The fundamental law, written or unwritten, that establishes the character of a government by defining the basic principles to which a society must conform; by describing the organization of the government and regulation, distribution, and limitations on the functions of different government departments; and by prescribing the extent and manner of the exercise of its sovereign powers.
Go, get a new life. what you are doing is a waste of your time and most importantly....MINE. I have to read all the drivel (your "constitution" posts) as well as all the meaningful stuff every day on this forum. What you have written and displayed so far IS A JOKE.
--
Mark M. Kahle H.
-- On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 9:33 AM, NoEinstein <noeinstein@bellsouth.net> wrote:
MJ: All of those quotations of others that you cut and paste aren't
increasing your status in the groups one bit. And haven't you heard?
It isn't polite to YELL (use larger type size). You are a pest on my
post, simply because you know I have a lot of things going for me. In
the perhaps years you have "tooted" your one page constitution, you
haven't gotten many readers, have you. Please make a "quote" of your
own worthy of being in Bartlett's. If you can't do that, then you
should seriously consider getting another (pretend) hobby. — J. A. A.
—
>> --MJMuch of the intellectual legacy of Marx is an anti-intellectual legacy. It has been said that you cannot refute a sneer. Marxism has taught many-inside and outside its ranks-to sneer at capitalism, at inconvenient facts or contrary interpretations, and thus ultimately to sneer at the intellectual process itself. This has been one of the sources of its enduring strength as a political doctrine, and as a means of acquiring and using political power in unbridled ways. -- Thomas SowellAt 10:06 AM 3/21/2011, you wrote:Party crashers, like MJ, are undeserving of being replied to. — J. A.
On Mar 21, 10:11 am, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> And yet AGAIN ... you offer a response.
> SADLY, you offer no support to your claims.
> Regard$,
> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum> A. —
> >
> On Mar 19, 9:50 pm, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> > It is my understanding that I am a member (in good standing?) of this Group (PoliticalForum@GoogleGroups.com).
> > I never claimed to be a moderator.
> > I did not request a 'discussion'.
> > I did, however, ask for YOU to support YOUR assertion and explain:
> > What 'constitutional rights' do you imagine 'run counter' when you claim, "sometimes runs counter to the Constitutional rights of both patients and their families"
> > Apparently you cannot support your claim(s) which is why you resort to spewing fallacy when anyone responds to your posts.
> > Regard$,
> > --MJ"Among the natural rights of the Colonists are these: First, a right to life; Secondly, to liberty; Thirdly, to property; together with the right to support and defend them in the best manner they can. These are evident branches of, rather than deductions from, the duty of self-preservation, commonly called the first law of nature." -- Samuel Adams, November 20, 1772At 05:42 PM 3/18/2011, you wrote:Dear MJ: You are a rude party crasher, not a moderator. I am not
> > interested in having a discussion with anyone regarding the specifics
> > of my New Constitution. As for science, I am the King of the Hill of
> > patriotic Americans! — J. A. Armistead —
> > >
> > On Mar 17, 8:45 pm, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> > > >In medical facilities all across the country, "medical protocol"
> > > >sometimes runs counter to the Constitutional rights of both patients
> > > >and their families.
> > >
> > > What 'constitutional rights' do you imagine to have 'run counter'?
> > > Please cite some examples.
> > >
> > > Regard$,
> > > --MJ
> > >
> > > Today, when a concerted effort is made to obliterate this point, it
> > > cannot be repeated too often that the Constitution is a limitation on
> > > the government, not on private individuals -- that it does not
> > > prescribe the conduct of private individuals, only the conduct of the
> > > government -- that it is not a charter _for_ government power, but a
> > > charter of the citizen's protection _against_ the government. --
> > > Alyssa Rosenbaum
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/> For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
> > * 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.
> * 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.
--
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