them in prison, don't you think? One of the reason's the USA is going
busted is because those employed were being given... "benefits" in
excess of the private sector. And those same government employees are
allowed to vote and to have enough control over government that they
can't be fired. For starters, ban all unconstitutional labor unions
of those working for government! If teachers strike for higher pay,
fire the entire batch! No one working for government should be
allowed to vote on the processes of government. Employees are the
laborers, NOT the management! — J. A. Armistead —
>
On May 22, 12:19 pm, Jonathan Ashley <jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
wrote:
> 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 communiqu� 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? � 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.
>
> ...
>
> 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