This:
<<<<<No law nor previous or subsequent vote on any issue shall usurp the right of an informed Public to decide controversial issues in direct referenda; the vote for passage shall be 60%. The apt macro-Will of the People in elections or referenda, as manifested by their votes, shall take precedence over any contrary existing or subsequent law, governmental hierarchy or judicial ruling. Because conditions change, older laws aren’t necessarily the Will of the People.">>>> is the very definition of MOB rule, it is not rule of law. It is a Socialist/Communist/Athenian Democracy failed experiment and mainstay and you, who claim to be Gods gift to "fairness" support and propose it ?? With this I can ban Blacks from my state, Ban blue-eyed people from attending school and even the more ridiculous that are unthinkable. You are truly an idiot. On May 19, 4:50 pm, Jonathan <[email protected]> wrote: > *John, INLINE:* > > On 05/19/2011 01:47 PM, NoEinstein wrote:> Dear Jonathan: > > > (1.) Most in the media considered Donald Trump to be a contender for > > President. You, an anarchist, aren't bright enough to know the > > present, let alone project the way future events could have played > > out. > > *I do not care what "most in the media" decided for YOU. Donald Trump > never declared himself to be a candidate. Who are you going to believe? > The media? Or, Donald Trump?* > > > > > > > > > Answer to (2.) is at *** in the preface, copied below: > > > "Preface: > > The Will of the People is the foundation of government. The > > People must be represented faithfully and without bias so that > > government can properly and efficiently perform its functions in the > > coming ages. Federal government shall be limited to functions that > > cannot be better performed by local and state governments. Such shall > > be the enabler of freedom, justice, fair commerce, climates of > > opportunity, cooperative efforts, and national security both internal > > and external. Such shall be businesslike yet human; impartial yet > > focused; considerate of our environment, heritage, peace and > > tranquillity; effective without boastfulness; *** and divorced from > > politics. The federal government shall not be considered to be > > synonymous with the USA, and those therein are not a ruling class nor > > are they dictators; rather they are the servants of the USA and shall > > be answerable to it and to any law-abiding Citizen or Citizens > > thereof. We honor these objectives for the benefit of our-selves and > > our posterity." > > *I am assuming you have just posted the preface to YOUR New > Constitution. Once again, you are guilty of obfuscation. You did not > answer my question. Where in the Constitution (the existing one - not > YOURS) does it prohibit political parties?*> (3.) In my New Constitution the > 'speaker' is simply a parliamentarian > > who happens to be presiding. That person shall have no power to > > direct the course of proceedings based on their personal biases. This > > is the sentence which you neglected to copy: > > > " The House makes the rules for its proceedings, punishes disorderly > > members, and with the assent of 60% can expel a member for a > > violation. ***But no rule shall be made that concentrates power in > > any individual(s) beyond his or her one vote." That excludes allowing > > the speaker, or chairmen of any committees, to have any more 'power' > > than the members have. > > *What does YOUR New Constitution have to do with reality?*> (4.) The Secret > Service wasn't part of government during the earlier > > years. It is required in the Constitution that candidates for > > President be natural born citizens of the USA and at least 35 years > > old. All members of the Secret service are required to take an oath > > to uphold the Constitution. If such deliberately and flagrantly > > overlook CRIMINALITY that is hugely harmful to the USA�the way all > > socialist-communist policies are�then members of the S. S. who are > > responsible, likewise, shall be guilty of treason, for giving aid and > > comfort to the ENEMY (socialists and communists)! Since the > > Constitution is the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND, deliberately violating > > that law for the obvious purpose of SUBVERTING the Constitution and > > causing the failure of our economic systems is TREASON of the highest > > order! Barack H. Obama should be hanged post haste! > > *The Constitution states, "No person except a natural born Citizen, or a > Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this > Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither > shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained > to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident > within the United States."* *Unfortunately, that same Constitution > offers no insight as to what constitutes a "natural born citizen" or how > such provision shall be enforced. That the Secret Service was not > created until 1865 (to suppress counterfeit currency) should be evidence > enough that they have no responsibility for determining the eligibility > of the POTUS. * > > > > > > > > > � John A. Armistead � Patriot > > > On May 19, 1:22 pm, Jonathan<[email protected]> wrote: > >> John, > > >> As usual, I have some comments and questions (which you will no doubt > >> avoid answering, as usual): > > >> 1) Reality check: Donald Trump was never in "the race." > > >> 2) Where in the Constitution does it prohibit political parties? > > >> 3) "Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings..." As such, > >> the House has chosen to elect a Speaker. This would prompt most people > >> to call that person Speaker, much as most would call the head of a local > >> PTA "Madam President." > > >> 4) Does any part of the Constitution or any Law require the Secret > >> Service to look into the qualifications of the President? "The mission > >> of the United States Secret Service is to safeguard the nation's > >> financial infrastructure and payment systems to preserve the integrity > >> of the economy, and to protect national leaders, visiting heads of state > >> and government, designated sites and National Special Security Events." > > >> On 05/18/2011 07:53 PM, NoEinstein wrote: > > >>> A huge number of the na�ve among us are probably supposing that the > >>> USA can be saved if we can just elect the right President. Our > >>> Republican choices include those who have already sold their souls to > >>> the lock-step rituals and the Pomp and Circumstance of Washington. > >>> The same, typical, ego-maniacs, are content to form committees to > >>> raise outlandish amounts of capital for waging months-long battles in� > >>> the primaries. None of those same presidential hopefuls have a enough > >>> practical sensibility to see that pressing-the-flesh in as many states > >>> as possible is more of a disqualification than a qualification to be > >>> President. > >>> As many as 18% of Americans are unemployed or underemployed. The rock > >>> hard, leftist Democrats for Obama are projected to be able to raise > >>> over a billion dollars to get that traitor to America re elected. If, > >>> as I�ve proposed, presidential candidates spend no more than five > >>> million dollars on their campaigns, *** there can be, literally, > >>> billions of dollars that can remain in the pockets of the voters, > >>> rather than going to our close-to-universally-corrupt media. A huge > >>> plus will be the suspension of the unconstitutional, spaced-out > >>> primaries that give the most power to the voters of Iowa and etc. > >>> When the primaries are suspended, there will be no more > >>> unconstitutional party conventions such as gave us our Manchurian > >>> Candidate, Barack Hussein Obama of Kenya. Once and for all there will > >>> be an end to the unconstitutional political parties which have �split > >>> the USA down the aisle� for far too long. > >>> Voters should have no trouble choosing good choices for President > >>> based simply on televised debates and fairly-formatted candidate > >>> interviews. The entire election process should span no more than six > >>> months, and the candidates can stay rested, rather than being frazzled > >>> by the stupidity of jetting back and forth on the pretext of being > >>> better able to� �serve� the people of the particular state they > >>> happen > >>> to be in better than he or she can serve the citizens of a dozen other > >>> states where the same dull speech was recited before. > >>> With �give-�em-hell� Donald Trump out of the race, I�m not sure > >>> there > >>> is a single presidential hopeful wise enough and practical enough to > >>> Kick the Ass of the Entire Primary System! It only takes ONE brave > >>> candidate to do that. Simply say: �The primaries give inequitable > >>> power to the voters in the early primaries. That makes the spaced-out > >>> primaries unconstitutional, as it does the party conventions that > >>> follow. Nothing in the Constitution allows quasi-governmental bodies, > >>> like our political parties, to have ANY say-so whatsoever in how > >>> governmental processes are run. In a Republic, like the USA is so > >>> clearly mandated to be, there can be no LEADERS in Congress! Every > >>> representative, regardless of how recently he or she was elected, > >>> shall have identical voting power. To call Newt Gingrich �Mr. > >>> Speaker� is to create ROYALTY in Congress that was so detested by the > >>> founding fathers. George Washington rejected the idea that he should > >>> be king! And George Washington would reject the notion that Czars > >>> under the control of the President can bypass the powers granted to > >>> Congress alone. > >>> Thus far, the �Ritual� of the Secret Service protecting the (gag) > >>> President is preventing them from asking this simple question: Is the > >>> �long form� birth certificate of Obama�which was posted on the > >>> Internet in digital form�a LAYERED *. pdf file? If there are LAYERS, > >>> then, that document is a definite forgery. I repeat: Is the �long > >>> form� birth certificate of Obama�which was posted on the Internet in > >>> digital form�a LAYERED *. pdf file? If the answer is confirmed to be > >>> yes, as I and thousands of other computer-savvy American�s know is the > >>> case, then Barack Hussein Obama won�t be running for President in > >>> 2012. He may be wishing that he had run from this country on any of > >>> those� family �vacations� that he took, checking-out the climate for > >>> fugitives from justice from the USA. > >>> Kicking the ass of the political parties by first one, then, most of > >>> the candidates; and/or having the Secret Service get off of its ass > >>> and serve the citizens of the USA, will set this country right, > >>> again. Nothing in the Constitution or in any Law requires the S. S. > >>> to look the other way to a non bona fide �president� in 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.
