Home » Archives by category » News » Politics (Page 1194)
Teenage Cheerleader Ordered To Pay School That Kicked Her Off The Squad For Refusing To Cheer For Her Rapist

enlarge I really can’t understand this at all : The Supreme Court this week refused to hear the case of a teenage girl who was kicked off her cheerleading team after refusing to cheer for the boy who sexually assaulted her. As a result, she now owes the school $45,000 in legal fees . The girl, known only as MS, accused a fellow student of raping her at a party. He plead guilty to a misdemeanor charge to avoid jail time and was allowed to return to school and the basketball team. She continued to cheer for the team during games, but refused to shout the boy’s name or clap for him when he shot free throws. When the superintendent discovered what she was doing, she was kicked off the team. She sued the Texas school, arguing that her free speech rights had been violated, but two courts ruled that as a cheerleader she speaks for the school, not herself, and did not have the right to refuse . Are you kidding me? Look, I get that the rules are different for minors and students. But imagine that teenage girl is your daughter. She was sexually assaulted , for the love of everything holy. Where the hell is the sensitivity from the school and the superintendent in the first place? Why was the boy allowed to rejoin the basketball team? Why were the extenuating circumstances not taken into consideration before the girl was kicked off the cheerleading squad? I know it’s pretty standard to make the losing side to pay the other’s court costs. But in this case, a teenage girl is being held to pay her school $45,000 for kicking her off the squad for refusing to cheer for her rapist. What kind of perversion of justice is this?

Continue reading …
Arrests follow Marrakech bombing

Al-Qaida ‘loyal’ main suspect in the bombing of cafe popular with foreign tourists, police say Three people have been arrested in connection with the bombing of a busy tourist cafe in Marrakech, Morrocan officials said. The three suspects in the bombing of the Argana cafe in the popular Jamaa el-Fnaa square last week were all Moroccans, the country’s official news agency reported. Police said the main suspect in the blast, the country’s deadliest for eight years, was “loyal” to al-Qaida. Jamaa el-Fnaa , next to the city’s historic market area, draws crowds of tourists with its snake charmers, fire-eaters and tooth pullers. Most of those killed when a remote-controlled nail bomb was detonated at lunchtime on 28 April were foreign nationals – including one Briton, French, Dutch and Canadian tourists – and at least 23 others were injured by the explosion. The British victim was Peter Moss, a 59-year-old travel writer, broadcaster and comedian who lived in West Hampstead, London.A video released before the attack by al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb claimed responsibility. Counter-terrorism experts believe the group was one of several likely candidates. Moroccan authorities said the bomb had been packed with nails and set off remotely and not by a suicide bomber. Counter-terrorism experts from several countries, including Spain, have been sifting through the wreckage of the cafe. They said the man disguised himself as a foreign visitor to plant the explosives, devices that could be detonated remotely, authorities said. He had learned to make the devices on the internet, the statement said. It added that investigators found some explosive materials and tools that were discarded after the explosion. “He made many attempts to go to such hot spots as Chechnya and Iraq before deciding to make this attack on Moroccan soil,” the statement from Moroccan officials said. It did not provide any details about the other two suspects or about where the arrests had taken place The attack is the deadliest in Morocco since 12 suicide bombers killed 33 people in co-ordinated strikes in Casablanca in 2003. The latest attack was a blow to Morocco’s most important tourist city. Tourism is Morocco’s biggest source of foreign currency and the second biggest employer after agriculture. The attack adds to the challenges facing Morocco’s ruler, King Mohammed VI, as he tries to prevent the uprisings in the Arab world from reaching his normally stable kingdom. The monarch has promised to reform the constitution to placate pro-democracy protesters. He recently pardoned political prisoners, including some alleged militant Islamists. Morocco Global terrorism al-Qaida David Batty guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …

Chris Matthews apparently misses moderating Republican debates and hectoring the candidates with bizarre questions. On Thursday's Hardball, hours before the first GOP face-off, the cable anchor dreamed up hypothetical queries he would like to see: ” Question to Mr. Candidate, do you believe in evolution? Are you a fundamentalist who believes in the Bible as written? Has man been around millions of years or, say, just about 6,000? ” Apparently this question is crucial as it determines “whether you believe in science or not.” On the week Osama bin Laden was killed, Matthews added this relevant inquiry: “A question for the fundamentalists who give that answer, why do we conduct health experiments for people on animals if there's no relation?”

Continue reading …
LA Noire: The interactive detective

The makers of Grand Theft Auto are set to revolutionise gaming by exploring the noir crime genre. Here the aim is to interrogate criminals – not kill them Two police detectives burst into a filthy apartment. A

Continue reading …

Good. Maybe more people will understand how important this is when they hear it from a nonpartisan group like AARP: AARP understands the urgent need to reduce the deficit and control government spending, but we also recognize that imposing arbitrary spending limits on Medicare and Social Security could significantly reduce benefits to current and future retirees. The proposed limits on Medicare could force seniors to pay higher insurance premiums and co-pays, and threaten their choice of doctors and hospitals. Imposing limits on Social Security could lead to cuts that could deny seniors the money they count on to pay for essentials such as groceries, utilities and prescription drugs. Cutting Social Security would also break our nation’s commitment to provide the benefits our seniors have rightfully earned. Instead of making harmful cuts to Social Security and Medicare, Congress should cut down waste, fraud and inefficiency throughout the health care system and target other wasted and inefficient spending, including spending through the tax code in the form of loopholes and other unnecessary subsidies. AARP urges members and all Americans to contact their representatives in congress and tell them to oppose arbitrary limits that could force dangerous cuts to Social Security and Medicare. Contact your member of congress now!

Continue reading …
Ashdown accuses PM of breach of faith over AV

Lib Dem grandee and close Nick Clegg ally calls PM ‘grave disappointment’ and says no campaign has told ‘regiment of lies’ Lord Ashdown, one of Nick Clegg’s closest allies, accused David Cameron of a breach of faith, describing his refusal to dissociate himself from a “regiment of lies” poured out by the no-to-AV campaign as setting him apart from every British prime minister of the postwar period. The former Liberal Democrat leader also predicted that Cameron’s behaviour would have long-term consequences for the coalition, including the terms on which it eventually ends. He told the Guardian: “So far the coalition has been lubricrated by a large element of goodwill and trust. It is not any longer. The consequence is that when it comes to the bonhomie of the Downing Street rose garden, that has gone. It will never again be glad confident morning.” The ferocity of his attack, made after consultations within the party, follows what looks like certain defeat in the referendum on the alternative vote due to be announced on Friday. The party also faces severe losses in the English council elections as results emerge. Senior figures in the yes campaign were predicting a 60%-to-40% defeat on a desultory turnout, with one admitting: “We were providing a solution to a problem the British public did not recognise.” Another said: “Once David Cameron moved in the way he did, the polls moved. It was unstoppable.” Ashdown is furious with the no campaign for personalised attacks on Clegg that accused him of broken promises on tuition fees and spending cuts, and arguments that AV was a “Lib Dem fix”. Ashdown, who led the party for 11 years until 1999, said: “The bottom line is that Liberal Democrats are exceedingly angry. We believe there has been a breach of faith here. If the Conservative party funds to the level of 99% a campaign whose central theme is to denigrate and destroy our leader, there are consequences for that. “What that means is that this is a relationship that is much less about congeniality, it becomes a business relationship, a transactional relationship, and maybe it will be all the better for that.” He went on: “David Cameron is the prime minister. He sets the tone of politics in this country. It is an unhappy fact that when he was asked to dissociate himself from a campaign that was run on the basis of personalisation and personal attacks, and messages that were far more than some subtle bending of the truth, he refused to do that. “I have to say that he did not dissociate himself from a campaign whose nature I believe every previous British prime minister in my time would have disassociated himself from. That is a grave disappointment. “This is a triumph for the regiment of lies. We live with pretty strenuous political campaigns in Britain, but these were downright lies.” Ashdown also accused Cameron of panicking after demands from his backbenchers to step up the referendum campaign. “In backtracking, to use no stronger a word than that, on what was a private agreement he had with Nick Clegg about the way this campaign was conducted, I think the prime minister panicked in the face of his rightwingers. I regret that.” Ashdown said it would be right if his party now highlighted its differences within the coalition. He insisted the Lib Dems would not leave the coalition until the end of the five-year parliament, saying: “We have set our hands to this task and now it must be completed so the purpose of the coalition has not altered, but the mood music, the atmosphere of the coalition most assuredly has as a result of what has gone on in the past three weeks. I think we should be much more straightforward where we disagree. That is not a criticism of Clegg. “I have always said when asked I did not think the result of the referendum could affect the coalition, but I did think the way it was fought could.” He seemed to imply that the party’s willingness to enter another coalition with Cameron may be affected. “I am very clear that the nature of this coalition and the way that it ends, the mood between the two parties when it ends and therefore what happens afterwards, may well be affected by this.” But he urged his party to hold its nerve, and to realise that popularity will take a long time to recover. “We are in there for the long haul, I recall how long it took us as a party to recover after 1991. It is not this year, next year or the year therafter. It is about being strong enough when the dividend comes.” He urged his battered colleagues to keep their nerve. “I am someone who has presided over a party represented by an asterisk denoting that there is no perceptible support for the party in the country, so I am used to setbacks and difficult days as this looks as though these will be. “Anyone that went into this coalition believing that there would be a benefit to the party particularly in the short term was living in cloud-cuckoo-land. We knew perfectly there was a price to be paid for this and it was going to be paid in the short term. “The dividend to be delivered in this will come after three or four years when the government has taken the country through an economic crisis.” He indicated that the Lib Dems’ fortunes were now inextricably bound up with the fate of the economy over the next four years. “The central proposition of this parliament stands: ‘Is George Osborne’s economic judgment right?’ I believe it is. The whole of British politics now rests on that single proposition. The fortunes of the coalition, the fortunes of the two parties in the coalition and the fortunes of the Labour party rest on that.” There is no sign that any senior Lib Dem cabinet member yet wants to revisit the deficit reduction plan. Ashdown challenged Cameron to show that he was the reformer he had claimed to be, by pressing ahead with an elected House of Lords. “It is in the Tory manifesto. Is he going to deliver or not? Let’s see the prime minister’s determination.” He also lashed out at Labour’s failure to back reform, saying: “Yet again Labour has proved it cannot be trusted with reform. Labour claims to be a great radical reforming party but whenever it comes to a key issue of reform, we find Labour defending the status quo.” Clegg and Cameron will try to show it is business as usual when they publish a checklist of coalition achievements before next week’s anniversary. There will be a symbolic joint foreword by the two men. There will also be some action on youth unemployment next week. Meanwhile Ed Miliband, the Labour leader, waiting anxiously for news of the scale of the Labour advance in his first nationwide electoral test, will urge the electorate not to be duped by the promise of a coalition mark 2, predicting sham concessions by the Conservatives. AV referendum Alternative vote Paddy Ashdown David Cameron Nick Clegg Liberal Democrats Conservatives Labour Electoral reform Liberal-Conservative coalition Patrick Wintour guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
Ashdown accuses PM of breach of faith over AV

Lib Dem grandee and close Nick Clegg ally calls PM ‘grave disappointment’ and says no campaign has told ‘regiment of lies’ Lord Ashdown, one of Nick Clegg’s closest allies, accused David Cameron of a breach of faith, describing his refusal to dissociate himself from a “regiment of lies” poured out by the no-to-AV campaign as setting him apart from every British prime minister of the postwar period. The former Liberal Democrat leader also predicted that Cameron’s behaviour would have long-term consequences for the coalition, including the terms on which it eventually ends. He told the Guardian: “So far the coalition has been lubricrated by a large element of goodwill and trust. It is not any longer. The consequence is that when it comes to the bonhomie of the Downing Street rose garden, that has gone. It will never again be glad confident morning.” The ferocity of his attack, made after consultations within the party, follows what looks like certain defeat in the referendum on the alternative vote due to be announced on Friday. The party also faces severe losses in the English council elections as results emerge. Senior figures in the yes campaign were predicting a 60%-to-40% defeat on a desultory turnout, with one admitting: “We were providing a solution to a problem the British public did not recognise.” Another said: “Once David Cameron moved in the way he did, the polls moved. It was unstoppable.” Ashdown is furious with the no campaign for personalised attacks on Clegg that accused him of broken promises on tuition fees and spending cuts, and arguments that AV was a “Lib Dem fix”. Ashdown, who led the party for 11 years until 1999, said: “The bottom line is that Liberal Democrats are exceedingly angry. We believe there has been a breach of faith here. If the Conservative party funds to the level of 99% a campaign whose central theme is to denigrate and destroy our leader, there are consequences for that. “What that means is that this is a relationship that is much less about congeniality, it becomes a business relationship, a transactional relationship, and maybe it will be all the better for that.” He went on: “David Cameron is the prime minister. He sets the tone of politics in this country. It is an unhappy fact that when he was asked to dissociate himself from a campaign that was run on the basis of personalisation and personal attacks, and messages that were far more than some subtle bending of the truth, he refused to do that. “I have to say that he did not dissociate himself from a campaign whose nature I believe every previous British prime minister in my time would have disassociated himself from. That is a grave disappointment. “This is a triumph for the regiment of lies. We live with pretty strenuous political campaigns in Britain, but these were downright lies.” Ashdown also accused Cameron of panicking after demands from his backbenchers to step up the referendum campaign. “In backtracking, to use no stronger a word than that, on what was a private agreement he had with Nick Clegg about the way this campaign was conducted, I think the prime minister panicked in the face of his rightwingers. I regret that.” Ashdown said it would be right if his party now highlighted its differences within the coalition. He insisted the Lib Dems would not leave the coalition until the end of the five-year parliament, saying: “We have set our hands to this task and now it must be completed so the purpose of the coalition has not altered, but the mood music, the atmosphere of the coalition most assuredly has as a result of what has gone on in the past three weeks. I think we should be much more straightforward where we disagree. That is not a criticism of Clegg. “I have always said when asked I did not think the result of the referendum could affect the coalition, but I did think the way it was fought could.” He seemed to imply that the party’s willingness to enter another coalition with Cameron may be affected. “I am very clear that the nature of this coalition and the way that it ends, the mood between the two parties when it ends and therefore what happens afterwards, may well be affected by this.” But he urged his party to hold its nerve, and to realise that popularity will take a long time to recover. “We are in there for the long haul, I recall how long it took us as a party to recover after 1991. It is not this year, next year or the year therafter. It is about being strong enough when the dividend comes.” He urged his battered colleagues to keep their nerve. “I am someone who has presided over a party represented by an asterisk denoting that there is no perceptible support for the party in the country, so I am used to setbacks and difficult days as this looks as though these will be. “Anyone that went into this coalition believing that there would be a benefit to the party particularly in the short term was living in cloud-cuckoo-land. We knew perfectly there was a price to be paid for this and it was going to be paid in the short term. “The dividend to be delivered in this will come after three or four years when the government has taken the country through an economic crisis.” He indicated that the Lib Dems’ fortunes were now inextricably bound up with the fate of the economy over the next four years. “The central proposition of this parliament stands: ‘Is George Osborne’s economic judgment right?’ I believe it is. The whole of British politics now rests on that single proposition. The fortunes of the coalition, the fortunes of the two parties in the coalition and the fortunes of the Labour party rest on that.” There is no sign that any senior Lib Dem cabinet member yet wants to revisit the deficit reduction plan. Ashdown challenged Cameron to show that he was the reformer he had claimed to be, by pressing ahead with an elected House of Lords. “It is in the Tory manifesto. Is he going to deliver or not? Let’s see the prime minister’s determination.” He also lashed out at Labour’s failure to back reform, saying: “Yet again Labour has proved it cannot be trusted with reform. Labour claims to be a great radical reforming party but whenever it comes to a key issue of reform, we find Labour defending the status quo.” Clegg and Cameron will try to show it is business as usual when they publish a checklist of coalition achievements before next week’s anniversary. There will be a symbolic joint foreword by the two men. There will also be some action on youth unemployment next week. Meanwhile Ed Miliband, the Labour leader, waiting anxiously for news of the scale of the Labour advance in his first nationwide electoral test, will urge the electorate not to be duped by the promise of a coalition mark 2, predicting sham concessions by the Conservatives. AV referendum Alternative vote Paddy Ashdown David Cameron Nick Clegg Liberal Democrats Conservatives Labour Electoral reform Liberal-Conservative coalition Patrick Wintour guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …

After attacking public union workers and passing draconian and very controversial new laws in Ohio and Wisconsin that vilified public workers as an albatross around the necks of their states, both Walker and Kasich are pretending as if nothing happened at all, and now are hypocritically thanking those same public workers. Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R) and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) have decided to pay tribute to state workers. In Ohio, Kasich declared this week ” Public Service Appreciation Week ” on Monday. The same day, Walker announced a new public employee “recognition” program in Wisconsin. Given their high-profile battles with unions and state employees, plenty of people in the two states are wondering whether the olive branches are some kind of joke. When “honoring Ohio’s thousands of public employees,” Kasich asked his fellow Ohioans to “reflect on all that our public employees do in our communities, and thank them for the invaluable work they do each day.” During his first four months in office, Kasich has made rolling back the collective bargaining rights of public workers a centerpiece of his administration’s agenda. In response to the declaration, Ohio House Minority Leader Armond Budish (D) said in a statement that he had to “check my calendar” to make sure it wasn’t April Fool’s Day. He continued: “Do you thank teachers and firefighters for the invaluable work before or after you slash their wages and benefits?” Now that we’ve screwed you, we will thank you. Workers are shocked by the chutzpah of these moves, and Wisconsinites are responding in kind: The Wisconsin Capital Times reports that today a group of state employees are rallying outside the Capitol to instead recognize ” State Employee Depreciation Day .”

Continue reading …

After attacking public union workers and passing draconian and very controversial new laws in Ohio and Wisconsin that vilified public workers as an albatross around the necks of their states, both Walker and Kasich are pretending as if nothing happened at all, and now are hypocritically thanking those same public workers. Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R) and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) have decided to pay tribute to state workers. In Ohio, Kasich declared this week ” Public Service Appreciation Week ” on Monday. The same day, Walker announced a new public employee “recognition” program in Wisconsin. Given their high-profile battles with unions and state employees, plenty of people in the two states are wondering whether the olive branches are some kind of joke. When “honoring Ohio’s thousands of public employees,” Kasich asked his fellow Ohioans to “reflect on all that our public employees do in our communities, and thank them for the invaluable work they do each day.” During his first four months in office, Kasich has made rolling back the collective bargaining rights of public workers a centerpiece of his administration’s agenda. In response to the declaration, Ohio House Minority Leader Armond Budish (D) said in a statement that he had to “check my calendar” to make sure it wasn’t April Fool’s Day. He continued: “Do you thank teachers and firefighters for the invaluable work before or after you slash their wages and benefits?” Now that we’ve screwed you, we will thank you. Workers are shocked by the chutzpah of these moves, and Wisconsinites are responding in kind: The Wisconsin Capital Times reports that today a group of state employees are rallying outside the Capitol to instead recognize ” State Employee Depreciation Day .”

Continue reading …
On Defensive, NY Times Takes on ‘Torture Apologists’ Who See Vindication of Harsh Interrogation Tactics

Thursday's New York Times lead editorial defended the paper's left-wing ideological ground against conservative arguments that the killing of Osama bin Laden is a vindication of harsh interrogation methods used on terrorist detainees in Guantanamo Bay and elsewhere: ” The Torture Apologists – Efforts to justify torture after the Bin Laden killing are cynical and destructive .”

Continue reading …