Politics News

Taly S asked:


a. Mikhail Gorbachev
b. Geoge Bush
c. Ronald Reagan
d. Lech Walesa

George Bush’s running mate in the 1988 presidential election was:
a. Ronald Reagan
b. Dan Quayle
c. Jesse Jackson
d. Michael Dukakis

The Polish leader of the Solidarity movement who emerged as a symbol of resistance to Communist rule was:
a. Lech Walesa
b. Saddam Hussein
c. Mikhail Gorbachev
d. Boris Yeltsin

kinev2010 asked:


I see people following men like Bin Laden. Hu jintao, George bush just to name a few. Instead of following peaceful people these people would rather beleive that they can get something by always killingpeople for it. Why is that exactly?

jesito_sascec asked:


I’ve begun to notice that more and more of world leaders are losing support and in fact their subjects are beginning to hate them. Hugo Chavez is hated, simply hated less than the rest of the candidates for his office. Mahmoud Ahmadenijad lost his party the parliamentary control. Vladimir Putin of Russia is accused of murdering his critics (and nearly everyone in his country believes the accusations are true). Shinzo Abe and Hu Jintao are losing in their approval ratings. Ehud Olmert of Israel is at a 14% rating. But look at Palestine and neither party (Fatah and Hezbollah) is well-liked, they have too much in-fighting. At least three governments (Fuji, Thailand, Somalia) have had coups to toss out their governments, and there are probably many more on their way out. Fidel Castro of Cuba gets sick enough to die and his country cheers the news with parades. Tony Blair will be forced into retirement soon (technically he already was, he just hasn’t left yet).
Even George Bush has only a 30% approval and falling, but the new Democrat Congress is seen only as a stop-gap measure to slow him down in his foolishness rather than a chance at new beginnings. With all this I’m beginning to think that soon the people all over the world will soon “revolt” in hopes of establishing a new world order geared toward peace. While normally this would be a good thing, it seems like the perfect environment for someone like the Antichrist to rise up (or rather depending on religion, just someone against God’s plans, whether you believe in Jesus, Jehovah, Allah, Buddha, etc.). Do others believe this is it, we are about to witness the fulfillment of Revelations (or any other prophetic book of the last days of humankind in its present form)?

last man standing asked:


Who would Win in an all out war? (hypothetical question)

1.USA vs China
2.UK vs Russia
3.Israel vs Iran,
4.India vs Pakistan,
5.France vs Germany
6.Venezuela vs Mexico
7.Canada vs Cuba
8.Japan vs N. Korea
9.S.Korea vs Thailand
10.Vietnam vs South Africa
11.Nigeria vs Sao Tome and Principe
12.Indonesia vs Hungary

1 on 1 Dead or Alive fighting match :
who would win
CONSIDERING them all in their PRIME:

1.George Bush vs Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (Iran)
2.John F Kennedy vs Che Guevara
3.George Bush Snr. vs Fidel Castro
4.Hu Jintao (China) vs Shinzo Abe (Japan)

david singer asked:



President George Bush delivered a severe rebuff to the Arab League in remarks made by him at the King David Hotel in Jerusalem on 10 January 2008 (“the King David Declaration”).

The President had already made it clear in April 2004 that the Arab League needed to abandon its long standing demand that millions of Arabs be allowed to go and live in Israel when he stated :

“It seems clear that an agreed, just, fair and realistic framework for a solution to the Palestinian refugee issue as part of any final status agreement will need to be found through the establishment of a Palestinian state, and the settling of Palestinian refugees there, rather than in Israel.”

The Arab League has failed to embrace this suggestion as the solution to the refugee issue.

The King David Declaration has now raised the diplomatic bar even higher with the President stating :

“I believe we need to look to the establishment of a Palestinian state and new international mechanisms, including compensation, to resolve the refugee issue.”

These well chosen and carefully crafted words make it clear that President Bush is proposing additional “international mechanisms” to solve the refugee issue - other than resettlement in the proposed new Arab State. One of those “international mechanisms” will be “compensation” - and Israel won’t be the only country asked to pay it.

The President has thereby tacitly acknowledged that Israel cannot be held solely responsible for what befell the Arab residents who left Palestine in the wake of the Arab- Jewish conflict in 1947-1948.

Other countries - including members of the Arab League who have perpetuated the refugee issue for the last 60 years - will also be expected to contribute generously to an internationally administered and funded compensation package.

Any other “new international mechanisms” contemplated by the President were unidentified by him. The possibilities however are ominous and they do not bode well for the Arab League.

One could involve a demand that the refugees be given the option of being granted full rights of citizenship and equality in the Arab states where they have been kept stateless and in refugee camps for the last 60 years - dependent for survival on hand outs by the United Nations Works and Relief Agency (UNWRA) running into hundreds of billions of dollars.

Generations of dysfunctional human beings have been the end result of this inhumane policy - resulting in bitterness, hatred and despair as persons of all ages turn themselves into human bombs - choosing to kill Jews and achieve martyrdom as their way out of this pitiless existence.

The denial of citizenship and equality by their own Arab brethren has been buried in Foreign Office and State Department filing cabinets as nations have bent over backwards in their desire to maintain good relations with despotic Arab oil suppliers and cashed up Arab buyers for military equipment - tangible benefits flowing to these nations for their continuing silence or just looking the other way.

Now with oil hitting US$100 a barrel, the US economy facing recession and the Arab League having done nothing to endorse the President’s 2004 proposal for solving the refugee issue, President Bush has been forced to rethink this earlier policy - which had left the Arab States relatively free of any responsibility for solving the refugee issue.

That problem had been caused initially by the Arab League decision to refuse to accept partition of Western Palestine between Arabs and Jews pursuant to United Nations Partition Resolution 181 on 29 November 1947 followed by the subsequent Arab League decision to invade Palestine on 15 May 1948.

The grounds for that invasion - as contained in the declaration issued by the Arab League on the actual day of the invasion - still remain dominant in Arab League thinking today and have acted as the major cause for the refugee problem remaining unresolved 60 years later :

“The Governments of the Arab States emphasise, on this occasion, what they have already declared before the London Conference and the United Nations, that the only solution of the Palestine problem is the establishment of a unitary Palestinian State, in accordance with democratic principles, whereby its inhabitants will enjoy complete equality before the law, minorities will be assured of all the guarantees recognised in democratic constitutional countries, and the holy places will be preserved and the right of access thereto guaranteed.”

The King David Declaration reiterated once more for the benefit of the Arab League that the President’s Roadmap envisioned not one but two States - Israel and Palestine - living side by side in peace and security and that there will be no withdrawal by Israel to the pre -1967 armistice lines.

This message - and warning - was conveyed to the Arab League by President Bush from the King David Hotel in Jerusalem on 10 January:

1. Wake up to reality and abandon the idea of a unitary state - unequivocally and without reservation - and get the PLO to explicitly excise this objective from its Charter.

2. End the conflict by agreeing to the creation of an Arab state between Israel and Jordan in that part of the West Bank which leaves Israel with secure, recognised and defensible borders.

3. Accept resettlement of the refugees in this new State or alternatively receive compensation from an internationally sponsored and supported fund if they are not willing to emigrate there.

4. If you fail to endorse this solution over the next twelve months then you can say goodbye to a new 23rd member State called Palestine joining the Arab League. My successor will certainly not want to be publicly humiliated by the Arab League as has happened to me over the last 5 years.

5. Expect that it will then become your obligation to solve the refugee issue and the ongoing conflict without any further diplomatic or financial support from the United States.

6. Don’t be surprised if the United States then calls on you to resolve the refugee issue by demanding that you grant citizenship and equal rights to all refugees living within the borders of your member States and that you pay for their rehabilitation out of your own oil-bloated revenues.

This is the legacy President Bush has bequeathed to the Arab League for 2008 - and beyond.

Ernie Fitzpatrick asked:


Let me give you my bias up front so you can better judge what I’m about to write. I spent my early life as a Democrat (ie. John and Bobby Kennedy and Nelson Rockefeller), but most of my adult life as a Republican. George Bush has greatly disappointed me and Hillary Clinton is the LAST person I want to see as president. So, am I left with Barack Obama?

I have no problem with a woman president. I have a big problem with Hillary as that woman president!

While lying seems to go with almost all politicians (a few really are honest), it’s a character trait (flaw) with Hillary and that’s only a small part of the baggage that I don’t want to see carried back into the White House as representative of us. Nor can I see a continuance of the Bush policies which McCain will surely advance (especially regarding war).

Why does McCain prefer running against Hillary?

Camille Paglia has asked a rhetorical question to which I feel the answer is obvious. Here question “Is Hillary Clinton the savior of feminism? Or its albatross, dragging feminism backwards under a weary weight of old-guard victimology and male-bashing?” For me the answer is the latter. Hillary would do more to set back not only America, but also feminism.

Gals, you don’t need Hillary Clinton as your first representative in the White House!

Many women have seized the feminist banner to proclaim Hillary the messianic Wonder Woman, destined to smash the glass ceiling of the presidency. The only wonder for me is how so many people cannot see through to her soul as she runs from sniper fire in Bosnia.

Hillary’s voter base consists of middle-aged to elderly white women who identify with her caustic, stubborn, bulldog resilience. Humiliated and upstaged by her philandering husband, Hillary is the champion of an army of women who were stymied, betrayed or outmanoeuvred by men. And when polling showed she had seemed too harsh to the caucus-goers of Iowa, she rolled out teary eyes for New Hampshire, which handed her a primary victory.

Hillary will scratch, claw, and morph through every gender trick if it rakes in votes. She has learned not only from the best of politicians, she the wife to him as well! And despite her reputation for brilliance, she failed the Washington, DC bar exam. Thus her migration to Little Rock was not simply a selfless drama for love; she was fleeing the capital where she had hoped to make her mark.

For me Hillary simply carries too much baggage and I’d rather we be faced with the prospects of either McCain or Obama than McCain or Hillary! I think many of the superdelegates are coming to that same conclusion. Or at least the tide is certainly going out and away from the toxic Hillary.

pjay asked:


I am appalled by President Bush’s behavior with Prime Minister Merkel before the G8 Summit! I wonder why NO ONE IS CRY FOUL over his behavior. I realize that a few media outlets talked about the story, but no one really spoke to HOW INAPPROPRIATE HIS BEHAVIOR WAS & HOW HIS COWBOY MENTALITY AND ARROGNANCE PLAYS OUT TO THE WORLD AT LARGE! I saw a news shot of Condi Rice speaking with Kofi Annan & I couldn’t help but think….what if Kofi Annan did the same thing to Secretary of State Rice that President Bush did to PM Merkel? I can only picture the American Republican Moral Outrage to this situation. What if it was French Prime Minister Chirac and not Kofi Annan? Another thought crossed my mind and that was…..WHY DOESN’T PRESIDENT BUSH DO THIS TO THE MALE HEADS OF STATE…LIKE POOTIE POO (PUTIN), SCHROEDER, CHIRAC or does he feel he can only be inappropriate if it’s a woman? It is clear to me Mr. Bush doesn’t respect other countries, women or morality! I wish PM Merkel had slapped him!

David Maillie asked:


The price of gas just keeps on going up and has no apparent relief in site (probably due more to George Bush’s close personal ties to big oil and the middle east than anything else). This in turn is driving up inflation and the cost of almost everything we buy or need including auto or car insurance. Here’s how to turn the tables in your favor and save money on your auto insurance like George Bush would if he had to pay for it.
We’ve all seen the commercials and mailings for Progressive and Geico telling us to get online and compare auto insurance companies and get competing quotes. There is a good reason for this - it will save you money. In most cases, shopping for auto insurance quotes online will save you big money (the average online auto insurance shopper pays 38% less). Get online and shop your auto or car insurance. You will save money.
It also helps to drive defensively and safely. According to the National Foundation for Highway and Traffic Safety, aggressive drivers cause 90% of all accidents and pay 30 - 70% more in car insurance premiums. Take a defensive driving course. Many technical and community colleges offer these courses and they may also reduce points on your license and DMV record. That leads to another important way of saving money on car insurance - get points removed from your license. You get points for things like speeding, not stopping for a stop sign, running a red light, etc… These points cause immediate rate increases to your insurance. Most states offer free or nearly free courses that will reduce the points on your license for most infractions (except for drunk driving and driving under the influence - you have to have a powerful name like Kennedy or Bush and then you get driven home).
Another way to save money on auto or car insurance is to increase your deductible and assume more risk.. You will save money by, for instance, going from a $250 deductible to a $1000 deductible. One word of caution, do not drop uninsured and under insured motorists coverage. Due to George Bush and his lenient policy in the past with illegal aliens in our country from Mexico we now have over 20 million illegal and uninsured motorists in America.
Another great way to save money on auto or car insurance is to drive a vehicle with a low theft rate. It is a proven fact that insurance companies charge higher premiums based on car brand and model theft rates. Since George Bush did practically nothing to stop these illegal aliens from Mexico we now have millions of them and they love to steal cars as some have found it easier than purchasing and they love Honda Civics and Accords. We don’t hear of many of them tooling around in a Mazda or a minivan. Maybe if George Bush invoked trade restrictions with Mexico this would change and jobs would come back to America?
Joining professional groups like AAA. AARP, etc… can also save you money on car or auto insurance as you may be entitled to group rates. There are many other ways also. Now you know how to save money on your car or auto insurance and why we are earning less and executives at big oil are earning more and more. Also, I don’t know if it’s a republican thing, but lets think before we put a Bush in a political office in the future. If you haven’t yet had the opportunity, please watch Farenheit 9/11 and learn more about George Bush and his brother in Florida.

Draco Malfoy asked:


Who is the top 5 most powerful men on earth?

1. George Bush
2. Hu Jintao
3. Vladimir Putin
4. Indias president
5. Britain’s PM?

Surely noone is more powerful than the above men… especially Hu Jintao.
your answer is fictional… and very stupid by the way…
Zardoz very good answer..
and yes Obama is very influential..
man.. every hollywood actor or actress has no political power at all… they are nothing but over glamourised fools

prawn74 asked:


I dont not know why so many people doubt President George Bush . Being President is like being a boss (employer) of an company and there’s allways going to be workers that are jealous but these jealous workers do not understand the hard work of keeping a company working like an oiled machine that is constantly maintained by the right people.The President Bush of america in my opinion has steered america in the right direction but still needs to do work at home (in america) to build a greater nation and weed out the sensor ship employee’s who wreck america by showing negative films that give the wrong idea’s (messages)of what america should be.Attitude IN FILM can build the greatest and smartest nation but only people in the 1950s relised this and america and other countrys have fallen prey to UPRODUCTIVE WAYS .Western and european hospitality is dieing and the southern gentleman (maam)(sir) is no more .All people where so well dressed as attitude and respect was installed in people.
To build a great nation is what you wear and your attitude towards work .Your home is clean so is your country.When was the last time a TV presenter said, you work and be happy and you’ll achieve what you want(NEVER WILL HAPPEN).As society is now built on addiction of taking the easy road by borrowing money and people will end up with achieving nothing except working for the bank .Its better to go without a couple things and live happy on the basics for 10 or 15 years and you’ll own what ever your paying off? Attitude of the individual is the attitude of the nation? (eg)Be smart who’s stopping who from breeding pigeons to eat as everyone relies on processed food which can keep a family poor(this is european mentality)?Being poor is a state of mind as long as your well feed ,clean and healthy your as good as the richest man in the world as he has to eat as well.?
To build a great nation is what you wear and your attitude towards work .Your home is clean so is your country.When was the last time a TV presenter said, you work and be happy and you’ll achieve what you want(NEVER WILL HAPPEN).As society is now built on addiction of taking the easy road by borrowing money and people will end up with achieving nothing except working for the bank .Its better to go without a couple things and live happy on the basics for 10 or 15 years and you’ll own what ever your paying off? Attitude of the individual is the attitude of the nation? (eg)Be smart who’s stopping who from breeding pigeons to eat as everyone relies on processed food which can keep a family poor(this is european mentality)?Being poor is a state of mind as long as your well feed ,clean and healthy your as good as the richest man in the world as he has to eat as well.? I dont hate a country because its there attitude towards what is in front of them is going to waste .