means... J. A. A.
>
On Apr 9, 12:07 am, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> Jonathan: Entertainment celebrities, like media celebrities, have a
> "following" which would be cesseptable to vote like the celebrities
> vote. The means celebrities would have more influence at the poles
> than the man-on-the-street. Of course, that shift of power runs
> counter to principles of fair play and democracy. The 1st Amendment
> says: "... the freedom of a fair and pro-democracy press or other
> medium". Having a pro-democracy press means that no one like Mark is
> allowed to push socialism nor communism. His threatening me because I
> correctly peg him as anti-America, would shut down Google, if Google
> didn't FIRE Mark, post haste! — J. A. A. —
>
> On Apr 5, 2:44 pm, Jonathan Ashley <jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > My New Constitution doesn't allow any person working for
> > any medium to express their personal political biases.
>
> > Does that mean my sister will no longer be allowed to work for Kenny
> > Kingston?
>
> > On 04/05/2011 11:28 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
>
> > > Folks: Pushing for socialism or communism in a Republic or Democracy
> > > is the same as trying to overthrow the government. There is no higher
> > > crime than that! I've never said that "anyone" who speaks freely is
> > > an outlaw. Only those like Mark, alias "The Annointed (sic) One" who
> > > attack me�the most patriotic and pro civil liberties person in the USA�
> > > is clearly an outlaw. Free speech IS allowed for all of those not
> > > employed by government and not being paid by any medium. Working as a
> > > 'moderator' for Google gives the likes of Mark an advantage of
> > > exposure. My New Constitution doesn't allow any person working for
> > > any medium to express their personal political biases. There can be
> > > no exceptions if the USA is to return the control of government to the
> > > People, and away from the elitist media and elitist politicians which
> > > the media made to be elitist in the first place. � John A. Armistead
> > > � Patriot
> > > On Apr 4, 12:11 pm, Mark<markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> Stalinesque...... Your "pegging" ANYONE that speaks freely as an "outlaw" is
> > >> absolutely Stalinesque.
>
> > >> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 9:38 AM, NoEinstein<noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > >>> Jonathan: My rationality for pegging you an outlaw and a traitor
> > >>> should be evident to anyone who has read my pro-people New
> > >>> Constitution that I've regularly detailed in Sections. Anyone, like
> > >>> you, who has a holier-than-thou tone doesn't have the value system to
> > >>> judge anything. Be content with looking things up in your elementary
> > >>> school dictionary, Jonathan. That's all the discourse you'll ever
> > >>> get. � J. A. A. �
> > >>> On Apr 1, 4:09 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>> John,
> > >>>> If you truly believe I have "no virtues worthy of... being allowed to
> > >>>> continue to live on this Earth," why don't you stop by sometime and we
> > >>>> can discuss this in person.
> > >>>> As for my being "an outlaw to humanity," how do you believe that is
> > >>>> possible?
> > >>>> *OUTLAW,* n. A person excluded from the benefit of the law, or
> > >>>> deprived of its protection.
> > >>>> *HUMANITY*, n. The peculiar nature of man, by which he is
> > >>>> distinguished from other beings.
> > >>>> How did you determine that humanity is law?
> > >>>> On 04/01/2011 11:38 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
> > >>>>> I can't be put on the defensive regarding the most highly-motivated,
> > >>>>> for-the-people document ever written. Jonathan, the socialist-
> > >>>>> communist, is bent on destroying the USA. He has no virtues worthy of
> > >>>>> his being allowed to continue to live on this Earth. He is an outlaw
> > >>>>> to humanity, along with Mark and MJ. I'm amazed that Keith can't see
> > >>>>> what rascals he purports to understand and tolerate! � J. A.
> > >>>>> Armistead � Patriot
> > >>>>> On Mar 29, 1:05 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> > >>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>> John,
> > >>>>>> The problem is you don't defend your document. If you were to defend
> > >>> it,
> > >>>>>> you would have to engage in dialogue. Instead, you resort to personal
> > >>>>>> attacks against those who pose questions - failing in every instance
> > >>>>>> thus far to answer any posed questions. You are nothing more than a
> > >>>>>> hypocrite.
> > >>>>>> On 03/29/2011 09:23 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
> > >>>>>>> Jonathan: You, like so many in the groups, seek to elevate your non-
> > >>>>>>> existent status by attacking the work of your intellectual and
> > >>>>>>> creative superiors. As required by the original Constitution, I
> > >>>>>>> only... "preserve, protect, and defend" my document from the attacks
> > >>>>>>> of lame brains like you, MJ and Mark. My time would be better spent
> > >>>>>>> writing more essays. � J. A. A. �
> > >>>>>>> On Mar 28, 11:59 am, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> > >>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>> John,
> > >>>>>>>> Why won't you face the fact that you just don't like YOUR New
> > >>>>>>>> Constitution being criticized.
> > >>>>>>>> On 03/28/2011 08:00 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>> Jonathan: For your information, no socialist-communist will ever
> > >>> get
> > >>>>>>>>> a chance to serve in, or be employed by government. The "input"
> > >>> that
> > >>>>>>>>> you seek to destroy the USA isn't available to tyrants like you.
> > >>> � J.
> > >>>>>>>>> A. A. �
> > >>>>>>>>> On Mar 26, 7:36 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> > >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>> Once again John has resorted to cut and paste name calling rather
> > >>> than
> > >>>>>>>>>> engage in meaningful dialog.
> > >>>>>>>>>> On 03/26/2011 03:53 PM, NoEinstein wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>> Jonathan Ashley, the socialist-communist, is undeserving of a
> > >>> reply.
> > >>>>>>>>>>> � J. A. A. �
> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 25, 2:41 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com
> > >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> John,
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> I am shocked. I am in agreement with your statement, "In the
> > >>> case of
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> contract law, a FAIR contract is one in which both parties to
> > >>> the
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> contract are happy with the deal." That is voluntary
> > >>> interaction. That
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> is how things should be.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> However, you lose me with, "If a person thinks they have been
> > >>> treated
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> unfairly by government or by business they can sue in civil
> > >>> court and
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> let the jury decide." Would not a better (and less expensive)
> > >>> solution
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> be to enter into a private contract with an arbitration firm
> > >>> that has no
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> vested interest in the outcome of the arbitration? No one would
> > >>> need, as
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> you have phrased it, "to go to any czar to see what the
> > >>> God-damned
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> government has to say!" Yet, if we follow your remedy when
> > >>> "treated
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> unfairly by government," we must seek redress from an arm of the
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> government that has treated us unfairly.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> How can government be the problem and the solution at the same
> > >>> time?
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Existing tax courts are a prime example of how this does not
> > >>> work. How
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> does one get remedy from the IRS when both the judge sitting on
> > >>> the
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> bench of a tax court and the prosecutor are biased toward the
> > >>> collection
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> of taxes for their very existence? A private arbitration firm
> > >>> would have
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> no vested interest either way.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Even if we accept that "sue in civil court and let the jury
> > >>> decide" is
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> the way to proceed, it is incompatible with your want of
> > >>> "democracy."
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Will the population collectively sit on every jury?
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> *DEMOCRACY*, n. [Gr. People, and to possess, to govern.]
> > >>> Government
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> by the people; a form of government, in which the
> > >>> supreme power is
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> lodged in the hands of the people collectively, or in
> > >>> which the
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> people exercise the powers of legislation. Such was the
> > >>> government
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> of Athens.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> On 03/25/2011 10:36 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Jonathan: You are a hopeless case. No one is needed to
> > >>> explain the
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 'Golden Rule': "Do unto others as you would have them do unto
> > >>> you."
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> And no prudent person has trouble knowing what is fair. In the
> > >>> case
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> of contract law, a FAIR contract is one in which both parties
> > >>> to the
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> contract are happy with the deal. If a person thinks they have
> > >>> been
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> treated unfairly by government or by business they can sue in
> > >>> civil
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> court and let the jury decide. Those with a conscience (but
> > >>> not you)
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> know, instinctively, when they are being fair to others. No
> > >>> one needs
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> to go to any czar to see what the God-damned government has to
> > >>> say!
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Give up your hobby of replying on Political Forum. You don't
> > >>> have the
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> reasoning ability of a (blind) mole. � J. A. A. �
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 24, 2:40 pm, Jonathan Ashley<
> > >>> jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> John,
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you serious? "Fair play and democracy shall have supremacy
> > >>> in the USA!"
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Who decides what is "fair play"? You? Mob rule?
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting to decide what's
> > >>> for lunch."
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 03/24/2011 09:36 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
>
> ...
>
> 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