GasBandit
Staff member
Also I have questions re: the girl on the bottom left. Maybe it's just the bright orange dress making her skin tone look darker...That photographer was awful, anyway. Everyone's face is out of focus.
Also I have questions re: the girl on the bottom left. Maybe it's just the bright orange dress making her skin tone look darker...That photographer was awful, anyway. Everyone's face is out of focus.
I believe you meant to say "more difficult." That avoids confusion more betterly.Well crap on a cracker. People like her just make being a Christian harder.
Kids, stay in school.A 66-year old woman from Nebraska is suing all gay people, because she thinks homosexuality is a sin, and she wants the law to finally acknowledge it.
Also because she is out of her mind.
Sylvia Driskell filed the lawsuit on May 1 with U.S. District Court of Omaha, and in a handwritten, 7-page document she lists herself as the “ambassador” for the plaintiffs “God and his son, Jesus Christ.”
The defendants are listed as simply “homosexuals” – presumably, every single one of them – which would make for quite a full courtroom.
Here are a few passages from the lengthy, incoherent argument:
I Sylvia Ann Driskell; Contented that homosexuality is a sin, And that they the homosexuals know it is a sin to live a life of homosexuality. Why else would they have been hiding in a closet.
Never before has Our great Nation the United States of America And our great State of Nebraska; been besiege by sin; The way to destroy any Nation, or State is to destroy its morals; Look what happen to Sodom and Gomorrah two city because of the same immoral behavior thats present in Our Nation, in Our States, and our Cities; God destroy them.
After the news broke, Dan Savage simply Tweeted that he hopes to get a chance to testify, which would be amazing.
You can read the whole insane document here.
Well, at least he's not doing the shooting any more.I swear he's competing for some kind of award... Police: George Zimmerman shot at in road rage incident with man he knew
FTFYWell, at least he's not doing the shooting today.
Yeah, but he shot a black kid to death, so he'll always be a hero to some people.He really does seem like a total piece of shit.
That's, um.... wow. That's just weird.So, uh... one of Rand Paul's staffers decided to lick the lens of somebody's camera while it was recording Paul.
They're just following what's trendy in the UK.The Washington Post has a clock timing how many minutes (30,000 so far) have elapsed since Hillary has answered a question from the press.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ce-hillary-clinton-answered-a-press-question/
She's been a candidate for a month, but she's been bringing her own pre-screened event attendees by bus, only answering questions her people gave them to ask (and even last did that 3 weeks ago), and has been barring media entry to the events.
I guess her handlers figured out Hillary is most popular when she's not seen or heard.
Why take the stand if the other side is making your case for you? Jade Helm 15 is bringing all the stupid on the right to the fore.The Washington Post has a clock timing how many minutes (30,000 so far) have elapsed since Hillary has answered a question from the press.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ce-hillary-clinton-answered-a-press-question/
She's been a candidate for a month, but she's been bringing her own pre-screened event attendees by bus, only answering questions her people gave them to ask (and even last did that 3 weeks ago), and has been barring media entry to the events.
I guess her handlers figured out Hillary is most popular when she's not seen or heard.
... because you don't get to plead the 5th when you're running for president. It looks bad when Republican candidates are stepping out the front door of whatever venue, into the crowded street, and answering every question shouted at them, but Hillary intentionally excludes and stymies not only "real" people but also the media, having to bring her own audience with her wherever she goes.Why take the stand if the other side is making your case for you?
I hear ya. I'm conflicted as well.I dunno where to put this, I don't want to make a new thread.
http://globalnews.ca/news/1993022/m...erEdmonton&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=2015
I don't know how I feel about this. Very conflicted.
Am I missing something? Cursory Wikipedia reading, plus that article, show me that parole seems warranted in this case. I'm not familiar with the events beyond that, though.I dunno where to put this, I don't want to make a new thread.
http://globalnews.ca/news/1993022/m...erEdmonton&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=2015
I don't know how I feel about this. Very conflicted.
It's the fact that 4 officers are dead, and there's nobody to "blame" except the two who set him up with a gun and a place to hide. And that consecutive sentencing isn't a thing in Canada, and thus people feel that he didn't do the time for doing this to 4 other families.Ditto as Denbrought. No doubt the guy did wrong, but he's been in prison for some 8 years on..;well, manslaughter, apparently, which strikes me as a legal oddity as I'd have guessed "giving someone a gun and wiping it down" would be more like aiding or being an accomplice. That aside, though, a prisoner who plead guilty, served most of his time, shows remorse, got his degree in prison, has shown through day leave that he can work in society and all that, isn't that the whole point of parole?
...the guy who did it? It's not because he's dead that it's suddenly not his fault.there's nobody to "blame" except the two who set him up with a gun and a place to hide.
Hadn't found them, didn't hear the knocking on the wall. Secret cellar next to the "normal" one. Yeah, great house search, folks!Wait, they left 2 abducted girls in the house?