Ha, ha, HA! Your type of non-reasoning isn't appreciated, and
confirms your being a socialist-communist. All who are not FOR me, in
substance and in tone, are against me. Get lost squirt! — J. A. A. —
>
On Mar 21, 11:48 am, Jonathan Ashley <jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
wrote:
> John,
>
> The term "civil liberties" is socialist B.S.*
>
> CIVIL*, a.1. Relating to the community, or to the policy and government
> of the citizens and subjects of a state; *
>
> LIBERTY,* n. [L. libertas, from liber, free.]1. Freedom from restraint,
> in a general sense, and applicable to the body, or to the will or mind.
>
> You can't have freedom from restraint if you are a subject of a state.
>
> On 03/21/2011 07:04 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Jonathan: Who is the more dictatorial, the man (me) who spends 14
> > years of his life writing a New Constitution to improve the quality of
> > life for all Americans; or the person (you) who wishes to detract from
> > my efforts so as to deny this country having maximum civil liberties,
> > maximum order, maximum efficiency and maximum respect for the rights
> > of others? You, the true socialist-communist, lose every time! � J.
> > A. Armistead � Patriott
> > On Mar 18, 5:51 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> > wrote:
> >> The dictator speaks again!
>
> >> On 03/18/2011 02:44 PM, NoEinstein wrote:
>
> >>> No. Every SENTENCE of my New Constitution speaks volumes! You don't
> >>> have the smarts to objectively discuss anything with anyone! � J. A.
> >>> A. �
> >>> On Mar 17, 9:00 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> John,
> >>>> If someone is proposing to change the Constitution under which I am
> >>>> forced to live, I would - if at all possible - like some input into the
> >>>> creation of that document.
> >>>> The fact that you deem yourself to be exempt from any input or
> >>>> questioning regarding YOUR New Constitution speaks volumes.
> >>>> On 03/17/2011 05:44 PM, NoEinstein wrote:
> >>>>> Jonathan: Be assured that nothing you say nor do, now or later, will
> >>>>> give you any sway over the content of my New Constitution. Do this:
> >>>>> For the next 14 years, write your own version of a US constitution.
> >>>>> Maybe then you will have learned to be a bit more respecting of
> >>>>> others. � J. A. A. �
> >>>>> On Mar 16, 3:38 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>> As usual, "no specifics are open for discussion." What an ego this guy
> >>>>>> has. Mustn't let anyone ask any questions. His head might explode.
> >>>>>> On 03/16/2011 11:53 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
> >>>>>>> Folks: The vast majority of the still apt portions of our original
> >>>>>>> Constitution remains within my New Constitution. Issues relating to
> >>>>>>> having government be deferential to the people, and placing reasonable
> >>>>>>> limits of the type and scope of the laws that may be passed, is the
> >>>>>>> subject of much that I have expanded on in my New Constitution. I've
> >>>>>>> placed great importance on seeing to it that the corruption in
> >>>>>>> government�state, local and federal�which I have observed first hand,
> >>>>>>> shall never again negatively impact any law-abiding citizen.
> >>>>>>> There are dozens of well-defined, unconstitutional acts by government
> >>>>>>> employees or elected officials that will either get the persons fired
> >>>>>>> or sent to prison. Working for government, even for the President, is
> >>>>>>> not a license to violate laws, or to have privileges that good
> >>>>>>> citizens don't have. Other than my eliminating the unconstitutional
> >>>>>>> (in the SPIRIT) US Senate, and excluding 'career politicians',
> >>>>>>> lobbyists and elitist media from ever setting foot in the Capital, the
> >>>>>>> changes in the daily operation of government won�t be too obvious to
> >>>>>>> most Americans.
> >>>>>>> Not specifically written into the New Constitution, I am personally
> >>>>>>> recommending that Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and Unemployment
> >>>>>>> Insurance ALL be privatized�while continuing to "cover" only those
> >>>>>>> older or sicker people who have no other means of surviving or of
> >>>>>>> getting first rate care. When most taxes and restrictions on the FAIR
> >>>>>>> operation of businesses in this country have been removed, the US
> >>>>>>> economy will experience a BOOM so large, that most people will be
> >>>>>>> making enough money (Prosperity!) to provide for their own futures
> >>>>>>> without needing to look to government for any handouts.
> >>>>>>> The next sentence will assure that socialism�now closely associated
> >>>>>>> with the Democratic Party�will never again influence any future action
> >>>>>>> taken by government: "Fair play and democracy shall have supremacy in
> >>>>>>> the USA!" Those in government employment must swear, on penalty of
> >>>>>>> death, to agree with that one sentence and to act accordingly.
> >>>>>>> Democrats, who consistently want better things without requiring any
> >>>>>>> work on their part, must learn that they will get no more free lunches
> >>>>>>> or free medical care. It is my sincere hope that the hard-core 40% of
> >>>>>>> socialist democrats in this country will realize that they will be far
> >>>>>>> better off working in an efficient capitalist economy than from
> >>>>>>> continuing to seek government-doled, socialist mediocrity.
> >>>>>>> I invite the readers to comment on the general people-oriented-tone of
> >>>>>>> my document. *** However, no specifics are open for discussion. ***
> >>>>>>> � John A. Armistead � Patriot
> >>>>>>> On Mar 15, 9:36 pm, NoEinstein<noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Folks: I've now presented over 50% of my New Constitution. That,
> >>>>>>>> plus the following, should give you a good idea of the love and
> >>>>>>>> devotion I've put into this long project. My efforts, aided by
> >>>>>>>> computer, exceed the combined total time spent by the actual
> >>>>>>>> contributers to writing the original Constitution by a factor of ten.
> >>>>>>>> At each step, I asked myself what the Founding Fathers would say. I'd
> >>>>>>>> bet they are happy people!
> >>>>>>>> "Article VI:
> >>>>>>>> Section 1, 2, 3, 4& 5: Laws in effect at the time of the adoption of
> >>>>>>>> this New Constitution shall remain in effect while such are
> >>>>>>>> systematically reviewed, debated and revoted in the House. Whether
> >>>>>>>> for the revoting of existing laws and regulations or for new bills,
> >>>>>>>> early and conspicuous public notice in the media shall invite Public
> >>>>>>>> input. Bills passing without broad and substantiated Public input,
> >>>>>>>> especially by those law-abiding Citizens most affected by the
> >>>>>>>> legislation, shall not become laws. The House shall make new laws and
> >>>>>>>> define procedures for implementing this New Constitution. Federal
> >>>>>>>> functions to be returned to local or state governments shall be phased
> >>>>>>>> out gradually and considerately for those to be displaced or relo-
> >>>>>>>> cated. Under this New Constitution the future state taxes of Citizens
> >>>>>>>> or businesses, typically, shall not exceed their com-bined former
> >>>>>>>> total of state and federal taxes. At any level of services provided,
> >>>>>>>> streamlining government and minimizing bureaucracy via wise laws shall
> >>>>>>>> always be primary goals.
> >>>>>>>> Local, state and federal law enforcement, the courts, or any
> >>>>>>>> branch or branches of the military or their respective parts shall at
> >>>>>>>> no time be used in support of corruption in government by any public
> >>>>>>>> official(s) at any level. Legal authority of law enforcement or the
> >>>>>>>> courts over the Citizens is voided if used in support of corruption.
> >>>>>>>> Local, state and federal law en-forcement agencies shall not be
> >>>>>>>> organizationally affiliated, and persons or groups, therein, shall not
> >>>>>>>> be presumed by law enforcement to be acting lawfully solely because of
> >>>>>>>> such auspices.
> >>>>>>>> All local, state and federal officer holders and employees�upon
> >>>>>>>> taking office or assuming employment�shall take the following oath:
> >>>>>>>> �I, (Name), promise to serve and be deferential to the People, and to
> >>>>>>>> be unbiased toward any group with a pro democracy, pro fairness
> >>>>>>>> ideology. I swear to honor and uphold the full civil rights of the
> >>>>>>>> citizens, as guaranteed by the Constitution, and I shall expect my
> >>>>>>>> coworkers and superiors to do the same. I understand that my
> >>>>>>>> employment in or by government is conditional upon my adherence to
> >>>>>>>> this oath.� No employee nor office holder shall be sanctioned for
> >>>>>>>> making complaints against another office holder, employee or
> >>>>>>>> superior. No government employee nor office holder shall be coerced
> >>>>>>>> into wrongdoing, immoral action or non action, or illegality by a real
> >>>>>>>> or implied threat of the loss of one�s job, promotion or benefits, nor
> >>>>>>>> by any bribe or promise of promotion or benefits. Making such a
> >>>>>>>> threat, bribe or promise is a felony carrying a minimum ten year
> >>>>>>>> prison sentence�and if part of a pattern�making such threats, bribes
> >>>>>>>> or promises is treason. Acqui-escing to such is a felony. Government
> >>>>>>>> officials, agents or employees who become aware of corruption in
> >>>>>>>> government or in any of its departments shall notify the Executive
> >>>>>>>> Branch and the courts; willful failure to do so is a felony. With
> >>>>>>>> impunity, a government officer(s) or employee(s) shall enforce no law
> >>>>>>>> nor perform any order or directive which violates their personal moral
> >>>>>>>> conscience or their oath.
> >>>>>>>> Local governments shall have 10 or more councilmen or a direct
> >>>>>>>> vote of the People is required to pass ordinances or raise taxes.
> >>>>>>>> Upon request by the Executive or 1/5 of the larger governing body,
> >>>>>>>> federal, state or local law making authority shall defer to the People
> >>>>>>>> on controversial issues where the Will of the People is in doubt. No
> >>>>>>>> law nor previous or subsequent vote on any issue shall usurp the right
> >>>>>>>> of an informed Public to decide controversial issues in
>
> ...
>
> 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