Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[penguinofhonor]

Cute story about an apparently gender-variant kid.

This deserves moar response. This was a great story, made my day. I wish everybody had siblings like that.

askjgnasdkjg

why do adorable stories like this exist

i almost teared up

[Heron TSG]

I'm sure that if Santorum or Paul wins the nomination, people will be pouring out of the woodwork to vote for someone, anyone, else.

[KaelGotDwarves]

Paul won't win the nomination. He remains, as always, a republican outsider.

Santorum has a slim chance at winning the nomination but it's very true that he's a conservative radical - as in he wants to return us all to Christian fundy 1800s New Revival US.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Paul came closer to winning the Iowa caucus than Santorum did. Outcast or not, the GOP is fairly divided these days between the moderate, conservative, and batshit-insane-reacionary republicans.

[KaelGotDwarves]

Santorum only lost by 8 votes. Paul was a few % behind. You are right on the divided front though, and the Republicans are pretty much stuck on the "Anyone but Obama" rut that the Democrats were with Bush years back.

[JoshuaFH]

I was pleasantly surprised to find the... ahem... "alternative definition" of Santorum that can be found through a quick google.

[Nadaka]

Spoiler: Santorum joke (click to show/hide)

I was pleasantly surprised to find the... ahem... "alternative definition" of Santorum that can be found through a quick google.

Yes. Now you know that the alternative definition of Santorum is a conservative republican political figure.

In other news: today was a busy day for gun articles. This may be a source of progressive anxiety for some, but I am rather pro firearm myself.

http://news.yahoo.com/fbi-data-shows-spike-firearm-purchases-2011-045125172.html
http://news.yahoo.com/police-utah-officer-dies-following-shootout-112446228.html
http://news.yahoo.com/okla-mom-wont-face-charges-shooting-intruder-031645004.html
http://news.yahoo.com/texas-police-kill-8th-grader-carrying-pellet-gun-003818851.html

[Tellemurius]

Yea woop de doo. I read on the Brady tidbits about shutting down the National Concealed Carry bill, this law is simple: you got a concealed carry permit in one state its good for all states. How the fuck does this make "more danger" by people with the privilege to carry concealed, if they want to kill they bring the fucking gun no matter what they don't give a damn about law then.

[MonkeyHead]

Black politician in UK criticized for racist tweet...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16423278

I cant decide if this is an over reaction, or unnaceptable. I can imagine the massive deal people would make if the person in question was white and made a negative comment referring to black people...

Long investigation (18/19 years!) into racially motivated murder secures conviction, but the law requires lean senteces. Review pending. (Stepehn Lawrence case, where both conviceted killers (now adults) were sentenced as children due to thier ages when they commited the crime, which was also before sentencing guidelines for hate crimes were established: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16430633)

Also, the figures in the table below this article make for interesting reading (Obama announces military spending review - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16430405), especially a  comaprison of "what you get for how much cash" between the 5 nations in the table.

[fqllve]

Black politician in UK criticized for racist tweet...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16423278

I think the point that she was trying to make is that by using the term "black leaders" they're separating us from them. Was it an acceptable way to go about it? I think the backlash show us that it wasn't, but I certainly don't think the term "black leaders" is any less offensive.

Also, this is yet more proof that Twitter is one of the worst methods of discourse available. Not only do you lack gesture and intonation, but you can't even make up for those deficiencies by piling words on the problem.

POLITICIANS SHOULD NOT USE TWITTER

[palsch]

Long investigation (18/19 years!) into racially motivated murder secures conviction, but the law requires lean senteces. Review pending. (Stepehn Lawrence case, where both conviceted killers (now adults) were sentenced as children due to thier ages when they commited the crime, which was also before sentencing guidelines for hate crimes were established: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16430633)

I don't think the sentences are short at all.

The reported 14-15 years is the hard minimum. That is, after that long they become eligible for parole. Technically the sentences are the classic 'at her Majesty’s Pleasure' life sentences that have no hard maximum term. Even if the sentence is never extended they will be kept in until they receive parole.

They will not qualify for automatic parole unless they show contrition. That seems unlikely to me given the 18+ years of them claiming to be innocent. They also have to show they are no longer a danger to the public and the argument has been made that their racism is an inherent danger. Unless they cooperate with any future prosecution of the other people involved in the murder and show a major personality change while behind bars I wouldn't expect them to be paroled easily.

[Leafsnail]

In other news: today was a busy day for gun articles. This may be a source of progressive anxiety for some, but I am rather pro firearm myself.

Surely "a whole bunch of people have been shot recently" is bad regardless of whether you like guns or not.  Unless you're pro firearm and pro people-being-shot-with-firearms.

Long investigation (18/19 years!) into racially motivated murder secures conviction, but the law requires lean senteces. Review pending. (Stepehn Lawrence case, where both conviceted killers (now adults) were sentenced as children due to thier ages when they commited the crime, which was also before sentencing guidelines for hate crimes were established: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16430633)

They're basically life sentences.  I read the whole judge's statement and even if they get released after 15 years they'll still effectively be on "parole" forever.  They can be called back into jail if they're ever judged to be a risk to the public again.

And... I hate to say this, but this is one area where I may have to praise the Daily Mail.  Because really, their pressure was possibly quite important for keeping the case open and finally securing convictions.  Their "Murderers" headline was pretty controversial and illegal, but I suppose they've been proved right on two of those men now... ugh, I don't know really.  I disagree with their method there but agree with their drive to help bring justice to some of the killers.

[Vector]

I was pleasantly surprised to find the... ahem... "alternative definition" of Santorum that can be found through a quick google.

I hope his children aren't being bullied too badly for it.

[ChairmanPoo]

You've got to be kidding me http://www.nature.com/news/paper-refuting-hiv-aids-link-secures-publication-1.9737

[Bauglir]

While I'm all for scientific rigor and avoiding the trap of dogma, and agree that no particular conclusion should be sole grounds for rejection of a paper, I feel confident in saying that this is almost certainly absurd. Unless he has a mountain of evidence that sufficiently accounts for existing data in addition to suggesting that the conclusion drawn from it is wrong, the paper's publication is not a good thing. Going to see a lot of people citing it as proof of their own opinions, no matter how ridiculous those opinions may be or how much exaggeration is required.