>
On Apr 8, 11:41 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> Jonathan: Intelligence is only part of a solution. I am one in 300
> million, because I have keen powers of observation; common sense; an
> incredible work ethic; understanding of human nature; and an unselfish
> motivation to improve the USA and the world. Most people starting to
> write a new constitution would tire of the task after a month.
> Everything I have written was for solving specific problems
> highlighted in the news. If the Founding Fathers could have had the
> power of foresight comparable to my hindsight (learning from what has
> actually transcribed) they would back my efforts 100%. Like I've
> said: I've spent at least ten times the total man hours spent by
> those who made known physical contributions to the wording of the
> Constitution. PLUS! I have had the benefit of using my computers to
> help refine and arrange the many parts. Show us how YOU string
> sentences together to solve a problem. I'm not ashamed of any part of
> what I've done. But I'd bet you aren't bold enough to try writing
> even one paragraph to improve the world. — John A. Armistead —
> Patriot
>
> On Apr 5, 3:17 pm, Jonathan Ashley <jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > John,
>
> > I am well aware of your previous claims as to why you ordered YOUR New
> > Constitution as you did. I simply wanted to point out to those 300-plus
> > million people who you deem to be less intellectual than yourself how
> > ludicrous such a construction is.
>
> > On 04/05/2011 11:56 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
>
> > > Jonathan: I've answered that same question numbers of times.
> > > Obviously, you've not read very far back in my thread. The logical
> > > reason for the order of my New Constitution is because I used the
> > > original constitution as the model. My first step was to transcribe
> > > the Constitution into my computer. I did this in the days before
> > > there was big cut and paste. Only by transcribing the Constitution,
> > > one key stroke at a time, does one come to realize how crudely written
> > > the Constitution actually is. Except for the (after-thought) Bill of
> > > Rights, there is very little other than an organizational structure in
> > > the majority of the Constitution. Wherever possible, I 'fluffed out'
> > > the document in those locations where the "subject heading" was
> > > there. That's why Article III is so much longer. Anyone wishing to
> > > find out about the Judiciary can still locate that in Article III.
> > > And anyone wishing to see if their rights are still there can look for
> > > the clarified and expanded Bill of Rights and Amendments. I invite
> > > the readers to look at what I've written one sentence at a time. The
> > > citizens�as individuals, not as 'puppet' members of biased groups�will
> > > have incredibly more power, and more civil liberties! When the size
> > > of government goes DOWN, civil liberties go UP! � J. A. Armistead �
> > > Patriot
> > > On Apr 4, 1:30 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >> John,
>
> > >> I have a simple question that even someone with your incredibly superior
> > >> intelligence<g> should be able to answer.
>
> > >> How is it YOUR New Constitution has a "1st Amendment" when it has yet to
> > >> be viewed in its entirety, let alone ratified?
>
> > >> On 04/04/2011 10:19 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
>
> > >>> Folks: A blushing, almost-kid-like Glenn Beck was on Bill O'Reilly's
> > >>> TV program this week. It was discussed whether The Donald's ideas for
> > >>> dealing with our economic woes make him a viable candidate for
> > >>> President. O'Reilly said, "Yes." But Beck said he would prefer a
> > >>> candidate who "just speaks the truth" (rather than one who has an
> > >>> actual PLAN that works). As a regular laugher (mostly) at Glenn
> > >>> Beck's e4 shows, his blackboards and shuffling of photos to
> > >>> incriminate people have gotten old fast. His memorable shows are now
> > >>> about one per month, where they used to be about one out of three. In
> > >>> essence, he has run out of material. His having �oh-isn't-that-sweat�
> > >>> shows like Mike Huckabee isn't improving the chances the USA will
> > >>> survive. Nor is Beck�s delusion that our present broke, broke
> > >>> government can be fixed if only the voters can be told... "the
> > >>> truth". Beck is going on faith that towns (like in Ohio) can be saved
> > >>> and countries, too, if only the good people in his viewing audience
> > >>> can get the word...
> > >>> At Fox News only two people stand out as selling the conservative
> > >>> route to salvation for the USA: Stu Varney and Andrew Napolitano.
> > >>> Sean Hannity continues to shoot-himself-in-the-foot by having Bob
> > >>> Beckel, the socialist, Obama-loving traitor as his regular guest.
> > >>> "Bob is a good friend," Hannity says. Anyone having Beckel as a
> > >>> friend isn't fit to have air time in this country. My New
> > >>> Constitution says:
> > >>> "1st Amendment: No law shall be made regarding the establishment of
> > >>> peaceable religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, but
> > >>> government, its campaigns, processes, slogans, and disbursements shall
> > >>> be secular. No law nor private or civil action shall abridge: the
> > >>> freedom of speech; ***the freedom of a fair and pro-democracy press or
> > >>> other medium; the right of People to peaceably assemble; and the right
> > >>> of any Citizen or group to petition government or any of its branches
> > >>> or departments for redress of grievances. Citizens so petitioning
> > >>> government shall receive appropriate, relevant, timely, comprehensive,
> > >>> helpful and just responses from proper authorities who have thoroughly
> > >>> read, understood, and addressed each salient aspect of the grievances
> > >>> or requests for directions or clarifications. Failure to so respond
> > >>> to a rightful petition for redress of a grievance shall, on a single
> > >>> provable instance, terminate the apt one�s employment, especially
> > >>> those in management or public office�including judges and justices�who
> > >>> ignore, frustrate or give the run-around to any competent Citizen who
> > >>> has been diligent in having a grievance properly addressed, or in
> > >>> having his or her civil rights fully upheld. No judge or justice
> > >>> shall presume that by performing the above required duties, that they
> > >>> in any way might be compromising their objectivity or fairness in
> > >>> court; justice be not �blind�, but well informed. Freedom of the
> > >>> press or other medium mandates that there be reasonable truthfulness
> > >>> in reporting. Wanton distortion of the truth, or deliberate omission
> > >>> of the truth�except in cases of obvious fiction or satire�is
> > >>> prohibited. Stating or implying that a particular news medium has a
> > >>> collective voice (we) or position on any issue is prohibited, as for
> > >>> example via: anonymous editorials; regularly occurring accompanying
> > >>> comments; commentary programs financed by, or ideologically screened
> > >>> by, the same news medium; editorials named as being authored by
> > >>> management; editorial comments by others that are in any way
> > >>> ideologically censored, omitted or screened; or by comments occurring
> > >>> at specific times or designated locations that most would come to
> > >>> associate with the management of such medium, even if such are
> > >>> innocuous. No medium shall be a forum for promoting the ideology of
> > >>> its management or owners, nor shall they employ anyone who uses such
> > >>> job to hawk their personal political preferences�at risk of loss of
> > >>> license or closure of the business. Flagrantly editing news to
> > >>> promote the ideology of management is a felony. No medium shall
> > >>> analyze, assess, summarize, or make subjective judgments about any
> > >>> pending election or referendum. Nor shall they invite others outside
> > >>> of the media to do so. But factual, thorough coverage of the
> > >>> candidates or referenda issues�on an as occurs basis�is allowed,
> > >>> provided there are no comments, nor actions, as above, and provided
> > >>> the same unbiased coverage is given to all of the candidates or to all
> > >>> of the referenda issues. It shall be a 10 year felony to repress
> > >>> truthful news reporting in any medium by threatening legal action. No
> > >>> medium can be sued for libel for presenting material authored by
> > >>> others, but if a person is harmed by the medium�s content, they shall
> > >>> be allowed to reply�without editing�in that medium. Each medium shall
> > >>> respond to breaking news without considering the response of any other
> > >>> medium. Injuries due to improper news coverage or non coverage shall
> > >>> not be excused by the media response. A medium reporting on
> > >>> government shall do so thoroughly, objectively, and with detachment�
> > >>> being neither laudatory nor critical by form, and not repressing
> > >>> thoughtful dissent nor its coverage. Every medium shall favor the
> > >>> truth over supposition, without parity nor bias. False or deceptive
> > >>> commercial advertising is prohibited. Deliberate use by any
> > >>> candidate, their staffs or election committees, of false or deceptive
> > >>> campaign speeches, slogans, advertisements, humor, or innuendo is a
> > >>> felony. No organization, nor part of the media, nor any special
> > >>> interest group(s) shall in any way endorse a slate of candidates for
> > >>> public office; flagrant violation is a felony. No medium shall
> > >>> display active public records without the free consent of the apt
> > >>> parties."
> > >>> "The freedom of a fair and pro democracy press..." means that NO
> > >>> person hired by the media�as consultants, commentators or otherwise�
> > >>> shall be allowed air time or
>
> ...
>
> 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