The Council on Foreign Relations issued a statement on the war on drugs declared current policy is ineffective and that what might work is politically impossible. Is this an example of disonnect between the political system and our government (Perception and reality), or an example of something else.
There is another scam fiscally conservative Republican. After years of this policy is totally ineffective Why do not rule it out? The Republicans are willing to spend money on unnecessary projects, but do not want to spend money on the poorest of our society. Go figure.
Grappling with Governance: Perspectives on the African Peer Review Mechanism
With feedback from adopters, editor Laurence O’Toole retains important classic selections from earlier editions while freshening this volume with new selections that cover not only the impact of recent fiscal developments and international influences on U.S. intergovernmental relations, but also explore the key role of the Supreme Court in shaping the system’s evolution in such areas as homeland s…
Some 2.5 billion human beings live in severe poverty, deprived of such essentials as adequate nutrition, safe drinking water, basic sanitation, adequate shelter, literacy, and basic health care. One third of all human deaths are from poverty-related causes: 18 million annually, including over 10 million children under five.However huge in human terms, the world poverty problem is tiny economically…
This new collection of Aristotle's political writings provides the student with all the necessary materials for a full understanding of his work as a political scientist. In addition to a revised and extended introduction, this expanded Cambridge Texts edition contains an extensive guide to further reading and an index of names with biographical notes. Presentation of The Politics and The Constitu...
Three Plays by Aristophanes presents Aristophanes' three women's comedies in a single volume and in unexpurgated, annotated translations. There are introductions to each play, and general introductory chapters cover Aristophanes, his theater and the women in his plays; an appendix contains relevant additional material from Aristophanes' lost comedies. Three Plays by Aristophanes will interest both...
Probably written by a student of Aristotle, The Athenian Constitution is both a history and an analysis of Athens' political machinery between the seventh and fourth centuries BC, which stands as a model of democracy at a time when city-states lived under differing kinds of government. The writer recounts the major reforms of Solon, the rule of the tyrant Pisistratus and his sons, the emergence of...
The paper will be an examination of the views of three sociological theorists i.e.; Sigmund Freud, Anthony Giddens and Judith Butler. Freud was known for introducing the transference theory or psychoanalysis into sociology. This idea was based on the existence of three elements of the psyche i.e. the id, ego and superego. (Held & Thompson, 2003)
Judith Butler on the hand is widely associated with the queer theory and contemporary feminism. Anthony Giddens is largely influential in redefining the major concepts of the self, modernity and causes of social changes. Since these authors representative entirely different ideologies and standpoints, their viewpoints in the debate will be diverse but rich. Through these three theorists, the paper intends on arguing that there is no future for couples in the future.
Freud: the idea of the existence of couples is largely governed by narcissistic or anaclictic ideas. Couples may not survive in the future because of the divergence of these ideas. Narcissistic individuals are those ones who are self loving and tend to look out for individuals who resemble themselves or ideals of themselves. Usually, women tend to fall in this category because they may be looking for persons who resemble a part of their past. For instance, if a person had been masculine before reaching puberty, then she may feel the need to continue with that masculinity by identifying a partner who possesses those traits. Consequently, this forms the basis for selection of partners. In other words, women tend to look for partners who might fulfil their ideals. (Halpin, 2003)
On the other hand, men do the opposite; they tend to look for partners based on the anaclictic ideals. In other words, their definitions of ideal partners are those individuals who resemble their parents, more so, their mother. In light of these, ideal couples are essentially made up of person who longs to be loved and admired as do the narcissistic persons while the latter group, i.e. the anaclictic persons tend to give more love.
Given the basis of these concepts, then one can assert that there is no future for couples given the fact that prospective female partners may not resemble a person’s mother. This is because most women are self sufficient and may not be the nurturing kind. On the other hand, women may find it extremely difficult to find a male partner of their choice because they tend to look for persons who represent the ideal description of what they would like to be yet such an ideal is difficult to come by. (Bone, 2005)
Giddens: I agree with you Freud about the future of couples. However, my explanation about why their future is uncertain is not founded on psychoanalysis; instead, it is founded on the issue of self identity. Unlike your explanations which place emphasis on the individual alone, my explanations dwell more on the influences that society exerts upon a person’s choice to remain in a relationship or to remain single. In traditional societies, issues were pre-defined, roles were pre-set and all one had to do was to fit into those shoes. However, modern society presents a series of different scenarios today.
Men and women today find that they have to keep asking themselves what they want to do, how they choose to act or who they would like to be. Consequently, different persons come up with different answers to these questions. This reflects on the issue of coupling in that the disparities existing between those choices makes it so difficult for individuals with the same types of needs or preferences to live and cope with one another and this ruins the possibility of the existence of couples in the future. (Christopher et al, 2001)
Butler: I also, believe that the future for coupling is quite shaky. However, my explanations are based on feminist theories rather than what you were putting forward Giddens. First of all, when someone asked me whether I was for or against gay marriage, I refused to answer that question. This is because if I had chosen to answer it, I would have been confined by the very obstacles which the question seeks to unravel. The truth of the matter is that this question of existence of couples or even marriage in the future is misguided. The priorities should be on the issues affecting vulnerable groups such as transgendered persons or the gay community.
But instead of diverting to another topic, let me answer that one, I firmly believe that the term couple is restrictive. It tends to focus on two individuals yet marriage can be an arrangement that encompasses more than two individuals. But given the evolving nature of society, then it is likely, that this notion can be accepted and that society may do away with this issue in the end. Additionally, I also believe that conventional definitions of constituents of a marriage or a couple will be changed in the future. Consequently, the hope for existence of traditional relationships may not be plausible. (Ritzer, 2003)
Freud: I strongly disagree with you on the issue of coupling constituents. This is because gay unions in themselves undermine the very definition of marriage in the first place. I know that this may sound incredibly conservative, but it is may affirm the conviction that gay unions will result in the institution of unconventional forms of marriage such as multi-partner unions, parental cohabitation and single parenting. Consequently, one cannot hide under the premise that these kinds of unions are typical. They introduce the concept of family change and in fact question the naturalness of the heterosexual relations.
Giddens: I have to concur with you Freud on that one, in my book “The transformation of intimacy” I have talked about the issue of gay couples or gay unions. I explained that these kinds of unions have reduced marriage to an issue that simply reflects the emotional connection between two individuals. It is devoid of other issues that held traditional couples together. For instance, the issue of economic dependence in these new unions is no longer a serious concern. Additionally, couples were held together by their mutual need to parent their offspring.
However, in modern alliances, these latter factors have been removed from the equation and it has now become an issue of mere emotional satisfaction. By reducing everything to this level, then society has accepted the notion of a pure relationship as was elaborated in my book. This will only serve to undermine the future of traditional couples. (Shumway, 2003)
Butler: I think all of you have misplaced this concept completely. First of all, you have all assumed that unconventional unions are some forms of alternative kinships. I put it to you, that marriage is merely one form of addressing the issue of kinship. In your perspective, you are merely considering certain issues such as coping with illness, ageing, attending to basic needs. However, the two of you have not considered responsibilities that the community holds towards persons who still love, live, thrive or even die outside conjugal arrangements. Society has not embraced the issue of giving kinship to those people who choose to defy gender norms. For instance, such persons may lose their employment, be physically injured, undergo various stresses or even lose their lives yet their issues have been treated as if they are private matters. It is my firm belief that eventually transgendered or gay people may become centres of attention in the future and they may not be regarded as vulnerable groups. (Butler, 2004)
Freud: I believe that the future for couples is dim not just because of the changes taking part in the external environment but also because there is a need to address the dynamics of a relationship. Whenever, women get into relationships, they tend to carry forward feelings that they had in their past. Most of them tend to carry the sentiments they held towards their parents. For instance, women who had stable relationship with their fathers tend to have a negative attitude towards their mothers. Consequently, when they enter into marriage, then they tend to carry forward those same feelings. (Mestrovic, 2002)
During the first years of a marriage or relationship, women tend to hold on to their hatred for their mother, consequently, they will love their parents more. However, with time, this hatred will begin piling up and will still need to be directed somewhere. Consequently, such women tend to take it to their respective partners and this may eventually ruin the relationships. The same scenario may also be applied to gay unions as parental hatred is still carried forward. Because of such rivalry, then the chances of forming lasting unions in the 21st century are much slimmer today than they were in the past.
Giddens: it seems as if Freud is mostly focusing on the family unit and the individual as an entity that operates in isolation. However, I think that there is much more at stake for the future of coupling in the future. This involves the macro environment. One cannot operate in isolation in this day and age, there is a need to look into macroeconomic issues that could be causing the current social patterns we see today. (Giddens, 1987)
When analysing these issues, it is necessary for one to ask himself/herself why there are so many divorce rates today. Additionally, one needs to look into the real reasons why so many people are moving form one relationship to another or why there is so much openness about the issue of sexuality today.
One can assert that this is visible because there was a combination of individual and macro level issues that both came into play to determine these outcomes. I put it to you that there have been collective changes created by women movements, varying laws and regulations about marriage etc. But also, there have been choices from individuals about the issues that will govern their lives in the next few years. Consequently, one must exercises a lot of caution in trying to understand such matters as most of them may not necessarily be brought about by one particular issue; instead, there should be a focus on all issues surrounding the matter.
Butler: My sentiments about marriage are likely to permeate into other sectors of society and possibly be accepted by many other persons in the future. I believe that there is not future for marriages because they are simply a symbolic representation of sentiments that people hold for one another and should therefore be left as something that is optional to the affected parties. Care should be taken when examining the issue of marriage. This is because when people associate marriage with health insurance, power of attorney or inheritance rights, then they are undermining civil rights in the first place. They should instead be a struggle to ensure that all persons regardless of their sexual attractions or gender are accorded these rights and that they are not tied to the institution of marriage. In other words, I believe that most marriages are usually seen as political paths or economic paths within which individuals can achieve what they desire. This is a misguided notion which will soon come to pass in the future. There are many revolutionaries who are taking on my point of view about this and it is possible that this same point of view may be propagated by others in order to ensure that the fairest method for dealing with the problem is chosen. (Ritzer, 2003)
Giddens: In relation what you have said about the changing rules in society is the issue of media. I believe that society has been radically transformed due to the role that media have played in their lives. Most televisions, internet, magazine readers are constantly looking for things that will excite them. Consequently, bringing out stories that are of interest to the public necessitates depicting stories about couples that have separated or divorced. (Gauntlett, 2002)
The media brings out the fact that monogamy, heterosexuality and stability are three characteristics that are incompatible together or they are idealistic traits. The recipients of these messages may then be prompted to enact those depictions. While it may be true that some of those propagations may not be practical at that time, they usually contribute towards adoption of these non conventional unions and in the end, they reinforce the stereotypes witnessed in mass media. Consequently, the media plays an important role in shaping the ways of life of people and since it does not support stable unions, then chances are that couples may become extinct in the future.
References
Butler, J. (2004): Can marriage be saved, The Nation, 17th June
Halpin, D. (2003): Hope and Education: The Role of the Utopian Imagination; Routledge, p.63
Gauntlett, D. (2002): Giddens’ work on modernity and self-identity: Media Gender and Identity, Routledge
Giddens, A. (1987): The Nation-State and Violence; University of California Press, p 7
Mestrovic, A. (2002): The Last Modernist, Routledge, p 245-270
Ritzer, G. (2003): The Blackwell Companion to Major Contemporary Social Theorists, Blackwell Publishing
Bone, J. (2005): The Social Map & The Problem of Order: A Re-evaluation of ‘Homo Sociology; Journal of Theory & Science
Shumway, D. (2003): Modern Love: Romance, Intimacy, and the Marriage Crisis, NYU Press, 2003
Christopher G. et al (2001): Social Theory in a Globalizing Age; Palgrave Macmillan, pp 145-156
Held, A. & Thompson, J. (2003): Social Theory of Modern Societies; Cambridge University Press, pp 155
As director of the London School of Economics, Anthony Giddens is one of the world’s foremost academics. He has served as an advisor to both President Bill Clinton and Prime Minister Tony Blair, and is closely tied to the center-left idea of “third-way” politics. In this brief book on globalization (drawn from a series of lectures delivered in 1999), Giddens writes, “We are living through a major …
Presenting case studies of schizophrenic patients, Laing aims to make madness and the process of going mad comprehensible. He also offers an existential analysis of personal alienation….
In Britain by 1850, democracy had begun to take on an effective face. However throughout the UK, equal representation did not exist, and it was the wealthy aristocracy that had any form of political power. Even in this elitist system there existed much corruption and bribery. Changing social attitudes lead to a series of acts being passed over the span of 80 years which would eventually lead to suffrage -the right to vote- for working class men, and eventually women, bar a few exceptions. In a true democracy in the purest sense of the word, there must be freedom of speech, regular elections, secret ballots and equality between genders and people. In he mid-nineteenth century, this was not the case. Historian Sydney Wood suggests that: “the parliamentary system of the 1950s was not democratic. Democracies were regarded as being at the mercy of the ignorant people unfit to possess power. It favoured the wealthy in a number of ways.” Prior to the passing of the first reform act in 1832, Britain’s political system had not changed since the sixteenth century.
The First Reform Act of 1832 increased the electorate from 435,00 to around 652,000. Every man owning property worth ?10 (per annum) now had the vote. Prior to the Act’s passing, there were no standard laws that said who could vote. Before the Act, there were two types of constituency; counties and boroughs. The passing gave rise to a greater number f MP’s. The Act corrected some anomalies of the voting system, and it made the working class more politically minded.
William Gladstone and Benjamin Disraeli were politically competing for credit as to who lead to the passing of the 1867 Second Reform Act, in order to gain support of working class voters. It was seen by many in parliament that in order to coincide with social changes, the voting system had to be updated. With the passing of the vote, the electorate became around 2.5 million, with working class men from towns and cities allowed the vote. All householders with one year’s residence got the vote, or those living in residence worth ?12. Overall, one in three men got the vote. However, the vote was not yet afforded to those under twenty-one, or women. The constituencies were reorganised, and some smaller ones were disenfranchised. The greatest change that this Act made was granting vote to those who occupied the boroughs. Also, the increased electorate meant that the parties had to nationally organise themselves.
Before the Ballot Act was passed in 1872, voting was carried out in the open, which meant that many votes were dictated by intimidation, bribery and corruption. The Act allowed voting to take place in private. The Third Reform Act of 1884/1885 gave the vote to working class men in rural areas, increasing the electorate to around 5 million. Still, around half of the male population was excluded. Those excluded included soldiers living in barracks, and sons still living at home. There was still no mention of women getting the vote.
The Representation of the People Act passed in 1918 allowed all adult males over the age of twenty-one who had a six month residence to vote. A large step however, was giving women over the age of thirty (provided they were householders or university graduates) the vote. Plural voting, which had been a thing that took place among the aristocracy, was minimised to two, and even then applied only to university graduates. As a result of Suffragist pressure, women were on the same footing as men in local elections. The 1928 Representation of the People Act finally put women on the same level as men in terms of voting, and the First-Past-The-Post system was confirmed. Historian Morrison feels that “As a consequence of the growing electorate, politicians were forced to abandon the nineteenth century principal of laissez-faire in favour of state interventionism.”
Another criticism that can be aimed at British democracy in the mid-nineteenth century was the lack of fairness. Elections were held in the open, and so many people were bribed to vote for a candidate, or forced to. The passing of the Ballot Act in 1872 changed all this, affording the voters to place their vote in secret. In densely populated areas the secret ballot made a difference. M Willis says “Since the passing of the Ballot Act we have never had the slightest trouble at any election that has taken place in London…” However, in the boroughs and counties where the populations were sparse, the boxes were still open to view, defeating the purpose of the Act.
In 1883, the Corrupt and Illegal practises Act was passed, limiting the amount of money that a candidate could spend upon their election campaign. Taking into account the rising number of voters, the second part of the Third Reform Act, The Redistribution of Seats Act reorganised the seats available, and increased the number of MP’s in Scotland.
Before say, the passing of the First Reform Act in 1832, often MPs were chosen by the wealthy landowners. Following the passing, and MP still had to own land. BY 1885, the number of MPs increased from 652 to 670, and universities still elected MPs, but using proportional representation, another of democratic governing. The 1911 Act, which allowed MPs payment, was very important in making parliament more representative, because before this, only the wealthy could afford to be Mps, but this legislation meant that working class men could become MPs. The Parliament Act did truly alter the face of parliament.
The Parliament Act of 1911 also changed something that before the act had been a large part of parliament. The House of Lords, whose positions were hereditary, lost much of their influence in terms of government spending and taxes. Instead, the decisions lay in the hands of the popularly elected House of Commons.
By the early 1900’s, there were three national parties to vote for. These were the Conservatives, the Liberals and Labour. Labour was a party that represented the working classes, Conservatives were middle/upper class, and Liberals were not unlike the Conservatives, but according to historian Henry Pelling: “In small towns and country villages the ministers and the lay preachers were the backbone of Liberal strength.” The introduction of the Labour party gave a party that the working class could support, giving them a voice in parliament.
Not only did the working class become better represented, they became more aware of politics and their country, as a result of social advances. In 1870 in England and 1872 in Scotland, education acts were passed, which required children to attend school. This act also led to the development of libraries in many communities.
The building of nationwide railway lines meant that tabloid newspapers came into existence since news could now travel across country with ease. Railways also meant that MP s could freely travel over the country, making speeches. In this way, the people were far more aware of current events in the world of politics.
Party agents were paid to organise publicity. These agents worked alongside branch associations. They were places where drinks were served and billiards played. Their purpose was to boost morale and increase support, as well as provide volunteers. In the Liberal parties, one of these branches grew and expanded into the National Liberal Federation in 1887. This branch served as a radical challenge to Whig leadership within the party. There was a similar branch that existed in the Conservative party: The Conservative Central Office. Unlike the NFL though, it mainly followed the orders of the party leadership. In 1881, the Primrose league was formed, and it seemed invaluable in maintaining party support. H Pelling observes that this support came from: “…the visit to village feasts, the chat in the village schoolroom, or pleasant friendly musical evenings in the winter.” In other words, providing such hospitality and warmth to the constituents kept support. The massive increase in the electorate called for this parry organisation to exist.
It can be strongly argued that in Britain by 1928, democracy had indeed been widely achieved. There was gender equality in terms of voting rights, for those over the age of twenty-one. There were regular elections, and voting was now free of corrupt activity, due to a secret ballot. MPs were now paid, enabling working class to be able to afford to enter into the House of Commons. There was a range of parties to choose from, and electoral districts were reasonable in size as well as roughly equal to each other. The House of Lords had far less influence over taxation and government spending. The various acts had improved the face of British democracy.
However, there were still flaws in the system. Those in the House of Lords got their position mainly by inheriting it, rather than voting. The basic democratic principal of ‘one man, one vote’ was still not truly enforced, since university graduates were entitled to two votes. Women, whilst having equal voting rights as men, still did not have social equality. They had received far lower wages than men did, and many careers were restricted, since it was still seen as a woman’s duty to tend to domestic life. Finally, in relation to the electoral system -such as the benefits of proportional representation over first-past-the-post- still remained unsolved, and mainly not addressed. Donald Morrison suggests that: “The development of liberal democracy had been slow and piecemeal. The system which had evolved by 1928…had in place most of the apparatus necessary to satisfy the democratic aspirations of the nation. Nevertheless, the essence of a democracy is that of a system of government which promotes and encourages political change from below. Thus issues such as electoral reform, devolution and the promotion of equality continue to be debated…as part of our ongoing democratic political culture.”
It can be concluded that by 1928, Britain was not purely a democracy; however, the acts and reforms that were passed over the decades prior had aided in bringing Britain close to it.
How could a political party as fundamentally evil and overtly racist as the Nazis come to power? Why was Japan known for its admirable treatment of POWs in WWI responsible for such grim atrocities in the Second World War? This comprehensive collection not only examines the details of the conflict (the Battle of Moscow the campaign against German U-boats the RAF bomber offensive) but digs deeper to…
Coalition governments: Your views of readers of the BBC in countries where coalition governments discuss the merits and disadvantages of the systems Parliaments choice again blocked. Alain Badiou. Democracy, Politics and Philosophy 2006 1/5
AN INTELLECTUALLY BRACING NEW VOLUME ON AMERICAâS TRANSFORMATION AND THE CLASH BETWEEN CONSTITUTIONALISM AND UTOPIANISMâFROM THE AUTHOR OF THE #1 NEW YORK TIMES BESTSELLER LIBERTY & TYRANNY , MARK R. LEVIN Hailed by Rush Limbaugh as âthe most compelling defense of freedom for our time,â and âthe necessary book of the Obama eraâ by The American Spectator, Mark R. Levin…
It all comes down to the truth. Much like the character in one of his best-selling books, Andy Andrews is first and foremost a Noticer. Sometimes, all one needs is a little perspective and Andy has been providing that perspective to some of the world’s most influential companies and organizations for the last 20 years. His ability to transform an individual by their own understanding and desi…
Computer communication technologies, such as the Internet, have become very common in many democratic public spheres throughout the world. The often-asked question is how people can use them for political purposes. Using several real world examples and the deliberative democracy theories of Rawls, Habermas, and Dryzek, this detailed, article length guide answers that question, and shows just what …
The West AustralianUS White House hopeful Romney wins big in NevadaThe West AustralianLAS VEGAS, Nevada (AFP) - US Republican White House hopeful Mitt Romney romped to victory in the Nevada caucuses Saturday, US media predicted, cementing him as frontrunner to take on President Barack Obama in November. And former House speaker Newt ...US White House hopeful […]
USCCB: White House Misrepresents its Own Contraceptive MandateSacramento Bee4, 2012 -- /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The US Conference of Catholic Bishops has issued the following response to the February 2 post on the White House blog. The Obama administration, to justify its widely criticized mandate for contraception and ...and more » […]
ABC NewsOccupy site near White House clearedStuff.co.nzPolice removed bedding and some tents at an "Occupy" protest site just blocks from the White House, enforcing a no-camping rule. Rough Cut (no reporter narration) Police have removed bedding and most tents at an "Occupy" protest site just blocks from ...Police clear tents from Occupy […]
International News NetworkAfghan Taliban deny Mullah Omar wrote to White HouseReutersKABUL (Reuters) - The Afghan Taliban denied on Saturday that the group's leader Mullah Omar wrote to the White House last year. The White House received a letter in 2011 which purported to come directly from Mullah Omar, asking the United States to ...Taliban strongly r […]
Tampabay.comSenior White House officials hear from Hispanic community at Tampa summitTampabay.comBy Shelley Rossetter, Times Staff Writer TAMPA — More than a dozen senior White House officials and policy makers met Friday with Hispanic leaders and community members in Tampa to discuss issues affecting the area's Latino population.Tucson hosts White Hous […]
Amid comtempt threat, White House sends GOP more Solyndra docsThe Hill (blog)By Andrew Restuccia and Ben Geman - 02/03/12 06:45 PM ET Amid threats by a top House Republican to pursue contempt charges, the White House on Friday sent lawmakers more internal documents related to the $535 million loan guarantee to failed solar firm ...and more » […]
ABC News (blog)White House: Jobs Report Shows Economy Is HealingABC News (blog)The latest jobs report is “further evidence that the economy is continuing to heal” but that faster growth is needed to put more Americans back to work, the White House says. Reacting to this morning's better-than-expected figures, Chairman of the ...White House's Alan K […]
Globe and MailWhite House Struggles to Clarify Obama Afghanistan StrategyVoice of AmericaFebruary 02, 2012 White House Struggles to Clarify Obama Afghanistan Strategy Dan Robinson | White House The White House faced additional questions Thursday on US and NATO discussions about potentially ending combat operations in Afghanistan by the ...White House clarifi […]
Fox News (blog)White House Press Secretary Won't "Comb Over" Trump Endorsement QuestionFox News (blog)by Kimberly Schwandt | February 02, 2012 White House Press Secretary Jay Carney says he won't "comb over" a question if President Obama sought out Donald Trump's endorsement. This of course comes as 2012 Republican presiden […]
The Associated PressWhite House chef says Obamas eat seasonalThe Associated PressWASHINGTON (AP) — The White House has fully embraced one of eating's hottest trends — seasonal cooking with ingredients grown at home. Presidential chef Cristeta Comerford credits the change in the food coming from the White House's kitchen to ...and more » […]
“In order to lower mortgage payments for millions of Americans, we need Congress to act,” Mr. Obama said in his weekly address. “And as anyone who has followed the news in the last six months can tell you, getting Congress to do anything these days is … Continue reading → […]
A Time magazine blogger reported Thursday that the Sierra Club, America’s oldest and most august environmental organization, accepted millions of dollars in donations from one of the nation’s biggest natural gas-drilling companies for a program lambasting coal-fired power plants as … Continue reading → […]
Dozens of U.S. Park Police descended on horseback and foot upon the Occupy D.C. camp in McPherson Square before dawn on Saturday to continue an enforcement of its no- camping rules launched earlier this week. U.S. Park Police Capt. Phil … Continue reading → […]
Mitt Romney’s Mormonism didn’t seem to do him any favors in Iowa and South Carolina, where some evangelical voters expressed discomfort with the former Massachusetts governor’s faith. But in Nevada, Romney’s religion is a serious asset. For proof, look to … Continue reading → […]
Senate Democratic leaders do not plan to propose a budget this year, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told reporters Friday, saying that they had already done so with the debt-ceiling agreement. “We do not need to bring a budget to the floor this year … Continue reading → […]
He won’t be in this Sunday’s Super Bowl and his Denver Broncos are already 50-to-1 longshots for next year’s National Football League title, but if Tim Tebow swapped the pigskin for politics, he just might be a shoo-in for the … Continue reading → […]
The Gallup state-by-state average approval numbers for 2011 released this week don’t necessarily predict where President Obama will finish on Election Day, but they do measure the hill he must climb to win re-election. The most important number in presidential elections, of … Continue reading → […]
It was standard fare for the former Pennsylvania senator. He doesn’t mince words in campaign speeches in which he describes how — in his view — the country is heading down the wrong path and the government is growing too … Continue reading → […]
Amid crippling sanctions over its nuclear weapons program, Iran is continuing to prepare itself for war against the West, and now is warning of a coming great event. “In light of the realization of the divine promise by almighty God, … Continue reading → […]
The great irony is that it was Tea Party conservatives – running on a platform of limited government, low taxes and balanced budgets – who propelled the GOP to make historic gains in the 2010 election. Yet the two leading candidates for … Continue reading → […]
Obama Needs To Give Back The 105 Billion Dollars He Stole. Michele Bachmann from Minneapolis, MN didn’t hold her feeling back on how she felt about our “gangster government”
iNetGlobal in really good company to grow their business and earn iNetGlobal. Register here: https://secure.inetglobal.com/public/signup.php?ocd=step2&t=1&referrer_id=117134
I'd comment on one of these posts but they are not in a form that is digestable. Possibly you are satisfied with just writing these thoughts and no response is desirable? If you would like to debate, my blog is www.martinhash.com/forums.
I don't know if you intended to spell Barack Obama's name wrong in the tagline of this blog, but most people will assume that you are not conscientious about what you write.
So you know I'm not just dogging you, I too am against that abortion of a "health" plan.[...]
Recent Comments