Jump to content

thesimbug

Member
  • Content Count

    125
  • Joined

  • Last Visited

    A long, long time ago...
  1. American Politics

    a foreigner learns the us politics. help requested. duke87, let me cut my questions into only three questions: The second is that, in the 19th century, the US was home to a sizeable chunk of the good ports in the Americas - and most of the others were not on the mainland but rather on islands (Havana, Port-au-Prince..), limiting their usefulness to a relatively local area. Shipping used to be very important. The lack of decent port cities on the part of other countries while we had most of them made us, essentially, dominant by default.quote>1. to see the comparison, what "good" and "decent" ports does the us have and what "good" and "decent" ports do canada and latin american nations have in 19th century? 2. compared to canada and latin american nations, why does the us own most of "good" and "decent" ports in the continent of america in 19th century? And then, once the industrial age started setting in, the east coast had many rivers ripe for damming up to create mills, and later for using as shipping channels.quote>3. how about canada's and latin american nations' many and big rivers? can't they be utilized "for damming up to create mills, and later for using as shipping channels"? your big lakes are even shared with canada, aren't they? finally, my very last post of questions, everybody: 1. what is the difference between individualism and selfishness/egoism? would you give me some examples, five perhaps, demonstrating the contrast difference between them? 2. why are/what causal factors do make americans as a society distinctively individualistic more than any other nation in the world? 3. why does the us in the first century of its history extremely and excessively believe in the virtue of high dosage economic liberalism: hands off laissez faire small government totally not intervening in the realm of economy? 4. why do the us and canada have strong stable democracy and, on the contrary, latin american nations have fragile turbulent "democracy" full with revolts, coup d'etats, and military juntas? 5. why are the us and canada economically more advanced i.e. developed in status and, on the contrary, latin american nations economically more backward i.e. still developing in status? on questions no. 4 and 5: please, take into consideration the difference of legacies those nations inherit from their original colonizers: the united kingdom X spain-portugal! hopes for replies: 1. long, wide, and deep explanations, please! 2. "earthly" words, please: less technical terms, more popular words! 3. plain simple ordinary english, please! 4. choose questions you can answer, leave the rest for the others! 5. more than one answer for any of my questions are welcomed! i'm waiting for your replies, everybody! thank you very much for your awareness! thank you very much for your attention! see you later!
  2. American Politics

    a foreigner learns the us politics. help requested. duke87, thank you very much for your explanation! your answer to question no. 2 is perfectly clear! but your answer to question no. 1 seems to need some further scrutiny. before go to the questions, let me clarify this: So - a lot of it is not "uniquely american factors", but rather convenient accidents of geography.quote> "convenient accidents of geography" = "uniquely american factors", duke87. 1. The second is that, in the 19th century, the US was home to a sizeable chunk of the good ports in the Americas - and most of the others were not on the mainland but rather on islands (Havana, Port-au-Prince..), limiting their usefulness to a relatively local area.quote> The lack of decent port cities on the part of other countries while we had most of them made us, essentially, dominant by default.quote> ~ to see the comparison, what "good" and "decent" ports does the us have and what "good" and "decent" ports do canada and latin american nations have in 19th century? ~ compared to canada and latin american nations, why does the us own most of "good" and "decent" ports in the continent of america in 19th century? ~ would you explain the difference between effect of ports on mainland which are not "limiting their usefulness to a relatively local area" and effect of ports on island which are "limiting their usefulness to a relatively local area"? 2. And then, once the industrial age started setting in, the east coast had many rivers ripe for damming up to create mills, and later for using as shipping channels.quote> how about canada's and latin american nations' many and big rivers? can't they be utilized "for damming up to create mills, and later for using as shipping channels"? your big lakes are even shared with canada, aren't they? please, focus on prominent nations of canada, mexico, brazil, and argentina ... and hugo chavez's venezuela! 3. America thus became post-industrial and now has an economy based largely on trading of comoddities rather than producing of products - which, admittedly, is not as strong of a basis for economic well-being and thus we really aren't what we used to be. Experts predict that Americas status of economic dominance is on its way out, and I have to say, they're probably right. In the coming decades, we'll find ourselves on more equal terms with Europe and Asia economically.quote> ~ you don't produce things but you trade. what the heck do you sell then? ~ why is "producing of products" "strong of a basis for economic well-being" and "trading of comoddities" "not as strong of a basis for economic well-being"? 4. Though, I don't particularly see Latin America ... going up too much.quote> why? you don't forget that, based on goldman sachs thesis, brazil and mexico are projected to be the world's leading economies in 2050 included respectively to quartet "bric" and "the next eleven", do you? please, focus on prominent nations of mexico, brazil, and argentina ... and hugo chavez's venezuela! hopes for replies: 1. long, wide, and deep explanations, please! 2. "earthly" words, please: less technical terms, more popular words! 3. plain simple english, please! 4. stripe per stripe answers, please, not number per number! i'm waiting for your reply, duke 87! thank you very much for your attention! see you soon!
  3. American Politics

    Progress of America by Domenico Tojetti
  4. American Politics

    a foreigner learns the us politics. help requested. first, merry christmas and happy new year, everybody! hope peace and posperity be always with us in the whole new year! duke87 and manticorefan, thank you very much for your lengthy replies! those're very insightful lectures! once again, thank you very much! i spend last week to explore wikipedia to find some light to my curiousity: 1. what uniquely american factors do give rise to the us to the status of global ECONOMIC superpower while other nations, especially "new world" nations, can't gain the same status? 2. what uniquely american factors do give rise to the us to the status of global MILITARY superpower while other nations, especially "new world" nations, can't gain the same status? and here are the pages i already read: History of the United States (1849–1865), History of the United States (1865–1918) and Gilded Age, History of the United States (1918–1945), History of the United States (1945–1964), Economic History of the United States, American Exceptionalism, and New Imperialism. and here are the pages i read some parts: Military History of the United States, Monroe Doctrine, Mexican–American War, Spanish-American War, and Banana Wars. but still i feel need to raise this curiousity to intelligent simtropoleans here. to ensure comprehensiveness, let me raise one question first. Q: what uniquely american factors do give rise to the us to the status of global ECONOMIC superpower while other nations, especially "new world" nations, can't gain the same status? what i mean with "new world" nations are: 1. latin american nations like mexico, brazil, and argentina, 2. canada (whose different historical background from latin american nations), and 3. australia and new zealand. hopes for replies: 1. long, wide, and deep explanations, please! 2. "earthly" words, please: less technical terms, more popular words! 3. plain simple english, please! 4. more than one reply are welcomed! i'm waiting for your replies, everybody! thank you very much for your attention! see you later!
  5. American Politics

    a foreigner learns the us politics. help requested. i'm sorry for my late response, everybody! i have some jobs to do. hym, docrorlach, skigeek, manticorefan, duke87, and kibblewitbit, thanks for your replies! i highly appreciate that! thank you very much! greekman, ... look i KNOW he made mistakes but i hate when nonamericans critize our president YOU DON"T LIVE in this country!!!!! it's annoyingquote> does your president feel needs to be an iraqi or even hear the voice of the arab world when he makes his arbitrary assessment of iraqi president saddam hussein that he's a threat to the world possessing weapons of mass destruction before overstepping united nations' mechanism and global denunciation, molesting iraq's national sovereignty, then very lately admitting that the casus belli he raises is actually deceptive? why must iraqis bother about playing with your president's face then? manticorefan, ... Look around, the US isn't your only bad guy in all of this.quote> no, manticorefan, the us is only one of the foremost bad guys. Let's be fair... you obviously have an axe to grind with the US.quote> not as big as the axes these ladies and gentlemen have to grind with the us, manticorefan. your own neighbours in your very back yard. Latin Leaders Joke about Bush Shoe Attack REUTERS Wed Dec 17, 5:20 pm ET COSTA DO SAUIPE, Brazil (Reuters) – Latin American leaders meeting in Brazil this week couldn't resist poking fun at U.S. President George W. Bush over his recent shoe-throwing incident in Iraq. "Please, nobody take off your shoes," Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva joked to reporters at the start of a news conference on Wednesday. An Iraqi journalist had hurled his shoes at Bush at a news conference in Baghdad on Sunday, calling him a dog. "In this heat, if anybody takes off their shoes, we'll know right away because of the smell," quipped Lula, reaping laughter from reporters and politicians alike. Earlier in the day, Lula threatened to throw a shoe at Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, Bush's fiercest critic in Latin America, if the long-winded leftist leader spoke beyond his allotted time. Officials from 33 Latin American and Caribbean countries burst into laughter at the summit meeting, which showcased the region's growing independence from Washington and welcomed Communist-run Cuba for the first time. Even Cuban President Raul Castro, on his first trip abroad since taking over from his ailing brother Fidel earlier this year, was overheard taking a stab at Bush over the shoe affair. (Reporting by Raymond Colitt, editing by Anthony Boadle)quote> Q: 1. docrorlach, 3 questions, please! would you explain in much longer explanations your statements ... ~ below? The war on Iraq was inevitable ever since Bush Sr. declared that "nobody could occupy Bagdhad" and survive. In fact, George W.'s father gave his successors plenty of reasons why not to fight Iraq. But following 9/11 Iraq was the only place where the then US government could hope to make any kind of forward statement, ...quote> ~ below? The then government not only acted on false premises, but was further led astray by its own military who - once again - mistook a huge technical advantage for an automatic victory.quote> ~ and below? It was never so, and the Pentagon should have learned its lessons in Korea & Vietnam.quote> 2. manticorefan, 2 questions, please! would you explain in much longer explanations your statements on military men vs politicians in wars ... ~ below? The Vietnam war was a noble idea, lost through mismanagement by politicians like LBJ.quote> ~ and below? The 1st Gulf war was run my military men like Powell and Schwarzkopf, this one was run by politicians like Bremer, Rumsfeld, et al.quote> 3. ~ how's the logics that qualifications which require that: 1. senators must be at least 30 years old and be citizen of the us for at least the past 9 years and 2. representatives must be at least 25 years old and be citizen of the us for at least the past 7 years can effectively separate: 1. "the most distinguished characters, distinguished for their rank in life and their weight of property" to fill senate and 2. "ordinary" characters, "ordinary" for their rank in life and their weight of property to fill house of representatives? ~ already taught since kindergarten that their founding fathers give senate more power and longer tenure because it's place for "the most distinguished characters, distinguished for their rank in life and their weight of property", why do your senators and representatives amend your constitution so that senators are now no longer appointed by state legislatures but directly elected by popular votes? why do they neglect and destroy their founding fathers' original design of federal institutions? ~ why don't they deprive senate of its privileges of more power and longer tenure for their new status of mere the second "house of commons" after they do the amendment? ~ why does supreme court do nothing to the amendment to secure your founding fathers' original design of federal institutions? ~ other than minimal age and length of citizenship i already say above, no other qualification for senators which is more stringent than that for representatives, right? if there is, what's that? 4. ~ how's the logics that republican senators in senate efforfully try to block the big 3 automakers' bailout proposal, while at the same time republican president in the white house immediately accepts the bailout proposal? ~ what is the difference between fund from congress and fund from white house? ~ do funds from congress and white house similarly come from tax payers? ~ why do the big 3 automakers propose their request for bailout fund first in congress then later in white house and not the opposite? hopes for replies: 1. long, wide, and deep explanations, please! 2. use "earthly" words, please: less technical terms, more popular words! 3. use plain simple english, please! 4. answer stripe per stripe, not number per number, please! 5. choose questions you can answer, leave the rest for the others! 6. more than 1 answer for any of my questions are welcomed! i'm waiting for your smart replies, everybody! thank you very much for your awareness! thank you very much for your attention! and one more thing, everybody! new news related to questions no. 4. Bush Reveals $17.4Bn Car Bail-Out FINANCIAL NEWS Friday, December 19, 06:07 PM LONDON (ShareCast) - President Bush outlined plans that will see US carmakers get $13.4bn in short-term financing from the $700bn Wall Street bail-out, while another $4bn will be provided later. The loans are for three years but the government set a deadline of 31 March for the carmakers to become viable. "Government has a responsibility to safeguard the broader health and stability of our economy. If we were to allow the free market to take its course now, it would almost certainly lead to disorderly bankruptcy and liquidation for the automakers," Bush said. "The American people want the auto companies to succeed and so do I," he added. Last week, the Bush administration signalled it would drop its opposition to using the Troubled Asset Relief Programme (TARP) to help out the car companies, having previously insisted the $700bn relief package would be used exclusively to bail-out the US banking system. General Motors (NYSE: GM - news) and Chrysler had previously told Congress they needed a total of $15bn to keep going until the end of March. Including Ford, the three giant carmakers had asked for a total bail-out worth $34bn.quote>
  6. American Politics

    a foreigner learns the us politics. help requested. manticorefan, ... Bush a war criminal? How, and by whose standards?quote> by standard of the people your president legally liberates, for example? the iraqi al zaidi does not forget to, with full enthusiasm, bid him farewell ... "this is a goodbye kiss from the Iraqi people, dog!"quote> and send a greeting from the iraqi families the "axis of good" heroically frees ... "This is for the widows and orphans and all those killed in Iraq!"quote> manticorefan, i don't need your pieces of comment. what i need is your comprehensive perspective. it's why i raise these questions before: Q (for manticorefan and everyone who supports "strong defense"): 1. what is your party (republican, democratic, etc)? 2. ~ how do americans give meaning to the us' arbitrary and lost interventions abroad like vietnam war? ~ how do americans position their soldiers, killed and surviving, involved in those interventions? 3. ~ how do americans give meaning to the us' arbitrary and won interventions abroad like iraq war? ~ how do americans position their soldiers, killed and surviving, involved in those interventions? 4. what moral/ideological base does justify republican party's traditional advocacy of unilateral military intervention in other nations' internal affairs? 5. how do americans explain to all world citizens their irresponsible action of, with their own hands, reelecting war criminal bush jr. (for his illegal war in iraq) as president of their very nation in 2004 free election? 6. ~ do you think bush jr. is war criminal? ~ why? i do realize that these are resurrected answered old questions. therefore i won't bump this thread just to get answers for these questions. leave these questions unanswered if none of you wants to respond them! hopes for replies: 1. long, wide, and deep explanations, please! 2. use "earthly" words, please: less technical terms, more popular words! 3. use plain simple english, please! 4. answer question per question, not number per number, please! 5. choose questions you can answer, leave the rest for the others! 6. more than 1 answer for any of my questions are welcomed! manticorefan and "strong defense" supporters, i'm waiting for your replies! thank you very much for presentation of your comprehensive view!
  7. American Politics

    still about senate, ... US automaker bailout deal fails to pass Senate From Wikinews, the free news source you can write! Friday, December 12, 2008 A US$14 billion bailout package deal for the "Big Three" United States automakers — Chrysler, Ford, and General Motors — has been rejected in the United States Senate after failing a procedural vote. The bill was rejected after bipartisan discussions on the bailout broke down when Republican Party leaders insisted that the United Auto Workers (UAW) union agree to steep wage cuts by next year in order to bring their pay into line with those of Japanese automobile companies in the United States. The UAW refused to meet the demands. The final vote count in the Senate was 52-35 against the bill, eight short of the 60 needed to pass. Only ten Republicans joined forty Democrats and two independents in voting for the bill. Three Democrats voted with thirty-one Republicans against it. Senate Majority leader Harry Reid said that he was "terribly disappointed" by the failure of the bill to pass. "I dread looking at Wall Street tomorrow. It's not going to be a pleasant sight," Reid said. "Millions of Americans, not only the auto workers but people who sell cars, car dealerships, people who work on cars are going to be directly impacted and affected." Republican Senator Bob Corker was also unhappy about the rejection. "We were about three words away from a deal. We solved everything substantively and about three words keep us from reaching a conclusion," he said. Some Democrats now want U.S. President Bush to reserve a portion of the $700 billion bailout package earmarked for Wall Street to assist the flagging car industry. Stock markets worldwide fell dramatically on the news, with Japan's Nikkei average losing 484.68 points, or 5.6 percent, reaching a level of 8253.87 points. Shares in the auto companies Toyota, Nissan and Honda all dropped by no less than 10 percent apiece. European stocks, such as those in the United Kingdom and Germany, also lost ground, with the FTSE-100 index of leading shares falling 176.3 points to a level of 4,211 at midday.quote>
  8. American Politics

    a foreigner learns the us politics. help requested. odainsaker, that's a long long long explanation! you must already spare a great deal of patience to type down all that explanation. that's an insightful explanation, odainsaker! that enriches my perspective on the us politics! perfectly clear, odainsaker! thank you very much for your reply! however i want to resharpen 1 previous question on racism. it's the question on whether southern americans today is factually still more racial (more look down on black americans) than northern americans. if i may sum up, barbarossa's and odainsaker's answers say that racism is a common phenomenon spread evenly all over the us. for me, these sound more like wise and diplomatic statements, but not assuredly honest ones. Q (old question, short-brief answer is okay): 1. frankly, honestly, and nakedly, are southern americans today factually still more racial (more look down on black americans) than northern americans? talk straight and clear yes-no answer, please! my next questions are about the us senate. first, i read duke87 says ... Also, the senate is considered the more powerful of the two, and senators serve six year terms while representatives only serve two year terms, so they have more power and are more wiling to wield it.quote>then i say, "wow, new knowledge!" (i previously think that senate and house of representatives have equal powers and equal tenures of 4 years) then i go to wikipedia and find ... The Senate has several exclusive powers not granted to the House, including consenting to treaties as a precondition to their ratification and consenting or confirmation of appointments of Cabinet secretaries, federal judges, other federal government officials and military officers.quote> It was to be a more deliberate forum of 'elite wisdom' where six-year terms insulated the senators from public opinion.quote>then i start to question why the us founding fathers design senate to possess more power and longer tenure than house of representatives. then i go back to wikipedia and find ... John Dickinson said the Senate should "consist of the most distinguished characters, distinguished for their rank in life and their weight of property, and bearing as strong a likeness to the British House of Lords as possible."quote> Originally, Senators were elected by the state legislatures, not by the citizens.quote> According to James Madison, "The use of the Senate is to consist in proceeding with more coolness, with more system, and with more wisdom, than the popular branch."quote>Q (new questions, long-lengthy answers, please!): 2. why do actually the us founding fathers design senate to possess more power and longer tenure than house of representatives? let me remind you, don't be limited to my explanation above! tell me all reasons of senate's more power and longer tenure including those other than "elite wisdom" i explain above! 3. if one of the reasons is "elite wisdom": ~ does senate really "consist of the most distinguished characters, distinguished for their rank in life and their weight of property" while house of representatives consist only of "ordinary" characters, "ordinary" for their rank in life and their weight of property? ~ what parameters are used to measure that some people are "the most distinguished characters, distinguished for their rank in life and their weight of property" while other people are merely "ordinary" characters, "ordinary" for their rank in life and their weight of property? ~ what regulations, electoral regulations perhaps, are applied to ensure that only "the most distinguished characters, distinguished for their rank in life and their weight of property" may enter senate while "ordinary" characters, "ordinary" for their rank in life and their weight of property, may only enter house of representatives? 4. just curious, what's wrong with senatorship in public opinion so that whenever we lose a game in simcity 4 by suffering excessive deficit always appears a page which offers us to run for senatorship? hopes for replies: 1. long, wide, and deep explanations, please! 2. use "earthly" words, please: less technical terms, more popular words! 3. use plain simple english, please! 4. answer question per question, not number per number, please! 5. choose questions you can answer, leave the rest for the others! 6. more than 1 answer for any of my questions are welcomed! i'm waiting for your smart replies, guys and girls! thank you very much for your awareness! thank you very much for your attention!
  9. American Politics

    a foreigner learns the us politics. help requested. easy bakes, that's a simple but clear answer. thank you for helping! barbarossa, that's a helpful explanation. thank you very much for sparing your time! that serves much of my curiousity. perfectly clear, barbarossa, some. unfortunately, some are still not sufficiently satisfying. so allow me to raise back and sharpen some of previous questions here. Q: (on racism) 1. ~ are southern americans today still more racial (look down on black americans) than northern americans? ~ does stereotyping which positions southern americans as racial and more racial (look down on black americans) than northern americans still commonly occur in the us? (on patriotism) 2. ~ how many are americans who are not proud (patriotic) of their own country? some estimation, please! ~ so those americans become unpatriotic because of what barbarossa says below? displeased, disappointed, or even ashamed at some of the things we have done, both recently and in the pastquote> hopes for replies: 1. long, wide, and deep explanations, please! 2. use "earthly" words, please: less technical terms, more popular words! 3. use plain simple english, please! 4. choose questions you can answer, leave the rest for the others! 5. more than 1 answer for any of my questions are welcomed! i'm waiting for your replies, everybody! thank you very much for your replies! thank you very much for your attentions!
  10. American Politics

    a foreigner learns the us politics. help requested. thanks again for your reply, duke87! that's such an immediate reply! perfectly clear, duke87! except one: answer to question no. 4. what i ask is not why bush jr. still can be reelected in 2004 though he already launches illegal war in iraq. what i ask is how americans explain to all world citizens their irresponsible actions of, with their own hands, reelecting a war criminal as president of their very nation in 2004 free election. doesn't that sound like germans freely elect extreme right racialist chauvinist nazi party as their leaders in early 20th century? so, i'm very sorry, i must raise back this question here. docrorlach, thank you too for your reply! unfortunately, i don't find your answer to question no. 4 sufficiently satisfying. and your explanation, docrorlach, for me, feels difficult to understand. not so "earthly" in my words. by the way, i know that washington's refusal to ratify international criminal court. Q: 1. how do americans explain to all world citizens their irresponsible actions of, with their own hands, reelecting war criminal bush jr. (for his illegal war in iraq) as president of their very nation in 2004 free election? (new questions) 2. in hollywood films, i often see scenes where an american mocks a southerner (an american from a southern state) as a racial man, a man who looks down on black americans. ~ are today americans in the southern states factually still racial, look down on black americans? ~ does stereotyping (and mocking) as what i often see in hollywood films above still commonly occur in the us? 3. your country is a superpower country, the only superpower on earth. your country defeats nazi germany in world war II and the soviet union in cold war. your country's liberal democracy is followed all over the world. your country's economy is the richest on earth. your country's defense is the strongest on earth. your country's culture is copied everywhere. when your country wants, it even can invade another country nakedly illegally. youngsters all over the world even stick not their country's flag but your country's flag in their bed rooms. but, to my surprise, i find that there are some americans who are not proud of their own country. ~ not proud of one's own country is the same with not patriotic, isn't it? ~ how many are americans who are not proud (= not patrotic?) of their own country? ~ why are they not proud (= not patriotic?) of their own country? what do they idealize then as an ideal country? 4. ~ is there beggar in a country as rich as the us? ~ are they as many as beggars in developing countries like india and indonesia? ~ why do they exist or not exist/exist in small number? ~ how do government and society take care of them? what minimal services does government provide freely for even the poorest americans? (i ever hear that poor americans are given coupons to get free money every week/month) hopes for replies: 1. long, wide, and deep explanations, please! 2. use "earthly" words, please: less technical terms, more popular words! 3. use plain simple english, please! 4. choose questions you can answer, leave the rest for the others! 5. more than 1 answer for any of my questions are welcomed! guys and girls, i'm waiting for your replies! thanks a lot for your replies! thanks a lot for your attentions!
  11. American Politics

    a foreigner learns the us politics. help requested. barbarossa, i already read your serious concern about my questions. i read that with serious attention. for future posts, barbarossa, i'll try to be more selective in raising questions: always look up the questions on wikipedia first, do not repeat answered questions, and do not question something obvious. while those are things i feel i always do, i'll be more introspective in my future posts. barbarossa, thank you for still sparing space in this thread for this foreigner's questions. i still wait for your further contribution in "enlightening" this foreigner on your country’s politics. and, duke87, again you come to lend your hands. all answers in your last reply are perfectly clear. all i can say is thank you very much for all your answers! you'll never be able to realize how much knowledge you already share with this foreigner. while your answers perhaps look trivial for you, they are hugely meaningful for this foreigner. duke87, once again, thank you very much! barbarossa and confused04, you also post replies for my questions. thank you too for you both, guys! i appreciate your cares to my curiousity! Q: 1. how do americans give meaning to the us arbitrary and lost (failed) interventions abroad like vietnam war? how do americans position their soldiers, killed and surviving, involved in those interventions? 2. how do americans give meaning to the us arbitrary but successful interventions abroad like iraq war (not to mention the overthrow of CHILE'S PRESIDENT SALVADOR ALLENDE, the overthrow of IRAN'S PRIME MINISTER MOHAMMED MOSADDEQ, john perkin's dirty job in his CONFESSIONS OF AN ECONOMIC HIT MAN, etc)? how do americans position their soldiers, killed and surviving, involved in those interventions? 3. what moral/philosophical/ideological base does justify republican party’s traditional advocacy of unilateral armed intervention in other countries’ internal affairs? 4. you know that your president, george w. bush, is war criminal for his globally-denounced illegal unjust deceptive unilateral bloody attack on sovereign iraq in 2003. how then do you explain to all world citizens why you, with your own hands, reelect that war criminal as president of your country in 2004 free election? hopes for replies: 1. long, wide, and deep explanations, please! 2. use "earthly" words, please: less technical terms, more popular words! 3. use plain simple english, please! 4. choose questions you can answer, leave the rest for the others! 5. more than 1 answer for any of my questions are welcomed! guys and girls, I’m waiting for your smart replies! thank you very much for knowledge you’d share! thank you very much for attention you already pay!
  12. American Politics

    a foreigner learns the us politics. help requested. o, duke87, that's a long long long long explanation! that's a very very "earthly" explanation! perfectly clear! you even take a peek on my list of future questions. "filibuster" is technical term really enlisted in my list of questions far before you ever say it. so you reduce my jobs by answering it, perfectly clearly, even before i ask it to everybody here. duke87, i really really highly appreciate that! i appreciate your patience to reply my questions and share your knowledge! thank you! and, docrorlach, thank you too for your perspective on "hedge fund"! that enriches my comprehension on "hedge fund"! thank you! guys and girls, my next question is related to the ideology of republican party and democratic party. based on my knowledge so far, republican party's and democratic party's ideologies are inconsistent. ~ republican party's ideology in economy is liberal i.e. advocates small role of government in economy e.g. deregulation, tax cut, no social security net, etc. inconsistently, republican party's ideology in social issues is not liberal/conservative e.g. no condom spread, no abortion, no gay-lesbian marriage, etc. ~ democratic party's ideology in economy is not liberal/social democratic i.e. advocates big role of government in economy e.g. reregulation, tax raising, yes social security net, etc. inconsistently, democratic party's ideology in social issues is liberal e.g. yes condom spread, yes abortion, yes gay-lesbian marriage, etc. Q: 1. ~ what are the ideologies of republican party and democratic party respectively? ~ which one of them is more liberal? ~ is "liberal" label on a politician or political group/party good, bad, or neutral based on public opinion? ~ why? ~ is "socialist" label on a politician or political group/party good, bad, or neutral bad based on public opinion? ~ why? 2. ~ what is the official national ideology of the us? ~ would you show me the legal-constitutional base of that national ideology? 3. (back on "filibuster") ~ does "filibuster" only happen in senate and not happen in house of representatives? ~ why? ~ based on present rule, does a "cloture" need supporting votes from 3/5 of all "duly chosen and sworn" (non vacant) legislators regardless however low the number of legislators present in the legislation making? 3/5 of all "duly chosen and sworn" (non vacant) legislators is not the same with 3/5 of all legislators present in the legislation making. 4. duke87 previously says: When the president nominates someone to a a position as a judge or a cabinet member, the senate has to vote to approve it.quote> ~ so whenever a president fires a minister and appoints a replacement he/she needs senate's approval? ~ does he/she need house of representatives' approval? ~ does barack obama need senate's and house of representatives' approval for all persons he currently chooses as members of his future cabinet? ~ when does that decision making on approval (on obama's cabinet members) take place in senate and house of representatives? ~ would you show me the legal-constitutional regulations which regulate this requirement of senate's (and house of representatives'?) approval for president's appoinments of cabinet members? hopes for replies: 1. long, wide, and deep explanations, please! 2. use "earthly" words, please: less technical terms, more popular words! 3. use plain simple english, please! 4. choose questions you can answer, leave the rest for the others! i'm waiting for your replies, everybody! thanks so much for your answers! thanks so much for your attention!
  13. American Politics

    a foreigner learns the us politics. help requested. jasoncw, thanks a lot for your reply! that's very helpful for my learning! jasoncw, your answer for question no. 1 is perfectly clear. your answer for questions no. 2 is extremely terse, but, let me tell you, it's extremely enlightening! that's exactly the wikipedia page i'm looking for these days. all key words i have in mind already i try, but i still fail to find it up to the day you tell me. unfortunately, the page you show me answers only parts of my questions, not all. so i'll raise again some questions on no. 2 here. i least like your answer for questions no. 3, jasoncw. why do you only reexplain duke87's previous explanation? i wait for your own whole perspective, jasoncw. you don't even answer question "why is "hedge fund" important and frequently discussed in the realm of economy?". while the wikipedia page you show me i already read some weeks ago. but that's not a page easy to understand by a man of zero touch with study of economics. it's why i raise these questions. by the way, i'll leave questions on "hedge fund" temporarily now. i think i must make some explorations on it first: read it, read that, things like that. well, jasoncw, once again, thanks a lot for your helpful reply! Q: 1. is it republican party or democratic party which promotes $25 billion funding to the big 3 automakers in october 2008 to help them meet new fuel efficiency standards of at least 35 miles per gallon by 2020 for vehicles they produce? 2. what energies does a hybrid car consume? note on question no. 2: i already read "hybrid vehicle" page on wikipedia, but it's too general. what i ask you is what energies hybrid cars which you most commonly find in the your country, the us, consume. guys and girls, i'm waiting for your replies! thank you very much for the answers you send!
  14. American Politics

    a foreigner learns the us politics. help requested. hurraaaaaaaaaay! after 3 days of waiting, finally comes a reply! and ... is that you again, duke87? o, god, what can i say to you, duke87? you help me really really much! i can only thank you very very much for all patience you spare to respond my questions! i highly appreciate your attention! and, duke87, all of your answers on the last post are perfectly clear for me. they contribute much to my understanding on the us politics. once again, thank you, duke87! but this foreigner has a full big truck of curiousity on the us politics. and this full big truck of curiousity, of course, needs some place to unload. so here come other questions: 1. what are the contrast differences between republican party's and democratic party's traditional policies on immigration and illegal immigration? 2. ~ is it republican party or democratic party which raises hybrid innovation to the big 3 automakers as requirement for bailout? ~ why is such requirement raised? what is the purpose? is this requirement related to the big 3 automakers' "economic health" more or less in the same way structural adjustment program (sap) is related to international monetary fund (imf) client countries' economic health? ~ are there other requirements for bailout raised to the big 3 automakers? if there are, what are they and which party does raise them? ~ by the way, what energies does a hybrid car consume? 3. ~ what is "hedge fund"? ~ why is it important and frequently discussed in the realm of economy? note on question no. 3: i'm a man of minimal touch with economy and economics. duke87 already effortfully tries to explain what "hedge fund" is and i fail to understand it. read duke87's first post on this thread, please! for example, duke87 explains that ... A hedge fund is essentially when you have a private fund that you only allow certain people to invest in (as opposed to a public fun which anyone with the money can invest in).quote>... and this dumb foreigner starts to question this thing ... money should be the thing we invest, right? money should not be the place where we invest something in! we invest money in some business! hopes for replies: 1. long, wide, and deep explanations, please! 2. use "earthly" words, please: less technical terms, more popular words! 3. use plain simple english, please! guys and girls, i'm waiting for your replies! thanks a lot for your answers! i do appreciate your attention!
  15. American Politics

    a foreigner learns the us politics. help requested. duke87, thanks a lot for your, indeed, lengthy explanation! that does help me understand the us politics. but one part of your explanation i still find less enlightening. explanation for question no. 1 on "earmark" is perfectly clear. explanation for question no. 3 on the us' big 3 automakers bailout is perfectly clear. but explanation for question no. 2 on "hedge fund" is, for me, totally hard to understand. however i want to concentrate on "earmark" first. Q (all are still about "earmark"): 1. how does earmaker legislator do earmarking? why can't other states' legislators inhibit him/her? 2. is earmarking perceived as bad practice by public opinion and political elites? if yes, why can't it be stopped up to this day? 3. "soft earmark" is "earmark" found in the text of "congressional committee report". what is "congressional committee report"? 4. would you show me the full chain of all earmarking-involving-legislation processes? please, with information on in which points of those chains earmarking usually happens! hopes for replies: 1. please, long, wide, and deep answers. 2. use "earthly" language, please. less technical terms, more popular words. 3. use plain simple english. guys and girls, i'm waiting for your replies! thanks a lot for your helps! i do appreciate them!
×