Next Question
RSS
YES! Definetaly.
Cherlie Sheen just has some questions, if 9/11 indeed was no cover up I am sure the president will be able to clearly answer all questions and back them up. Everybody would be happy. However it is obvious that some of the questions/concerns about 9/11 are taboo topics for Obama so he cannot address them. Cover up, partial cover up, whatever, the White House smells fishy!
--quote--
CS – Thank you Mr. President. Okay, first; On the FBI’s most wanted list Osama Bin Laden is not charged with the crimes of 911. When I called the FBI to ask them why this was the case, they replied: “There’s not enough evidence to link Bin Laden to the crime scene,” I later discovered he had never even been indicted by the D.O.J.
CS – Number 2; FBI translator Sibel Edmonds, was dismissed and gagged by the D.O.J. after she revealed that the government had foreknowledge of plans to attack American cities using planes as bombs as early as April 2001. In July of ‘09, Mrs. Edmonds broke the Federal gag order and went public to reveal that Osama Bin Laden, Al Qaeda and the Taliban were all working for and with the C.I.A. up until the day of 9/11.
CS – Number 3; The following is a quote from Mayor Giuliani during an interview on 9/11 with Peter Jennings for ABC News. “I went down to the scene and we set up headquarters at 75 Barkley Street, which was right there with the Police Commissioner, the Fire Commissioner, the Head of Emergency Management, and we were operating out of there when we were told that the World Trade Center was going to collapse. And it did collapse before we could actually get out of the building, so we were trapped in the building for 10, 15 minutes, and finally found an exit and got out, walked north, and took a lot of people with us.”
WHO TOLD HIM THIS??? To this day, the answer to this question remains unanswered, completely ignored and emphatically DENIED by Mayor Giuliani on several public occasions.
CS – Number 4; In April 2004, USA Today reported, “In the two years before the Sept. 11 attacks, the North American Aerospace Defense Command conducted exercises simulating what the White House says was unimaginable at the time: hijacked airliners used as weapons to crash into targets and cause mass casualties.” One of the targets was the World Trade Center.
CS – Number 5; On September 12th 2007, CNN’s ‘Anderson Cooper 360′, reported that the mysterious “white plane” spotted and videotaped by multiple media outlets, flying in restricted airspace over the White House shortly before 10am on the morning of 9/11, was in fact the Air Force’s E-4B, a specially modified Boeing 747 with a communications pod behind the cockpit; otherwise known as “The Doomsday Plane”.
Though fully aware of the event, the 9/11 Commission did not deem the appearance of the military plane to be of any interest and did not include it in the final 9/11 Commission report.
CS – Number 6; Three F-16s assigned to Andrews Air Force Base, ten miles from Washington, DC, are conducting training exercises in North Carolina 207 miles away as the first plane crashes into the WTC. Even at significantly less than their top speed of 1500 mph, they could still have defended the skies over Washington well before 9am, more than 37 minutes before Flight 77 crashes into the Pentagon, however, they did not return until after 9:55am.
Andrews AFB had no armed fighters on alert and ready to take off on the morning of 9/11.
CS – Number 7; WTC Building 7. Watch the video of its collapse.
CS – Number 8; Flight 93 is fourth plane to crash on 9/11 at 10:03am. V.P. Cheney only gives shoot down order at 10:10-10:20am and this is not communicated to NORAD until 28 minutes after Flight 93 has crashed.
Fueling further suspicion on this front is the fact that three months before the attacks of 9/11, Dick Cheney usurped control of NORAD, and therefore he, and no one else on planet Earth, had the power to call for military sorties on the hijacked airliners on 9/11. He did not exercise that power. Three months after 9/11, he relinquished command of NORAD and returned it to military operation.
A D V E R T I S E M E N T
CS – Number 9; Scores of main stream news outlets reported that the F.B.I. conducted an investigation of at least FIVE of the 9/11 hijackers being trained at U.S. military flight schools. Those investigations are now sealed and need to be declassified.
CS – Number 10; In 2004, New York firefighters Mike Bellone and Nicholas DeMasi went public to say they had found the black boxes at the World Trade Center, but were told to keep their mouths shut by FBI agents. Nicholas DeMasi said that he escorted federal agents on an all-terrain vehicle in October 2001 and helped them locate the devices, a story backed up by rescue volunteer Mike Bellone.
As the Philadelphia Daily News reported at the time, “Their story raises the question of whether there was a some type of cover-up at Ground Zero.”
CS – Number 11 – Hundreds of eye witnesses including first responders, fire captains, news reporters, and police, all described multiple explosions in both towers before and during the collapse.
CS – Number 12; An astounding video uncovered from the archives shows BBC News correspondent Jane Standley reporting on the collapse of WTC Building 7 over twenty minutes before it fell at 5:20pm on the afternoon of 9/11. Tapes from earlier BBC broadcasts show news anchors discussing the collapse of WTC 7 a full 26 minutes in advance. The BBC at first claimed that their tapes from 9/11 had been “lost” before admitting that they made the “error” of reporting the collapse of WTC 7 before it happened without adequately explaining how they could have obtained advance knowledge of the event.
In addition, over an hour before the collapse of WTC 7, at 4:10pm, CNN’s Aaron Brown reported that the building “has either collapsed, or is collapsing.”
CS – Number 13; Solicitor General Ted Olson’s claim that his wife Barbara Olsen called him twice from Flight 77, describing hijackers with box cutters, was a central plank of the official 9/11 story.
However, the credibility of the story was completely undermined after Olsen kept changing his story about whether his wife used her cell phone or the airplane phone. The technology to enable cell phone calls from high-altitude airline flights was not created until 2004. American Airlines confirmed that Flight 77 was a Boeing 757 and that this plane did not have airplane phones on board.
According to the FBI, Barbara Olsen attempted to call her husband only once and the call failed to connect, therefore Olsen must have been lying when he claimed he had spoken to his wife from Flight 77.
CS – Number 14; The size of a Boeing 757 is approximately 125ft in width and yet images of the impact zone at the Pentagon supposedly caused by the crash merely show a hole no more than 16ft in diameter. The engines of the 757 would have punctured a hole bigger than this, never mind the whole plane. Images before the partial collapse of the impact zone show little real impact damage and a sparse debris field completely inconsistent with the crash of a large jetliner, especially when contrasted with other images showing airplane crashes into buildings.
CS – Number 15; What is the meaning behind the following quote attributed to Dick Cheney which came to light during the 9/11 Commission hearings? The passage is taken from testimony given by then Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta.
During the time that the airplane was coming in to the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President, “The plane is 50 miles out.” “The plane is 30 miles out.” And when it got down to “the plane is 10 miles out,” the young man also said to the Vice President, “Do the orders still stand?” And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said, “Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?”
As the plane was not shot down, in addition to the fact that armed fighter jets were nowhere near the plane and the Pentagon defensive system was not activated, are we to take it that the orders were to let the plane find its target?
CS – Number 16; In May 2003, the Miami Herald reported how the Bush administration was refusing to release a 900-page congressional report on 9/11 because it wanted to “avoid enshrining embarrassing details in the report,” particularly regarding pre-9/11 warnings as well as the fact that the hijackers were trained at U.S. flight schools.
CS – Number 17; Top Pentagon officials cancelled their scheduled flights for September 11th on September 10th. San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown, following a security warning, cancelled a flight into New York that was scheduled for the morning of 9/11.
CS – Number 18; The technology to enable cell phone calls from high-altitude airline flights was not created until 2004, and even by that point it was only in the trial phase. Calls from cell phones which formed an integral part of the official government version of events were technologically impossible at the time.
CS – Number 19: On April 29, 2004, President Bush and V.P. Cheney would only meet with the commission under specific clandestine conditions. They insisted on testifying together and not under oath. They also demanded that their testimony be treated as a matter of “state secret.” To date, nothing they spoke of that day exists in the public domain.
CS – And finally Mr. President – Number 20; A few days after the attack, several newspapers as well as the FBI reported that a paper passport had been found in the ruins of the WTC. In August 2004, CNN reported that 9/11 hijacker Ziad Jarrah’s visa was found in the remains of Flight 93 which went down in Shanksville, Pennsylvania.
At least a third of the WTC victim’s bodies were vaporized and many of the victims of the Pentagon incident were burned beyond recognition. And yet visas and paper passports which identify the perpetrators and back up the official version of events miraculously survive explosions and fires that we are told melted steel buildings.
--/quote--
Source(s):
http://www.infowars.com/twenty-minutes-with-the-president/
Helpful Answer?
(4)
(1)
Permalink |
Report
If significant portions of the population start to believe this theory politicians will have to take him and others like him seriously.
Permalink | Report
Source(s):
My own personal opinion....
Permalink | Report
Permalink | Report
Answered Question
M$1
September 11, 2009 03:41 PM
Should Barack Obama grant Charlie Sheen an interview to discuss 9-11?
Actor Charlie Sheen believes 9-11 was orchestrated by the U.S. Government to start a war in Iraq among other things. He has asked President Barack Obama for a 20-minute interview to present his facts and feelings and ask that the investigation into the 9-11 attacks be re-opened.
Should Obama grant him this interview? Why or why not?
Should Obama grant him this interview? Why or why not?
Interesting Question?
Yes (0)
No (0)
RSS
Best Answer Decided by Votes
| September 11, 2009 11:12 PM |
Cherlie Sheen just has some questions, if 9/11 indeed was no cover up I am sure the president will be able to clearly answer all questions and back them up. Everybody would be happy. However it is obvious that some of the questions/concerns about 9/11 are taboo topics for Obama so he cannot address them. Cover up, partial cover up, whatever, the White House smells fishy!
--quote--
CS – Thank you Mr. President. Okay, first; On the FBI’s most wanted list Osama Bin Laden is not charged with the crimes of 911. When I called the FBI to ask them why this was the case, they replied: “There’s not enough evidence to link Bin Laden to the crime scene,” I later discovered he had never even been indicted by the D.O.J.
CS – Number 2; FBI translator Sibel Edmonds, was dismissed and gagged by the D.O.J. after she revealed that the government had foreknowledge of plans to attack American cities using planes as bombs as early as April 2001. In July of ‘09, Mrs. Edmonds broke the Federal gag order and went public to reveal that Osama Bin Laden, Al Qaeda and the Taliban were all working for and with the C.I.A. up until the day of 9/11.
CS – Number 3; The following is a quote from Mayor Giuliani during an interview on 9/11 with Peter Jennings for ABC News. “I went down to the scene and we set up headquarters at 75 Barkley Street, which was right there with the Police Commissioner, the Fire Commissioner, the Head of Emergency Management, and we were operating out of there when we were told that the World Trade Center was going to collapse. And it did collapse before we could actually get out of the building, so we were trapped in the building for 10, 15 minutes, and finally found an exit and got out, walked north, and took a lot of people with us.”
WHO TOLD HIM THIS??? To this day, the answer to this question remains unanswered, completely ignored and emphatically DENIED by Mayor Giuliani on several public occasions.
CS – Number 4; In April 2004, USA Today reported, “In the two years before the Sept. 11 attacks, the North American Aerospace Defense Command conducted exercises simulating what the White House says was unimaginable at the time: hijacked airliners used as weapons to crash into targets and cause mass casualties.” One of the targets was the World Trade Center.
CS – Number 5; On September 12th 2007, CNN’s ‘Anderson Cooper 360′, reported that the mysterious “white plane” spotted and videotaped by multiple media outlets, flying in restricted airspace over the White House shortly before 10am on the morning of 9/11, was in fact the Air Force’s E-4B, a specially modified Boeing 747 with a communications pod behind the cockpit; otherwise known as “The Doomsday Plane”.
Though fully aware of the event, the 9/11 Commission did not deem the appearance of the military plane to be of any interest and did not include it in the final 9/11 Commission report.
CS – Number 6; Three F-16s assigned to Andrews Air Force Base, ten miles from Washington, DC, are conducting training exercises in North Carolina 207 miles away as the first plane crashes into the WTC. Even at significantly less than their top speed of 1500 mph, they could still have defended the skies over Washington well before 9am, more than 37 minutes before Flight 77 crashes into the Pentagon, however, they did not return until after 9:55am.
Andrews AFB had no armed fighters on alert and ready to take off on the morning of 9/11.
CS – Number 7; WTC Building 7. Watch the video of its collapse.
CS – Number 8; Flight 93 is fourth plane to crash on 9/11 at 10:03am. V.P. Cheney only gives shoot down order at 10:10-10:20am and this is not communicated to NORAD until 28 minutes after Flight 93 has crashed.
Fueling further suspicion on this front is the fact that three months before the attacks of 9/11, Dick Cheney usurped control of NORAD, and therefore he, and no one else on planet Earth, had the power to call for military sorties on the hijacked airliners on 9/11. He did not exercise that power. Three months after 9/11, he relinquished command of NORAD and returned it to military operation.
A D V E R T I S E M E N T
CS – Number 9; Scores of main stream news outlets reported that the F.B.I. conducted an investigation of at least FIVE of the 9/11 hijackers being trained at U.S. military flight schools. Those investigations are now sealed and need to be declassified.
CS – Number 10; In 2004, New York firefighters Mike Bellone and Nicholas DeMasi went public to say they had found the black boxes at the World Trade Center, but were told to keep their mouths shut by FBI agents. Nicholas DeMasi said that he escorted federal agents on an all-terrain vehicle in October 2001 and helped them locate the devices, a story backed up by rescue volunteer Mike Bellone.
As the Philadelphia Daily News reported at the time, “Their story raises the question of whether there was a some type of cover-up at Ground Zero.”
CS – Number 11 – Hundreds of eye witnesses including first responders, fire captains, news reporters, and police, all described multiple explosions in both towers before and during the collapse.
CS – Number 12; An astounding video uncovered from the archives shows BBC News correspondent Jane Standley reporting on the collapse of WTC Building 7 over twenty minutes before it fell at 5:20pm on the afternoon of 9/11. Tapes from earlier BBC broadcasts show news anchors discussing the collapse of WTC 7 a full 26 minutes in advance. The BBC at first claimed that their tapes from 9/11 had been “lost” before admitting that they made the “error” of reporting the collapse of WTC 7 before it happened without adequately explaining how they could have obtained advance knowledge of the event.
In addition, over an hour before the collapse of WTC 7, at 4:10pm, CNN’s Aaron Brown reported that the building “has either collapsed, or is collapsing.”
CS – Number 13; Solicitor General Ted Olson’s claim that his wife Barbara Olsen called him twice from Flight 77, describing hijackers with box cutters, was a central plank of the official 9/11 story.
However, the credibility of the story was completely undermined after Olsen kept changing his story about whether his wife used her cell phone or the airplane phone. The technology to enable cell phone calls from high-altitude airline flights was not created until 2004. American Airlines confirmed that Flight 77 was a Boeing 757 and that this plane did not have airplane phones on board.
According to the FBI, Barbara Olsen attempted to call her husband only once and the call failed to connect, therefore Olsen must have been lying when he claimed he had spoken to his wife from Flight 77.
CS – Number 14; The size of a Boeing 757 is approximately 125ft in width and yet images of the impact zone at the Pentagon supposedly caused by the crash merely show a hole no more than 16ft in diameter. The engines of the 757 would have punctured a hole bigger than this, never mind the whole plane. Images before the partial collapse of the impact zone show little real impact damage and a sparse debris field completely inconsistent with the crash of a large jetliner, especially when contrasted with other images showing airplane crashes into buildings.
CS – Number 15; What is the meaning behind the following quote attributed to Dick Cheney which came to light during the 9/11 Commission hearings? The passage is taken from testimony given by then Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta.
During the time that the airplane was coming in to the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President, “The plane is 50 miles out.” “The plane is 30 miles out.” And when it got down to “the plane is 10 miles out,” the young man also said to the Vice President, “Do the orders still stand?” And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said, “Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?”
As the plane was not shot down, in addition to the fact that armed fighter jets were nowhere near the plane and the Pentagon defensive system was not activated, are we to take it that the orders were to let the plane find its target?
CS – Number 16; In May 2003, the Miami Herald reported how the Bush administration was refusing to release a 900-page congressional report on 9/11 because it wanted to “avoid enshrining embarrassing details in the report,” particularly regarding pre-9/11 warnings as well as the fact that the hijackers were trained at U.S. flight schools.
CS – Number 17; Top Pentagon officials cancelled their scheduled flights for September 11th on September 10th. San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown, following a security warning, cancelled a flight into New York that was scheduled for the morning of 9/11.
CS – Number 18; The technology to enable cell phone calls from high-altitude airline flights was not created until 2004, and even by that point it was only in the trial phase. Calls from cell phones which formed an integral part of the official government version of events were technologically impossible at the time.
CS – Number 19: On April 29, 2004, President Bush and V.P. Cheney would only meet with the commission under specific clandestine conditions. They insisted on testifying together and not under oath. They also demanded that their testimony be treated as a matter of “state secret.” To date, nothing they spoke of that day exists in the public domain.
CS – And finally Mr. President – Number 20; A few days after the attack, several newspapers as well as the FBI reported that a paper passport had been found in the ruins of the WTC. In August 2004, CNN reported that 9/11 hijacker Ziad Jarrah’s visa was found in the remains of Flight 93 which went down in Shanksville, Pennsylvania.
At least a third of the WTC victim’s bodies were vaporized and many of the victims of the Pentagon incident were burned beyond recognition. And yet visas and paper passports which identify the perpetrators and back up the official version of events miraculously survive explosions and fires that we are told melted steel buildings.
--/quote--
Source(s):
http://www.infowars.com/twenty-minutes-with-the-president/
Helpful Answer?
(4)
(1)
Helpful: chriswingate, georgehembree, henrikproductions, stanar
Unhelpful: andrew44232
Tip nickunderscore for this answerOther Answers (4)
September 11, 2009 04:50 PM
Unless Charlie can produce his argument in a very compelling manner no interview will be needed. IE create a well received documentary or book stating his position. If he can not do this, he will be dismissed as a "wingnut" and can be easily dismissed by the president without negative impact. If significant portions of the population start to believe this theory politicians will have to take him and others like him seriously.
Permalink | Report
September 11, 2009 11:06 PM
Here's his short list, all his points are backed up by news reports, eye witnesses and the previous investigation reports.
see my answer
Report
see my answer
September 12, 2009 12:24 AM
I am not saying no one believes this, but until a very large portion of the US believes it it is going to be considered "wild accusations". . . but lets say some things don't add up, does that mean that the government did it? Or does that mean there were some things that the government knew or suspected that they could not reveal for 1) lack of solid evidence 2) fear of national security .
Ex. Even if we go with the idea that explosives were in both towers perhaps everything was hushed to prevent public panic of bombings? It seems more likely then a government plot to destroy the towers.
If the government wanted to build support for a war there would have been easier cheaper and cleaner ways to do it, a massive bomb threat at a power plant or city block that we disarm in the "nick of time" would have done likely done the trick, while making our leaders look far more capable and heroic.
Report
Ex. Even if we go with the idea that explosives were in both towers perhaps everything was hushed to prevent public panic of bombings? It seems more likely then a government plot to destroy the towers.
If the government wanted to build support for a war there would have been easier cheaper and cleaner ways to do it, a massive bomb threat at a power plant or city block that we disarm in the "nick of time" would have done likely done the trick, while making our leaders look far more capable and heroic.
September 12, 2009 02:25 AM
Chris now that you mention it, that does sound Die Hard-ish! Perhaps I have been watching too many action flicks ^_^
Report
September 12, 2009 09:50 AM
So everybody has to believe it in order for it to be true? Thats the worst argument I have ever heard. It sounds to me that you are just afraid of exactly that, I could be wrong. In any case 9/11 was, if a cover up, a bit more than just a pretext to go to war. There would have been much easier ways like you said.
But for example, tell me, why did WTC 7 collapse? Simple question.
Report
But for example, tell me, why did WTC 7 collapse? Simple question.
September 12, 2009 12:56 PM
" . . . he will be dismissed as a "wingnut" and can be easily dismissed by the president without negative impact.
If significant portions of the population start to believe this theory politicians will have to take him and others like him seriously."
I didn't say that if people don't believe it, it isn't true. I said if enough people don't believe it, politicians can ignore it and write it off . . . there is a VERY significant difference. If the public considers 9/11 theories to be the realm of tinfoil hats and alien takeover plots, then politicians can dismiss them at whim, even if the charges are true. Is it ethical no, but it is the way it works.
If the wide public opinion is that there is a cover up politicians will have to act
To address your question . . .
WTC 7? Good question, perhaps a bomb, and perhaps the government does not want the public to know that, but does that mean the government is the one who planted it? It could mean lots of different things. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. The claim that the government did it is an extraordinary claim IMHO.
Does every bit of the official story add up . . perhaps not. Some things in national events will be covered up and considered sensitive information for decades, however I think there is not enough evidence to pin it on the government.
Perhaps I will write to you with my personal theories on the matter some time.
Report
If significant portions of the population start to believe this theory politicians will have to take him and others like him seriously."
I didn't say that if people don't believe it, it isn't true. I said if enough people don't believe it, politicians can ignore it and write it off . . . there is a VERY significant difference. If the public considers 9/11 theories to be the realm of tinfoil hats and alien takeover plots, then politicians can dismiss them at whim, even if the charges are true. Is it ethical no, but it is the way it works.
If the wide public opinion is that there is a cover up politicians will have to act
To address your question . . .
WTC 7? Good question, perhaps a bomb, and perhaps the government does not want the public to know that, but does that mean the government is the one who planted it? It could mean lots of different things. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. The claim that the government did it is an extraordinary claim IMHO.
Does every bit of the official story add up . . perhaps not. Some things in national events will be covered up and considered sensitive information for decades, however I think there is not enough evidence to pin it on the government.
Perhaps I will write to you with my personal theories on the matter some time.
September 12, 2009 01:53 PM
Extraordinary proof? Have you seen the videos and reports? The building is clearly in tact, no fire and no plane hit it. Videos clearly depict the building imploding like a perfect demolition. As for reasons, Enron and Worldcom SEC files. Especially those $70 billion concerning the California energy swindle, by Enron ... all gone. Other reasons I dont know, however you should consider Silverstein Properties and the fact that the WTC insurance policy was changed weeks before the attack to include acts of terrorism and the $8 billion plus the new contract Mr. Silverstein got out of 9/11. Coincidence?
Perhaps, but then why was the building blown??? If the reason was legitimate then there is no reason for the government to hold back. AND EVEN IF THE REASON IS NOT LEGITIMATE, WOULD YOU JUST ACCEPT LIES FROM YOUR GOVERNMENT?? WHAT ELSE ARE YOU WILLING TO ACCEPT FROM YOUR "DEMOCRACY"? Seriously such things are shocking to me. But perhaps normal in a debt ridden country like the US.
Report
Perhaps, but then why was the building blown??? If the reason was legitimate then there is no reason for the government to hold back. AND EVEN IF THE REASON IS NOT LEGITIMATE, WOULD YOU JUST ACCEPT LIES FROM YOUR GOVERNMENT?? WHAT ELSE ARE YOU WILLING TO ACCEPT FROM YOUR "DEMOCRACY"? Seriously such things are shocking to me. But perhaps normal in a debt ridden country like the US.
September 12, 2009 02:24 AM
NO, NO, NO....First of all, I think that there was more to 9-11 than we will ever know. However, I am so tired of Hollywood Hacks spouting their opinions like they know more than when to jump on cue. I like Charlie Sheen, great actor, I really like the sitcom "Two and a Half Men" But I guess what really gets me is the fact that so many Americans actually look to Hollywood for Political Advice. Barbara Striesand or the like can spew an opinion and it makes front page news all over the world. However, the best political scientists in the world can voice an opinion on the same subject and it doesn't make news. We are all to often distracted by Hollywood and their gossip mongers. If your in trouble in Washington D.C., the best thing that you can do is to pull a scandle out of the Hollywood cesspool to divert America's attention. Not to long ago there was a scandle in Washington and the only thing on the news was Brittney Spears latest discretion. Since when did Hollywood become our collective representative/scapegoat. I think that Obama should have some agency look into 9-11. I just don't think that America should be taking our political cues from an Actor. If you want political advice, as a political scientist or at least a janitor. A janitor has a little more real world experience. Charlie Sheen was born with a silver spoon and grew up in a pearl bubble. Yes, Charlie has had drug problems and has a hard time staying away from the prostitutes, but the janitor knows what it's like to wonder if he can make his mortgage and feed his family at the same time. Not that that makes a political genuis out of him, but he would know why he likes or dislikes any given policy. It is easy to be a liberal when your rich. Try being a liberal on 18k a year. I was once asked why I was a conservative because I wasn't rich. Seems to me that the rich are only conservative with their own money while the poor tend to be conservative with the peoples money. In fact, no one who makes more than 50k per year should be allowed to represent the people. Its like a black guy having a jury of all white males when accused of raping a white girl.....Anyway, if you don't understand now, you never will............
Source(s):
My own personal opinion....
Permalink | Report
September 12, 2009 03:05 PM
"In fact, no one who makes more than 50k per year should be allowed to represent the people"
I guess this number would include all the politicians and the president!.
Report
I guess this number would include all the politicians and the president!.
September 12, 2009 07:52 AM
It is sad to realize how many families lost someone important to them that day and how Osama Bin Laden is still yet to be found for his crimes but during this economic crisis I think there are a lot more important matters at hand then to discuss a theory with Charlie Sheen. Barack should be focusing more on this healthcare dilemma and the real estate disaster.
Permalink | Report
Answer this Question
Voted "No best answer": eagle6912, nickunderscore,
Related Questions
As a parent, when should you stop paying for your child's gas money? Or should you st...
At your sister-in-law-to-be's bachelorette party, you catch her getting some "private...
How long should you hold on to your children's baby clothes and toys before it is con...
I'm building a new home should I install a residential Fire Sprinkler system? The Cos...
At your sister-in-law-to-be's bachelorette party, you catch her getting some "private...
How long should you hold on to your children's baby clothes and toys before it is con...
I'm building a new home should I install a residential Fire Sprinkler system? The Cos...
Ask a Question
Buy Mahalo Dollars with Credit Card or PayPal
Top Members
Most Popular Tags
Categories
- Anonymous
- Arts & Design
- Beauty & Style
- Books & Authors
- Business
- Cars & Transportation
- Consumer Electronics
- Coupons Deals
- Education
- Entertainment
- Environment
- Fitness
- Food & Drink
- From Email
- From Iphone
- From Twitter
- Health
- History
- Hobbies
- Home & Garden
- How Tos
- Humor
- Jobs
- Legal
- Local
- Love & Relationships
- Mahalo Answers Community
- Money
- Music
- News
- NSFW
- Parenting
- Pets
- Science & Mathematics
- Services
- Shopping
- Social Science
- Society & Culture
- Sports
- Technology & Internet
- Travel
- Video Games
Welcome New Members
- mirey06, November 23, 2009 05:27 PM
- mattopia, November 23, 2009 05:26 PM
- malcolm302, November 23, 2009 05:25 PM
- fb_10506916, November 23, 2009 05:17 PM
- l5evans, November 23, 2009 05:16 PM
Mahalo Dollars are the currency of Mahalo Answers.
Each Mahalo Dollar costs $1.
Once you earn more than 40 Mahalo Dollars, you can request to be paid via PayPal. Each Mahalo Dollar is currently worth $0.75 when paid out via PayPal. Learn More
PS: Charlie's show is amazing, accept it ;)