Re: Wringing-the-Neck of Empty Ritual.

MJ, the party crasher, socialist-communist is bent on destroying, not
saving the USA. So, that YELLING, quotation-mad jerk is rightly
undeserving of a reply. — J. A. A. —
>
On Mar 26, 1:47 pm, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> Another meaningless fallacy spew from Armistead. A pity.
> Post this Constitution of yours so we can all revel in its splendor -- of course doing so would further expose your failures.
> Regard$,
> --MJMuch of the intellectual legacy of Marx is an anti-intellectual legacy. It has been said that you cannot refute a sneer. Marxism has taught many-inside and outside its ranks-to sneer at capitalism, at inconvenient facts or contrary interpretations, and thus ultimately to sneer at the intellectual process itself. This has been one of the sources of its enduring strength as a political doctrine, and as a means of acquiring and using political power in unbridled ways. -- Thomas SowellAt 01:11 PM 3/25/2011, you wrote:MJ, the party crasher, socialist-communist is bent on destroying, not
> saving the USA.  So, that YELLING, quotation-mad jerk is rightly
> undeserving of a reply.  — J. A. A. —
> >
> On Mar 24, 1:06 pm, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> > Round and round we go ... Armistead makes claims ... others request he support those claims ... he replies spewing fallacy while pretending his is not replying.
> > Regard$,
> > --MJMuch of the intellectual legacy of Marx is an anti-intellectual legacy. It has been said that you cannot refute a sneer. Marxism has taught many-inside and outside its ranks-to sneer at capitalism, at inconvenient facts or contrary interpretations, and thus ultimately to sneer at the intellectual process itself. This has been one of the sources of its enduring strength as a political doctrine, and as a means of acquiring and using political power in unbridled ways. -- Thomas SowellAt 12:10 PM 3/24/2011, you wrote:MJ, the party crasher, socialist-communist is bent on destroying, not
> > saving the USA.  So, that YELLING, quotation-mad jerk is rightly
> > undeserving of a reply.  — J. A. A. —
> > >
> > On Mar 23, 11:44 am, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> > > And yet you AGAIN provide a response complete with the standard fallacies and name-calling.
> > > As noted previously, I am a member (in good standing?) of this group. If I am crashing your socialist-communist party it is ONLY because you chose to conduct such in THIS forum.
> > > Regard$,
> > > --MJMuch of the intellectual legacy of Marx is an anti-intellectual legacy. It has been said that you cannot refute a sneer. Marxism has taught many-inside and outside its ranks-to sneer at capitalism, at inconvenient facts or contrary interpretations, and thus ultimately to sneer at the intellectual process itself. This has been one of the sources of its enduring strength as a political doctrine, and as a means of acquiring and using political power in unbridled ways. -- Thomas SowellAt 11:27 AM 3/23/2011, you wrote:Folks:  MJ—the lying, deranged, yelling, socialist-communist, party
> > > crasher—is undeserving of being replied to.  — J. A. A. —
> --
> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
> * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> * Read the latest breaking news, and 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.

Re: Wringing-the-Neck of Empty Ritual.

MJ, the party crasher, socialist-communist is bent on destroying, not
saving the USA. So, that YELLING, quotation-mad jerk is rightly
undeserving of a reply. — J. A. A. —
>
On Mar 26, 1:49 pm, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> My New Constitution is probably 50 times more explicit about the
> proper scope of government.  It most definitely limits what government
> is empowered to do!  I invite you to elucidate why you suppose my even
> more limited government than the Founding Fathers spelled out is in
> any wise a bad idea. 
> Probably, but unlikely if the 'snippets' are an indicator.
> The proper scope of government is to secure (natural) rights <period>. How much more 'explicit' is necessary?
> Regard$,
> --MJIt is to secure our rights that we resort to government at all. -- Thomas Jefferson to Francois D'Ivernois, 1795.

--
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.

Re: Wringing-the-Neck of Empty Ritual.

MJ, the party crasher, socialist-communist is bent on destroying, not
saving the USA. So, that YELLING, quotation-mad jerk is rightly
undeserving of a reply. — J. A. A. —
>
On Mar 26, 1:45 pm, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> Another meaningless fallacy spew from Armistead. A pity.
> Post this Constitution of yours so we can all revel in its splendor -- of course doing so would further expose your failures.
> Regard$,

--
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.

Re: Wringing-the-Neck of Empty Ritual.

Mark, one of those socialist-communists who's scared to death of my
pro-democracy New Constitution, is undeserving of a reply. — John A.
Armistead — AKA NoEinstein
>
On Mar 25, 3:01 pm, Mark <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Not to defend MJ or anything of the sort but to say this:
>
> Those
> WITH enough IQ surely must realize that my New Constitution is the
> strongest and most people-oriented document ever written!
>
> Is so Stalinesque that it is hilarious. You write that and call someone else
> an idiot ??
>
> If by disagreeing with you (or anything else for that matter) is cause in
> your little mind to say that someone is un-American then you really need a
> little (or a lot) of "rest" (accompanied by some gentle but consuming
> drugs).
>
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 11:06 AM, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Dear MJ, the socialist-communist, party-crashing jerk:  You have an IQ
> > problem, evident in your continued YELLING of the words of others,
> > while having nothing worthy to say, yourself.  From day one, you have
> > been rude to attack even the fringes of anything I say or do.  Those
> > WITH enough IQ surely must realize that my New Constitution is the
> > strongest and most people-oriented document ever written!  If, like
> > you say, you are... "interested" (very weak compared to MOTIVATED)
> > toward returning America to liberty and freedom, you would be praising
> > everything I am doing for the benefit of hard-working Americans.  Your
> > TONE is clearly one of opposition to me.  That fact is proof positive
> > that you are a fraud who is undeserving of being called an American!
> > — J. A. A. —
>
> > On Mar 24, 12:17 pm, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> > > And yet you continue to reply -- spewing fallacy -- while pretending NOT
> > to reply.
> > > In reality, I am interested in returning America to liberty and freedom.
> > What is obvious, however, are your Orwellian efforts.
> > > Regard$,
> > > --MJMuch of the intellectual legacy of Marx is an anti-intellectual
> > legacy. It has been said that you cannot refute a sneer. Marxism has taught
> > many-inside and outside its ranks-to sneer at capitalism, at inconvenient
> > facts or contrary interpretations, and thus ultimately to sneer at the
> > intellectual process itself. This has been one of the sources of its
> > enduring strength as a political doctrine, and as a means of acquiring and
> > using political power in unbridled ways. -- Thomas SowellAt 12:07 PM
> > 3/24/2011, you wrote:MJ, the party crasher, is bent on destroying, not
> > saving the USA.  So,
> > > that YELLING, quotation-mad jerk is rightly undeserving of a reply.  —
> > > J. A. A. —
>
> > > On Mar 22, 6:43 pm, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> > > > And yet you AGAIN provide a response.
> > > > You will be hard-pressed to PROVE your silly assertion that I am
> > somehow a "deranged, socialist-communist" ... but I suggest you do so.
> > > > There is a pattern here ... you provide absurd claims/assertions ...
> > others 'call' you on it -- usually requesting substantiation ... you pitch a
> > fit and spew fallacy while calling names.
> > > > Regard$,
> > > > --MJMuch of the intellectual legacy of Marx is an anti-intellectual
> > legacy. It has been said that you cannot refute a sneer. Marxism has taught
> > many-inside and outside its ranks-to sneer at capitalism, at inconvenient
> > facts or contrary interpretations, and thus ultimately to sneer at the
> > intellectual process itself. This has been one of the sources of its
> > enduring strength as a political doctrine, and as a means of acquiring and
> > using political power in unbridled ways. -- Thomas SowellAt 06:38 PM
> > 3/22/2011, you wrote:MJ, the deranged, socialist-communist, party crasher is
> > undeserving of
> > > > being replied to.  —  J. A. A. —
>
> > > > On Mar 22, 12:57 pm, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> > > > > >Folks:  Apparently, MJ is incapable of reasoning.  He supposes that
> > > > > >since my "ideal" (not mandated in my New Constitution) government
> > > > > >would have ZERO outlays to individual citizens, i.e., no SS,
> > Medicare,
> > > > > >Medicaid, nor Unemployment, that that shows me to be a socialist.
> > Can
> > > > > >you believe it?!
>
> > > > > <sigh>
> > > > > How a Government programs the STEALS from person
> > > > > A in order to give to person B will be
> > > > > 'privatized' not being provided notwithstanding,
> > > > > the portion that continues to embrace socialism,
> > > > > of course, was "while continuing to "cover" only
> > > > > those older or sicker people who have no other
> > > > > means of surviving or of getting first rate
> > > > > care". Like the woman who finally agrees on her
> > > > > price being a 'prostitute', so too is yours an embrace of socialism.
>
> > > > > Sad isn't it, that Armistead is reduced to
> > > > > projecting his shortcomings onto others.
>
> > > > > It is also noted that you AVOIDED the second
> > > > > example (like the misdirection you attempt on the
> > > > > first) of your socialist tendencies.
>
> > > > > >Socialism and communism (the ideal of Barack Obama)
> > > > > >have government providing everything and controlling everything.
>
> > > > > Government 'providing' everything is not required
> > > > > for socialism's myriad of children.
>
> > > > > >  I want government to provide next to nothing and to control next
> > to
> > > > > >nothing.
>
> > > > > Except what excerpts of your Constitution you
> > > > > have provided does not bolster such a claim.
>
> > > > > >  A properly functioning free enterprise system can do those
> > > > > >thing, AND allow the maximum FAIR prosperity for the maximum number
> > of
> > > > > >Americans!
>
> > > > > And yet your own brand of utopian socialism raises its head again.
>
> > > > > >MJ is revealing himself to be a socialist-communist bent on
> > retarding
> > > > > >my efforts to promote my New Constitution.  He and Jonathan Ashley
> > > > > >aren't wanting to save the USA, but to have the USA fail.  A person
> > > > > >can be either FOR me or AGAINST me.  100% of those who are against
> > me
> > > > > >are criminal, socialist-communists like OUTLAW Barack Obama.  — John
>
> > > > > Your fantasies and fallacies may aid you in
> > > > > retaining that pleasing vision, but they do little to those who grasp
> > reality.
>
> > > > > I certainly understand your need to pretend your
> > > > > embraces of socialism are really not. I can also
> > > > > understand your desire for baseless
> > > > > 'name-calling'. I am quite certain that OTHERS do as well.
>
> > > > > Regard$,
> > > > > --MJ
>
> > > > > Nothing in the world is more dangerous than
> > > > > sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.   -- Martin Luther
> > King, Jr
>
> > > > > >A. Armistead —  Patriot
>
> > > > > >On Mar 21, 10:26 am, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> > > > > > > ELSEWHERE in THIS thread:Socialism and
> > > > > > communism are the anti-thesis of a
> > > > > > representative republic or a democracy.  My New
> > > > > > Constitution RETURNS civil liberties to the
> > > > > > People and will fire, jail or hang those in
> > > > > > government who support socialism and
> > > > > > communism.  When you attack my New Constitution
> > > > > > with your "include me" talk, you are attacking
> > > > > > THE most pro capitalism and pro civil liberties
> > > > > > person on the planet!  Get lost, Jonathan!  J.
> > > > > > A. A.And now HERE in THIS thread the same
> > > > > > person:I am personally recommending that Social
> > > > > > Security, Medicare, Medicaid and Unemployment
> > > > > > Insurance ALL be privatized—while continuing to
> > > > > > "cover" only those older or sicker people who
> > > > > > have no other means of surviving or of getting
> > > > > > first rate care. The implications are rather
> > > > > > OBVIOUS, but perhaps the author fails to see his EMBRACE of
> > socialism.
> > > > > > > There is ALSO this from the same
> > > > > > person:Businesses or professions meeting
> > > > > > licensing standards germane to the type and
> > > > > > scope of work such perform, and being regularly
> > > > > > apprised of substantive new developments, may
> > > > > > control their own work without governmental
> > > > > > sanction, nor, once licensed, being required to
> > > > > > be other than self-trained to maintain
> > > > > > continuing competency for doing safe work
> > > > > > within their chosen type. Professionals
> > > > > > qualified by training, testing and experience
> > > > > > who perform safe and acceptable work within an
> > > > > > area of their competency shall not be
> > > > > > sanctioned for being unlicensed in another job
> > > > > > class or licensing jurisdiction—beyond fair
> > > > > > registration cost.  No more than 25% of
> > > > > > regulatory board members shall have been
> > > > > > employed in the profession or industry
> > > > > > regulated.Again continuing to EMBRACE socialism.
> > > > > > > It should no longer be a 'mystery' why this
> > > > > > 'constitution' is NEVER fully presented NOR
> > > > > > that the author cannot support what drivel he presents.
> > > > > > > <sigh> Sad.
> > > > > > > Regard$,
> > > > > > > --MJThere is simply no other choice than
> > > > > > this: either abstain from interference in the
> > > > > > free play of the market, or to delegate the
> > > > > > entire management of production and
> > > > > > distribution to the government. Either
> > > > > > capitalism or socialism: there exists no middle way. -- Ludwig von
> > Mises
>
> > > > > >--
> > > > > >Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > > > >For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > > > > >* Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > > > > >* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > > > > >* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
> > > > --
> > > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
> > > > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
> > > --
> > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > For options & help see <a...
>
> ...
>
> 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.

Re: Wringing-the-Neck of Empty Ritual.

Mark, one of those socialist-communists who's scared to death of my
pro-democracy New Constitution, is undeserving of a reply. — John A.
Armistead — AKA NoEinstein
>
On Mar 25, 2:55 pm, Mark <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If you are a leader and have no followers or adherents .... you are not a
> leader
>
> if you are a writer and have no readers....  you are not a writer
>
> Do you get the point there Einstein ??
>
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 10:53 AM, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Dear Jonathan:  If I had wanted to have the opinions of others
> > influence anything, I would have sought public office and had my
> > insightful solutions neutered in committees and on the floor of the
> > House and the Senate.  I realized, early on, that the status quo
> > governmental processes are so screwed-up that our country has gotten
> > away from the "leave-me-alone to make-my-own-way" ideals of the
> > founding fathers.  Not a single person would have risked their lives
> > to come to America if they had supposed every hard-earned dollar they
> > make would be taxed and controlled to serve the LAZY members of
> > society who want the right to vote, but are unwilling to support their
> > own weight in society.
>
> > It was only after the Civil War that media coverage started showing
> > photographs of political candidates and of rallies and conventions.
> > From that day forward, ego-maniacal career politicians became the
> > norm.  And those were treated like (unconstitutional) royalty by the
> > media—which is largely responsible for the long, slow decline of the
> > US economy.  My New Constitution will pin-back-the-ears of the corrupt
> > US media, and remove all undue influences by those purporting to
> > assess the events of the day.  Once John Q. Public starts watching
> > news COVERAGE rather than 24-7 news commentary, the USA will again be
> > on the path to success and prosperity for the vast majority of
> > hardworking Americans!  —  John A. Armistead —  Patriot
>
> > On Mar 24, 12:39 pm, Jonathan Ashley <jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> > wrote:
> > > John,
>
> > > I am fully aware that my opinions "are neither sought, considered, nor
> > > appreciated." It appears that no one's opinions are ever "sought,
> > > considered, nor appreciated" by you. Unfortunately for your ego, the
> > > opinions of others are a necessary requisite for the passage of YOUR New
> > > Constitution. Unless, of course, you plan on seceding from the Union to
> > > create a one-man nation.
>
> > > On 03/24/2011 09:19 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
>
> > > > Jonathan:  Judging from quick scans of two of your TOME '+ new posts',
> > > > you lack the ability to be concise in your wording of ideas.  I don't
> > > > have the time, nor the desire, to personally explain to you things
> > > > that I've already explained in detail, if you would only read back
> > > > into my thread.  Please quit bugging me to get personal with you about
> > > > my New Constitution.  I can assure you, Jonathan, that your opinions
> > > > in these regards are neither sought, considered, nor appreciated.  ï¿½
> > > > J. A. A. �
> > > > On Mar 23, 12:47 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >> John,
>
> > > >> If, as you stated earlier, YOUR New Constitution "defines the limits
> > of
> > > >> both business, social, and governmental influences of our lives."
>
> > > >> Will it allow me the right to live my life in any way I choose so long
> > > >> as I respect the equal rights of others?
>
> > > >> Will it allow me to defend my right to life, liberty, and
> > > >> property-rights � rights that existed naturally before any
> > government
> > > >> was created?
>
> > > >> Will it allow me the freedom to travel unrestricted � a right that
> > > >> existed naturally before any government was created?
>
> > > >> Will it limit government initiation of force to actions that involve
> > the
> > > >> prior initiation of force by others � such as murder, rape, robbery,
> > > >> kidnapping, and fraud?
>
> > > >> Will it allow businesses to compete on equal footing � no special
> > > >> privileges to Monsanto, AT&T, Lockheed Martin, etc.?
>
> > > >> I could continue, but you have a tendency to not answer any questions
> > �
> > > >> preferring instead to resort to name calling. Will this instance be
> > any
> > > >> different?
>
> > > >> On 03/23/2011 08:51 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
>
> > > >>> Dear Jonathan:  You don't qualify to interpret even one sentence of
> > my
> > > >>> New Constitution!  The proper function of government is to pass only
> > > >>> the minimum number of laws to be sure capitalism�the concept of
> > which
> > > >>> has existed for millennia�doesn't become unfair or burdensome to
> > the
> > > >>> people.  There are no "czars" or government officials required to
> > pull
> > > >>> any of the strings.
> > > >>> Maximum civil liberties parallel having the MINIMUM of government
> > > >>> interaction with the people.  And that is NOT anarchy.  My New
> > > >>> Constitution clearly defines the limits of both business, social, and
> > > >>> governmental influences of our lives.  I recommend to others (than
> > > >>> Jonathan) my recently published book: "The Shortest Distance; Harmony
> > > >>> Through Prosperity."  from Amazon, and Barnes and Noble.  There is a
> > > >>> chapter on spheres of freedom that explains how your personal
> > freedoms
> > > >>> are limited only when those directly and negatively impact the
> > > >>> freedoms of others.  If anyone thinks they have the "freedom" to tell
> > > >>> others how to live their lives, I would suggest you immediately
> > moving
> > > >>> out of the USA.  No "group" nor individuals will have the power to
> > > >>> limit your personal liberties�trust me on that!  ï¿½  John A.
> > Armistead
> > > >>> � Patriot
> > > >>> On Mar 22, 7:02 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>>> John,
> > > >>>> Hopefully you realize that the term "capitalism" was non-existent
> > when
> > > >>>> the Constitution was written. It first appeared circa 1854.
> > > >>>> Setting that aside, in pure capitalism, also called the free-market
> > > >>>> system, all economic decisions are made _without government
> > > >>>> intervention_. Yet YOUR New Constitution appears to ignore that
> > concept.
> > > >>>> Any constitution that wants to promote free market enterprise should
> > by
> > > >>>> necessity prevent government intervention into business.
> > > >>>> I must also point out that if one has to codify "maximum civil
> > > >>>> liberties" (as YOUR New Constitution is want to do) it implies that
> > a
> > > >>>> government has control over ones life. Otherwise one would have
> > complete
> > > >>>> liberty without such need.
> > > >>>>       *LIBERTY,* n. [L. libertas, from liber, free.]
> > > >>>>       1. Freedom from restraint, in a general sense, and applicable
> > to the
> > > >>>>       body, or to the will or mind.*
> > > >>>>       CIVIL*, a. Relating to the community, or _to the policy and
> > > >>>>       government of the citizens and subjects of a state_;
> > > >>>> On 03/22/2011 03:35 PM, NoEinstein wrote:
> > > >>>>> Mark, if you feel that way, then you too are a
> > socialist-communist�or
> > > >>>>> else you can't read and comprehend.  Attack me in any way, and you
> > > >>>>> attack fair, free-enterprise capitalism and having maximum civil
> > > >>>>> liberties for the vast majority of Americans.  Until you can
> > recognize
> > > >>>>> those facts, I have you correctly pegged-through-the-heart with a
> > > >>>>> sharply pointed wooden stake.  ï¿½ NE �
> > > >>>>> On Mar 22, 11:55 am, Mark<markmka...@gmail.com>      wrote:
> > > >>>>>> Kinda like you and your supposed "constitution" that goes beyond
> > the scope
> > > >>>>>> of a REAL Constitution ie.
> > > >>>>>> *The fundamental law, written or unwritten, that establishes the
> > character
> > > >>>>>> of a government by defining the basic principles to which a
> > society must
> > > >>>>>> conform; by describing the organization of the government and
> > regulation,
> > > >>>>>> distribution, and limitations on the functions of different
> > government
> > > >>>>>> departments; and by prescribing the extent and manner of the
> > exercise of its
> > > >>>>>> sovereign powers.*
> > > >>>>>> *
> > > >>>>>> *
> > > >>>>>> ***Go, get a new life. **what you are doing is a waste of your
> > time and most
> > > >>>>>> importantly....MINE. I have to read all the drivel (your
> > "constitution"
> > > >>>>>> posts) as well as all the meaningful stuff every day on this
> > forum. What you
> > > >>>>>> have written and displayed so far IS A JOKE.*
> > > >>>>>> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 9:33 AM, NoEinstein<
> > noeinst...@bellsouth.net>wrote:
> > > >>>>>>> MJ:  All of those quotations of others that you cut and paste
> > aren't
> > > >>>>>>> increasing your status in the groups one bit.  And haven't you
> > heard?
> > > >>>>>>> It isn't polite to YELL (use larger type size).  You are a pest
> > on my
> > > >>>>>>> post, simply because you know I have a lot of things going for
> > me.  In
> > > >>>>>>> the perhaps years you have "tooted" your one page constitution,
> > you
> > > >>>>>>> haven't gotten many readers, have you.  Please make a "quote" of
> > your
> > > >>>>>>> own worthy of being in Bartlett's.  If you can't do that, then
> > you
> > > >>>>>>> should seriously consider getting another (pretend) hobby.  ï¿½
> > J. A. A.
> > > >>>>>>> �
> > > >>>>>>> On Mar 21, 10:11 am, MJ<micha...@america.net>      wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>> And yet AGAIN ... you offer a response.
> > > >>>>>>>> SADLY, you offer no support to your claims.
> > > >>>>>>>> Regard$,
> > > >>>>>>>> --MJMuch of the intellectual legacy of Marx is an
> > anti-intellectual
> > > >>>>>>> legacy. It has been said that you cannot refute a sneer. Marxism
> > has taught
> > > >>>>>>> many-inside and outside its ranks-to sneer at capitalism, at
> > inconvenient
> > > >>>>>>> facts or contrary interpretations, and thus ultimately to sneer
> > at the
> > > >>>>>>> intellectual process itself. This has been one of the sources of
> > its
> > > >>>>>>> enduring strength as a political doctrine, and as a means of
> > acquiring and
> > > >>>>>>> using political power in unbridled ways. -- Thomas SowellAt 10:06
> > AM
> > > >>>>>>> 3/21/2011, you wrote:Party crashers, like MJ, are undeserving of
> > being
> > > >>>>>>> replied to.
>
> ...
>
> 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.