>> The numerical results of the early primaries are presented in the
>> media. Those candidates not in the top one or two, are,
>> statistically, tagged as fighting a losing race, and most of them will
>> soon drop out, because there isn't enough money to continue
>> campaigning. Effectively, the media; the early voters; and the bank
>> accounts are ruling out 80% plus of the candidates before even 15% of
>> the members of that party have had a say-so. And THAT is clearly
>> unconstitutional from at least three different perspectives! First,
>> political parties are NOT sanctioned by the Constitution to be
>> determining anything done in the USA! Second, even if political
>> parties were sanctioned, having spaced-out primaries giving the most
>> influence to those living in the early primary states would be the
>> anti-thesis of a Representative Republic-like the USA was supposed to
>> be, but since day one, has not been. And third, allowing ANY campaign
>> to be limited by ones bank account allows money, rather than personal
>> experience and character to determine who stays in the race. The
>> Founding Fathers would not be happy about that!

>> Well before I contemplated writing us a New Constitution of the United
>> States of America, I was aware that tremendous pressure was being put
>> on candidates to publicly state that they will favor this or that
>> group in order to become the nominee. Most of the bad things that are
>> happening in the world is because of group-against-group fights.
>> Following elections, there will be huge celebrations when the nominee
>> of a particular party wins office. But on that very day, the next
>> campaign plans of the losing party are being formulated. In the USA,
>> we are split-down-the-aisle along unconstitutional party lines, and
>> the power keeps seesawing to allow the opposing party to again be on
>> top, at least for a while.

>> What I've put in a nutshell is the regrettable norm of politics. No
>> New Constitution having the objective of being FAIR to all law-abiding
>> citizens can allow the status quo norms to continue! Since political
>> parties are the anti-thesis of a Representative Republic, how, then,
>> will we decide whom is to be our President? By reading the following,
>> most should realize that, finally, it will be the voters, NOT any
>> biased group pressures, determining whom the President will be.

>> From Article I, Section 4: "Representatives shall not intentionally
>> communicate with any news medium whose coverage area is predominately
>> outside of their home district. Nor shall they, or any government
>> official, cultivate a media personae, or make petty public speeches,
>> introductions or comments lauding any person, living or dead, nor any
>> civil or private projects or those responsible. Comments to media by
>> representatives or government employees shall be germane to pending
>> legislation, or to the exercise of their jobs. The media shall not
>> solicit public officials' opinions over those of the People. The
>> American Flag shall be red, white, and readily discernable blue. Only
>> when the President or Secretary of State are addressing the nation or
>> appearing before or receiving foreign dignitaries shall the American
>> Flag, bunting, or flag-color drapes be used as a backdrop. No other
>> public official nor candidate shall use such. Flags shall not be
>> displayed in or outside of government buildings other than: public
>> schools, post offices, military bases, memorials, the White House, the
>> Pentagon, and outside of the Capital or other government seats. Use
>> this public oath: "I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag of the United
>> States of America and to the Democracy-on-demand Republic for which it
>> stands. We're One Nation of individuals who champion fair play,
>> maximum civil liberties, the Right of Self-determination, and having
>> an efficient, unobtrusive and deferential government." Governments
>> aren't graders of performance, style, art, design, history, nor social
>> significance, and shall make no law, proclamation, stamp or other
>> acclaim recognizing any persons, organizations or events in history.
>> Public officials shall make judgments within their expertise or shall
>> poll unbiased experts, or the Citizens, and defer to the opinions of
>> such.

>> And. from Article I, Section 9: "It is unlawful for representatives
>> to intentionally reveal affiliation with any political party or
>> political activist group, whatsoever, and unlawful for representatives
>> to assemble in such groups, or in pro or con factions, for the purpose
>> of gaining persuasion over any vote." And. also from Section 9:
>> "Representatives shall not be polled concerning issues up for a vote,
>> nor shall Citizens be polled prior to any election on their support
>> for any candidate, amendment, or referendum item. It shall be a
>> felony to take, or to disseminate, the results of any such poll. But
>> representatives shall poll those law-abiding Citizens within their
>> districts who are most affected by any bill, and defer to the results
>> in voting. No release of projected election or referenda results
>> shall be made until all polls have been closed one hour.

>> "Article II:

>> Section 1: Executive power shall be vested in a President of the
>> United States of America. Candidates for President shall be Citizens
>> born in the USA who are at least 35 years of age. With the exception
>> of the incumbent President and/or VP-if eligible and seeking re
>> election-other candidates shall, within ninety days of the date of
>> filing as a candidate for President, have obtained the endorsement of
>> a minimum of 25,000 confirmed registered voters knowledgeable of such
>> candidate's qualifications. The 3rd Tuesday in July, voters of all
>> the states and territories shall reduce the field of presidential
>> candidates to 8, with the incumbent Pres. & VP to be included in such
>> number, if applicable. The 3rd Tuesday in October, voters shall
>> reduce the field to four, with the incumbent Pres. and VP not
>> automatically included. The 1st Tuesday in November, each voter
>> selects their 1st & 2nd choices-points 4 and 3 respectively. The
>> President and Vice President Elect receive the highest and the 2nd
>> highest total points."

>> And. from Section 4: "It shall be a felony for any government
>> official, celebrity or media idol-past or present-to publicly endorse
>> or campaign on behalf of any candidate for public office or job.
>> Candidates for public office shall be disqualified for: soliciting the
>> votes of any ideologically-biased group or obtaining the endorsement
>> of such a group, as by addressing a gathering that is composed only of
>> the biased members of such; soliciting new voter registrants; and
>> aiding or organizing the transportation of voters to the polls. The
>> winners in national elections shall be determined only by the popular
>> vote totals, irrespective of State borders. Therefore, any candidate
>> for such offices shall be disqualified for making campaign appearances
>> to target the voters of any state, county or city. Voters shall make
>> their decisions based on non-media-sponsored televised debates and on
>> fair and unscripted candidate interviews-televised nationally-and held
>> no sooner than four months before the specific election."

>> And. from Amendment 1: "Freedom of the press or other medium mandates
>> that there be reasonable truthfulness in reporting. Wanton distortion
>> of the truth, or deliberate omission of the truth-except in cases of
>> obvious fiction or satire-is prohibited. Stating or implying that a
>> particular news medium has a collective voice (we) or position on any
>> issue is prohibited, as for example via: anonymous editorials;
>> regularly occurring accompanying comments; commentary programs
>> financed by, or ideologically screened by, the same news medium;
>> editorials named as being authored by management; editorial comments
>> by others that are in any way ideologically censored, omitted or
>> screened; or by comments occurring at specific times or designated
>> locations that most would come to associate with the management of
>> such medium, even if such are innocuous. No medium shall be a forum
>> for promoting the ideology of its management or owners, nor shall they
>> employ anyone who uses such job to hawk their personal political
>> preferences-at risk of loss of license or closure of the business.

> As shown by ancient Greek and Roman writers such as Polybius,
> and by the American Founding Fathers in the Federalist Papers,
> the most stable forms of government
> have featured a strong executive,

> The best way to do this would be to randomly
> select a "House of Representatives"
> from a pool of ANYONE who wanted the job,

> and to sell the seats in the "Elite Senate" to the highest bidders,
> NO MATTER who they are or where they live,
> as the elite are multinational in truth.

> The department heads (Defense, State, housing, transportation, etc.)
>  would be screened by the Senate, and accepted by the Representatives,

> The Senate would have the power to shift a certain percentages of the
> resources and responsibilities around in the executive,
> for SHORT periods of time during emergencies,
> after which the shift had to be approved by the Representatives.

> The Senators, which would be composed of the most successful business
> people,

> The Representatives would have power to select Judges,
> and to initiate budgets,
> which would have to be approved by the Senate.

> And in order to prevent Judges from being biased
> to the left ( Catering to the masses. )
> or the right ( Catering to the elite. )

> any Federal Judge could be removed
> by two thirds of either the Senators or the Representatives.

> A system like this would make for a true democracy,
> would eliminate the hostility and division that results from the two party
> system, and it would prevent media, search engines, foreign nations,
> religions, unions, etc. from co-opting the government by various tactics.

> The system would also protect the elite and give them the confidence to make
> the large, long term investments that are needed to build a viable society.
> As the power of the executive would be divided, it would be impossible for
> any one man to grab all of the power, and it would eliminate the situations
> where fools, wanabe tyrants, immoral people, and loose cannons have their
> hands on the nuclear button, and most of the power.

> The responsibilities between the Senate and the Representatives would be
> pretty much along the same lines as it is in the American Congress. The
> Senate would be more responsible for treaties, and the Representatives would
> be most responsible for budgets, crime and punishment.

> Observe that selecting Representatives randomly
> would insure that the masses are truly represented,
> and that selling Senate seats to the highest bidder
> would insure that the elite are truly represented.

> > As shown by ancient Greek and Roman writers such as Polybius,
> > and by the American Founding Fathers in the Federalist Papers,
> > the most stable forms of government
> > have featured a strong executive,

> A huge mistake being made regarding the “executive” (or President) is
> that such person’s ideals and proposals for America matter very much.
> An executive needs to manage people and to orchestrate running the
> land based on the Laws that are in place.  'The Donald' has more, true
> executive experience and native ability than all of the other (had
> been) candidates combined.  And his views on how to deal with China,
> and with OPEC, certainly would be legal.

> The best, and most efficient form of government would be a benevolent
> dictatorship.  Of course, it would help if that dictator was as wise
> as Solomon, and as tight with the tax money as possible.  Being
> benevolent, in my ideal, is making decisions that will foster having
> the optimum interactions of all portions of society and of
> businesses.  It is not about giving free lunches to anyone.  Most
> people don’t mind working for a living so long as they know others
> aren’t getting monetary favors.  And once things are as fair as
> possible, most won’t mind being charitable to neighbors in true need.
> There is a reluctance to be charitable if “government” is perceived as
> looking out for everyone.  Once that latter cancerous ’bubble’ is
> busted, things can start improving, quickly.

> > provided stability for the elite to implement long term and costly projects,
> > and functioned to serve the masses.

> > The best way to do this would be to randomly
> > select a "House of Representatives"
> > from a pool of ANYONE who wanted the job,

> If the people are selected, randomly, then the ones pulled out of the
> “selective service” hat wouldn’t be “representatives” at all.  What
> you say ‘might’ work, but only if the randomly chosen ones poll the
> voters in their districts to be sure the House votes being made are
> acceptable to the voters.

> > and to sell the seats in the "Elite Senate" to the highest bidders,
> > NO MATTER who they are or where they live,
> > as the elite are multinational in truth.

> Those egomaniac JERKS who run for Senate seats are, effectively,
> buying their way into office—either by the high cost (millions) of
> their campaigns, or by the implied bribes of “free lunches” if such
> and such candidate wins.  Oligarchies are the anti-thesis of a
> Representative Republic.  Don’t try to “save” such a self-serving
> governing body that bribed its way into being in the first place!

> > The department heads (Defense, State, housing, transportation, etc.)
> >  would be screened by the Senate, and accepted by the Representatives,

> Oh.  So, you think the Senate should have the power to select, and the
> House can only say yea or nay.

> > and the department heads would select someone to be the "Buck Stopper".

> > The Senate would have the power to shift a certain percentages of the
> > resources and responsibilities around in the executive,
> > for SHORT periods of time during emergencies,
> > after which the shift had to be approved by the Representatives.

> The president can declare war, but only for a short while until things
> must be approved by the Congress.

> > The Senators, which would be composed of the most successful business
> > people,

> The US Senate is composed, primarily, of CAREER politicians, most of
> whom had a decade or so of experience being God damned lawyers. Is it
> any wonder that things in this country are so adversarial?
> Collectively, there is very little true business management experience
> in the Senate nor in the House.  My “NC” removes the EGO component
> from those willing to run for public office.  Finally, smart executive
> types, not expected to be in the public eye all of the time, will
> start running for public office!  Our governments’ failings are
> largely personnel issues.  Once we take away the career politicians
> with term limits and etc., and deny allowing national media
> interaction with Congress, our governmental processes can start being
> pragmatic.

> > understand what it takes to be a good executive,
> > whereas the masses do not,
> > and as can seen by many presidential appointments, most presidents do not.

> > The Representatives would have power to select Judges,
> > and to initiate budgets,
> > which would have to be approved by the Senate.

> Tom, before you start giving powers to branches of government,
> shouldn’t we be sure that there are no built-in biases in the
> branches?  The unconstitutional democrats control the Senate, and
> nothing (like a budget) is getting done.  Don’t you realize that the
> House and Senate are always at odds?  Only the HOUSE is needed to have
> representative government.  The Senate is just a HUGE embarrassment
> that I have rightly eliminated in my “NC”.

> > And in order to prevent Judges from being biased
> > to the left ( Catering to the masses. )
> > or the right ( Catering to the elite. )

> > any Federal Judge could be removed
> > by two thirds of either the Senators or the Representatives.

> Here is what my “NC” says:

> Article III:

> Section 1:  The lesser Judicial Branch consists of a High Court and
> such inferior courts as the House establishes.  Its major duty is to
> interpret laws.  It has no power to command enforcement of any of its
> rulings unless so mandated in prior, formally stipulated and apt
> laws.  Judges and justices are technicians of the law and of this New
> Constitution.  They shall perform their duties as individuals, never
> as part of any perceived culture of the lesser Judicial Branch, nor
> from any consultation whatsoever with past or present members of
> such.  Additionally, they shall not have held state or federal
> executive or legislative office.  The President shall nominate new
> justices who are between the ages of 50 and 60 years old, and may on
> good behavior, serve a single term of up to 10 years.  The President,
> or his agents, shall not work to win the confirmation of any
> nominee.   Judges and justices shall be selected for their intellect,
> high moral character, compassion, knowledge of the law, likable
> nature, and for their proficiency and expediency in office.  Such
> shall not be aloft nor considered infallible in all their judgments,
> yet shall be respected if they right injustices quickly.  They shall
> make decisions based on apt laws and this New Constitution—never on
> their personal ideologies.  *** Every two years an unbiased review
> panel shall apprise the Citizens of the job performance grade, as
> herein, of seated judges and justices.  With the assent of 60% of the
> voters nationwide, the latter can be unseated.  Judges and justices
> aren’t royalty, nor do they have an implied moral judgment inherently
> superior to public macro-consensus.   They shall not be chambered
> lavishly, sit in throne-like chairs, wear robes on the job, nor dress
> in a style that differentiates them from the People.  They shall not
> socialize with, nor privately be in conference with, members of the
> Executive or Legislative branches of government; nor shall they attend
> State of the Union Addresses or similar events.  The Public shall not
> stand for entering or exiting judges or justices who shall be
> addressed only as: judge or justice.  Judges and justices not
> respecting such provisions, or who exhibit excessive arrogance or
> pomposity on the job shall be removed.  Sessions of all trials shall
> begin with the judge(s) or justice(s) saying: “The justice system is
> on trial.”  All assent five-to-four High Court decisions are for one
> year only, or shall be invalid; and the same nine justices shall not—
> on their own—reconsider such issue.  Courtrooms shall be devoid of
> gavels, seals, flags and oppressive art, and no design feature nor
> process shall imply that judges or justices represent government or
> respond patly or collectively.  It is TREASON for a judge or justice
> to rule with disfavor on the supremacy of a fair democracy.

> > A system like this would make for a true democracy,
> > would eliminate the hostility and division that results from the two party
> > system, and it would prevent media, search engines, foreign nations,
> > religions, unions, etc. from co-opting the government by various tactics.

> Tom, how do any of the excerpts that I’ve given on my “NC” fail to
> have adequate controls and protections?

> > The system would also protect the elite and give them the confidence to make
> > the large, long term investments that are needed to build a viable society.
> > As the power of the executive would be divided, it would be impossible for
> > any one man to grab all of the power, and it would eliminate the situations
> > where fools, wanabe tyrants, immoral people, and loose cannons have their
> > hands on the nuclear button, and most of the power.

> > The responsibilities between the Senate and the Representatives would be
> > pretty much along the same lines as it is in the American Congress. The
> > Senate would be more responsible for treaties, and the Representatives would
> > be most responsible for budgets,

> > Hello Tom!  Have the Jews gotten to China, yet?  You can be credited
> > with having some real original ideas about how government should
> > work.  I’ll inject several, I hope informative, insights where apt.  —
> > NoEinstein — AKA John A. Armistead, Author and Patriot

> > > As shown by ancient Greek and Roman writers such as Polybius,
> > > and by the American Founding Fathers in the Federalist Papers,
> > > the most stable forms of government
> > > have featured a strong executive,

> > A huge mistake being made regarding the “executive” (or President) is
> > that such person’s ideals and proposals for America matter very much.
> > An executive needs to manage people and to orchestrate running the
> > land based on the Laws that are in place.  'The Donald' has more, true
> > executive experience and native ability than all of the other (had
> > been) candidates combined.  And his views on how to deal with China,
> > and with OPEC, certainly would be legal.

> > The best, and most efficient form of government would be a benevolent
> > dictatorship.  Of course, it would help if that dictator was as wise
> > as Solomon, and as tight with the tax money as possible.  Being
> > benevolent, in my ideal, is making decisions that will foster having
> > the optimum interactions of all portions of society and of
> > businesses.  It is not about giving free lunches to anyone.  Most
> > people don’t mind working for a living so long as they know others
> > aren’t getting monetary favors.  And once things are as fair as
> > possible, most won’t mind being charitable to neighbors in true need.
> > There is a reluctance to be charitable if “government” is perceived as
> > looking out for everyone.  Once that latter cancerous ’bubble’ is
> > busted, things can start improving, quickly.

> > > provided stability for the elite to implement long term and costly projects,
> > > and functioned to serve the masses.

> > > The best way to do this would be to randomly
> > > select a "House of Representatives"
> > > from a pool of ANYONE who wanted the job,

> > If the people are selected, randomly, then the ones pulled out of the
> > “selective service” hat wouldn’t be “representatives” at all.  What
> > you say ‘might’ work, but only if the randomly chosen ones poll the
> > voters in their districts to be sure the House votes being made are
> > acceptable to the voters.

> > > and to sell the seats in the "Elite Senate" to the highest bidders,
> > > NO MATTER who they are or where they live,
> > > as the elite are multinational in truth.

> > Those egomaniac JERKS who run for Senate seats are, effectively,
> > buying their way into office—either by the high cost (millions) of
> > their campaigns, or by the implied bribes of “free lunches” if such
> > and such candidate wins.  Oligarchies are the anti-thesis of a
> > Representative Republic.  Don’t try to “save” such a self-serving
> > governing body that bribed its way into being in the first place!

> > > The department heads (Defense, State, housing, transportation, etc.)
> > >  would be screened by the Senate, and accepted by the Representatives,

> > Oh.  So, you think the Senate should have the power to select, and the
> > House can only say yea or nay.

> > > and the department heads would select someone to be the "Buck Stopper".

> > > The Senate would have the power to shift a certain percentages of the
> > > resources and responsibilities around in the executive,
> > > for SHORT periods of time during emergencies,
> > > after which the shift had to be approved by the Representatives.

> > The president can declare war, but only for a short while until things
> > must be approved by the Congress.

> > > The Senators, which would be composed of the most successful business
> > > people,

> > The US Senate is composed, primarily, of CAREER politicians, most of
> > whom had a decade or so of experience being God damned lawyers. Is it
> > any wonder that things in this country are so adversarial?
> > Collectively, there is very little true business management experience
> > in the Senate nor in the House.  My “NC” removes the EGO component
> > from those willing to run for public office.  Finally, smart executive
> > types, not expected to be in the public eye all of the time, will
> > start running for public office!  Our governments’ failings are
> > largely personnel issues.  Once we take away the career politicians
> > with term limits and etc., and deny allowing national media
> > interaction with Congress, our governmental processes can start being
> > pragmatic.

> > > understand what it takes to be a good executive,
> > > whereas the masses do not,
> > > and as can seen by many presidential appointments, most presidents do not.

> > > The Representatives would have power to select Judges,
> > > and to initiate budgets,
> > > which would have to be approved by the Senate.

> > Tom, before you start giving powers to branches of government,
> > shouldn’t we be sure that there are no built-in biases in the
> > branches?  The unconstitutional democrats control the Senate, and
> > nothing (like a budget) is getting done.  Don’t you realize that the
> > House and Senate are always at odds?  Only the HOUSE is needed to have
> > representative government.  The Senate is just a HUGE embarrassment
> > that I have rightly eliminated in my “NC”.

> > > And in order to prevent Judges from being biased
> > > to the left ( Catering to the masses. )
> > > or the right ( Catering to the elite. )

> > > any Federal Judge could be removed
> > > by two thirds of either the Senators or the Representatives.

> > Here is what my “NC” says:

> > Article III:

> > Section 1:  The lesser Judicial Branch consists of a High Court and
> > such inferior courts as the House establishes.  Its major duty is to
> > interpret laws.  It has no power to command enforcement of any of its
> > rulings unless so mandated in prior, formally stipulated and apt
> > laws.  Judges and justices are technicians of the law and of this New
> > Constitution.  They shall perform their duties as individuals, never
> > as part of any perceived culture of the lesser Judicial Branch, nor
> > from any consultation whatsoever with past or present members of
> > such.  Additionally, they shall not have held state or federal
> > executive or legislative office.  The President shall nominate new
> > justices who are between the ages of 50 and 60 years old, and may on
> > good behavior, serve a single term of up to 10 years.  The President,
> > or his agents, shall not work to win the confirmation of any
> > nominee.   Judges and justices shall be selected for their intellect,
> > high moral character, compassion, knowledge of the law, likable
> > nature, and for their proficiency and expediency in office.  Such
> > shall not be aloft nor considered infallible in all their judgments,
> > yet shall be respected if they right injustices quickly.  They shall
> > make decisions based on apt laws and this New Constitution—never on
> > their personal ideologies.  *** Every two years an unbiased review
> > panel shall apprise the Citizens of the job performance grade, as
> > herein, of seated judges and justices.  With the assent of 60% of the
> > voters nationwide, the latter can be unseated.  Judges and justices
> > aren’t royalty, nor do they have an implied moral judgment inherently
> > superior to public macro-consensus.   They shall not be chambered
> > lavishly, sit in throne-like chairs, wear robes on the job, nor dress
> > in a style that differentiates them from the People.  They shall not
> > socialize with, nor privately be in conference with, members of the
> > Executive or Legislative branches of government; nor shall they attend
> > State of the Union Addresses or similar events.  The Public shall not
> > stand for entering or exiting judges or justices who shall be
> > addressed only as: judge or justice.  Judges and justices not
> > respecting such provisions, or who exhibit excessive arrogance or
> > pomposity on the job shall be removed.  Sessions of all trials shall
> > begin with the judge(s) or justice(s) saying: “The justice system is
> > on trial.”  All assent five-to-four High Court decisions are for one
> > year only, or shall be invalid; and the same nine justices shall not—
> > on their own—reconsider such issue.  Courtrooms shall be devoid of
> > gavels, seals, flags and oppressive art, and no design feature nor
> > process shall imply that judges or justices represent government or
> > respond patly or collectively.  It is TREASON for a judge or justice
> > to rule with disfavor on the supremacy of a fair democracy.

> > > A system like this would make for a true democracy,
> > > would eliminate the hostility and division that results from the two party
> > > system, and it would prevent media, search engines, foreign nations,
> > > religions, unions, etc. from co-opting the government by various tactics.

> > Tom, how do any of the excerpts that I’ve given on my “NC” fail to
> > have adequate controls and protections?

> > > The system would also protect the elite and give them the confidence to make
> > > the large, long term investments that are needed to build a viable society.
> > > As the power of the executive would be divided, it would be impossible for
> > > any one man to grab all of the power, and it would eliminate the situations
> > > where fools, wanabe tyrants, immoral people, and loose cannons have their
> > > hands on

> On Oct 10, 7:02 am, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:

> > On Oct 3, 10:59 am, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:

> > > Hello Tom!  Have the Jews gotten to China, yet?  You can be credited
> > > with having some real original ideas about how government should
> > > work.  I’ll inject several, I hope informative, insights where apt.  —
> > > NoEinstein — AKA John A. Armistead, Author and Patriot

> > > > As shown by ancient Greek and Roman writers such as Polybius,
> > > > and by the American Founding Fathers in the Federalist Papers,
> > > > the most stable forms of government
> > > > have featured a strong executive,

> > > A huge mistake being made regarding the “executive” (or President) is
> > > that such person’s ideals and proposals for America matter very much.
> > > An executive needs to manage people and to orchestrate running the
> > > land based on the Laws that are in place.  'The Donald' has more, true
> > > executive experience and native ability than all of the other (had
> > > been) candidates combined.  And his views on how to deal with China,
> > > and with OPEC, certainly would be legal.

> > > The best, and most efficient form of government would be a benevolent
> > > dictatorship.  Of course, it would help if that dictator was as wise
> > > as Solomon, and as tight with the tax money as possible.  Being
> > > benevolent, in my ideal, is making decisions that will foster having
> > > the optimum interactions of all portions of society and of
> > > businesses.  It is not about giving free lunches to anyone.  Most
> > > people don’t mind working for a living so long as they know others
> > > aren’t getting monetary favors.  And once things are as fair as
> > > possible, most won’t mind being charitable to neighbors in true need.
> > > There is a reluctance to be charitable if “government” is perceived as
> > > looking out for everyone.  Once that latter cancerous ’bubble’ is
> > > busted, things can start improving, quickly.

> > > > provided stability for the elite to implement long term and costly projects,
> > > > and functioned to serve the masses.

> > > > The best way to do this would be to randomly
> > > > select a "House of Representatives"
> > > > from a pool of ANYONE who wanted the job,

> > > If the people are selected, randomly, then the ones pulled out of the
> > > “selective service” hat wouldn’t be “representatives” at all.  What
> > > you say ‘might’ work, but only if the randomly chosen ones poll the
> > > voters in their districts to be sure the House votes being made are
> > > acceptable to the voters.

> > > > and to sell the seats in the "Elite Senate" to the highest bidders,
> > > > NO MATTER who they are or where they live,
> > > > as the elite are multinational in truth.

> > > Those egomaniac JERKS who run for Senate seats are, effectively,
> > > buying their way into office—either by the high cost (millions) of
> > > their campaigns, or by the implied bribes of “free lunches” if such
> > > and such candidate wins.  Oligarchies are the anti-thesis of a
> > > Representative Republic.  Don’t try to “save” such a self-serving
> > > governing body that bribed its way into being in the first place!

> > > > The department heads (Defense, State, housing, transportation, etc.)
> > > >  would be screened by the Senate, and accepted by the Representatives,

> > > Oh.  So, you think the Senate should have the power to select, and the
> > > House can only say yea or nay.

> > > > and the department heads would select someone to be the "Buck Stopper".

> > > > The Senate would have the power to shift a certain percentages of the
> > > > resources and responsibilities around in the executive,
> > > > for SHORT periods of time during emergencies,
> > > > after which the shift had to be approved by the Representatives.

> > > The president can declare war, but only for a short while until things
> > > must be approved by the Congress.

> > > > The Senators, which would be composed of the most successful business
> > > > people,

> > > The US Senate is composed, primarily, of CAREER politicians, most of
> > > whom had a decade or so of experience being God damned lawyers. Is it
> > > any wonder that things in this country are so adversarial?
> > > Collectively, there is very little true business management experience
> > > in the Senate nor in the House.  My “NC” removes the EGO component
> > > from those willing to run for public office.  Finally, smart executive
> > > types, not expected to be in the public eye all of the time, will
> > > start running for public office!  Our governments’ failings are
> > > largely personnel issues.  Once we take away the career politicians
> > > with term limits and etc., and deny allowing national media
> > > interaction with Congress, our governmental processes can start being
> > > pragmatic.

> > > > understand what it takes to be a good executive,
> > > > whereas the masses do not,
> > > > and as can seen by many presidential appointments, most presidents do not.

> > > > The Representatives would have power to select Judges,
> > > > and to initiate budgets,
> > > > which would have to be approved by the Senate.

> > > Tom, before you start giving powers to branches of government,
> > > shouldn’t we be sure that there are no built-in biases in the
> > > branches?  The unconstitutional democrats control the Senate, and
> > > nothing (like a budget) is getting done.  Don’t you realize that the
> > > House and Senate are always at odds?  Only the HOUSE is needed to have
> > > representative government.  The Senate is just a HUGE embarrassment
> > > that I have rightly eliminated in my “NC”.

> > > > And in order to prevent Judges from being biased
> > > > to the left ( Catering to the masses. )
> > > > or the right ( Catering to the elite. )

> > > > any Federal Judge could be removed
> > > > by two thirds of either the Senators or the Representatives.

> > > Here is what my “NC” says:

> > > Article III:

> > > Section 1:  The lesser Judicial Branch consists of a High Court and
> > > such inferior courts as the House establishes.  Its major duty is to
> > > interpret laws.  It has no power to command enforcement of any of its
> > > rulings unless so mandated in prior, formally stipulated and apt
> > > laws.  Judges and justices are technicians of the law and of this New
> > > Constitution.  They shall perform their duties as individuals, never
> > > as part of any perceived culture of the lesser Judicial Branch, nor
> > > from any consultation whatsoever with past or present members of
> > > such.  Additionally, they shall not have held state or federal
> > > executive or legislative office.  The President shall nominate new
> > > justices who are between the ages of 50 and 60 years old, and may on
> > > good behavior, serve a single term of up to 10 years.  The President,
> > > or his agents, shall not work to win the confirmation of any
> > > nominee.   Judges and justices shall be selected for their intellect,
> > > high moral character, compassion, knowledge of the law, likable
> > > nature, and for their proficiency and expediency in office.  Such
> > > shall not be aloft nor considered infallible in all their judgments,
> > > yet shall be respected if they right injustices quickly.  They shall
> > > make decisions based on apt laws and this New Constitution—never on
> > > their personal ideologies.  *** Every two years an unbiased review
> > > panel shall apprise the Citizens of the job performance grade, as
> > > herein, of seated judges and justices.  With the assent of 60% of the
> > > voters nationwide, the latter can be unseated.  Judges and justices
> > > aren’t royalty, nor do they have an implied moral judgment inherently
> > > superior to public macro-consensus.   They shall not be chambered
> > > lavishly, sit in throne-like chairs, wear robes on the job, nor dress
> > > in a style that differentiates them from the People.  They shall not
> > > socialize with, nor privately be in conference with, members of the
> > > Executive or Legislative branches of government; nor shall they attend
> > > State of the Union Addresses or similar events.  The Public shall not
> > > stand for entering or exiting judges or justices who shall be
> > > addressed only as: judge or justice.  Judges and justices not
> > > respecting such provisions, or who exhibit excessive arrogance or
> > > pomposity on the job shall be removed.  Sessions of all trials shall
> > > begin with the judge(s) or justice(s) saying: “The justice system is
> > > on trial.”  All assent five-to-four High Court decisions are for one
> > > year only, or shall be invalid; and the same nine justices shall not—
> > > on their own—reconsider such issue.  Courtrooms shall be devoid of
> > > gavels, seals, flags and oppressive art, and no design feature nor
> > > process shall imply that judges or justices represent government or
> > > respond patly or collectively.  It is TREASON for a judge or justice
> > > to rule with disfavor on the supremacy of a fair democracy.

> > > > A system like this would make for a true

> On Oct 17, 9:55 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:

> Dear Readers:  The height of Glenn Beck’s patriotic fervor on Fox
> News, three years ago, was when he showed up wearing combat boots.  At
> the end of that particular show, he boldly told his viewing audience
> that he would not take off those combat boots until our out-of-control
> government is reined-in.  That was about the time that the ‘Tea Party’
> was stressing having government be fiscally responsible as well as
> answerable to the Will of the People.  I was disappointed that Beck,
> to my knowledge, only wore combat boots that one day.  He mentioned on
> a subsequent show that he had been getting death threats.  He also
> mentioned that the Obama administration had given out a directive
> allowing ‘terrorists’ to be shot, with impunity, for threatening this
> country in any way.  In a very short time, the “steam” was taken out
> of Beck’s TV show.  The show’s decline coincided with his shift of
> topic away from… “revolt!” and toward American history and the
> righteousness of our fore bearers.  That must have struck a responsive
> chord with the religious right, because over 700,000 people showed up
> for his Washington rally, last year, including a flight of curious
> Canada geese.

> At the rally, Beck said that there might be a young “George
> Washington” in the crowd who will one day straighten out our many
> governmental woes.  For the ‘latter’, post-revolt Beck, the solutions
> to what ails this country are things in the future, not things in the
> present.  Perhaps to prove that his intentions are peaceful, he
> shifted emphasis from “now” to future, and from “us” to God, as though
> there are no solutions to be found without help from the Devine.
> Judging by the attendance, or non attendance, at his next gathering,
> the steam seemed to have gone out of the latter rallying-cry, too.

> I was and am offended by those who see saving the USA as some slow,
> work-within-the-system process.  This anecdote, with a message, is
> apt: The low-lying areas of a town were flooding.  When it became
> obvious that a man’s home was in the path, he climbed up on the roof
> of the porch.  A neighbor, with a row boat, offered to transport him
> to safe ground, but he said, “I’m fine; the Lord will take care of
> me.”  The water kept rising, so the man climbed up onto the higher,
> main roof.  A police power boat came by.  Again, the man said, “I’m
> fine; the Lord will take care of me.”  Not long after that the man was
> forced to climb up onto his chimney in order to be above water.  A
> Coast Guard helicopter dangled a life ring on a rope, but the man
> waved it away, saying, “I’m fine, the Lord will look after me.”  Half
> an hour later, this same, now angry, man was at the Pearly Gate.  He
> told Saint Peter: “I put my FAITH in the Lord and he let me down!”  To
> which Saint Peter replied: “No He didn’t!  Who do you think sent those
> two boats and that helicopter?”

> It doesn’t require a young “George Washington” politician… to save the
> USA, it only requires me, John A. Armistead.  I’m a wise, patriotic
> and super-intelligent man.  I’ve worked for 16 plus years, OUTSIDE of
> the corrupt political processes, to quite easily SAVE the USA in

> On Oct 22, 12:50 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:

> Time was when the killing of an American citizen by any foreign
> government, or by foreign government affiliates, and especially the
> killing of an American public official, would cause immediate military
> retaliation.  There are records of emails that were sent to the White
> House, and to other seats of departments of our government, that prove
> that the White House was informed within one hour that an attack on
> the US Embassy compound in Benghazi, Libya was under way.  But the
> White House did not order the immediate sending-in of troops, that
> were as close as a mile away, to save, perhaps three of those who
> would be killed within the next seven to eight hours.

> Yesterday—apparently at the bequest of the Obama Administration—former
> General Colen Powel went before the media to explain that it ‘took
> time’ to realize what was going on in Libya and ‘took time’ to order
> the launching of two drones to confirm what was happening.  Powel then
> gave this most criminally-shallow rationale: “We don’t send troops
> into harm’s way without justification.”

> First, by logic—which Colen Powel is apparently incapable of using—the
> sending of troops to the embassy compound, when there wasn’t an attack
> going on there, could not possibly place anyone in danger.  Second,
> Powel knew that troops would be going into “harm’s way”.   So, the
> White House, in a likely ‘Freudian slip’, indicates that they knew
> there was fighting going on in Benghazi and knew that an American
> diplomat and soldiers were in mortal danger—but they did nothing.

> Here is how the White House could have, within one minute’s time,
> determined the truth about what was “likely” happening at that embassy
> compound, and without wasting hours ordering the launching of unarmed
> drones.  *** They could have phoned the people in that place and
> asked:  “Is the Embassy under attack?”  A reply like: “Yes!  Please
> send military help, immediately!” should have caused helicopter gun
> ships to be launched, and troop reinforcements to be dispatched.

> To add insult to his own treasonous aiding-and-abetting of the ENEMY,
> Barack Hussein Obama, Colen Powel went on the say, as he did in 2008,
> that he continues to endorse Obama for President.  Whether you like
> him or not (I don‘t.), Charles Krauthammer supposed that there aren’t
> ten people who will be swayed to vote for Obama because of Powel’s
> endorsement.  It’s amazing to me how someone with the “caged smarts”
> of Charles Krauthammer doesn’t have the moral backbone to call Obama,
> the Kenyan squatter-in-the-White House, a TRAITOR to the USA who
> should be HANGED for treason.  Isn’t it logical to use capital
> punishment on THE most damaging “human” ever to set foot on American
> soil?  Isn’t “robbing” 4,000 plus dollars from every family in
> America, and promoting a form of government that is dooming this
> country, treason?    The liberal publishers of Krauthammer’s
> syndicated news commentary columns don’t think so.  As a result, low-
> morals Krauthammer JUMPS whenever his liberal bosses tell him how
> high.  Sad but true; sad but true.

> The likely reason that Obama ’sacrificed’ those Americans in Benghazi
> is this:  One of the top “accomplishments” of his term—while he has
> been squatting as President—was the killing of Osama Ben Laden.  By
> that deed, Obama and Biden have implied that the USA is safer from
> terrorism.  Obama has also been downsizing the military.  He probably
> realized that if he ordered military action that was too little too
> late, his arguments for reducing our military would be shot all to
> hell.  There was a real possibility that if a huge and angry outcry
> went up from the White House against Muslim extremists, that there
> would be an immediate, greater risk of a deadly attack, here in the
> USA.  In either case, the demand on Obama’s time would reduce the
> amount of campaigning he can do, and reduce his chances of continuing
> to destroy our country via socialism and communism, in a… second term.

> Most politicians are chameleons.  Today, “Laughing” Joe Biden did a
> credible job of eulogizing former Senator George McGovern—for whom I
> had voted for president.  Like millions of Americans, I was against
> the Vietnam ’war’.  My rationale is that no American should be asked
> to “go-into-harm’s-way” for any reason not supported by the vast
> majority of Americans.  When the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, the
> vast majority of Americans were in favor of fighting.   But there
> wasn’t even a simple majority of Americans agreeing that our young men
> risk all in Vietnam.

> I had forgotten that McGovern was responsible for “food stamps”.  As I
> would gradually figure out, “charity” should be dispensed by private
> citizens, close to home, and seldom if ever should be dispensed by
> government programs.  If McGovern were alive, today, I wouldn’t vote
> for him.  But if Biden was as consistently nice in “tone” as he was,
> today, at McGovern’s funeral, there would probably be more people
> willing to vote Obama-Biden.  Of course, both of those men are
> criminals of the highest order.  Both should be arrested,
> immediately!  Two billion dollars is a shameful amount of money to
> waste on any campaign for President.  My New Constitution will END
> state by state campaigning once and for all!  From Article II, Section
> 4:
> “… Candidates for public office shall be disqualified for: soliciting
> the votes of any ideologically-biased group or obtaining the
> endorsement of such a group, as by addressing a gathering that is
> composed only of the biased members of such; soliciting new voter
> registrants; and aiding or organizing the transportation of voters to
> the polls.  The winners in national elections shall be determined only
> by the popular vote totals, irrespective of State borders.  Therefore,
> any candidate for such offices shall be disqualified for making
> campaign appearances to target the voters of any state, county or
> city.  Voters shall make their decisions based on non-media-sponsored
> televised debates and on fair and unscripted candidate interviews—
> televised nationally—and held no sooner than four months before the
> specific election.”

> Best wishes to all Americans who are good at heart.

> Respectfully submitted,

> John A. Armistead, Author and Patriot
> AKA NoEinstein on Google’s sci.physics

> > On Oct 17, 9:55 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:

> > Dear Readers:  The height of Glenn Beck’s patriotic fervor on Fox
> > News, three years ago, was when he showed up wearing combat boots.  At
> > the end of that particular show, he boldly told his viewing audience
> > that he would not take off those combat boots until our out-of-control
> > government is reined-in.  That was about the time that the ‘Tea Party’
> > was stressing having government be fiscally responsible as well as
> > answerable to the Will of the People.  I was disappointed that Beck,
> > to my knowledge, only wore combat boots that one day.  He mentioned on
> > a subsequent show that he had been getting death threats.  He also
> > mentioned that the Obama administration had given out a directive
> > allowing ‘terrorists’ to be shot, with impunity, for threatening this
> > country in any way.  In a very short time, the

> On Oct 29, 9:11 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:

> Folks:  As the presidential election nears, the two (yes,
> unconstitutional) parties are pinning their hopes on having group
> solidarity, and high group turnout.  If, and probably when, Romney-
> Ryan win, very little of the actual cancer that is socialism and
> communism will have been cut out.  Effectively, it will be business as
> usual in Washington with this country still split close to 47% to 47%
> ‘down-the-aisle’.  Haven’t we all “been-there-done-that-bought-the-tee-
> shirt?”  Is the USA any better off with the G. D. media rejoicing how
> effectively they have made the sickening game of politics into a
> national, non-stop, year-in-year-out sport?  Is the USA any better off
> because of the thousands of voter-usurping polls that have been taken
> that have only served to seduce viewers into watching the
> advertisements on “news” finger-down-the-throat networks?  Is the
> dissatisfaction of up to 85% of the citizens over the direction the
> USA is headed suddenly going away just because of a (likely) change in
> the “leadership” in the White House?  Absolutely not!

> Those who want to GET from government, “without giving”, will be even
> more determined to lie, cheat and steal their way back into power in
> the next two or four years.  It is a virtual certainty that few, if
> any, non-ego-maniacs will venture into the political arena.  And only
> those with large private fortunes, who are so unsavory to many, will
> command the backing necessary to repeat the can-only-be-called-lunacy,
> state-by-state campaigns that should have gone out of style with the
> invention of the

> On Nov 3, 5:00 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:

> Our broken

> On Nov 8, 5:15 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:

> Some of you folks may be interested in reading more regarding my years-
> long odyssey to save the USA from corruption and socialism.  My meaty
> little book, 'The Shortest Distance; Harmony Through Prosperity', has
> a chapter on spheres of influence that explains why it is counter
> productive to band together in groups and to fight for one's personal
> ideals at the expense of respecting the differing, but still
> legitimate ideals of others.  Such semi-autobiographical book is
> available athttp://www.virtualbookworm.com/bookstore/or at Amazon.

> About 90% of my 'New Constitution of the United States of America' has
> been posted, deliberately in segments, so that there will be little
> chance such heart-felt work will be 'blanket' slighted by the less
> inspired.  I have posted for two or three years on Political Forum
> news group, only to realize that the Tico 'owner' of that site is a
> political sadist, with inclination to "moderate" any idea he didn't
> like.  Freedom of Speech, especially on the Internet, is one of our
> "last" great freedoms.  Obama and liberals want to see that taken
> away.

> The links at the end are essays on political subjects that I've
> written over the last five or six years.  More recently, I've not been
> making as many ''+new posts', but rather I have been putting essay-
> like replies within posts that will remain active for a long time.
> Any of you willing to go back into each of the more recent threads
> will find some emotional, but always truthful assessments of our
> broken government and how I am most qualified to FIX it.
> Surprisingly, the majority of the problems with government are
> personnel ones.  In my "NC" I empower any law-abiding citizen who is
> conversant on the New Constitution as a whole to FIRE (The Donald
> would be amazed!) any employee of government or any public official
> who violates that person's well-spelled-out civil liberties.  Clint
> Eastwood would be so proud!

> "All local, state and federal officer holders and employees—upon
> taking office or assuming employment—shall take the following oath:
> “I, (Name), promise to serve and be deferential to the People, and to
> be unbiased toward any group with a pro democracy, pro fairness
> ideology.  I swear to honor and uphold the full civil rights of the
> citizens, as guaranteed by the New Constitution, and I shall expect my
> coworkers and superiors to do the same.   I understand that my
> employment in or by government is conditional upon my adherence to
> this oath.”

> “The Will of the People is the foundation of government.  So,
> Citizens’ votes shall have parity without compromise.  Principles of
> fair play and democracy shall have supremacy in the USA.  Any public
> office holder who disavows or manifests disagreement with the latter
> shall be guilty of treason.  Those found guilty can be punished up to
> and including the death penalty.  Any government employee, media
> figure or private person(s) who uses the authority or influence of
> their job, or their celebrity, to argue against democracy and fair
> play shall be guilty of a felony.  Note: Fair play shall be defined as
> any individual or group action that achieves positive results without
> bias or partiality of the weak toward the strong nor of the strong
> toward the weak and which doesn’t selfishly or maliciously exploit any
> individual, group or class.  None of the latter shall be allowed to
> claim the personal property of others, or to limit the rights of others
> —whether by government edict or private business rules—without first
> obtaining the free consent of the property holder, or of the person or
> group whose property is being taken or whose rights are being
> limited.  In no case shall fair play be defined as an entitlement of
> an individual, group or class to have equality of lifestyle, material
> possessions or any assisted living equivalent thereof paid for by
> others.  In the USA the ideal shall be to have reasonable equality of
> opportunity for self determination of one’s own lifestyle and level of
> personal achievement within our Free Enterprise System without
> requiring government oversight.”

> "Conclusion:  This New Constitution, together with any and all
> subsequent amendments, shall set the tone for all other laws that are
> made or that shall be allowed to remain in force.  The
> constitutionality of laws may be brought into question by any law-
> abiding, prudent Citizen conversant on the whole New Constitution.
> When a law’s constitutionality is justifiably questioned,
> determination of constitutionality shall be made by a qualified judge
> or justice—thoughtfully and without bias—within six weeks.  Any such
> ruling by a judge or justice can be appealed to an upper court or to
> the entire High Court on a first-come-first-serve basis.
>      This New Constitution empowers every Citizen with broad civil
> rights that they may invoke at will without the necessity of the prior
> involvement of counsel or of a judicial authority.  Those in or
> working for governments shall be subordinate to any Citizen demanding
> civil rights.  The rightfulness of any such demand may be brought into
> question only by just and comprehensive proof—delivered at a later
> date in writing—with the apt named official(s) being in full jeopardy
> of such punishments as are herein defined, if they are in error."

> I've been getting "vibes" from some 'name' people in the media
> regarding my recent "stand-tall-and-carry-a-big-stick" reply.  I've
> also gotten 'smiling' vibes from Romney, who, rightfully, should
> become our next LEGAL President!  I will gladly explain my rationale
> regarding any portion of my "NC", if a person with love in their heart
> for the USA will simply ask.  Remember what I often say: "Pay It
> Forward!"!   — John A. Armistead —  Author and Patriot

> Handwriting Analysis of Clinton, Obama, McCain and Einstein (is
> Copyrighted.)http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/eed2b...
> Happy Days… !http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/99033...
> Happy Days... 2http://groups.google.com/group/views/browse_thread/thread/d63f04a0594...
> Campaigning is a Science, too.http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/a83e5...
> OBAMA’S NOMINATION OF SOTOMAYOR BETRAYS DEMOCRACYhttp://groups.google.com/group/views/browse_thread/thread/998870d93fd...
> USA IS BOTH SOOTHED AND BETRAYED BY RHETORIChttp://groups.google.com/group/views/browse_thread/thread/576e701e1d9...
> A Democracy Doesn’t Favor Media Figures and Celebritieshttp://groups.google.com/group/views/browse_thread/thread/e6230d64020...
> Changing the USA from a Police Statehttp://groups.google.com/group/views/browse_thread/thread/4b4b7fbd47d...
> A Line Is Drawn in the Sand for the USAhttp://groups.google.com/group/views/browse_thread/thread/11704cf2bc7...
> A TIME FOR TRUTH AND A TIME FOR LIEShttp://groups.google.com/group/views/browse_thread/thread/d93ce51a4db...
> Government ‘As You Like It’http://groups.google.com/group/politicalforum/browse_thread/thread/ae...
> THE FOUNDING FATHERS WOULD NOT RECOGNIZE OUR GOVERNMENT, TODAY.http://groups.google.com/group/politicalforum/browse_thread/thread/f3...
> PLAYING THE GAME TO BRING DOWN AMERICAhttp://groups.google.com/group/politicalforum/browse_thread/thread/35...
> There’s Only One Way for the Tea Party Movement to WIN.http://groups.google.com/group/politicalforum/browse_thread/thread/8e...
> Start the Revolution! Government is out-of-touch with the People!http://groups.google.com/group/politicalforum/browse_thread/thread/c6...
> Wringing-the-Neck of Empty Ritual.http://groups.google.com/group/politicalforum/browse_thread/thread/5a...
> The USA is lost in the "Corn" of politics.http://groups.google.com/group/politicalforum/browse_thread/thread/62...
> Democrats won’t be laughing for long.http://groups.google.com/group/politicalforum/browse_thread/thread/78...
> Can Donald Trump fix the thin ice the USA is skating

> Folks:  I'm almost certain that members of the media; ham-strung
> politicians; and science teachers, both at the high school and college
> levels, constitute the vast majority of my readers.  If 47% of you
> media people are disillusioned by the illegal and UNCONSTITUTIONAL
> Obama "victory", why don't a few of you mention on the air what I keep
> explaining about our broken government, and especially about the
> outmoded-since-the-horse-and-buggy era manner in which we "elect" our
> president.

> Take away the twenty percent of Obama’s votes that were obtained by
> out-and-out BRIBES using the money of others, or by out-and-out lies
> (fraud) that were used to attack Romney in the early going, and it can
> only be ROMNEY who is qualified to be our next president!  Instead of
> his just "smiling" as if to say: "Look how good a looser I am.",
> Romney should go on the ATTACK and say—before the media—that Obama is
> a fraud president who has BRIBED the people to give him the margin of
> victory.  If the Republicans in the House will make up their minds to
> abstain from voting for anything that Obama proposes, he is already
> dead meat to deliver anything to any of those expecting to "get" from
> him.  The survival of the USA is about getting off of our tushes and
> demanding that justice be done!  Since day one, Obama has been guilty
> of TREASON.  Once that bastard, and some of his hey-boys, have been
> hanged, the USA will finally be on a true course.  Long live the USA!
> — John A. Armistead —  Author and Patriot

>> On Nov 8, 5:15 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:

>> Some of you folks may be interested in reading more regarding my years-
>> long odyssey to save the USA from corruption and socialism.  My meaty
>> little book, 'The Shortest Distance; Harmony Through Prosperity', has
>> a chapter on spheres of influence that explains why it is counter
>> productive to band together in groups and to fight for one's personal
>> ideals at the expense of respecting the differing, but still
>> legitimate ideals of others.  Such semi-autobiographical book is
>> available athttp://www.virtualbookworm.com/bookstore/or at Amazon.

>> About 90% of my 'New Constitution of the United States of America' has
>> been posted, deliberately in segments, so that there will be little
>> chance such heart-felt work will be 'blanket' slighted by the less
>> inspired.  I have posted for two or three years on Political Forum
>> news group, only to realize that the Tico 'owner' of that site is a
>> political sadist, with inclination to "moderate" any idea he didn't
>> like.  Freedom of Speech, especially on the Internet, is one of our
>> "last" great freedoms.  Obama and liberals want to see that taken
>> away.

>> The links at the end are essays on political subjects that I've
>> written over the last five or six years.  More recently, I've not been
>> making as many ''+new posts', but rather I have been putting essay-
>> like replies within posts that will remain active for a long time.
>> Any of you willing to go back into each of the more recent threads
>> will find some emotional, but always truthful assessments of our
>> broken government and how I am most qualified to FIX it.
>> Surprisingly, the majority of the problems with government are
>> personnel ones.  In my "NC" I empower any law-abiding citizen who is
>> conversant on the New Constitution as a whole to FIRE (The Donald
>> would be amazed!) any employee of government or any public official
>> who violates that person's well-spelled-out civil liberties.  Clint
>> Eastwood would be so proud!

>> "All local, state and federal officer holders and employees—upon
>> taking office or assuming employment—shall take the following oath:
>> “I, (Name), promise to serve and be deferential to the People, and to
>> be unbiased toward any group with a pro democracy, pro fairness
>> ideology.  I swear to honor and uphold the full civil rights of the
>> citizens, as guaranteed by the New Constitution, and I shall expect my
>> coworkers and superiors to do the same.   I understand that my
>> employment in or by government is conditional upon my adherence to
>> this oath.”

>> “The Will of the People is the foundation of government.  So,
>> Citizens’ votes shall have parity without compromise.  Principles of
>> fair play and democracy shall have supremacy in the USA.  Any public
>> office holder who disavows or manifests disagreement with the latter
>> shall be guilty of treason.  Those found guilty can be punished up to
>> and including the death penalty.  Any government employee, media
>> figure or private person(s) who uses the authority or influence of
>> their job, or their celebrity, to argue against democracy and fair
>> play shall be guilty of a felony.  Note: Fair play shall be defined as
>> any individual or group action that achieves positive results without
>> bias or partiality of the weak toward the strong nor of the strong
>> toward the weak and which doesn’t selfishly or maliciously exploit any
>> individual, group or class.  None of the latter shall be allowed to
>> claim the personal property of others, or to limit the rights of others
>> —whether by government edict or private business rules—without first
>> obtaining the free consent of the property holder, or of the person or
>> group whose property is being taken or whose rights are being
>> limited.  In no case shall fair play be defined as an entitlement of
>> an individual, group or class to have equality of lifestyle, material
>> possessions or any assisted living equivalent thereof paid for by
>> others.  In the USA the ideal shall be to have reasonable equality of
>> opportunity for self determination of one’s own lifestyle and level of
>> personal achievement within our Free Enterprise System without
>> requiring government oversight.”

>> "Conclusion:  This New Constitution, together with any and all
>> subsequent amendments, shall set the tone for all other laws that are
>> made or that shall be allowed to remain in force.  The
>> constitutionality of laws may be brought into question by any law-
>> abiding, prudent Citizen conversant on the whole New Constitution.
>> When a law’s constitutionality is justifiably questioned,
>> determination of constitutionality shall be made by a qualified judge
>> or justice—thoughtfully and without bias—within six weeks.  Any such
>> ruling by a judge or justice can be appealed to an upper court or to
>> the entire High Court on a first-come-first-serve basis.
>>      This New Constitution empowers every Citizen with broad civil
>> rights that they may invoke at will without the necessity of the prior
>> involvement of counsel or of a judicial authority.  Those in or
>> working for governments shall be subordinate to any Citizen demanding
>> civil rights.  The rightfulness of any such demand may be brought into
>> question only by just and comprehensive proof—delivered at a later
>> date in writing—with the apt named official(s) being in full jeopardy
>> of such punishments as are herein defined, if they are in error."

>> I've been getting "vibes" from some 'name' people in the media
>> regarding my recent "stand-tall-and-carry-a-big-stick" reply.  I've
>> also gotten 'smiling' vibes from Romney, who, rightfully, should
>> become our next LEGAL President!  I will gladly explain my rationale
>> regarding any portion of my "NC", if a person with love in their heart
>> for the USA will simply ask.  Remember what I often say: "Pay It
>> Forward!"!   — John A. Armistead —  Author and Patriot

>> Handwriting Analysis of Clinton, Obama, McCain and Einstein (is
>> Copyrighted.)http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/eed2b...
>> Happy Days…
>> !http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/99033...
>> Happy Days...
>> 2http://groups.google.com/group/views/browse_thread/thread/d63f04a0594...
>> Campaigning is a Science,
>> too.http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/a83e5...
>> OBAMA’S NOMINATION OF SOTOMAYOR BETRAYS
>> DEMOCRACYhttp://groups.google.com/group/views/browse_thread/thread/998870d93fd...
>> USA IS BOTH SOOTHED AND BETRAYED BY
>> RHETORIChttp://groups.google.com/group/views/browse_thread/thread/576e701e1d9...
>> A Democracy Doesn’t Favor Media Figures and
>> Celebritieshttp://groups.google.com/group/views/browse_thread/thread/e6230d64020...
>> Changing the USA from a Police
>> Statehttp://groups.google.com/group/views/browse_thread/thread/4b4b7fbd47d...
>> A Line Is Drawn in the Sand for the
>> USAhttp://groups.google.com/group/views/browse_thread/thread/11704cf2bc7...
>> A TIME FOR TRUTH AND A TIME FOR
>> LIEShttp://groups.google.com/group/views/browse_thread/thread/d93ce51a4db...
>> Government ‘As You Like It’http://groups.google.com/group/politicalforum/browse_thread/thread/ae...
>> THE FOUNDING FATHERS WOULD NOT RECOGNIZE OUR GOVERNMENT,
>> TODAY.http://groups.google.com/group/politicalforum/browse_thread/thread/f3...
>> PLAYING THE GAME TO BRING DOWN
>> AMERICAhttp://groups.google.com/group/politicalforum/browse_thread/thread/35...
>> There’s Only One Way for the Tea Party Movement to
>> WIN.http://groups.google.com/group/politicalforum/browse_thread/thread/8e...
>> Start the Revolution! Government is out-of-touch with the
>> People!http://groups.google.com/group/politicalforum/browse_thread/thread/c6...
>> Wringing-the-Neck of Empty
>> Ritual.http://groups.google.com/group/politicalforum/browse_thread/thread/5a...

> Sore loser!
> "NoEinstein" <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message

> news:3af6df40-52db-4992-a0e7-4fce1dcae6e7@c20g2000vbz.googlegroups.com...> On Nov 9, 8:18 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:

> > Folks:  I'm almost certain that members of the media; ham-strung
> > politicians; and science teachers, both at the high school and college
> > levels, constitute the vast majority of my readers.  If 47% of you
> > media people are disillusioned by the illegal and UNCONSTITUTIONAL
> > Obama "victory", why don't a few of you mention on the air what I keep
> > explaining about our broken government, and especially about the
> > outmoded-since-the-horse-and-buggy era manner in which we "elect" our
> > president.

> > Take away the twenty percent of Obama s votes that were obtained by
> > out-and-out BRIBES using the money of others, or by out-and-out lies
> > (fraud) that were used to attack Romney in the early going, and it can
> > only be ROMNEY who is qualified to be our next president!  Instead of
> > his just "smiling" as if to say: "Look how good a looser I am.",
> > Romney should go on the ATTACK and say before the media that Obama is
> > a fraud president who has BRIBED the people to give him the margin of
> > victory.  If the Republicans in the House will make up their minds to
> > abstain from voting for anything that Obama proposes, he is already
> > dead meat to deliver anything to any of those expecting to "get" from
> > him.  The survival of the USA is about getting off of our tushes and
> > demanding that justice be done!  Since day one, Obama has been guilty
> > of TREASON.  Once that bastard, and some of his hey-boys, have been
> > hanged, the USA will finally be on a true course.  Long live the USA!
> > John A. Armistead  Author and Patriot

> >> On Nov 8, 5:15 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:

> >> Some of you folks may be interested in reading more regarding my years-
> >> long odyssey to save the USA from corruption and socialism.  My meaty
> >> little book, 'The Shortest Distance; Harmony Through Prosperity', has
> >> a chapter on spheres of influence that explains why it is counter
> >> productive to band together in groups and to fight for one's personal
> >> ideals at the expense of respecting the differing, but still
> >> legitimate ideals of others.  Such semi-autobiographical book is
> >> available athttp://www.virtualbookworm.com/bookstore/orat Amazon.

> >> About 90% of my 'New Constitution of the United States of America' has
> >> been posted, deliberately in segments, so that there will be little
> >> chance such heart-felt work will be 'blanket' slighted by the less
> >> inspired.  I have posted for two or three years on Political Forum
> >> news group, only to realize that the Tico 'owner' of that site is a
> >> political sadist, with inclination to "moderate" any idea he didn't
> >> like.  Freedom of Speech, especially on the Internet, is one of our
> >> "last" great freedoms.  Obama and liberals want to see that taken
> >> away.

> >> The links at the end are essays on political subjects that I've
> >> written over the last five or six years.  More recently, I've not been
> >> making as many ''+new posts', but rather I have been putting essay-
> >> like replies within posts that will remain active for a long time.
> >> Any of you willing to go back into each of the more recent threads
> >> will find some emotional, but always truthful assessments of our
> >> broken government and how I am most qualified to FIX it.
> >> Surprisingly, the majority of the problems with government are
> >> personnel ones.  In my "NC" I empower any law-abiding citizen who is
> >> conversant on the New Constitution as a whole to FIRE (The Donald
> >> would be amazed!) any employee of government or any public official
> >> who violates that person's well-spelled-out civil liberties.  Clint
> >> Eastwood would be so proud!

> >> "All local, state and federal officer holders and employees upon
> >> taking office or assuming employment shall take the following oath:
> >> I, (Name), promise to serve and be deferential to the People, and to
> >> be unbiased toward any group with a pro democracy, pro fairness
> >> ideology.  I swear to honor and uphold the full civil rights of the
> >> citizens, as guaranteed by the New Constitution, and I shall expect my
> >> coworkers and superiors to do the same.   I understand that my
> >> employment in or by government is conditional upon my adherence to
> >> this oath.

> >> The Will of the People is the foundation of government.  So,
> >> Citizens votes shall have parity without compromise.  Principles of
> >> fair play and democracy shall have supremacy in the USA.  Any public
> >> office holder who disavows or manifests disagreement with the latter
> >> shall be guilty of treason.  Those found guilty can be punished up to
> >> and including the death penalty.  Any government employee, media
> >> figure or private person(s) who uses the authority or influence of
> >> their job, or their celebrity, to argue against democracy and fair
> >> play shall be guilty of a felony.  Note: Fair play shall be defined as
> >> any individual or group action that achieves positive results without
> >> bias or partiality of the weak toward the strong nor of the strong
> >> toward the weak and which doesn t selfishly or maliciously exploit any
> >> individual, group or class.  None of the latter shall be allowed to
> >> claim the personal property of others, or to limit the rights of others
> >> whether by government edict or private business rules without first
> >> obtaining the free consent of the property holder, or of the person or
> >> group whose property is being taken or whose rights are being
> >> limited.  In no case shall fair play be defined as an entitlement of
> >> an individual, group or class to have equality of lifestyle, material
> >> possessions or any assisted living equivalent thereof paid for by
> >> others.  In the USA the ideal shall be to have reasonable equality of
> >> opportunity for self determination of one s own lifestyle and level of
> >> personal achievement within our Free Enterprise System without
> >> requiring government oversight.

> Dear Sid9:  Your maximum "Tweet" mentality (140 characters to
> overload) may enjoy reveling in a victory "won" by fraud, bribery, and
> a complete and total disregard for the letter and the SPIRIT of the
> Constitution—as conceived by our Founding Fathers.  "Four more years!"
> will become "Many more TEARS..." for any of you socialists expecting
> to 'get' by the dictates of a fraudulent 'president'.  The Office of
> President shall never be that of a DICTATOR who gets to do a thing not
> authorized by the Constitution!  The ideology of the President is
> allowed, by the Constitution, to have an effect only to the extent
> that he (or she) can convince Congress to enact CONSTITUTIONAL
> legislation.  [Note: No ’law’—such as ‘Obama Care’—can meet the SPIRIT
> of the Constitution’s requirement that the enacted laws be AGREEABLE
> to the majority of the PEOPLE, simply because 51% of the corrupt
> politicians voted that way.  And no FRAUDULENT president can
> “validate” such a non-law by signing it.]   The Constitution never
> intended to allow presidential directives, with respect to the
> operations of departments of government, or of the 'rules and
> regulations' affecting businesses, to bypass the authority intended
> ONLY for Congress or for the PEOPLE.  And the CONSTITUTION never
> intended to allow those nominated to the US Supreme Court to be so
> beholden to the President who nominated them, that such airheads will
> vote to overturn or invalidate any law which the UNCONSTITUTIONAL
> seated president dislikes.

> The Constitution has been undermined—since the beginning of the last
> century—with the MISTAKEN notion that anything that can get 51% of the
> votes is OK, or is "constitutional" (ha!).  It was never
> constitutional (by the SPIRIT of the Constitution) to have the
> oligarchy US Senate be allowed to have any say-so, whatsoever, in what
> laws can get passed.  Such UNCONSTITUTIONAL inclusion of the US Senate
> was the result of the BRIBE of small states who said that they would
> not sign the document unless the small-population areas had the same
> POWER as the larger population areas.  The latter is clearly a
> VIOLATION of the SPIRIT of the Constitution that the USA be as close
> to a democracy (exclusive of SOCIALISM) as possible.  A Representative
> Republic, which it was supposed the USA would be, has never been
> realized for a single DAY that the USA has existed!  The USA, by the
> 'powers' invested, is primarily an oligarchy, because the G. D. US
> Senate has the majority power, per member of Congress.  From day one,
> my ten-fold strengthened NEW Constitution FIRES every single member of
> the US Senate and CLOSES that branch of government, permanently.
> Similarly, it will close down every state senate anywhere in the USA.
> No state can decide to be run by elected officials (representatives)
> not prorated based on the populations of the districts served.

> Sid9, if you have ANY arguments in any regard that can counter even
> one sentence of my New Constitution, I'm sure the readers will find it
> most humorous how little you have going for you as "an intellectual".
> Otherwise, thank you for taking the time to reply.  Now, I KNOW that
> I’m getting-under-the-skin of socialists.  So, your period of
> 'rejoicing' over Obama will soon be coming to an abrupt termination,
> when Obama drops to the end of his most-just hangman’s noose.  — John
> A. Armistead — Author and Patriot  [For more details, read my book,
> 'The Shortest Distance; Harmony Through Prosperity'.]

>> Sore loser!

>> "NoEinstein" <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message

>> news:3af6df40-52db-4992-a0e7-4fce1dcae6e7@c20g2000vbz.googlegroups.com...>
>> On Nov 9, 8:18 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:

>> > Folks:  I'm almost certain that members of the media; ham-strung
>> > politicians; and science teachers, both at the high school and college
>> > levels, constitute the vast majority of my readers.  If 47% of you
>> > media people are disillusioned by the illegal and UNCONSTITUTIONAL
>> > Obama "victory", why don't a few of you mention on the air what I keep
>> > explaining about our broken government, and especially about the
>> > outmoded-since-the-horse-and-buggy era manner in which we "elect" our
>> > president.

>> > Take away the twenty percent of Obama s votes that were obtained by
>> > out-and-out BRIBES using the money of others, or by out-and-out lies
>> > (fraud) that were used to attack Romney in the early going, and it can
>> > only be ROMNEY who is qualified to be our next president!  Instead of
>> > his just "smiling" as if to say: "Look how good a looser I am.",
>> > Romney should go on the ATTACK and say before the media that Obama is
>> > a fraud president who has BRIBED the people to give him the margin of
>> > victory.  If the Republicans in the House will make up their minds to
>> > abstain from voting for anything that Obama proposes, he is already
>> > dead meat to deliver anything to any of those expecting to "get" from
>> > him.  The survival of the USA is about getting off of our tushes and
>> > demanding that justice be done!  Since day one, Obama has been guilty
>> > of TREASON.  Once that bastard, and some of his hey-boys, have been
>> > hanged, the USA will finally be on a true course.  Long live the USA!
>> > John A. Armistead  Author and Patriot

>> >> On Nov 8, 5:15 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:

>> >> Some of you folks may be interested in reading more regarding my
>> >> years-
>> >> long odyssey to save the USA from corruption and socialism.  My meaty
>> >> little book, 'The Shortest Distance; Harmony Through Prosperity', has
>> >> a chapter on spheres of influence that explains why it is counter
>> >> productive to band together in groups and to fight for one's personal
>> >> ideals at the expense of respecting the differing, but still
>> >> legitimate ideals of others.  Such semi-autobiographical book is
>> >> available athttp://www.virtualbookworm.com/bookstore/orat Amazon.

>> >> About 90% of my 'New Constitution of the United States of America' has
>> >> been posted, deliberately in segments, so that there will be little
>> >> chance such heart-felt work will be 'blanket' slighted by the less
>> >> inspired.  I have posted for two or three years on Political Forum
>> >> news group, only to realize that the Tico 'owner' of that site is a
>> >> political sadist, with inclination to "moderate" any idea he didn't
>> >> like.  Freedom of Speech, especially on the Internet, is one of our
>> >> "last" great freedoms.  Obama and liberals want to see that taken
>> >> away.

>> >> The links at the end are essays on political subjects that I've
>> >> written over the last five or six years.  More recently, I've not been
>> >> making as many ''+new posts', but rather I have been putting essay-
>> >> like replies within posts that will remain active for a long time.
>> >> Any of you willing to go back into each of the more recent threads
>> >> will find some emotional, but always truthful assessments of our
>> >> broken government and how I am most qualified to FIX it.
>> >> Surprisingly, the majority of the problems with government are
>> >> personnel ones.  In my "NC" I empower any law-abiding citizen who is
>> >> conversant on the New Constitution as a whole to FIRE (The Donald
>> >> would be amazed!) any employee of government or any public official
>> >> who violates that person's well-spelled-out civil liberties.  Clint
>> >> Eastwood would be so proud!

>> >> "All local, state and federal officer holders and employees upon
>> >> taking office or assuming employment shall take the following oath:
>> >> I, (Name), promise to serve and be deferential to the People, and to
>> >> be unbiased toward any group with a pro democracy, pro fairness
>> >> ideology.  I swear to honor and uphold the full civil rights of the
>> >> citizens, as guaranteed by the New Constitution, and I shall expect my
>> >> coworkers and superiors to do the same.   I understand that my
>> >> employment in or by government is conditional upon my adherence to
>> >> this oath.

>> >> The Will of the People is the foundation of government.  So,
>> >> Citizens votes shall have parity without compromise.  Principles of
>> >> fair play and democracy shall have supremacy in the USA.  Any public
>> >> office holder who disavows or manifests disagreement with the latter
>> >> shall be guilty of treason.  Those found guilty can be punished up to
>> >> and including the death penalty.  Any government employee, media
>> >> figure or private person(s) who uses the authority or influence of
>> >> their job, or their celebrity, to argue against democracy and fair
>> >> play shall be guilty of a felony.  Note: Fair play shall be defined as
>> >> any individual or group action that achieves positive results without
>> >> bias or partiality of the weak toward the strong nor of the strong
>> >> toward the weak and which doesn t selfishly or maliciously exploit any
>> >> individual, group or class.  None of the latter shall be allowed to
>> >> claim the personal property of others, or to limit the rights of
>> >> others
>> >> whether by government edict or private business rules without first
>> >> obtaining the free consent of the property holder, or of the person or
>> >> group whose property is being taken or whose rights are being
>> >> limited.  In no case shall fair play be defined as an entitlement of
>> >> an individual, group or class to have equality of lifestyle, material

> "NoEinstein" <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message

> news:416c42f7-afa7-4a74-894a-7512b8d9c89f@f17g2000vbz.googlegroups.com...> On Nov 11, 5:43 pm, "Sid9" <sid9@ bellsouth.net> wrote:

> > Dear Sid9:  Your maximum "Tweet" mentality (140 characters to
> > overload) may enjoy reveling in a victory "won" by fraud, bribery, and
> > a complete and total disregard for the letter and the SPIRIT of the
> > Constitution as conceived by our Founding Fathers.  "Four more years!"
> > will become "Many more TEARS..." for any of you socialists expecting
> > to 'get' by the dictates of a fraudulent 'president'.  The Office of
> > President shall never be that of a DICTATOR who gets to do a thing not
> > authorized by the Constitution!  The ideology of the President is
> > allowed, by the Constitution, to have an effect only to the extent
> > that he (or she) can convince Congress to enact CONSTITUTIONAL
> > legislation.  [Note: No law such as Obama Care can meet the SPIRIT
> > of the Constitution s requirement that the enacted laws be AGREEABLE
> > to the majority of the PEOPLE, simply because 51% of the corrupt
> > politicians voted that way.  And no FRAUDULENT president can
> > validate such a non-law by signing it.]   The Constitution never
> > intended to allow presidential directives, with respect to the
> > operations of departments of government, or of the 'rules and
> > regulations' affecting businesses, to bypass the authority intended
> > ONLY for Congress or for the PEOPLE.  And the CONSTITUTION never
> > intended to allow those nominated to the US Supreme Court to be so
> > beholden to the President who nominated them, that such airheads will
> > vote to overturn or invalidate any law which the UNCONSTITUTIONAL
> > seated president dislikes.

> > The Constitution has been undermined since the beginning of the last
> > century with the MISTAKEN notion that anything that can get 51% of the
> > votes is OK, or is "constitutional" (ha!).  It was never
> > constitutional (by the SPIRIT of the Constitution) to have the
> > oligarchy US Senate be allowed to have any say-so, whatsoever, in what
> > laws can get passed.  Such UNCONSTITUTIONAL inclusion of the US Senate
> > was the result of the BRIBE of small states who said that they would
> > not sign the document unless the small-population areas had the same
> > POWER as the larger population areas.  The latter is clearly a
> > VIOLATION of the SPIRIT of the Constitution that the USA be as close
> > to a democracy (exclusive of SOCIALISM) as possible.  A Representative
> > Republic, which it was supposed the USA would be, has never been
> > realized for a single DAY that the USA has existed!  The USA, by the
> > 'powers' invested, is primarily an oligarchy, because the G. D. US
> > Senate has the majority power, per member of Congress.  From day one,
> > my ten-fold strengthened NEW Constitution FIRES every single member of
> > the US Senate and CLOSES that branch of government, permanently.
> > Similarly, it will close down every state senate anywhere in the USA.
> > No state can decide to be run by elected officials (representatives)
> > not prorated based on the populations of the districts served.

> > Sid9, if you have ANY arguments in any regard that can counter even
> > one sentence of my New Constitution, I'm sure the readers will find it
> > most humorous how little you have going for you as "an intellectual".
> > Otherwise, thank you for taking the time to reply.  Now, I KNOW that
> > I m getting-under-the-skin of socialists.  So, your period of
> > 'rejoicing' over Obama will soon be coming to an abrupt termination,
> > when Obama drops to the end of his most-just hangman s noose.   John
> > A. Armistead Author and Patriot  [For more details, read my book,
> > 'The Shortest Distance; Harmony Through Prosperity'.]

> >> Sore loser!

> >> "NoEinstein" <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message

> >>news:3af6df40-52db-4992-a0e7-4fce1dcae6e7@c20g2000vbz.googlegroups.com...>
> >> On Nov 9, 8:18 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:

> >> > Folks:  I'm almost certain that members of the media; ham-strung
> >> > politicians; and science teachers, both at the high school and college
> >> > levels, constitute the vast majority of my readers.  If 47% of you
> >> > media people are disillusioned by the illegal and UNCONSTITUTIONAL
> >> > Obama "victory", why don't a few of you mention on the air what I keep
> >> > explaining about our broken government, and especially about the
> >> > outmoded-since-the-horse-and-buggy era manner in which we "elect" our
> >> > president.

> >> > Take away the twenty percent of Obama s votes that were obtained by
> >> > out-and-out BRIBES using the money of others, or by out-and-out lies
> >> > (fraud) that were used to attack Romney in the early going, and it can
> >> > only be ROMNEY who is qualified to be our next president!  Instead of
> >> > his just "smiling" as if to say: "Look how good a looser I am.",
> >> > Romney should go on the ATTACK and say before the media that Obama is
> >> > a fraud president who has BRIBED the people to give him the margin of
> >> > victory.  If the Republicans in the House will make up their minds to
> >> > abstain from voting for anything that Obama proposes, he is already
> >> > dead meat to deliver anything to any of those expecting to "get" from
> >> > him.  The survival of the USA is about getting off of our tushes and
> >> > demanding that justice be done!  Since day one, Obama has been guilty
> >> > of TREASON.  Once that bastard, and some of his hey-boys, have been
> >> > hanged, the USA will finally be on a true course.  Long live the USA!
> >> > John A. Armistead  Author and Patriot

> >> >> On Nov 8, 5:15 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:

> >> >> Some of you folks may be interested in reading more regarding my
> >> >> years-
> >> >> long odyssey to save the USA from corruption and socialism.  My meaty
> >> >> little book, 'The Shortest Distance; Harmony Through Prosperity', has
> >> >> a chapter on spheres of influence that explains why it is counter
> >> >> productive to band together in groups and to fight for one's personal
> >> >> ideals at the expense of respecting the differing, but still
> >> >> legitimate ideals of others.  Such semi-autobiographical book is
> >> >> available athttp://www.virtualbookworm.com/bookstore/oratAmazon.

> >> >> About 90% of my 'New Constitution of the United States of America' has
> >> >> been posted, deliberately in segments, so that there will be little
> >> >> chance such heart-felt work will be 'blanket' slighted by the less
> >> >> inspired.  I have posted for two or three years on Political Forum
> >> >> news group, only to realize that the Tico 'owner' of that site is a
> >> >> political sadist, with inclination to "moderate" any idea he didn't
> >> >> like.  Freedom of Speech, especially on the Internet, is one of our
> >> >> "last" great freedoms.  Obama and liberals want to

> Dear Sid9:  The people who voted for Obama are the naive mentalities
> who suppose that money grows from the US Mint, not from the goods and
> services sold by those who actually work for a living.  Obama has
> BRIBED his supporters with such things as promises of free college
> educations for every "poor" person.  He has BRIBED Hispanics with the
> promise of favoritism counter to the majority will of the people, and
> counter to the best interests of the USA.  Obama stated in that
> 'rigged' press conference how wonderful it is that Hispanics are
> starting to become involved in elections.  But, of course, he was
> rejoicing that all of them are being conditioned to vote for
> socialism.  Obama, the anti-Christ, sees himself running, a borderless
> socialist world.  He is the Liar-in-Chief, who stated that he will
> find out what happened "in Libya" and will inform the relatives of
> those four men who died, needlessly.  But he stated in the same breath
> that he won't tell that same group of reporters (as in a press
> conference.)

> So far, my observation of you as someone (a socialist) with a maximum
> of 140 printed characters (and spaces) to over-load, fits you
> exactly.  If you dislike what I'm saying enough to fault me, then you
> hate half of the USA, just like OBAMA.  It is a near certainty that
> you have never strived for anything approaching an ideal.  Until you
> do, don't bother me with your petty mouse-squeaks.  — John A.
> Armistead — Author and Patriot.

> A note to Dick Morris: "Loosing" in an illegitimate election, such as
> on November 6, doesn't change a thing if those of us who are still
> honest will stick together, and will hopefully speak out.  What is
> constitutional isn't determined by bribing large numbers of voters so
> things will be this way or that.  What is constitutional is determined
> by understanding the SPIRIT of the Constitution, which mainly is:
> "That democracy and fair play shall have supremacy in the USA."
> Socialism can't exist, anywhere, if that one simple sentence is
> respected!  That’s because it is never fair to STEAL from those who
> work, by supposing the votes of the lazy and the shallow are on a
> par.  Crimes perpetrated by government are still crimes.  My New
> Constitution will benefit both the left and the right.  But the way to
> our salvation is liberated capitalism, not governments pushing us over
> that one last fiscal cliff.   Once the economic stability is restored
> (by reducing government to the minimum size practical) there should be
> very few people living below the poverty line, and very few people who
> think government is the answer to every want.  "ATLAS Shrugged".  I’ve
> spent the last sixteen years of my life trying to make sure that the
> USA doesn't!   — J. A. A. —

>> "NoEinstein" <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message

>> news:416c42f7-afa7-4a74-894a-7512b8d9c89f@f17g2000vbz.googlegroups.com...>
>> On Nov 11, 5:43 pm, "Sid9" <sid9@ bellsouth.net> wrote:

>> > Dear Sid9:  Your maximum "Tweet" mentality (140 characters to
>> > overload) may enjoy reveling in a victory "won" by fraud, bribery, and
>> > a complete and total disregard for the letter and the SPIRIT of the
>> > Constitution as conceived by our Founding Fathers.  "Four more years!"
>> > will become "Many more TEARS..." for any of you socialists expecting
>> > to 'get' by the dictates of a fraudulent 'president'.  The Office of
>> > President shall never be that of a DICTATOR who gets to do a thing not
>> > authorized by the Constitution!  The ideology of the President is
>> > allowed, by the Constitution, to have an effect only to the extent
>> > that he (or she) can convince Congress to enact CONSTITUTIONAL
>> > legislation.  [Note: No law such as Obama Care can meet the SPIRIT
>> > of the Constitution s requirement that the enacted laws be AGREEABLE
>> > to the majority of the PEOPLE, simply because 51% of the corrupt
>> > politicians voted that way.  And no FRAUDULENT president can
>> > validate such a non-law by signing it.]   The Constitution never
>> > intended to allow presidential directives, with respect to the
>> > operations of departments of government, or of the 'rules and
>> > regulations' affecting businesses, to bypass the authority intended
>> > ONLY for Congress or for the PEOPLE.  And the CONSTITUTION never
>> > intended to allow those nominated to the US Supreme Court to be so
>> > beholden to the President who nominated them, that such airheads will
>> > vote to overturn or invalidate any law which the UNCONSTITUTIONAL
>> > seated president dislikes.

>> > The Constitution has been undermined since the beginning of the last
>> > century with the MISTAKEN notion that anything that can get 51% of the
>> > votes is OK, or is "constitutional" (ha!).  It was never
>> > constitutional (by the SPIRIT of the Constitution) to have the
>> > oligarchy US Senate be allowed to have any say-so, whatsoever, in what
>> > laws can get passed.  Such UNCONSTITUTIONAL inclusion of the US Senate
>> > was the result of the BRIBE of small states who said that they would
>> > not sign the document unless the small-population areas had the same
>> > POWER as the larger population areas.  The latter is clearly a
>> > VIOLATION of the SPIRIT of the Constitution that the USA be as close
>> > to a democracy (exclusive of SOCIALISM) as possible.  A Representative
>> > Republic, which it was supposed the USA would be, has never been
>> > realized for a single DAY that the USA has existed!  The USA, by the
>> > 'powers' invested, is primarily an oligarchy, because the G. D. US
>> > Senate has the majority power, per member of Congress.  From day one,
>> > my ten-fold strengthened NEW Constitution FIRES every single member of
>> > the US Senate and CLOSES that branch of government, permanently.
>> > Similarly, it will close down every state senate anywhere in the USA.
>> > No state can decide to be run by elected officials (representatives)
>> > not prorated based on the populations of the districts served.

>> > Sid9, if you have ANY arguments in any regard that can counter even
>> > one sentence of my New Constitution, I'm sure the readers will find it
>> > most humorous how little you have going for you as "an intellectual".
>> > Otherwise, thank you for taking the time to reply.  Now, I KNOW that
>> > I m getting-under-the-skin of socialists.  So, your period of
>> > 'rejoicing' over Obama will soon be coming to an abrupt termination,
>> > when Obama drops to the end of his most-just hangman s noose.   John
>> > A. Armistead Author and Patriot  [For more details, read my book,
>> > 'The Shortest Distance; Harmony Through Prosperity'.]

>> >> Sore loser!

>> >> "NoEinstein" <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message

>> >>news:3af6df40-52db-4992-a0e7-4fce1dcae6e7@c20g2000vbz.googlegroups.com...>
>> >> On Nov 9, 8:18 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:

>> >> > Folks:  I'm almost certain that members of the media; ham-strung
>> >> > politicians; and science teachers, both at the high school and
>> >> > college
>> >> > levels, constitute the vast majority of my readers.  If 47% of you
>> >> > media people are disillusioned by the illegal and UNCONSTITUTIONAL
>> >> > Obama "victory", why don't a few of you mention on the air what I
>> >> > keep
>> >> > explaining about our broken government, and especially about the
>> >> > outmoded-since-the-horse-and-buggy era manner in which we "elect"
>> >> > our
>> >> > president.

>> >> > Take away the twenty percent of Obama s votes that were obtained by
>> >> > out-and-out BRIBES using the money of others, or by out-and-out lies
>> >> > (fraud) that were used to attack Romney in the early going, and it
>> >> > can
>> >> > only be ROMNEY who is qualified to be our next president!  Instead
>> >> > of
>> >> > his just "smiling" as if to say: "Look how good a looser I am.",
>> >> > Romney should go on the ATTACK and say before the media that Obama
>> >> > is
>> >> > a fraud president who has BRIBED the people to give him the margin
>> >> > of
>> >> > victory.  If the Republicans in the House will make up their minds
>> >> > to
>> >> > abstain from voting for anything that Obama proposes, he is already
>> >> > dead meat to deliver anything to any of those expecting to "get"
>> >> > from
>> >> > him.  The survival of the USA is about getting off of our tushes and
>> >> > demanding that justice be done!  Since day one, Obama has been
>> >> > guilty
>> >> > of TREASON.  Once that bastard, and some of his hey-boys, have been
>> >> > hanged, the USA will finally be on a true course.  Long live the
>> >> > USA!
>> >> > John A. Armistead  Author and Patriot

>> >> >> On Nov 8, 5:15 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:

>> >> >> Some of you folks may be interested in reading more regarding my
>> >> >> years-
>> >> >> long odyssey to save the USA from corruption and socialism.  My
>> >> >> meaty
>> >> >> little book, 'The Shortest Distance; Harmony Through Prosperity',
>> >> >> has
>> >> >> a chapter on spheres of influence that explains why it is counter
>> >> >> productive to band together in groups and to fight for one's
>> >> >> personal
>> >> >> ideals at the expense of respecting the differing, but still
>> >> >> legitimate ideals of others.  Such semi-autobiographical book is
>> >> >> available athttp://www.virtualbookworm.com/bookstore/oratAmazon.

>> >> >> About 90% of my 'New Constitution of the United States of America'
>> >> >> has
>> >> >> been posted, deliberately in segments, so that there

> On Nov 16, 10:07 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:

> The “spin” of corruption.

> Being a very busy person, I almost had to force myself to watch ‘Face
> the Nation’ and ‘This Week’, today.   Experience has shown that both
> of those shows are platforms intended to allow Democratic Party
> insiders to brainwash the viewers regarding the ‘news‘ of the day.
> Typically, each of those shows will have an “almost” conservative like
> George Will on their expert panel list in order to make their 75% left-
> leaning guests seem to be… ’fair’.

> Ubiquitous Senator John McCain was on Bob Schieffer’s show.  McCain
> repeated his usual questions: “What did ’president’ Obama know (about
> Benghazi)” ?  And… “When did he know it?”   McCain seemed ’pained’ to
> add that the “reason” we need such information is “for the benefit of
> the families of those who were killed“; and to work, with Congress, to
> “make sure such things don’t happen again.”  Throughout all of this,
> Bob Schieffer had on his quite-often revealing, frozen-in-place, “used
> car salesman” smile.  Though biased for the left, Schieffer is smart
> enough to know that the implications for Obama are much more DIRE than
> his simply being an instrument for understanding why the White House
> goofed up.  McCain knows that, too.  But because McCain needs forums
> for getting-out his messages, he always includes the required liberal
> “CURL” somewhere within his remarks so that it will be likely he will
> be invited back on those corrupt, and under my “NC”, UNCONSTITUTIONAL
> shows, again.

> On ‘This Week', a video of Governor Bobby Jindal was shown as he
> stated that Republicansshouldn’tbe saying that “Democrats were
> ’bought’ (in the election).”  I was pleased to see that Mitt Romney
> has, apparently, agreed with me that it was the “gifts” of the
> Democrats (Obama) that had resulted in his (appearance of, but not
> LEGAL) victory in the election.  For the liberal producers of that
> show, leaving Romney’s photo on the screen for so long, with the word
> “gifts” in the caption, was their way of setting-up USA-traitor-guest
> Donna Brazile to say (I paraphrase): “People are asking me: ’Where are
> my gifts?”  Exactly!!!  Obama made only PROMISES OF GIFTS in order to
> get the corrupt votes he needed for his ILLEGAL victory.   A promise
> is every bit as much a BRIBE as is

> > On Nov 16, 10:07 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:

> > The spin of corruption.

> Hoo, boy!

> And I thought _Hartung_ was crazy...

> > The spin of corruption.

> Hoo, boy!

> And I thought _Hartung_ was crazy...

> On Nov 22, 8:41 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:

> Of Stamps and Trash.

> My primary civic goal is to save the USA from socialism and from
> financial ruin.  Both are being caused by the hugely mistaken notion
> of close to half of the citizens that government is the cradle-to-
> grave answer to all woes that might befall.

> Last night I got vibes from Rudy Giuliani—probably relative to these
> same essays