mr mahs

IDIOTS.

ECONOMY: 8.2% 3rd quarter growth...enough said!

Good speech that touched on a number of important topics. Medical benefits. UnGodly high law suit payouts that is running up costs for all of us. I think the fact that he ruled out the govt running medical programs and giving incentives to seek private medical coverage is the way that all americans can receive benefits. Foreign Policy. The list of partners in the coalition and the fact we don't need a permission slip to defend America. This stand was a plus in my eyes because if anyone thinks we should trust the people that objected ie.France, Germany,Canada and Russsia with our security they are dellusional. Marriage: I posted a article about this and how the majority of poverty stricken americans are single parents that have children out of wedlock. I think the promotion of marriage can help and teach moral values to americans, which can only help them succeed. All in all good speech!

I stand corrected on the date.

Pop, even NY's are hated there... You can't compare the south today to the south 60 years ago...

OH MY... Who are you voting for?

This worries me....

FONT=century gothic]Bush's job approval rating, 58 percent in the ABC-Washington Post poll taken Sunday, is higher than for any president at this point in his term since President Eisenhower in 1956. Bush's poll numbers are buoyed by his leadership on the fight against terrorism - 66 percent approval - but dragged down by concerns over domestic issues, such as health care, immigration and the economy.

Do you blame America for those wars?

Just because the Shias want it a certain way doesn't mean all Iraqi's want it... Equal representation... What do you think the Governing council is???

Your wrong.. The only way to ensure sytability in Iraq is by creating a constitution first then a govt that is EQUALLY represented by all etnic groups and by hurrying that transition especially elections, will only ensure a path to civil war....

1ST- Read 1441 before you believe this horse shit of no trigger to war.. ""a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations." Please read the resolution before you take your vegans friends from starbuck's word that the rsolution said otherwise OK Jack?http://usinfo.state.gov/topical/pol/usandun/02110803.htm 2nd- How can they hand over power with out a constitution drawn? A constitution that protects ALL ethnic groups in Iraq. The shiats want a election because they are the majority and will only revenge what attrocities that were done to them..Do you want a civil war? you probabbly do so you can blame the Bush admin. This is the kicker.... Annan should resist the poisoned chalice. He should support the concept of direct elections. It need not mean a delay in sovereignty for Iraq. Five months are not too long to prepare a vote. Alternatively, the UN should offer to take over responsibility for the entire transition to Iraqi rule, as many member governments originally hoped Oh, you mean the same U.N. that tucked tail and ran when they were bombed because they failed to listen to the coalition recommendation of increased security? Not the same UN that defrauded the Iraqi people of billions when they provided billions to Sadaam, Uday and Qusay to build soccer fields and palaces, right? This article is a joke.. show me one article Guardian wrote about the atrocities committed under Sadaam.. Until then Guardian has lost all of the VERY little respect I had for it....

WAR HAS NEVER SOLVED ANYTHING (EXCEPT FOR ENDING SLAVERY, FASCISM, NAZISM AND COMMUNISM)......

This is where he said it.. http://63.250.36.152/showthread.php?s=&threadid=205884

Me either, NONSENSE ! Little word of advice, Normal is a science experiment gone bad.. The guy thinks he's some revolutionary hippie who lives in his moms basement so don't bother with him....

This is for Jamiroguy... Jamiro claimed that the liberation was a failure because of a Afghani supreme court ruling against the singing of women in public.. The gov't decided to uphold the recently inacted constitution, which give women eqyual rights.... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3406253.stm Afghan TV wins 'woman singer war' President Karzai says such broadcasts are traditional Afghan state television has pressed ahead with broadcasts of women singers after winning government support in the teeth of religious protests. Footage of 1960s star Ustad Mahwash was shown on Saturday night despite the objections of the supreme court. Until this week, state TV had not shown women singers since the fall of the Soviet-backed secular regime in 1992. Culture Minister Sayed Makhdoom Raheen said Afghanistan's new constitution gave women equal rights. On Monday, a popular singer called Salma appeared on television, prompting a letter from the court demanding such broadcasts be stopped. Television executives decided they had gone too far, and said on Friday that the country was not yet ready for such broadcasts. But on Saturday night, it was the turn of Ustad Mahwash, a household name in Afghanistan in the 1960s and 1970s. Earlier, amid some confusion over whether the TV would follow the court, the culture minister upheld its right to air the songs. "There is no discrimination and there will be no discrimination," he said. President Hamid Karzai said that it should be up to the government to decide on the issue, adding that there had been a tradition of women singers on TV and radio for "50-60 years". 'Not un-Islamic' Deputy Chief Justice Fazel Ahmed Manawi had said the supreme court was "opposed to women singing and dancing as a whole". "This is totally against the decisions of the supreme court and it has to be stopped," he said on Wednesday. However, Women's Affairs Minister Habiba Surabi accused the court of "interfering in issues which are not their business". "I didn't see anything un-Islamic in Ms Salma's footage," she said. "She was just sitting politely and singing." Women have gradually been gaining a higher profile since the fall of the Taleban - which banned television outright - just over two years ago. The recent loya jirga, or grand assembly, adopted a new constitution which gave women equal rights. Since 2002, some have presented news shows on television. There has also been a proliferation of Indian movies and cable television, which conservative Muslims have heavily criticised.

This sis what I said.. --Those who donot take FULL ADVANTAGE, would rather worship gangsta rap and basketball players.. who's at fault here raver? the govt?

JAN. 15, 2004: FEMINISM, HAMAS-STYLE A Breakthrough for Palestinian Women The Palestinian radical Islamic group Hamas has just deployed its first female suicide bomber, Reem al-Raiyshi, a 22-year-old mother of two. Kind of puts the American debate about women in combat in a new perspective doesn’t it? Who says fundamentalist Islam is hostile to the aspirations of women? But this breakthrough for Islamic feminism has some interesting aspects that aren’t being reported, not yet anyway. One question that immediately comes to mind: What happened to the suicide-bomber’s husband? According to early news reports, Raiyshi was married. Yet while she swears in her suicide video that she loved her soon-to-be orphaned three-year-old and 18-month-year-old, she had nothing to say about their father. Is he alive? While the 800 or so Israeli casualties since September 2000 have mostly been women and children, the overwhelming majority of the 2000-plus Palestinian casualties have been men of military age. Yet one has to think that if Reem al-Raiyshi’s husband numbered among the casualties of Arafat’s terror war, his devoted widow would have mentioned him. Is he a prisoner? Again, one would think that al-Raiyshi might have had a word or two to say. So how to explain why he went unmentioned? Might he have divorced and abandoned her under Islamic law – and, still following that law, taken custody of her children? If so, could her abandonment and shame and the loss of her children party explain her willingness to kill and die? Could the twisted imaginations of the local Hamas chiefs have pointed suicide-murder out to her as a solution to her problems – a way to erase the shame of being discarded, a way to redeem herself in the eyes of her family, a way to acquire glory in the eyes of her children, and even a way to earn them some money: for Saudi money still continues to flow to the families of suicide bombers. It’s a very striking thing how the Palestinian groups have profited from their own oppression of their local women. First they deprive them of all hope in life – then they exploit that hopelessness to make killers of them. Yasser Arafat’s Al Aqsa brigades have been using women bombers for many months now – and again and again one reads of them words to the effect of: “Her family was baffled by her action. They had just arranged a marriage for her, and they thought that she was looking forward to her new life ….” These observations undergird a point that Richard Perle and I stress in An End to Evil: that the war on terror is not just a battle on the ground – it is a battle of ideas: extremist Islam against democracy and freedom, including freedom for women. The self-described realists who promise that Middle Eastern autocracies can guarantee US security and the flow of oil if only we refrain from “destabilizing” them are deluding themselves. The cruel “stability” of Middle Eastern life is precisely what is creating the terrorists. The region needs – and Americans need – an emancipating wave of destabilization that shatters for good and all the prestige and credibility of the murderous imams of Hamas and its supporters in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere in the region

You're missing the point. I am no longer for affirmative action because it is no longer needed, you said it your self with theYeah, there are lots of African americans...but guess how they got there pal. comment. When a Colin Powell and Conde Rice can be in a Presidents cabinet and both are self made millionaires, isn't that proof enough that the oppurtunities are indeed out there and it's up to U to make something of yourself? The immigrant stat you are looking for is refelected in our country as a whole,where the majority of our population have come as immigrants and were discriminated against from the Irish to the Italians. Granted the blacks suffred more but it's time to look to the future not the past and stop making excuses for your hardships and do something about it... You attend school right? Anyone who is willing to go to school and are poor enough can receive a education for free due to grants and scholarships. Those who donot take FULL ADVANTAGE would rather worship gangsta rap and basketball players who's is at fault here raver? the govt?

Centuries ago, mankind created the greatest anti-child-poverty program in all of recorded history. It was called marriage. During the past three decades, the consensus behind this wondrously effective social program has collapsed. The result has harmed countless American children for whom there is no disaster quite like being born out of wedlock and growing up in a single-parent household. Almost two-thirds of the nation's poor children are in single-parent households. A child raised in a never-married household is roughly seven times more likely to be in poverty and five times more likely to be welfare-dependent. He is at greater risk to have emotional problems, fail academically, abuse drugs — and experience everything else you hope a child would be spared. The United States doesn't have a "welfare problem," so much as a marriage problem. We spend $200 billion a year on various means-tested welfare programs. Seventy-five percent of it goes to single parents. The welfare system as we know it for children would hardly exist if it weren't for widespread single parenthood. The Bush administration has proposed programs to strengthen marriage as part of the reauthorization of the 1996 Welfare Reform Act, and President Bush might well highlight them in his State of the Union address. If so, the marriage debate in the United States could be usefully widened from whether judges should be allowed to create gay marriages to the broader question of how to strengthen marriage among heterosexuals. Government has avoided promoting marriage because it feels too "judgmental," and feminists have created a malodor around the institution (patriarchal, repressive, blah, blah, blah). "Over the last 20 years," says Bush-administration marriage guru Wade Horn, "there has only been one service that we have not been offering — marriage education — because we're afraid of saying the word 'marriage.'" But without a renaissance in marriage there will be no true welfare reform. "The point of welfare reform was never to have lots and lots of hardworking single mothers," says the Heritage Foundation's Robert Rector, who was a prime architect of the 1996 welfare bill. He hoped it would promote marriages that would fundamentally improve the lives of women and children in a way government benefits, or even a job, can't. Those excusing the single-motherhood status quo say that there are just no men for low-income mothers to marry. According to a Princeton University survey, however, roughly half of mothers of out-of-wedlock kids are cohabiting with the father at birth. The relationships are there; they just don't last. Another excuse is that the men involved don't make enough money to support the mothers. But fathers of children born out of wedlock make, on average, $17,000 a year. According to Rector, if they were to marry the mothers of their children, 75 percent of the mothers would be lifted out of poverty. In roughly two-thirds of the cases, the mothers would be lifted out of poverty without even having to work themselves. Nor is the problem that marriage is held in low esteem. "Marriage is already sold; we don't need to sell it," says Horn. Rector reports that single mothers value marriage. It's just that they consider it a near-utopian state to be achieved in some far-off future when they have made it into the middle class. What they don't realize is that marriage is their ticket into the middle class. Why not help those young couples — on a voluntary basis, of course — interested in getting this ticket? Private-sector programs that teach couples better relationship skills have repeatedly been shown to encourage healthy, sustained marriages. Most of these programs have been tried with middle-class couples, but they would almost certainly work with low-income couples — the target of the Bush proposal — as well. "What is astounding to me," says Horn, "is that this isn't already being done, because it's so logical." Unfortunately, logic hasn't been the guide to American social policy since the 1960s. Or the most effective anti-child poverty program ever would never have been abandoned.

Fallacy? You're clueless bud, where do you work MARS? I work at a fortune 500 company in NYC where the majority are hard working African Americans.. Stop making excuses for the one that are responsible for their own failure in getting their priorities straight. How can a immigrant come to this country with nothing and become a millionaire but a person who is already a citizen can't?

WHAT? The CEO of Morgan Stanley is African american as well as countless others succesful african americans who went to school and made a better for themselves. What ever you get in life you earn, nothing is free....

Thats where our beliefs and party lines are in contrast... Affirmative action is not the answer, morality especially children out of wedlock is. I wrote a paper on the issue for a theolgy course and found some intersting stats.. Crime Boys born to teen mothers are 2.7 times more likely to end up behind bars than their peers born within a marriage. It is estimated that a 10 percent increase in out of wedlock rates leads to a 17 percent increase in serious violent crime. Social Breakdown in America Studies indicate that more than 70 percent of juveniles in state reform institutions come from fatherless homes. Jennifer E. Marshall, Sanctioning Illegitimacy: Our National Character Is at Stake, Family Research Council. 3/28/97 Children born out of wedlock are two to three times less likely to be rated "excellent" in school by their teachers. These students have a tendency to score lower on tests than their other classmates. It is estimated that out of wedlock births cost taxpayers $2.2 billion in welfare and food stamps each year. How in Gods name is Affirmative action going to fix this promblem when children are born to poverty stricken housholds because the fathers aren't taking care of their children and would rather spend their money on Timberland boots and BLING BLING instead of diapers?

Dude if we are counting websites, type in JIHAD into GOOGLE and see what comes up. here is a good example lol http://arabic.aljazeera.net/HomePage