At my own local polling place, which happens to be the main Black
voting place in my small town, the turnout on 11/02/10 was very high
among Blacks. It is probable that those Blacks punched the "straight
Democratic party" button. Each individual, regardless of race, has
the right to choose for whom they will vote. But for Blacks, the
issue wasn't about doing what is best for the USA—which I must add,
ultimately, is what is best for each individual—but about voting, with
unity, for the Black race against the World. As in fighting a war,
there is seen to be strength in banding together, without question, to
try to gain advantage for one's group.
Though Democrats suffered big losses, the biases which caused the
obvious unity of the leftist Democrats, most of whom still "support"
Obama, are alive and well. Like a socialist CANCER, the disease has
been slowed, but not stopped, from mortally wounding the USA.
Democrats see themselves as only loosing at the half, in a game which
still has one half to go. As long as… "their candidate", Barack
Obama, says he needs more time, Democrats have no problem waiting two
more years.
Rush Limbaugh was most eloquent on his radio show, yesterday, in
describing the country-destroying effects of liberal objectives. He
asked: "Where in the Constitution does it say that those who are
successful must be controlled by the unsuccessful?" What Limbaugh
should have said was: "The USA Constitution was, first and foremost,
about having the maximum of individual Liberties and the Freedom of
Self-determination. That means that people get to succeed or fail by
their own efforts and nobody else's. The ultimate loss of freedom is
to allow the successful to be robbed by the unsuccessful simply
because the numbers of the unsuccessful are so high, and are getting
higher. As long as it is a crime to steal, in any wise, then it is a
crime for a group like the Democratic Party to orchestrate the
unconstitutional theft of hundreds of thousands of dollars from
American families over the lives of those now living, or not yet
born. The Democratic Party is organized crime, plain and simple! The
leadership of that party is clearly guilty of plotting to destroy the
USA, and that is high TREASON!" Limbaugh should be making statements,
not asking questions about the criminality so rampant in America.
The usual post-election talk is about who will assume "leadership"
positions during the coming term. Here is what my New Constitution
says:
"The House shall judge its members on the appropriateness of their
districts' boundaries and population thereof, and shall enumerate and
fairly adjudge members' qualifications without discrimination due to
sex, race, creed, nor political ideology. The House makes the rules
for its proceedings, punishes disorderly members, and with the assent
of 60% can expel a member for a violation. *** But no rule shall be
made that concentrates power in any individual(s) beyond his or her
one vote. 55% attendance is a quorum. Those present may compel
absent members to attend, or penalize non attendance. Written, audio
and video record shall be made of all House proceedings. Master
records shall not be destroyed, and copies shall be made readily
available to any Citizen for a nominal fee."
In a fair and democratic (not the party) Congress, there shall be no
leaders with more power than any other member. In effect, the
"speaker" is chosen as a parliamentarian who is changed frequently,
and gets to preside over proceedings without having any power beyond
his or her one vote. All of the former "rules" allowing the winning
political party to have more power in committees or elsewhere are
UNCONSTITUTIONAL!
It is amazing that a liberal state like Nevada gets to elect a Senator
like Harry Reid who has betrayed his country by favoring socialism.
In the single day that it will take to ratify my New Constitution, the
US Senate will be no more! Its members aren't determined by
principles of a Republic nor a Democracy. So, they are an
unconstitutional oligarchy, which is mainly responsible for the
economic and social decline of the USA. SC's Senator Jim DeMint said
that the Republican Party is dead unless it emphasizes the ideals of
the 'Tea Party'. He's right. And the Democratic Party is already…
dead.
Barack Obama, the anti-Christ, expects the Republican-controlled House
to work with him. If he weren't guilty of the highest, most
TREASONOUS crimes against the USA, his "veto power" would have to be
reckoned with. Rather, that man is never more than minutes away from
being arrested, tried and hanged for the economic damage that his
socialist-communist objectives have done to this country. Instead of
having Republicans discussing how best to negate 'Obama Care', that
unconstitutional law will immediately be struck down, upon the
ratification of my New Constitution, for not having gotten 55% or more
of the vote. And if any other of his Laws got less than 60% of the
vote, such will be subject to the one day, up-or-down vote of the
House, alone.
Obama can be arrested, tried and hanged for flagrant violations of the
present Constitution. Once that "figurehead" is out of the way, more
of his core supporters should be willing to consider what Condoleezza
Rice said on Bill O'Reilly's show: "I favor individuals over groups!"
That simple sentence is the core principle of my New Constitution! By
fairly empowering all law-abiding individuals, there will be no need
for lobbyists, nor for group leaders or wasted group efforts! My New
Constitution will, as well, punish businesses that aren't fair.
Suddenly, the playing field is leveled, and all Americans will get
equal opportunities to achieve success under our renewed free-
enterprise, capitalist system. And such will need little or no
tweaking by Government.
Suppose Blacks are asked: "Which would you prefer, going to a GOLD
RUSH and working very hard for a one-in-twenty chance of super
success; or standing on a street corner waiting for the next survival-
level check from government to arrive?" All block-voting Blacks are
choosing to have state-controlled mediocrity. So, there will be only
WHITES panning for the gold, and only WHITES getting rich. But that
is how Blacks all across this country are choosing for things to be…
If economic success was a game of basketball, Blacks would want to be
spotted 20 points before entering the court. Because everyone knows,
Blacks can't compete in the real world.
For the many Blacks and others whom I hope are offended by the last
sentence, I invite you to read my just published book: 'The Shortest
Distance; Harmony Through Prosperity', which is available at Amazon
and B & N.
We must unite as INDIVIDUALS, because: "United we stand; divided we
fall!" May we all unite to SAVE the USA!
Respectfully submitted,
— John A. Armistead — Patriot
AKA NoEinstein on Google's sci.physics.
>
On Oct 25, 5:38 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> The USA is a nation of criminals and victims of crime.
>
> Questions:
>
> 1.) Is stealing in excess of 100 dollars a felony?
> 2.) Is it a felony to knowing receive stolen property for personal
> use?
> 3.) Is it a felony to aid and abet those who commit felonies?
> 4.) Are known felons allowed to vote to lower the penalties for
> committing felonies or for benefiting, personally, from felonies?
> 5.) Is the blatant or incremental overthrowing of our US
> Representative Republic—which is the government type dictated by the
> US Constitution—treason?
> 6.) Are those in public office immune from prosecution for their
> crimes?
> 7.) Do average citizens in their own homes have the right to shoot
> and kill those who are forcing entry into their homes for the purpose
> of stealing from, and possibly harming, the citizens?
> 8.) Is organized crime a higher and more serious crime than simple
> theft?
> 9.) Are any citizens of the USA bound by any laws which do not have
> the approval of the majority of the citizens?
> 10.) Is it a felony to blackmail public officials to benefit an
> individual or group?
> 11.) Is it a crime to use deadly force to protect the USA from being
> overthrown by radicals?
> 12.) Do those who are employed by government owe their loyalty to
> government, or to the people of the USA who pay their salaries?
> 13.) Is any felony excused, simply, because such is very common?
> 14.) Are those in government, who all SWORE to uphold and to protect
> the US Constitution, guilty of treason for trying to over-throw the
> Constitution or not adhere to its precepts?
> 15.) Should power in the USA be in the hands of the people, or in the
> hands of the political party that happens to be in the majority?
> 16.) Is preserving our failed system of government more important
> than making government be deferential to the people?
> 17.) Should the media be allowed to influence the outcome of
> elections, while benefiting from the political ad money that results
> from having most elections be cliffhangers?
> 18.) Is it right to allow those with seniority in government to have
> more power?
> 19.) Is it right to favor those in public office whose main job for
> most of their lives has been to be a career politician?
> 20.) If a carefully-crafted New Constitution can return the power to
> the people, and do so fairly, should such a constitution be
> considered?
>
> There are clear right answers to each of the above questions.
> "Taxation without representation is TYRANNY!" Such is also
> unconstitutional, criminal and treasonous! Voting for candidates who
> support socialist positions is anti-constitution, and is thus a
> crime. No "To the victor belongs the spoils." form of government has
> the right to indebt generations of Americans to pay for unworkable
> social programs intended to benefit the lazy, socialist beggars among
> us. At present, those beggars and thieves are the 40% of Americans
> who steadfastly believe that President (sic) Barack Obama is doing a
> good job. (sic) The core of the 40% are the 90% of the Black block
> voters who put Obama into office in the first place. Also included
> are the spoiled, career students in our universities who suppose how
> nice it would be if they never have to get a job and pay their own
> way. And it includes most of those one-dimensional women who suppose
> that their "right to choose" will be shot down if anyone but Democrats
> ever gets elected into office.
>
> Clearly, we are a country divided along group lines… Condoleezza
> Rice, on Bill O'Reilly's TV show, stated that she favors individuals
> over groups. Brava! Lobbyists for many groups, including Blacks and
> labor unions, wish to use their block-voting power to force the votes
> on candidates and on issues to favor them. Initially, their typical
> objective was to be treated fairly. When that began working out,
> instead of disbanding the lobbyists and de-emphasizing the block-
> voting, most groups have continued to vie for more power than fairness
> dictates. No government with democracy as the ideal, like our USA
> government, can allow 53% of the voters to have free authority to
> steal from the 47% who happened not to win the election. The USA is a
> Representative Republic! Those elected to office must fairly
> represent ALL factions, not exploit a faction for the benefit of any
> other faction.
>
> The ONLY way to have HARMONY in this country is to limit the undue
> power of groups (political parties included), and to MAXIMIZE the
> power of the individuals! Blacks, for example, need—first and foremost
> —to become members of the human race, rather than members (just) of
> the Black race. Presently, Blacks follow, like puppy dogs, the
> dictates of their selfish leaders who set getting more than is fair as
> the objective. My New Constitution will make it a treasonable offense
> for any elected official to violate this oath: "Democracy and fair
> play shall have supremacy in the USA!" That one sentence will put all
> Americans on an even footing with other Americans. There will be no
> need for lobbyists or for bowing to the dictates of the leaders of any
> groups!
>
> After months of work, my book, 'The Shortest Distance; Harmony Through
> Prosperity', is becoming available in bookstores. Any of you who are
> interested can purchase a copy from Amazon. Those agreeing with the
> simply-stated philosophies for improving the socioeconomic climate in
> this country, are invited to rate my book favorably. In order for me
> to improve the world, my ideas need to be read, and heeded!
>
> When you vote in the mid-terms, realize that there are opposing
> factions who aren't bad people, who simply want to be treated fairly,
> and to have their vote properly influence how life in the USA can be
> beneficial to the most people.
>
> "United we stand; divided we fall." May we all unite to SAVE the USA!
>
> Respectfully submitted,
>
> — John A. Armistead — Patriot
>
> AKA NoEinstein on Google's news group sci.physics.
>
> On Oct 15, 7:07 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > The loose-loose situation in US politics.
>
> > In the Desert Storm War, strategic victory was won within hours over
> > the Iraqi, supposedly-elite, Republican Guard troops. But then-
> > president George H. W. Bush wouldn't let General Norman Schwarzkopf
> > "finish the job" by marching into Baghdad and ousting Saddam Hussein
> > from power. Bush's pacifist decision allowed the Iraqis to lick-their-
> > wounds and harden their defenses for the next conflict with the USA.
> > We all know how costly the latter has been in American lives and in
> > taxpayer dollars that continue to be poured-down-the-drain.
>
> > Every American soldier killed in-the-line-of-duty, in whatever war or
> > conflict, is entitled to the heartfelt appreciation of the citizens.
> > But no soldier, solely by having died, is entitled to be elevated to
> > the status of "hero" and used as a figurehead to glorify the fighting
> > of a present or future war. The "glorification of war", which more
> > than one church congregation or group opposes, isn't in the best
> > interest of any should-be-peaceable nation, such as the USA.
>
> > It is unfortunate that the families of some fallen soldiers see the
> > free-speech opposition to war as a direct personal attach on those who
> > have died. But had there been no war, there would be no deaths to be
> > mourned. The major issue is whether or not public parades; government-
> > declared days of remembrance; US Flags being posted on public and on
> > private property; uniformed color-guards; guns firing solutes; plane
> > fly-overs; and bugles being played by those in well-pressed military
> > uniforms, are ever appropriate. I say the latter are NOT appropriate,
> > if the implication is that there is collective public support for a
> > present or future war, simply because there are groups of people
> > willing to watch, reverently, any of the above proceedings. But all
> > out-of-the-public-view solemn remembrances, in funeral homes,
> > churches, or in rented halls that are explicitly not open to the
> > public should be acceptable and inviolable by any public protester.
>
> > Fox's big, but mostly-shallow (and conversationally rude), Bill
> > O'Reilly doesn't understand the sanctity of free speech. This week he
> > had former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice as a guest. Rice
> > pointed-out that her father, a Republican, had once told her mother
> > that he was willing to fight-to-the-death, if necessary, to defend his
> > family and his beliefs. Rice, an only child, became an accomplished
> > pianist and ice skater. Near the end of the interview, she
> > volunteered that she champions the INDIVIDUAL over groups. I was
> > absolutely THRILLED to hear a Black say what I have been saying all
> > these years while touting my New Constitution of the United States of
> > America! I couldn't stop clapping at the TV! The (collective)
> > individuals should (shall!) have supremacy over any group! The latter
> > is the essence of what democracy is. And democracy-on-demand is at
> > the heart of my New Constitution!
>
> > Bill O'Reilly was on The View this week. He touched a soft-spot for
> > Whoopi and Joy when he generalized that the USA was attacked by
> > Muslims on 9/11. Not by Muslim extremists, but by Muslims. If there
> > were such a thing as a "radical Catholic" doing bodily harm to
> > thousands of people, within 24 hours the Pope Himself would be
> > renouncing what had happened. But following 9/11, there was this
> > great echo of SILENCE from the moderate or otherwise Muslim community
> > about what some Muslims had just done in the name Islam.
>
> > The mass-minded Muslim communities are ritualistically brainwashed not
> > to speak out, and especially not to say anything negative about other
> > Muslims. So, by their silence, Muslims throughout the USA are giving
> > their tacit
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
No comments:
Post a Comment