"A 'camel' is a horse designed in a committee." Yes indeed it is (in your mind). A camel is so well suited for its use where it exists that only fools own horses there. A horse is not capable of doing a camels work... and with the exception of speed (both in km/h and to the grave)... the inverse is not true.... try again.
On Feb 26, 5:54 am, NoEinstein <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear Mark, one of the airheads: "A 'camel' is a horse designed in a > committee." I happen to be among the most intelligent people ever > born on this Earth. I could have gone into... politics (God forbid!) > and had my talents negated in committees and in the daily empty > RITUAL. I had seen how departed from the Constitution our government > had become, and decided that the only solution would be to make our > constitution STRONGER. Along the way, I realized that too many really > important things were being left for being defined in subsequent > laws. So, I gradually added-in items that most Americans will > recognize as affecting their daily lives. Having those things be > visible in the New Constitution, itself, will have government working > quite well without "trusting" that the House (There will be no > senate.) can write some good laws. The best way to assure that only > good laws, acceptable to the majority of Americans, will be passed, is > my having raised the minimum vote for passage to 60%. (Note: 55% is > probationary, only.) I've also denied the media access to the > capital. That will remove most of the ego component from those > wishing to be "important", because they are in the public eye all the > time. I require that House members never have held public office nor > been employed by government (other than for possible military > service). So, there will be no more... "career" politicians! And I > limit the total number of... lawyers in public office to 20%, > maximum. Restrictions on lawyers in businesses, also, is crucial to > improving the working climate in this country, so no business will > ever try to take unfair advantage of their employees nor their > customers. Read back into my thread. I really don't have time to > keep "capsuling" my document—which has been developed over a 14-year > period to benefit the majority of Americans. — John A. Armistead — > Patriot > > On Feb 25, 11:24 am, Mark <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > My dearest Einstein.... it is misspelt on purpose... I am certainly NOT > > Anointed... > > > Since you would like to be correct in all things... THIS IS AN INTERNET > > FORUM > > > Definition is: An *Internet forum*, or *message board*, is an online > > discussion site where people can hold conversations in the form of posted > > messages. > > > What you are looking for is a self-serving BLOG as all members on a forum do > > have the right to respond to ANYTHING as they see fit in civil tone. > > > As to what you have done.... about twenty years to write a set of (your > > description) unfinished rules in the form of a constitution that you do want > > everyone to praise but don't want anyone to read or comment on... how Pelosi > > of you. > > > There are reasons that documents such as you are trying to produce are done > > by committee,at least with intelligent and educated people involved they > > are. There are reasons that every draft is sent to several people for input > > and polishing... > > > If those reasons escape you or you are not willing for whatever reason then > > it will die with you. > > > On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 9:41 AM, NoEinstein <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > Dear Anointed One: You can't even spell your own handle. I'm posting > > > NOT to get anyone's feed-back, but simply to inform people what I've > > > done. Frankly, I have better things to do than to banter with > > > shallows like you. — J. A. A. — > > > > On Feb 23, 10:24 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Your response to people is: <<<< 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>>> > > > > > How VERY Nancy Pelosi of you. > > > > > On Feb 23, 8:42 pm, NoEinstein <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Anointed One: If you agree with the mega pages I've written > > > > > explaining my New Constitution, I welcome you support. But when you > > > > > simply copy what I wrote, and substitute your own pet ideas, I'm not > > > > > sure if you are for a better and tougher constitution or not. > > > > > Concisely stated replies will be appreciated. — John A. Armistead — > > > > > Patriot > > > > > > On Feb 23, 2:45 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE <[email protected]> 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." > > > > > > > (The Anointed One wrote:) 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; > > ... > > 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.
