Dear Jonathan: Get this and get this good: Your "pushy" attitude on MY post about MY New Constitution pegs you as a likely socialist- communist. You are not wanted here, nor anywhere else in the USA! — John A. Armistead — Patriot > On Feb 23, 2:56 pm, Jonathan Ashley <[email protected]> wrote: > How does John expect to implement his New Constitution if no one is ever > allowed to read it? He sounds like a wanna-be dictator in the making. > > On 2/23/2011 11:45 AM, THE ANNOINTED ONE wrote: > > > That 40% of my New Constitution which has been made public has > > scarcely been commented on. I am NOT wishing to have your nor anyone > > else's feedback on what I have written! Most would love to see the > > entire document so that they can make grandiose criticisms about this > > or that. From my personal life, I have had head-to-head run-ins with > > our corrupt state, local, and federal governments that allow me to > > speak from personal experience that few if any other person could > > have > > had. That is why my New Constitution will immediately fire or kick > > out of office any public official or employee, including the > > President > > himself, who does not respond appropriately for a logical request of > > a > > single law-abiding citizen for the redress of a grievance. To wit: > > > Substitute "Obamacare" and thats what the DEMS slammed down your > > throats. > > > On Feb 22, 11:07 am, NoEinstein<[email protected]> wrote: > >> Dear Keith: Thanks for your rational-toned reply. My New > >> Constitution will indeed be copyrighted. But only those parts of it > >> not copied and adapted from the original, public-domain document. > >> This isn't being done for making money from the sale of copies, but to > >> be sure no crazies print 'modified copies' that would, maliciously, > >> make me look bad�as part of a socialist/communist plot to side-track > >> my efforts. > > >> I'm not sure you nor others realize that my document has, for fourteen > >> years, withstood the test of correcting the daily crises highlighted > >> in the news, and the regular injustices coming from our courts. What > >> is included is at least ten times broader in scope than the original > >> constitution. Realize that I have had the advantage (over the > >> Founding Fathers) of seeing what has and what hasn't worked with our > >> Constitution. > > >> That 40% of my New Constitution which has been made public has > >> scarcely been commented on. I am NOT wishing to have your nor anyone > >> else's feedback on what I have written! Most would love to see the > >> entire document so that they can make grandiose criticisms about this > >> or that. From my personal life, I have had head-to-head run-ins with > >> our corrupt state, local, and federal governments that allow me to > >> speak from personal experience that few if any other person could have > >> had. That is why my New Constitution will immediately fire or kick > >> out of office any public official or employee, including the President > >> himself, who does not respond appropriately for a logical request of a > >> single law-abiding citizen for the redress of a grievance. To wit: > > >> "1st Amendment: No law shall be made regarding the establishment of > >> peaceable religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, but > >> government, its campaigns, processes, slogans, and disbursements shall > >> be secular. No law nor private or civil action shall abridge: the > >> freedom of speech; the freedom of a fair and pro-democracy press or > >> other medium; the right of People to peaceably assemble; *** and the > >> right of any Citizen or group to petition government or any of its > >> branches or departments for redress of grievances. Citizens so > >> petitioning government shall receive appropriate, relevant, timely, > >> comprehensive, helpful and just responses from proper authorities who > >> have thoroughly read, understood, and addressed each salient aspect of > >> the grievances or requests for directions or clarifications. Failure > >> to so respond to a rightful petition for redress of a grievance shall, > >> on a single provable instance, terminate the apt one�s employment, > >> especially those in management or public office�including judges and > >> justices�who ignore, frustrate or give the run-around to any competent > >> Citizen who has been diligent in having a grievance properly > >> addressed, or in having his or her civil rights fully upheld. No > >> judge or justice shall presume that by performing the above required > >> duties, that they in any way might be compromising their objectivity > >> or fairness in court; justice be not �blind�, but well informed. > >> Freedom of the press or other medium mandates that there be reasonable > >> truthfulness in reporting. Wanton distortion of the truth, or > >> deliberate omission of the truth�except in cases of obvious fiction or > >> satire�is prohibited. Stating or implying that a particular news > >> medium has a collective voice (we) or position on any issue is > >> prohibited, as for example via: anonymous editorials; regularly > >> occurring accompanying comments; commentary programs financed by, or > >> ideologically screened by, the same news medium; editorials named as > >> being authored by management; editorial comments by others that are in > >> any way ideologically censored, omitted or screened; or by comments > >> occurring at specific times or designated locations that most would > >> come to associate with the management of such medium, even if such are > >> innocuous. No medium shall be a forum for promoting the ideology of > >> its management or owners, nor shall they employ anyone who uses such > >> job to hawk their personal political preferences�at risk of loss of > >> license or closure of the business. Flagrantly editing news to > >> promote the ideology of management is a felony. No medium shall > >> analyze, assess, summarize, or make subjective judgments about any > >> pending election or referendum. Nor shall they invite others outside > >> of the media to do so. But factual, thorough coverage of the > >> candidates or referenda issues�on an as occurs basis�is allowed, > >> provided there are no comments, nor actions, as above, and provided > >> the same unbiased coverage is given to all of the candidates or to all > >> of the referenda issues. It shall be a 10 year felony to repress > >> truthful news reporting in any medium by threatening legal action. No > >> medium can be sued for libel for presenting material authored by > >> others, but if a person is harmed by the medium�s content, they shall > >> be allowed to reply�without editing�in that medium. Each medium shall > >> respond to breaking news without considering the response of any other > >> medium. Injuries due to improper news coverage or non coverage shall > >> not be excused by the media response. A medium reporting on > >> government shall do so thoroughly, objectively, and with detachment� > >> being neither laudatory nor critical by form, and not repressing > >> thoughtful dissent nor its coverage. Every medium shall favor the > >> truth over supposition, without parity nor bias. False or deceptive > >> commercial advertising is prohibited. Deliberate use by any > >> candidate, their staffs or election committees, of false or deceptive > >> campaign speeches, slogans, advertisements, humor, or innuendo is a > >> felony. No organization, nor part of the media, nor any special > >> interest group(s) shall in any way endorse a slate of candidates for > >> public office; flagrant violation is a felony. No medium shall > >> display active public records without the free consent of the apt > >> parties." > > >> Keith, the above should highlight the extreme attention to detail I've > >> put into my document. No person, by a casual comment, shall have the > >> "right" to denigrate my efforts. The following proviso is at the > >> closing of my New Constitution: > > >> "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!" > > >> � John A. Armistead � Patriot > > >> On Feb 20, 12:54 pm, Keith In K�ln<[email protected]> wrote: > > >>> Good Afternoon John, > >>> Like Jonathan, Michael, and Mark, I too would like to see your New > >>> Constitution that you ave talked about for at least several years. > >>> Yes, I realize that you have posted various parts and pieces of this > >>> document, but why not post the damn thing, for us to read and try to > >>> understand? > >>> Why the hesitation? Are you concerned about some sort of copyright > >>> infringement? If that is the case, then I can understand.....To a degree, > >>> and you need only state that this is the cause of your hesitation. > >>> Although I disagree with Michael (MJ) on a number of occasions, I will say > >>> that he is a well thought, well meaning and logical gentleman and not one > >>> who is apt to hurl insult or personal attacks on the board. > >>> Just a thought, but obviously we'd love to see your work! > >>> KeithInTampa (Today) > >>> On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 7:30 PM, > >>> NoEinstein<[email protected]>wrote: > >>>> Folks: The following was prompted by a direct email to me. (See > >>>> below.) I'd like to share it with you. � John A. Armistead � > >>>> Patriot > >>>> 02/19/11 > >>>> Dear Robert (Prezioso): > >>>> My first essay 'title-set" on > > ... > > 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.
