HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » LuckyTheDog » Journal
Page: 1


Profile Information

Member since: Tue Apr 5, 2005, 09:55 AM
Number of posts: 6,837

Journal Archives

For those on Facebook, some handy tips for teabaggers

From Anglo-Saxons for Obama: https://www.facebook.com/AngloSaxonsForObama

Please go to the source links and use the "share" button.

Source: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=422992991134178&set=pb.268963819870430.-2207520000.1382986492.&type=3&theater

Source: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=422978164468994&set=pb.268963819870430.-2207520000.1382986492.&type=3&theater

Source: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=422400444526766&set=pb.268963819870430.-2207520000.1382986492.&type=3&theater

Source: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=422397751193702&set=pb.268963819870430.-2207520000.1382986492.&type=3&theater

My Huffpo right-wing talking point takedown: Debt Limit Follies Need to Stop Now

Debt Limit Follies Need to Stop Now

Would the U.S. have defaulted on its debt payments if Congress had refused to raise the debt limit? Probably not right away. But the risks were real and presented a level of danger we should never again inflict upon ourselves.

Conservatives like to say a debt-limit freeze could be manageable. They point out that the government takes in more than enough tax money each month to more than cover the interest on the debt. So, in theory, the government could make "hard choices" to pay bond holders before it pays for other things. It also, theoretically, could have borrowed more money as old debt was retired.

That sounds logical, but it ignores some pesky realities. Those involve serious technical problems, as well as economic and political complications.

Technical problem number one: It is not clear that the U.S. Treasury or the president have the legal authority to prioritize payments in order to put bond holders at the front of the line. So, in order to do that, somebody might have to break the law.

MORE HERE: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-melton/debt-limit-follies-need-to-stop_b_4149318.html?utm_hp_ref=detroit&ir=Detroit


From Florida's SYG law:

A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

From the jury instructions:

If George Zimmerman was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in any place where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony

Same-sex marriage opponents are going to lose

“The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.’’ – Thomas Jefferson

That Jefferson quote is among his best-known statements in favor of privacy and personal liberty. It’s unclear that our third president would have extended this logic to approving marriage for homosexual couples. But I would like to think he would.

As a straight, married man, gay marriage “neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg,” and that leaves me no reason to oppose it. In fact, when one considers the range of personal, financial, and societal benefits offered by marriage, I think it should be available to as many people as possible.

The main reason for opposing gay marriage comes down to religion and, honestly, not much else. One does not have to dig very far into the websites of anti-gay marriage organizations to find passages that cite Bible verses or rely on a quasi-religious defense of “traditional values” to make their case.

More here: http://blogs.detroitnews.com/politics/2013/04/01/gay-marriage-opponentswill-lose/

^^ This is my latest blog post for the Detroit News.

A marriage equality graphic you might like

If you are on Facebook, please consider clicking this link and hitting the "share" button: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=349727375127407&set=a.349727371794074.1073741825.268963819870430&type=1&theater

Even MORE civil war talk in Freeper Nation (more proof that they are a nest of traitors)

The lunatic Adam Yoshida posted an excerpt from his new e-book, in which he fantasizes about glorious battle against the United States. And, of course, the Freepers are all for it.

The thread is here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2990041/posts

Sample responses:

I’ve had this idea literally for years, and I’ve written about here at FR. The ideas motivating the conflict in our time and during the Glorious Revolution are the same, too... does the monarch (or the state) have unlimited authority, or should the authority of the monarch (or the state) be limited?

In any case... God help us.

It’s inevitable. There’s no damn way we can co-exist with libtards.

Too many imagine some contest of arms, but that will not succeed without first creating a new ship of state, as our Founding Fathers did.

I believe the time has come, that for each county throughout each of the states, that county Tea Party should convene and choose 2 representatives to attend a Tea Party convention of their state, which will in turn debate and then consider and elect 2 representatives of their state, to attend a unique Tea Party national convention for the purpose of establishing a Second Continental Congress.

Setting the time and place for a first setting of the Second Continental Congress, then the unique national convention shall adjourn, and the representatives return to their states, where the Tea Party conventions of each state, will then take into consideration, who shall be their 2 representatives in the Second Continental Congress.

I believe, it is time to follow in the steps of our Founding Fathers, and create a new ship of state, to which our allegiance and love of our worthy American heritage and many foundations, shall transfer.

I believe, that *everybody* needs to see this preparation and action.

If the existing federal government fails us and takes one more step toward tyranny on which it has proven to be hell-bent, then we know, as Benjamin Franklin et al knew, it is time.

We must have a new democratic-republic to be where people can again be free from government tyranny, and we must, thru starting with a Second Continental Congress, make a good government, which will very likely be framed as the first but with a few refinements regarding how we may better limit government and that includes the courts.

Frankly, the assault of liberalism/leftism upon the US Constitution is an attack fomented from the outside by their allies on the inside. The liberals are the literal modern-day fifth column. Therefore the term “civil war” would not really be applicable.

It really won’t be defined as a Civil War. A second Revolutionary War is more of a correct definition.It then could turn into a hybrid Rev-Civ War if states start to fight each other.

Liberals have become a threat to all that I stand for.

Question: "Could a Second Civil War Happen?"
Answer: No.

Response: It will be a Social War,in essence Left vs. Right with a large racial element. The First American Civil War was a political war; i.e. could the States withdraw from the union at will.

I would propose that the Red States Caucus would vote to purge neo Europa, the states from New York, north and east. Once the Eurotrash is gone, America can be America and the Eurocrats can have Europe in North America.

Here in Louisiana we are ready for cw2 against the democrats/socialists

My son was forced to pray at a school-sponsored event; sucks to be agnostic in a Christian culture

So, here is the good news: My son attends an amazingly good inner-city school. The even better news: The school this year started an incredible chess program. In its first-ever appearance at the state tournament, his school brought hone four trophies, including two first-place trophies. My son was undefeated in five matches and his team was one of those that won the state championship in its category.

So far so good, right? Well, it is and I am very proud of my son and his classmates. The chess coach is amazing at what he does. But there is a problem.

I have known all along that the chess coach - arguably one of the best chess instructors in the country - is a serious holy roller. It's obvious. But frankly, I never had a problem with that till now.

At the chess tournament, the coach insisted on ending each of several team meetings with a prayer. And we are not talking simple, non-specific requests for blessings from the Almighty.These were prayers of the "in the name of Jesus Christ" variety. My son, knowing how I feel about such things, kind of squirmed.

I did not want to disrupt the event, but I complained to the assistant coach, who said he would give the coach a head's up about by feelings. That should have been the end of it, but it wasn't. The coach continued. And not only did he continued, but it got worse. At one point, when a couple of boys were not paying adequate attention to the prayer, he warned them that "there would be consequences" if they did not bow their heads and participate the next time.

My wife was at home and, when she heard about this, she was not as discreet as I was. She called the coach on his cell phone and (in her diplomatic way) asked him to cut it out. But he didn't.

The weird part (to me, anyway) was we I appear to be the only parents who objected to this. And I am sure the other parents will look at us now as the "party poopers." And, oh yes... did I mention that we are the only white parents in the whole group? That's going to be a complicating factor - at least I fear it will.

So, this sucks. I am taking this up with the school principal. But I don't expect things to go well.

Take Insurrection off the Table (James Melton in Huffington Post)

I think we would be courting many more problems than solutions if we responded to the Sandy Hook massacre by placing armed guards in all schools or arming teachers. But as bad as those proposals are, using firearms to protect our kids from bad guys isn't nearly as toxic to the American idea as using them to "protect" ourselves from our own government.

More than 236 years after we began forging the United States in the fire of revolution, it's time for Americans to finally take insurrection off the table and re-commit ourselves to our peaceful republican ideals.

We can and should maintain the right to keep and bear arms without holding on to the irrational fear that the only thing standing between us and tyranny is the potential for political violence. Doing that would not only provide a dose of sanity into our debate about guns; it could actually save us from a senseless, potentially suicidal second civil war.

Unfortunately, getting there means taking on the long and deeply held beliefs of many Americans.

More here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-melton/second-amendment_b_2469688.html

FYI: The writer is me.

Commonwealth Of Belle Isle Scheme Is Unhinged, Un-American Radicalism

The proponents of the Commonwealth of Belle Isle plan, being successful businessmen with a sound understanding of economic principles, are most likely familiar with the Law of Unintended Consequences. Therefore they must be comfortable with the precedent this plan would create.

If Belle Isle could be extracted from Michigan to form a tax-free Puerto Rico-like “commonwealth,” then why couldn’t other parts of the country secede from their respective states? The greater San Francisco Bay area could leave California and form a territorial government based on the governing structure of an organic food co-op. Mississippi could simply renounce its statehood and form a territory where a poll tax is allowed. Clearwater could leave Florida and form a theocracy built around Scientology. For that matter, why couldn’t a group of unhinged left-wingers form a territory on vacant Detroit land and implement Pol Pot’s agrarian policies within its borders?

More: http://deadlinedetroit.com/articles/3348/commonwealth_of_belle_isle_scheme_is_unhinged_un-american_radicalism
Go to Page: 1