Can you believe that the Neo-CON death squads in the House of Reps. have put limits on how much you can be compensated for damages in civil lawsuits! They have capped the damages at $250,000.00. Yet the same Neo-Con death squads in the house have raised the fines that are imposed by the FCC to $500,00.00 for the broadcaster and unspecified fines for the actor or actress or performer who says or does something on screen or radio broadcast that the FCC considers profanity or lewd. Go figure?
-
This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
-
Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.
Limiting damages (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Jaymo
- Start date
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2005
- Messages
- 1,020
- Reaction score
- 6
- Location
- IN
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
What do you expect, they're neo-cons! Honesty, how could anyone be a neo-con? They combine utter faith in the market with the belief that preemptive war is somehow 'neccesary'. Note that this means they believe it's OK to invade a country and, as happens in war, kill innocent civilians under the premise of suspicion alone! Also, several neo-cons have publicly said that they support the idea of an American empire (or rather, the advancement of the American Empire, as we already are the most powerful empire ever to exist on this earth), or even an American ruled world.Jaymo said:
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2005
- Messages
- 1,020
- Reaction score
- 6
- Location
- IN
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
As I believe is Garza UK's quote (by a Roman general): "war is only sweet to those who have never experienced it". But be careful. Such feelings as you have expressed lead some Democrats to support a draft, so that 'all will have an equal chance of serving in the military'. I am opposed to any draft, as it will send the unwilling into battle. But yes, Iraq is a rich man's war being fought by the poor. Who is benefitting the most from this war? The weapons dealers! But wait, we all know those companies deserve every dime of that fortune they're making, right?
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2005
- Messages
- 1,988
- Reaction score
- 10
- Location
- Pasadena, California
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Liberal
anomaly said:
Let Freedom reign, and a draft is not free. Honestly, I am at that age and I will sue if I am drafted under the damn constitution. It hasn't been done before and a draft denies one the chance to live (theoretically) and to pursue happiness (because war ain't happy). And before I get some hate pm's about this, frankly, I might actually sign up if there were to be a draft to serve my country, but I just wouldn't do it unwillingly, becasue I do believe in Bush's doctrine of freedom for all...just have a differeing viewpoint...
