SPECIAL: Constitution intentionally vague
 

On 9/17/10 24:42 , wrote:
On Sep 16, 8:22 am, Kevin Alfred
wrote:
On 9/16/2010 2:14 AM, Brenda Ann wrote:





"Kevin Alfred wrote in message
...

The founders must have been aware that such a situation could evolve,
hence their repeated words "Congress shall make no law..." -- surely the
most important statement in the entire document.

CONgress has been making unconstitutional law for many decades. First
there's the flagrant violation of the Second Amendment by regulating WHO may
own or carry a gun. They've been doing that one for a very long time, and
they just keep slipping in more BS under the flag of protecting the public.
Protecting the public is the job of the police, not the CONgress passing
unconstitutional law.

Then there's due process, double jeopardy and ex-post-facto. They get around
that by saying the law is not punitive, but "regulative". And the SCOTUS
goes right along with it.

You're right.

And the illegal usurpation of power has been going on for a very
long time, with huge spikes of illegal "law-making" occurring during
and after major wars. Practically everything the regime in
Washington does now is unconstitutional.

It's gone beyond illegality and actually reached the point of
insanity now.

At one time, I opined that these pretended "laws" ought to be void
because, among many other reasons, there were so many of them that
no one person could ever even read them all in a single lifetime,
let alone understand or obey them. (This excess of "laws," by the
way, converts us from a government of laws into a government of men
-- men who can cherry pick a victim and then cherry pick a "law" to
charge him with violating, since all have violated some. Tax laws
are among their favorites in this regard.)

But it's worse now. Multiple-thousand-page "laws" are passed by
legislators who never even bother to read them. And really, they
couldn't even if they wanted to -- there are too many. It's beyond
insane, beyond Kafkaesque. May the gods end it all soon.

With all good wishes,

Kevin Alfred Strom.
--http://kevinalfredstrom.com/- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

BTW, where in the US Constitution does it say that we must pay taxes
to the Federal government?

The 16th Amendment, for one.

SPECIAL: Constitution intentionally vague
 

On Sep 16, 9:44*am, dave wrote:
Kevin Alfred Strom wrote:

But it's worse now. Multiple-thousand-page "laws" are passed by
legislators who never even bother to read them. And really, they
couldn't even if they wanted to -- there are too many. It's beyond
insane, beyond Kafkaesque. May the gods end it all soon.

With all good wishes,

Kevin Alfred Strom.

Why stop with the Constitution? *210 years ago people were generally a
lot smarter than they are now. Hell, look at the way they talked.

I'm all for returning to the principle that only Congress can declare
war. I'm also for confiscatory taxes to prevent family dynasties and
concentration of power at the top. *I'm for import duties to protect
domestic industry and for the abolition of standing armies. And the
pre-Marbury v Madison Supreme Court.

When you start pinin' for the good old days where do you stop?

And how, may we ask is it "that 210 years ago people were generally a
lot smarter than they are now" ? I was always told that most people
(worldwide) were mostly illiterate until very recently. And how can we
sample a spoken recording of such a time???

(OT) : US Constitution Not Vague About "Freedom of Religion" . . .
 

On Sep 16, 11:08*am, John Smith wrote:
On 9/16/2010 6:36 AM, dave wrote:

RHF wrote:

There you good again Attacking Persons-of-Faith
and Singling out the Mormons for your Hate Speech.

The Mormons' plan for world domination doesn't stop at the border.

Well, I could live with that, even get a second wife outta' the deal ...
but I could rest easily if we wipe the radical mooselums out ... them I
could NOT deal with ... LOL

Regards,
JS

Mooselums will hook you up with many wives. They say it is legal. And
I find it very difficult dealing even with one !

SPECIAL: Constitution intentionally vague
 

On Sep 17, 1:46*am, "D. Peter Maus" wrote:
On 9/17/10 24:42 , wrote:





On Sep 16, 8:22 am, Kevin Alfred
wrote:
On 9/16/2010 2:14 AM, Brenda Ann wrote:

"Kevin Alfred * *wrote in message
...

The founders must have been aware that such a situation could evolve,
hence their repeated words "Congress shall make no law..." -- surely the
most important statement in the entire document.

CONgress has been making unconstitutional law for many decades. *First
there's the flagrant violation of the Second Amendment by regulating WHO may
own or carry a gun. They've been doing that one for a very long time, and
they just keep slipping in more BS under the flag of protecting the public.
Protecting the public is the job of the police, not the CONgress passing
unconstitutional law.

Then there's due process, double jeopardy and ex-post-facto. They get around
that by saying the law is not punitive, but "regulative". And the SCOTUS
goes right along with it.

You're right.

And the illegal usurpation of power has been going on for a very
long time, with huge spikes of illegal "law-making" occurring during
and after major wars. Practically everything the regime in
Washington does now is unconstitutional.

It's gone beyond illegality and actually reached the point of
insanity now.

At one time, I opined that these pretended "laws" ought to be void
because, among many other reasons, there were so many of them that
no one person could ever even read them all in a single lifetime,
let alone understand or obey them. (This excess of "laws," by the
way, converts us from a government of laws into a government of men
-- men who can cherry pick a victim and then cherry pick a "law" to
charge him with violating, since all have violated some. Tax laws
are among their favorites in this regard.)

But it's worse now. Multiple-thousand-page "laws" are passed by
legislators who never even bother to read them. And really, they
couldn't even if they wanted to -- there are too many. It's beyond
insane, beyond Kafkaesque. May the gods end it all soon.

With all good wishes,

Kevin Alfred Strom.
--http://kevinalfredstrom.com/-Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

BTW, where in the US Constitution does it say that we must pay taxes
to the Federal government?

* *The 16th Amendment, for one.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

O, yes. Several states never ratified/or considered it. No wonder .

SPECIAL: Constitution intentionally vague
 

On 9/17/10 01:21 , wrote:
On Sep 17, 1:46 am, "D. Peter wrote:
On 9/17/10 24:42 , wrote:





On Sep 16, 8:22 am, Kevin Alfred
wrote:
On 9/16/2010 2:14 AM, Brenda Ann wrote:

"Kevin Alfred wrote in message
...

The founders must have been aware that such a situation could evolve,
hence their repeated words "Congress shall make no law..." -- surely the
most important statement in the entire document.

CONgress has been making unconstitutional law for many decades. First
there's the flagrant violation of the Second Amendment by regulating WHO may
own or carry a gun. They've been doing that one for a very long time, and
they just keep slipping in more BS under the flag of protecting the public.
Protecting the public is the job of the police, not the CONgress passing
unconstitutional law.

Then there's due process, double jeopardy and ex-post-facto. They get around
that by saying the law is not punitive, but "regulative". And the SCOTUS
goes right along with it.

You're right.

And the illegal usurpation of power has been going on for a very
long time, with huge spikes of illegal "law-making" occurring during
and after major wars. Practically everything the regime in
Washington does now is unconstitutional.

It's gone beyond illegality and actually reached the point of
insanity now.

At one time, I opined that these pretended "laws" ought to be void
because, among many other reasons, there were so many of them that
no one person could ever even read them all in a single lifetime,
let alone understand or obey them. (This excess of "laws," by the
way, converts us from a government of laws into a government of men
-- men who can cherry pick a victim and then cherry pick a "law" to
charge him with violating, since all have violated some. Tax laws
are among their favorites in this regard.)

But it's worse now. Multiple-thousand-page "laws" are passed by
legislators who never even bother to read them. And really, they
couldn't even if they wanted to -- there are too many. It's beyond
insane, beyond Kafkaesque. May the gods end it all soon.

With all good wishes,

Kevin Alfred Strom.
--http://kevinalfredstrom.com/-Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

BTW, where in the US Constitution does it say that we must pay taxes
to the Federal government?

The 16th Amendment, for one.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

O, yes. Several states never ratified/or considered it. No wonder .

Actually, all but one.

(OT) : US Constitution Not Vague About "Freedom of Religion". . .
 

On 9/16/2010 11:01 PM, wrote:

...
Mooselums will hook you up with many wives. They say it is legal. And
I find it very difficult dealing even with one !

Yeah, you and me both ... I think you are supposed to stick 'em in
burkas and beat 'em once a week ... I just don't have the heart ...

Regards,
JS

(OT) : US Constitution Not Vague About "Freedom of Religion" . . .
 

On Sep 17, 2:54*am, John Smith wrote:
On 9/16/2010 11:01 PM, wrote:

...
Mooselums will hook you up with many wives. They say it is legal. *And
I find it very difficult dealing even with one !

Yeah, you and me both ... I think you are supposed to stick 'em in
burkas and beat 'em once a week ... I just don't have the heart ...

Regards,
JS

In that case, we should be getting advice from the ayatollas ! They
must know something,that we don't ... BTW what does US constitution
say about stoning women dressed in burkas ?

(OT) : US Constitution Not Vague About "Freedom of Religion" . . .
 

wrote in message
...
On Sep 17, 2:54 am, John Smith wrote:
On 9/16/2010 11:01 PM, wrote:

...
Mooselums will hook you up with many wives. They say it is legal. And
I find it very difficult dealing even with one !

Yeah, you and me both ... I think you are supposed to stick 'em in
burkas and beat 'em once a week ... I just don't have the heart ...

Regards,
JS

In that case, we should be getting advice from the ayatollas ! They
must know something,that we don't ... BTW what does US constitution
say about stoning women dressed in burkas ?

(OT) : US Constitution Not Vague About "Freedom of Religion" . . .
 

On Sep 16, 11:01*pm, wrote:
On Sep 16, 11:08*am, John Smith wrote:

On 9/16/2010 6:36 AM, dave wrote:

RHF wrote:

There you good again Attacking Persons-of-Faith
and Singling out the Mormons for your Hate Speech.

The Mormons' plan for world domination doesn't stop at the border.

Well, I could live with that, even get a second wife outta' the deal ....
but I could rest easily if we wipe the radical mooselums out ... them I
could NOT deal with ... LOL

Regards,
JS

- Mooselums will hook you up with many wives.
- They say it is legal. *

(OT) : US Constitution Not Vague About "Freedom of Religion". . .
 

On 9/17/2010 12:56 AM, Brenda Ann wrote:

...
Only one place does it say anything remotely applicable:

VIII: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

We've all seen how much good this amendment does, when bail for many crimes
runs in excess of half a million dollars, fines are being issued far in
excess of any value involved. Also, cruel and unusual punishment is purely
subjective. A SCOTUS decision back in the 90's found that prison
overcrowding (in CA, IIRC) may well be cruel, but is certainly not unusual,
and so a tort claim by inmates was struck down. If enough people wanted
stoning, it would probably pass muster in the current SCOTUS.

Aye. These are dark and ignorant times we live in. Common sense is
absent in our public servants; They refer to themselves as "leaders," I
wouldn't follow them across the street to where they bought me a free beer!

Anyone even remotely mentioned as running in the next election, on any
level, local, state, federal, would not get my vote ... I honestly have
been unable to vote in the last few elections ... there is simply no one
fit which is on the ballot. Amazing, really ...

Regards,
JS

SPECIAL : US Constitution Intentionally Not Vague About Taxes . . .
 

On Sep 16, 11:41*pm, "D. Peter Maus" wrote:
On 9/17/10 01:21 , wrote:



On Sep 17, 1:46 am, "D. Peter *wrote:
On 9/17/10 24:42 , wrote:

On Sep 16, 8:22 am, Kevin Alfred
wrote:
On 9/16/2010 2:14 AM, Brenda Ann wrote:

"Kevin Alfred * * *wrote in message
...

The founders must have been aware that such a situation could evolve,
hence their repeated words "Congress shall make no law..." -- surely the
most important statement in the entire document.

CONgress has been making unconstitutional law for many decades. *First
there's the flagrant violation of the Second Amendment by regulating WHO may
own or carry a gun. They've been doing that one for a very long time, and
they just keep slipping in more BS under the flag of protecting the public.
Protecting the public is the job of the police, not the CONgress passing
unconstitutional law.

Then there's due process, double jeopardy and ex-post-facto. They get around
that by saying the law is not punitive, but "regulative". And the SCOTUS
goes right along with it.

You're right.

And the illegal usurpation of power has been going on for a very
long time, with huge spikes of illegal "law-making" occurring during
and after major wars. Practically everything the regime in
Washington does now is unconstitutional.

It's gone beyond illegality and actually reached the point of
insanity now.

At one time, I opined that these pretended "laws" ought to be void
because, among many other reasons, there were so many of them that
no one person could ever even read them all in a single lifetime,
let alone understand or obey them. (This excess of "laws," by the
way, converts us from a government of laws into a government of men
-- men who can cherry pick a victim and then cherry pick a "law" to
charge him with violating, since all have violated some. Tax laws
are among their favorites in this regard.)

But it's worse now. Multiple-thousand-page "laws" are passed by
legislators who never even bother to read them. And really, they
couldn't even if they wanted to -- there are too many. It's beyond
insane, beyond Kafkaesque. May the gods end it all soon.

With all good wishes,

Kevin Alfred Strom.
--http://kevinalfredstrom.com/-Hidequoted text -

- Show quoted text -

- - - - BTW, where in the US Constitution does it say
- - - - that we must pay taxes to the Federal government?

Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution
-wrt- Taxing and Spending by the US Fedeeral Government
* The Power To Tax : The Congress Shall Have Power
To Lay and Collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises
** "Lay" -t- Establish : Levy : Impose

- - - The 16th Amendment, for one.

TRUE.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/16th_Am...s_Constitution

- - O, yes. Several states never ratified/or considered it.
- - No wonder .

TRUE.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/16th_Am...s_Constitution

-*Actually, all but one.

Not So True.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixteen... ion#Adoption

1 - The legislatures of the following states rejected the
amendment without ever subsequently ratifying it:
Connecticut & Rhode Island & Utah

2 - The legislatures of the following states never
considered the proposed amendment:
Florida & Pennsylvania & Virginia

SPECIAL : US Constitution Intentionally Vague About Spanking. . . {Tough Love}
 

On 9/17/2010 7:02 AM, dave wrote:

...
This is a great example of corporations making law, changing politics,
and getting rich.

Follow the "3 strikes" laws, drugs laws, and the development of private
"for-profit" prisons.

Sounds like we have reached some ground we can agree on.

Anyway, I can attest to something me, the wife and everyone around me
has commented on. The prison system seems to be able to take someone
who has "made a mistake" and turn him into a big-bad-dangerous-criminal
in no time ... into someone who you DON'T WANT AS A NEIGHBOR!

From just our observations, prisons look more like "Criminal Technical
Training Schools" than anything else ... my wifes nephew and a few of
the kids of our friends "made a mistake" and came out full blown
criminals and drug addicted ... what is up with that, anyway?

Regards,
JS

SPECIAL: Constitution intentionally vague
 

On 9/17/2010 6:57 AM, dave wrote:

...
Europeans are the most perverse people on the planet. They ****ed the
world up. There is nothing to be admired that they didn't steal from
somebody else. All hail Einstein's planet killer bomb.


Well, I don't know about that kind of "Bomb Worship." However, I am
pretty certain, it did save me from speaking japanese--I am thankful for
that ...

Regards,
JS

SPECIAL: Constitution intentionally vague
 

On 9/17/2010 6:30 AM, John Smith wrote:

...
Well, I don't know about that kind of "Bomb Worship." However, I am
pretty certain, it did save me from speaking japanese--I am thankful for
that ...

Regards,
JS

Well, did I mention, it saved a lot of lives too ... I am thankful for that.

Regards,
JS

SPECIAL: Constitution intentionally vague
 

SPECIAL: Constitution intentionally vague
 

John Smith wrote:
On 9/17/2010 6:57 AM, dave wrote:

...
Europeans are the most perverse people on the planet. They ****ed the
world up. There is nothing to be admired that they didn't steal from
somebody else. All hail Einstein's planet killer bomb.


Well, I don't know about that kind of "Bomb Worship." However, I am
pretty certain, it did save me from speaking japanese--I am thankful for
that ...

Regards,
JS

The war was just about over when they dropped the bombs. They needed a
human population to use as Guinea Pigs. The only atrocity bigger in
the War was the fire bombing of German cities.

As for Einstein, it would appear he was a thief.

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_einstein.htm
http://home.comcast.net/~xtxinc/AEIPBook.htm
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11...in_relativity/



mike.

SPECIAL: Constitution intentionally vague
 

On 9/17/2010 2:02 PM, m II wrote:
John Smith wrote:
...
Well, I don't know about that kind of "Bomb Worship." However, I am
pretty certain, it did save me from speaking japanese--I am thankful for
that ...

Regards,
JS
...
The war was just about over when they dropped the bombs. They needed a
human population to use as Guinea Pigs. The only atrocity bigger in
the War was the fire bombing of German cities.
...
mike.

I love when fools attempt to rewrite history ... japan was not so
anxious to surrender with the first dropping of a super weapon, wiping
out a whole city ... it took the second ... that is not even close for
horseshoes ... but then, one more American life wasted, to not having
dropped the bomb would have been far too many for me.

Regards,
JS

SPECIAL: Constitution intentionally vague
 

On 9/17/2010 3:18 PM, John Smith wrote:

...
I love when fools attempt to rewrite history ... japan was not so
anxious to surrender with the first dropping of a super weapon, wiping
out a whole city ... it took the second ... that is not even close for
horseshoes ... but then, one more American life wasted, to not having
dropped the bomb would have been far too many for me.

Regards,
JS

That is just dealing with the matter way too lightly ... I am damn proud
of what we done to win the war. That is a time when the government was a
government to be damn proud of. The men who fought that war were men to
be damn proud of. American ingenuity spent developing the bomb is/was
something to be damn proud of.

Bomb Pearl Harbor and that is exactly what it will take to settle the
score ... the fools I share America with, today, I am too often ashamed of.

Regards,
JS

SPECIAL: Constitution intentionally vague
 

On Sep 17, 6:38*am, John Smith wrote:
On 9/17/2010 6:30 AM, John Smith wrote:

...
Well, I don't know about that kind of "Bomb Worship." However, I am
pretty certain, it did save me from speaking japanese--I am thankful for
that ...

Regards,
JS

Well, did I mention, it saved a lot of lives too ... I am thankful for that.

Regards,
JS

Reportedly the MIL-INTEL that Prez Truman was given
to help him make the Decision to Drop the A/H Bombs
or not was that :
1 - Using the Bombs would Break the Will of the
Japanese to continue to Fight and Defend their
Mainland like they did Okinawa.
2 - Not using the Bombs would mean that the USA
and the Allies would have to Fight the Japanese both
Military and Civilian in their Home Island with the
potential cost of a Million or more Japanese Civilian
Lives along with a 100K or more US MIL causalities.

Prez Truman decided to Drop the Bombs and yes
doing so did save a million or more Deaths on both
sides.

Note - MacArthur's Post-War Occupation Intelligence
discover from the Japanese Military that the US's
prior estimates were low and the Japanese were
prepared ready to Fight more and longer; and the
causalities may have been doubled into the Millions.
The Japanese thinking was that the Japanese could
Fight the US & Allies to a stalemate on their Home
Islands and Win a Cease Fire and an Armistice
versus a Complete Surrender and Occupation by
the US & Allies. -wrt- N&S Korea later in 1953

~ RHF

(OT) : Once Again 'The Voice of Canada' Got It Wrong
 

On Sep 17, 2:02*pm, m II wrote:
John Smith wrote:
On 9/17/2010 6:57 AM, dave wrote:

...
Europeans are the most perverse people on the planet. They ****ed the
world up. There is nothing to be admired that they didn't steal from
somebody else. All hail Einstein's planet killer bomb.

Well, I don't know about that kind of "Bomb Worship." *However, I am
pretty certain, it did save me from speaking japanese--I am thankful for
that ...

Regards,
JS

- The war was just about over when they dropped
- the bombs. They needed a human population to
- use as Guinea Pigs. The only atrocity bigger in
- the War was the fire bombing of German cities.

Nah the Fire Bombing of Tokyo killed more Japanese
an estimated 1.5 million people
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Tokyo

Once Again 'The Voice of Canada' Got It Wrong.

Speaking of "Guinea Pigs" M II how are you . . .

;;-}} ~ RHF

SPECIAL: Two Big Boom for USSR
 

On Sep 17, 4:48*pm, dave wrote:
John Smith wrote:

I love when fools attempt to rewrite history ...

I love it when people believe the "conventional wisdom". It makes it
easier to manipulate them.

We bombed Japan TWICE to send a message to Joe Stalin. *Had nothing to
do with the Japanese, who were ready to surrender without us needing to
take ground.

Note - MacArthur's Post-War Occupation Intelligence
discover from the Japanese Military that the US's
prior estimates were low and the Japanese were
prepared ready to Fight more and longer; and the
causalities may have been doubled into the Millions.
The Japanese thinking was that the Japanese could
Fight the US & Allies to a stalemate on their Home
Islands and Win a Cease Fire and an Armistice
versus a Complete Surrender and Occupation by
the US & Allies. -wrt- N&S Korea later in 1953

~ RHF

(OT) : Once Again 'The Voice of Canada' Got It Wrong
 

On 9/17/2010 3:44 PM, RHF wrote:
On Sep 17, 2:02 pm, m wrote:
John Smith wrote:
On 9/17/2010 6:57 AM, dave wrote:

...
Europeans are the most perverse people on the planet. They ****ed the
world up. There is nothing to be admired that they didn't steal from
somebody else. All hail Einstein's planet killer bomb.

Well, I don't know about that kind of "Bomb Worship." However, I am
pretty certain, it did save me from speaking japanese--I am thankful for
that ...

Regards,
JS

- The war was just about over when they dropped
- the bombs. They needed a human population to
- use as Guinea Pigs. The only atrocity bigger in
- the War was the fire bombing of German cities.

Nah the Fire Bombing of Tokyo killed more Japanese
an estimated 1.5 million people
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Tokyo

Once Again 'The Voice of Canada' Got It Wrong.

Speaking of "Guinea Pigs" M II how are you . . .

;;-}} ~ RHF
.


As for Einstein, it would appear he was a thief.

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/es...in_relativity/

mike.


It is because of guys like you that the rewriting of history frequently
fails, at least on the educated ... you sure know how to ruin a guys
good time! LOL

Regards,
JS

SPECIAL: Constitution intentionally vague
 

On 9/17/2010 3:56 PM, m II wrote:

...
Isaac Newton supposedly said that energy and matter have an
equivalence and are interchangeable. That should be a few hundred
years before 1900. Then there are the ancient Greeks and their
atoms...where does it end?


mike

There is not a mind around that is not the product of all it has learned
.... credit is always given to those providing the proofs, not just
guessing ... mathematical proofs are accepted--at least until dis-proven.

Regards,
JS

SPECIAL: Two Big Boom for USSR
 

Ranks of poor are climbing.
http://www.clarionledger.com
Business section

And that is the way those Commies in fed govt like it.
cuhulin

SPECIAL: Two Big Boom for USSR
 

John Smith wrote:


I love when fools attempt to rewrite history ...

I love it when people believe the "conventional wisdom". It makes it
easier to manipulate them.

We bombed Japan TWICE to send a message to Joe Stalin. Had nothing to
do with the Japanese, who were ready to surrender without us needing to
take ground.

SPECIAL: Two Big Boom for USSR
 

http://www.devilfinder.com
S-510 The most dangerous Bill in American History

Makes it illegal to grow, share, sell or trade homegrown food.

Our Very Worst ENEMY is fed govt!
cuhulin

SPECIAL: Constitution intentionally vague
 

On 9/17/10 17:56 , m II wrote:

Isaac Newton supposedly said that energy and matter have an
equivalence and are interchangeable. That should be a few hundred
years before 1900. Then there are the ancient Greeks and their
atoms...where does it end?

Iowa.

(OT) : US Constitution Not Vague About "Freedom of Religion" . . .
 

On Sep 17, 5:56*am, RHF wrote:
On Sep 16, 11:01*pm, wrote:



On Sep 16, 11:08*am, John Smith wrote:

On 9/16/2010 6:36 AM, dave wrote:

RHF wrote:

There you good again Attacking Persons-of-Faith
and Singling out the Mormons for your Hate Speech.

The Mormons' plan for world domination doesn't stop at the border.

Well, I could live with that, even get a second wife outta' the deal ....
but I could rest easily if we wipe the radical mooselums out ... them I
could NOT deal with ... LOL

Regards,
JS

- Mooselums will hook you up with many wives.
- They say it is legal. *
*.
France now is having a Social-Financial problem
with the Muslim "2nd Wife Option". *Since Marriage
in France is defined as 1-Man & 1-Women there
is NO Legal "2nd Wife Option" -so- The "2nd Wives"
are Not-Married and the "2nd Wives" are Collecting
Public Assistance to Support Themselves and Their
Many Children. *Heard on the Radio that 1-in-6 Muslim
Women with Kids in France is On-Public-Support.
Paid for by the Majority Christian Tax Payers of France.

Allah Is Good and Rewards the "2nd Wife Option" in
France for Muslims to be fruitful and multiply ~asa~
*.



And I find it very difficult dealing even with one !- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

My guess is in France they don't care. They have no law against making
illegitimate kids. Old European traditions are disappearing really
fast nowdays.

(OT) : US Constitution Not Vague About "Freedom of Religion" . . .
 

On Sep 17, 5:57*am, John Smith wrote:
On 9/17/2010 12:56 AM, Brenda Ann wrote:

...
Only one place does it say anything remotely applicable:

VIII: *Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

We've all seen how much good this amendment does, when bail for many crimes
runs in excess of half a million dollars, fines are being issued far in
excess of any value involved. *Also, cruel and unusual punishment is purely
subjective. A SCOTUS decision back in the 90's found that prison
overcrowding (in CA, IIRC) may well be cruel, but is certainly not unusual,
and so a tort claim by inmates was struck down. If enough *people wanted
stoning, it would probably pass muster in the current SCOTUS.

Aye. *These are dark and ignorant times we live in. *Common sense is
absent in our public servants; *They refer to themselves as "leaders," I
wouldn't follow them across the street to where they bought me a free beer!

Anyone even remotely mentioned as running in the next election, on any
level, local, state, federal, would not get my vote ... I honestly have
been unable to vote in the last few elections ... there is simply no one
fit which is on the ballot. *Amazing, really ...

Regards,
JS

You are not alone ! And the same names seem to be in the limelight
for 2012, sadly enough.

SPECIAL : US Constitution Intentionally Vague About Spanking . .. {Tough Love}
 

On Sep 17, 9:50*am, dave wrote:
Day Brown wrote:

I was born on a farm, as I'm sure all my ancestors were going back
10,000 years. If spanking was such a bad idea, we'd know by now.

As the world is totally screwed-up and rapidly deteriorating from there,
somebody did something wrong. *I was beaten daily and I've made it my
life's work to bring down civilization. *Thanks for the help.

What does a naughty boy say when he grows up? I didn't get enough
beating in my early days ! Another excuse.

SPECIAL : US Constitution Intentionally Vague About Spanking . .. {Tough Love}
 

On Sep 17, 10:02*am, dave wrote:
John Smith wrote:
On 9/16/2010 6:14 PM, RHF wrote:

...
i am for smaller prisons : hence the trash compactor
at the front gate -not-so-funny-and-sort-of-sick- ~ RHF
...

I keep hearing that the average cost per inmate, in prison, is ~$40,000
per year. I would think we would be anxious to make the prisons as small
as possible ... but, I keep hearing that prisoners are being used as
slave labor, paid ~0.25 per hour and do jobs for private industries
which contract with the prisons ...

Point is, the whole prison "thing" stinks to high heaven ... and, I also
hear that ~1% of our population is locked up in prisons ... add to that
the rumor has it that ~30%-50% of the prisoners are in their for
"victimless crimes" and it is a real reeking sewer plant of possible
corruption and abuses ...

This is a great example of corporations making law, changing politics,
and getting rich.

Follow the "3 strikes" laws, drugs laws, *and the development of private
"for-profit" prisons.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Someone is making a lot of money from all them prisoners. Lot more
than we know, does anybody out there keep track of the actual figures ?

SPECIAL: Constitution intentionally vague
 

On Sep 17, 10:16*am, dave wrote:
wrote:

And how, may we ask is it "that 210 years ago people were generally a
lot smarter than they are now" ? *I was always told that most people
(worldwide) were mostly illiterate until very recently. And how can we
sample a spoken recording of *such a time???

In the 18th century Americans were more rational and focused than they
are today. Their vocabularies were much bigger and they could follow an
argument to a logical conclusion.

TV, the internet, etc., may fill up our heads with more facts, etc., but
they have done nothing but made us functionally way dumber. *I like to
think of the mass media as a voluntary electronic lobotomy.

Read "the Age of Reason" by Thomas Paine (the atheist who invented the
USA). *It is one of the most beautiful things ever written. Nothing
today compares.

Thomas Paine was not an average person. I seriously doubt that the
average 18th century American was even half as bright.

(OT) : Once Again 'The Voice of Canada' Got It Wrong
 

On Sep 17, 6:44*pm, RHF wrote:
On Sep 17, 2:02*pm, m II wrote: John Smith wrote:
On 9/17/2010 6:57 AM, dave wrote:

...
Europeans are the most perverse people on the planet. They ****ed the
world up. There is nothing to be admired that they didn't steal from
somebody else. All hail Einstein's planet killer bomb.

Well, I don't know about that kind of "Bomb Worship." *However, I am
pretty certain, it did save me from speaking japanese--I am thankful for
that ...

Regards,
JS

- The war was just about over when they dropped
- the bombs. They needed a human population to
- use as Guinea Pigs. The only atrocity bigger in
- the War was the fire bombing of German cities.

Nah the Fire Bombing of Tokyo killed more Japanese
an estimated 1.5 million peoplehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Tokyo

Once Again 'The Voice of Canada' Got It Wrong.

Speaking of "Guinea Pigs" M II how are you . . .

;;-}} ~ RHF
*.





As for Einstein, it would appear he was a thief.

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/es...//home.comcast...

mike.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

1.5 million is an estimate only. We may never know the real number of
civilian deaths. Japanese are very good in deception. especially when
they are at war.

SPECIAL: Two Big Boom for USSR
 

On Sep 17, 7:48*pm, dave wrote:
John Smith wrote:

I love when fools attempt to rewrite history ...

I love it when people believe the "conventional wisdom". It makes it
easier to manipulate them.

We bombed Japan TWICE to send a message to Joe Stalin. *Had nothing to
do with the Japanese, who were ready to surrender without us needing to
take ground.

Uncle Joe was also a great deceiver/ actor. His own people still fear/
hate/despise him. Even in his hometown his statue was removed not so
long ago. Had to be done at night,though.

SPECIAL: Constitution intentionally vague
 

On Sep 17, 8:43*pm, "D. Peter Maus" wrote:
On 9/17/10 17:56 , m II wrote:

Isaac Newton supposedly said that energy and matter have an
equivalence and are interchangeable. That should be a few hundred
years before 1900. Then there are the ancient Greeks and their
atoms...where does it end?

* *Iowa.

LOL!

SPECIAL: Constitution intentionally vague
 

On Sep 16, 10:56*pm, wrote:
On Sep 16, 9:44*am, dave wrote:





Kevin Alfred Strom wrote:

But it's worse now. Multiple-thousand-page "laws" are passed by
legislators who never even bother to read them. And really, they
couldn't even if they wanted to -- there are too many. It's beyond
insane, beyond Kafkaesque. May the gods end it all soon.

With all good wishes,

Kevin Alfred Strom.

Why stop with the Constitution? *210 years ago people were generally a
lot smarter than they are now. Hell, look at the way they talked.

I'm all for returning to the principle that only Congress can declare
war. I'm also for confiscatory taxes to prevent family dynasties and
concentration of power at the top. *I'm for import duties to protect
domestic industry and for the abolition of standing armies. And the
pre-Marbury v Madison Supreme Court.

When you start pinin' for the good old days where do you stop?

And how, may we ask is it "that 210 years ago people were generally a
lot smarter than they are now" ? *I was always told that most people
(worldwide) were mostly illiterate until very recently. And how can we
sample a spoken recording of *such a time???

I think that the people of the time who *were* educated, without
knowing nearly so much as is known now, were far more philosophically
and classically trained as a rule. Reason and logic were held in high
esteem, unlike these days when instinct seems to be making a comeback
and narrowly-focused hedonism is more prevalent.

However, you are right - the ranks of the illiterate and substantially
uneducated were legion - and for most vocations of the time it
probably was not critical anyway. Formal education for farming,
blacksmithing, coopering, tailoring and etc. was apprenticeship.

SPECIAL: Constitution intentionally vague
 

On Sep 18, 2:39*am, bpnjensen wrote:
On Sep 16, 10:56*pm, wrote:





On Sep 16, 9:44*am, dave wrote:

Kevin Alfred Strom wrote:

But it's worse now. Multiple-thousand-page "laws" are passed by
legislators who never even bother to read them. And really, they
couldn't even if they wanted to -- there are too many. It's beyond
insane, beyond Kafkaesque. May the gods end it all soon.

With all good wishes,

Kevin Alfred Strom.

Why stop with the Constitution? *210 years ago people were generally a
lot smarter than they are now. Hell, look at the way they talked.

I'm all for returning to the principle that only Congress can declare
war. I'm also for confiscatory taxes to prevent family dynasties and
concentration of power at the top. *I'm for import duties to protect
domestic industry and for the abolition of standing armies. And the
pre-Marbury v Madison Supreme Court.

When you start pinin' for the good old days where do you stop?

And how, may we ask is it "that 210 years ago people were generally a
lot smarter than they are now" ? *I was always told that most people
(worldwide) were mostly illiterate until very recently. And how can we
sample a spoken recording of *such a time???

I think that the people of the time who *were* educated, without
knowing nearly so much as is known now, were far more philosophically
and classically trained as a rule. *Reason and logic were held in high
esteem, unlike these days when instinct seems to be making a comeback
and narrowly-focused hedonism is more prevalent.

However, you are right - the ranks of the illiterate and substantially
uneducated were legion - and for most vocations of the time it
probably was not critical anyway. *Formal education for farming,
blacksmithing, coopering, tailoring and etc. was apprenticeship.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Most people lived off the land they resided on until ( very roughly)
100-150 years ago. Village or parochial (in rural areas) education
could not hold a candle to what the contemporary city/town kids have
learned back in those days. Incidentally,one of the reasons why the
War between the States ended decisively was the superiority of
science,technology and education. And railroads. And telegraph. And
schools There is no substitute for knowledge.

SPECIAL: Constitution intentionally vague
 

On 9/18/10 02:01 , wrote:
On Sep 18, 2:39 am, wrote:
On Sep 16, 10:56 pm, wrote:





On Sep 16, 9:44 am, wrote:

Kevin Alfred Strom wrote:

But it's worse now. Multiple-thousand-page "laws" are passed by
legislators who never even bother to read them. And really, they
couldn't even if they wanted to -- there are too many. It's beyond
insane, beyond Kafkaesque. May the gods end it all soon.

With all good wishes,

Kevin Alfred Strom.

Why stop with the Constitution? 210 years ago people were generally a
lot smarter than they are now. Hell, look at the way they talked.

I'm all for returning to the principle that only Congress can declare
war. I'm also for confiscatory taxes to prevent family dynasties and
concentration of power at the top. I'm for import duties to protect
domestic industry and for the abolition of standing armies. And the
pre-Marbury v Madison Supreme Court.

When you start pinin' for the good old days where do you stop?

And how, may we ask is it "that 210 years ago people were generally a
lot smarter than they are now" ? I was always told that most people
(worldwide) were mostly illiterate until very recently. And how can we
sample a spoken recording of such a time???

I think that the people of the time who *were* educated, without
knowing nearly so much as is known now, were far more philosophically
and classically trained as a rule. Reason and logic were held in high
esteem, unlike these days when instinct seems to be making a comeback
and narrowly-focused hedonism is more prevalent.

However, you are right - the ranks of the illiterate and substantially
uneducated were legion - and for most vocations of the time it
probably was not critical anyway. Formal education for farming,
blacksmithing, coopering, tailoring and etc. was apprenticeship.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Most people lived off the land they resided on until ( very roughly)
100-150 years ago. Village or parochial (in rural areas) education
could not hold a candle to what the contemporary city/town kids have
learned back in those days. Incidentally,one of the reasons why the
War between the States ended decisively was the superiority of
science,technology and education. And railroads. And telegraph. And
schools There is no substitute for knowledge.


Unless you have cable.

SPECIAL : US Constitution Intentionally Vague About Spanking. . . {Tough Love}
 

SPECIAL: Constitution intentionally vague