said... it was finally said well, thank-you.
On Apr 26, 9:24 am, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> The supposed 'window of opportunity' for potential candidates to
> decide whether to run for President is getting smaller. Donald Trump
> is now topping the polls with his give-'em-hell solutions to this
> country's pressing problems. He's headed to New Hampshire to expound
> on those ideas. Two weeks ago Michele Bachmann headed to… Iowa and
> got lost in the CORN by playing-up-to the people of that
> geographically central, but otherwise unexceptional, state.
> Intelligence should be one standard for judging the qualifications of
> anyone wishing to become President. Even though it's a tradition of
> long standing… no person who accepts the archaic RITUAL of acting like
> impractical fools; jetting all over to USA; and wasting tens, if not
> hundreds of millions of dollars just to press-the-flesh with the
> maximum number of voters, isn't wise enough, nor practical enough, to
> be our President.
>
> As I regularly state, political parties—by whatever name—are
> UNCONSTITUTIONAL. So to are the mindless, spaced-out, media-serving
> primaries. Those automatically preclude from being President any non
> megalomaniac who would be a better choice for President simply by
> virtue of having a more sensible personality. Within, say, a six-week
> period of well-thought-out candidate interviews and debates, every
> voter who has access to a TV should be able to pick the candidate who
> is most agreeable to him. And the total campaign expenditure of any
> one candidate need not exceed five million dollars.
>
> Rep. Ron Paul, that derelict candidate from the 2008 election, is
> locked-in-on the RITUAL of brown-nosing the voters of Iowa. Paul
> could easily have become our president in the last election if he had
> simply done what I urged him to do, and abandoned the Republican Party
> to run as an Independent. Glenn Beck, to his credit, sees BOTH major
> parties as being out-of-touch. The Tea Party movement, which isn't
> really a "party", is more agreeable to Beck, who has declined taking
> continued credit for the 9/12 project. Beck will only go so far with
> anything, then he bails.
>
> On his flagging TV show, yesterday, Glenn Beck emotionally derided the
> declining moral values in this country—which he attributes to our
> being out-of-touch with God. At a McDonald's restaurant, a
> transgender person got beaten-up badly enough to cause a seizure.
> Only one person in that restaurant attempted to stave-off the attack.
> Glenn Beck is most naïve; there is limited 'first aid' that can be
> done for anyone having a seizure, other than to put them on their side
> to reduce the chance of possible choking if they vomit. That person
> was already on her side. Beck chided the video camera operator for
> not rushing over to, essentially, do nothing. In defense of those
> customers in the restaurant, they very likely didn't know "what
> infraction" had so angered the attackers. Supposing that the victim
> was a "bad person", most just looked around, and seeing no others
> taking action, they took no action, themselves. The psychology of why
> that same thing happens—most often in big, impersonal cities—has been
> studied extensively. In rare cases, those not calling police, or
> calling down the attackers, have been found to be criminally negligent
> for not providing reasonably prudent assistance.
>
> As was the case with that video camera operator, Glenn Beck sees the
> "historically predictable" failures of our government, our economy,
> and of our society. But he consistently does little or nothing. His
> 56 Refounders—as of the Constitution—failed to expose the "Good
> Dirt" (a quote of J. R. from "Dallas") that would rally the American
> people to vote-in good candidates. Prior to the 8/18 rally last year
> in Washington, that drew 3/4 million people, Beck vowed to keep on his
> "combat boots" until the corruption in Washington has been corrected.
> But about that same time, the Obama W. H. put out a directive saying
> that suspected terrorists (supposedly, including those proposing
> violence, as in a… revolution) could be shot without recourse. That
> threat caused Beck to take off his combat boots, put on his bullet-
> proof vest, and to take-on the guise of being an evangelist deferring
> all solutions to Divine Providence. He saw it as an act of God that a
> flock of curious and very 'ham' Canada Geese flew over the reflection
> pool. And of course there was that "eight-year-old" (looked 14) red-
> headed kid who lucked up and got the last tickets to sit in a section
> close to the Lincoln Monument. A father loving his son, oh how much
> of a God-send 'that' is…
>
> I could be flattered, but I'm not, that Glenn Beck has been reading my
> essays under "Wringing-the-neck of empty ritual." For the first time
> ever, Beck is acknowledging that no groups—religions included—can make
> the needed changes in our government. Following my lead, he is now
> charging INDIVIDUALS with that responsibility. Surprisingly, Beck
> realizes that having anything other than a secular government would be
> wrong. (Note: The latter is such a huge departure for Beck, that I
> suspect it is due to the world-threatening mess caused by Muslims
> believing that their religion should also control governments.) The
> second proof that Beck is reading what I write is his overt… slap at
> me for saying that 'I repeatedly asked myself what James Madison would
> have thought about what each new thing I wrote in my New
> Constitution.' Beck, almost angrily said: "James Madison isn't Jesus
> Christ!"
>
> Glenn Beck seems to be saying he would have preferred that I ask Jesus
> Christ what should be included in my New Constitution. The reason I
> used Madison and the Founding Fathers as my standard was because I
> could sense the SPIRIT of the Constitution just from reading what they
> wrote. Jesus never wrote a Constitution, but the Golden Rule, "Do
> unto others as you would have them do unto you." and "Love thy
> neighbor as thyself." Would be pretty good constitutions, taken alone
> or together. Beck is a cad if he supposes my motives are less high
> simply because I, unlike him, don't DROP the name Jesus or give…
> "credit" to God at every turn. I'll guarantee you this: I wasn't
> inspired to spend fourteen years of my life writing my New
> Constitution to benefit most Americans, unless I was a highly moral
> person (who knows right from wrong).
>
> Charles Krauthammer is one of those political commentators who will
> lose his job once my New Constitution is ratified. He flagrantly
> violates the provisions preventing celebrities in the media or in
> entertainment, etc., from having more influence on the outcome of
> elections than the man-on-the-street. Though "conservatively"
> insightful, Krauthammer keeps including enough "jabs" at the right to
> keep the liberal publishers of his syndicated news columns happy.
> Unless he does that, he won't be making big bucks any more.
> Krauthammer has only one standard of right and wrong, and that is
> dollars and cents—just like most of those on the Fox News Channel,
> especially Brit Hume.
>
> Krauthammer erred big time when he called Donald Trump "a clown, with
> no chance of becoming President." Sending out 'negative psychology'
> is a ploy used by both the left and the right that must be stopped, if
> we are to survive as a nation. If a candidate says obvious untruths
> against another candidate he or she will be disqualified or jailed.
> All election-related commentary (but not COVERAGE) in the media shall
> stop!
>
> Pitiful Gov. Mike Huckabee is probably jealous that Glenn Beck has
> upstaged Huckabee's religious (insincere) sweetness. Barack Obama
> hides his emotions behind a cool exterior. Huckabee hides his
> insincerity behind a for-show, phony smile that may appeal to the
> religious right. I knew Huckabee was two-faced when he interrupted a
> guest who was saying negative things about Obama, so that his audience
> wouldn't get to applaud their assent. I call Huckabee a two-faced
> LIBERAL. Beck calls him a Republican "progressive", which is a
> conflict of terms.
>
> Numbers of people are proposing that we should pass a balanced-budget
> amendment. My New Constitution does that within the main body of the
> document:
>
> "The House shall author bills of appropriation within budget; in
> addition, the President shall have Line Item Veto power on all such
> bills, except if overruled by a 60% vote of the House. 12 years from
> the adoption of this New Constitution, and following a successful two
> year test in two or more states, taxation in the USA shall be changed
> to sales tax only—at a maximum conglomerate rate per annum of 35% of
> the GNP—home food and medicines excluded.* "
>
> Thinking Americans—like I hope the majority of my readers are—should
> realize that merely passing a balanced budget amendment will still
> leave in place all of the corrupt Washington establishment that let
> the USA get into such sad shape to begin with. The expression is: "If
> something is broken, FIX it!" All of our piddling with government
> over the last century has left it still broken and unworkable. ***
> The first step to correcting things is for any person with the
> public's ear to adamantly renounce our… two party system, which is and
> always has been, unconstitutional. SCRAP the primaries and SCRAP the
> conventions! Let the voters decide their favorite candidates via the
> magic of TV. If we had had TV a century ago, the… "ritual" of
> campaigning in all of the states never would have gotten started.
> It's time we wring-the-neck of the empty ritual of primaries(!) as
> well as those of the other wasteful and hurtful things that we do in
> this country! Instead of putting billions of dollars into the pockets
> of the media for campaigns lasting two or three years, put only a few
> million dollars into their pockets for campaigns lasting no more that
> THREE MONTHS! Politics isn't a GAME, people; it is the bane of our
> existence!
>
> Respectfully submitted,
>
> — John A. Armistead — Patriot
>
> AKA NoEinstein on Google's sci.physics news group.
>
> Those who are interested are invited to read my book: "The Shortest
> Distance; Harmony Through Prosperity," available at Amazon and Barnes
> and Noble.
--
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