Wednesday, April 20, 2011

Re: Wringing-the-Neck of Empty Ritual.

Jonathan: For you, anything 'right' of anarchy is socialist. I
suggest you write your one paragraph constitution banning government.
Unless you are from the stone ages, you won't survive very long on
your own. — J. A. A. —
>
On Apr 18, 11:53 pm, Jonathan Ashley <jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
wrote:
> But John, you're the one who has written a socialist constitution.
>
> On 04/18/2011 08:31 PM, NoEinstein wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Jonathan:  Mainly he's done that by attacking the capitalist system
> > that made this country great; and by supposing that government should
> > control everything (with him in charge).  The fact that you even ask
> > that question confirms my initial gut reaction that you are a
> > socialist-communist, like 95% of Democrats are.  The remaining 5% are
> > just stupid.  You're in both of those groups.  ï¿½ J. A. Armistead �
> > Patriot
> > On Apr 18, 3:03 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> > wrote:
> >> John,
>
> >> That you own stock in a company that routinely downgrades websites based
> >> on "link relevance" over "content relevance" says much about your
> >> credibility regarding the understanding of what freedom of expression means.
>
> >> That you believe Obama "has caused more economic and social harm to the
> >> USA than any other person who ever lived, including Hitler" seems
> >> ludicrous. Just how has he (as an individual) been able to pull off this
> >> tremendous task?
>
> >> On 04/17/2011 09:05 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
>
> >>> Dear Mark:  I own Google stock.  It's an American multinational
> >>> Corporation that's headquartered in Mountain View, California.  Google
> >>> World shows the new complex quite well.  In many ways you are very
> >>> naive.  Your obvious desire to protect Barack Obama's neck from the
> >>> noose is tantamount to looking-the-other-way to those who commit
> >>> TREASON every day of their existence.  Would you put on moderation
> >>> someone who proposes that Libyan President Kadafi should be killed?
> >>> Do you suppose it is Google's obligation to protect those who kill
> >>> their citizens?  Hundreds, if not thousands, of Americans have
> >>> committed suicide because of the bad economy and the lack of jobs
> >>> resulting from Obama's socialist-capitalist policies.  He has caused
> >>> more economic and social harm to the USA than any other person who
> >>> ever lived, including Hitler.
> >>> Treason is a recognized capital offense.  Those in our government and
> >>> in our law enforcement who don't press to have that bastard arrested,
> >>> tried and hanged are themselves in violation of the Constitution for
> >>> giving aid and comfort to the enemy.  Keith suggested that you,
> >>> Jonathan and MJ are anxious to read my next "missive".  He's viewed
> >>> you all in a favorable light, before.  As for me, I suspect you are so
> >>> screwed-up in the head that you are both for and against having a
> >>> better government.  That means you have schizophrenia.  Get some couch-
> >>> time, Mark.  You need it!  ï¿½  J. A. Armistead �  Patriot
> >>> On Apr 16, 10:28 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE<markmka...@gmail.com>    wrote:
> >>>> Einstein,
> >>>> Again, you mistake me for someone that is liable under the present, or
> >>>> your future, US Constitution. The message you received is the standard
> >>>> message sent to all new or moderated members, get used to it. It
> >>>> originates from outside the US and is also not liable under US law.
> >>>> Isn't the internet grand when the originating country has the
> >>>> responsibility for what is or is not allowed under their law(s).
> >>>> On Apr 16, 7:11 pm, NoEinstein<noeinst...@bellsouth.net>    wrote:
> >>>>> Dear Keith:  I sensed that there was a common thread of "reasoning" in
> >>>>> those you name. My last missive, as you say, was explaining why Jews
> >>>>> are causing a lot of problems and expense while seeming to be such
> >>>>> nice people.  Israel should become a training place for successful
> >>>>> capitalism.  Only the latter can start to heal the deep wounds Muslims
> >>>>> feel.
> >>>>> Today, when I posted: "Can The Donald 'Fix' the Thin Ice that the USA
> >>>>> is skating on?"  There was a message (Mark's responsibility?) saying
> >>>>> that moderators must approve what I say.  Of course that in
> >>>>> UNCONSTITUTIONAL by both the present Constitution, and by my New
> >>>>> Constitution, which requires that Mark be fired from his job.  If you
> >>>>> butterfly conservatives are starting to understand what I'm saying,
> >>>>> then you should like to know that about 85% of my New Constitution has
> >>>>> now  been copied and pasted for interested citizens to read.  The last
> >>>>> 15% relates to problems with government which I have batted heads
> >>>>> with, first hand.  Once people begin showing appreciation for the 85%
> >>>>> of my non-Stalinesk document, the remainder will become available.
> >>>>> But NOT on this forum.  The full document will be presented as part of
> >>>>> a book containing my many essays and detailed rational for why this
> >>>>> country needs a New Constitution Now.  You guys can help speed things
> >>>>> along by talking-up my document on the NET.  ï¿½ John A. Armistead �
> >>>>> Patriot
> >>>>> On Apr 16, 4:17 pm, Keith In K�ln<keithinta...@gmail.com>    wrote:
> >>>>>> Hey John!
> >>>>>> I am atwitter with excitement and anticipation!  Jonathan,  Mark  and MJ are
> >>>>>> already chomping at the bit to sling complimentary praise and one of them
> >>>>>> maybe even will write a haiku in your honor!  Sugarshack Literal Truth might
> >>>>>> even have an orgasm in anticipation of reading your next missive!
> >>>>>> On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 4:21 AM, NoEinstein<noeinst...@bellsouth.net>wrote:
> >>>>>>> Stay tuned, People!  Tomorrow I will write you another essay
> >>>>>>> explaining why the "ritual" of most of our political-governmental
> >>>>>>> processes are either unconstitutional, wasteful of economic resources,
> >>>>>>> or otherwise stupid.  ï¿½  John A. Armistead �  Patriot
> >>>>>>> On Apr 14, 10:44 pm, NoEinstein<noeinst...@bellsouth.net>    wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Like me, the readers must be busy with spring buying and fix-up.  The
> >>>>>>>> present discussions will affect the fortunes and the liberty
> >>>>>>>> (happiness) of your grandchildren.  There won't be any more fortunes
> >>>>>>>> and little liberty if the US economy goes down-the-tubes.  By adapting
> >>>>>>>> my New Constitution, the survival of the USA will be assured!  ï¿½ John
> >>>>>>>> A. Armistead �  Patriot
> >>>>>>>> Those interested are invited to read my book: "The Shortest Distance;
> >>>>>>>> Harmony Through Prosperity" (Amazon and B.&    N.).  I'm thrilled that
> >>>>>>>> the word 'prosperity' is being mentioned more and more as a cure for
> >>>>>>>> our ailing economy (Capitalism over socialism).  That book explains
> >>>>>>>> the 'build-up' to my writing the New Constitution.  Simple things can
> >>>>>>>> turn this country around!  And none of them involving conducting...
> >>>>>>>> business-as-usual in Washington!  Trust me, Folks!  I know what I am
> >>>>>>>> doing.  99.5% of those in Washington are clueless!
> >>>>>>>> On Apr 11, 2:36 am, NoEinstein<noeinst...@bellsouth.net>    wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Mark:  If you could, and would, read my document with an open mind,
> >>>>>>>>> there is nothing injurious to ordinary citizens.  Stalin didn't give a
> >>>>>>>>> damn about ordinary citizens (or soldiers).  He killed them by the
> >>>>>>>>> millions.  Are you saying that my New Constitution will harm ordinary
> >>>>>>>>> citizens?  Ha, ha, HA!  Then you can't read, for sure!  ï¿½ J. A. A.
> >>>>>>>>> �
> >>>>>>>>> On Apr 10, 7:25 pm, Mark<markmka...@gmail.com>    wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> I prefer to call it what it is.... Stalinesque.
> >>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 4:30 PM, Jonathan Ashley<
> >>>>>>>>>> jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>    wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>    John,
> >>>>>>>>>>> So you are trying to eliminate celebrities who have an opinion that
> >>>>>>> differs
> >>>>>>>>>>> from yours. How fascist of you!
> >>>>>>>>>>> On 04/10/2011 01:53 PM, NoEinstein wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> No, Jonathan!  Celebrities in the media and in entertainment simply
> >>>>>>>>>>> can't voice their opinions or political preferences in any MEDIUM.
> >>>>>>>>>>> The man-on-the-street doesn't get hours a week to talk about how
> >>>>>>> great
> >>>>>>>>>>> Barack Obama is, the way Oprah Winfrey did.  Barbara Walters, a
> >>>>>>>>>>> celebrity, made no bones about the fact she supported Barack Obama.
> >>>>>>>>>>> What in our "Constitution" gives high-paid celebrities the right to
> >>>>>>>>>>> have more influence on the outcome of elections than the man on the
> >>>>>>>>>>> street?  As soon as Jay Leno or David Letterman make one joke about
> >>>>>>> a
> >>>>>>>>>>> candidate for public office, they will immediately be fired or
> >>>>>>> their
> >>>>>>>>>>> network closed.  Politics is NOT about entertainment, nor is it a
> >>>>>>> game
> >>>>>>>>>>> with 24-7 play-by-play coverage with commentary and prove-nothing
> >>>>>>>>>>> polls.  Those who would like our government to be run the way the
> >>>>>>>>>>> People say, rather than the way those who publicly endorse a
> >>>>>>> candidate
> >>>>>>>>>>> say, should rally behind my New Constitution�a document for the
> >>>>>>>>>>> people!  ï¿½  J. A. A. �
> >>>>>>>>>>>     On Apr 9, 1:01 am, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> >>>>>>> <jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>    John,
> >>>>>>>>>>> You have once again shown that you have no interest in freedom, but
> >>>>>>>>>>> instead want to dictate what others can and cannot do.
> >>>>>>>>>>> That you believe celebrities should have less right to voice their
> >>>>>>>>>>> opinions smacks of fascism. Or am I misinterpreting what you mean
> >>>>>>> when
> >>>>>>>>>>> you state, "Entertainment celebrities, like media celebrities, have
> >>>>>>> a
> >>>>>>>>>>> 'following' which would be cesseptable (sic) to vote like the
> >>>>>>>>>>> celebrities vote. The (sic) means celebrities would have more
> >>>>>>> influence
> >>>>>>>>>>> at the poles (sic) than the man-on-the-street (sic).  Of course,
> >>>>>>> that
> >>>>>>>>>>> shift of power runs counter to principles of fair play and
> >>>>>>> democracy."
> >>>>>>>>>>> Please explain to the world what "principles of fair play" means
> >>>>>>> and why
> >>>>>>>>>>> someone who is a celebrity will not be allowed to "play" in your
> >>>>>>> world.
>
> ...
>
> 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