copied excellent quotes from Walter Lippman and others. Those people,
in spite of their excellent rhetoric, never ventured to correct the
problems they had observed. Within hours of my observing non-fair or
non-functioning aspects of government, the judiciary, or the business
"norms" in this country, I would be writing the most concise
correction for those problems. Many times, the correction was from a
combination of two or more clauses, often not closely spaced. Keeping
my document to just ten ledger pages caused me to have to eliminate
the verbal deadwood. Computer technology, and years of work, would
have (if I had had just that intent) allowed reducing the words in the
Constitution by 1/3rd, while improving the clarity.
The format looks like many sentences run together. Often times those
sentences are powerful. The ordering of things follows the original
Constitution in most cases. When there were whole new clauses without
precedent, such have been added as though being amendments. Of course
the citizens will get to vote on ratifying the entire New
Constitution, and those very important amendments. This is an
example:
"36th Amendment: All campaign contributions to candidates for public
office shall be made anonymously through a Federal Campaign
Contribution Clearing House, and such shall limit individual
contributions per election, per candidate, to $1,000.00, and limit
corporate contributions to $10,000 per election, per candidate
(adjustable for inflation). With the exception of contributions from
one's family or business associates, accepting contributions from any
other known source shall disqualify a candidate for office.
37th Amendment:
No person, organization nor special interest group shall propose
or organize the boycott of a business(es); however, individual
Citizens can freely choose where to do business. Flagrant violation
is a felony, and a business harmed may sue in civil court. Amnesty—
but not citizenship for illegals—shall be granted to all persons
imprisoned, or about to be sentenced to imprisonment, for non violent
crimes that occurred before the adoption of this New Constitution. At
the discretion of the apt prison warden, or of a judge having
jurisdiction, persons with a singular conviction of a violent crime
whose civil rights treatment, likely, would not meet the requirements,
herein, shall be granted amnesty.
MJ, you seem to be on-the-fence whether you concur with what I'm
doing. I invite your more specific comments, because time does not
allow me to be as wordy in future replies. Your "$" salutation amuses
me. A functioning capitalist system will put the most dollars into
the deserving (hard working) people's pockets. I hope you agree. —
John A. Armistead — Patriot.
I invite those who are interested to read my recently published book:
"The Shortest Distance; Harmony Through Prosperity", available at
Amazon and B. & N
>
On Feb 10, 10:08 pm, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> >(3.) Our Constitution details the procedures associated with the
> > Electoral College System for APPROXIMATING the democratic votes of the
> > People. In pioneer times, the Electoral College was the only workable
> > way to get the votes relayed to Washington. Before there was such
> > thing as even a telegraph, it was electors on horseback, or nothing.
> > But the SPIRIT of the Constitution demands that when technology—such
> > as we have, now—enables the accurate counting of the votes of the
> > People in a single day, that both the People AND democracy are best
> > served by letting the popular votes decide elections! Any President
> > who takes an oath to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution",
> > must preserve, protect, and defend the OBJECTIVES of the Constitution,
> > NOT just the horse and buggy era… 'traditions' which are no longer
> > serving the best interests of the People!
> > There is no such thing as an 'Electoral College'. The DESIGN was for
> > these various State Electors to NEVER come to a consensus, but instead
> > to serve as a 'search committee' of sorts. The House of Representatives
> > would then choose the president. This did not occur in practice (except
> > once).
> [D] Ditto the pedantry part in [C].
> You are obviously confused.
> Regard$,
> --MJThe art of politics, under democracy, is simply the art of ringing it. Two branches reveal themselves. There is the art of the demagogue, and there is the art of what may be called, by a shot-gun marriage of Latin and Greek, the demaslave. They are complementary, and both of them are degrading to their practitioners. The demagogue is one who preaches doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots. The demaslave is one who listens to what these idiots have to say and then pretends that he believes it himself. -- H.L. Mencken
--
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