Why are so many conservative wonks asking so many rhetorical questions in the Politics section?
919369
If you'll go back and look, wonks from both sides are asking a lot of rhetorical questions, just like the one you just asked.
536670
Maybe apathy.  Maybe defensiveness.  Maybe too many questions.\n\nI tried to answer some guy's question the other day and he got upset that I didn't answer yes or no.\n\nWell, his initial question was not a yes or no question and there were at least 3 questions he was asking at once.  If you ask too many questions, people are generally going to pick either the first or the last thing you said.\n\n(Case in point, read my question here:  http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AlYHfr9enEYxTaAQOGFw.9_sy6IX?qid=1006051030349 and then read some of my answers.  It is a highly specific question.  I think I have asked it in a logical progression.  But it's too much information.  People either didn't read all the way to the bottom or it's just more work than they want to put into an answer.  At least two of them gave me the exact answer I asked them to avoid.  It's too many questions.)\n\nIn his case, I actually did address the two questions at the end of his litany.  But it seemed silly to me to answer those first when they were asked last.  Sometimes the question isn't that great.\n\nAs for answering based on opinion or agenda, we only know first hand what our experiences are and what our interpretations are.  I don't know if we are fully capable of answering anything in a completely unbiased way.  Do people go too far and become unwilling to see anyone else's side?  Sure.  But if they perceive the question as "where do you stand?" of course they're going to tell you.  Or if someone asserts their way is the only way, someone is going to feel compelled to point out all the other ways. \n\nSometimes the questions are not questions at all.  Loaded questions are generally statements with a question mark tacked on at the end.  People who ask them, don't really want to know, but people feel compelled to answer them anyway, because they are generally based on what one group  considers to be untrue.\n\nThe higher the stakes or the contention, the more divided people become.  And this is the division as far as I can see:\n\nAtheist's statement:  "you are stupid if you believe in mythology and any belief in God or anyone higher than ourselves is the equivalent of belief in the Easter bunny," or "Christians are too ignorant to understand science and if they were just smarter, they would see that there is no need for God."\n\nChristians' statement:  "your life would be better if you accepted Jesus as your Savior", or "if you don't see the error of your ways, you are going to hell."\n\nI've not been paying enough attention to the other views (agnostics, pagans, wiccans, Jews, Muslims, etc) to voice their "side."  But you get the idea.\n\nI think part of the problem between Theists and atheists is that if science is wielded by the party who is trying to overthrow God, science necessarily cannot be neutral ground.  Theology is not neutral ground.  \n\nI'm not saying that science is the enemy, but it can't answer everything.  Since it is used by atheists to discredit God, it cannot be considered neutral.\n\nSo were do we meet to talk things out?  What could we decide is neutral?
749395
I agree that you picked the wrong category. Some friendly advice-remember if you post in politics, by nature almost everyone posting answers in this section is mad about something.  It's a bit of a hoot to make fun of, and be made fun of by, people I disagree with.  So you are far more likely to run into foul-mouthed a-holes occasionally.\n   Also, I would think twice about asking personal advice to complete strangers.  You don't know who is sitting behind a keyboard.  Well, sorry ya got insulted.  And whatever problem you have, that it works out for you in the end. \n  Best wishes.
1067125
because there are so many people who answer questions just to be arseholes.
974245
The trouble with "rhetoric" is often that it is so "sound-byte"-ish. People like to say a lot with as few words as possible.
905423
As a liberal, it's embarrasing to have people posting questions like this.\n\nLet's try to raise the level of the discourse.  Let the fundamentalist conservatives have Shiraz and his ilk and their hateful questions.  Liberals should be better than this.\n\nI'm no fan of Bush, but the Nazi comparisons just don't hold water, and they make us look as silly as those we oppose.
426584
You should take a look at your self.  You just stereotyped every conservative person in the country in to one category.  Perhaps if you were more a liberal person you would see that many people are conservative.  Furthermore that many conservatives are not Republican.  Though I find your remarks insulting, I feel that you obviously asked the question, expecting a response so here it is.\n\nSir/Madam which ever you may be, you are a buffoon.
526977
Ho ho ho!  great question!  \n\nThe conservatives are backwards, they cry when they drop the ball, then they cry for help when they want a pass.
537573
Because it is easier to label someone into a stereotype then actually have a meaningful discussion. This happens all the way from the US senate to ideological internet forums. \n\nReally both parties are much of the same varying on a relatively few number of issues. \n\nWhat is really alarming is those in the party cannot see this.
1128449
I can see how your question relates to your comments.  Oh, no, wait.  I see.  This was just a way for you to vomit your diatribe on how you don't like conservatives.  You're not really interest in a dialogue or an exchange ideas.  You just want to bash conservatives.  Ok...  at least you're honest.
902719
Why is this a political question?
326349
Nice generalisation. The sharing of true facts can never harm people, But i do have to kind of agree with you on the reason some of the questions are asked. I would hope that people use common sense and answer the more risky questions with tact and diplomacy, With knowledge comes responsibility
991051
Because it's just so *fun* to post blatantly ridiculous political "questions" that turn into arguements on Yahoo! Answers.\n\nBelieve me, I'm sick of it, too.
871377
good question! \n\nyou know, I can't think of a better way to get a cross section of society's honest opinion on such a wide range of issues, even including various sponsored polls and surveys. I think even the yahoo guys themselves should consider bringing the \nY!A politics politics section to their attention because many people have had suspicions or seen evidence of politicians seeming out of touch with their voter's opinion through the years & not just in the west either.\n\nit would do them a lot of good (and no harm at all) to read some of the answers on Y!A, and even perhaps ask a few questions as well!\nY!A
250300
I think a lot of people want to answer questions that no one is asking them.  So they create "questions" that allow them to express themselves.
1162077
If you look closely you'll notice that it's only one person asking the same question with different wording each time.  That person isn't looking for an answer -- they're just looking to push their socio/political viewpoint.
1117284
I understand your point.  I think it has to do with the fact that people are intensely stuck into categorizing. If a person considers him or herself to be liberal. They will normally take a harsh view on a conservative question that is not asked in a meaningful way. Or the other way, if a liberal question starts off with "why did bush kill our soldiers?" you will get an angry response from the right. That is why I asked the question that you answered. We have always been a society of labels. As far back as this countries founding there were labels on people for their political views or origin. Today it just takes an ever so hateful view and ignorance.