I ask the question only because it always seems when he does something he must have an agenda that only he knows. And only he knows how things fit in it.

As is proof here where it at least sounds like he has not taken into account what happens after these jail birds are let out.

‘The biggest sham’: Sheriffs fume at mass release of 6,000 federal inmates | Fox News

He make sthe announcements, then pulls the trigger then walks away from what ever happens as a result. Getting out his check list and marking another one off the list.

He must have use his personal assesment right. He did not see where the action he took has any negative effect on the Obamas!!!

Originally Posted by Guest

I ask the question only because it always seems when he does something he must have an agenda that only he knows. And only he knows how things fit in it.

As is proof here where it at least sounds like he has not taken into account what happens after these jail birds are let out.

‘The biggest sham’: Sheriffs fume at mass release of 6,000 federal inmates | Fox News

He make sthe announcements, then pulls the trigger then walks away from what ever happens as a result. Getting out his check list and marking another one off the list.

He must have use his personal assesment right. He did not see where the action he took has any negative effect on the Obamas!!!

They can't vote from jail.

Because Obama feels more comfortable surrounding himself with criminals. His history proves that.

It was a court ordered release. Obama didn't just arbitrarily order prisoners get an early release. Not only did the court order a reduction in prisoners, the order specifically called for the early release of drug offenders. Personally, I would have preferred to see those convicted of a non-violent conspiracy charge be released, but it is what it is. To rail about someone, including our President, for following a court order is ridiculous. Rail against the judicial system, not someone obeying the law. And do remember that felons cannot legally vote.

Red

Originally Posted by Guest

It was a court ordered release. Obama didn't just arbitrarily order prisoners get an early release. Not only did the court order a reduction in prisoners, the order specifically called for the early release of drug offenders. Personally, I would have preferred to see those convicted of a non-violent conspiracy charge be released, but it is what it is. To rail about someone, including our President, for following a court order is ridiculous. Rail against the judicial system, not someone obeying the law. And do remember that felons cannot legally vote.

Red

Sorry, Red, it is not ridiculous. The report is on Fox News, the fair and balanced network. So, it must be true. Look at the headline! How could an article like that have a headline that is so passive that even Fox News was reluctant to use it? They tried very hard to use something that would really stir up the anger of their viewers, but couldn't do it much to their dismay.

Criticizing this president for everything he has done is a constant state of being on this board. Being ridiculous isn't a thought that would even cross their mind.

Whether it is illegal immigration, or sentencing reform, there is no penalty to harsh for these law breakers. Enforce the law, we don't want to hear anything different. People, whose feet are caste in cement, will not listen to the problems policies on the above cause. They don't care. It is not like they are dealing with real people.

Originally Posted by Guest

Sorry, Red, it is not ridiculous. The report is on Fox News, the fair and balanced network. So, it must be true. Look at the headline! How could an article like that have a headline that is so passive that even Fox News was reluctant to use it? They tried very hard to use something that would really stir up the anger of their viewers, but couldn't do it much to their dismay.

Criticizing this president for everything he has done is a constant state of being on this board. Being ridiculous isn't a thought that would even cross their mind.

Whether it is illegal immigration, or sentencing reform, there is no penalty to harsh for these law breakers. Enforce the law, we don't want to hear anything different. People, whose feet are caste in cement, will not listen to the problems policies on the above cause. They don't care. It is not like they are dealing with real people.

That's OK, next time they have a prisoner release, why don't you take in a few to live with you? Why have laws if you are not going to enforce them? You liberals crack me up. You want to be protected, and then you cry and complain about the police. You sympathize with the criminals and protest executions, and yet you are pro-abortion, the murder of innocent babies. You don't believe in war, but when attacked, you want to attack your leaders for not protecting you. I don't know where you are from, but where I grew up, it's called being SPOILED.

We have laws to not only punish but to act as a deterrent. No deterrent, slack enforcement ends up with a higher crime rate. We have minimum and maximum institutions for offenders. What more do you want? You want the criminal released but you won't hire them to work for you.

Get over you aversion of conservatives because we are the ones that protect you needy wimps.

If you want them released, then how about you sign up as their sponsor and take responsibility for them if they become repeat offenders? Because the overwhelming majority of convicted are repeat offenders.

The prisoner release was due in part to Eric Holder's testimony. Apparently, there will be another 46,000 prisoners released at a date to be determined. Since congress did not vote against it, the prisoner release is moving forward. Eric Holder worked for Obama and did nothing that did not coincide with Obama's agenda.

Originally Posted by Guest

It was a court ordered release. Obama didn't just arbitrarily order prisoners get an early release. Not only did the court order a reduction in prisoners, the order specifically called for the early release of drug offenders. Personally, I would have preferred to see those convicted of a non-violent conspiracy charge be released, but it is what it is. To rail about someone, including our President, for following a court order is ridiculous. Rail against the judicial system, not someone obeying the law. And do remember that felons cannot legally vote.

Red

Incarcerated felons cannot legally vote. There is plenty of evidence that felons have been voting, due to our lax voter ID enforcement. One good example of a felon voting is Hilary Clinton........

Originally Posted by Guest

It was a court ordered release. Obama didn't just arbitrarily order prisoners get an early release. Not only did the court order a reduction in prisoners, the order specifically called for the early release of drug offenders. Personally, I would have preferred to see those convicted of a non-violent conspiracy charge be released, but it is what it is. To rail about someone, including our President, for following a court order is ridiculous. Rail against the judicial system, not someone obeying the law. And do remember that felons cannot legally vote.

Red

You are correct that the President did not do this arbitrarily, and is not part of his individual effort...

"The early releases follow action by the U.S. Sentencing Commission — an independent agency that sets sentencing policies for federal crimes — that reduced the potential punishment for future drug offenders last year and then made that change retroactive.

The commission’s action is separate from an effort by President Obama to grant clemency to certain nonviolent drug offenders, an initiative that has resulted in the early release of 89 inmates."


https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...699_story.html

Originally Posted by Guest

Sorry, Red, it is not ridiculous. The report is on Fox News, the fair and balanced network. So, it must be true. Look at the headline! How could an article like that have a headline that is so passive that even Fox News was reluctant to use it? They tried very hard to use something that would really stir up the anger of their viewers, but couldn't do it much to their dismay.

Criticizing this president for everything he has done is a constant state of being on this board. Being ridiculous isn't a thought that would even cross their mind.

Whether it is illegal immigration, or sentencing reform, there is no penalty to harsh for these law breakers. Enforce the law, we don't want to hear anything different. People, whose feet are caste in cement, will not listen to the problems policies on the above cause. They don't care. It is not like they are dealing with real people.

Your sarcasm aside, the minute I read the Fox news shot, I pretty much know who this is and what it is about.

1. I agree that the President is oft times criticized unfarily on this forum. I just want to remind you of something I keep reminding others of. HE IS THE PRESIDENT, and once you get elected, you will be blamed for a lot, many if not most times unfairly. It matters not your party.....it has always been that way and will always be that way.

With the internet availability, it is more noticeable, and more accessible.

This is the reason and the point I keep trying to make to YOU and others who pollute this forum with the one liners and the smart a$$ remarks.

Discuss the issues and why you feel the way you do, not the individual.

The smart aleck defenses of the WH are just as much to blame as it simply enflames the rhetoric that does no body any good at all.

2. You appear to be against enforcing the law. May I ask why you feel that way ? I do not think anyone, including you, me or anyone, can pick and choose the laws we like, the rules we want to play by. They are set and are the law until amended. It is my opinion that lack of any respect for any law is our problem in this country. We have made our base....THE LAW...a political football, and it should not be.

zZZZZzzzzzzzzzzZZZzzzzzz!

Originally Posted by Guest

Your sarcasm aside, the minute I read the Fox news shot, I pretty much know who this is and what it is about.

1. I agree that the President is oft times criticized unfarily on this forum. I just want to remind you of something I keep reminding others of. HE IS THE PRESIDENT, and once you get elected, you will be blamed for a lot, many if not most times unfairly. It matters not your party.....it has always been that way and will always be that way.

With the internet availability, it is more noticeable, and more accessible.

This is the reason and the point I keep trying to make to YOU and others who pollute this forum with the one liners and the smart a$$ remarks.

Discuss the issues and why you feel the way you do, not the individual.

The smart aleck defenses of the WH are just as much to blame as it simply enflames the rhetoric that does no body any good at all.

2. You appear to be against enforcing the law. May I ask why you feel that way ? I do not think anyone, including you, me or anyone, can pick and choose the laws we like, the rules we want to play by. They are set and are the law until amended. It is my opinion that lack of any respect for any law is our problem in this country. We have made our base....THE LAW...a political football, and it should not be.

Where did you get the impression that I am against enforcing the law? The problem is laws that do not accomplish the goals that they set out to do should be changed. Laws aren't caste in stone. Both of the articles referenced in the thread explained who and why the prisoners are being released, and under the conditions of their release. The people that I attacked selectively chose what they want to be the case, facts be damned.

Both the illegal immigration laws, and the mandatory drug sentencing laws should be changed. Read this article concerning the strict Alabama immigration laws. How America's harshest immigration law failed | MSNBC

When you take a real hard line, you will fall flat on your face. The Alabama law was so strict some parts of it were unconstitutional. The same thing happened with the Arizona strict immigration laws. The Supreme Court ruled that you can't require people to carry their papers. If they don't have them, you can't legally arrest, or detain them. Given the Supreme Court ruling, how the hell is Trump going to find and deport 11/12 million people?

This is an election year, and the Republican candidates have to appeal to their base especially in the primary. The last thing in the world that their base wants to do is change any laws that helps minorities. They want to take a hard line on everything. You can't be reasonable with unreasonable people.

It is a good thing that Obama executive action on illegal immigrants will be ruled upon, after the next election. Maybe then some common sense immigration laws will be enacted, because then election will be over.

Originally Posted by Guest

Where did you get the impression that I am against enforcing the law? The problem is laws that do not accomplish the goals that they set out to do should be changed. Laws aren't caste in stone. Both of the articles referenced in the thread explained who and why the prisoners are being released, and under the conditions of their release. The people that I attacked selectively chose what they want to be the case, facts be damned.

Both the illegal immigration laws, and the mandatory drug sentencing laws should be changed. Read this article concerning the strict Alabama immigration laws. How America's harshest immigration law failed | MSNBC

When you take a real hard line, you will fall flat on your face. The Alabama law was so strict some parts of it were unconstitutional. The same thing happened with the Arizona strict immigration laws. The Supreme Court ruled that you can't require people to carry their papers. If they don't have them, you can't legally arrest, or detain them. Given the Supreme Court ruling, how the hell is Trump going to find and deport 11/12 million people?

This is an election year, and the Republican candidates have to appeal to their base especially in the primary. The last thing in the world that their base wants to do is change any laws that helps minorities. They want to take a hard line on everything. You can't be reasonable with unreasonable people.

It is a good thing that Obama executive action on illegal immigrants will be ruled upon, after the next election. Maybe then some common sense immigration laws will be enacted, because then election will be over.

With all due respect because I know that anyone who might disagree with you is subject to...well, your written wrath...

You have a warped view of this country based on hatred for the Republican party. That is how I see it anyway. It really becomes a chore to respond to your posts. You hate the Republican party and what YOU think it stand for....you ignore the discussions on immigration and ignore the fact we are in a primary conversation that will include a lot of hysteria, but play the game of the media by highlighting such hysteria.

I have no idea of what you are speaking of. I just know that NO...NONE immigration will be passed until.......and let me say, despite his many promises, our President when he had the senate and the house did NADA ...nothing to advance immigration reform at a time when he could have done whatever he wanted.

BUT...there will be NO immigration reform until and if both parties sit down and talk. RATIONAL people know all of this hyperbole is simply political talk and that includes the candidates on both sides. What the primary contest thus far is showing is that the American People want the LAW OBEYED first and foremost. THAT was what killed the Senate bill for one thing...many others but the President not wanting to commit to enforcing the LAW was another.

You can post all you want about immigration....it aint gonna happen because of any election unless we elect someone who can get both parties together. If Obama would not even try when he could have done it, well....how important can it be !

Originally Posted by Guest

Where did you get the impression that I am against enforcing the law? The problem is laws that do not accomplish the goals that they set out to do should be changed. Laws aren't caste in stone. Both of the articles referenced in the thread explained who and why the prisoners are being released, and under the conditions of their release. The people that I attacked selectively chose what they want to be the case, facts be damned.

Both the illegal immigration laws, and the mandatory drug sentencing laws should be changed. Read this article concerning the strict Alabama immigration laws. How America's harshest immigration law failed | MSNBC

When you take a real hard line, you will fall flat on your face. The Alabama law was so strict some parts of it were unconstitutional. The same thing happened with the Arizona strict immigration laws. The Supreme Court ruled that you can't require people to carry their papers. If they don't have them, you can't legally arrest, or detain them. Given the Supreme Court ruling, how the hell is Trump going to find and deport 11/12 million people?

This is an election year, and the Republican candidates have to appeal to their base especially in the primary. The last thing in the world that their base wants to do is change any laws that helps minorities. They want to take a hard line on everything. You can't be reasonable with unreasonable people.

It is a good thing that Obama executive action on illegal immigrants will be ruled upon, after the next election. Maybe then some common sense immigration laws will be enacted, because then election will be over.

Not hard line enough. Put guns on the border and shoot the invaders. Calling them minorities is your way of legitimizing them. They are criminals, and should be treated as enemy invaders. They must be the enemy if they are not attempting to enter legally. At the very least, they are criminals. We shoot escaping convicts, so what's wrong with shooting invaders?

Originally Posted by Guest

With all due respect because I know that anyone who might disagree with you is subject to...well, your written wrath...

You have a warped view of this country based on hatred for the Republican party. That is how I see it anyway. It really becomes a chore to respond to your posts. You hate the Republican party and what YOU think it stand for....you ignore the discussions on immigration and ignore the fact we are in a primary conversation that will include a lot of hysteria, but play the game of the media by highlighting such hysteria.

I have no idea of what you are speaking of. I just know that NO...NONE immigration will be passed until.......and let me say, despite his many promises, our President when he had the senate and the house did NADA ...nothing to advance immigration reform at a time when he could have done whatever he wanted.

BUT...there will be NO immigration reform until and if both parties sit down and talk. RATIONAL people know all of this hyperbole is simply political talk and that includes the candidates on both sides. What the primary contest thus far is showing is that the American People want the LAW OBEYED first and foremost. THAT was what killed the Senate bill for one thing...many others but the President not wanting to commit to enforcing the LAW was another.

You can post all you want about immigration....it aint gonna happen because of any election unless we elect someone who can get both parties together. If Obama would not even try when he could have done it, well....how important can it be !

You literally have no idea what you are talking about. If this is what you see, then you are not looking. There will be no immigration laws until both parties sit down and talk. Then, what do you call the gang of eight immigration law that was presented to the Senate and passed with support from both parties. Rubio was one of the eight, and now he is running away from it. Why, because both parties weren't involved?

How can you sit there with a straight face, and say the not say the only immigration reform plan the Republicans want is a wall, and deport everyone? Work together on that? How? Following your logic there is only one America, and it is inhabited solely by Republicans. I defy you to post an article that says that the Senate bill was defeated, because citizens of both parties want the LAW OBEYED.

I hate Republicans. As the old saying goes, how can I hate Republicans most of my friends are Republicans? I am laughing at you. I have stated many times John Kasich is my man. People here saw that, and said the only reason why you want Kasich is he has no chance of winning. It is always something. like I said, you can't be reasonable with unreasonable people.

There was just a Republican debate. I am not sure was there even one thread about it? Take a look at all the threads, and you tell me, which party seems to thrive on hate.

How long after the slaughters in Paris did it take for a thread to start here, and attack Obama? It was record breaking time.