of putting your panacea Constitution out for all to see and revere.
Pity.
Regard$,
--MJ
"Nothing is more securely lodged than the
ignorance of the experts" Nobel laureate and Austrian economist F. A. Hayek
At 06:16 AM 2/26/2011, you wrote:
>MJ: You are NOT wanted on this post! In the last few weeks you've
>managed to give your cook-booked quotations of others, and your own
>breakfast-table-written "constitution" of sorts. But you have not
>even gone back into my thread to read about my New Constitution, which
>is detailed in essays that highlight the apt portions of my document.
>And you obviously have no "Regard$" for anyone but yourself. ***
>Since my base philosophy is pro-capitalism and pro minimumist
>government, when you attack me—the author-messenger—you are revealing
>yourself to be a socialist and probably a communist. If it offends
>you that I have figured you out, take your "quotes" and your "regards"
>elsewhere. You are not wanted here! — J. A. A. — Patriot
> >
>On Feb 25, 10:45 am, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> > And yet ANOTHER fallacy spew.
> > Let's see this panacea of yours. What -- exactly
> > -- are you afraid of? That it is shit?
> >
> > Regard$,
> > --MJ
> >
> > "We can evade reality, but we cannot evade the
> > consequences of evading reality" -- Alyssa Rosenbaum
> >
> > At 10:36 AM 2/25/2011, you wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >Dear MJ: You sir, are a total BUM! What I have written describing my
> > >New Constitution and how such would be apt to events in the news would
> > >fill several "War and Peace"-size novels. Not a single WORD of what I
> > >have written supports socialism nor communism! I am in favor of
> > >having a super-efficient, minimum-size government that has close to
> > >zero interaction with individual citizens. 'My' government will no
> > >longer keep records on the law-abiding citizens, because taxes will be
> > >value-added, only. And I have nixed having the government maintain
> > >records of criminal investigations of anyone found to be innocent.
> > >Those on-file records tend to prejudice law enforcement to "convict"
> > >the person they failed to convict the last time. My corrections of
> > >corrupt law enforcement practices, alone, should be justification
> > >enough to ratify my New Constitution! Presently, the USA is a police
> > >state—with the strings being pulled by corrupt public figures. And
> > >the courts have done whatever the political leaders dictate. I've put
> > >them in their place, big time!
> >
> > >You, MJ, are little more than a party-crasher. I do not appreciate in
> > >the least having you post your elementary version of "A" constitution
> > >of some kind. Post your God-damned junk constitution under your name,
> > >not mine. I am not playing games, here. If you would like to get
> > >back into anyone's good graces, explain your political philosophy in
> > >two paragraphs or less. Unless I see the words: "I pro-capitalist
> > >and anti-socialist"… included, then I will know for sure that you are
> > >just some HACKER who is back-dooring your socialist-communist ideals.
> > >Anyone who says anything at all negative about my ideals can only be
> > >the latter. — J. A. A. —
> >
> > >On Feb 23, 9:40 pm, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> > > > In case anyone missed it ... anyone who ASKS to
> > > > see this 'Constitution' ... is labelled as a socialist-communist.
> > > > My guess is that this Constitution upholds,
> > > > endorses and hails ... socialism. THAT is the
> > > > true reason Armistead does not want to post it OR let anyone 'see it'.
> > > > Pity.
> >
> > > > Regard$,
> > > > --MJ
> >
> > > > "We can evade reality, but we cannot evade the
> > > > consequences of evading reality" -- Alyssa Rosenbaum
> >
> > > > At 09:33 PM 2/23/2011, you wrote:
> >
> > > > >Dear Jonathan: Get this and get this good: Your "pushy" attitude on
> > > > >MY post about MY New Constitution pegs you as a likely socialist-
> > > > >communist. You are not wanted here, nor anywhere else in the USA! —
> > > > >John A. Armistead — Patriot
> >
> > > > >On Feb 23, 2:56 pm, Jonathan Ashley <jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> > > > >wrote:
> > > > > > How does John expect to implement his New
> > > Constitution if no one is ever
> > > > > > allowed to read it? He sounds like a
> wanna-be dictator in the making.
> >
> > > > > > On 2/23/2011 11:45 AM, THE ANNOINTED ONE wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > That 40% of my New Constitution which has been made public has
> > > > > > > scarcely been commented on. I am
> NOT wishing to have your nor anyone
> > > > > > > else's feedback on what I have
> written! Most would love to see the
> > > > > > > entire document so that they can
> make grandiose criticisms about this
> > > > > > > or that. From my personal life, I
> have had head-to-head run-ins with
> > > > > > > our corrupt state, local, and
> federal governments that allow me to
> > > > > > > speak from personal experience that few if any other person could
> > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > had. That is why my New
> Constitution will immediately fire or kick
> > > > > > > out of office any public official or employee, including the
> > > > > > > President
> > > > > > > himself, who does not respond
> appropriately for a logical request of
> > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > single law-abiding citizen for the
> redress of a grievance. To wit:
> >
> > > > > > > Substitute "Obamacare" and thats what the DEMS slammed down your
> > > > > > > throats.
> >
> > > > > > > On Feb 22, 11:07 am, NoEinstein<noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > > > > > >> Dear Keith: Thanks for your rational-toned reply. My New
> > > > > > >> Constitution will indeed be
> copyrighted. But only those parts of it
> > > > > > >> not copied and adapted from the
> original, public-domain document.
> > > > > > >> This isn't being done for making money
> > > from the sale of copies, but to
> > > > > > >> be sure no crazies print 'modified
> copies' that would, maliciously,
> > > > > > >> make me look bad�as part of a
> > > socialist/communist plot to side-track
> > > > > > >> my efforts.
> >
> > > > > > >> I'm not sure you nor others realize
> > > that my document has, for fourteen
> > > > > > >> years, withstood the test of
> correcting the daily crises highlighted
> > > > > > >> in the news, and the regular
> > > injustices coming from our courts. What
> > > > > > >> is included is at least ten times
> broader in scope than the original
> > > > > > >> constitution. Realize that I have had the advantage (over the
> > > > > > >> Founding Fathers) of seeing what
> has and what hasn't worked with our
> > > > > > >> Constitution.
> >
> > > > > > >> That 40% of my New Constitution which has been made public has
> > > > > > >> scarcely been commented on. I am NOT
> > > wishing to have your nor anyone
> > > > > > >> else's feedback on what I have
> written! Most would love to see the
> > > > > > >> entire document so that they can make
> > > grandiose criticisms about this
> > > > > > >> or that. From my personal life, I
> > > have had head-to-head run-ins with
> > > > > > >> our corrupt state, local, and
> federal governments that allow me to
> > > > > > >> speak from personal experience that
> > > few if any other person could have
> > > > > > >> had. That is why my New
> Constitution will immediately fire or kick
> > > > > > >> out of office any public official or
> > > employee, including the President
> > > > > > >> himself, who does not respond
> > > appropriately for a logical request of a
> > > > > > >> single law-abiding citizen for the
> redress of a grievance. To wit:
> >
> > > > > > >> "1st Amendment: No law shall be
> made regarding the establishment of
> > > > > > >> peaceable religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, but
> > > > > > >> government, its campaigns, processes,
> > > slogans, and disbursements shall
> > > > > > >> be secular. No law nor private or
> civil action shall abridge: the
> > > > > > >> freedom of speech; the freedom of
> a fair and pro-democracy press or
> > > > > > >> other medium; the right of People
> to peaceably assemble; *** and the
> > > > > > >> right of any Citizen or group to
> petition government or any of its
> > > > > > >> branches or departments for redress of grievances. Citizens so
> > > > > > >> petitioning government shall
> receive appropriate, relevant, timely,
> > > > > > >> comprehensive, helpful and just
> > > responses from proper authorities who
> > > > > > >> have thoroughly read, understood, and
> > > addressed each salient aspect of
> > > > > > >> the grievances or requests for
> > > directions or clarifications. Failure
> > > > > > >> to so respond to a rightful petition
> > > for redress of a grievance shall,
> > > > > > >> on a single provable instance,
> terminate the apt one�s employment,
> > > > > > >> especially those in management or
> > > public office�including judges and
> > > > > > >> justices�who ignore, frustrate or
> > > give the run-around to any competent
> > > > > > >> Citizen who has been diligent in having a grievance properly
> > > > > > >> addressed, or in having his or her
> civil rights fully upheld. No
> > > > > > >> judge or justice shall presume
> that by performing the above required
> > > > > > >> duties, that they in any way might
> be compromising their objectivity
> > > > > > >> or fairness in court; justice be
> not �blind�, but well informed.
> > > > > > >> Freedom of the press or other medium
> > > mandates that there be reasonable
> > > > > > >> truthfulness in reporting. Wanton distortion of the truth, or
> > > > > > >> deliberate omission of the
> > > truth�except in cases of obvious fiction or
> > > > > > >> satire�is prohibited. Stating
> or implying that a particular news
> > > > > > >> medium has a collective voice (we) or position on any issue is
> > > > > > >> prohibited, as for example via: anonymous editorials; regularly
> > > > > > >> occurring accompanying comments;
> commentary programs financed by, or
> > > > > > >> ideologically screened by, the
> same news medium; editorials named as
> > > > > > >> being authored by management;
> > > editorial comments by others that are in
> > > > > > >> any way ideologically censored,
> omitted or screened; or by comments
> > > > > > >> occurring at specific times or
> designated locations that most would
> > > > > > >> come to associate with the management
> > > of such medium, even if such are
> > > > > > >> innocuous. No medium shall be a
> forum for promoting the ideology of
> > > > > > >> its management or owners, nor
> shall they employ anyone who uses such
> > > > > > >> job to hawk their personal political
> > > preferences�at risk of loss of
> > > > > > >> license or closure of the business. Flagrantly editing news to
> > > > > > >> promote the ideology of management is a felony. No medium shall
> > > > > > >> analyze, assess, summarize, or
> make subjective judgments about any
> > > > > > >> pending election or referendum. Nor
> > > shall they invite others outside
> > > > > > >> of the media to do so. But factual, thorough coverage of the
> > > > > > >> candidates or referenda
> issues�on an as occurs basis�is allowed,
> > > > > > >> provided there are no comments,
> nor actions, as above, and provided
> > > > > > >> the same unbiased coverage is given to
> > > all of the candidates or to all
> > > > > > >> of the referenda issues. It shall
> be a 10 year felony to repress
> > > > > > >> truthful news reporting in any medium
> > > by threatening legal action. No
> > > > > > >> medium can be sued for libel for presenting material authored by
> > > > > > >> others, but if a person
> >
> > ...
> >
> > read more »
>
>--
>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.
--
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