that identifies you as a socialist-communist. Bug-off, loser! — J.
A. A. —
>
On Feb 25, 11:55 am, Jonathan Ashley <jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
wrote:
> It appears to me you are about self-glorification, not patriotism.
>
> On 2/25/2011 7:49 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
>
> > Dear Socialist-Communist: There is three or four times more MEAT in
> > the 40% of my New Constitution, regularly printed in the thread, than
> > in the entire original Constitution! In the RUDEST way, you've
> > attacked me for not showing you the 60%, when you haven't cared enough
> > to even look back for the meaty 40%! Make your own post, traitor.
> > I'm about saving the USA. I have a �pointed wooden stake� for the
> > heart of anyone who stands in my way! � J. A. A. � Patriot
> > On Feb 23, 11:21 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> > wrote:
> >> John,
>
> >> I was under the impression when I joined this political "discussion"
> >> group that folks subscribed to the group to discuss political issues.
>
> >> Your failure to post YOUR New Constitution when at least four people
> >> (including myself) have expressed a sincere interest in reading it shows
> >> you are not interested in having it enacted. Either that or you are
> >> afraid of the feedback you will receive.
>
> >> I seem to recall your concern with publishing it was it isn't
> >> copyrighted. Would a true "patriot" (as you continually label yourself)
> >> be more concerned with the direction in which his country is headed or
> >> HIS copyright protection? As it stands now, YOUR New Constitution will
> >> likely die when you do because no one else will ever have a chance to
> >> read it.
>
> >> Your claim that I am "likely socialist-communist" shows you have never
> >> read anything I have posted to this group. If you had you would know
> >> that I come real close to believing that the government that governs
> >> best is no government at all. A completely voluntary society could not
> >> possibly be any worse than the socialist police state we now live in.
>
> >> Your comment, "You are not wanted here, nor anywhere else in the USA!"
> >> only confirms my suspicion that you are a wanna-be dictator. If you were
> >> a moderator for this group, I would likely have been banned long ago
> >> because I dared to comment on YOUR posts.
>
> >> On 2/23/2011 6:33 PM, NoEinstein 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 is harmed by the medium�s content, they shall
> >>>>>> be allowed to reply�without editing�in that medium. Each medium shall
> >>>>>> respond to breaking news without considering the response of any other
> >>>>>> medium. Injuries due to improper news coverage or non coverage shall
> >>>>>> not be excused by the media response. A medium reporting on
> >>>>>> government shall do so thoroughly, objectively, and with detachment�
> >>>>>> being neither laudatory nor critical by form, and not repressing
> >>>>>> thoughtful dissent nor its coverage. Every medium shall favor the
> >>>>>> truth over supposition, without parity nor bias. False or deceptive
> >>>>>> commercial advertising is prohibited. Deliberate use by any
> >>>>>> candidate, their staffs or election committees, of false or deceptive
> >>>>>> campaign speeches, slogans, advertisements, humor, or innuendo is a
>
> ...
>
> 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.
No comments:
Post a Comment