This should be an option, only if we were forced to take part in elections.
Term limits make our government work more efficiently. When you have people serving term after term, they care more about keeping their power, rather than doing the right thing. Career politicians are more likely to be corrupt and be swayed by lobbyists and special interest groups.
Earth isn't going to be around forever. If mankind wants to survive we will eventually have to move somewhere else. First we colonize the moon, then Mars, and work our way out of our solar system. When the technology will catch up, I can't say.
I would like to become president of the US someday. In a more realistic sense, I would like to join the military (Army or Marines) and after that I would like to build and restore old muscle cars and play my trumpet.
I dare you to try and turn the US back into a British colony. ;) *
There are still debates going on about this, and the supreme court has yet to make a ruling.
There are certain things that are good about the bill, such as not being denied coverage because of "pre existing conditions" and kids being able to stay on their parents coverage until they are 26, but the idea of government controlled health care just doesn't appeal to me.
Since the government would control the health care industry, there would be no competition and no incentive to do well, so people would have healthcare that would be set at sub standards.
I think instead of getting rid of this healthcare bill, it should instead be reformed.
They are either too scared to denounce radical Islam or they secretly support it.
I don't really have a problem with it. if people don't like it, then they shouldn't watch it.
The constitution guarantees the rights of American citizens. I don't see why it should protect somebody who does not uphold the law.
I don't see what all the hubbub is about. I'm not particularly religious, but it doesn't kill me to say it. It doesn't infringe on life, liberty or the pursuit of happiness.
But if you have products to trade, then countries will likely be interested in trade
Only if the product you have is useful to the other country. you can't forcefully trade with another country.
if you do not have the products to trade how will that affect the economy?
You will lose out on revenue. Jobs that could have been created won't be.
Not much, except for how to kill each other more efficiently.
I don't think we are losing. Although I don't know what the definition of victory is in this case, but I think we have made significant progress. I think we were right to fight terrorism at the heart. The Afghanis have come a long way. They are becoming more capable and independent, but there is still progress to be made. Of course terrorism is popping up in other places, and we obviously can't go invading every terrorist nation, so I think it is important that domestically we maintain a zero tolerance policy with terrorists, and stop treating domestic terrorist as criminal instead of combatants.
Getting rid of traffic lights and stop signs won't cut back on accidents. Pedestrians and cyclists already face many dangers, and I don't see the point in increasing those dangers.
yes we were
sigh
Some ally you are...
Of course if we didn't enter and didn't sell you weapons... at best, the war would have lasted until 1947.
That your massive military expenditure does nothing to cover up the incredibly poor division of wealth, poor social welfare and criminally bad health system.
For any nation, military expenses are a separate area of funding. Other things are to be funded by other areas of the budget. Granted our military budget can be trimmed and stripped of redundancies.
British troops are commonly regarded and reputed to be the best trained
I don't know about that, but I have heard that British troops are very professional, which I admire, and I am glad that we are allies.
I am unwilling to conduct a review of every world military to determine which is the best equipped.
Between the British and the Us it's kind of hard to say, seeing as how we use much of the same technology and weapons.
Which is how humans wiped out the mammoth?
Global warming was also a huge factor in the mammoth's downfall.
Private healthcare discriminates against the vast majority of the population.
There are some aspects of universal healthcare that aren't bad such as nobody can be turned away because of "pre existing" conditions and such, but people shouldn't be forced to pay for somebody else's healthcare.
The constitutional argument is completely invalid; it's republican logic.
I am a republican. It's not invalid. The constitution gives congress the power to regulate commerce. Congress does not have the power to force a citizen into commerce and then regulate them.
Greece is full of dust and homosexuals,
...and riots.
Spain is Spain
No argument there.
Ireland is perhaps the most miserable, outdated, vile, loathsome, incestuous, deplorable and irredeemable wasteland that the world has ever seen.
...and drunken.
Like a man with a small penis compensating by building muscle or purchasing a motorcycle?
What does that even mean? Our troops are the best trained and best equipped.
Strength is not synonymous with size.
It sure helps.
Undereducated
We have some of the best universities in the world.
Overweight
We actually aren't the fattest country in the world... we're 6th.
massive opposition to attempts at universal healthcare
Government run health care is not the answer, and forcing people to buy health insurance goes against our constitution.
(which we have, by the way)
Well good for you! Look at the mess England and the Eu is in now. It's worse than us.
When somebody tries to prove a liberal wrong, liberals first resort to name calling, then projection of guilt, then thought control induced hysteria. And when they run out of options, they just deny everything.
Denial of reality is a last resort.
