Post a Political News Story

Quintin_Stone wrote:
karmajay wrote:

Supreme Court rules in favor of terror victims

So terror victims can sue the bank of Iran now for 9/11.

Will we allow innocent drone victims in the Middle East to sue the USA now as well?

They probably can try, in their own countries. The tough thing about such a suit is enforcing the judgment. In this case, it's a nationalized bank that has assets in the US.

I have this weird feeling we'll look back on this as the start of a colossal sh*t storm a decade or so from now.

"Written hemorrhoid." "Toxic waste trash fire." St. John's daughter doesn't hold back.

https://medium.com/@milistjohn/i-am-...

NathanialG wrote:

The comments section is horrific.

Godsdammit I hate people.

*whistles*

I am Alex St. John’s Daughter, and He is Wrong About Women in Tech
(Amilia St. John, Medium, 2016-04-21)

Article wrote:

My name is Amilia St. John and I am the daughter of Alex St. John. Yes, that one. For those not following the horrific toddler meltdown my father has been very publicly broadcasting over the past few days, here is a short summary; ...

...

As his toxic waste trash fire not only is associated with my last name but also my face, I felt compelled to respond to my father’s sexist, ableist, and racist rants.

...

*slow clap*

Her article is merciless. I love it.

She's just a professional victim with daddy issues /sarcasm

Australia is beginning what they consider a "marathon" election. Something adorable like 3 months. Anyway, they started it the right way today.

And to be clear on where I stand. I think fracking is terrible, obviously. But I think this approach to a political commercial is kind of amazing. I wish the US political system had the ability to give airtime to something like this.

DSGamer wrote:

I wish the US political system had the ability to give airtime to something like this.

It does...if campaigns want to buy two minutes of commercial airtime.

Heck, I remember Perot's campaign buying 30- and 60-minute prime time slots so he could run what were essentially infomercials.

Plus I'm sure there's research out there that shows that four 30-second ads or eight 15-second spots are more effective when it comes to getting a candidate's name out there (or dragging their opponent's name through the mud). What was the old advertising adage? Prospective customers have to see your ad about seven times before they'll buy your product?

I'm also saying that politicians play it so safe. Or when they do get extreme they get extreme in an ugly way. I'd love to see an actual liberal in America stake their career on environmental issues and with ads that grab you. Even if they only ever made it to YouTube.

Wow.

Oklahoma House passes bill banning all abortions
(Mary Emily O'Hara, The Daily Dot, 2016-04-22)

Article wrote:

Late on Thursday, the Oklahoma House of Representatives passed a bill that fully bans abortion in the state.

Oklahoma's SB 1552 passed by a 59-9 vote in the heavily Republican legislature. The law is now on the desk of the state's Republican governor, Mary Fallin, who has yet to address whether she plans to sign the legislation into law. If she does, the state could face one of the most intense federal legal battles on the issue.

The controversial Oklahoma bill manages to sideline abortion services by revoking the medical licenses of any doctor found performing the procedure for any other reason than in cases of miscarriage or severe physical trauma to the fetus or pregnant woman.

Doctors who do perform abortions outside this spectrum may face felony charges.

The prohibition includes abortions required to save the life of a pregnant woman; however, inducing an early birth to save the life of a fetus would be legal.

So apparently these folks think ignoring Roe v. Wade and picking a fight directly with the Supreme Court is a good idea? I'm doubtful that this would have flown even *with* Scalia on the court.

"The prohibition includes abortions required to save the life of a pregnant woman"

So this is pro-life?

I'm sure someone has decided that women can't really be endangered by pregnancy, and all the evidence to the contrary is created by doctors to give women excuses to have abortions. :l

Don't women have a way to shut that whole thing down anyway?

BadKen wrote:

"The prohibition includes abortions required to save the life of a pregnant woman"

So this is pro-life?

Fetuses are more important than women, apparently.

Farscry wrote:
BadKen wrote:

"The prohibition includes abortions required to save the life of a pregnant woman"

So this is pro-life?

Fetuses are more important than women, apparently.

They need to identify if the fetus is a woman though because then neither are important.

farley3k wrote:
Farscry wrote:
BadKen wrote:

"The prohibition includes abortions required to save the life of a pregnant woman"

So this is pro-life?

Fetuses are more important than women, apparently.

They need to identify if the fetus is a woman though because then neither are important.

The fetus is still more important, because it hasn't had sex yet and might still go to purity balls and have a chance to remain virginal until it marries the right man.

I'll stop there. Let's just say there's added bitterness about the religious right's obsession with preserving fetuses thanks to my religiously judgmental family.

Missouri lawmaker's just spent $8.3 million of state taxpayer's money to make sure Planned Parenthood doesn't get $400,000.

The state legislature rejected $8.3 million in federal Medicaid funds because the money came with strings that prevented Missouri from forbidding payments to certain medical providers, specifically Planned Parenthood. So they decided to get around the problem by refusing the federal money and funding everything with state taxes.

Sometimes I hate the Midwest.

Wow that's just...wow...

IMAGE(https://45.media.tumblr.com/eb2e923659bb724244c2ea5337ee4010/tumblr_mn9gol1XUJ1qjby9po1_500.gif)

OG_slinger wrote:

Missouri lawmaker's just spent $8.3 million of state taxpayer's money to make sure Planned Parenthood doesn't get $400,000.

The state legislature rejected $8.3 million in federal Medicaid funds because the money came with strings that prevented Missouri from forbidding payments to certain medical providers, specifically Planned Parenthood. So they decided to get around the problem by refusing the federal money and funding everything with state taxes.

Could have sworn they were supposed to be the party of lower taxes.

Demosthenes wrote:
OG_slinger wrote:

Missouri lawmaker's just spent $8.3 million of state taxpayer's money to make sure Planned Parenthood doesn't get $400,000.

The state legislature rejected $8.3 million in federal Medicaid funds because the money came with strings that prevented Missouri from forbidding payments to certain medical providers, specifically Planned Parenthood. So they decided to get around the problem by refusing the federal money and funding everything with state taxes.

Could have sworn they were supposed to be the party of lower taxes.

Shhh, it's only when the folks on the other side of the isle wanna tax stuff.

More "data" my family will say is stupid/tained/untrue and generally "it worked fine for us!"

Disciplinary spanking increases childhood defiance and mental health issues

What i find compelling (even without fully reading it) is the scope of the study.

Their study, which was published in the April edition of the Journal of Family Psychology, was based on five decades worth of research involving more than 160,000 children. They are calling it the most extensive scientific investigations into the spanking issue, and one of the few to look specifically at spanking rather than grouping it with other forms of physical discipline.

Lack of airbags and car seats worked fine for us, too... because those who it didn't work fine for didn't live to tell the tale.

I think one of the things that triggers my relatives is that the chose to hit their kids. Airbags and car seats didn't exist so not using them isn't really anyone's fault. You have to choose to beat a child. It is much more personal.

The idea that they are doing more harm than good when they do it is very hard to stomach.

That's a deal-breaker for me. I'd simply break ties or cut them back for a while. That, or punch someone in the face when they screw up, then let them know you did it lovingly, so they'd learn not to do that thing in the future. (Well, not really, but I'd sure as hell think about it.)

Hell, the *military* no longer use negative reinforcement on *animals*. Why would it work on children?

Robear wrote:

Hell, the *military* no longer use negative reinforcement on *animals*. Why would it work on children?

Because the Bible says it works.

SallyNasty wrote:

Sometimes I hate the Midwest.

I grew up being taught that the midwest was the former Northwest Territory and Missouri was not a part of that. Hate on the flyover states all you want, but can a Plains State a Plains state.

Geez people...

Neat.