriage.

2007-10-26 09:45:32 · 32 answers · asked by Liberal City 6

http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2007/10/fema-stages-fak.html

FEMA employees posed as press asking questions of the FEMA asst director. They tried to pass it off as a real press conference. Typical or what?

2007-10-26 09:42:59 · 10 answers · asked by Dastardly 6

And please don't make this a question about Edwards.

Do you agree with the statement and do you think this would be good/bad for the country?

2007-10-26 09:39:48 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous

If so, what makes you support a party whose platform doesn't completely square with your views?

2007-10-26 09:37:54 · 14 answers · asked by tangerine 7

I personally think she would have ended up an average lawyer that no one had ever heard of,definitely not a Senator or possible Presidential Contender.

2007-10-26 09:30:44 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous

What have they done for America???

They are smart? then we should elect a Nobel Prize winner.
They have plans? gee... I have plans too.

Governor Richardson is the most experienced but he will never win.... Sad.

Liberals vote with their EMOTION not Brain.

2007-10-26 09:28:29 · 9 answers · asked by Samm 6

same with conservatives!! you can be a liberal republican and a conservatice democrat.

2007-10-26 09:24:24 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-10-26 09:22:21 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

I hear a lot about how some people want to ban gay marriage. Please pardon my ignorance but I was under the impression that two people of the same gender marrying has been illegal in every state for as long as the USA has existed.

If that is true how can people be trying to ban it?

Isn't that like saying people who are against the legalization of certain drugs are trying to "ban" those drugs?

This makes no sense to me.

2007-10-26 09:21:42 · 24 answers · asked by Brian 7

Fred Phelps is not exactly liberal.

..let’s face it, an awful lot of Republicans are protestors, and some of them even spit on Vietnam Vets for protesting (link)

http://www.williambowles.info/gispecial/2005/gi_3C36A.pdf

2007-10-26 09:19:28 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-10-26 09:12:59 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous

Combined.

2007-10-26 09:05:35 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-10-26 09:04:08 · 10 answers · asked by matias7x3 1

2007-10-26 08:54:24 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous

I mean, he let them FILM him in front of that graph claiming that CO2 causes global warming. He didn't even have the brains to HIRE someone with a brain to point out that the graph showed temperature increases PRECEEDING CO2 increases throughout history. Is he just too dumb to realize we're not that dumb?
-
I really can't think of a public figure who's a bigger dork. Anyone?

2007-10-26 08:51:39 · 24 answers · asked by Anonymous

And why?

2007-10-26 08:51:14 · 17 answers · asked by alex_from_sf 4

And why are so many professors liberals? Is it a liberal conspiracy? Or is there something about gaining knowledge that makes people more liberal?

2007-10-26 08:43:53 · 38 answers · asked by Earl Grey 5

Let me know what you think!!
http://www.migrationpolicy.org/pubs/FS16_USImmigration_051807.pdf

2007-10-26 08:39:40 · 1 answers · asked by nothing 5

last week pkk terrorists killed 13 soldiers.also they call "terrorist" some iraqi people who trying to defense their own country. ( some people could be but not all of them).

2007-10-26 08:39:31 · 4 answers · asked by memphis44 2

2007-10-26 08:31:42 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous

I think there bad *** some of my friends diss them what do you think?

2007-10-26 08:30:08 · 11 answers · asked by jj 1

From rape, sexual harassment, and molestation, by the first Gentleman?
Who will have the authority to arrest him? The first family is protected by the Secret Service, but isn't that part of the Justice Department headed by a political appointee? Jamie Gorelick or Janet Reno type that has always run interference for the Clintons, in fact, Gorelick was the fix on the 9-11 commission. LOL in getting justice inside the White House if Clinton is elected!

2007-10-26 08:29:13 · 17 answers · asked by plezurgui 6

As 77 million members of the Baby Boom generation begin to retire, America is about to experience one of the most dramatic economic, sociological and demographic changes in its history. The institutions we have relied upon in the past are completely unprepared for what lies ahead.

Politicians, the national news media and the general public have become increasingly aware that our federal entitlement programs are about to be swamped. Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid have made trillions of dollars of explicit and implicit unfunded promises. In fact, by 2030 (about the midpoint of the baby boomers' retirement years), we will have to double every tax rate or cut every benefit in half.

But our problems do not end there. Federal, state and local governments have made $5 trillion in promises (many of which are unfunded) to civil service workers. Corporate America owes about $450 billion in pension promises and $350 billion in post-retirement health care promises that are also unfunded.

To make matters worse, the instruments we have created to help individuals save for their own retirement - principally through 401(k) accounts — are also not working well. In general, people are not saving enough, and they are not prudently investing the funds they do save.

Behind our inadequate institutions are inadequate public policies. For example:

* On balance, the tax law encourages current consumption, but discourages saving for consumption during retirement.
* Even more important, the tax law encourages overconsumption of health care before retirement, but discourages saving for what are likely to be greater health needs later in life.
* The American answer to the European-style welfare state has traditionally been employer-provided benefits. Yet:
* Unwise public policies are encouraging large employers to abandon pension and post-retirement health care promises made to their employees.
* Other policies are preventing employers from helping employees make their own provision for income and health care during the retirement years.
* The policies that are most inadequate for the baby boomers' retirement years are those affecting early retirees. In general:
* People who retire early will find that their opportunities to save are much more restricted than those available to people still in the workforce.
* They will find that health insurance is not only more costly when purchased by individuals, but the insurance (unlike insurance obtained at work) must be purchased with after-tax dollars.
* Once they begin drawing Social Security, they will discover that if they earn additional income, say by working part-time, they will face draconian effective tax rates - taking as much as two-thirds of what they earn.
* And even if they don't work for wages, they will discover that the tax rates on their pension income and IRA withdrawals are much higher than the rates paid by younger taxpayers at the same income level.

2007-10-26 08:28:16 · 10 answers · asked by mission_viejo_california 2

What High Crimes or Misdemeanors has he presented?

Do you realize impeachment doesn't mean removal from office.
Remember Clinton was impeached?

2007-10-26 08:22:34 · 34 answers · asked by Moody Red 6

NO WIKIPEDIA ANSWERS, PLEASE (i can look that up myself) - maybe i ditched history class that day, but i don't recall learning about that. was just reading a book that kind of mentions it in passing.
okay - let's commence with the enlightenment, already!

2007-10-26 08:18:56 · 3 answers · asked by Anonymous