ericktravel

Dempsey was known as the giant killer during his day, how do u think he would fare against a prime vitali? personally i think vitali would knock him unconscious but what do you guys think?

I mean all these british guys are going crazy over him for beating an old hopkins and stuff and yes i know hopkins beat pavlik but shouldn t calzaghe be facing prime opposition? At least hopkins did not back down and chose to face pavlik a tough prime fighter shouldn't calzaghe do the same and face chad dawson?

I am playing madden 09 and i am trying to figure out what i should name the team i am creating and how their jerseys will look like I would love some suggestions.

I was having a discussion with a pentecostal lady from MA. The conversation moved to politics and she began to denounce Obama as a racist muslim, who hung out with terrorists and got funds from islamofascists. I listened quietly and waited until she was done. After she finished, I went ahead and explained to her that Obama was half black and half white, he was no arab and he had been a christian for many years, I went on to explain that despite all the speculation from the right, there was never any evidence that Obama was close to Ayers

and his record showed that he was no racist. Then i decided to test her, i asked why it was okay for the republican party to have the support of the kkk a group that has been deemed a "domestic terrorist threat" by the FBI, i asked why it was okay that Palin would be considered a good presidential pick even though she lacked experience and did not sound very intelligent. The lady paused and said: " well Palin does not need experience because God will show her the way" and then she said "moreover if things get worse it does not mean anything, it just means that the end times are coming"...... I paused for a few seconds and pondered what i could possibly say to someone who actually believed such statements...she never bothered to name her sources and defend their validity and she had no clue about where the candidates stood on issues such as the economy and health care reform and she kept on saying that "God wants us to vote republican"....If you guys were in my situation what would you have said to a women like this?

Looking at the way things are now I think he would have been better off with Romney instead of Palin. What do you guys think?

In the past there would have been no debate as to who would have won but lately i have been reading some very curious opinions on this issue, what are your thoughts?

a while back i asked what could be done to improve the inner city school system, many areed that it should start with the parents, thus my question, what can be done to encourage parents to be more responsable with their kids?

I often hear women complain that men who are players are viewed as sluts and women who do the same thing are viewed negatively, i have been doing some thinking and i think i know why people feel this way....usually it's the man that does the courting, the man is the guy that has to impress the girl enough to get with him in the first place (in the clubs girls are more likely to be hit on by guys than vice versa) thus when a guy is successful he is respected by other guys who also set out to do the same thing (impress women in order to get with them), women on the other hand do not necessarily have to go out and get guys, usually guys will hit on them and it would be up to the women to decide whether they would get with the guy or not they do not actually have to go out of their way to impress guys to get with them, all they need to do usually is look good thus if a woman sleeps with most of the guys that go after her she is not viewed the same way as the guys because she is not

I once had an argument with a girl from the women and gender section (you know...the feminist section)who said that if they mixed boxing and have both women and men fight in the same division that women would have an equal chance to dominate, she went as far as saying that if they had mixed the sport earlier a woman would have probably defeated George Foreman and Mike Tyson (yes she said that...) i just wanted to know... what are your thoughts on this? Do you agree with this statement? Please explain. By the way this is is the link to that question (please pay attention to the answers of some feminists lol)

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AgJ7....

I think it is unfair that a man would be required to keep paying child support for a child that does not belong to him, not only does it affect a man financially but it affects them emotionally too, the same goes for false rape allegations, nowdays there are many loose definitions of the word rape and all it takes is someone saying she got raped even in the absence of strong evidence, these videos show examples of the consequences of these actions , shouldn't these actions (paternity fraud and false rape accusations) be made punishable by law on a federal level?

I one had an argument with a girl from this section who said that if they mixed boxing and have both women and men fight in the same division that women would have an equal chance to dominate, she went as far as saying that if they had mixed the sport earlier a woman would have probably defeated George Foreman and Mike Tyson (yes she said that...) i just wanted to know... what are your thoughts on this? Do you agree with this statement? Please explain.

A lot of times when the topic of divorce comes up and it's prevalence within the American society many American women say that some men might prefer non american women because such women would be uneducated and submissive.....this often made me wonder why such women would be considered uneducated, a lot on non american women who marry american men have college degrees and work, many of them even come to the US and to get degrees and jobs, yet because they do not fit the image of the modern feminist american woman when it comes to marriage(the carrie bradshaw type) they are considered uneducated and overly submissive even though most of the times non american women work just as hard and are quite happy with their marriages and the divorce rates in marriages between american men and non american women is a lot lower than those with american women....

A lot of times when the topic of divorce comes up and it's prevalence within the American society many American women say that some men might prefer non american women because such women would be uneducated and submissive.....this often made me wonder why such women would be considered uneducated, a lot on non american women who marry american men have college degrees and work, many of them even come to the US and to get degrees and jobs, yet because they do not fit the image of the modern feminist american woman when it comes to marriage(the carrie bradshaw type) they are considered uneducated and overly submissive even though most of the times non american women work just as hard and are quite happy with their marriages and the divorce rates in marriages between american men and non american women is a lot lower than those with american women....

I have always wondered how dempsey would have fared against marciano's competition

It seems to me that in every election the elections section of Y!A gets filled with tons of propaganda (silly questions that often spread rumors) and give people a false impression. for example do any of you guys remember a few months ago during the republican primaries?? No one could say anything negative about Ron Paul without getting like 15 thumbs down or simply getting deleted, if one was to judge from the internet it would have seemed that Ron Paul was the inevitable nominee even though the polls showed a different story, i have also noticed a lot of people who would create accounts with the sole purpose of asking questions to make candidates look bad and then forget about those accounts a few days later (in other words trolling)......I think that behind all these anti obama and anti mccain or anti hillary questions there are really just a few people with numerous accounts who try to spread false information in an attempt to undermine the campaign of those running against his or

is there a rational reason why a democrat who supported Hillary Clinton would switch from an aniti-war, universal healthcare, repeal the Bush tax cut,pro abortion candidate to vote for McCain who is the polar opposite and go against Obama who for the most part stood for the same ideals that Hillary stood for?

I was a huge Mccain supporter in the 2000 republican primaries, I always felt he was a moderate candidate in a party where there weren't many moderates and too many conservatives. In 2002 he called Jerry Falwell and other fundamentalist christians agents of intolerance yet today he enlists the support of rev. john hagee who is the living embodiement of everything McCain detested, at one time he supported abortion rights,he opposed bush's tax cuts,In McCain's campaign for the presidency in 2000, he supported the federal ban on offshore drilling for oil. In 2008, however, he endorsed Bush's call for an end to the ban

I used to support McCain because he seemed to me to be the most reasonable man in a party filled with contradictions, why does he have to pander to ultra conservatives now? Why did he change his stace on various issues when his earlier opinions were a lot better

It seems odd to me that some former hillary supporters and so called democrats are switching their support to Mccain all of a sudden, Hillary and Obama share a lot similar ideas whereas McCain is pretty much the oppositie of Hillary in numerous issues yet some people are voting for McCain nonetheless even though he stands for the opposite of what their initial candidate stood for, why is this happening?

I was doing some research and i found some interesting facts that raised a lot of questions, the religious right as we know it today began its conception in the form of the moral majority founded by jerry falwell at the time it was seen as a reaction against civil rights legislation and the civil rights movement in general, for years falwell opposed the end of segregation and favoured jim crow laws. Falwell launched on the warpath against civil rights four years after the Supreme Court's Brown v. Board of Education decision to desegregate public schools with a sermon titled "Segregation or Integration: Which?"

"If Chief Justice Warren and his associates had known God's word and had desired to do the Lord's will, I am quite confident that the 1954 decision would never have been made," Falwell boomed from above his congregation in Lynchburg. "The facilities should be separate. When God has drawn a line of distinction, we should not attempt to cross that line."