GIVE ADVICE ON RACE, RELIGION &AMP; POLITICS

Blog this

Race, Religion & Politics / 1 day ago

Remove from Hot10

Remove Post

Recategorize / Edit

OBAMA BOWS, MAYAN CALENDAR BULLSHIT, GLENN BECK'S EMOTIONAL COLITIS, ILLEGAL ALIENS FROM MARS...

it's all the same to me. i just don't care. can you dig it?

Update: November 19, 2009.
sorry,... i just don't care, and that's that! punto y finale', dominos and woebiskets, fuggit', i just don't care. so there!

- Asked by two469, An Intellectual Guy, Male, Who Cares?, Consulting

Answer this question

Read Responses (6)

Invite A Friend To Respond

Blog this

Race, Religion & Politics / 1 day ago

Remove from Hot10

Remove Post

Recategorize / Edit

Whats my age again??????

Just wondering,
Does it bother you that the age brackets on A*ology get much larger as you get older?
Compare: 18-21, 22-25 with 36-45.
If I was 36 I'd be weirded out that I'm placed prematurely in the 40's bracket.
How do you feel about it?

- Asked by mstoronto2, A Thinker, Female, 22-25, Toronto

Answer this question

Read Responses (7)

Invite A Friend To Respond

Blog this

Race, Religion & Politics / 1 day ago

Remove from Hot10

Remove Post

Recategorize / Edit

This guy blocked me, so just to point out ...

If America broke up into two different nations, liberalism would die an ugly death. This is not an arguable point.

First of all, liberal America is ROUGHLY equivalent in terms of population. But liberal America is basically concentrated in the top four or five urban metropolitan areas. Look at a voting map and it's basically 90% "red" by size.

So "blue" America is in all of the major urban areas. And guess what? Those places are large areas of suckitude. No surprise. Places like New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, and Philadelphia are awash in debt, the focuses of homelessness and poverty, murder capitals, and tax holes. Good luck with that.

Throw in the fact that liberals constitute areas like government and other unionized industries that are unaccustomed (and against, actually) competition and free market capitalism and it would be like watching the French fight. Liberals don't know how to live without people to tax, namely conservatives (i.e., people who work).

On the other hand, if liberals left, what would we have? Um ...let's see. A place where you could say a woman looks hot without getting sued. A place where people who do the crime do the time, unless we decide to shoot them in the head (that's called time off for good behavior). A place where people compete for jobs, instead of being "the best minority we could find for your quota."

I don't mind liberals saying they'll be "super smart." After all, they do that right now and basically look like retarded hippos. It would be even more hilarious for them to do that while they were sitting around in poverty, shivering in the cold, and sucking ass. I'm down with breaking up the U.S.

Update: November 19, 2009.
Don't forget, joybird, the "native liberals" that you're loving so much also were quite repressive towards their women, practiced slavery, believed in human sacrifice, and also were taken down by like two Spanish conquistadors and a handful of beads. Bravo, native liberals!

- POP'd by istillhatescreennames, A Mr. Nice Guy, Male, 66 or older

Should the U.S break into two different nations?

The Liberal Democratic northern blue states will join with Canada and become the 'United States of Liberty and Education'.

While the southern conservative, Republican, Bible-belt red states will form a new nation called 'Jesusland'.

Then everyone will be much happier.

- Asked by Male, 22-25

Answer This POP'd Question

Read Responses To POP'd Question (10)

Read Responses To Original Question (10)

Race, Religion & Politics / 1 day ago

Remove from Hot10

Remove Post

Recategorize / Edit

Do foreign countries "respect strength"?

A lot of repubs, conservatives and others love to claim that the Obama administration displays weakness and that this encourages our enemies. They argue that "showing strength" is the way to achieve our foreign-policy goals. Where do they get this ludicrous idea? First of all the people who push this idea, and those who agree with it, are generally, lets face it, NOT the sort of people who know that much about foreign cultures to begin with! I mean I know I am stereotyping, but generally speaking the kind of person who loves to travel and explore the world and learn about other cultures, that person sounds more like your typical touchy-feely liberal than your average strong-on-defense hawkish repub/conservative.

Yet despite this, these right wing hawks keep telling us what other cultures believe! As if they know!

What other cultures respect is FAIRNESS. What they despise is ARROGANCE. Those people who hate us think we are too arrogant, they think we have one standard of behavior for us, and a different standard for them. By behaving in a way that repubs call "showing strength" we are behaving PRECISELY in the kind of way other cultures consider arrogant and hypocritical. For example we used to support civil rights and we opposed torture around the world and we would tell foreign countries that just because they are facing problems from terrorists they should still stick to the law - and then as soon as we face terrorism, we say torture is OK and civil rights are not important.

Other countries think that is hypocritical. But to repubs and conservatives, behaving in completely the opposite way we told those countries to behave before WE faced terrorism, is a sign of strength and countries will respect us for that? What are right wingers smoking?

Why are we even listening to repubs/conservatives when it comes to foreign policy issues? They have proved to be so consistently wrong they have forfeited ANY right to be taken seriously, IMHO.

Fire away...

Update: November 19, 2009.
Where are all the repub/conservative hawks? No responses from any of them?

- Asked by xerxes, An Intellectual Guy, Male, 36-45, Washington, DC, Lawyer

Answer this question

Read Responses (9)

Invite A Friend To Respond

Blog this

Race, Religion & Politics / 1 day ago

Remove from Hot10

Remove Post

Recategorize / Edit

WAR, good God...what it is good for? ABSOLUTELY NUTHIN', say it again!

What does war mean as far as the ol' Constitution goes. Y'all know about the ol' Constitution right?

Who in our government must act to place US in a condition of being at WAR with another COUNTRY?

Please vote now.

- Asked by llafsroh, An Intellectual Guy, Male, 36-45, Boston, Science / Engineering

Answer this question

Read Responses (5)

Invite A Friend To Respond

Blog this

Race, Religion & Politics / 1 day ago

Remove from Hot10

Remove Post

Recategorize / Edit

Religion is for those who don't want to go to Hell.

Spirituality is for those who have already been through it. =-)

*(This is not an insult, just a statement.)

- Asked by cutypy5840, A Thinker, Female, 29-35, Medical / Dental

Answer this question

Read Responses (7)

Invite A Friend To Respond

Blog this

Race, Religion & Politics / 1 day ago

Remove from Hot10

Remove Post

Recategorize / Edit

Would you consider the Vietnam war a war?

The reason I ask - llafsroh made a good point - that we have not formally declared war against the terrorists.

Yet, we never made a formal declaration of war against Vietnam, either - it was considered an extensive military engagement authorized by Congress, the same as the current conflict. Congress has authorized the current war and they fund it, but they haven't made a formal declaration.

BTW, Congress did the same thing with the Persian Gulf war.

And, in the Korean war, we didn't have a formal declaration either, but were authorized by the UN Security Council.

I believe most people would consider the Vietnam War, the Korean War and the Persian Gulf war to all be military conflicts.

I was just curious what people thought, since the idea seems to be - we can't try the 9/11 masterminds in military tribunals since we haven't formally declared war.

I do think, and I probably surprise the liberals here - that we should never have gone into Vietnam, for example, without a formal declaration of war, and we should have done the same with Afghanistan, etc. I also don't think we should have gone into Iraq. But, I also see it as a no-brainer that when an organization such as Al Qaeda decides it wants to declare war on us, we should return the favor and declare war on them.

- Asked by curvysmartgirl, A Creative, Female, 36-45, Dallas, Artist / Musician / Writer

Answer this question

Read Responses (9)

Invite A Friend To Respond

Blog this

Race, Religion & Politics / 1 day ago

Remove Post

Recategorize / Edit

Would we try Osama bin Ladin in civilian courts?

Sen. Lindsey Graham had an interesting Q&A with Attorney General Holder today. (Holder is Pres. Obama's Attorney General). According to NPR (National Public Radio), "The exchange started with Graham stumping Holder with a question one would have thought the attorney general would have been prepared for."

Graham basically pointed out that if we are going to try KSM in civilian courts, does that mean if we capture Osama bin Ladin, do we also try him in civilian courts? And he also asked if that means we have to read Osama bin Ladin his Miranda rights?

Holder was unable to answer these questions.

If you want to see this exchange, it's up on YouTube. I can send you a link if you can't find it.

Update: November 20, 2009.
Why is it that when some of us say - "let's treat enemy combatants in the war on terror the same way we treated enemy combatants during WWII", people like bailarenfuego say "gee that means you want us to be like Saudi Arabia or China". For all the vaunted liberal ability to see nuances - they can't seem to see any nuances here. It's either all one thing or all the other - but in reality we are talking about something in the middle.

Update: November 19, 2009.
xerxes - if Graham was merely raising a red herring - why did our Attorney General, Holder, not make that point? Assuming Xerxes is right - then Holder is incompetent, because he, our Attorney General, could not cogently state the point as well as some guy commenting on Answerology! Again, this does not inspire confidence.

Update: November 19, 2009.
BTW, my personal opinion - I think since the terrorists have declared war on us, we should treat them as enemy combatants and try them using military tribunals. Of course, if our soldiers meet them on the field of battle, they can just shoot them. Now, some people think that 9/11 was not a declaration of war by the terrorists - it was merely a terrorist attack. I suppose if they'd had a nuke and killed half the city, that would also be considered merely grounds for police action by some people. BTW, when a US citizen acts to destroy his or her own country, that used to be called treason... We absolutely do need to protect civil liberties. However, enemy combatants have never been given the same civil liberties as civilians. Our civil liberties were put in place to protect the rights of civilians, not to protect enemies trying to destroy us. International rules of engagement have been codified to deal with enemies. One point llasroh made that is quite a good point - why did we never make a formal declaration of war against the terrorists? I guess because the terrorists are not localized to any country, and we generally make a declaration of war against a particular country... at any rate, good discussion. I think the Obama administration is giving an appearance of weakness to our enemies, and this is dangerous for us in the long run. Some people obviously disagree. However, anyone familiar with the culture in places like Iraq knows that those people respect strength and look down on perceived weakness. That is one reason why strong men like Saddam were able to take power.

Update: November 19, 2009.
Hey, all, I do wish everyone would check out the exchange between Graham and Holder. It's on YouTube. The reason - Graham asks Holder some serious questions, including whether or not this would mean we now have to read terrorists Miranda rights on a battlefield. And Holder CANNOT answer the question - which means - either Graham is right, or Holder is incompetent. Neither option is particularly reassuring.

- Asked by curvysmartgirl, A Creative, Female, 36-45, Dallas, Artist / Musician / Writer

Answer this question

Read Responses (23)

Invite A Friend To Respond

Blog this

Race, Religion & Politics / 1 day ago

Remove Post

Recategorize / Edit

Do you think the "race card" is appropriate here or not?

In Jan 2007, in Kennett, Missouri, Heather Ellis, a 21 year old black college student, was shopping with her cousin at Wal-mart and they both stood in different lines, her cousin's line was faster so Ellis switched lines.

This angered other customers. Ellis shoved merchandise belonging to another customer on the conveyor belt to make room for hers. The ensuing arguments were described as Ellis going "ballistic in a profane tirade"

The police were called. Ellis had paid in cash but the cashier refused to give Ellis her change, waiting for the police. The police arrived and Ellis confronted them with profane language. Police say Ellis repeatedly kicked one officer in the shin and another in the face.

Ellis says that the police officers addressed her "with a series of racial remarks that included the N-word and everything you can imagine." and "Go back to the ghetto."

Her felony trial started yesterday on charges of assaulting police officers, resisting arrest and disturbing the peace.

There are five police officers. They're all saying the same thing. There are at least four other witnesses within the Wal-Mart store. They're all saying the same thing. Two years ago she was offered but refused a plea bargain under which she would receive probation if she dropped her complaint against the police.

This seems just like the Prof Gates case where a person feels they did nothing wrong and that they are being discriminated against based on their race.

What do you make of this?

Update: November 19, 2009.
google or go here for the entire article: tinyurl.com/ydr5kcu

- Asked by donuthate, A Creative, Male, Who Cares?, Phoenix, Who Cares?

Answer this question

Read Responses (16)

Invite A Friend To Respond