Dear Einstein..... It doesn't matter... anything you said does not address the issue... until the document is presented as a whole it can not be Amended. It may be revised, but NOT amended. Further if this very small fact on the use of concise language to allow for no misinterpretations is bothersome to you then simply give it up, you are sounding like Obama...Its true because he says so. Sorry, that doesn't fly.
On Feb 23, 8:53 pm, NoEinstein <[email protected]> wrote: > On Feb 23, 2:37 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Einstein... If it comes in the original document it can not be an > > "Amendment" > > Dear Anointed One: My New Constitution is developed from, and expands > upon, the original Constitution. Things like the 2nd Amendment are so > well known that I kept the amendment numbers, sometimes expanding on > and clarifying the language. When there was a totally new subject > category without an obvious location, as from the original > Constitution, I gave those new subjects amendment numbers. The voters > will, of course, get to vote on the whole New Constitution package, > including those "new" amendments. If I had simply used amendments to > the original Constitution to express my improvements, the number of > amendments would have exceeded four hundred. The way I have handled > things is the best, I can assure you. — John A. Armistead — Patriot > > > > > > > > > > > 37th Amendment: > > No person, organization nor special interest group shall propose > > or organize the boycott of a business(es); however, individual > > Citizens can freely choose where to do business. Flagrant violation > > is a felony, and a business harmed may sue in civil court. Amnesty— > > but not citizenship for illegals—shall be granted to all persons > > imprisoned, or about to be sentenced to imprisonment, for non violent > > crimes that occurred before the adoption of this New Constitution. > > At > > the discretion of the apt prison warden, or of a judge having > > jurisdiction, persons with a singular conviction of a violent crime > > whose civil rights treatment, likely, would not meet the > > requirements, > > herein, shall be granted amnesty. > > > On Feb 11, 7:28 pm, NoEinstein <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Dear MJ: For you "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing." You've > > > copied excellent quotes from Walter Lippman and others. Those people, > > > in spite of their excellent rhetoric, never ventured to correct the > > > problems they had observed. Within hours of my observing non-fair or > > > non-functioning aspects of government, the judiciary, or the business > > > "norms" in this country, I would be writing the most concise > > > correction for those problems. Many times, the correction was from a > > > combination of two or more clauses, often not closely spaced. Keeping > > > my document to just ten ledger pages caused me to have to eliminate > > > the verbal deadwood. Computer technology, and years of work, would > > > have (if I had had just that intent) allowed reducing the words in the > > > Constitution by 1/3rd, while improving the clarity. > > > > The format looks like many sentences run together. Often times those > > > sentences are powerful. The ordering of things follows the original > > > Constitution in most cases. When there were whole new clauses without > > > precedent, such have been added as though being amendments. Of course > > > the citizens will get to vote on ratifying the entire New > > > Constitution, and those very important amendments. This is an > > > example: > > > > "36th Amendment: All campaign contributions to candidates for public > > > office shall be made anonymously through a Federal Campaign > > > Contribution Clearing House, and such shall limit individual > > > contributions per election, per candidate, to $1,000.00, and limit > > > corporate contributions to $10,000 per election, per candidate > > > (adjustable for inflation). With the exception of contributions from > > > one’s family or business associates, accepting contributions from any > > > other known source shall disqualify a candidate for office. > > > > 37th Amendment: > > > No person, organization nor special interest group shall propose > > > or organize the boycott of a business(es); however, individual > > > Citizens can freely choose where to do business. Flagrant violation > > > is a felony, and a business harmed may sue in civil court. Amnesty— > > > but not citizenship for illegals—shall be granted to all persons > > > imprisoned, or about to be sentenced to imprisonment, for non violent > > > crimes that occurred before the adoption of this New Constitution. At > > > the discretion of the apt prison warden, or of a judge having > > > jurisdiction, persons with a singular conviction of a violent crime > > > whose civil rights treatment, likely, would not meet the requirements, > > > herein, shall be granted amnesty. > > > > MJ, you seem to be on-the-fence whether you concur with what I'm > > > doing. I invite your more specific comments, because time does not > > > allow me to be as wordy in future replies. Your "$" salutation amuses > > > me. A functioning capitalist system will put the most dollars into > > > the deserving (hard working) people's pockets. I hope you agree. — > > > John A. Armistead — Patriot. > > > > I invite those who are interested to read my recently published book: > > > "The Shortest Distance; Harmony Through Prosperity", available at > > > Amazon and B. & N > > > > On Feb 10, 10:08 pm, MJ <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >(3.) Our Constitution details the procedures associated with the > > > > > Electoral College System for APPROXIMATING the democratic votes of the > > > > > People. In pioneer times, the Electoral College was the only workable > > > > > way to get the votes relayed to Washington. Before there was such > > > > > thing as even a telegraph, it was electors on horseback, or nothing. > > > > > But the SPIRIT of the Constitution demands that when technology—such > > > > > as we have, now—enables the accurate counting of the votes of the > > > > > People in a single day, that both the People AND democracy are best > > > > > served by letting the popular votes decide elections! Any President > > > > > who takes an oath to “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution”, > > > > > must preserve, protect, and defend the OBJECTIVES of the Constitution, > > > > > NOT just the horse and buggy era… ’traditions’ which are no longer > > > > > serving the best interests of the People! > > > > > There is no such thing as an 'Electoral College'. The DESIGN was for > > > > > these various State Electors to NEVER come to a consensus, but instead > > > > > to serve as a 'search committee' of sorts. The House of > > > > > Representatives > > > > > would then choose the president. This did not occur in practice > > > > > (except > > > > > once). > > > > [D] Ditto the pedantry part in [C]. > > > > You are obviously confused. > > > > Regard$, > > > > --MJThe art of politics, under democracy, is simply the art of ringing > > > > it. Two branches reveal themselves. There is the art of the demagogue, > > > > and there is the art of what may be called, by a shot-gun marriage of > > > > Latin and Greek, the demaslave. They are complementary, and both of > > > > them are degrading to their practitioners. The demagogue is one who > > > > preaches doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots. > > > > The demaslave is one who listens to what these idiots have to say and > > > > then pretends that he believes it himself. -- H.L. Mencken -- 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.
