US Politics Mega-thread - Page 1143

On June 30 2014 04:45 GreenHorizons wrote:



For a group that is so anti-frivolous lawsuits it seems pretty silly for them to bring a suit they probably wont even have standing for let alone a shot in hell of winning.

At least Rand Paul actually means what he says even if it sounds crazy sometimes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTw2wrvuR2A

On June 30 2014 04:45 GreenHorizons wrote:



For a group that is so anti-frivolous lawsuits it seems pretty silly for them to bring a suit they probably wont even have standing for let alone a shot in hell of winning.

At least Rand Ron Paul actually means what he says even if it sounds crazy sometimes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTw2wrvuR2A

On June 30 2014 04:10 Chocolate wrote:
By the way, if you were qualified enough to get in to one of those rich private schools, I don't even know why you would complain about loans. You could easily get a full ride, or very close to one, at a different school, in all likelihood. It was your choice to go to a school that would be a stretch financially.

On June 30 2014 10:35 oneofthem wrote:
it may not be fair in terms of some meritocratic ideal but college name is a signaling tool that shows you had the ability to get into a certain school. the actual knowledge or whatever may or may not matter that much depends on the field.

WASHINGTON — Just weeks before Blackwater guards fatally shot 17 civilians at Baghdad’s Nisour Square in 2007, the State Department began investigating the security contractor’s operations in Iraq. But the inquiry was abandoned after Blackwater’s top manager there issued a threat: “that he could kill” the government’s chief investigator and “no one could or would do anything about it as we were in Iraq,” according to department reports.

American Embassy officials in Baghdad sided with Blackwater rather than the State Department investigators as a dispute over the probe escalated in August 2007, the previously undisclosed documents show. The officials told the investigators that they had disrupted the embassy’s relationship with the security contractor and ordered them to leave the country, according to the reports.

After returning to Washington, the chief investigator wrote a scathing report to State Department officials documenting misconduct by Blackwater employees and warning that lax oversight of the company, which had a contract worth more than $1 billion to protect American diplomats, had created “an environment full of liability and negligence.”

“The management structures in place to manage and monitor our contracts in Iraq have become subservient to the contractors themselves,” the investigator, Jean C. Richter, wrote in an Aug. 31, 2007, memo to State Department officials. “Blackwater contractors saw themselves as above the law,” he said, adding that the “hands off” management resulted in a situation in which “the contractors, instead of Department officials, are in command and in control.”

His memo and other newly disclosed State Department documents make clear that the department was alerted to serious problems involving Blackwater and its government overseers before the Nisour Square shooting, which outraged Iraqis and deepened resentment over the United States’ presence in the country.

On June 30 2014 11:29 Yoav wrote:


Sure, but it's classist. I got into a top 5 liberal arts college ED, a friend of mine in high school got into the same one. My parents could afford it, and so I could go. His financial aid wasn't enough, so he couldn't. We were as qualified by the standards of the college (which are classist on their own), but I got the name recognition and he didn't just because of the way his financial aid worked out.

On June 30 2014 13:27 Livelovedie wrote:
If it was a top liberal arts school then his parents chose not to afford it.

On June 29 2014 06:40 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
NPR reran a story the other day on the price of college education. Apparently prices haven't grown nearly as much as people think, because of a growing disconnect between the costs that schools publish and what people actually pay.


source

Also from Brookings on how much people are shelling out to pay back loans:

+ Show Spoiler +

On June 30 2014 07:58 Yoav wrote:


School prestige is a stupid social concept, but it's one you have to deal with. A given GPA and a given major at Princeton gets you more places than the same GPA and major gets you at Rutgers. It's not fair; hell, the Rutgers professors might care more/be more engaged. And there is the corresponding thing that some people go by the liberal arts college rankings, which gets you a different list of top schools. Most places go by some combination, so Williams or Brown are both gonna be considered "top tier."

Getting a degree isn't exactly about getting an education anymore. I know some very educated people who graduated from low-tier schools or not at all. I know some extraordinarily ignorant people who went to Ivies or Nescac schools. But what matters is certification. You get more currency in the job and dating market with a more prestigious school name. It helps a ton in a lot of stupid ways, and the degree to which we make doing this easier for rich people is sickening, and a contributor to economic immobility.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court has rejected a challenge to California's law that bars mental counseling aimed at turning gay minors straight.

The justices on Monday let stand an appeals court ruling that said the state's ban on so-called conversion therapy for minors doesn't violate the free speech rights of licensed counselors and patients seeking treatment.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last year that California lawmakers properly showed that efforts to change sexual orientation were outside the scientific mainstream and have been rejected for good reason.

Liberty Counsel, a Christian legal aid group, had challenged the law along with other supporters of the therapy. They argue that lawmakers have no scientific proof the therapy does harm.

On June 30 2014 13:51 GreenHorizons wrote:


Even if that was the case, sucks to have parents who make bad (for you) choices. Suppose we are supposed to punish the sons for the sins of their fathers though right?

On July 01 2014 01:26 BronzeKnee wrote:
I don't even think we can ask the question: "Do we live in an Oligarchy"? anymore... the answer is a resounding yes.

The Supreme Court ruled today that the religious rights of a few people at the top of a company override the personal rights of all those below it regarding healthcare? That a few rich people, the owners of a company, can restrict the healthcare options of their employees based on their religion, even if the employees have a different religion?

Disgusting.

Lakeside Christian Church's senior pastor, the Rev. Ryan J. Muehlhauser, 55, of Cambridge, appeared in court Tuesday on eight felony counts of fourth-degree criminal sexual conduct and remains free pending another hearing next month.

Muehlhauser also was a counselor through Robbinsdale-based Outpost Ministries, whose website says it was founded more than 30 years ago to help men and women "break away from gay life" and declares that "all homosexual behavior is sin."

Authorities were informed of the alleged assaults from another Outpost counselor, who said the two men told him what had gone on with Muehlhauser.

According to the criminal complaint:

One of the men told investigators that Muehlhauser "blessed" him by cupping his genitals outside of his clothing several times and that Muehlhauser asked the man to masturbate in front of him for "spiritual strength." Muehlhauser would also fondle the man at times. Their encounters occurred over a period of nearly two years.

Another man told investigators of similar encounters spanning most of this year, adding that Muehlhauser feared he would "lose everything" if anyone found out. At one encounter, Muehlhauser fondled the man and then the two joined the pastor's wife for a dinner outing.

On July 01 2014 01:35 xDaunt wrote:


So go work elsewhere? When did employment become a "right?" Oh, right. It didn't.

The larger point is that letting the government infringing upon one group's religious freedoms when there are alternatives to that infringement that will accomplish the same objection, the infringement shouldn't be allowed. Go read Kennedy's concurrence.

On July 01 2014 01:45 Jormundr wrote:

Then why is your party making 'right to work' laws?