Politics - 4 December 2007

Basically your right to freedom of speech extends as far as you use it to hurt someone/incite violence. Should the same not be true for ownership of weapons? You can use weapons as long as you do not use it to hurt someone, then it is revoked and you go to jail. Also is the supposed "safety" which we get really worth giving up the civil liberty of gun ownership?

2007-12-04 07:38:33 · 16 answers · asked by mannzaformulaone 3

2007-12-04 07:35:53 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-12-04 07:27:41 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

He ridiculed Marshareff about being President AND being in control of the military about a month ago...But isn't that exactly what HE is? With the passage of the "Patriot" act, Military Commissions Act of 2006, and the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2007, at a drop of a hat Bush could declare Marshall law for ANY reason.

2007-12-04 07:27:13 · 34 answers · asked by Fedup Veteran 6

cabinet members, and a close personal adviser who served as president. No other candidate on either side offers that.
At this time in our history, is that type of experience more important than Senator Clinton's personal agenda? Can we really afford a State Dept or a Defense Dept that will require on the job training? Does our need for an experienced foreign policy team outweigh social issues at the moment?
Your thoughts?

2007-12-04 07:21:42 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous

I can only think of 3 liberals in Government off the top of my head and one of them is a Republican Presidential Candidate...

Nancy Pelosi (who is becoming less so by the minute)
Barney Frank
and Ron Paul

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are not liberals by any stretch of the imagination.

I'd estimate that only about 20% of their voters would call themselves liberal... I am one of them.

I support some far-left policies on environment, gay rights and religious freedom.
- I think gays and mormons should be able to marry any way they want.
- I believe that a 0 tolerance policy should be made on companies that exploit natural resources in America to fund their overseas businesses.

There is no position on Iraq that would be considered "liberal" by its correct definition.
Also - Socialism and Liberalism are different.
I subscribe to both (to some degree) but not all liberals do.

So why do Republicans say "liberal" when they just mean "democrat"?

2007-12-04 07:20:27 · 9 answers · asked by rabble rouser 6

and tried in our courts?

2007-12-04 07:16:29 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-12-04 07:15:24 · 19 answers · asked by realitycheck 3

What laws would be different?

Would it be any different from what the "religious right" seeks?

2007-12-04 07:07:52 · 10 answers · asked by Dastardly 6

Arrested for having a drink of alchol 1920 - 30's ish ?

Pschistrists diganose run away slave as a mental disorder and recomend whipping as a possible cure - America's deep south late 1700's not changed until late 1800's - 6 maybe 8 generations ago

Acused and found guilty of witchcraft is ----- who being in league with Satan kept a familiar spirt who taking the form a cat soured your nieghbor's milk - and therefore you are to be burned to death - Early to mid 1600's or so -


FBI policy statement - The danger that homosexuals pose to society is their inherent suicdal nature prefering tall buildings which causes havoc for citezen's 1970's (Flying ****'s were a problem in the 70's ?)

Jean's were somthing that was cheap and only poor people wore that - has turned into such a status symbol designer names compition that the first discription of jeans seems insane - impossible to concieve it was once a social shame to only be able to afford a pair of jeans

2007-12-04 07:07:49 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-12-04 07:00:23 · 5 answers · asked by Clarance C 2

Which candidate is most likely to start WWIII?

2007-12-04 06:52:27 · 25 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-12-04 06:51:15 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous

..He supports Hillary Clinton.
..Anybody have thoughts about this?

2007-12-04 06:48:33 · 15 answers · asked by carson123 6

Afganistan, Sudan, United Nations...et al...

2007-12-04 06:47:37 · 29 answers · asked by realitycheck 3

2007-12-04 06:47:30 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous

I have never met a conservative sociologist
or a liberal economist.
I must admit that i have been around hundreds of sociologists and only a few economists but it is the norm, i gather.

Economists look at the bottom line (money)
sociologists look at the happiness of the people.

Americans are rich and unhappy
judging by the suicide and depression rates

2007-12-04 06:47:28 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous

...she remembers people on the streets crying for "their president."

How many of you would shed a tear for President Bush? If not, how come?

2007-12-04 06:44:54 · 23 answers · asked by Alex G 6

2007-12-04 06:44:33 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-12-04 06:43:01 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

Which party would be angry if credit card companies had to use some form of fiduciary responsibility in evaluating customers?

2007-12-04 06:41:09 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous

Since both sexes of liberals wear the same clothes.

2007-12-04 06:39:14 · 10 answers · asked by NEO PIRATE 3

2007-12-04 06:39:05 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous

Most people have at least basic cable, so I'm wondering, how many people have actually sat and watched at least one round of questions on any Presidential debate since they've begun this year?
If you haven't, why not?
I haven't. Of course I don't have basic cable either. If I did, I still don't think I would. Questions aren't answered in a debate, either due to time constraints, or because no one wants to go out on a limb and put forth an answer that might make it seem like they have a stand on something. And as I understand it, the "real" questions weren't picked, only the ones that proved entertaining to the viewing audience.
What's your opinion of the debates? If you watched them were they a waste of time? If you didn't, do you feel you missed out on something relevant?

2007-12-04 06:37:13 · 6 answers · asked by Tonya in TX - Duck 6

I know he's disappointed, but the intelligence report shows without a doubt that Iran stopped its nuclear production in 2003. Who will be Bush's next victim?

2007-12-04 06:34:27 · 12 answers · asked by Not so looney afterall 5

2007-12-04 06:31:30 · 6 answers · asked by NEO PIRATE 3

why?

2007-12-04 06:25:59 · 47 answers · asked by Anonymous

As the presidential indescretions are in some way equal?
How are they able to do that with a straight face?
lol it just blows my mind how they turn marital indeiscretion into a worse world crisis than Iraq, afghan and possibly Iran/Russia.

2007-12-04 06:24:34 · 32 answers · asked by Anonymous

Personally, I am moderate on the issue, but for those who really get their panties in a twist, wouldn't it be a self-correcting problem? Liberals / lefties / progressives / democrats are far and away the primary customer base for abortion clinics. What other herd thins itself?
-
Put this together with the poofies who don't know what goes where and it has to be just a matter of time right?

2007-12-04 06:23:34 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous

until after the last state has finished voting. It wouldn't be hindering the press but clearing up a way for democracy to be more effective.

2007-12-04 06:21:01 · 2 answers · asked by Anonymous