Friday, April 1, 2011

Re: Wringing-the-Neck of Empty Ritual.

Jonathan: Get this, jerk: I've written and substantially completed
my New Constitution of the United States of America. No traitors to
this country get to question any portion of such. In fact, since
traitors aren't law-abiding citizens, YOU won't even get to vote! —
J. A. A. —
>
On Mar 31, 1:27 pm, Jonathan Ashley <jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
wrote:
> John,
>
> I find it enlightening that you won't define what you think a "Patriot"
> is. I also find it disturbing that you do not deny being "an agent
> provocateur for the CIA."
>
> On 03/31/2011 10:20 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Jonathan:  Your seeking answers to items of common knowledge shows you
> > to be motivated to destroy, not save, the USA.  The entire tone of my
> > New Constitution�over 50% of which has been posted�is pro power to the
> > individual citizens, and con power to those biased groups that so
> > regularly bypass the democratic ideal of one-person-one-vote, fairly
> > counted.  You are spinning your wheels.  I won't be answering any
> > questions from those with a clearly negative bent.  ï¿½ J. A. A. �
> > On Mar 31, 11:55 am, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> > wrote:
> >> John,
>
> >> Once again you have failed to answer even a single question posed to you.
>
> >> That you won't provide a definition for what you think a "Patriot" is
> >> says volumes. I am beginning to think your are an agent provocateur for
> >> the CIA.
>
> >> On 03/30/2011 09:27 PM, NoEinstein wrote:
>
> >>> Jonathan:  From the tone of your first reply, weeks ago, I knew you
> >>> were a negative person in talking about THE most positive for-the-
> >>> people document ever written.  There isn't a single person in the USA
> >>> with enough status as a patriot to have me explain even one sentence
> >>> of my New Constitution.  I've written such to be understandable by
> >>> ordinary Americans.  Too many important areas of "the law" were hidden
> >>> in codes of laws, out-of-sight of the man on the street needing to
> >>> know what laws say.  My New Constitution, alone, could run the country
> >>> without any other law being required to be written.  When the majority
> >>> of the man-on-the-street know my document, no policeman nor judge will
> >>> violate their rights with impunity.  Knowledge is POWER!  That's what
> >>> my New Constitution gives to the People!  ï¿½  J. A. Armistead �
> >>> Patriot
> >>> On Mar 29, 12:58 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> John,
> >>>> 1) Since you claim to be a Patriot, please provide YOUR definition of
> >>>> that word.
> >>>> 2) One does not need to "transcribe" the original Constitution, one
> >>>> merely has to perform a "cut and paste" action - a technique you are
> >>>> quite familiar with - as many sources of the Constitution exist on-line.
> >>>> 3) I would never spend 14 years making "that document" suit my "liking"
> >>>> since I firmly believe "that document" is inherently the cause of our
> >>>> existing problems. But if I were so inclined, I am certain it would not
> >>>> take me 14 years - not even 14 months - and it would certainly be less
> >>>> convoluted than your vain attempt.
> >>>> I would start with a Preamble such as this:
> >>>>       With the understanding that no Person has the Right to rule over
> >>>>       another, the Government instituted upon the adoption of this
> >>>>       Constitution shall be Restricted to the powers specifically granted
> >>>>       herein. The sole purpose of this Government shall be the protection
> >>>>       of the Right to Life, Liberty, and Property for all Persons living
> >>>>       within the limits of the several States. The exercise of a Right not
> >>>>       infringing upon the Right of another is not subject to Regulation.
> >>>> I would also attach a list of definitions for words of importance
> >>>> because people are want to change the meanings of words over time. I
> >>>> remember when "bad" meant "evil; opposed to good." Now half the
> >>>> population equates "bad" with "good."
> >>>> 4) YOUR "already-in-place New Constitution" is already "dead in the water."
> >>>> On 03/29/2011 09:18 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
> >>>>> Jonathan:  Do this: Transcribe the original Constitution, and spend
> >>>>> the next fourteen years making that document to suit your liking.
> >>>>> Then, you can get a referendum on your constitution.  My bet is that
> >>>>> you won't get the 60% of the votes required to change even one word of
> >>>>> my already-in-place New Constitution.  ï¿½  J. A. Armistead �  Patriot
> >>>>> On Mar 28, 11:56 am, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>> John,
> >>>>>> I read Article III of YOUR New Constitution in its entirety yesterday.
> >>>>>> It is both wordy and convoluted.
> >>>>>> Let's examine the first line of Section 8:
> >>>>>>        * It�s a felony for any person, organization, group, or special
> >>>>>>          interest � publicly or privately � to lobby judges or justices for
> >>>>>>          influencing their rulings; also, for any judge or justice to
> >>>>>>          accept a bribe in exchange for a judicial favor.
> >>>>>> It took you 39 words to state what can be stated more effectively in 26  
> >>>>>> words.
> >>>>>>        * The lobbying of Members of the Judicial system by any Person is
> >>>>>>          prohibited; as is the issuance of Favor by any Member of the
> >>>>>>          Judicial system.
> >>>>>> In addition to being wordy, YOUR New Constitution fails to provide
> >>>>>> remedy. One can provide such remedy by adding the following:
> >>>>>>        * Persons found guilty of Lobbying or the issuance of Favor under
> >>>>>>          Article III, Section 8, shall be imprisoned for not less than 10
> >>>>>>          Years and/or deported.
> >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>> "'My country, right or wrong' is a thing that no patriot would think of
> >>>>>> saying except in a desperate case. It is like saying 'My mother, drunk
> >>>>>> or sober.'"�Gilbert Keith Chesterton
> >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>> On 03/28/2011 07:55 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
> >>>>>>> Folks:  Jonathan shows his anti-America ideas with every word he
> >>>>>>> utters.  There are no moderators on this group.  So, he, MJ and Mark
> >>>>>>> hang-out here because my readership is high.  Those who love America
> >>>>>>> are invited to attack these socialist-communists.  I have better
> >>>>>>> things to be doing.  Thanks!  ï¿½ J. A. A. �
> >>>>>>> On Mar 26, 7:35 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> John,
> >>>>>>>> If "naive, pesky losers" like myself failed to ask questions regarding
> >>>>>>>> the excrement self-proclaimed intellectuals like yourself keep spilling
> >>>>>>>> forth, less-discerning individuals in this group might blindly accept
> >>>>>>>> the bull crap you have written.
> >>>>>>>> It is /highly/ unlikely that you will ever get the opportunity for an up
> >>>>>>>> or down vote on YOUR New Constitution. I say that because the casinos I
> >>>>>>>> visited during my recent trip to Las Vegas had no idea YOUR New
> >>>>>>>> Constitution even existed. If Vegas doesn't know about it, the masses
> >>>>>>>> necessary for its passage surely don't.
> >>>>>>>> In the unlikely event you ever have the opportunity to place YOUR New
> >>>>>>>> Constitution before the voters, it is my belief that ambiguous
> >>>>>>>> provisions such as "Every two years an unbiased review panel shall
> >>>>>>>> apprise the Citizens of the job performance grade, as herein, of seated
> >>>>>>>> judges and justices" and "It is TREASON for a judge or justice to rule
> >>>>>>>> with disfavor on the supremacy of a fair democracy" (both from Article
> >>>>>>>> III, Section 1) will insure more "down" votes than "up" - even from our
> >>>>>>>> dumbed-down society.
> >>>>>>>> On 03/26/2011 03:48 PM, NoEinstein wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Jonathan:  The only opinions of others that matter are the one-day, up
> >>>>>>>>> or down votes for ratification of my New Constitution.  I don't have
> >>>>>>>>> time to explain to a naive, pesky loser like you the sociology and the
> >>>>>>>>> psychology of how and why people make up their minds one way or the
> >>>>>>>>> other.  I highly recommend "The Power of Positive Thinking" to you.
> >>>>>>>>> "Great things are never accomplished by the skeptical."  ï¿½ J. A. A.
> >>>>>>>>> �
> >>>>>>>>> On Mar 25, 1:12 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> John,
> >>>>>>>>>> You failed to address "the opinions of others are a necessary requisite
> >>>>>>>>>> for the passage of YOUR New Constitution." How do you envision YOUR New
> >>>>>>>>>> Constitution being enforced when you will never get it instituted?
> >>>>>>>>>> On 03/25/2011 09:53 AM, NoEinstein 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
>
> ...
>
> 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.

Jonathan: Get this, jerk: I've written and substantially completed
my New Constitution of the United States of America. No traitors to
this country get to question any portion of such. In fact, since
traitors aren't law-abiding citizens, YOU won't even get to vote! —
J. A. A. —
>
On Mar 31, 11:55 am, Jonathan Ashley <jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
wrote:
> John,
>
> Once again you have failed to answer even a single question posed to you.
>
> That you won't provide a definition for what you think a "Patriot" is
> says volumes. I am beginning to think your are an agent provocateur for
> the CIA.
>
> On 03/30/2011 09:27 PM, NoEinstein wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Jonathan:  From the tone of your first reply, weeks ago, I knew you
> > were a negative person in talking about THE most positive for-the-
> > people document ever written.  There isn't a single person in the USA
> > with enough status as a patriot to have me explain even one sentence
> > of my New Constitution.  I've written such to be understandable by
> > ordinary Americans.  Too many important areas of "the law" were hidden
> > in codes of laws, out-of-sight of the man on the street needing to
> > know what laws say.  My New Constitution, alone, could run the country
> > without any other law being required to be written.  When the majority
> > of the man-on-the-street know my document, no policeman nor judge will
> > violate their rights with impunity.  Knowledge is POWER!  That's what
> > my New Constitution gives to the People!  ï¿½  J. A. Armistead �
> > Patriot
>
> > On Mar 29, 12:58 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> > wrote:
> >> John,
>
> >> 1) Since you claim to be a Patriot, please provide YOUR definition of
> >> that word.
>
> >> 2) One does not need to "transcribe" the original Constitution, one
> >> merely has to perform a "cut and paste" action - a technique you are
> >> quite familiar with - as many sources of the Constitution exist on-line.
>
> >> 3) I would never spend 14 years making "that document" suit my "liking"
> >> since I firmly believe "that document" is inherently the cause of our
> >> existing problems. But if I were so inclined, I am certain it would not
> >> take me 14 years - not even 14 months - and it would certainly be less
> >> convoluted than your vain attempt.
>
> >> I would start with a Preamble such as this:
>
> >>      With the understanding that no Person has the Right to rule over
> >>      another, the Government instituted upon the adoption of this
> >>      Constitution shall be Restricted to the powers specifically granted
> >>      herein. The sole purpose of this Government shall be the protection
> >>      of the Right to Life, Liberty, and Property for all Persons living
> >>      within the limits of the several States. The exercise of a Right not
> >>      infringing upon the Right of another is not subject to Regulation.
>
> >> I would also attach a list of definitions for words of importance
> >> because people are want to change the meanings of words over time. I
> >> remember when "bad" meant "evil; opposed to good." Now half the
> >> population equates "bad" with "good."
>
> >> 4) YOUR "already-in-place New Constitution" is already "dead in the water."
>
> >> On 03/29/2011 09:18 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
>
> >>> Jonathan:  Do this: Transcribe the original Constitution, and spend
> >>> the next fourteen years making that document to suit your liking.
> >>> Then, you can get a referendum on your constitution.  My bet is that
> >>> you won't get the 60% of the votes required to change even one word of
> >>> my already-in-place New Constitution.  ï¿½  J. A. Armistead �  Patriot
> >>> On Mar 28, 11:56 am, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> John,
> >>>> I read Article III of YOUR New Constitution in its entirety yesterday.
> >>>> It is both wordy and convoluted.
> >>>> Let's examine the first line of Section 8:
> >>>>       * It�s a felony for any person, organization, group, or special
> >>>>         interest � publicly or privately � to lobby judges or justices for
> >>>>         influencing their rulings; also, for any judge or justice to
> >>>>         accept a bribe in exchange for a judicial favor.
> >>>> It took you 39 words to state what can be stated more effectively in 26  
> >>>> words.
> >>>>       * The lobbying of Members of the Judicial system by any Person is
> >>>>         prohibited; as is the issuance of Favor by any Member of the
> >>>>         Judicial system.
> >>>> In addition to being wordy, YOUR New Constitution fails to provide
> >>>> remedy. One can provide such remedy by adding the following:
> >>>>       * Persons found guilty of Lobbying or the issuance of Favor under
> >>>>         Article III, Section 8, shall be imprisoned for not less than 10
> >>>>         Years and/or deported.
> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> "'My country, right or wrong' is a thing that no patriot would think of
> >>>> saying except in a desperate case. It is like saying 'My mother, drunk
> >>>> or sober.'"�Gilbert Keith Chesterton
> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> On 03/28/2011 07:55 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
> >>>>> Folks:  Jonathan shows his anti-America ideas with every word he
> >>>>> utters.  There are no moderators on this group.  So, he, MJ and Mark
> >>>>> hang-out here because my readership is high.  Those who love America
> >>>>> are invited to attack these socialist-communists.  I have better
> >>>>> things to be doing.  Thanks!  ï¿½ J. A. A. �
> >>>>> On Mar 26, 7:35 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>> John,
> >>>>>> If "naive, pesky losers" like myself failed to ask questions regarding
> >>>>>> the excrement self-proclaimed intellectuals like yourself keep spilling
> >>>>>> forth, less-discerning individuals in this group might blindly accept
> >>>>>> the bull crap you have written.
> >>>>>> It is /highly/ unlikely that you will ever get the opportunity for an up
> >>>>>> or down vote on YOUR New Constitution. I say that because the casinos I
> >>>>>> visited during my recent trip to Las Vegas had no idea YOUR New
> >>>>>> Constitution even existed. If Vegas doesn't know about it, the masses
> >>>>>> necessary for its passage surely don't.
> >>>>>> In the unlikely event you ever have the opportunity to place YOUR New
> >>>>>> Constitution before the voters, it is my belief that ambiguous
> >>>>>> provisions such as "Every two years an unbiased review panel shall
> >>>>>> apprise the Citizens of the job performance grade, as herein, of seated
> >>>>>> judges and justices" and "It is TREASON for a judge or justice to rule
> >>>>>> with disfavor on the supremacy of a fair democracy" (both from Article
> >>>>>> III, Section 1) will insure more "down" votes than "up" - even from our
> >>>>>> dumbed-down society.
> >>>>>> On 03/26/2011 03:48 PM, NoEinstein wrote:
> >>>>>>> Jonathan:  The only opinions of others that matter are the one-day, up
> >>>>>>> or down votes for ratification of my New Constitution.  I don't have
> >>>>>>> time to explain to a naive, pesky loser like you the sociology and the
> >>>>>>> psychology of how and why people make up their minds one way or the
> >>>>>>> other.  I highly recommend "The Power of Positive Thinking" to you.
> >>>>>>> "Great things are never accomplished by the skeptical."  ï¿½ J. A. A.
> >>>>>>> �
> >>>>>>> On Mar 25, 1:12 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> John,
> >>>>>>>> You failed to address "the opinions of others are a necessary requisite
> >>>>>>>> for the passage of YOUR New Constitution." How do you envision YOUR New
> >>>>>>>> Constitution being enforced when you will never get it instituted?
> >>>>>>>> On 03/25/2011 09:53 AM, NoEinstein 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!  ï¿½  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
>
> ...
>
> 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.

I can't be put on the defensive regarding the most highly-motivated,
for-the-people document ever written. Jonathan, the socialist-
communist, is bent on destroying the USA. He has no virtues worthy of
his being allowed to continue to live on this Earth. He is an outlaw
to humanity, along with Mark and MJ. I'm amazed that Keith can't see
what rascals he purports to understand and tolerate! — J. A.
Armistead — Patriot
>
On Mar 29, 1:05 pm, Jonathan Ashley <jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
wrote:
> John,
>
> The problem is you don't defend your document. If you were to defend it,
> you would have to engage in dialogue. Instead, you resort to personal
> attacks against those who pose questions - failing in every instance
> thus far to answer any posed questions. You are nothing more than a
> hypocrite.
>
> On 03/29/2011 09:23 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Jonathan:  You, like so many in the groups, seek to elevate your non-
> > existent status by attacking the work of your intellectual and
> > creative superiors.  As required by the original Constitution, I
> > only... "preserve, protect, and defend" my document from the attacks
> > of lame brains like you, MJ and Mark.  My time would be better spent
> > writing more essays.  ï¿½  J. A. A. �
> > On Mar 28, 11:59 am, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> > wrote:
> >> John,
>
> >> Why won't you face the fact that you just don't like YOUR New
> >> Constitution being criticized.
>
> >> On 03/28/2011 08:00 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
>
> >>> Jonathan:  For your information, no socialist-communist will ever get
> >>> a chance to serve in, or be employed by government.  The "input" that
> >>> you seek to destroy the USA isn't available to tyrants like you.  ï¿½ J.
> >>> A. A. �
> >>> On Mar 26, 7:36 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> Once again John has resorted to cut and paste name calling rather than
> >>>> engage in meaningful dialog.
> >>>> On 03/26/2011 03:53 PM, NoEinstein wrote:
> >>>>> Jonathan Ashley, the socialist-communist, is undeserving of a reply.
> >>>>> � J. A. A. �
> >>>>> On Mar 25, 2:41 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>> John,
> >>>>>> I am shocked. I am in agreement with your statement, "In the case of
> >>>>>> contract law, a FAIR contract is one in which both parties to the
> >>>>>> contract are happy with the deal." That is voluntary interaction. That
> >>>>>> is how things should be.
> >>>>>> However, you lose me with, "If a person thinks they have been treated
> >>>>>> unfairly by government or by business they can sue in civil court and
> >>>>>> let the jury decide." Would not a better (and less expensive) solution
> >>>>>> be to enter into a private contract with an arbitration firm that has no
> >>>>>> vested interest in the outcome of the arbitration? No one would need, as
> >>>>>> you have phrased it, "to go to any czar to see what the God-damned
> >>>>>> government has to say!" Yet, if we follow your remedy when "treated
> >>>>>> unfairly by government," we must seek redress from an arm of the
> >>>>>> government that has treated us unfairly.
> >>>>>> How can government be the problem and the solution at the same time?
> >>>>>> Existing tax courts are a prime example of how this does not work. How
> >>>>>> does one get remedy from the IRS when both the judge sitting on the
> >>>>>> bench of a tax court and the prosecutor are biased toward the collection
> >>>>>> of taxes for their very existence? A private arbitration firm would have
> >>>>>> no vested interest either way.
> >>>>>> Even if we accept that "sue in civil court and let the jury decide" is
> >>>>>> the way to proceed, it is incompatible with your want of "democracy."
> >>>>>> Will the population collectively sit on every jury?
> >>>>>>        *DEMOCRACY*, n. [Gr. People, and to possess, to govern.] Government
> >>>>>>        by the people; a form of government, in which the supreme power is
> >>>>>>        lodged in the hands of the people collectively, or in which the
> >>>>>>        people exercise the powers of legislation. Such was the government
> >>>>>>        of Athens.
> >>>>>> On 03/25/2011 10:36 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
> >>>>>>> Jonathan:  You are a hopeless case.  No one is needed to explain the
> >>>>>>> 'Golden Rule': "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."
> >>>>>>> And no prudent person has trouble knowing what is fair.  In the case
> >>>>>>> of contract law, a FAIR contract is one in which both parties to the
> >>>>>>> contract are happy with the deal.  If a person thinks they have been
> >>>>>>> treated unfairly by government or by business they can sue in civil
> >>>>>>> court and let the jury decide.  Those with a conscience (but not you)
> >>>>>>> know, instinctively, when they are being fair to others.  No one needs
> >>>>>>> to go to any czar to see what the God-damned government has to say!
> >>>>>>> Give up your hobby of replying on Political Forum.  You don't have the
> >>>>>>> reasoning ability of a (blind) mole.  ï¿½ J. A. A. �
> >>>>>>> On Mar 24, 2:40 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> John,
> >>>>>>>> Are you serious? "Fair play and democracy shall have supremacy in the USA!"
> >>>>>>>> Who decides what is "fair play"? You? Mob rule?
> >>>>>>>> "Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting to decide what's for lunch."
> >>>>>>>> On 03/24/2011 09:36 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Dear Jonathan:  If you had spent 14 years of your life writing a New
> >>>>>>>>> Constitution for the benefit of most Americans, you'd realize that
> >>>>>>>>> "ego" just wouldn't be a suitable enough motive.  Apparently, I pegged
> >>>>>>>>> you right that you are simply jealous that I have already accomplished
> >>>>>>>>> things you've only talked about.  Conservatives such as Glenn Beck and
> >>>>>>>>> Rush Limbaugh like to talk about this country's problems, but can't be
> >>>>>>>>> taken seriously that they actually want those problems to be solved.
> >>>>>>>>> Judge Andrew Napolitano has close to the right assessments of the
> >>>>>>>>> unconstitutionality of much that the WH is doing.  But he always grins
> >>>>>>>>> and stops short of calling for the immediate arrest of Barack Obama
> >>>>>>>>> for TREASON.  My New Constitution will hang any public official not
> >>>>>>>>> upholding this simple sworn statement: "Fair play and democracy shall
> >>>>>>>>> have supremacy in the USA!"  Since socialism and communism are the
> >>>>>>>>> anti-theses of fair play and of democracy, I highly recommend that no
> >>>>>>>>> socialist-communist-minded air-heads ever seek public office.  If they
> >>>>>>>>> do, there could become a shortage of hangman's nooses!  ï¿½ John A.
> >>>>>>>>> Armistead � Patriot
> >>>>>>>>> On Mar 23, 12:50 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> It always comes back to John's ego: "I suspect you can't see the
> >>>>>>>>>> positive tone, because you are jealous of my commitment and talent to
> >>>>>>>>>> accomplish what I have."
> >>>>>>>>>> On 03/23/2011 09:05 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> Dear Mark:  Should I be flattered that you remember what I say from
> >>>>>>>>>>> one day to the next?  If indeed you can read and comprehend, you
> >>>>>>>>>>> wouldn't need to put those words in capitals.  Unlike you and MJ, I
> >>>>>>>>>>> don't depend on YELLING to make my points.  If you find what I'm
> >>>>>>>>>>> writing to be interesting enough to read every day, then you are
> >>>>>>>>>>> either very much in favor of what I'm saying or very threatened and
> >>>>>>>>>>> thus opposed.  The "tone" of my document is pro control of government
> >>>>>>>>>>> by the people; maximum civil liberties; having the most efficient use
> >>>>>>>>>>> of tax dollars; respect for the environment; and respect for the
> >>>>>>>>>>> rights of others.  I suspect you can't see the positive tone, because
> >>>>>>>>>>> you are jealous of my commitment and talent to accomplish what I
> >>>>>>>>>>> have.  If you are FOR the people, Mark, embrace my New Constitution.
> >>>>>>>>>>> If you are AGAINST the people, then stop replying on my posts.  No
> >>>>>>>>>>> socialist-communists are welcomed in the USA!  ï¿½ John A. Armistead �
> >>>>>>>>>>> Patriot
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 22, 7:50 pm, Mark<markmka...@gmail.com>            wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> The biggest problem Einstein will have with his "New Constitution" is that
> >>>>>>>>>>>> we CAN READ AND COMPREHEND.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> The other immediate problem is that he can't remember one day to the next
> >>>>>>>>>>>> what he says.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 4:47 PM, MJ<micha...@america.net>            wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Asked and answered -- only you tried to change the subject while pretending
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> it did not occur. 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!  ï¿½ 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
>
> ...
>
> 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: Why in the world would the NYT print this story - why not just point a finger at the CIA agents and tell the Libyans there they are

Not any more. Question is should it have been in the first place. Next
question is who leaked it to the NYT and why and who told them to, who
is behind the leak at the ultimate end. I just find it strange that the
NYT feels entitled to release anything like this with what was said
about it to begin with. If it was secret, if it was clandestine, if it
was authorized for the CIA to act, then it should not be up to the NYT
to decide to print the info.

On 04/01/2011 11:20 AM, GregfromBoston wrote:
> Note that the president has issued a secret finding - authorize the
> CIA - clandestine effort. What part of that tells us that the
> president
> wants this broadcast to the world. Note the word secret, CIA,
> clandestine. Which of those words do you not understand.
> -------------------------------------
>
> If you're reading about it in the New York Times, its neither
> clandestine nor secret.
>

--
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.

Fwd: March Straw Poll Results are in!



Palin Wins March Straw Poll; Paul in 2nd

Percentages tightening up

 
Congratulations to former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin who won the March Townhall/HotAir Straw Poll with 16.91% of the vote! For the second straight month Texas Congressman Ron Paul came in right behind her, this time amassing 16.02%. The results are starting to get really close in comparison to the previous months.

Minnesota Representative Michele Bachmann was the mover and shaker this month, gaining 1.47 percentage points. New Jersey Governor Chris Christie saw the biggest decrease in support, losing 1.42 percentage points. The second biggest decrease come from the winner Sarah Palin at 1.23 percentage points. Is this an indication that next month see a new candidate in the top spot? We will see!

Thank you for voting in the March Republican Straw Poll!

If you haven't already, please join our Facebook Page to get all the latest news on the Townhall/HotAir Straw Poll and the 2012 elections. Click the Facebook image and become a fan today!

The Townhall.com Presidential Straw Poll

We printed the February results in the latest issue of Townhall Magazine. Make sure to subscribe to get all the conservative content that is exclusive to the print edition and cannot be found anywhere on the web. If you want to stay up to date on the 2012 presidential election then you need Townhall Magazine! With your subscription you get a free book from a conservative author.




Subscribe or renew to Townhall Magazine and get your choice of a FREE book!


Townhall Magazine is the monthly news and opinion journal from the same team of right-thinking reporters, opinions makers, insiders and political leaders conservatives have trusted for 15 years. It's the place to find interviews with and profiles and writings of some of your favorite conservatives, including Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin, Thomas Sowell, Andrew Breitbart, Newt Gingrich, Walter Williams, Charles Krauthammer, George Will, Jonah Goldberg, Tim Pawlenty, Michele Bachmann, Wayne LaPierre, Mitt Romney, Pat Toomey, Mike Pence, Bill Bennett, Fred Thompson, and many more.

Townhall Magazine is exclusively in print. Townhall Magazine's coverage features investigative journalism, in-depth reporting, heavily researched analysis, interviews with the heavy hitters and powerful exposes--all exclusive to the magazine.

No other magazine offers you this brilliant combination of smart, conservative, in-depth reporting and opinion that truly reflects your values.

Townhall Magazine is taking "conservative magazines" to new heights with its investigative reporting and stories, conservative humor, photography, culture, and commentary from your favorites. Fresh. Intelligent. Conservative.



__________________________SUBSCRIPTION INFO__________________________

This email was sent to you because you signed up to receive conservative alerts on the Townhall.com network OR a friend forwarded it to you.

We respect and value your time and privacy. If you no longer would like to receive information about Townhall Magazine we will be happy to remove your address immediately.

You can unsubscribe by clicking here.

Or Send postal mail to:
Townhall Unsubscribe
1901 N. Moore St - Suite 701, Arlington, VA 22209

WERE YOU FORWARDED THIS NEWSLETTER?
You can get your own free subscription to this newsletter by clicking here.
NOT A CURRENT TOWNHALL MAGAZINE SUBSCRIBER?
Get Townhall Magazine today by clicking here!
* Copyright Townhall and its Content Providers.
All rights reserved.



--
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.