Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest
It was my post and I'm curious why the attitude? I didn't make a statement I just wanted to hear your view point.
Now my next question is were you concerned with Hillary's supposed "Pay to play" when it came to her charity? Lets see if you can answer the question without being so defensive.
|
I am concerned about a lot of things. That does not mean if I don't like something I have a right to lynch someone. It is either against the law or it isn't. And even if the law is ridiculous thankfully the system is change the law and then enforce it forward not backwards to fit a situation someone did not like.
I am all for enforcement of the law. I am against anyone who did not like the outcome or the media trying to prolong an audience by trying to sidestep the law even under the disguise of moral ethics etc. I totally despise anyone especially lawyers gaining financial reward for giving false hope to an obvious situation. I am all for changing the law the proper way if it is the will of the people not a political party. To even consider making a law retroactive would fly directly in the face of democracy in my book. Following up with another question illustrating if the shoe were on the other foot won't change my position.