hawkguy

went to another country and was given a overwhelmingly warm welcome by the MAJORITY of its people. Sure Bush went to Africa and was shown a good time by native people, but they were all tribal people that had no idea who he was or where the US is. Every time Obama, Clinton or Carter go to some other country, you have thousands of people who come on their own to hear them speak or see them walk by.

Why are there so many conservative actors who get elected for office? Ronald Reagan, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Jesse Ventura, Fred Thompson, Shirley Temple (ran but didn't win), Clint Eastwood (mayor of a small town), Sonny Bono.

The only democrat actor that I can think of is Al Franken, and he barely won. What does this say about conservatives and actors?

How could anyone actually vote for someone who doesn't believe that separation of church and state is protected by the first amendment? Her campaign says that she was just trying to point out that it doesn't specifically say those words (which it doesn't, but that is the concept), but if you listen to her, that wasn't what she was trying to say. She was trying to say that the concept itself wasn't protected,

But what is even more disturbing is that she said "American scientific companies are cross breeding humans and animals and coming up with mice with fully functioning human brains." I mean, how stupid is she? This isn't something she said to Bill Maher 10-15 years ago as a young fool. She said this on Bill O'Reilly less than 3 years ago. She said these cross breeding would lead to human cloning. She must be the result of an early experiment of a human with a mouse brain. What kind of people would actually vote for her?

He often compares Obama to Hitler but then turns around and calls Obama a socialist. The two just don't add up. Hitler was a Fascist, which means he was ultra conservative. Calling Obama a socialist is on the opposite end of the spectrum.

"Fascists believe that a nation is an organic community that requires strong leadership, singular collective identity, and the will and ability to commit violence and wage war in order to keep the nation strong" Grčić, Joseph. Ethics and political theory. Lanham, Maryland, USA: University of America, Inc, 2000. p. 120

Mmmm, sounds like Bush was just as much a Fascist as Obama is a Socialist.

Ok, I'm watching the championship game right now. I have never seen Australian football before, so I am really confused on what is going on. I get that if they kick the ball through the 2 middle uprights they get a goal (6 points). I notice they dribble every once in a while when running with the ball. But beyond that, I don't understand what is going on. Sometimes guys are tackled and they get called for a foul, but other times they push someone down from behind and they just keep playing. Also, the refs keep blowing the whistle for some reason and they just keep playing. This game is really intense and looks more fun than rugby, but I just can't figure out what is going on.

Soccer is so much easier to understand. Kick the ball in the goal, don't be nearer the end line than the second to last defender (offside), don't use your hands, don't tackle anyone. If the ball goes into touch on the side throw it in using both hands over your head. If it goes over the end line, kick it in via corner or goal area. Pretty simple.

So how big is a football field and what is going on/ basic rules?

Do you think this would be an acceptable compromise to Rev Jones?

He would be allowed to burn the Koran, but he would have to go light another fire first. We could take a statue of Jesus on the cross and place bibles underneath it, then burn it all down. It would be a protest to the FLDS Mormons for there practice of raping their little girls. Sure it isn't mass murder, but sending your 14 year old daughter to marry her uncle and his 5 wives isn't pretty either.

Do you think he would go along with that? Its the same concept as him asking Muslims to burn the Koran (their holy book that they believe is the actual word of god) to protest some small group of extremist that associate themselves with the larger group.

Conservatives said that Universal Health Care meant you would have to wait a really long time to get an appointment at a doctor. If we don't have Universal Health Care, why do I have to wait 10 weeks to see a specialist for my back? He isn't the only one in the area, but the only one my insurance will cover. If we had Universal Health Care, I could go where I wanted and get treated sooner. Does the GOP like making people suffer?

On Fox News, they pointed out that he changed his stance on several policies. McCain denied that he ever changed his stance on any of the issues even though they provided proof that he did. He then diverted to other things.

McCain was against the Bush tax cuts when they were installed. He wanted tax cuts for middle class and small businesses instead. Now that the Bush tax cuts are ending, and the Democrats want to make tax cuts to the middle class and small businesses specifically, he thinks the opposite. He thinks that these new tax cuts that are designed for today's economy is a bad idea and would rather go with tax cuts designed for yesterday's economy. Why can't he ever admit he is or was wrong? Almost every other politician will admit that they were wrong at some point in their career. Why not him?

...specifically about the Cordoba House. Ron Paul said this: This is all about hate and Islamaphobia. We now have an epidemic of "sunshine patriots" on both the right and the left who are all for freedom, as long as there's no controversy and nobody is offended. He then goes on to blame the neo-conservative movement for fueling the controversy.

Rand Paul on the other hand is going in the complete opposite direction. His people responded by saying, "In Dr. (Rand) Paul's opinion, the Muslim community would better serve the healing process by making a donation to the memorial fund for the victims of September 11th."

So Rand thinks that all Muslims everywhere should apologizes for what a small extremist group of terrorist did and pay people to make them feel better. Is that really what America thinks?

In a previous question on here, someone insinuated that the FDA dropping their approval of a drug called Avastin was the start of death panels. They used an article from investors.com to back their claim. The article, titled "Death Panels Begin As Reform Takes Shape", starts right out saying,

"It didn't take long for the health care philosophy of Dr. Donald Berwick, President Obama's choice to head the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services, and an appointee we have labeled a "one-man death panel," to have an effect."

Now, how does a newspaper publication expect to be take seriously and seen as credible if it starts and labels and article like that? This is the same publication that stated Stephen Hawking "wouldn't have a chance in the U.K., where the National Health Service would say the life of this brilliant man, because of his physical handicaps, is essentially worthless." Unfortunately for them, Stephen Hawking is, and always has been British. He has lived his entire life in the UK and responded with: "I wouldn't be here today if it were not for the NHS... I have received a large amount of high-quality treatment without which I would not have survived."

Now, how can we take these claims of "Death Panels" seriously if they can't even provide credible proof that they even exist? Who is more likely to have a "Death Panel"? A private insurance company, whose interest is making sure they make a profit, or the Federal Government, whose main concern is serving the people?

The original question I am referring to:

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

I'm looking at getting a used laptop from Best Buy refurbishing site. It is in tested working condition, but the hard drive has been wiped clean. My wife works at a university and can get Windows 7 for $12 from them. I have installed XP myself a few times on a new hard drive, but I had the disks that came with the computer. This computer will not come with any disks or anything. It should be as simple as installing 7 and then downloading the drivers needed right? Where would I go to download the drivers or will it prompt me to download them as needed?

In Acts 1: 18-19, Judas is described as having his guts spilled over the land that he purchased using the money he recieved to turn in Jesus.

But in Mathew 27:5, Judas threw the money into a temple and then hanged himself.

If the bible is written without error, how are there 2 conflicting stories of his death and what he did with his blood money?

He is talking about Shirley Sherrod in his opening comments. He keeps going back and forth, suggesting she shouldn't have been fired. Then he comes back with more snippets of her speech saying it IS cause for termination. Then he blaming the other (or real) news networks for scolding Fox News for running a none story, which he just admitted was a non story.

Then he has a guest on basically saying that if the White House fired this lady, the only reason was Fox News. He says the White House fired her to preempt Fox News from criticizing them for not firing her. Then he said, had the White House not fired her right away, and did it later, it would have been because Fox News pressured them into it. They are so arrogant and assuming. That is why it isn't Fox News. I have a new slogan for them "Fair and Balanced...for the right". Any other slogan suggestions?

I would love to see this happen. Obama would absolutely destroy her in a debate. She constantly lies and avoids actually answering the questions.

I was at my local Petco and noticed a dog food. It was called "Humane Choice". It said USDA Organic and I noticed that it was also endorsed by HSUS all over the packaging. I will start there.

It is USDA Certified Organic by the Argentine Department of Agriculture and actually grown and manufactured in Uruguay. Are we playing a game of telephone here? Why can't they endorse a product that is grown and manufactured right here in the US? They care so much for the animals that they want to feed them food grown and processed in another country?

Then, I turned it over and read the ingredients. It was full of indigestible grains. Ingredients: canola seed, brown rice, soybean meal, buckwheat, flaxseed, sunflower seed... HSUS argues on their website that dogs are not carnivorous but rather opportunistic carnivores and therefore don't need meat at all. They are completely inaccurate, and the proof is right on the package. It instructs you to gradually switch the food over 10 days, and it may take up to 6 weeks for your dog to tolerate the food! They advertise that the food doesn't contain corn or wheat (which many dogs are allergic to, mainly because they are not part of a normal canine diet), but the food does contain soy. Soy is one of the more common allergens along with corn and wheat. So why do they decide that soy is ok, but corn and wheat are bad?

Dogs can NOT live a healthy life as vegans, like the HSUS would like us to think. They are trying to force their moral ideas onto animals that are not cerebral beings. Canines have evolved to eat primarily meat, but HSUS thinks that it can defy nature and evolution to push their ideas. That is cruetly, no?

So in Wisconsin, it is illegal for minors to have sex, its a misdemeanor. If a minor is under 17 and has sex, they are tried as a juvenile. If the minor is 17 and has sex, they are tried as an adult. How does that make any sense at all? If they are old enough to be tried as an adult, then why do they have to follow the law of a minor?

They are delusional. Why aren't they arrested? They can't take the law into their own hands. They crashed their multi million dollar boat into the Japanese ship and then blamed it on the Japanese.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/australianzealandjapan...

Hopefully, the Japanese ships will take him all the way back to Japan and throw him in jail. Or maybe they should drop him in a remote location in the south seas in a small dingy with a life vest and let him fend for himself. Which one sounds more fitting?

Michelle Duggar is 43 years old and still having kids. At some point, because of her age, she will start having mentally retarded babies. How many retards will she pop out before they stop having kids? Or will they have a whole handful of them and a lot of miscarriages ?

If there are so many people that believe that life starts at the moment of conception then why don't pro-lifer's (which everyone is, I've never heard anyone hoping to give everyone an abortion) push to celebrate the day you are conceived rather than the day you are born?

I think it is so funny that Newt Gingrich is criticizing Obama and the rest of the Democrats for taking charge of these huge corporations that were a big reason our economy was running into the ground. The Republicans have allowed these companies to do what ever they wanted because they believe the market will right itself. The Obama administration is having to clean up after the Bush administration. Nobody wants to give these companies money, and we are not. They are loans that will have to be paid back. If they didn't get money or pointed in the right direction, we could have possibly seen the end of our economy as there would have been no money to lend out. Gingrich is criticizing Obama for taking control of these companies even though many of the biggest were ceased during the Bush administration. Indy Mac, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac were all taken over in 2008 under Bush. We can't just turn our backs and hope for the best. What else are we suppose to do? Do you agree with Gingrich, that we should have done nothing?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20090609/pl_bloo...