2007-09-29 10:27:09 · 12 answers · asked by ♥FABULOUS♥ 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
it's all a matter of money distribution...how much can they fanagle for their state wheather they need it or not...
Alaska was getting millions to build a bridge for joining two pieces of land for approximately what.. like 50 people...
it recently was canceled...what crap...what a waste of money but everyone wants their bite for their state....and the politicians come up with all these bs causes & needs for that much more they need for theisr state.....crooked just crooked.
2007-09-29 10:36:11 · answer #1 · answered by gr8ful_one 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I don't know,
Why was the democratic party against stem cell research, against gay marriage and for war , when Bill Clinton was president ?
1.Since Clinton never provided federal funding for stem cell research.
2. Since Clinton signed the only anti gay federal law ever passed ( the defense of marriage act ) , not to mention that EVERY current democratic presidential candidate has publicly came out AGAINST gay marriage.
3. Since the last Democratic president attacked/invaded 6 countries on 4 separate continents, all without congressional or UN approval.
On the other hand.
1.Since Bush is the only president to provide federal funding for stem cell research.
2. Since Bush has never signed any anti gay law, nor any law that would prevent gay marriages.
3. Since Bush has had congressional approval, everytime he has used the US military.
You really shouldn't pick on the Democrats this way,
Your making them look bad.
2007-09-29 15:51:02 · answer #2 · answered by jeeper_peeper321 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I am a democrat for both those things.
I understand why they are against them.
1) They are NOT against all stem cell research, just the kind that involves harvesting them from aborted fetuses. They fear (I share that fear, as would any sane person) the ethical slide into body harvesting that even now goes on in China.
2) gay marriage is based on a choice (the research trying to prove being gay is genetic fell through). It would also involve either forcing businesses to share marriage benefits equally, force those same businesses to go out of business, or to drop benefits to stay into business. Many of them want it to happen but SLOWLY, so as not to wipe out millions of small businesses. Even if allowed in one state, all other states are then FORCED to acknowledge that marriage, hence the desire to have a federal ban on it. The economic results of this decision could devastate our country.
I understand, but I disagree with these views.
Why is it hard for you to understand?
Having come from a family that escaped Islam in the 1950s, we've been expecting this war for decades. I'm surprised the U.S. caught on before a nuclear blast hit it.
2007-09-29 10:40:51 · answer #3 · answered by mckenziecalhoun 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
They love their goats and Nanny States maybe? Truth is after you cross one theshold because one person is more viable than another where do you draw the line? Should pedophiles be able to have consensual sex with minor children and no repercussions? War for a reason and abotion or stem cell research is an entirely different ball of wax.
2007-09-29 10:40:42 · answer #4 · answered by Stormchaser 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
"Why are some politicians against stem cell research"
Most opponents are against embryonic stem cell research. At the same time they want to foster umbillicla stem cell research, and adult stem cell research. Don't oversimplify an argument.
2007-09-29 10:55:00 · answer #5 · answered by 29 characters to work with...... 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Which war? We are fighting two. If you are referring to Iraq, it's because they understand what is truly at stake -- the world's economy. The rest are just imaginary "issues". Flashpoints or topics of discussion that ultimately carry no weight or bearing other than to get the people talking and excited. They, are what keep the spin doctors employed.
2007-09-29 10:36:21 · answer #6 · answered by Doc 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Because the people who ARE for those things are more concerned with their personal little agendas rather than issues that affect the entire country.
2007-09-29 10:59:49 · answer #7 · answered by kathy_is_a_nurse 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think you were looking along the lines of morality and the hypocrasy of supporting war which is immoral weren't you?
2007-09-29 10:58:22 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes.
Life gets soooo complicated.
Much too complex for little Democrats to understand.
2007-09-29 10:35:18 · answer #9 · answered by wolf 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Because they're different issues that have nothing to do with one another.
2007-09-29 11:16:58 · answer #10 · answered by Bob 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋