your plan sucks
On Jun 17, 12:17 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> The voters can say "THIS SUCKS" if they so choose. But no person who
> is a celebrity or anyone employed by any medium can say a single
> "assessing" word about anything to do with government. Being in a
> medium gives such individuals a thousand times more influence than the
> man-on-the-street, and is thus unconstitutional. The Founding Fathers
> could not possibly have foreseen the democracy-bypassing influence of
> those like Alan Colmes and Rush Limbaugh. When my new constitution is
> ratified, commentators, regardless of their ideology, can find other
> employment, or do exactly like Monopoly says and "Go to jail; go only
> to jail." Does anyone not understand what 'make no assessing
> comments' means?
>
> On Jun 8, 10:37 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Any law that would stop someone from saying "THIS SUCKS!!" will never
> > last... it it pure boot heel obedience being demanded...
>
> > Your inability and or unwillingness to post your supposed "New
> > Constitution" after having been asked to do so on this (and others)
> > Forum is telling me that it is an absolute joke as is the purported
> > author.
>
> > Now go away little fly.
>
> > On Jun 8, 6:45 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> > > Nice try, looser! Your stratagy is to make unsupported, blanket
> > > statements about my New Constitution. The closing statements of my
> > > document injoin anyone from making statement in any medium regarding
> > > the document. And that requirement is made retroactive with severe
> > > punishments, including death for treason! The rationale is that the
> > > original Constitution allows having the People modify their government
> > > at their will. In the horse-and-buggy era, the cumbersome amendment
> > > process was the only way the founding fathers could come up with.
> > > Note: The Founding Fathers could not immaginer how technology can
> > > allow the taking of direct votes of all the states in a single day.
> > > The SPIRIT of the Constitution surely favors having the Will of the
> > > People prevail. Now, if anyone ventures to judge my document BEFORE
> > > the votes get to decide, THAT is circumvinting democracy and is
> > > tantamount to treason! I would highly recommend that no person in
> > > government or in any medium (Google staff, included) say a single pro
> > > or con word about my document! Here is that excerpt:
>
> > > Notes: (1.) *Italicized text represents portions of the New
> > > Constitution which shall be omitted unless separately and specifically
> > > approved by 60% of the voters. Voting to approve the New Constitution
> > > shall not be a vote on italicized portions. (2.) Any person, group or
> > > business which polls the People on their support or non support of
> > > this New Constitution or its parts prior to the national referendum,
> > > shall, retroactively, be guilty of a felony(s). (3.) The news media
> > > standards required, herein, as relates to coverage concerning this
> > > document, shall, following ratification of the New Constitution by the
> > > People, be retroactively applied to any news medium or person therein—
> > > including the full punishments relating thereto—for non compliance
> > > with the standards. Likewise, any judge or justice acting counter to
> > > this New Constitution regarding news coverage issues or any part of
> > > the ratification process shall be held fully accountable. The macro-
> > > will of the Citizens shall be Supreme!
>
> > > _______
>
> > > Footnote: The "full punishments", above, include death for treason!
>
> > > On Jun 7, 8:04 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Dear John... Why yes I can,,, simply post the entire document so
> > > > everyone can see that my remarks are in context.
>
> > > > On Jun 7, 5:50 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > Dear Tico: In spite of your limited experience writing important
> > > > > documents, why not choose a few sentences, in context, from my New
> > > > > Constitution, and explain—as best you can—WHY such in any way might
> > > > > fail to improve the USA and the People in it. Can you do that? — J.
> > > > > A. Armistead — Author and Patriot
>
> > > > > On Jun 5, 9:10 am, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > I would have no idea what "documents" you are talking about...all I
> > > > > > see are poorly written snippets that require more explanation than
> > > > > > they have in substance.
>
> > > > > > Again, Why is it that no one can see the entire supposed "document" ?
> > > > > > Your lack of forthrightness in this matter would indicate that nothing
> > > > > > exists but these three or four poorly written "clauses" or "articles"
> > > > > > you bandy about. Your "word" about any more existing isn't worth a
> > > > > > spit as we have been hearing that bullshit for years.
>
> > > > > > On Jun 5, 12:51 am, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Dear Tico: Comment on the parts of my New Constitution. Otherwise,
> > > > > > > you can't see the trees for the forests. Don't you like the trees?
> > > > > > > Or do you only like getting to make grandiose errant statements about
> > > > > > > documents which are fundamentally against your socialist agendas? —
> > > > > > > J. A. A. —
>
> > > > > > > On May 28, 5:20 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Then as any reasonable citizen that has asked for and never received a
> > > > > > > > full copy of your "new constitution" (so I can "easily understand" it)
> > > > > > > > and as a citizen of reasonable temperament speaking to the creator of
> > > > > > > > a "government document" I would like to ask why you are so "
> > > > > > > > adversarial" every time someone asks for a copy....
>
> > > > > > > > You sir are in violation of your own document.... get a rope!!!!
>
> > > > > > > > On May 28, 1:56 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > Dear plainolamerican: Well said! "What do you call a heavy chain on
> > > > > > > > > the bottom of the ocean with a thousand lawyers attached? Answer: A
> > > > > > > > > GOOD START!" My new constitution will castrate the entire profession
> > > > > > > > > known as lawyers! That screwed-up profession dominates the House,
> > > > > > > > > Senate, the Executive Office and the Justice Department. But no
> > > > > > > > > more! My New Constitution will limit the number of lawyers (or any
> > > > > > > > > other profession for that matter) working in government to be no more
> > > > > > > > > than 20%. And my New Constitution will mandate that no lawyer, ever
> > > > > > > > > again, can be employed by any business (such as banks and big
> > > > > > > > > corporations) where they try to force relationships to be
> > > > > > > > > adversarial. And my N. Const. will strike down any supposed contract
> > > > > > > > > that isn't easily understood by people of average background. And it
> > > > > > > > > will mandate that those harmed by any business get quick and
> > > > > > > > > reasonable amends without requiring that anyone get a lawyer and sue
> > > > > > > > > anyone. In short. I eliminate 75% of the reasons lawyers find work!
> > > > > > > > > Lastly, if even one lawyer seeks to go into public office when there
> > > > > > > > > are already 20% of those in that same branch who are lawyers, never
> > > > > > > > > again will any public-connected funding be available for sending any
> > > > > > > > > person to any God Damned law school! Are you listening, Tico? Ha,
> > > > > > > > > ha, HA! — NoEinstein —
>
> > > > > > > > > On May 24, 2:02 pm, plainolamerican <plainolameri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > Lawyers like me are the people that protect your "right" to
> > > > > > > > > > petition
> > > > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > > > > oh, like soldiers are people who protect our freedom?
>
> > > > > > > > > > no offense, but we don't need lawyers or soldiers to protect our
> > > > > > > > > > freedom
>
> > > > > > > > > > On May 24, 10:58 am, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > First, Thank you for the compliment!!
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Basically what I can take from your non-answer is a quote from Pelosi,
> > > > > > > > > > > "you must pass the ..... to find out what is in it."
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Lawyers like me are the people that protect your "right" to
> > > > > > > > > > > petition ...regardless of how ridiculous the petition...
>
> > > > > > > > > > > On May 24, 8:55 am, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Tico: Every sentence is a "book" in and of itself. Realize that
> > > > > > > > > > > > lawyers, like you claim to be, will be excluded from screwing-up the
> > > > > > > > > > > > USA like they have done for too long. A judge or justice violating
> > > > > > > > > > > > even a sentence of my Constitution can be fired on-the-spot by any
> > > > > > > > > > > > prudent citizen. Working for government means being a SERVANT of the
> > > > > > > > > > > > people. Servants who screw up can be fired; and it doesn't take a
> > > > > > > > > > > > court decision or the next election to make that firing final. Come
> > > > > > > > > > > > back to the USA and get a government job, and I will take great pride
> > > > > > > > > > > > in firing you as soon as you fail to respect the civil rights of me or
> > > > > > > > > > > > anyone. You terse comments on this group show you have little respect
> > > > > > > > > > > > for others. How did you turn out so badly? — John A. Armistead —
> > > > > > > > > > > > Author and Patriot
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > On May 13, 8:56 am, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > <<<That New Constitution of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > mine is your and their best hope. Pass it on!>>>
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Since you
>
> ...
>
> 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