English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Politics - 11 November 2007

[Selected]: All categories Politics & Government Politics

Is this the type of ethics you can expect from Hillary Clinton if elected?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,310316,00.html

2007-11-11 04:15:05 · 12 answers · asked by Johnny D 2

In other words do the people from Cedar Rapids, Iowa and people from Los Angeles, California have a different system of valuing life in America and how they want the world to see America?

2007-11-11 04:04:57 · 9 answers · asked by Kelly B 4

Bill Clinton got oral sex they try to impeach him ... George Bush lies to the american people and kills thousands of people and he does not get impeached ... i dont understand how americans could reelect him anyways ... oh yeah the high oil prices next he will say let me drill in Alaska and oil and gas prices will go down ... in my opinion he is a evil man

2007-11-11 03:58:28 · 28 answers · asked by richc452002 1

Dep. Dir. of Natl. Security, Donald Kerr told a congressional committee that Americans will have to get used to the idea that their right to privacy simply isn't going to be supported by 'their' government anymore. The idea of anonymity has gone the way of the buffalo. Nothing you do or say is beyond the reach of government. I always thought the government workd for us.....wadda' 'ya think?

2007-11-11 03:35:01 · 11 answers · asked by Noah H 7

Bring it on!

2007-11-11 03:28:55 · 18 answers · asked by The prophet of DOOM 5

2007-11-11 03:08:10 · 15 answers · asked by . 5

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/016797.html

Here's a video from Fox News of them calling for acts of terrorism against Iran. Clearly, if we want to get serious in our "War against Terrorism," we need to arrest those who call for acts of terrorism, including these people at Fox News. If the US did as they ask that we do, then we'd be a state sponsor of terrorism and no better than we accuse the Iranians of being.

2007-11-11 03:01:51 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous

Which would you choose for them or hope for them:

1. That they change their minds and realize it's a woman's right to choose and support the Pro-Choice position. (ie "switch sides")

2. Strip them of their right to free speech about their position on reproductive rights. meaning allowing them to be Anti-Choice, but as long as they keep it to themselves.

3. That they do time in prison until they switch their position, Lengthy sentences for Anti-Choice activists, regardless if they change their position and the Death penality for some of the hardcore Anti-Choicers/Pro-Lifers

2007-11-11 02:47:42 · 16 answers · asked by InTROLLigent 3

I am from the north of Ireland, but visit US often, and it seems to me Bush has severely harmed your nation internally and in its standing in the world.

2007-11-11 02:45:17 · 34 answers · asked by gortamor 4

Why would a government mandated solution ever be cheaper or more effective than a market-based approach?

The best answer will not mention:
- a "right" to health care
- the need for government involvement to counteract greedy insurance companies
- costs increasing so quickly only the government can pay for it

2007-11-11 02:43:40 · 13 answers · asked by WJ 7

The American people need to take a look at Duncan Hunter as the only true Conservative candidate, Duncan Hunter has the experience, he wants to secure our borders, he wants to send back the illegals who are here and force them to come legally, He is in favor of tax incentives for companies who hire Americans, he wants to bring back the manufacturers who have opted to move to other countries in an effort to get away from the Unions.

2007-11-11 02:39:21 · 10 answers · asked by DJR 2

She was in Iowa yesterday and her handlers were caught giving out lists of questions that audience members SHOULD ask! What a scam! Does anyone really want a President that will dictate what can or can't be asked of them???

2007-11-11 02:25:54 · 23 answers · asked by Anonymous

Yes, I'm talking about their support for the independent socialist Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT).

Supposed Conservatives have been opposing the most pro-market member of Congress, Ron Paul, and supporting one of the most anti-market members of Congress, Joe Lieberman.

Maybe this provides some insight as to why Rudy Giuliani (a staunch advocate of gun control) is currently leading the "scientific" polls of 2004 Republican Primary voters.

What exactly is so conservative about these anti-gun, pro-war, anti-market politicians that the supposed "conservatives" have been supporting? Isn't conservatism supposed to be about limited government, protecting our country (and therefore going after those who attack us and protecting our borders, not overthrowing the governments of 3rd world countries that pose no threat to us), and free markets? If so, why are "conservatives" supporting Lieberman and Giuliani and opposing people like Ron Paul?

2007-11-11 02:12:49 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous

The nation of X land decides that Bush has invaded one to many places and a regime change is needed

70 % or better of the buildings are bombed and unsafe

Troops are kicking in your door looking for weapons

The water is undrinkable and there is little to no food

Uranium shells are all over the place and their military is telling you it is safe while they wear protectice masks and gear

But it is all to get you away from that evil President Bush who they are busy trying in a court for war crimes

your convinced it is a Kangraroo court and they find him guilty

Every time you fight back the news reports crazed insurgent when they report it at all

Are you ok with this set up ?

2007-11-11 02:04:22 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous

I'd like to know how you would improve things if you could.

2007-11-11 02:00:52 · 16 answers · asked by Incognito 7

SIOUX CITY, Iowa — Democratic presidential frontrunner Hillary Clinton’s campaign admitted Friday that it planted a global warming question in Newton, Iowa, Tuesday during a town hall meeting to discuss clean energy.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,310316,00.html

2007-11-11 01:50:26 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous

It seems ironic to me that American liberals, a group usually advertising how tolerant they are of differing views, never seem to cease in their venomous hateful name-calling of seemingly anyone who disagrees with them on matters of politics or spirituality. Republicans and conservatives aren't simply people with a different view on politics. Christians aren't simply people with a different view on spirituality. They are all evil greedy hateful X Y Z [insert more insults here]. Everywhere you look where these issues come up, whether it's a forum like this, an editorial page, a TV show, you will see behavior like this which seems to be perfectly ok to these people who otherwise would want someone fired, sued, and smeared for treating people this way if the victim was a minority.

2007-11-11 01:48:57 · 32 answers · asked by Anonymous

Answer with reference to any one or all three of the following countries:

USA
UK
INDIA


Thanks

2007-11-11 01:46:14 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous

Will anyone care about America enough to educate yourself about the Clintons, Sandy Berger,Vince Foster, Jim Mc Dougal, Susan Mc Dougal, Whitewater, Filegate, Travel Gate, Monica Lewinski, Linda Tripp, Paula Jones, Jennifer Flowers, Kathleen Willy, Can anyone ignore the most corrupt people to have entered politics in the history of the good old USA.

2007-11-11 01:44:07 · 3 answers · asked by DJR 2

The President
Congress
The people

2007-11-11 01:25:29 · 25 answers · asked by Anonymous

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/02/20030207-10.html

2007-11-11 01:18:45 · 9 answers · asked by Duminos 2

fedest.com, questions and answers