OK, MJ. We'll make you President for a day. Since you like to yell all the time, not one reader in a thousand takes you seriously about anything. Why do you YELL, MJ? Is that because you are ear deaf to anything logical that is said? Ha, ha, HA! — J. A. Armistead — > On Apr 19, 8:46 am, MJ <[email protected]> wrote: > Another ad nauseam approach? > Let's see, where was that -- aaah, here:1. Get our government out of the > entitlement business! Privatize > Social Security; Medicare; Medicaid; and Unemployment Insurance, etc. > Like the Republicans are now planning to do, protect those now in > programs from being hurt who are close to retirement. But unlike > Republicans, once and forever, get the USA out of managing the > entitlement business! If government pulls any of the strings, things > will start getting bad again, soon.Please explain how one privatizes Social > Security -- or why such needs to be privatized. > Similarly, do the SAME for Medicare/Medicaid, etc. > These unconstitutional programs should be abolished.2. Inform China and our > other creditors that the USA will not be > paying them any interest on their loans. We will repay the principal, > but only when doing so won’t jeopardize our recovery.Will have to consider > what the unintended consequences might entail ...3. Bring home 90% of US > troops within 90 days. Leave 10% of the > troops in bases around the world to serve as a front guard in case > redeployment is necessary.What happened to that Constitution thingy? Bring > home 100% of the troops ... 90 days may work. Dismantle > theunconstitutionalstanding army OR pass an amendment to keep it. IMMEDIATELY > slash the so-called 'defense' budget by at least half -- further cuts to > follow.4. Stop wasting billions and billions of dollars on political > campaigns! That money is going into the pockets of the media. Those > media rascals salivate over the ad money they generate by “talking up” > how ‘close’ the elections are going to be. Britt Hume, though a > conservative, keeps pumping air into Obama by talking about the money > Obama can spend (waste!) to get re elected. Barack Obama is a cash > cow for the media. That’s why no one in the media will call the > majority of Democrats CROOKS!<sigh> > Government should spend ZERO on campaigns. > Individuals (and their created groups, etc.) have the freedom and liberty to > spend as many dollars as they desire. > Remove the ability for Politicians to peddle pull (ie. follow the > constitution as written) and you eliminate the bulk. If Archer Daniels > Midland, for instance, does not reap zillions in subsidies and other > advantages (read: regulations), they are unlikely to be concerned with > pumping millions into various campaigns. If they receive nothing, who cares > if they continue to give millions.5. ‘Fat cats’ should stop being wimps! > Government has become no- > longer-legal STEALING from the supposed rich to give to the poor. The > Democrats talk about how Republicans are wanting to give tax breaks to > the wealthy while denying women medical screenings. Republicans > should be talking about how “Democrats are criminals for seeking > stolen benefits for themselves and other criminals!”That you fail to realize > that Ds and Rs are effectively the same is troubling. > The Income Tax should be abolished (thus ending the bulk of the class > warfare). Required dollars should be apportioned between the Sovereign States > -- with the States paying from dollars they raise as they choose (50 of them > in competition for Citizens) coupled with an across-the-board 3% tariff. No > borrowing is permissible EXCEPT for cash flow needs UNLESS War (in accordance > with AIS8C11) and then all extra proceeds go ONLY to that cause.1. The > Constitution does NOT allow political parties! Those arequasi governmental > bodies which get to decide who our candidates for > public office can be, and decide who “the leaders” in Congress are. > Because our country was conceived as a Representative Republic, such > fact tacitly mandates that each representative shall have identical > power! Seniority nor party affiliation can give more power to ANYONE!The > Constitution *does* allow Congress to make its OWN rules. Additionally PEOPLE > will organize into various factions (which is their liberty to do so). > What is needed, rather, is to eliminate the various CAMPAIGN and ELECTION > laws -- which have zero Constitutional basis -- which enable the Duopoly to > maintain their positions.2. The US Senate is an UNCONSTITUTIONAL oligarchy of > elitists who > effectively have been running-the-USA-into-the-ground since the birth > of this nation. Senators aren’t determined by having a parity of the > population which they each serve. Though the Senate was begrudgingly > included in the ‘words’ of the Constitution, it has never been within > the SPIRIT of the Constitution!Huh? The Senate served as the Representatives > of the States -- you know, those parties to the Constitution? Those parties > that put it into effect? Those parties charged with the power/authority to > amend that agreement? > Amendment 17 (which is unconstitutional per Article V -- 10 states have STILL > not ratified) should be rescinded/repealed/abolished. > This STATE check against Federal usurpation (along with others) need to be > restored.3. The principle of FAIR representation makes it UNCONSTITUTIONAL to > allow the State of Iowa to have more “power” in determining who our > candidates for President can be. And by the same general reasoning, > it makes the entire primary system UNCONSTITUTIONAL, because the > states with earlier-dated primaries always have the most influence in > determining who can run.Again, this is part and parcel to the > Election/Campaign laws which maintain the Duopoly along with the ability of > Politicians to peddle pull. > Having some utopian same date primary changes neither. > The underlying idea of the system was to have the House choose the President > from the 'search committee' provided by the various State Legislature chosen > electors (remember those States who are party to that Constitution thingy). > By choosing two, it was expected that the Electors would NEVER reach the > required majority. > ADDITIONALLY, having the top two vote getters (presumably persons with > DIFFERENT ideals/positions) restores yet ANOTHER check eliminated.4. > Political party conventions are UNCONSTITUTIONAL, because those > are “governed” by the unsanctioned and UNCONSTITUTIONAL rules of the > UNCONSTITUTIONAL political parties!This is nonsensical. > Again, your problem *is* and *remains* that unconstitutional > Election/Campaign laws have been made. There are no 'Federal' Elections. The > ONLY thing the Congress *is* charged with concerning such is that they may > set a uniform date as to when the Electors are to be chosen and other > time/dates associated with those electors.5. The principle of fairness makes > it UNCONSTITUTIONAL to allow any > individual or group to have more influence on the outcome of an > election or referenda than one-person-one vote. That criminalizes > entertainment or media celebrities who use their influence to garner > votes for any candidate. And it makes any groupsuch as labor unions > who seek more ‘power’ than could ever be manifested by just their > members‘ votes, criminals. Labor unions and other unconstitutional > group influences, effectively, have been blackmailing candidates by > implying… “You vote for ‘us’ or you won’t get elected.” Since the > latter is a SUBVERSION of the Constitution that shifts the par of > power away from individuals and toward specific groups, the leaders of > such groups are guilty of TREASON!More nonsensical bullshit. > As noted previously, Government becomes important SOLELY because Government > has dictated rules, regulations, advantage, etc. which people seek to > influence. It is GOVERNMENT which should be prohibited (which they largely > are already according to the Constitution as written) from providing > advantage to some at the expense of everyone else (which LIMITS Government to > securing the (natural) right of ALL <period>). As long as the Government > provides advantage, people will be trying to influence that process.6. The > principle of fairness makes it UNCONSTITUTIONAL to give equal > time to discuss any socialist idea! Since socialism and communism > aren’t fair, then it is UNCONSTITUTIONAL to allow democrats to > represent anyone in Congress!Who is 'giving' this equal time? Individuals may > do with their property as they choose -- if they wish to shout 'socialism' > and 'communism', such is most certainly their prerogative. > It is not 'unconstitutional' for the (socialist) democrats to represent > anyone any more than the (socialist) republicans. > <snip> too much deluded sillinessSection 9 & 10: Other than the President or > his... > > 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.
