Skip to main content

Home/ Government Diigo/ Group items tagged Think

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
16More

Girl "Raped" at After Game Parties.. Should Boys be Charged? - 1 views

www.cnn.com/...index.html
shared by Madison Clark on 14 Mar 13 - No Cached
  • Madison Clark on 14 Mar 13
     
    The eye witness admitted to sharing a bottle of vodka with the girl. If she allowed herself to get so sloppy drunk, especially at the age of 16, then how are people suppose to feel bad for her? I mean i'm not saying that getting "raped" is ever okay but I'm sure the boys were impaired as well and neither parties really knew what was going on. Another thing I would like to point out is, how does this girl just happen to show up at MULTIPLE parties with these guys?
  • ...13 more comments...
  • Kayla Beck on 14 Mar 13
     
    To me, the boys definitely should have to face the consequences of their actions, for taking advantage of a girl the way they did, but she had every intention to go to that party to drink. How do you not expect to be taken advantage of at a party when you're a drunk teenage girl? Going to the party in the first place was irresponsible and not safe on her part, because anyone will take advantage of a girl too drunk to say no. Her "friend" should have made sure she did not go to the house with those two boys anyway.
  • jalitz336 on 14 Mar 13
     
    The guys who did that should be charged, maybe 90 + but the girls "victim" should also be charged for drinking under age. The person who gave her the vodka should be charged for distributing to minors
  • cbonar311 on 14 Mar 13
     
    Those two guys should have to serve time in prison, rape is a serious crime. They were super cruel!!!
  • Alex Barrett on 15 Mar 13
     
    To me it seems like she is saying she was raped to help her image. She might not of wanted to do what she did when she was sober, but since she was drunk her mindset could have changed completely
  • madacyn on 15 Mar 13
     
    I think all three of them should be punished. They were all drinking way too much and did it to themselves. Although I do think the boys should be in more trouble than the girl because rape is worse than drinking.
  • Bryan Pregon on 15 Mar 13
     
    I feel that this case is a good reminder that there are "natural consequences" for our behavior. These are separate from the legal consequences that so many people argue over. I think that anyone should expect bad things to happen when they put themselves in these situations, but that doesn't mean they "deserve it". In my eyes the legal consequences are clear; anytime you have sex with a person who doesn't know what's happening, you are committing rape. Period.
  • jalitz336 on 15 Mar 13
     
    It was her fault that she was drinking, and if it was a "rape" at a party. Someone would have heard or saw i think she just did something she regretted and now shes saying that she got raped.
  • Nina Crochet on 15 Mar 13
     
    I think that it was partially her fault for putting herself in that situation, but if she shared a bottle of vodka and was that so drunk, than how does she actually know if she was raped? Plus she showed up at other parties with these boys when they all knew what would happen at each party when they drank. This is why there is an age limit to drinking, and minors should not drink.
  • Meghan Manifold on 18 Mar 13
  • jalitz336 on 19 Mar 13
     
    Multiple people should be charged for different crimes
  • melissamartinez on 20 Mar 13
     
    They should be punished. But the girl should also receive a punishment for she was drinking underage and she should have been conscious of how much she drank. None of them should really be considered "victims" in my opinion
  • courtney wilson on 20 Mar 13
     
    well my opinion is that the boy shouldnt be the only charged with a crime. Multiple people should be charged for different crimes.
  • amandacombs on 20 Mar 13
     
    Okay, here's my perspective on this. The girl obviously decided to party with them at multiple parties with them multiple times. if she chose to drink that much alcohol and get drunk to where she didn't know what was going on, then that's her own fault. But they boys also should not have taken advantage of the girl. But her choice had bad consequences.
  • Bryan Pregon on 20 Mar 13
     
    Even more people may end up being charged with this crime: http://www.hlntv.com/article/2013/03/18/steubenville-rape-investigation-isnt-finished
  • Tori Caddell on 22 Mar 13
     
    If the girl has party with the boys before, and probably then, got stupid drunk, then what would urge the oys to "take advantage" of her this time, as opposed to all the other times? It does not make sense. Plus, she is only sixteen, so it is more her fault that she even allowed herself to go to parties, knowing everything that could, or may happen.
21More

5-year-old Kentucky boy fatally shoots 2-year-old sister - 3 views

www.cnn.com/...index.html
shared by Cara Ireland on 02 May 13 - No Cached
  • Cara Ireland on 02 May 13
     
    (CNN) -- A Kentucky mother stepped outside of her home just for a few minutes, but it was long enough for her 5-year-old son to accidentally shoot his 2-year-old sister with the .22-caliber rifle he got for his birthday, state officials said.
  • ...18 more comments...
  • Austin Parrott on 10 May 13
     
    Im stuck on why the 5 year old got a gun and was able to get to it easily
  • olinde on 10 May 13
     
    why would you even have guns in your house to where a little kid could be able to get a hold of the gun and shoot his little sister.
  • Victoria Kirk on 28 Aug 13
     
    The mother should be the one being punished for this accident.
  • Zach Standard on 29 Aug 13
     
    Who leaves a gun out in the direct access of children?
  • Sara Borgaila on 29 Aug 13
     
    I agree that this was an accident but the article also says the 5 year old boy was playing with it. 5 year old's are smart enough to know/ be taught not to play with guns. They obviously didn't know enough to keep a gun out of a 5 year old's reach.
  • spencer schmitz on 29 Aug 13
     
    why whould a gun be out any way let alone in reach of a child....
  • Sara Dunn on 29 Aug 13
     
    If you give a 5 year old child a gun for his birthday and leave it in reach for him to get a hold of it, it is the parents fault that this happened.
  • Hayli Erickson on 29 Aug 13
     
    Why would you give your 5-year old son a .22-caliber rifle for his birthday? That is asking for trouble. The mother should be blamed for the incident. You should never leave your kids unattended, not even for a minute, when they are that little. Let alone, never leave a child unattended when there is a gun in the house and it is loaded?!?!
  • Andrew Ryan on 29 Aug 13
     
    I've had guns since a young age and I always knew not use them on people no excuse
  • Ryan Edmondson on 29 Aug 13
     
    Why does a 5 year old have a rifle in the first? I do agree with Victoria, that the mother should be punished.
  • tristan wheeldon on 29 Aug 13
     
    what kind of person leaves a 5 year olds gun loaded
  • destany mass on 29 Aug 13
     
    I think think it was an accident, but the mother should be held responsible for being the one who gave the little boy a gun. I don't think young kids should be allowed to have any kinds of weapons at a young age. I mean I know they may be old enough to understand that it's bad, but how many 5 year old kids do you know that will actually listen and do stuff theyre not supposed to. I think it's fine to own a gun if you want to, but not for kids and they need to be under lock and key.
  • Maddie christensen on 29 Aug 13
     
    if the gun had child safety on it why was it easy for it to go off? and why was it easy for the child to reach?
  • Rachel Cottone-Dungan on 29 Aug 13
     
    Its the mother's fault, I've had guns around my whole life, I was taught how to use them, and that I shouldn't touch them unless my parents were there. They shouldn't have had the gun out in the open. Multiple Mistakes.
  • Mikaela Bowen on 30 Aug 13
     
    I agree with Rachel. Guns should never be out in the open, whether or not there are kids in the house.
  • jefferyduncan on 30 Aug 13
     
    i just think its crazy that a 5 year old would get a .22 cal for his birthday
  • Jessi Gallagher on 03 Sep 13
     
    Who gives their kid a loaded gun or has one around where they could get to it.
  • jasminemarie16 on 03 Sep 13
     
    This is crazy! Who would give a gun to a five year old for his birthday ! That is just bad parenting.
  • sarah smith on 10 Sep 13
     
    who in the world gives a five year old a .22 caliber for his birthday!?
  • Hannah Hennings on 16 Sep 13
     
    Who would give there child a gun for their 5th birthday? Thats not ok
14More

Teenage girl suffered strokes, brain damage after smoking synthetic marijuana - 3 views

www.foxnews.com/...er-smoking-synthetic-marijuana
shared by Natalie Wilson on 06 Feb 13 - No Cached
  • caseyyard on 08 Feb 13
     
    class A reason why they should just legalize what is know to be a safe substance. Then maybe kids wouldn't be choking each other for a high... or putting stuff in their body they have no background knowledge on.
  • ...11 more comments...
  • dalton burk on 08 Feb 13
     
    That's the risk of doing she lived on the edge and she fell off
  • nelsontad on 01 Mar 13
     
    Something that is legal so you can get a high, it almosted costed her life and the worst thing is she wont ever be the same.
  • anadler380 on 01 Mar 13
     
    I think that's a perfect example as to why they shouldn't legalize it, not the opposite.
  • Carlos Villarreal on 01 Mar 13
     
    She may not of known what would've happened to her if she smoked the fake marijuana but, she did make a choice into smoking it knowing that it might not of been a good thing to her. Sure it's bad that she had seizures and became paralyzed. But, it was fake it wasn't the real thing maybe due to the chemicals in the drug triggered the seizures and other symptoms.
  • codyself1 on 01 Mar 13
     
    I think that the fact that real marijuana is illegal while "fake" marijuana remains legal, is ridiculous. I think the fact that Marijuana being illegal is ridiculous in itself. If we can legalize alcohol, why not Marijuana? I can understand that there is no immediate test to see if one is high or not while there is for alcohol, but that is a minor step in the road. Why not take it, set an age restriction on it, then tax the poop out of it? Make some money while legalizing something that has no reason to not be legal and will continue to be used anyway.
  • Meghan Manifold on 01 Mar 13
     
    I think this proves that we should just go with the lesser evil and legalize it. Make it available at a certain age, yeah minors will be able to get a hold of it like they do with cigarettes and alcohol, but clearly marijuana is much safer than the legal "fake" stuff. It poses no harm to the user other than the fear of getting possession charges.
  • Nicole Lee on 01 Mar 13
     
    This information should be spread so people know the effect that it can have on people if they don't know what is in it. They need to learn some of the effects of it before doing it. She chose to smoke it not knowing the effects of it and she won't ever be the same because of it. This story is a good example of why you need to be educated about what you are doing.
  • melissamartinez on 04 Mar 13
     
    That should prove why it would be wrong to legalize it, especially since a lot of young users don't know the side effects it can cause not just to themselves but to their loved ones as well.
  • jalitz336 on 04 Mar 13
     
    Well it was her choice, Kids only do it to be against "the man" if they legalized thaat itd be a few days of people smoking on every corner then everyone would get tired of it. There will always be substance abuse.
  • Colton Tracy on 05 Mar 13
     
    Obviously fake and legal marijuana creates more problems than illegal marijuana does. If marijuana were to be legalized these problems wouldn't occur due to the fact that people wouldn't get the fake kind. Even tho marijuana does cause problems, it's not to that intensity where you have multiple strokes and your brain is half or three fourths dead.
  • Austin Parrott on 06 Mar 13
     
    She should have known more about it before she did it
  • Delaney Bolton on 08 Mar 13
     
    I think this is a perfect reason why they shouldn't legalize it. If she wants to smoke then she should just go live in Colorado.
  • Delaney Bolton on 08 Mar 13
     
    I mean if she wanted to smoke she should of just moved to Colorado!
8More

Obama's candid reflections on race - CNNPolitics.com - 7 views

www.cnn.com/...index.html
shared by Bryan Pregon on 07 Dec 16 - No Cached
  • Bryan Pregon on 07 Dec 16
     
    "A majority of Americans now say relations between blacks and whites have worsened since Obama took office."
  • ...5 more comments...
  • gracie1bradley on 07 Dec 16
     
    I don't agree with this quoted statement because as bad as racism use to be, it has gotten better for sure. There will never be peace between blacks and whites, but there is a certain level of being equal either way.
  • lauren rambo on 07 Dec 16
     
    I don't think that all republicans were against Obama solely because of his race, some people did just disagree with him. However, I do think that some people did take that into play. In the article a close representative said 'He recalled a moment when a powerful Republican said to him, "you know, we don't really think you should be here, but the American people thought otherwise so we're going to have to work with you.""
  • zayned on 07 Dec 16
     
    I disagree with this quote because I don't not believe racism has gotten worse since a time period like 1960. The problem is that the media has gotten so corrupt it makes it seem that way.
  • sschultz777 on 07 Dec 16
     
    I believe it has worsened since he has been in office. With a black president it kind of gives them a better chance to protest. I believe once Donald Trump is president they would have less a chance and less riots.
  • Bradley Daugherty on 07 Dec 16
     
    I think that the tension between blacks and whites haven't got any better since Obama entered office, but the relations between blacks and whites now are better than they have ever been in America.
  • kim bagshaw on 07 Dec 16
     
    I feel like race is only a problem when an incident has been taken out of proportion, if something happens to a white person not many people care but if a black person gets hurt everybody goes crazy, so people just need to chill, people normally don't intentionally try and hurt another person, accidents occur people just need to think more rationally rather than personally.
  • emma spidle on 07 Dec 16
     
    I agree with Bradley. The relations between blacks and whites have gotten way better then what they used to be.
12More

100 moments from Obama's presidency - 23 views

www.cnn.com/...index.html
shared by Bryan Pregon on 07 Dec 16 - No Cached
  • Bryan Pregon on 07 Dec 16
     
    "100 moments from Obama's presidency" President Obama's 8 years in office end in one more month. Here are many cool photos that span the two terms.
  • ...9 more comments...
  • katelyndewaele on 07 Dec 16
     
    my favorite picture is the little boy touching Obama's hair to see if it "feels the same as his"
  • Austin Webster on 07 Dec 16
     
    My favorite picture is President Obama saluting the fallen soldier. Because it shows respect to the people that put their lives on the line everyday so we can be free.
  • dallastomasello on 07 Dec 16
     
    my favorite picture is Obama is putting his toe on the scale while someone is trying to weigh themselves. Just shows that you can be the president and be funny and have a good sense of humor.
  • Matthew E on 07 Dec 16
     
    For Obama touching the lives of many and being so kind and thoughtful to everyone, he deserves his eight years.
  • lmcdowell956 on 07 Dec 16
     
    My favorite pictures was the one of Obama and his wife in the elevator. They were sharing a moment with his wit. Its was cold so he took his tuxedo off and put it on his wife so she could stay warm.
  • dbratcher097 on 07 Dec 16
     
    I think he has done a great job for the time he was dropped in here during. Cleaning up after Bush definitely took more time then it should have because of the wars and debt and such. But overall, he's been great with people, and shown he can be serious and fun loving. He was a great president and will definitely be remembered throughout history.
  • anonymous on 07 Dec 16
     
    Obama thinks of himself as an regular person, and he cares about the people. He can make connections with every person he meets. His eight years of being our president were spent wisely.
  • Alex Thacker on 07 Dec 16
     
    I like the picture when he is saluting the solider because I think it's a very strong thing to do and it is very respectful for our country and everyone in it.
  • ogomez1025 on 07 Dec 16
     
    My favorite photo during Obama's presidency is when I gave food to the needy because he sees the true humble person who is the one and that for me makes it big of heart to help and understand people's problems clearly
  • amonge914 on 07 Dec 16
     
    These pictures are so great, I can feel his passion, love and work he's put into this country. They show so many cool things you didn't think the president did and his warmth for this country and love for his family. Haven't see any pictures like this of any other leaders. I'm impressed.
  • nick perry on 07 Dec 16
     
    My favorite picture was Obama was visiting the Sphinx, He wanted to seek a new begging with Muslims and the US, and thats good because not all Muslims are terrorists although many Americans think that.
10More

Ohio's 'heartbeat' abortion bill awaits Gov. Kasich's signature - CNNPolitics.com - 11 views

www.cnn.com/...index.html
shared by Bryan Pregon on 07 Dec 16 - No Cached
  • Bryan Pregon on 07 Dec 16
     
    "Ohio state lawmakers have passed a controversial "Heartbeat Bill" that would ban abortions from the moment the heartbeat of a fetus can be detected -- which usually occurs about six weeks into a pregnancy."
  • ...7 more comments...
  • Faith Otten on 07 Dec 16
     
    There have two different attempts at this in Arkansas and North Dakota, were found unconstitutional in court when they tried to make it a law. It hasn't been said if the 'heartbeat' abortion bill will apply to victim's of rape or in the case of incest. There are too many variables involved to make a clear cut decision.
  • sydney matheny on 07 Dec 16
     
    I feel like this bill will cause women to do abortions illegally and go back to old methods. In one of the paragraph it said they wont do abortions even if its rape or incest. it gives me a little hope that he said he is pro-life when it come to rape, incest, and the life of the mother.
  • Mallori Wagoner on 07 Dec 16
     
    I think that if someone was raped they should be able to have an abortion because that could affect their life in a lot of bad ways if they had a baby from someone that raped them.
  • mwheeler21 on 07 Dec 16
     
    I can see both the pros and cons of this bill. I hate the thought of ending a life before it has barely begun, but if a woman had the reason of abortion because she was a rape victim 6 weeks might not be a long enough time to reveal that she is pregnant. Women are scarred from these experiences and by telling her she has to keep proof of the memory may be worse than abortion. A new life is suppose to be celebrated not forced into someone's body. I don't like abortion, but I can see why some women would.
  • gracie1bradley on 12 Dec 16
     
    Everything that Macy said, I agree with. I don't agree with abortion but the reasoning behind it of rape makes sense and is an exception. Keeping something that'll remind the mother is torturing herself, again celebration not force.
  • mckenzie spanjer on 12 Dec 16
     
    I agree with Macy. I also think that abortion is a bad thing and you shouldn't be able to end someones life just because you weren't responsible enough, but what if someone was rapped and had to live with that because they didn't realize they were pregnant until after 20 something weeks. I think it's unfair in those situations.
  • dallastomasello on 12 Dec 16
     
    I agree with everything Macy said. 6 weeks may not be enough time to fine out you're pregnant. If it was rape women should be able to abort the child. No woman should have to have a that mans baby. Would scar her for life.
  • lmcdowell956 on 12 Dec 16
     
    I think that having an abortion is your choice so you should be able to make it. If you are raped you should be allowed to get an abortion because having the kid would make you remember getting rapped and people don't want to remember things like that.
  • savannah131999 on 12 Dec 16
     
    I would say it should be the state's choice if it's majority agrees and votes on it then I believe that it should be passed. My own opinion out of it, I think that 6 weeks is far enough time to make the choice, with other things that you can do.
8More

Who owns America's debt? - May. 10, 2016 - 8 views

money.cnn.com/...index.html
shared by Bryan Pregon on 11 May 16 - No Cached
  • Bryan Pregon on 11 May 16
     
    "The top holder by far is U.S. citizens and American entities, such as state and local governments, pension funds, mutual funds, and the Federal Reserve. Together they own the vast majority -- 67.5% -- of the debt. Foreign nations only hold 32.5% of the total."
  • ...5 more comments...
  • lizretikis on 11 May 16
     
    I honestly think that this plan is cheating the people who we borrowed money from. If we said we would pay them a certain amount then we should pay up. A deal is a deal whether or not you don't want to follow through.
  • ltorneten065 on 11 May 16
     
    I agree with what lizretikis said however, were so in debt that paying them back in full is nearly impossible. So I agree with Trump when he says we should pay them back 85 cents for every dollar.
  • gage barton on 11 May 16
     
    The large amount 67.5% of the US's debt is inside the us. If he where to drop the mount paid out he will hurt the American populous not foreign country's.
  • nickwarneke on 11 May 16
     
    Can Trump really do it though and if he does ask I think the other countries are just gonna say no.
  • kfloerchinger on 11 May 16
     
    I think that since the U.S. debt is 18 trillion more than China then something does need to change. But I don't think it should have to do with paying less for the debt, I think there's a lot of unnecessary things that each part of the state and federal government can reduce spending money on. Overtime the amount of debt we go into each year will be smaller and eventually we can get closer to paying most of it off.
  • kittyterhune on 11 May 16
     
    Best case scenario is trump alleviates a small fraction of our debt but destroys our foreign relations along the way. I wouldn't want someone who has had 4 companies go bankrupt gambling with the entire united states economy anyway.
  • alexander4434 on 11 May 16
     
    The best way this could go is he suttels some of the debt but runs our reputation in the process and nobody will buy bonds anymore so it would become worse in the long run
5More

Obama approval rating back to 50% mark - 6 views

politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/...pproval-rating-back-to-50-mark government politics news cnn
shared by Brice Johnson on 17 Feb 12 - No Cached
  • Caleb Hohneke on 01 Mar 12
     
    i love obama
  • ...2 more comments...
  • Jeff Reddish on 02 Mar 12
     
    Caleb, you know nothing of politics..... read a book.
  • Wesley May on 02 Mar 12
     
    I think should get someone else in office instead of Obama because he hasn't been doing so well.
  • xhotxsoccerbabe on 09 Mar 12
     
    Yes, Obama hasn't been the best, but he has done a much better job than Bush. Let us not forget that Bush is the one who set us into debt and left Obama on a sliding slope. He has actually made our decrease much better then how Bush left us and he has created a lot of new jobs. An example: Bush's reign is a car. He made this car junky and it barely runs and is steadily getting worse. Obama is then sold the car and he starts to make repairs, but the car keeps breaking and having other parts go bad because of the state it was left in. Obama is doing everything that he can to make this car good again. It's also frustrating that everyone is so against what Obama is doing. I mean if you think he's doing such a bad job, do you think you could do it better? What could you do differently compared to what Obama is doing? This takes time to get out of debt. It's not like you can just snap your fingers and make the debt go away. So, maybe we should think before we just hate our President because everything's not perfect. Perhaps we should think before we just bash on someone.
  • Jake Radford on 21 Mar 12
     
    Obama is in the 98th percentile for his NCAA bracket. Little fun fact for you guys.
12More

New wrinkle in pot debate: stoned driving - 23 views

hosted.ap.org/...US_DRIVING_STONED
shared by Bryan Pregon on 19 Mar 12 - No Cached
  • garrettcollier on 19 Mar 12
     
    This women is given a medical drug. When she drive's when she's is still high? So if she is getting medical weed and they make a law stating that you can not be "high" or drugged up before driving. Then why doesn't the government give them transportation, sure buses work if you live in the city, or taxi's. But why should she have to pay when the hospitals are giving it to her.
  • ...9 more comments...
  • drake prazak on 20 Mar 12
     
    Or maybe instead they should just not drive. if smoking marijuana impairs you to the point to where your incapable of driving then don't drive, its not the governments responsibility to provide transportation to someone who chooses that as a medicine. and yeah the hospital gave it to her, but the hospital gives people a lot of other drugs that have warning labels stating not to drive and use heavy machinery. so why should the government have to provide transportation when people know that using that medicine might not allow them to be able to drive?
  • garrettcollier on 20 Mar 12
     
    Why Shouldn't they? there handing it out? Right? So if the government made the decision to give out marijuana to those who would like to have because of health problems then they should take Responsibility for the people there giving it to . Plus people wouldn't listen any ways, people drive under the influence all the time. No matter what its going to happen, that's why I think that the government should keep tabs on people who have medical drugs and make sure there safe, and make sure there not hurting someone else.
  • drake prazak on 20 Mar 12
     
    if people wouldn't listen, then there is no point for the government to pay to transport someone around who would just abuse it in the first place. and keeping tabs on all of the people who use medical marijuana or any drug that could impair you would take a ridiculous amount of time and money that our government probably isn't willing to do. if someone wants or needs that medical drug then they should be responsible for their actions while using it not the government.
  • garrettcollier on 21 Mar 12
     
    Then why make a laws and expect people to follow this one. It's pretty evident that nobody listen's anyways. So enforcing the law by keeping tabs might save people's lives and save them from injury? So how would that be a waste of time? And yes the thought is unrealistic but, I was just throwing out an idea.
  • Brittney Russell on 21 Mar 12
     
    i think its ok to be given the drug for a medical problem and to be able to drive, but if its worse then being drunk and then driving afterwards then you shouldn't be able to drive and be under an influence of a medical use of drugs. they should have special ways of transportation.
  • Captain Crunk on 21 Mar 12
     
    I believe it's impossible to be too dough'd to drive!
  • Jessica Lewis on 21 Mar 12
     
    I think that yes government should provide the transportation if your under medication that you should not be driving or using heavy machinery. Then there is also the thought of who is to say that some one won't just get high and say its hospital medication? It will always be a battle no matter what happens. you could have the government provide the transportation but the only way you can use it is by providing proof by like wearing a I.d. bracelet or having to keep the container with you. Then there are still ways that people will get around like taking other peoples bracelets or containers or them expiring. So there is almost no way to decide and make it possible! Not everyone is going to follow the laws or ever will!
  • tyler woodruff on 21 Mar 12
     
    i dont think it really matters wether they make it legal or not, people will still abuse it just like alcohol. they can set an age limit on it, but you still see 9 yearolds getting their hands on cigaretts even though ur supposed to be 18. and as far as transportation goes, i dont believe the government will provide transportation. if you choose to smoke pot, then its ur problem wether to drive or not. i dont think its a big deal if you smoke a bowl or two and then drive to the store, but can the police actualy tell or test you for thc? argue all you want i say let people be free and smoke whatever plant they want wether its tobacco or marijuana, its a natural god given plant.
  • Jeff Reddish on 21 Mar 12
     
    There's no reason that the government should use the money, that we don't have, to provide transportation to someone who doesn't need it. Does she need marijuana? Clearly, she may however, that does not constitute the necessity to have someone pay for her to get around. Maybe, she should try taking the bus.
  • Riley Barton on 22 Mar 12
     
    I believe she should not be driving while under the influence. Even if she is prescribed the drug, there should be warnings and other precautions taken to prevent accidents.
  • Joel Grimm on 23 Mar 12
     
    Maybe she should try cocaine I heard that works too.
10More

Massachusetts judge rules for inmate's sex-change surgery - 3 views

www.cnn.com/...index.html Government CNN Judge
shared by Jeremy Vogel on 06 Sep 12 - No Cached
  • Jeremy Vogel on 06 Sep 12
     
    A federal court judge on Tuesday ordered Massachusetts officials to provide sex-reassignment surgery for a transsexual prison inmate, after determining that it was the only adequate treatment for the inmate's mental illness.
  • ...7 more comments...
  • Hope Philbrick on 06 Sep 12
     
    I think that from the physiological stand point this court case makes seance. How ever I think that our tax dollars should not be used to make this medical procedure happen.
  • Payton Whiteaker on 07 Sep 12
     
    This is a very odd case to say the least. This prison inmate is at 13x the risk of a sexual assault as the average inmate. So, the question is, is the protection of a near-insane murder worth tax payer dollars? I don't think so, but something has to be done about the inmates safety, perhaps being placed alone, or with people of the preferred gender of the inmate? In the event of tax payers paying, is it really that much? The government comes up with about $2,650 billion yearly from income tax alone. To add on, it is really not that often that this expensive of a situation arises. Is it really that big of a deal for something that almost never happens, but may help someone in the near future?
  • Alex Snipes on 07 Sep 12
     
    This may be what's "best" for the inmate, but he/she (no offense intended, I just don't know what to call them) murdered someone. Don't you think that a murderer should in some way "pay" for what they've done. They don't deserve the best, but they also don't deserve to be sexually assaulted. Also, tax payer dollars should not go towards things like this, that money is for the betterment of the community and/or the country. To fix the sexual harassment problem, the inmate should be put somewhere alone. Yet, another question rises, what about all the other inmates (male or female) who are sexually assaulted? We can't worry about them all, plus they're in there for a reason, they don't deserve tax money to go towards protecting them whenever they put others in danger that led them to be in prison. So, the answer is no, it's not worth it. It's not tax payer's problem.
  • Jenny Ord on 07 Sep 12
     
    if this person wanted to become a women then wouldn't they prefer men? which means that if they are 13 times the risk, wouldn't that be a good thing since they like guys? well if it was a rape then i understand but there are sometimes in prison when it isn't a rape or sexual assault, both want to do it. in that case that person should consider themselves lucky to be around guys all the time.
  • keowa coleman on 07 Sep 12
     
    haha what if this dude was just really straight and thought that if he gets a sex change that he will be placed with da lady's so he wouldn't be around all da dudes n stuff .
  • Alexis Theos on 07 Sep 12
     
    I agree with Payton just place her alone if its for her safety. If its for her mental condition send her to a prison mental health facility.
  • Jaidlyn Bookout on 07 Sep 12
     
    I just don't understand how a PRISON INMATE is allowed that luxury of sex change surgery. Especially considering the price and how much it really is causing taxpayers
  • Olivia Burgher on 07 Sep 12
     
    I personally think that this was a great decision. I believe that a person's mental health is the most important aspect in the road to any sort of recovery. Even though the transgender inmate did commit a murder, she deserves to have the resources to stabilize her well-being. Should the rest of America have to pay for it? Perhaps not, but I don't mind helping out someone who desperately needs it. Although, I guess that depends on your belief on the importance of mental health.
  • Payton Whiteaker on 11 Sep 12
     
    Jenny, this is really not a matter of sexual interests. If this person wants a sex change, it may be because of this sexual interest, but then again, it may not. They may simply want to be a female. The funding should come from the inmate, but the inmate cannot earn funds while behind bars, perhaps the inmate should be allowed to work up to being allowed to have a sex change operation.
4More

Swiss Company Wants Its Drugs Back - 9 views

www.wowt.com/..._Its_Drugs_Back_134709313.html government death penalty drugs
shared by Bryan Pregon on 30 Nov 11 - No Cached
  • Ziada Karbowski on 30 Nov 11
     
    The death penalty scares me, I have watched movies where they kill people this way and it is cruel. I don't think anyone should be put to death if they are in prison for a crime I think they should do their time. They should sit and rot in prison for the rest of their life, but they are in prison for killing, etc...and then we do the same to them, I don't get it.
  • ...1 more comment...
  • broxton anderson on 01 Dec 11
     
    i feel that the death penalty should stay around as a form of punishment, but only for the most heinous of crimes. As for how we obtained this lethal drug, it is ours legally and can not be taken back. However america should start making our own lethal drugs if we want to take part in executions.
  • anonymous on 01 Dec 11
     
    I think we need stay out of overseas activities like this. It doesn't matter if we did everything legally, it's still wrong.
  • casandra morales on 01 Dec 11
     
    i dont think anyone should go on death row i think they should give them a life sentence and be kept alive that way they feel guilty later on about what they've done and little by little they'll start going crazy and eventually try suicide because they wont want to be locked up forever but the cops wont let them hurt themselves so then they'll be getting even more crazy go psycho probably.....its like self torture for them:)
10More

Political Cartoon: http://goo.gl/k9G1r - 22 views

goo.gl/k9G1r government politics protest 99% economy occupy political cartoon
shared by Bryan Pregon on 16 Dec 11 - No Cached
  • Bryan Pregon on 16 Dec 11
     
    What is the illustrator trying to convey? What do the images represent?
  • ...7 more comments...
  • Joey Ruckman on 16 Dec 11
     
    i think that wall street is bringing attention to the middle class and the media doesnt like it
  • Megan Funkhauser on 16 Dec 11
     
    The occupy wall street protest is bringing more attention to the middle class, and it's shocking the media. The illustrator is trying to show how it's all tied together in one way or another.
  • Anna Gahm on 16 Dec 11
     
    I think that with all the "action" going on between wall street and the middle class, the media is shocked and is in disbelief.
  • Brice Johnson on 16 Dec 11
     
    The Occupy movement is like the middle-class' prince charming, exactly what we want. The 1% on the other hand is trying to poison the middle class with lies and deception from the media which is made up of the 1%.
  • Katelynn Hunter on 16 Dec 11
     
    The Occupy Wall Street movement is trying to revive the middle class in order increase their supporters to the full 99% it once was, but the 1% aka the media is like the wicked witch in Snow White that gave her the poisoned apple so she would be out of the way...and the media is upset that attention is being drawn back to them
  • Carrie Fuest on 16 Dec 11
     
    I think it's that occupy wall street has now involved the middle class and the media is appalled by it.
  • Daniel Pengra on 16 Dec 11
     
    I think it means that occupy wall street is trying to save the middle class and the media doesnt want to have it back.
  • Kristin Molgaard on 16 Dec 11
     
    I think it means how the occupy wall street movement is bringing attention to the middle classes economic struggles, and the media doesn't want that to happen.
  • Megan Rief on 16 Dec 11
     
    I believe the cartoon is portraying that there is a connection between the Middle class and the wall street movement, and wall street is trying to revive the middle class. The media however, is not thrilled about the attention being brought to the middle class problems. So the media poisons the the other one percent into believing the lies and misleading comments to try getting their way.
10More

Parents consider legal action after South Dakota police use Taser on 8-year-old girl - ... - 4 views

usnews.nbcnews.com/...e-use-taser-on-8-year-old-girl
shared by Bryan Pregon on 10 Oct 13 - No Cached
  • Bryan Pregon on 10 Oct 13
     
    "The parents of an 8-year-old South Dakota girl want the police officer who stunned their daughter with a Taser disciplined, but the police chief said Wednesday that the officer acted properly and may have saved the little girl's life."
  • ...7 more comments...
  • amber1996 on 10 Oct 13
     
    If the girl was really threatening her life and possible even the cops or the baby sitter than it was good that the cops Tarazed the girl. it probably saved her and maybe even another life.
  • Hayli Erickson on 15 Oct 13
     
    Personally, I believe that it was wrong to tase the 8 year old. It could have possibly NOT saved her life. What if she fell and stabbed herself in the process. I do think that it was not, but I don't think that the officer's intention was to hurt her, just save her.
  • Sara Borgaila on 15 Oct 13
     
    I think the police officer did the right thing because the girl was crazy. And there was really no other way to help the situation. I think that the police officers should maybe have another taser that would be better for children who are crazy!
  • Victoria Kirk on 15 Oct 13
     
    The parents are just mad because this is most likely reflecting on their parenting. They just need to shut their mouths, don't press charges, and get help for their little girl. I just feel bad for the babysitter for having to go through that and for the police officer because he was just doing what he thought was the right thing to do at that time and who is it for the parents to judge what would best be done when they weren't even there.
  • ladasia on 15 Oct 13
     
    Ok, yeah, tasers should not be used on children because kids are just super sensitive to certain things, but honestly, a knife is a knife and although the choice made was difficult, it was very smart. The only other option would be to shoot are tackle her. Tackling can lead to the knife accidently stabbing her and shooting could lead to death. Using a taser as I see it was the best option.
  • Ryan Camden on 15 Oct 13
     
    no way a child needs tasered. i mean they do but they dont feel free to taze anyone as long as its in your head but never tazer a little kid..
  • sarah smith on 16 Oct 13
     
    The police officer felt like he had to in order to save the little girl,the only reason i can think of on why the parents would be suing him is because they are afrais it wil hurt their repetation as a parent.
  • Jessi Gallagher on 17 Oct 13
     
    If the girls life was in danger or the officers I would see why he would use a tazer but other wise he should of used a different approach.
  • Sara Dunn on 21 Oct 13
     
    She was endangering herself and the officer, he used the least harmful weapon he had. He saved that girls life he should not be getting sued. Obviously the parents are blind to their own kids problems, that's what they should be focusing on.
8More

Michael Brown's stepfather sorry for outburst - 20 views

www.cnn.com/...index.html Government news cnn protest
shared by Sydney Wilson on 04 Dec 14 - No Cached
  • Sydney Wilson on 04 Dec 14
     
    (CNN) -- Michael Brown's stepfather says he's sorry for his emotional outburst to demonstrators after learning a police officer wouldn't be indicted in the teen's death. But he says he's unfairly taking heat for the rioting that followed.
  • ...5 more comments...
  • fwyldes753 on 09 Dec 14
     
    While i disagree with everything that is going on in Ferguson, I think it is very nice that he apologized, i really understand his anger not because of the courts decision but just the main fact him stepson is dead. I can't say i could react any other way.
  • tcomulada881 on 09 Dec 14
     
    I think that if Michael Brown's stepfather could say that he's sorry for saying those things because he cares a lot about Ferguson that he doesn't want it to go down in flames then they could stop having this uncivilized riots it won't do anything except get yourselves in trouble.
  • Erin Wolff on 09 Dec 14
     
    I understand the reasoning behind his apology, and why he shouldn't have acted the way he did. I don't think anybody would've acted any different if their stepson had died. Now granted they did take things a little too far, but it was only out of anger and "raw emotion" as Louis Head stated.
  • djones036 on 09 Dec 14
     
    He shouldn't have said what he did, even though he was emotional for the decision about the indictment of officer Wilson, and he realizes that, but people do things on their own he didn't physically make them set fires. So, he shouldn't be blamed for what others did.
  • John Scheffler on 09 Dec 14
     
    I think the apology was appropriate as well as needed. I believe in him coming out and saying this will be the beginning of the decrease in Ferguson.
  • darianhubbard on 12 Dec 14
     
    The emotional outburst is understandable, but to have such an outburst that it can be threatening, is too far. I'm glad he apologized, but he should of never said those threats in the first place.
  • escheffler on 15 Dec 14
     
    I think that is was good to apologize. Everyone does speak out of anger and in this situation I'm sure a lot of people are speaking out of anger. Almost everyone is acting out of anger right now.
12More

United Airlines flight turns around due to unruly passenger - CNN.com - 20 views

www.cnn.com/...index.html Government Politics news
shared by jay_hubbard on 17 Mar 15 - No Cached
  • jay_hubbard on 17 Mar 15
     
    Man suspected of terrorism on a United flight from Washington to Denver was detained after the plane had to return after the passenger rushed the cockpit yelling 'jihad, jihad, jihad'
  • ...9 more comments...
  • alexander4434 on 17 Mar 15
     
    stupid people do stupid things
  • dillonpalen on 17 Mar 15
     
    The actions of the suspect on the plane was uncalled for and the intensions of the suspect are unknown.
  • jesse_lorenzen on 17 Mar 15
     
    This sounds like a bad idea for a prank.
  • britthutch12 on 17 Mar 15
     
    Sad that someone would do something so stupid to scare people, knowing the past with terrorism and planes.
  • cschnackel824 on 18 Mar 15
     
    It's scary to think this can happen any where. Just on a plan to Denver this happened. It's also really weird that the man was not arrested.
  • rduncan264 on 18 Mar 15
     
    I don't understand this fully but from what it seems a man running towards the cockpit of a plan while also not responding to the flight attendants is something to be alert about. I think those 2 men reacted fairly towards the safety of them selves and others. I think on each planes there should be trained guys like them to protect incase there is something real like that on a plane.
  • kylecrowl on 20 Mar 15
     
    I think this guy was definitely on some type of drug to be this stupid. They said he was fidgeting on the ground so I think he was on drugs and had something mentally wrong with him. I'd be intrigued to see if they did blood work on the guy after they took him to jail to see if there was anything in his system or if he was actually trying to commit an act of terror.
  • Cecilia Saldana on 20 Mar 15
     
    I found it really weird on how afterwards they didn't arrest him.
  • claireboes on 20 Mar 15
     
    It sounds like this man might have just been emotionally unstable, considering that after everything happened he started pleading and saying "I'm sorry. I'm so sorry." There could have been medication involved, whether or not it was prescribed or not, and other factors influencing his behavior. It doesn't surprise me that they didn't arrest him quite yet, seeing as he doesn't have any suspicious background or anything of the nature.
  • meganferleman on 20 Mar 15
     
    Its weird that they let him go, though he did not seem to right in the head. Just maybe alittle out there, not sure whats going on. But at the same time, why did they not arrest him.
  • ccannon666 on 24 Mar 15
     
    "Jihad" is not a violent concept. It's a miscommunication.
15More

Why Donald Trump Blinked on Guns | Time - 30 views

time.com/...donald-trump-gun-proposals
shared by Bryan Pregon on 13 Mar 18 - No Cached
  • Bryan Pregon on 13 Mar 18
     
    What are your thoughts on the gun control debate. It will be 1 month tomorrow that Parkland FL school shooter killed 17 and seriously wounded 17 others. Has the outrage become "yesterdays news"? How do the POLITICS of this issue make solutions difficult to reach?
  • ...12 more comments...
  • levihardiman on 13 Mar 18
     
    My thoughts on the debate is that guns should be more restricted, but not completely disallowed. Ideas like banning bump stocks are very good, but going without due process is a side that isn't good. However, the outrage and protesting about mass shootings like parkland and sandy hook should never become just yesterday news and should be a constant focus, but due to media jumping off issues quickly for ratings, how divisive the issue is among political groups, and the NRA lobbying extremely for gun rights, it is hard to reach any sort of conclusion and compromise,
  • saratruong on 13 Mar 18
     
    I do believe that our government did have intentions of wanting to change in order to prevent gun violence, but as time passed, they seem to have little effort now to do anything. Yes, the solution may take a long time for everyone to be on board with, especially to those that support guns, they are now neglecting the idea. From the government's perspective, it seems to be old news to them, but society and civilians are still trying to remind and encourage the White House to make a change.
  • jacklancers71 on 13 Mar 18
     
    I think trumps thoughts on arming teacher is a good idea because it would keep schools safe and their students. It would also make the school shootings less likely to happen
  • tylerrardin on 13 Mar 18
     
    I believe that we should ban bump stocks, and raise the age to buy a gun with stricter background checks.
  • dthomas713 on 13 Mar 18
     
    I agree with Sara. It even said in the article that most of Trumps supporters republicans that don't want stricter gun laws. With that being said, he doesn't want to lose those supporters. It also talked about how he was for tightening the laws right after the shooting happened; moving into the idea without really knowing about gun laws. During the luncheon he hosted, he didn't stick to what he had proposed.
  • ghannan137 on 13 Mar 18
     
    I think sadly it has begun to become yesterdays news. At first everyone was outraged and everyone wanted results with plans of walkouts and things like that but as time passes people slowly started talking about it less and the press for change lessened.
  • sarahj046 on 13 Mar 18
     
    agreeing with sarah and dthomas how they had put their attention to it at first but after few days and weeks had passed they had lost the interest to put as much attention to it. They do need to put more attention and change the age to buy an assault rifle as it is as deadly as any other weapon, especially to an 18-year-old. The government risks more lives being taken with more school shootings by people who shouldn't have a weapon in the first place.
  • Mackenzie Frush on 13 Mar 18
     
    This outrage has become slightly a thing of yesterday. I know it's not completely out of people's minds because there is still a lot of local and national talk about the walkouts and movements planned to continue the spread of awareness. In this article it states that Trump had changed his mind on the gun legislation a few weeks following the tragedy. He was all for changing the ages and putting restrictions on the gun laws, but was very quick to change his mind after the media died down on the subject. Most of his supporters, shown in private polls, are not interested in changing the gun laws and legislation because he still wants to hold as many supporters as he can. The outrage seems to be yesterday news because it isn't in the media all the much anymore. I don't think our country has moved on from the tragedy yet because there is still a lot of talk about the national walkouts and the other movements that are being pushed to enforce change in the legislation.
  • esorenson on 13 Mar 18
     
    I feel like as the president he should stick with his ideas and support them.Not switch up because hes afraid to upset people.The people voted him in he shouldn't cave because hes scared of the NRA when its our safety he should worry about
  • aasmus466 on 13 Mar 18
     
    I agree with Grace. She right it has become old news which is sad, people should talk more about the safety of people. And like Grace said they plan all these walkouts and stuff but people stopped talking about it which made the press quit talking about it, and if the press isn't talking about it then no one else is. And if no one is talking then there is going to be no change
  • chaseburns on 13 Mar 18
     
    I think that this news has become "old". Huge amounts of support at first, but the momentum died eventually. The whole conversation is slowly dying because of the realities of politics too. Like one person said in the article, you can just swing a pen around for a bit and give way to legislation. It takes time. But sadly, this topic won't stay around long enough.
  • molson133 on 13 Mar 18
     
    When these shooting first happened the government had intentions of taking control of gun violence and preventing these type of events. But after a while their effort to control this has reduced to little or nothing. From the governments perspective they think that it will go away and but the community wants to have the laws change.
  • majesticdragon1 on 13 Mar 18
     
    I feel maybe they should be more strict on guns and the background checks be more thorough. just wondering why 21 for semiauto pistols but 18 for fully auto AR's. It should be the other way around.
  • cceder858 on 13 Mar 18
     
    its yesterday news because after the shooting we been talking about to raise the age in assault rifle as in the last couple of weeks so this shooting gave a heads up about school safety and the age to buy assault rifles.
14More

Aunt of 13 siblings allegedly held captive tried 'for years' to get in touch with the f... - 25 views

abcnews.go.com/...story
shared by sarahspidle on 17 Jan 18 - No Cached
  • nathanaelhale on 30 Jan 18
     
    I think that the law enforcement did the right thing and got these terrible people for what they did to those kids.
  • ...11 more comments...
  • bethanyfoley on 30 Jan 18
     
    I agree that the law enforcement did do the right thing but I also think that it was good that the daughter did escape and called the police, or else they might not of gotten the help they needed in the first place.
  • creatures0ver on 30 Jan 18
     
    I heard about this all over the internet such as facebook, snapchat, etc... and i believe the law enforcement did the right thing and saved many lives that day.
  • nbushey395 on 30 Jan 18
     
    This is so very sad. I have been reading about this and in one article I read it said all the kids could keep a diary. They believe the parents could be faced with more charges.
  • jdofner419 on 30 Jan 18
     
    We talk about this story in ROTC. It's very sad, but even though how scared that girl must of been she did a great thing and saved her life, and her siblings life.
  • bschiller303 on 30 Jan 18
     
    This looks like something off of criminal minds, I watch it all the time and this is actually something that would happen on there. That's crazy people are so heartless
  • yazmin cabrera on 30 Jan 18
     
    This is very sad but they got the right punishment and glad everyone was safe!
  • sreynolds702 on 30 Jan 18
     
    I think this is repulsive and terrible however the authorities did do the right thing
  • kkermeen144 on 30 Jan 18
     
    This story is very sad and scary. But I would probably not love my sister after knowing that all this happened. Considering the fact that she never got to see her sisters children that she really badly wanted to see.
  • kegner573 on 07 Feb 18
     
    I think it is very strange how the sister didn't catch on to any of the strange actions that happened when she was there and that no one even questioned the fact that they were never allowed any further than the driveway with no contact with the kids for years.
  • lynx_2019 on 07 Feb 18
     
    I think the police did the right things but I don't understand how no one noticed the kids didn't come out of the house or didn't hear them.
  • lyricreed709 on 07 Feb 18
     
    They cops did the right thing but the sister shouldn't have been so oblivious.
  • Bryan Pregon on 12 Mar 18
     
    Bump
  • marrissa_842 on 12 Mar 18
     
    I believe that what the law did was the right thing, but however, the sister should've been more suspicious and paid closer attention to the signs or even try entering the house.
13More

Elon Musk is Selling Flamethrowers - Bloomberg - 5 views

www.bloomberg.com/...-musk-is-selling-flamethrowers
shared by anonymous on 30 Jan 18 - No Cached
  • anonymous on 30 Jan 18
     
    How do you all feel about items/weapons like these being readily available and advertised?
  • ...10 more comments...
  • arodriguez333 on 30 Jan 18
     
    I saw the merchandise he was selling on Twitter, and it's quite fascinating at the amount of sales he's generated from these products. I think Elon holds so much influence over people that he's able to create a product, and immediately gain success from it. According to the article, the weapon does not violate any limits, so citizens should have the right to own such a weapon.
  • jacobjensen113 on 30 Jan 18
     
    I think flame throwers are a little extreme
  • connor garges on 30 Jan 18
     
    I think it is completely ridiculous to allow citizens to own a flamethrower. Who in their right mind thinks "hey it would be a nice day to carry this flamethrower around"? By selling these weapons you're just asking for issues.
  • estelapetit on 30 Jan 18
     
    For what reason would anybody need a flamethrower?
  • reeganfilip on 30 Jan 18
     
    i think it woukd be cool to have a flamethrower even if i dont need it, it still would be cool
  • aruss77 on 30 Jan 18
     
    I dont understand why someone would ever need a flamethrower, but it is cool
  • nfahrenkrog on 30 Jan 18
     
    Its not like anyone can just order one. First of they have to have the money to order one and they would have to go through some sort of screening to make sure its not some psychopath getting it.
  • slindsey503 on 30 Jan 18
     
    Elon is... interesting...
  • dmckiddy517 on 30 Jan 18
     
    I can see he is selling flamethrowers for that tunnel project, but can't you sell something besides flamethrowers. Like girl scout cookies?
  • lpruitt897 on 30 Jan 18
     
    I like flamethrowers it's funny how there is fire extingusihers underneath
  • rhoag202 on 30 Jan 18
     
    As long as he is following all the rules that come along with manufacturing and selling weapons I feel like he should be able to do it. Yes a flamethrower is a little on the extreme side but as long he is staying within the realm of the law I feel like it should be allowed.
  • jherrington221 on 30 Jan 18
     
    Flamethrowers are like guns so if the person buying the flamethrower is able to buy a gun then they should be able to purchase this as well.
7More

Trump budget calls for billions for border wall with Mexico - 5 views

www.foxnews.com/...r-border-wall-with-mexico.html
shared by tjones797 on 16 Mar 17 - No Cached
  • tjones797 on 16 Mar 17
     
    President Trump's discretionary budget plan set to be released Thursday reportedly includes a request for $2.6 billion in funding to begin planning and building a "physical wall" along the border with Mexico along with security funding. The Wall Street Journal reported that Tump will ask Congress for billions in new spending to be earmarked ofr immigration enforcement.
  • ...4 more comments...
  • azyla646 on 16 Mar 17
     
    Trump thinks he'll be able to persuade mexico to build the wall. He's crazy for thinking that. Why would they want to help fund for the wall when they don't want be even leave the United States. There's no way he'll be able to persuade them.
  • racosta116 on 24 Mar 17
     
    I doubt Mexico will at all consider paying for the wall, it's just not their problem.
  • rtallman on 28 Mar 17
     
    I doubt that Mexico will pay for it because Trump is the one who wants it up, not them.
  • lmakram on 28 Mar 17
     
    What will Trump do if they refuse to pay?
  • taylor_m on 29 Mar 17
     
    I don't think Trump actually thought about what would need to happen to make his precious wall when he was campaigning. I think he was more focused on getting the position and making everything sound good and now that it's time to step up to the plate HE created, he's trying to find anyway to get the money needed to fill said plate. He wants to cut so many programs and he expects others to pay and he just has his expectation bar to high. The border wall he wants to make would take $21 billion dollars! That's a lot of money to raise and I just can't help but think, what are the consequences of the actions he's willing to take to make that money appear.
  • ahayden800 on 09 May 17
     
    Who is going to pay for the wall?
« First ‹ Previous 101 - 120 of 525 Next › Last »
Showing 20▼ items per page