Richard Said:

Student council speech?

We Answered:

That sounds really good! I like the part that said, "in case you were sleeping when I began my speech." Adding slight humor like that will get the students' attention, and they will be more likely to remember you.

Just make sure your promises aren't unobtainable. No one likes an officer who promises something they can't achieve.

Good luck on your election!

Christopher Said:

What are your thoughts on this?

We Answered:

WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. It was debunked so fast that WND pulled the original article. Eligibility cases have come up 9 times before the Supreme Court, and not one of them was ever granted Certiori. That means that the plaintiffs never convinced 4 justices that their cases deserved to be heard. Since no cert was granted, there was no answer from the defendent side. Kagan never had to do anything on any eligibility case. Someone just searched for "Obama and Kagan" assuming all would be eligibility cases. They aren't.

Of the 9 cases Kagen handled for Obama, ZERO have anything to do with eligibility. The cases are:
Holt v. Obama is a prisoner civil rights case.
Jerome Julius Brown, Sr., v. Obama is another prisoner civil rights case.
Lutz v. Obama is a nut who sued Bush for creating the class of "unlawful combatant". The case carried over to Obama.
2 entries are for Al-Ghizzawi v. Obama, a Gitmo case started under Bush
3 entries are for Kiyemba v. Obama, a Gitmo case started under Bush
The Real Truth About Obama v. FEC is a free speech case sent back to lower court in light of the Citizens United decision.

The eligibility cases were Berg v. Obama, Beverly v. FEC, Craig v. US, Donofrio v Wells, Herbert v. US, Obama/John Roberts, Lightfoot v. Bowen, Rhodes v. MacDonald, Schneller v. Cortes, Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz. Kagan had nothing to do with them.

Leslie Said:

Since when are Dems and liberals tough on drugs?

We Answered:

As soon as they get them to a private location where they can consume them.

Maria Said:

Are Republicans forcing scientists to engage in politics?

We Answered:

This has been a concern of many climate scientists since the ClimateGate fable began almost a year ago, and it is the reason relatively few have of them have aggressively defended themselves either in the courtroom or publicly.

Most scientists (like most working professionals) cannot afford to fight legal battles on multiple fronts or for very long. Knowing it was a possibility that anti-science politicians could make significant gains in the 2010 elections, they have been saving their money for what would certainly be expensive and lengthy Congressional hearings. Although it has not been a news story, the fact is that many climate scientists are lawyered-up and have been preparing for this fight since last winter.

And while it is unfortunate that our society has sunk to a level of stupidity that may make the fight unavoidable, it may also be the best thing that could happen to climate science. If deniers think their scientifically illiterate representatives and partisan mediawank heroes are going to humiliate and walk-over the world’s best and smartest climate scientists, they are in for a rude awakening.

Velma Said:

EPA wants to ban lead bullets & other types already outlawed - is this the backdoor to end our 2nd amendment?

We Answered:

So, if I shoot some one who broke into my house with a lead bullet, am I guilty of a hate crime?

First they tried to serialize ammo. That didn't work, now this.

After all the bruising they took over health care I really expected them to wait before tackling guns.

It's like they just don't want to be in power anymore. They are doing everything they can to alienate everyone in the country except Muslims. It's insane.

Leslie Said:

Is the GOP being very thick about the Goldman Sachs Mess?

We Answered:

this is part of the new reality - thanks to our new activist supreme court - corporations will now be able to spend as much as they want.

the wall street banksters (criminals though they are) are still the most powerful ($$$) lobby in washington.

nevermind that republicans are on the wrong side (again) of this issue - the millions in bribes will come in handy when it comes to keeping the current criminal laws on wall street 'legal.'