Group items tagged

"Students at one south Georgia high school share classrooms and sports fields; but, they don't share the same prom." Welcome to 2013. How far have we come in fighting segregation... not far enough.

I can't believe this stuff still exist. The football team is segregated but the prom isn't? What took so long?

Is this even legal?

It is fun to look at the graph of Apple's stocks, you can see where new products were announced and other major events like the passing of Steve Jobs. But reaching $500 a stock is amazing, then you compare it to Microsoft's stock of $32ish and you laugh at that company.

You have to look at the number of shares not the value. While Microsoft is only $32 a share, there are far more shares. By Microsoft splitting stock they can give more people the power to buy in. So in response to Brice stock price isn't important, it's stock history. I will admit Microsoft isn't as solid as Apple currently is but the $32 to $500 isn't a true reflection of the companies.

Even though Microsoft isn't that big and does not have that much money in shares, I would still go for Apple because if you have shares with Apple you can get a huge amount of money.

Studying Government in the textbook is fine to get the basic ideas, but to really understand what is happening around us takes more work. Use this forum to share interesting content that you find. I ask that we try and keep our links related to government topics and stay within the code of conduct.

Studying Government in the textbook is fine to get the basic ideas, but to really understand what is happening around us takes more work. Use this forum to share interesting content that you find. I ask that we try and keep our links related to government topics and stay within the code of conduct.

Studying Government in the textbook is fine to get the basic ideas, but to really understand what is happening around us takes more work. Use this forum to share interesting content that you find. I ask that we try and keep our links related to government topics and stay within the code of conduct.

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?

Even more people may end up being charged with this crime: http://www.hlntv.com/article/2013/03/18/steubenville-rape-investigation-isnt-finished

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.

"Reddit, Craigslist and more than 30,000 other websites are flying the flag of opposition to the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, or CISPA, a controversial cybersecurity bill that was recently reintroduced in Congress."

I don't think the government should be able to see that kind of information. Makes you think twice about what you put online.

"The Supreme Court accepts only a fraction of the appeals submitted to it, and in May it declined to review the case of Joel Tenenbaum, who like Thomas-Rasset is still fighting the recording industry in court."

i did the math so over the company lost over 9000 customers if the song cost was 24$

When we use something from the school like a uniform or a book and it isn't returned we are fined the price of the item. I lose my basketball uniform, I pay $40. How come when this women takes something that is worth 24$ she must pay 10,000x what it is worth to the owner?

Isn't this lovely? In California, some folks in California who signed up for Obamacare got their personal information (name, phone #, etc.) shared with insurance agents and people like that WITHOUT their consent... Isn't this a breach of privacy? Let's hear what y'all think!

This whole Obamacare crap Is driving me even more insane. When will It finally end!?

(CNN) -- Arnold Abbott handed out four plates of food to homeless people in a South Florida park. Then police stopped the 90-year-old from serving up another bite. "An officer said, 'Drop that plate right now -- like I had a weapon,'" Abbott said.

There is nothing wrong with feeding those who don't have food. But I also believe at some point these people should have done something to prevent themselves from getting to the point that they can't afford food. Everybody gets a chance to try to find a place where they can support themselves. But I also believe it is wrong to prevent someone from trying to help them along, all they are trying to do is make their lives a little bit easier. There is no reason this man should be put in jail, he has done no wrong.

I don't see anything wrong with giving to the homeless, but instead of giving an giving I would try and get them a job or help them

US President Donald Trump has defended his "absolute right" to share information with Russia, following a row over classified material.

"As President I wanted to share with Russia (at an openly scheduled W.H. meeting) which I have the absolute right to do, facts pertaining ...to terrorism and airline flight safety. Humanitarian reasons, plus I want Russia to greatly step up their fight against ISIS & terrorism." (Trump) I feel like this just shows us that he is willing to admit that he is in/ has power and sharing about what his discussion is going to encounter, but if he is willing to go public with this then what else will he tell other leaders ?

"Russia has banned a picture depicting President Vladimir Putin as a potentially gay clown."

As a public figure, like any, Putin should accept the pros and cons of being in his position, this included.

I dont think they should have went that far and banned any images of vladimir because he should know that being at such a high power people are going to be making photos and comments that arent so pleasing.

"Donald Trump Jr got a lesson in sharing from social media on Tuesday, after tweeting a picture of his daughter Chloe with her Halloween candy haul, and threatening to take half of it away to "teach her about socialism"."

This was hilarious

"The FCC's vote on net neutrality is scheduled for this Thursday, December 14th. There is still time to tell them why they should reconsider. Go here to share your story of how the repeal of net neutrality rules would personally affect you. And go to www.battleforthenet.com to tell your member of Congress why he or she should call on Chairman Pai to reconsider his plan."

I like knowing that the police and the owner can't take it unless they have a court order.

i agree with alex i believe if they told us everything we would have more to worry about then knowing nothing

Well have you ever thought that maybe that would be better for our Country? To Actually think.....?

interesting back and forth regarding free speech

I would blame the media for starting this "conspiracy" in the first place. Once one person makes an assumption based on an event they didn't even witness, and they share it with some sort of media, it explodes into a big "conspiracy" against the government? I really do feel bad for the families who lost their children in such a tragic incident, and I feel even worse that they have to put up with these nonsense hate messages and such from people. It's very disrespectful.

I think the intensity of media coverage of an event such as this can be both good and harmful. When you over expose every detail and interview every last person related to the issue at hand there is bound to be inconsistencies in reporting. However when the media is able to really tell the story of such a tragedy it enlightens the public to some very serious issues. it makes it much easier for legislation to be brought to the table.

Someone posted this, but it wasn't possible to comment

First point: I fail to see how denying a single cell the chance to go through mitosis is abortion. It's no more aware than bacteria. Also, the author is referencing the morning-after pill. For some reason there's a lot of confusion about how the morning after pill actually works. It prevents the egg from joining the sperm, or depending on where the woman is in her cycle, prevents the ovaries from releasing eggs. Contrary to what pro-life proponents apparently believe, conception does not happen immediately after having sex. If using the morning-after pill is abortion, we may as well call abstinence abortion. Secondly, "the mandate requires private citizens who are also employers to purchase private goods (health insurance services) with private money from non-government companies." This is clearly written by a sensationalist. What it really means is that a company has to use its own money to provide healthcare. (And everyone seems to be forgetting that employees don't just receive healthcare plans for free). There is a difference between being a private citizen and being an employer. Owning a public company and employing people is about as far from private as you can get. "Requiring private citizens to pay for abortifacients is more akin to requiring the Amish to use their own money to purchase weapons from a private gun dealer or be forced into bankruptcy. Or kind of like forcing anti-pornography legal scholar Catharine MacKinnon to buy pornography for her law students." This is simply ludicrous and shows that the author clearly doesn't understand what a business is. It's a corporation, it employees people, it isn't a private citizen. I will admit that if Hobby Lobby employed only people who were in complete agreement with the beliefs of the owners I would support them in their case. However, the reality is that many of Hobby Lobby's employees don't share the exact same beliefs as the owner. And it would in fact be illegal for Hobby Lobby to choose their employ

ees because of their beliefs. And the last time I checked, in America we don't make people follow certain religions or beliefs. In fact, the law isn't supposed to be based in religion. I know it sounds shocking, but it actually isn't okay to force a religion on people, or to make everyone live in accordance with one belief system, which is exactly what Hobby Lobby, and everyone who argues against this provision in the new health care law, is trying to do. Lastly, the author says repeatedly that this law essentially discriminates against Christians, which is a complete lie. Christians is a broad term. There are Christians who believe in all kinds of birth control and then there are those who think all birth control should be outlawed. There are even Christians who get abortions. So, and this is a message to anyone who writes articles of this kind, stop saying just saying Christians. Tell the truth and call yourself a Fundamentalist. Saying Christians make it seem like the majority of people who believe in Jesus Christ agree with you, and they don't. You're a minority, and you need to accept that. And maybe read a little about how our government works. It's a majority rules system.

At issue is the "cost sharing" provision in the law that requires insurance companies offering health plans through the law to reduce out-of-pocket costs for policy holders who qualify. The government offsets the added costs to insurance companies by reimbursing them. But lawyers for the House argued that Congress did not properly approve the money for those reimbursements.

This suit represents the first time in our nation's history that Congress has been permitted to sue executive branch over a disagreement about how to interpret a statute," Earnest said during his daily briefing. "These are the kinds of political disputes that characterize a democracy. It's unfortunate that Republicans have resorted to a taxpayer-funded lawsuit to re-fight a political fight they keep losing.

"More than 20 students at a southwestern Virginia high school were suspended Thursday after wearing clothing bearing the Confederate flag in protest of school policy."

The students who are representing the flag may represent it for their own reason but if it offends other people because it's known widely for the racism coming from it in history.

The flag was created to show the support for slavery, it was the face of the southern states, the reason they flew it high and proudly was to fight FOR slavery, not just to show pride. It was offensive then, it's offensive now.