2006-11-13 02:01:33 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Yeahhhhhhhhhhhaaa! Enough! One way to keep from making policy and establish procedures that could solve problem and make the world a safe and better place to life.......is to argue endlessly about ideology.
Democracy asks that you compromise and respect the process of decision making.
2006-11-13 02:12:13 · answer #1 · answered by copestir 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
nicely, blaming Bush, will really very last see you later, then whats he going to do ? Bush is attentive to, and that is the reason i'm particular that he's not chatting with every person. If I were Bush, i does not both. All of you persons that imagine the massive O is going that could also help you, better bypass out and purchase a prayer rug. replace, its what you've been waiting for. draw close on on your hat, as its coming
2016-11-23 19:27:10 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely
2006-11-13 02:08:15 · answer #3 · answered by E 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
One of the first acts of intentionally divisive politics was the unconstitutional Congressional act violating the endorsement of religion clause of the first amendment by replacing the words "E Pluribus Unum" with "In God We Trust" on our currency and placing the words "Under God" in our pledge of allegiance in 1957.
"E Pluribus Unum" Latin for "From Many, One".
This motto was created by our founding fathers as a symbol of our unity and strength. We haven't always been that good about expressing those ideals. We've had shameful periods of discrimination, chauvinism, and bigotry. One such time was the McCarthy era, the post World War II time of communist and atheist paranoia. That period of fear led to the inclusion of "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance and "In God We Trust" as our national motto. Those two acts had the effect of making non-religious people second-class citizens, as is evidenced by George H. W. Bush's statement that he doesn't consider atheists to be citizens nor patriots.
2006-11-13 02:13:37 · answer #4 · answered by sprcpt 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Would it be better to have everyone agree on every issue? The democratic process requires political discourse. Without it, you might as well live under a dictatorship.
2006-11-13 02:09:39 · answer #5 · answered by Hemingway 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Yes!
2006-11-13 02:19:12 · answer #6 · answered by The Idealist 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes.
2006-11-13 02:07:50 · answer #7 · answered by iwasnotanazipolka 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
America. This is you life.
2006-11-13 02:15:36 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I accept it as inevitable.
2006-11-13 02:26:57 · answer #9 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
There is a lot of discord.
2006-11-13 02:10:10 · answer #10 · answered by kman1830 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋