American, and is thus undeserving of being replied to. — J. A. A. —
>
On Mar 4, 1:51 pm, Jonathan Ashley <jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
wrote:
> It seems to me that John A. Armistead � Patriot � has wasted a lot of
> time. Not only will he not post his alleged masterpiece (which he claims
> has taken him 14 years to complete), he has allowed the current
> government many, many years to further decompose.
>
> Since he claims to have all the answers, why has he not enticed the
> masses to accept his solutions?
>
> On 03/04/2011 10:14 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Dear Sage 2: Apparently, you can't understand the difference between
> > assessing the problems with our government and FIXING the problems.
> > Like I've told you, the Constitution was too "trusting" that quality
> > people would get elected to office. The Founding Fathers had no way
> > of realizing the negative effects of having the elitist media treat
> > elected officials like ROYALTY. The ego maniacal, career politicians
> > we now have in Washington (mostly lawyers) desired supposed public
> > service to make them feel more important. The effect of that is to
> > have only ego maniacs willing to vie for public service. But I want
> > salt-of-the-Earth types to represent us! So, I take the media out of
> > the equation and limit our representatives to those who have NEVER
> > held public office before.
>
> > Please realize that I don't have the time nor the motivation to keep
> > justifying my spending fourteen years writing my New Constitution,
> > only to have a "shallow" like you claim that no changes are needed.
> > My guess is that you are hoping in your heart that I don't get to FIX
> > the problems, because you like the unfair inequities in this country
> > just as they are. If you can�t change your thinking relative to my
> > efforts, this will be the last time I ever reply to you. � John A.
> > Armistead � Patriot
> > On Mar 2, 11:26 pm, Sage2<wisdom...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Hi Keith,Mark and John
>
> >> The weakness is not in the Constitution but in the fact that
> >> we have moved away from it's original intent. To make a long history
> >> short we have become a two party oligarchy whereby the politicians
> >> represent themselves their "shadows" and their " phantoms"; not the
> >> American public nor The Constitution. This is evident in the fact
> >> that many in both parties try to undermine and discredit the
> >> grassroots movement known as The Tea Party. It is their worse
> >> nightmare. Fortunately it is a nightmare they will have to live with
> >> for a long time. The process then is not to rewrite The U.S.
> >> Constitution but to restore IT and restore power back to the American
> >> people. Only then will the intentions of the " founding fathers " be
> >> realized again !
> >> *************************************************************************** ********************************************************
>
> >> On Feb 27, 7:14 pm, NoEinstein<noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> >>> Dear Sage 2: Consider this: If our original Constitution was so
> >>> perfect, how has it been possible that government evolved away from
> >>> the ideals of the Founding Fathers? It did so because that document
> >>> is WEAK! There was an assumption that elected officials would be
> >>> motivated to do what is best for the country (ha!). But everyone
> >>> knows politicians do what they know gives them the best chance of
> >>> getting re elected. Making socialist-communist promises to the lazy
> >>> wasn't nixed by any language of the Constitution. But my New
> >>> Constitution will hang for treason anyone advocating socialism�the
> >>> anti-thesis of the democratic ideals of the Founding Fathers. I
> >>> suspect that you are far more left than the country can tolerate.
> >>> Please give the readers a capsule description of your feelings about
> >>> the free-market capitalist system that made the USA great. And about
> >>> your 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 rewritten
> >>>> nor changed, but from time to time revisited to it's original intent
> >>>> and meaning, less personal interpretation. " It is what it is " and
> >>>> was not intended to be anything more nor anything less than that. The
> >>>> only true recourse the founding fathers wisely gave us was the "
> >>>> amendment " and even they should be rare and few. We should not try to
> >>>> fix 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 to
> >>>>> share 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, world
> >>>>> affairs and current events. (And occasionally, pro football and
> >>>>> baseball!) Your posts I find sometimes interesting and usually thought
> >>>>> provoking, so therein lied my initial interest in you posting your, "New
> >>>>> Constitution". 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 will
> >>>>> find that both men are thoughtful, and probably share many of the same
> >>>>> concerns as you do. I consider myself a conservative libertarian, (not so
> >>>>> much a capitalist as I am one who beleives in protection of free market
> >>>>> enterprise, and I believe that there is a distinction between a, "free
> >>>>> market" versus an economic system such as capitalism, of which I also
> >>>>> support 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 agree
> >>>>> with me!!) but the point being, is that instead of taking the route of many
> >>>>> of the nasty, hateful rhetorical smear merchants from the far left, (e.g.;
> >>>>> the Wacko left socialist-elitist Moonbats) who from time to time and on
> >>>>> occasion chime in here; I would like to think that the thoughtful, well
> >>>>> reasoned conservative voices of Politicall Forum can have discussion, as
> >>>>> well as disagreement with a little more civility!
> >>>>> At any rate, have a good Saturday....Mine is almost over!
> >>>>> KeithInSeoul
> >>>>> On 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've
> >>>>>> managed to give your cook-booked quotations of others, and your own
> >>>>>> breakfast-table-written "constitution" of sorts. But you have not
> >>>>>> even gone back into my thread to read about my New Constitution, which
> >>>>>> is detailed in essays that highlight the apt portions of my document.
> >>>>>> And you obviously have no "Regard$" for anyone but yourself. ***
> >>>>>> Since my base philosophy is pro-capitalism and pro minimumist
> >>>>>> government, when you attack me�the author-messenger�you are revealing
> >>>>>> yourself to be a socialist and probably a communist. If it offends
> >>>>>> you that I have figured you out, take your "quotes" and your "regards�
> >>>>>> elsewhere. You are not wanted here! � J. A. A. � Patriot
> >>>>>> On Feb 25, 10:45 am, MJ<micha...@america.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>> And yet ANOTHER fallacy spew.
> >>>>>>> Let's see this panacea of yours. What -- exactly
> >>>>>>> -- are you afraid of? That it is shit?
> >>>>>>> Regard$,
> >>>>>>> --MJ
> >>>>>>> "We can evade reality, but we cannot evade the
> >>>>>>> consequences of evading reality" -- Alyssa Rosenbaum
> >>>>>>> At 10:36 AM 2/25/2011, you wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Dear MJ: You sir, are a total BUM! What I have written describing my
> >>>>>>>> New Constitution and how such would be apt to events in the news would
> >>>>>>>> fill several "War and Peace"-size novels. Not a single WORD of what I
> >>>>>>>> have written supports socialism nor communism! I am in favor of
> >>>>>>>> having a super-efficient, minimum-size government that has close to
> >>>>>>>> zero interaction with individual citizens. �My� government will no
> >>>>>>>> longer keep records on the law-abiding citizens, because taxes will be
> >>>>>>>> value-added, only. And I have nixed having the government maintain
> >>>>>>>> records of criminal investigations of anyone found to be innocent.
> >>>>>>>> Those on-file records tend to prejudice law enforcement to "convict"
> >>>>>>>> the person they failed to convict the last time. My corrections of
> >>>>>>>> corrupt law enforcement practices, alone, should be justification
> >>>>>>>> enough to ratify my New Constitution! Presently, the USA is a police
> >>>>>>>> state�with the strings being pulled by corrupt public figures. And
> >>>>>>>> the courts have done whatever the political leaders dictate. I�ve put
> >>>>>>>> them in their place, big time!
> >>>>>>>> You, MJ, are little more than a party-crasher. I do not appreciate in
> >>>>>>>> the least having you post your elementary version of "A" constitution
> >>>>>>>> of some kind. Post your God-damned junk constitution under your name,
> >>>>>>>> not mine. I am not playing games, here. If you would like to get
> >>>>>>>> back into anyone's good graces, explain your political philosophy in
> >>>>>>>> two paragraphs or less. Unless I see the words: �I pro-capitalist
> >>>>>>>> and anti-socialist�� included, then I will know for sure that you are
> >>>>>>>> just some HACKER who is back-dooring your socialist-communist ideals.
> >>>>>>>> Anyone who says anything at all negative about my ideals can only be
> >>>>>>>> the latter. � J. A. A. �
> >>>>>>>> On Feb 23, 9:40 pm, MJ<micha...@america.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> 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