At 12:54 PM 6/6/00 -0400, you wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>In a message dated 6/5/00 6:25:09 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>>
>><< Oh yes, the propertied minority needs vigorous protection against the
>> masses. Just ask Madison, Federalist #10. >>
>>
>>I was think
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>In a message dated 6/5/00 6:25:09 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
><< Oh yes, the propertied minority needs vigorous protection against the
> masses. Just ask Madison, Federalist #10. >>
>
>I was thinking more of the 14th Amendment, due process, e
In a message dated Tue, 6 Jun 2000 4:42:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time, "M A Jones"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
<< Justin, you have a way of telling me things I already know while not
answering the real point, which is about your strange affection for the
glorious 'C' especially the notably undemo
Jones
http://www.egroups.com/group/CrashList
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 4:12 AM
Subject: [PEN-L:19920] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The Nader campaign, part 1
> In a message dated 6/5/00 6:34:01 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
&
Thanks for the clarification, Mine, I'll bear it in mind.
Mark Jones
http://www.egroups.com/group/CrashList
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 12:54 AM
Subject: [PEN-L:19914] Re: Re: Re: Re: The Nader camp
>In a message dated 6/5/00 7:54:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< Mark,
> I would never put blacks, Indians, women and hispanics in the same
>equation with bankers. they are the victim, not the oppresssor..
>Mine
>>
>Mine, you really are irony proof. Go syeep y
In a message dated 6/5/00 7:54:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< Mark,
I would never put blacks, Indians, women and hispanics in the same
equation with bankers. they are the victim, not the oppresssor..
Mine
>>
Mine, you really are irony proof. Go syeep yourself
In a message dated 6/5/00 6:34:01 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< discrete and insular minorities << protected by the "C" were/are who
exactly? Blacks? American Indians? Women? Hispanics? Bankers? >>
The phrase is from the famous (to Americal lawyers) footnote 4 of the 1
In a message dated 6/5/00 6:25:09 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< Oh yes, the propertied minority needs vigorous protection against the
masses. Just ask Madison, Federalist #10. >>
I was thinking more of the 14th Amendment, due process, equal protection,
that sort of t
Mark,
I would never put blacks, Indians, women and hispanics in the same
equation with bankers. they are the victim, not the oppresssor..
Mine
>>>discrete and insular minorities << protected by the "C" were/are who
>exactly? Blacks? American Indians? Women? Hispanics? Bankers?
>Mark Jones
>h
>>discrete and insular minorities << protected by the "C" were/are who
exactly? Blacks? American Indians? Women? Hispanics? Bankers?
Mark Jones
http://www.egroups.com/group/CrashList
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >The comments about Jefferson and the Constitution are almost too silly to
> >disc
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>The comments about Jefferson and the Constitution are almost too silly to
>discuss. J was no great fan of the C, which he did not sign precisely because
>of its comparative conservatism, And as for the anti-majoritarainsim od the
>C, and especially the Bill of Rights, is
What did I do to make you think I would disagree with this? --jks
This distinction (reform through established channels vs. yelling in the
streets) is a false dichotomy. The two are connected and interact with each
other.
>>
Justin wrote:
>So, if you accept that refiorms are good and necessary, you have to
>support lobbuing for and otherwise trying to effect them through the
>esrablished channels. Otherwise, you will be out in the streets yelling
>for reforms that will be implemented, if at all, without your partic
Mark Jones has discovered that anything but the self-described express
movement for the revolutionmary overthrow of capitalsim is a distraction;
reforms that merely improve people's livesw ithin existing constrints are
bad. Hey, Mark, why doesn't this distrction theorya pply to a movement for
In a message dated 00-06-03 21:11:11 EDT, you write:
<< The main point is that it wasn't an $85 per month furnished room.
>be bought. If he stayed silent on no-fault, it was not because he was
bribed,
>but because there are serious consumerist arguments against it. There are,
The proble
EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2000 5:03 AM
Subject: [PEN-L:19866] Re: Re: Re: The Nader campaign, part 1
> The political criticism of Nadar is valid, but the personal attack on him
is
> misguided and fundamentally irrelevant.
>
> Rod
>
> Louis Proyect wrote:
>
&
The political criticism of Nadar is valid, but the personal attack on him is
misguided and fundamentally irrelevant.
Rod
Louis Proyect wrote:
> >Yes, but not that much further. My parents, who lived on my dad's middle
> >class income of about $25,000 a year back in those days, bought a $100,000
In a message dated 6/3/00 4:31:32 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
<< I don't know about Washington, but where I live a $100,000 home is pretty
>modest. (and that is Canadian dollars!)
>
>Rod
$100,000 went further 25 years ago.
>>
Yes, but not that much further. My pa
19 matches
Mail list logo
