Ding Ding Ding--We have a winner. You may be Captain Obvious to me, and many others, but there are some that still don't believe. Pity them. Pity halfshaft.
2006-12-06 16:49:24
·
answer #1
·
answered by scottyurb 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Um, have you paid any attention outside the last 6 years or so? President Clinton cut budgets, hacked the total number of active duty Soldiers/Sailors/Marines and killed a number of programs. It certainly didn't dominate anything while he was in office. He did fight to keep the VM-22 Osprey going though, since a few people kept trying to kill that. Different people, political groups and political climates are more interested and conducive to spending different amounts on the military and its components, out growths and projects. I would recommend you do some research and read your history.
2006-12-06 16:51:12
·
answer #2
·
answered by DJL2 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes & No. As a capitalist society, you could say that economics should have a majore influence on US policies. However, a significant percentage of the current influence is not legal or moral.
So, while it should ... as long as that influence is corrupt ... it shouldn't.
2006-12-06 16:50:45
·
answer #3
·
answered by bionicbookworm 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Absolutely not!!!!
And further more, there is absolutely ZERO evidence that global warming is taking place.
And by the way, once we have established democracy in Iraq, it will be a beacon of stability and peace to the entire Middle East.
And I would like to destroy one other myth while I am at it:
Big money used to "influence" elected politicians who make decisions that affect millions of citizens is in NO WAY dangerous to democracy.
2006-12-06 16:55:09
·
answer #4
·
answered by halfshaft 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
Of course it does, who do you think runs ( owns ) the political system.
2006-12-06 16:52:42
·
answer #5
·
answered by Rock Ogre 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
As simple as you can get, the president doesn't run this country, the corporations do....
2006-12-06 16:55:28
·
answer #6
·
answered by doman1526 1
·
0⤊
0⤋