On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 4:38 PM, NoEinstein <noeinstein@bellsouth.net> wrote:
Mark: Rots of ruck! Take your one-page "constitution" and shove it!
There now; isn't SPAM a lot friendlier? — NE —
> On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 9:40 AM, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net>wrote:
On Mar 13, 12:12 pm, Mark <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Einstein,
>
> You have no "RIGHT" to continuously SPAM the board with this "Canned"
> response. This is your last warning.... next time you will go to
> moderation.
>
> How is that for communist/socialist/party crashing you ignorant putz.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Mark, the manner-less party crasher, is undeserving of a reply. — J.
> > A. A. —
>
> > On Mar 11, 10:34 am, Mark <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Section 1, 2& 3: States shall recognize other states� public acts,
>
> > > > > records and judicial proceedings, and shall pass no laws much more
> > > > > strict on common issues than are in effect in the majority of the
> > > > > states having laws governing such.
>
> > > THERE GOES MY STATES RIGHT TO THE DEATH PENALTY AND LIFE IN PRISON FOR
> > > REPEAT OFFENDER PEDOPHILES...
>
> > > English, that is grammatically
>
> > > > > written and correctly spoken, is the official language of the USA and
> > > > > shall be the model for every medium and every public discourse.
> > Laws,
> > > > > documents, contracts, instructions and forms shall be written
> > > > > concisely, without legalese, and shall be understandable by average
> > > > > people,
>
> > > JUST WHAT IS "AVERAGE"... DEFINE "LEGALESE".... DOES THAT MEAN (IT
> > CERTAINLY
> > > IMPLIES) THAT ANY "OFFICIAL" LANGUAGE MUST BE IN A FORM THAT WOULD ALLOW
> > > IDIOTS AND DROPOUTS TO UNDERSTAND..(EBONICS).. THIS WOULD MEAN THAT
> > ANYONE
> > > WITH AN EDUCATION COULD NOT UNDERSTAND IT.
>
> > > or no person shall be bound thereby, even if endorsed.
>
> > > > > Persons harmed by confusing language or verbiage may sue for damages
> > > > > in civil court.
>
> > > EXPLAIN WHAT IS CONFUSING ABOUT A THOUSAND YEAR OLD LANGUAGE??
>
> > > No person shall be punished for violations of laws
>
> > > > > that: aren�t common knowledge;
>
> > > SO IF I CLAIM THAT I DID NOT KNOW THAT KILLING UNCLE JOE WAS "ILLEGAL" I
> > > CAN'T BE PROSECUTED.
>
> > > disagree with the macro moral consensus
>
> > > > > of the People and this constitution; or are in the probationary first
> > > > > year and passed by less than 60% of the House.
>
> > > On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 6:56 AM, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net
> > >wrote:
>
> > > > Jonathan, a socialist-communist masquerading as a conservative, is
> > > > undeserving of being replied to. — J. A. A. —
>
> > > > On Mar 10, 9:50 pm, Jonathan Ashley <jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > It is so sad that you spent 14 years writing this incoherent statist
> > > > > hodge-podge.
>
> > > > > On 03/10/2011 06:25 PM, NoEinstein wrote:
>
> > > > > > Folks: About 1/3rd of my New Constitution relates to
> > straightening-
> > > > > > out the Judiciary. Here, in sequence, is...
>
> > > > > > " Article IV:
>
> > > > > > Section 1, 2& 3: States shall recognize other states� public
> > acts,
> > > > > > records and judicial proceedings, and shall pass no laws much more
> > > > > > strict on common issues than are in effect in the majority of the
> > > > > > states having laws governing such. English, that is grammatically
> > > > > > written and correctly spoken, is the official language of the USA
> > and
> > > > > > shall be the model for every medium and every public discourse.
> > Laws,
> > > > > > documents, contracts, instructions and forms shall be written
> > > > > > concisely, without legalese, and shall be understandable by average
> > > > > > people, or no person shall be bound thereby, even if endorsed.
> > > > > > Persons harmed by confusing language or verbiage may sue for
> > damages
> > > > > > in civil court. No person shall be punished for violations of laws
> > > > > > that: aren�t common knowledge; disagree with the macro moral
> > > > consensus
> > > > > > of the People and this constitution; or are in the probationary
> > first
> > > > > > year and passed by less than 60% of the House.
> > > > > > Citizens in any state are entitled to the same privileges and
> > > > > > immunities as the Citizens of the several states. Anyone charged
> > with
> > > > > > treason or other crime in any state who flees to another state,
> > shall,
> > > > > > on demand of the executive authority of the state from which he
> > fled,
> > > > > > be delivered up, to be removed to the state having jurisdiction in
> > > > > > such crime. No imprison-ment, slavery, nor involuntary
> > servitude�
> > > > > > except as punishment for a crime whereof the party shall have been
> > > > > > duly convicted�shall exist within the United States or any place
> > > > > > subject to its jurisdiction.
> > > > > > The House may create new states if such aren�t within the
> > > > > > jurisdiction of another state that dissents, and aren�t formed by
> > > > > > joining two or more dissenting states or parts thereof. The House
> > can
> > > > > > make rules and regulations respecting the territory or property of
> > the
> > > > > > United States. The New Constitution shall not prejudice claims of
> > the
> > > > > > USA or a particular state, and shall guarantee to each state in the
> > > > > > union a government that is a democracy or a republic, and shall
> > > > > > protect states against invasion. Upon request by the legislature
> > or
> > > > > > the executive of a state (when the legislature cannot be convened),
> > > > > > the United States shall protect such state from domestic violence."
> > > > > > � John A. Armistead � Patriot
>
> > > > > > On Mar 6, 6:39 pm, NoEinstein<noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > > > > >> Dear Keith in Koln: I lived in Charlotte for over two decades.
> > My
> > > > > >> father, in his childhood, lived in Tarpon Springs. One of my most
> > > > > >> frightening times was driving over the Tampa Bay bridge. The
> > > > > >> "starting point" for me in rewriting the constitution was to
> > correct
> > > > > >> the rampant injustices in our courts, and to allay our (You have
> > to
> > > > > >> experience it to know it.) police state. As happened with O. J.,
> > the
> > > > > >> police target who they want to convict whether they are guilty or
> > > > > >> not. The police are especially unfair to Blacks. I make it a
> > felony
> > > > > >> for any prosecutor to be overly zealous to convict someone who is
> > > > > >> latter proved to be innocent. At every turn, justice demands that
> > the
> > > > > >> presumption of innocence be there throughout the trial until the
> > jury
> > > > > >> has reached a unanimous decision for guilt. Never again will
> > there be
> > > > > >> the converse requirement for a unanimous decision of innocence...
> > ***
> > > > > >> Only one of twelve jury members is required to find someone not
> > > > > >> guilty. The latter is exactly what the Founding Fathers intended!
>
> > > > > >> I'm flattered that someone with a Law background, like you, has
> > said
> > > > > >> anything favorable about my essays or my daily battles with
> > others.
> > > > > >> Here is the entire Article III relating to the Justice System:
>
> > > > > >> "Article III:
>
> > > > > >> Section 1: The lesser Judicial Branch consists of a Supreme Court
> > and
> > > > > >> such inferior courts as the House establishes. Its major duty is
> > to
> > > > > >> interpret laws. It has no power to command enforcement of any of
> > its
> > > > > >> rulings unless so mandated in prior, formally stipulated and apt
> > > > > >> laws. Judges and justices are technicians of the law and of this
> > New
> > > > > >> Constitution. They shall perform their duties as individuals,
> > never
> > > > > >> as part of any perceived culture of the lesser Judicial Branch,
> > nor
> > > > > >> from any consultation whatsoever with past or present members of
> > > > > >> such. Additionally, they shall not have held state or federal
> > > > > >> executive or legislative office. The President shall nominate new
> > > > > >> justices who are between the ages of 50 and 60 years old, and may
> > on
> > > > > >> good behavior, serve a single term of up to 10 years. The
> > President,
> > > > > >> or his agents, shall not work to win the confirmation of any
> > > > > >> nominee. Judges and justices shall be selected for their
> > intellect,
> > > > > >> high moral character, compassion, knowledge of the law, likable
> > > > > >> nature, and for their proficiency and expediency in office. Such
> > > > > >> shall not be aloft nor considered infallible in all their
> > judgments,
> > > > > >> yet shall be respected if they right injustices quickly. They
> > shall
> > > > > >> make decisions based on apt laws and this New Constitution�never
> > on
> > > > > >> their personal ideologies. Every two years an unbiased review
> > panel
> > > > > >> shall apprise the Citizens of the job performance grade, as
> > herein, of
> > > > > >> seated judges and justices. With the assent of 60% of the voters
> > > > > >> nationwide, the latter can be unseated. Judges and justices
> > aren�t
> > > > > >> royalty, nor do they have an implied moral judgment inherently
> > > > > >> superior to public macro-consensus. They shall not be chambered
> > > > > >> lavishly, sit in throne-like chairs, wear robes on the job, nor
> > dress
> > > > > >> in a style that differentiates them from the People. They shall
> > not
> > > > > >> socialize with, nor privately be in conference with, members of
> > the
> > > > > >> Executive or Legislative branches of government; nor shall they
> > attend
> > > > > >> State of the Union Addresses or similar events. The Public shall
> > not
> > > > > >> stand for entering or exiting judges or justices who shall be
> > > > > >> addressed only as: judge or justice. Judges and justices not
> > > > > >> respecting such provisions, or who exhibit excessive arrogance or
> > > > > >> pomposity on the job shall be removed. Sessions of all trials
> > shall
> > > > > >> begin with the judge(s) or justice(s) saying: �The justice
> > system is
> > > > > >> on trial.� All assent five-to-four Supreme Court decisions are
> > for
> > > > > >> one year only, or shall be invalid; and the same nine justices
> > shall
> > > > > >> not�on their
>
> ...
>
> 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.
--
Mark M. Kahle H.
Fila Coffee
--
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