Jonathan: My rationality for pegging you an outlaw and a traitor should be evident to anyone who has read my pro-people New Constitution that I've regularly detailed in Sections. Anyone, like you, who has a holier-than-thou tone doesn't have the value system to judge anything. Be content with looking things up in your elementary school dictionary, Jonathan. That's all the discourse you'll ever get. — J. A. A. — > On Apr 1, 4:09 pm, Jonathan Ashley <[email protected]> wrote: > John, > > If you truly believe I have "no virtues worthy of... being allowed to > continue to live on this Earth," why don't you stop by sometime and we > can discuss this in person. > > As for my being "an outlaw to humanity," how do you believe that is > possible? > > *OUTLAW,* n. A person excluded from the benefit of the law, or > deprived of its protection. > > *HUMANITY*, n. The peculiar nature of man, by which he is > distinguished from other beings. > > How did you determine that humanity is law? > > On 04/01/2011 11:38 AM, NoEinstein wrote: > > > > > > > > > I can't be put on the defensive regarding the most highly-motivated, > > for-the-people document ever written. Jonathan, the socialist- > > communist, is bent on destroying the USA. He has no virtues worthy of > > his being allowed to continue to live on this Earth. He is an outlaw > > to humanity, along with Mark and MJ. I'm amazed that Keith can't see > > what rascals he purports to understand and tolerate! � J. A. > > Armistead � Patriot > > On Mar 29, 1:05 pm, Jonathan Ashley<[email protected]> > > wrote: > >> John, > > >> The problem is you don't defend your document. If you were to defend it, > >> you would have to engage in dialogue. Instead, you resort to personal > >> attacks against those who pose questions - failing in every instance > >> thus far to answer any posed questions. You are nothing more than a > >> hypocrite. > > >> On 03/29/2011 09:23 AM, NoEinstein wrote: > > >>> Jonathan: You, like so many in the groups, seek to elevate your non- > >>> existent status by attacking the work of your intellectual and > >>> creative superiors. As required by the original Constitution, I > >>> only... "preserve, protect, and defend" my document from the attacks > >>> of lame brains like you, MJ and Mark. My time would be better spent > >>> writing more essays. � J. A. A. � > >>> On Mar 28, 11:59 am, Jonathan Ashley<[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>>> John, > >>>> Why won't you face the fact that you just don't like YOUR New > >>>> Constitution being criticized. > >>>> On 03/28/2011 08:00 AM, NoEinstein wrote: > >>>>> Jonathan: For your information, no socialist-communist will ever get > >>>>> a chance to serve in, or be employed by government. The "input" that > >>>>> you seek to destroy the USA isn't available to tyrants like you. � J. > >>>>> A. A. � > >>>>> On Mar 26, 7:36 pm, Jonathan Ashley<[email protected]> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> Once again John has resorted to cut and paste name calling rather than > >>>>>> engage in meaningful dialog. > >>>>>> On 03/26/2011 03:53 PM, NoEinstein wrote: > >>>>>>> Jonathan Ashley, the socialist-communist, is undeserving of a reply. > >>>>>>> � J. A. A. � > >>>>>>> On Mar 25, 2:41 pm, Jonathan Ashley<[email protected]> > >>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> John, > >>>>>>>> I am shocked. I am in agreement with your statement, "In the case of > >>>>>>>> contract law, a FAIR contract is one in which both parties to the > >>>>>>>> contract are happy with the deal." That is voluntary interaction. > >>>>>>>> That > >>>>>>>> is how things should be. > >>>>>>>> However, you lose me with, "If a person thinks they have been treated > >>>>>>>> unfairly by government or by business they can sue in civil court and > >>>>>>>> let the jury decide." Would not a better (and less expensive) > >>>>>>>> solution > >>>>>>>> be to enter into a private contract with an arbitration firm that > >>>>>>>> has no > >>>>>>>> vested interest in the outcome of the arbitration? No one would > >>>>>>>> need, as > >>>>>>>> you have phrased it, "to go to any czar to see what the God-damned > >>>>>>>> government has to say!" Yet, if we follow your remedy when "treated > >>>>>>>> unfairly by government," we must seek redress from an arm of the > >>>>>>>> government that has treated us unfairly. > >>>>>>>> How can government be the problem and the solution at the same time? > >>>>>>>> Existing tax courts are a prime example of how this does not work. > >>>>>>>> How > >>>>>>>> does one get remedy from the IRS when both the judge sitting on the > >>>>>>>> bench of a tax court and the prosecutor are biased toward the > >>>>>>>> collection > >>>>>>>> of taxes for their very existence? A private arbitration firm would > >>>>>>>> have > >>>>>>>> no vested interest either way. > >>>>>>>> Even if we accept that "sue in civil court and let the jury decide" > >>>>>>>> is > >>>>>>>> the way to proceed, it is incompatible with your want of "democracy." > >>>>>>>> Will the population collectively sit on every jury? > >>>>>>>> *DEMOCRACY*, n. [Gr. People, and to possess, to govern.] > >>>>>>>> Government > >>>>>>>> by the people; a form of government, in which the supreme > >>>>>>>> power is > >>>>>>>> lodged in the hands of the people collectively, or in which > >>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>> people exercise the powers of legislation. Such was the > >>>>>>>> government > >>>>>>>> of Athens. > >>>>>>>> On 03/25/2011 10:36 AM, NoEinstein wrote: > >>>>>>>>> Jonathan: You are a hopeless case. No one is needed to explain the > >>>>>>>>> 'Golden Rule': "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." > >>>>>>>>> And no prudent person has trouble knowing what is fair. In the case > >>>>>>>>> of contract law, a FAIR contract is one in which both parties to the > >>>>>>>>> contract are happy with the deal. If a person thinks they have been > >>>>>>>>> treated unfairly by government or by business they can sue in civil > >>>>>>>>> court and let the jury decide. Those with a conscience (but not > >>>>>>>>> you) > >>>>>>>>> know, instinctively, when they are being fair to others. No one > >>>>>>>>> needs > >>>>>>>>> to go to any czar to see what the God-damned government has to say! > >>>>>>>>> Give up your hobby of replying on Political Forum. You don't have > >>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>> reasoning ability of a (blind) mole. � J. A. A. � > >>>>>>>>> On Mar 24, 2:40 pm, Jonathan Ashley<[email protected]> > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> John, > >>>>>>>>>> Are you serious? "Fair play and democracy shall have supremacy in > >>>>>>>>>> the USA!" > >>>>>>>>>> Who decides what is "fair play"? You? Mob rule? > >>>>>>>>>> "Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting to decide what's for > >>>>>>>>>> lunch." > >>>>>>>>>> On 03/24/2011 09:36 AM, NoEinstein wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> Dear Jonathan: If you had spent 14 years of your life writing a > >>>>>>>>>>> New > >>>>>>>>>>> Constitution for the benefit of most Americans, you'd realize that > >>>>>>>>>>> "ego" just wouldn't be a suitable enough motive. Apparently, I > >>>>>>>>>>> pegged > >>>>>>>>>>> you right that you are simply jealous that I have already > >>>>>>>>>>> accomplished > >>>>>>>>>>> things you've only talked about. Conservatives such as Glenn > >>>>>>>>>>> Beck and > >>>>>>>>>>> Rush Limbaugh like to talk about this country's problems, but > >>>>>>>>>>> can't be > >>>>>>>>>>> taken seriously that they actually want those problems to be > >>>>>>>>>>> solved. > >>>>>>>>>>> Judge Andrew Napolitano has close to the right assessments of the > >>>>>>>>>>> unconstitutionality of much that the WH is doing. But he always > >>>>>>>>>>> grins > >>>>>>>>>>> and stops short of calling for the immediate arrest of Barack > >>>>>>>>>>> Obama > >>>>>>>>>>> for TREASON. My New Constitution will hang any public official > >>>>>>>>>>> not > >>>>>>>>>>> upholding this simple sworn statement: "Fair play and democracy > >>>>>>>>>>> shall > >>>>>>>>>>> have supremacy in the USA!" Since socialism and communism are the > >>>>>>>>>>> anti-theses of fair play and of democracy, I highly recommend > >>>>>>>>>>> that no > >>>>>>>>>>> socialist-communist-minded air-heads ever seek public office. If > >>>>>>>>>>> they > >>>>>>>>>>> do, there could become a shortage of hangman's nooses! � John > >>>>>>>>>>> A. > >>>>>>>>>>> Armistead � Patriot > >>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 23, 12:50 pm, Jonathan Ashley<[email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> It always comes back to John's ego: "I suspect you can't see the > >>>>>>>>>>>> positive tone, because you are jealous of my commitment and > >>>>>>>>>>>> talent to > >>>>>>>>>>>> accomplish what I have." > >>>>>>>>>>>> On 03/23/2011 09:05 AM, NoEinstein wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear Mark: Should I be flattered that you remember what I say > >>>>>>>>>>>>> from > >>>>>>>>>>>>> one day to the next? If indeed you can read and comprehend, you > >>>>>>>>>>>>> wouldn't need to put those words in capitals. Unlike you and > >>>>>>>>>>>>> MJ, I > >>>>>>>>>>>>> don't depend on YELLING to make my points. If you find what I'm > >>>>>>>>>>>>> writing to be interesting enough to read every day, then you are > >>>>>>>>>>>>> either very much in favor of what I'm saying or very threatened > >>>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>> thus opposed. The "tone" of my document is pro control of > >>>>>>>>>>>>> government > >>>>>>>>>>>>> by the people; maximum civil liberties; having the most > >>>>>>>>>>>>> efficient use > >>>>>>>>>>>>> of tax dollars; respect for the environment; and respect for the > >>>>>>>>>>>>> rights of others. I suspect you can't see the positive tone, > >>>>>>>>>>>>> because > >>>>>>>>>>>>> you are jealous of my commitment and talent to accomplish what I > >>>>>>>>>>>>> have. If you are FOR the people, Mark, embrace my New > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Constitution. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> If you are AGAINST the people, then stop replying on my posts. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> No > >>>>>>>>>>>>> socialist-communists are welcomed in the USA! � John A. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Armistead � > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Patriot > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 22, 7:50 pm, Mark<[email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The biggest problem Einstein will have with his "New > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Constitution" is that > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> we CAN READ AND COMPREHEND. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The other immediate problem is that he can't remember one day > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to the next > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> what he says. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 4:47 PM, MJ<[email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Asked and answered -- only you tried to change the subject > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> while pretending > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it did not occur. ELSEWHERE in THIS thread: Socialism and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> communism are > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the anti-thesis of a representative republic or a democracy. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My New > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Constitution RETURNS civil liberties to the People and will > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fire, jail or > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hang those in government who support socialism and communism. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When you > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attack my New Constitution with your "include me" talk, you > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are attacking > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> THE most pro capitalism and pro civil liberties person on the > > ... > > 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.
