About eight something years ago, I used to email chat back and forth
about a dozen times with a thirties something years old bank tellar
lezzie in a city of about 50,000 population in Wisconsin.
She was a lot of fun to talk to.I think her older straight sister put a
stop to that.
cuhulin

Ahh yam tarred,,, bean ahwoikin onna mah leanto shed,,, Ahh yam
tarred,,, done putted uppa mah touls ferr teh dey.

Rand McNally features Mississippi Road Trip.
http://www.clarionledger.com

Ahh has just gots to get meself one of those new Rand McNally Road
Atlas.
INDEED!
cuhulin

bpnjensen wrote:
On May 12, 5:32 am, wrote:
bpnjensen wrote:

Yes, but it is clearly also a classical Republic, designed that way
from the ground up by the writers of the Constitution. The two are
not mutually exclusive.

It must be a strange place to live; the world where a certain word* can
cause people to get all nervous and defensive.

*liberal

THE USA was founded by liberal revolutionaries. They had no intention
of the Constitution lasting this long. It was written for farmers, not
imperialist warmongers. We really need to trash this whole mess and
start over (without the mouth breathers).

Now what makes you say that? Are you saying they were purposefully
shortsighted? Clearly, they designed the Constitution to be flexible
at times, and changeable when necessary, but the basic concept and
construct are designed to last.

Bruce

Why are we afraid to put the whole thing on the table again?

Are we that emasculated?
Are we not more learned than a bunch of colonialists?

"dave" wrote in message
...
bpnjensen wrote:
On May 12, 5:32 am, wrote:
bpnjensen wrote:

Yes, but it is clearly also a classical Republic, designed that way
from the ground up by the writers of the Constitution. The two are
not mutually exclusive.

It must be a strange place to live; the world where a certain word* can
cause people to get all nervous and defensive.

*liberal

THE USA was founded by liberal revolutionaries. They had no intention
of the Constitution lasting this long. It was written for farmers, not
imperialist warmongers. We really need to trash this whole mess and
start over (without the mouth breathers).

Now what makes you say that? Are you saying they were purposefully
shortsighted? Clearly, they designed the Constitution to be flexible
at times, and changeable when necessary, but the basic concept and
construct are designed to last.

Bruce

Why are we afraid to put the whole thing on the table again?

Are we that emasculated?
Are we not more learned than a bunch of colonialists?

First, it would take decades to do it, since you would first have to repeal
various sections of the current Constitution, which would take a 2/3
majority in EVERY state (think about the ERA.. if they couldn't get that
through, how will they get much else through?). You can't just say "OK, this
Constitution is toilet paper (though it would seem that the last three
administrations believed such), let's start from scratch."

Second, almost nothing ever gets BETTER by scrapping it and starting over.
Back during the end of the OJ trial, a lot of people wanted to change the
Constitution to allow for less than a unanymous jury verdict to convict
someone of a capital crime. Stuff like that SOUNDS good, until an innocent
person gets caught up in it. Ditto with the attempts to curtail death
sentence appeals to one or two. Think now of the dozens who have been found
to be innocent in the past few years by DNA evidence. We can't just dig
someone up and say "Oops... sorry about that.. but you WERE found guilty by
a jury of your peers.."


Third, think of the total melee that would ensue in trying to put together
the new Constitution... especially in the current political climate, where
both ends of the political spectrum are eating their young.

On 5/13/2010 8:44 AM, Brenda Ann wrote:
wrote in message
...
bpnjensen wrote:
On May 12, 5:32 am, wrote:
bpnjensen wrote:

Yes, but it is clearly also a classical Republic, designed that way
from the ground up by the writers of the Constitution. The two are
not mutually exclusive.

It must be a strange place to live; the world where a certain word* can
cause people to get all nervous and defensive.

*liberal

THE USA was founded by liberal revolutionaries. They had no intention
of the Constitution lasting this long. It was written for farmers, not
imperialist warmongers. We really need to trash this whole mess and
start over (without the mouth breathers).

Now what makes you say that? Are you saying they were purposefully
shortsighted? Clearly, they designed the Constitution to be flexible
at times, and changeable when necessary, but the basic concept and
construct are designed to last.

Bruce

Why are we afraid to put the whole thing on the table again?

Are we that emasculated?
Are we not more learned than a bunch of colonialists?

First, it would take decades to do it, since you would first have to repeal
various sections of the current Constitution, which would take a 2/3
majority in EVERY state (think about the ERA.. if they couldn't get that
through, how will they get much else through?). You can't just say "OK, this
Constitution is toilet paper (though it would seem that the last three
administrations believed such), let's start from scratch."

Second, almost nothing ever gets BETTER by scrapping it and starting over.
Back during the end of the OJ trial, a lot of people wanted to change the
Constitution to allow for less than a unanymous jury verdict to convict
someone of a capital crime. Stuff like that SOUNDS good, until an innocent
person gets caught up in it. Ditto with the attempts to curtail death
sentence appeals to one or two. Think now of the dozens who have been found
to be innocent in the past few years by DNA evidence. We can't just dig
someone up and say "Oops... sorry about that.. but you WERE found guilty by
a jury of your peers.."


Third, think of the total melee that would ensue in trying to put together
the new Constitution... especially in the current political climate, where
both ends of the political spectrum are eating their young.



Brenda, vary well put. I like your thinking.
Now, can we please get back to radio?

Drifter...

Brenda Ann wrote:

Are we not more learned than a bunch of colonialists?

First, it would take decades to do it, since you would first have to repeal
various sections of the current Constitution, which would take a 2/3
majority in EVERY state (think about the ERA.. if they couldn't get that
through, how will they get much else through?). You can't just say "OK, this
Constitution is toilet paper (though it would seem that the last three
administrations believed such), let's start from scratch."

We need to get a framework in place now. It won't be much longer before
the current mess devolves completely into an internet incited angry mob.

Jefferson said our government is impossible without rational and
educated people. We are in a culture that eschews intelligence and is
more religious (therefore less rational) than any other, save the
radical Islamists.

On May 12, 5:32*am, dave wrote:
bpnjensen wrote:

Yes, but it is clearly also a classical Republic, designed that way
from the ground up by the writers of the Constitution. *The two are
not mutually exclusive.

It must be a strange place to live; the world where a certain word* can
cause people to get all nervous and defensive.

*liberal

- THE USA was founded by liberal revolutionaries.
-*They had no intention of the Constitution lasting this long.

DO'H !
Secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our POSTERITY
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Constitution

Posterity =for all= succeeding or future generations collectively
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/posterity
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/posterity

dave - i did not read or see no expiration date
or limited warranty on the us constitution ~ RHF

-*It was written for farmers, not imperialist warmongers.

"We the People of the United States"

We The People =is= We The People
{Collectively All of US}

-*We really need to trash this whole mess
- and start over

All Acts of Sedition against the The Office of the
US Presidency {aka Obama Regime} and the
Duly Elected Government of the USA are being
noted and reported.
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/sedition
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_TIPS
https://tips.fbi.gov/

- (without the mouth breathers).

dave - start with yourself ~ RHF

On May 12, 7:24*am, dave wrote:
dxAce wrote:

THE USA was founded by liberal revolutionaries. *They had no intention
of the Constitution lasting this long. *It was written for farmers, not
imperialist warmongers. *We really need to trash this whole mess and
start over (without the mouth breathers).

You need to move to CanaDuh, clown 'tard.

- * As soon as we annex it from the French.

The French ?

Elizabeth II [UK aka England] Head of State of Canada
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_Act_1982
-wrt- Monarch of Canada
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_of_Canada

-fwiw- Canada's got a Governor General of Canada !
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governor_General_of_Canada

dave - are you smarter that a 5th grader . . . ~ RHF

On May 12, 5:37*am, dave wrote:
DEFCON 88 wrote:
On May 11, 1:13 pm, wrote:
Lezzie Dyke Kagan.
Who (Whom) do you think posted that at the online alt.gossip.celebrities
newsgroup?

I did, that's Who.(Whom)
cuhulin

When I heard of the pending Supreme Court vacancy, I told my friends
that filthy piece of $hit Omaumau would probably put a lesbian Jew
communist up for nomination. I was right!

PREDICTION: The NEXT one will be a Muslim, probably Black.

How may lesbianjewcommunists have there been on the court?

Don't you think it's about time?

- Maybe we need a few more Catholic white guys.

No we need honest DIVERSITY on the SCOTUS,
and Catholics and Jews are way over represented
on the SCOTUS. while the 50+% of Protestants
in the USA.
http://www.adherents.com/adh_sc.html

Replacing Justice Stevens the last 'lone' Protestant
on the SCOTUS with another Jew is Not Diversity [.]
http://www.adherents.com/adh_sc.html

There should and must be Jews on the SCOTUS
along with Catholics, Protestants, Muslims and
yes even Atheists -but- in proportion to their overall
representation in the US Population in general.
* That goes for Women on the SCOTUS which
should number 4~5 as reflected in their overall
representation in the US Population in general.
* A SCOT"US" THAT LOOKS LIKE "US"

US President Obama [The White House] talked
about Elena Kagan's "Life Experiences" as being
a reason for her nomination : What "Life Experiences"

Elena Kagan has never been Married, had a
'domestic-partner' or even lived with someone.
She is simply a loner, self-centered and into
herself : How does Kagan relate to real people
who have lived real lives ?

Elena Kagan has never held a real world Job;
but always been a college student, college
professor or university administrator, or a
government employee; living off the tax payers.
-again- How does Kagan relate to ordinary people
who have lived real lives with families, jobs, and
taxes ?

Elena Kagan as a Women has never had Children
or for that matter an Abortion and Sexual Abuse.
-again- How does Kagan relate to the vast majority
of Women who have lived real lives with families,
raising children, the need for abortion, and dealing
with sexual abuse ?

We Need Real People on the SCOTUS :
Not another Ivory Tower Bureaucrat [.]

US President Obama 'promised' us a US Government
that looked like us : So this is how BHO see's us . . .
http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/i...0411182437.jpg

dave - well just may be she does look like you . . .

-butt- on the other hand . . . others may
see you differently {paleface} ~ RHF
http://downsdad.files.wordpress.com/...orses-ass1.jpg

On May 11, 7:35*am, bpnjensen wrote:
On May 11, 6:09*am, dave wrote:



wrote:
Whose Country is This? The Constitutional REPUBLIC Of AMERICA.

I Say it is My Country, My REPUBLIC.Yours too, if you were Born in this
Country, born of AMERICAN Parents,,, and NOT a WETBACK anchor baby.
cuhulin

The USA is a Liberal Democracy. *Look it up.

Liberal democracy

Liberal democracy (bourgeois democracy or constitutional democracy) is a
common form of representative democracy. A liberal democracy may take
various constitutional forms: it may be a Republican democracy, as the
United States, India or France, or a constitutional monarchy, such as
the United Kingdom, Japan, or Spain. It may have a presidential system
(United States), a parliamentary system (Westminster system, UK and
Commonwealth countries), or a hybrid, semi-presidential system (France)..

The term "liberal" in "liberal democracy" refers to adherence to the
ideology of political liberalism.[1] Liberal democracies feature
constitutional protections of individual rights from government
power,[2] which were first proposed during the Age of Enlightenment by
social contract theorists such as Hobbes and Locke. At present, there
are numerous countries ruled by non-liberal political parties—parties
that uphold conservatism, Christian democracy, social democracy, or some
forms of socialism—that are considered to have liberal democracy as
their form of government.[3]

*From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yes, but it is clearly also a classical Republic, designed that way
from the ground up by the writers of the Constitution. *The two are
not mutually exclusive.

Democratically Elected 'Representative' Government.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy