1 - 10 Next
Okay, so they all donate their fees to the Clinton Foundation. And how much compensation do they receive from the Clinton Foundation? It makes it sound so philanthropic, but let's be realistic here.
I'm not sure why anyone is shocked. Apparently, they didn't hire enough ghost buyers to boost the sales in advance. Other than that, how many liberals/progressives actually read books?
Do these criminals, but more importantly, do the citizens of this country a favor, and do not allow these hardcore criminals within our borders. Illegal Aliens commit countless crimes every year. Under what loss of cognitive reasoning can anyone justify allowing admitted murderers in to add to the amount of crimes committed? Additionally, this is America, and there are plenty of people who will be placed in the crosshairs of these murderers, and plenty of people who will have to stand trial to defend themselves before a judge after they kill one of these dirtbags in self defense. Grow some brains people.
Being able to effectively communicate is essential to the performance of ANY job. I you are unable to communicate effectively, you can perform your job, and are a danger to yourself, and those you work with. If someone were injured on a job due to their inability to speak the language, I'll be OSHA would sue the company. Also, if I were to go to Mexico to make a living, I would be expected to at least reasonably speak the language. It's not a disrespect to a person's "National Origin" to require that they be able to communicate in the dominant language of this country if they wish to succeed here.
I typed enemy instead of soldier up there. I wish to edit that.
Perhaps you should study your history a little more closely. As pointed out in the post below from Alan. While it is certainly true that we should never leave any American behind, enemy or civilian, should it be done at the risk of freeing five of the worst of the worst terrorists in our hands? This clearly emboldens and aids the enemy for them to receive five of their top combatants in exchange for a useless deserter who has already given them all that they can get from him. And don't try to hide what it is. Even if he is mentally ill, he clearly deserted at best, and that does not excuse his actions. Yes, he should come home and face court martial, and military justice. More likely he's a traitor as well. And don't try to be all soft here. The Taliban were treating him just fine, and they wouldn't have done so if he wasn't useful to them. So, yes, we should secure his return, but not at increased risk to American lives, and not at returning enemy combatants to the field against us. A patriot who truly loves their country would not risk the lives of innocents in his nation by releasing known terrorists who will return to fight against us, merely to secure the return of one deserter who will never aid his country again. Perhaps you should look up the definition of the word. Patriot: "a person who vigorously supports their country and is prepared to defend it against enemies or detractors" This act was not in the interests of our nation. I suggest learning what a word means before you use it as an insult.
In response to:

Prosecute the President

Rob1122 Wrote: Jun 11, 2014 12:47 PM
My only argument with this premise is that they don't need to delegate their powers. As our employees, they only have the power that we the people grant them. Those powers are the peoples' to reclaim at their will, not something to be returned to us by our rulers, but a responsibility delegated to our employees, which, as employers, we are more than capable of removing from them. Just a thought.
When will people step up and call this administration for what it is: Treason.
At the very least, we shouldn't be paying Lois Lerner's pension as a betrayer of the public's trust.
1 - 10 Next