Good Afternoon (CET) John, Your proposed, "First Amendment" is interesting, and obviously written by someone who has been wronged by our judiciary. I can understand your premist first hand.
I don't think that you can improve upon the First Amendment as it is written today however. Who is it in your mind, that should be the determiner of facts, regarding, for instance: 1. Who determines whether, a person is, (A) "competent"; (B) whether his grievance is "legitimate"; and (C) whether his grievance has been properly addressed? 2. Who is the individual or entity who determines whether a news organization is broadcasting, "truth" or "fiction", and whether they have been diligent in attempting to broadcast the truth? I suggest that the system that we have now, although not at all perfect, is better than one that is controlled by a government. That a capitalist system, motivated by the ability to prosper, is the better way for any news organization to improve, and stay fair and balanced. I could expand on this, and give a number of examples, but in general, there will always be individuals who are searching for the truth, which is another prime motivator. n Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 1:06 PM, NoEinstein <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear Studio: You are mainly an airhead who gets offended being shown > to be wrong. I can assure you that any person who voluntarily gives > up his or her life for their nation, knows in their heart that they > are people of principle. The dictionaries side with me, not you, on > the definition of 'patriot'. So quit you bluster. You are impressing > no one. — John A. Armistead — Patriot! > > > On Jan 31, 6:32 pm, studio <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Jan 31, 6:03 pm, NoEinstein <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On Jan 31, 1:06 am, studio <[email protected]> wrote:> On Jan 30, > 11:38 pm, NoEinstein <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Never call yourself a Patriot. > > > > The term is given to you by others and not self proclaimed. > > > > > WRONG! > > > At the Alamo, a line was drawn in the sand. > > > > Calling yourself a Patriot has nothing to do with the Alamo. > > Not a damn one of those men called themselves Patriots. > > Cite me a reference if I'm wrong. > > > > > Those willing to > > > fight for the Texas cause were asked to cross that line. In short, > > > those willing to fight for a cause determine their own place in > > > history. > > > > The Mexican's fought and won that battle. > > And "the cause"? > > To grab land? > > Might makes right? > > The winner gets to write the history? > > > > > My Dictionary defines patriot: "One who loves his country, > > > and zealously guards its welfare; especially a defender of popular > > > liberty." > > > > Doesn't sound like guarding to me... well, maybe guarding what you > > want to guard of it. > > > > > If my spending fourteen plus years of my life writing my > > > New Constitution to SAVE the USA doesn't qualify as patriotism, I > > > don't suppose anyone can qualify. — John A. Armistead — Patriot! > > > > What it qualifies you as, is self proclaiming and self serving. > > It doesn't save anything, much less the US. > > Any Constitution written by one person is not a Constitution at all, > > it's Mein Kampf. > > -- > 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/<http://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.
