>
On Feb 28, 4:14 pm, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> And yet ... three replies were provided.
> Too bad this *magical* Constitution has not.
> And too bad this pertinent question was ignored:Sage 2: Our Constitution is inside of a bomb-proof vault. About acentury ago, politicians learned how to pay the Constitution lip-service while working around the spirit of that WEAK document to dowhatever they want.And how will YOUR unseen panacea Constitution CHANGE this problem?Did you include "Pretty Please" throughout? For someone claiming themselves to be so smart ....
> Regard$,
> --MJ "Bureaucrats write memoranda both because they appear to be busy when they are writing and because the memos, once written, immediately become proof that they were busy" -- Charles Peters.At 04:01 PM 2/28/2011, you wrote:MJ, the party crasher, is undeserving of a reply. — J. A. A. —
> >
> On Feb 27, 11:03 pm, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> > If I had to point out the characteristic trait that differentiates socialism from [a proper view of the political economy], I should find it here. Socialism includes a countless number of sects. Each one has its own utopia, and we may well say that they are so far from agreement that they wage bitter war upon one another. Between M. Blanc's organized social workshops and M. Proudhon's anarchy, between Fourier's association and M. Cabet's communism, there is certainly all the difference between night and day. What then, is the comon denominator to which all forms of socialism are reducible, and what is the bond that unites them against natural society, or society as planned by Providence? There is none except this: They do not want natural society. What they want is an artificial society, which has come forth full-grown from the brain of its inventor... They quarrel over who will mould the human clay, but they agree that there is human clay to mould. Mankind is not in their eyes a living and harmonious being endowed by God Himself with the power to progress and to survive, but an inert mass that has been waiting for them to give it feeling and life; human nature is not a subject to be studied, but matter on which to perform experiments. -- Frédéric BastiatAt 10:59 PM 2/27/2011, you wrote:<Grin>!! "Date: 1837. From Latin socialis for "friend" or "companion" or "associate". Any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods; usually there is no private property; in Marxist theory this is also considered just a transitional stage between capitalism and communism and it is distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done." The above definition is by Mr. John Spargo, from his work titled: "Socialism, A Summary And Interpretation Of Socialist Principles" (McMillan & Co. 1913).
> > On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 4:05 AM, Jonathan Ashley <jonathanashleyii@lavabit.com> wrote:John,I know I'm not Sage 2, but you wrote:> Making socialist-communist promises to the lazy wasn't nixed by any language of the Constitution.Since Robert Owen (in 1817) appears to be the first person to publicly entertain the idea of alleviating poverty through the creation of social communities; and since the term "socialism" itself was first used in early 1830s Britain by the followers of Owen and in France by those of Claude- Henri de Rouvroy comte de Saint-Simon; and since the terms "communism" and "communist" appeared first among the Parisian revolutionists of the 1830s, just how exactly were the authors of the Constitution (adopted in 1787) supposed to nix "by any language" such concepts?I'm sure you on the other hand, as brilliant as you have claimed to be, can look into your crystal ball and see (prior to their first existence) concepts and terminology that may appear 20-30 years from now.On 2/27/2011 4:14 PM, NoEinstein wrote:Dear Sage 2: Consider this: If our original Constitution was soperfect, how has it been possible that government evolved away fromthe ideals of the Founding Fathers? It did so because that documentis WEAK! There was an assumption that elected officials would bemotivated to do what is best for the country (ha!). But everyoneknows politicians do what they know gives them the best chance ofgetting re elected. Making socialist-communist promises to the lazywasn't nixed by any language of the Constitution. But my NewConstitution will hang for treason anyone advocating socialism—theanti-thesis of the democratic ideals of the Founding Fathers. Isuspect that you are far more left than the country can tolerate.Please give the readers a capsule description of your feelings aboutthe free-market capitalist system that made the USA great. And aboutyour ideas on the role of government in such an economy. Thanks. —John A. Armistead, — Patriot —On Feb 26, 11:11 pm, Sage2<wisdom...@gmail.com>wrote: Hey Keith, Mark et al, Suffice it to say that OUR Constitution need never be rewrittennor changed, but from time to time revisited to it's original intentand meaning, less personal interpretation. " It is what it is " andwas not intended to be anything more nor anything less than that. Theonly true recourse the founding fathers wisely gave us was the "amendment " and even they should be rare and few. We should not try tofix what ain't broke by breaking that which don't need fixing !*************************************************************************** *********************************************************On Feb 26, 6:31 am, KeithInSeoul<keithinta...@gmail.com>wrote:Greetings from Seoul Korea John!Uhm.....This seems to me, to be, "Much Ado, About Nothing".....We'd all like to read your "New Constitution"; but if ya don't want toshare it with the group, that is your perogative.The purpose of Political Forum is to share political thought, ideas,commentary and opinion, as well as to comment on government, politics, worldaffairs and current events. (And occasionally, pro football andbaseball!) Your posts I find sometimes interesting and usually thoughtprovoking, so therein lied my initial interest in you posting your, "NewConstitution". It was never my intent to get a shit storm started!If you take the time to read both Jonathan's and Michael's posts, you willfind that both men are thoughtful, and probably share many of the sameconcerns as you do. I consider myself a conservative libertarian, (not somuch a capitalist as I am one who beleives in protection of free marketenterprise, and I believe that there is a distinction between a, "freemarket" versus an economic system such as capitalism, of which I alsosupport and subscribe to. Jonathan and Michael are damn near anarchists,(and I say that with a smile on my face, I don't think either would agreewith me!!) but the point being, is that instead of taking the route of manyof the nasty, hateful rhetorical smear merchants from the far left, (e.g.;the Wacko left socialist-elitist Moonbats) who from time to time and onoccasion chime in here; I would like to think that the thoughtful, wellreasoned conservative voices of Politicall Forum can have discussion, aswell as disagreement with a little more civility!At any rate, have a good Saturday....Mine is almost over!KeithInSeoulOn Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 12:16 PM, NoEinstein<noeinst...@bellsouth.net>wrote:MJ: You are NOT wanted on this post! In the last few weeks you'vemanaged to give your cook-booked quotations of others, and your ownbreakfast-table-written "constitution" of sorts. But you have noteven gone back into my thread to read about my New Constitution, whichis detailed in essays that highlight the apt portions of my document.And you obviously have no "Regard$" for...
> >
> > read more »
> --
> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
> * Visit our other community athttp://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