[Most Recent Entries]
Below are the 20 most recent journal entries recorded in
Right Leaning Furries' LiveJournal:
[ << Previous 20 ]
[ << Previous 20 ]
|Wednesday, September 21st, 2011|
Cop killer Troy Davis executed
At 11:08pm Eastern, Troy "Davis was convicted of the 1989 murder of off-duty Savannah, Ga., policeman Mark MacPhail, and had his execution stayed four times over the course of his 22 years on death row, but multiple legal appeals during that time failed to prove his innocence."
The movement that he was innocent was fueled in part by
"Public support grew for Davis based on the recanted testimony of seven witnesses from his trial and the possible confession of another suspect, which his defense team claimed cast too much doubt on Davis' guilt to follow through with an execution. Several witnesses recanted their testimony that Davis fired the shot that killed MacPhail. His impending execution has brought those efforts to a head"
Source of the above two quoteshttp://abcnews.go.com/US/troy-davis-executed-stay-denied-supreme-court/story?id=14571862
Its easy to look at evidence that someone may be innocent and say they're innocent, but the evidence of their guilt has to be considered to and that's what every appeals court did. If he were indeed innocent, then why were all the different courts over the years so consistent in ruling against him?
To avoid confusion, this is not about whether or not he should have been executed or got life without parole. I don't want to get into that argument. This is about whether or not he was guilty to start with.
|Thursday, August 18th, 2011|
Why won't birthers admit why they believe that way?
Birthers insist that Obama wasn't born in the U.S.A. despite all of the evidence that he was. Obviously, they have chosen to believe the way they do.
What I don't understand is why they refuse to be honest and admit that they have chosen to believe the way they do tell the real reason why they want to believe that way and just simply give a straight answer to those who want to know why instead of giving them a hard time.
I wonder the same thing about a lot of groups that resist those who try to get them to tell the real reason why they believe the way they do despite the evidence against what they say is the truth. I don't understand why they won't be honest and admit it
|Thursday, August 4th, 2011|
|Thursday, April 28th, 2011|
Not surprisingly, birthers unmoved (Obama's birth cert.)
For those who haven't already heard, Obama has released the long form of his birth certificate.
Not surprisingly, birthers are not convinced. This kind of thing is exactly what I thought would happen if Obama released his long form birth certificate. Birthers are no different than moon landing conspiracy theorists, 9/11 truthers, Jewish holocaust deniers, etc. They believe what they want to believe and no evidence will convince them otherwise.
What pisses me off about such people in general is that they won't have the guts to at least be honest and admit that they have chosen to believe the way they do and just say directly the real reason why they chose to believe the way they do and rationalize away any and all evidence that says they're wrong. Just why is that so difficult?http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0411/Birthers_unmoved.html
The theories about President Barack Obama's birth — as we reported last week — have evolved over time from the idea that he was a Muslim to the modern incarnation that he was smuggled into the U.S. from Kenya. With the release of his long-form birth certificate today, they've evolved again.
Phil Berg, who filed one of the original birther lawsuits, now believes that Obama was adopted by his Indonesian father and lost his U.S. citizenship:
"I think the issue is that he's not any more natural born. I don't care if he releases his birth certificate or whatever," said Berg. "Let's see his records coming back through immigration."
Orly Taitz, once called 'Queen of the birthers' and who was responsible for a number of lawsuits, is verifying the document's authenticity and now believes that the president is using a false social security number.
"In Obama's Selective Service [document], his social security is listed as a Connecticut Social Security number," said Taitz, who has tried to have forgeries introduced into court filings before.
POLITICO could not verify that the document that she is referring to is genuine
|Friday, January 14th, 2011|
|Saturday, January 1st, 2011|
|Wednesday, December 22nd, 2010|
|Wednesday, November 17th, 2010|
|Monday, November 15th, 2010|
|Wednesday, November 3rd, 2010|
Writer's Block: Hey, big spender
Should there be limits on how much money a political candidate can spend on an election campaign, and why?
I've wondered if it should be law that no candidate can spend more money on campaigning than other candidates to prevent any candidate from winning just because they have more money to spend on campaigning.
Also, while I'm at it anyway, I wonder the same thing about spending money on lawyers to defend/prosecute a lawsuit and other court cases.
But there could be having disadvantages to having laws like that. What do you think?
|Saturday, September 25th, 2010|
Congress changes intellectual disability wording
"WASHINGTON – Disabilities advocates are applauding Congress for passing legislation that eliminates the term "mental retardation" from federal laws."
This is stupid. You watch. At some point in the future, people like those "disabilities advocates" will start saying that "intellectual disability" is as offensive as what they're saying "mental retardation" is now. And yes, I would say that straight to the face of any one of those "disabilities advocates." Being "politically correct" is a bunch of crap.
"What a bunch of fecal-cephalics."
Fark user FredaDeStilleto
"Idiot and moron were both medical terms, back in the day. "Special" didn't have negative overtones when it started being used, neither did retarded. Whatever you call them is going to be taken negatively, because no one wants to be called a retard. Simple as that."
Fark user EvilEgg
"Thirty years from now Congress will pass a law eliminating the offensive term "intellectually disabled" from legislation"
Fark user ne2d
|Sunday, September 19th, 2010|
What's missing from this statement?
"We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, endowed with certain inalienable rights, Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness"
President Obama at the 22:30 point in this video
Now here's a quote directly from the Declaration Of Independence
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"
Notice how Obama pauses at "created equal" and acts as if he doesn't like saying what comes next before continuing at "endowed with" leaving out the part about "by their Creator"
|Wednesday, September 15th, 2010|
Who really wrecked the economy?
Can someone please tell me if any part of this is accurate or inaccurate? Thanx! :-)
The day the Democrats took over was not January 22nd 2009 -- it was actually January 3rd 2007.
The day the Democrats took over the House of Representatives & Senate, the start of the 110th Congress.
The Democratic Party controlled a majority in both chambers for the first time since the end of the 103rd Congress in 1995.
For those of you who are listening to the liberals propagating the fallacy that everything is "Bush's Fault," think about this:
January 3rd, 2007 was the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the Congress:
At the time:
The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77
The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5%
The Unemployment rate was 4.6%
George Bush's Economic policies set a record of 52 straight months of job creation!http://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/George_W__Bush_Jobs.htm
January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee.
The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the economy? Banking and Financial Services!
Bush asked Congress 17 TIMES to stop Fannie & Freddie - starting in 2001 because it was financially risky for the US economy).
And who took the THIRD highest pay-off from Fannie Mae AND Freddie Mac? Obama! And who fought against reform of Fannie and Freddie? Obama & the Democratic Congress!
|Saturday, September 11th, 2010|
Coach fired for anti-obama song
Link also has lyrics to the song in question.
"Williamson County School Superintendent Mike Looney disputed Glover’s account and said his dismissal had nothing to do with the song. "Absolutely not,” he told FOX News Radio. "That’s a false claim."
So he just happened to get fired right after posting a song criticising Obama. I can't help wondering if it's more than just a coincidence.
"Looney said he was not allowed to go into specifics but acknowledged he spoke with the school’s principal and was satisfied with their handling of the matter. "They presented me with logical, legally defensible reasons for doing so," Looney said. "As far as I’m concerned they’ve handled the matter appropriately."
So what are those reasons? Why not just tell what they are and remove all doubt? Even if the school did have a good reason to fire the coach, by happening to fire him just after posting an anti-Obama song and refusing to talk about why they fired him, they're making themselves look awfully suspicious.
Maybe it's just me, but I don't see any "racial overtones" in the lyrics.
More articles on the same story herehttp://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=coach+fired+for+anti-obama+song&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=C4HxyDQWKTNaVB6mMzAS26cjtBAAAAKoEBU_QcXNA
|Friday, August 6th, 2010|
The proposed mosque near Ground Zero
I already knew that it's going to be where a former Burlington Coat Factory is. I just now found out that the exact address is 45 Park Place, New York, NY.
So I went to Google Maps, entered 45 Park Place, New York, NY, clicked the "search nearby" link and searched for "Mosque"
There are several other already existing mosques in the area, at least one of which is even closer to Ground Zero than the proposed mosque.
So what's all the fuss about? Why is this new mosque an insult to the victims of 9/11 but the already existing mosques aren't?
Believe it or not, even Jewish groups are backing the mosquehttp://www.thejewishweek.com/news/new_york/wake_adl_jewish_groups_back_ground_zero_mosque
|Thursday, July 22nd, 2010|
|Saturday, July 17th, 2010|
Obama's Friday morning speech
Some of you saw Obama's speech on the oil spill that was broadcast live Friday morning. What did you think of it?
I noticed that he said "we" an awful lot when "BP" would have sufficed, promting critics of his to say things like "He's taking credit for stopping the oil spill, it wasn't "we" who stopped the spill, it was BP!"( Transcript under the cutCollapse )
|Friday, July 16th, 2010|
Hateful, bigoted Anti-Muslum commercial
This is a political issue and so I thought it would be appropriate to post it here
For the record, I'm Baptist.
A group calling itself the National Republican Trust has produced this deliberately inflammitory hate inducing commercial against the Islamic center being built near ground zero.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjGJPPRD3u0
Comments on the video are disabled, but you can still send them a message through YouTube or the Contact section of their website, http://nationalrepublicantrust.com/
which mysteriously quit working just before I could send them a message.
Here is the message I sent through YouTube
I cannot image how you can possibly justify such illogical, prejudiced hatred against Muslums.
I don't understand why you either don't realize or don't care that it was RADICAL muslums who destroyed the World Trade Center and that their words and beliefs are not shared by mainstream Islam.
There were several muslums who were not participants in that attack that also lost their lives, loved ones or were otherwise affected who do not agree with the beliefs of the extremists who perpetrated the attack
Your opposition to that mosque is bigoted, stereotyping hatred, plain and simple. Opposing a Mosque because of crimes that radical islamists have done makes about as much sense as opposing a Harley dealership because of crimes that outlaw bikers have done.
|Tuesday, July 13th, 2010|
Barack Obama's BBQ
Some say this makes fun of Obama.
Others say it makes fun of the American public not understanding that Obama is doing the best he can.
Me, I just think it's a funny commentary on current events and thought that you might like it too :-)http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1938115
|Wednesday, June 23rd, 2010|
When someone's favorite politician or ideal is questioned or attacked
This is something that's been on my mind for some time now
Ever notice that when you post something to a liberal community questioning or attacking liberal politicians or ideals or to a conservative community questioning or attacking conservative politicians or ideals, it never fails, the members of said community *always* say that it is biased, full of half truths, not factual, slanted, lies or there's something else wrong with it?
Why is that? It's like many of them want to believe that they're right, couldn't possibly be wrong and can't rationally handle it when someone says that they're wrong or even just brings up the possibility that they may be wrong.
"The high and mighty cry out "TREASON!" when you challenge the word that they call truth!"
Rez Band - House Of Pain
"Minds are like parachutes: they only function when they're open."
Sir Thomas Robert Dewar