Re: Save America by kicking all political rituals in the ass!

John,

You live in fantasy land. Facts are facts! While "a positive thinker" like you might have dreams of a clown with a contrived television show running our country, the clown has to first declare himself a candidate.

That you would be suckered into believing that a hustler with a gimmick ("you're fired") would be some kind of savior for the United States says volumes about your thinking process (e.g., lack thereof).

On 05/21/2011 07:17 PM, NoEinstein wrote:

J. Ashley:  Any communication involves two, the sayer and the receiver.  You and I are different 'receivers' and so interpret the same communiqué differently.  A positive thinker, like me, wants a "you're fired" man to be President.  A negative thinker, like you, was hoping Trump would not enter the race.  You would have made a great lawyer, because those like to make their point.  They could do that in a game of musical chairs with a tack in each seat.  Get the point? Ha, ha, HA!  — J. A. A. — 

On May 20, 10:41 pm, Jonathan <jonathanashle...@lavabit.com> wrote: 

John,  Trump never dropped out of anything. He declared, "After considerable deliberation and reflection, I have decided not to pursue the office of the Presidency." That's not dropping out. That's declaring he has no intention of entering the race.  On 05/20/2011 05:44 PM, NoEinstein wrote:        

J. Ashley:  Then what was Trump dropping out of?  ï¿½ J. A. A. � On May 19, 6:50 pm, Jonathan<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>  wrote: 

*John, INLINE:* 

On 05/19/2011 01:47 PM, NoEinstein wrote:>  Dear Jonathan: 

(1.)  Most in the media considered Donald Trump to be a contender for President.  You, an anarchist, aren't bright enough to know the present, let alone project the way future events could have played out. 

*I do not care what "most in the media" decided for YOU. Donald Trump never declared himself to be a candidate. Who are you going to believe? The media? Or, Donald Trump?* 

Answer to (2.) is at *** in the preface, copied below: "Preface:        The Will of the People is the foundation of government.  The People must be represented faithfully and without bias so that government can properly and efficiently perform its functions in the coming ages.  Federal government shall be limited to functions that cannot be better performed by local and state governments.  Such shall be the enabler of freedom, justice, fair commerce, climates of opportunity, cooperative efforts, and national security both internal and external.  Such shall be businesslike yet human; impartial yet focused; considerate of our environment, heritage, peace and tranquillity; effective without boastfulness; *** and divorced from politics.  The federal government shall not be considered to be synonymous with the USA, and those therein are not a ruling class nor are they dictators; rather they are the servants of the USA and shall be answerable to it and to any law-abiding Citizen or Citizens thereof.  We honor these objectives for the benefit of our-selves and our posterity." 

*I am assuming you have just posted the preface to YOUR New Constitution. Once again, you are guilty of obfuscation. You did not answer my question. Where in the Constitution (the existing one - not YOURS) does it prohibit political parties?*>  (3.)  In my New Constitution the 'speaker' is simply a parliamentarian 

who happens to be presiding.  That person shall have no power to direct the course of proceedings based on their personal biases.  This is the sentence which you neglected to copy: " The House makes the rules for its proceedings, punishes disorderly members, and with the assent of 60% can expel a member for a violation.  ***But no rule shall be made that concentrates power in any individual(s) beyond his or her one vote."  That excludes allowing the speaker, or chairmen of any committees, to have any more 'power' than the members have. 

*What does YOUR New Constitution have to do with reality?*>  (4.)  The Secret Service wasn't part of government during the earlier 

years.  It is required in the Constitution that candidates for President be natural born citizens of the USA and at least 35 years old.  All members of the Secret service are required to take an oath to uphold the Constitution.  If such deliberately and flagrantly overlook CRIMINALITY that is hugely harmful to the USA�the way all socialist-communist policies are�then members of the S. S. who are responsible, likewise, shall be guilty of treason, for giving aid and comfort to the ENEMY (socialists and communists)!   Since the Constitution is the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND, deliberately violating that law for the obvious purpose of SUBVERTING the Constitution and causing the failure of our economic systems is TREASON of the highest order!  Barack H. Obama should be hanged post haste! 

*The Constitution states, "No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."* *Unfortunately, that same Constitution offers no insight as to what constitutes a "natural born citizen" or how such provision shall be enforced. That the Secret Service was not created until 1865 (to suppress counterfeit currency) should be evidence enough that they have no responsibility for determining the eligibility of the POTUS. * 

� John A. Armistead �  Patriot On May 19, 1:22 pm, Jonathan<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>    wrote: 

John, As usual, I have some comments and questions (which you will no doubt avoid answering, as usual): 1) Reality check: Donald Trump was never in "the race." 2) Where in the Constitution does it prohibit political parties? 3) "Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings..." As such, the House has chosen to elect a Speaker. This would prompt most people to call that person Speaker, much as most would call the head of a local PTA "Madam President." 4) Does any part of the Constitution or any Law require the Secret Service to look into the qualifications of the President? "The mission of the United States Secret Service is to safeguard the nation's financial infrastructure and payment systems to preserve the integrity of the economy, and to protect national leaders, visiting heads of state and government, designated sites and National Special Security Events." On 05/18/2011 07:53 PM, NoEinstein wrote: 

A huge number of the na�ve among us are probably supposing that the USA can be saved if we can just elect the right President.  Our Republican choices include those who have already sold their souls to the lock-step rituals and the Pomp and Circumstance of Washington. The same, typical, ego-maniacs, are content to form committees to raise outlandish amounts of capital for waging months-long battles in� the primaries.  None of those same presidential hopefuls have a enough practical sensibility to see that pressing-the-flesh in as many states as possible is more of a disqualification than a qualification to be President. As many as 18% of Americans are unemployed or underemployed.  The rock hard, leftist Democrats for Obama are projected to be able to raise over a billion dollars to get that traitor to America re elected.  If, as I�ve proposed, presidential candidates spend no more than five million dollars on their campaigns, *** there can be, literally, billions of dollars that can remain in the pockets of the voters, rather than going to our close-to-universally-corrupt media.  A huge plus will be the suspension of the unconstitutional, spaced-out primaries that give the most power to the voters of Iowa and etc. When the primaries are suspended, there will be no more unconstitutional party conventions such as gave us our Manchurian Candidate, Barack Hussein Obama of Kenya.  Once and for all there will be an end to the unconstitutional political parties which have �split the USA down the aisle� for far too long. Voters should have no trouble choosing good choices for President based simply on televised debates and fairly-formatted candidate interviews.  The entire election process should span no more than six months, and the candidates can stay rested, rather than being frazzled by the stupidity of jetting back and forth on the pretext of being better able to� �serve� the people of the particular state they happen to be in better than he or she can serve the citizens of a dozen other states where the same dull speech was recited before. With �give-�em-hell� Donald Trump out of the race, I�m not sure there is a single presidential hopeful wise enough and practical enough to Kick the Ass of the Entire Primary System!  It only takes ONE brave candidate to do that.  Simply say: �The primaries give inequitable power to the voters in the early primaries.  That makes the spaced-out primaries unconstitutional, as it does the party conventions that follow.  Nothing in the Constitution allows quasi-governmental bodies, like our political parties, to have ANY say-so whatsoever in how governmental processes are run.  In a Republic, like the USA is so clearly mandated to be, there can be no LEADERS in Congress!  Every representative, regardless of how recently he or she was elected, shall have identical voting power.  To call Newt Gingrich �Mr. Speaker� is to create ROYALTY in Congress that was so detested by the founding fathers.  George Washington rejected the idea that he should be king!  And George Washington would reject the notion that Czars under the control of the President can bypass the powers granted to Congress alone. Thus far, the �Ritual� of the Secret Service protecting the (gag) President is preventing them from asking this simple question: Is the �long form� birth certificate of Obama�which was posted on the Internet in digital form�a LAYERED *. pdf file?  If there are LAYERS, then, that document is a definite forgery.  I repeat: Is the �long form� birth certificate of Obama�which was posted on the Internet in digital form�a LAYERED *. pdf file?  If the answer is confirmed to be 

 ..  read more » 

--

Freedom is always illegal!

When we ask for freedom, we have already failed. It is only when we declare freedom for ourselves and refuse to accept any less, that we have any possibility of being free.

"The great object is that every man be armed; everyone who is able may have a gun."
- Patrick Henry