Sangria

Or is this look overdone? Other ideas appreciated!! :)

Please back up your response with a reason. Thanks.

This is in reference to the Mukasey hearing on waterboarding that you may find here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3A1luTdLaSs

Is there a logical argument that supports this, that robbing a bank may not necessarily constitute stealing?

I am struck by his aggressiveness, anger, and passion to defeat the stranglehold corporations/lobbyists have on our democracy. Does this style and approach of his resonate with anyone else, or does it turn you off?

For example, do you agree with this political stump statement?

"I don't believe you can change this country without taking on entrenched interests in Washington, including lobbyists, that stand between us and the change America needs. And I don't believe you can do it by sitting at a table, negotiating with them and trying to bring them together. These people will never give away their power voluntarily. We have to take their power away from them."

(Why this was deleted before, I have no idea! No, I am not violating any TOS; I checked twice, thank you very much.)

Question: "What's your take on contraception?"

Why this matters: "If their statements and actions are indicators, most of the GOP candidates oppose contraception. Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, Ron Paul, Tom Tancredo, Duncan Hunter, and Fred Thompson all define life as beginning at conception or fertilization, in other words when sperm meets egg."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20...

This stance has wide ranging implications. For one thing, it strictly limits what couples may do in the privacy of their homes; barrier contraceptives like condoms (or, *GASP!* abstinence) are the only methods people may use to prevent pregnancy.

How do ya'll feel about your potential President dictating what contraceptive methods you may or may not use during sex? Do you think this may have further slippery slope implications? Serious and HONEST responses only, please.

I see this all the time: I'll pose such and such question, ("Why is Bush condoning waterboarding?") and receive a response along the lines of, "You're just a Bush basher!" in reply.

To a lesser extent I'll see something like: "Why is Hillary a corporate sell-out?" and might see "Hillary basher!" as a response.

Seriously. Think about this question before you reply. Do you, as answerers, ever stop to consider that these questions are not meant as an attack, but are asked to encourage a critical reply?

Would waterboarding (torture) still be acceptable to you?

Or would you take my argument and claim that she is subverting the Geneva Conventions? Would it matter?

Please provide your sources! Thanks. =)

Disclaimer: This video is meant as satire. However, it does depict actual waterboarding techniques. (I gagged watching it.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GcXl1y_mQw

1. Invoke a terrifying internal and external enemy

2. Create a gulag

3. Develop a thug caste

4. Set up an internal surveillance system

5. Harass citizens' groups

6. Engage in arbitrary detention and release

7. Target key individuals

8. Control the press

9. Dissent equals treason

10. Suspend the rule of law

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2064157,00....

I'm curious to know who else agrees with this. What's your argument against? Please read the article before responding, thanks.

Has anyone had any personal experience with doing this in an effective/non-threatening way? Links to resources would be helpful!

OSAMA BIN LADEN!!!

Bin Laden, long time friend to the Bush Family announced his candidacy for President of the U.S. today on the Republican Ticket. "No one understands the War on Terrorism better than me. The GOP Theme is keeping America Safe: Security over Prosperity (unless your a member of the American Royality). NO OTHER REPUBLICAN Candidate Knows how to keep America Safe BETTER THAN ME."

When asked about the other Republican candidates on the ticket. "These guys all talk about security, but not a single one of them has ever held an AKA 47, er, M16 Rifle on the front lines. I single handedly kept the Soviet Union out of Afgahanistan (with a little help from the Reagan Administration). My experience trumps every other candidate on the ticket. I am sure to win."

When asked about being a foreigner gaining the presidency and it not being Constitutional, Bin Laden respondend "The GOP has been single handedly stripping Americans of their Constitutional Rights for the sake of "Security". What is one more Constitutional rule to keep me from keeping America safe? Listen, According to the Republican Party, Americans value safety over EVERYTHING ELSE, especially their Constitutional rights. So, I figure, with all my experience and unique qualifications for keeping America safe, they would surely elect me on the Republican Ticket."

Hypothetically speaking: what should happen if a U.S. President did this?

Does it make any difference now? Should Bush and his administration be held accountable?

"Wait & Switch" - Keith Olbermann

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vegosrOCwic

Bush knew Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction

Salon exclusive: Two former CIA officers say the president squelched top-secret intelligence, and a briefing by George Tenet, months before invading Iraq.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/2007/09/06...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8maMmj5u58

This question is in response to, "Is it Muslims vs Christians or Muslims vs. Everyone else?"

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

I think both are equally ridiculous.

First off, why does any one religion have to square off against the other? In America we adhere to principles of religious freedom and tolerance and yet this (assumingly) American citizen is setting up a dichotomous, "us vs. them" conflict between two of the world's major religions. How are we to spread our democratic ideals and quell the urge to divide, conquer and hate each other if we do not practice what we are preaching?

Also, how is it so hard to distinguish mainstream Islam from the extremist version of Islam? Christianity hasn't had such a rosey past with extremism either--the Crusades and Inquisition comes to mind. However, you do not normally think of the Inquisition when you say "Christian", so why do that with terrorism and "Muslims"?

From the Financial Times:

"LEARN FROM THE FALL OF ROME, US WARNED"

The US government is on a ‘burning platform’ of unsustainable policies and practices with fiscal deficits, chronic healthcare underfunding, immigration and overseas military commitments threatening a crisis if action is not taken soon, the country’s top government inspector has warned.

David Walker, comptroller general of the US, issued the unusually downbeat assessment of his country’s future in a report that lays out what he called “chilling long-term simulations”.

These include “dramatic” tax rises, slashed government services and the large-scale dumping by foreign governments of holdings of US debt.

Drawing parallels with the end of the Roman empire, Mr Walker warned there were “striking similarities” between America’s current situation and the factors that brought down Rome, including “declining moral values and political civility at home, an over-confident and over-extended military in foreign lands and fiscal irresponsibility by the central government”. ...

... “Our very prosperity is placing greater demands on our physical infrastructure. Billions of dollars will be needed to modernise everything from highways and airports to water and sewage systems. The recent bridge collapse in Minneapolis was a sobering wake-up call.”

Mr Walker said he would offer to brief the would-be presidential candidates next spring.

“They need to make fiscal responsibility and inter-generational equity one of their top priorities. If they do, I think we have a chance to turn this around but if they don’t, I think the risk of a serious crisis rises considerably”. "

(I posted this answer before and it was deleted. Does anyone have any idea why?! Here it is in it's entirety:)

I betcha didn't know that Bin Laden was found in a Dubai hospital and visited by a U.S. CIA agent two months before Sept. 11 either?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/waronterror/story/0,1361...

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/context.jsp?ite...

http://www.iht.com/articles/2001/11/01/laden_ed3_....

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0111/S00018.htm

**REMEMBER 9/11 ; REMEMBER WHO ATTACKED US ; NOW KNOW THAT WE DO NOT CARE ABOUT HIM (BIN LADEN) ANYMORE.**

BUSH IN HIS OWN WORDS (WITH CONTEXT): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PGmnz5Ow-o

"Deep in my heart I know the man's on the run if he's alive at all... And, uh, I, uh, you know who knows if he's hiding in some cave or not, we haven't heard from him in a long time."

"He's a person who's now been marginalized... So, I don't know where he is, nor do I spend that much time on it to be honest with you."

How the heck can you rationalize that it was "taken out of context" or "that's the liberal media for ya!"... Let's see it now. Try again, you good Little Germans.