Actually, we’ve got a movie out about Benghazi right now.
I look forward to the day when, if a man forces his way into a woman’s vagina, her claim to that effect is treated with as much respect by the cops as I get when I claim that someone’s broken into my house.
The general consensus seems to be that we’re a few country miles away from that, still.
How do you get that?
Being First Lady certainly counts as experience. But it doesn’t count as having responsibility for the President’s actions. The same is true for other close Presidential advisors.
My point is that Bill will be heavily involved in governing the country, according to Hillary’s rationale for her own justification for being President. I’m sure his advice on how to handle campus sexual assault, sexual harassment, etc. , will be quite enlightening to her.
Oooohhh, now you’re fantasizing about spanking her. 
Anything else you want to share with us?
Good.
Many other countries have much lower crime rates without harsh “law and order” policies. It’s opinion, not fact, that this is the only way to improve crime. I believe that improving rehabilitation, education, and things like that in prisons could reduce recidivism, which is significantly lower in many other countries.
Even if what you say is true, Hillary is still much better for the country than the Republican candidate.
Is that supposed to prove something?
Oh that is adaher thinking that all the debunkings of what the Republicans claimeddid not ever took place just because the debunked points might appear in a movie.
AFAIK, the talk of the movie being a problem for Hillary is based more on wishful thinking, of course no movie does follow a book closely but in the book the movie is based:
What’s morally bankrupt about one’s labor belonging to oneself? This is the problem with a system where there is a huge incentive to promise the leech class other people’s time and labor.
There is more than one issue in this world. Even if I agreed with the Republicans on labor (or any other particular issue), I disagree with them on almost everything else.
PS – I don’t agree with them on labor, and I don’t believe that the Democratic party is less in favor of “one’s labor belonging to oneself”.
I agree. The pay for CEOs should be tied to the wages they’re willing to pay.
That principle has very nearly fuck-all to do with the Republican party. But it’s adorable that you believe it.
So you agree with Sanders then, that labor rights are important and workers shouldn’t be screwed over by the companies they work for in order to pay executives vastly inflated salaries. That’s what you meant, right?
What’s not morally bankrupt about referring veterans, the elderly, active military, people down on their luck or, hey, anyone who wants to use a fucking road as leeches?
Labor rights are important. But freely exchanging labor for pay with no wage floor is more to my liking. If there is a shortfall it can be made up with a guaranteed basic income or something of that nature.
You must not get out much if you think everyone leeching is deserving. Many choose to exploit the system and that’s bad. Earned or benefits necessary because of no other choice aren’t the target.
Wait, you use “leech” language and then shift to talking about a basic income guarantee? I think you just threw all of us.
So you want the government(us) to subsidize companies who want to pay pennies?
Or is that to free up money so executives who run the company into the ground still gets their golden parachutes and performance bonuses.
I don’t know how often you get out, but it’s apparently a place where everyone freely shared easily disproven talking points. Welfare fraud is only a problem in the minds of the uninformed. The facts say you’re wrong. And your pejorative term leeches days you’re wrong and a jerk.