Sage, I can agree with that !!!! It needs a lot less knee jerk reaction and
a lot more plain english (of the day) reading.

On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 10:11 PM, Sage2 <[email protected]> wrote:

>       Hey Keith, Mark et al,
>
>     Suffice it to say that OUR Constitution need never be rewritten
> nor changed, but from time to time revisited to it's original intent
> and meaning, less personal interpretation. " It is what it is " and
> was not intended to be anything more nor anything less than that. The
> only true recourse the founding fathers wisely gave us was the "
> amendment " and even they should be rare and few. We should not try to
> fix what ain't broke by breaking that which don't need fixing !
>
>
> ************************************************************************************************************************************
>
> On Feb 26, 6:31 am, KeithInSeoul <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Greetings from Seoul Korea John!
> >
> > Uhm.....This seems to me, to be, "Much Ado, About Nothing".....
> >
> > We'd all like to read your "New Constitution";  but if ya don't want to
> > share it with the group, that is your perogative.
> >
> > The purpose of Political Forum is to share political thought, ideas,
> > commentary and opinion, as well as to comment on government, politics,
> world
> > affairs and current events.  (And occasionally,  pro football and
> > baseball!)  Your posts I find sometimes interesting and usually thought
> > provoking, so therein lied my initial interest in you posting your, "New
> > Constitution".   It was never my intent to get a shit storm started!
> >
> > If you take the time to read both Jonathan's and Michael's posts, you
> will
> > find that both men are thoughtful, and probably share many of the same
> > concerns as you do.  I consider myself a conservative libertarian, (not
> so
> > much a capitalist as I am one who beleives in protection of free market
> > enterprise, and I believe that there is a distinction between a, "free
> > market"  versus an economic system such as capitalism, of which I also
> > support and subscribe to.   Jonathan and Michael are damn near
> anarchists,
> > (and I say that with a smile on my face, I don't think either would agree
> > with me!!)  but the point being, is that instead of taking the route of
> many
> > of the nasty, hateful rhetorical smear merchants from the far left,
>  (e.g.;
> > the Wacko left socialist-elitist Moonbats)  who from time to time and on
> > occasion chime in here;  I would like to think that the thoughtful, well
> > reasoned conservative voices of Politicall Forum can have discussion, as
> > well as disagreement with a little more civility!
> >
> > At any rate,  have a good Saturday....Mine is almost over!
> >
> > KeithInSeoul
> >
> > On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 12:16 PM, NoEinstein <[email protected]
> >wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > MJ:  You are NOT wanted on this post!  In the last few weeks you've
> > > managed to give your cook-booked quotations of others, and your own
> > > breakfast-table-written "constitution" of sorts.  But you have not
> > > even gone back into my thread to read about my New Constitution, which
> > > is detailed in essays that highlight the apt portions of my document.
> > > And you obviously have no "Regard$" for anyone but yourself.  ***
> > > Since my base philosophy is pro-capitalism and pro minimumist
> > > government, when you attack me—the author-messenger—you are revealing
> > > yourself to be a socialist and probably a communist.  If it offends
> > > you that I have figured you out, take your "quotes" and your "regards”
> > > elsewhere.  You are not wanted here!  — J. A. A. —  Patriot
> >
> > > On Feb 25, 10:45 am, MJ <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > And yet ANOTHER fallacy spew.
> > > > Let's see this panacea of yours. What -- exactly
> > > > -- are you afraid of? That it is shit?
> >
> > > > Regard$,
> > > > --MJ
> >
> > > > "We can evade reality, but we cannot evade the
> > > > consequences of evading reality" -- Alyssa Rosenbaum
> >
> > > > At 10:36 AM 2/25/2011, you wrote:
> >
> > > > >Dear MJ:  You sir, are a total BUM!  What I have written describing
> my
> > > > >New Constitution and how such would be apt to events in the news
> would
> > > > >fill several "War and Peace"-size novels.  Not a single WORD of what
> I
> > > > >have written supports socialism nor communism!  I am in favor of
> > > > >having a super-efficient, minimum-size government that has close to
> > > > >zero interaction with individual citizens.  ‘My’ government will no
> > > > >longer keep records on the law-abiding citizens, because taxes will
> be
> > > > >value-added, only.  And I have nixed having the government maintain
> > > > >records of criminal investigations of anyone found to be innocent.
> > > > >Those on-file records tend to prejudice law enforcement to "convict"
> > > > >the person they failed to convict the last time.  My corrections of
> > > > >corrupt law enforcement practices, alone, should be justification
> > > > >enough to ratify my New Constitution!  Presently, the USA is a
> police
> > > > >state—with the strings being pulled by corrupt public figures.  And
> > > > >the courts have done whatever the political leaders dictate.  I’ve
> put
> > > > >them in their place, big time!
> >
> > > > >You, MJ, are little more than a party-crasher.  I do not appreciate
> in
> > > > >the least having you post your elementary version of "A"
> constitution
> > > > >of some kind.  Post your God-damned junk constitution under your
> name,
> > > > >not mine.  I am not playing games, here.  If you would like to get
> > > > >back into anyone's good graces, explain your political philosophy in
> > > > >two paragraphs or less.  Unless I see the words:  “I pro-capitalist
> > > > >and anti-socialist”… included, then I will know for sure that you
> are
> > > > >just some HACKER who is back-dooring your socialist-communist
> ideals.
> > > > >Anyone who says anything at all negative about my ideals can only be
> > > > >the latter.  — J. A. A. —
> >
> > > > >On Feb 23, 9:40 pm, MJ <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > In case anyone missed it ... anyone who ASKS to
> > > > > > see this 'Constitution' ... is labelled as a socialist-communist.
> > > > > > My guess is that this Constitution upholds,
> > > > > > endorses and hails ... socialism. THAT is the
> > > > > > true reason Armistead does not want to post it OR let anyone 'see
> > > it'.
> > > > > > Pity.
> >
> > > > > > Regard$,
> > > > > > --MJ
> >
> > > > > > "We can evade reality, but we cannot evade the
> > > > > > consequences of evading reality" -- Alyssa Rosenbaum
> >
> > > > > > At 09:33 PM 2/23/2011, you wrote:
> >
> > > > > > >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
> >
> > ...
> >
> > read more »- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> --
> 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.
>



-- 
*Mark M. Kahle H.*
*
*
*The cost of living hasn't affected its popularity.*

-- 
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.

Reply via email to