Hee! Hee! Hee!

Oh, yeah - the involuntary servitude clause!

Thanks! Rich

"Joel Koltner" wrote in news:Q9HKm.167382$ snipped-for-privacy@en-nntp-01.dc.easynews.com:

But private businesses are not dependent on TAX monies,and may not have the other benefits that gov't workers enjoy. Like a virtual no-layoff policy. It nearly takes an Act of Congress to fire a gov't employee. You really have to screw up big time to get fired at a gov't job.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

"Joel Koltner" wrote in news:tQIKm.167480$ snipped-for-privacy@en-nntp-01.dc.easynews.com:

Much of it is the fact that none of the money collected was invested. It gets paid out as fast as it comes in. a Ponzi scheme.

No,it's a huge LIE;BS that the gullible and naive accept.

and you forgot his promises of "no new taxes" and "no reduction of services". (like long waits for procedures as in other socialized nations)

that "provide for the general welfare" phrase -in the preamble-!! was never meant to be any legal justification for many of the areas gov't has gotten into.

the "living" part of the Constitution is it's ability to be AMENDED,to be able to change with the times,and there's a specific procedure for that,which Congress scrupulously avoids,knowing they could never get most of their crap passed in that manner.

It does NOT mean reinterpretation of words or phrases to fit whatever the legislators are trying to justify,or to fit current popular opinion. Or passing laws that are clearly UNconstitutional,relying on the court system to finagle it. that shit renders the rule of law meaningless.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

=20

Just like "protection" from the "mob".

=20

So if the Republican candidate was that liberal, how did the candidate obtain the nomination??

That's one (entirely valid) interpretation. :-)

I'm pretty sure that you couldn't get the original constitution passed today anymore either, though: In 1787, the vast majority of people were just trying to get their crops in or whatever, generally working 12+ hour days of hard physical labor. Even if they did care about politics getting information about what was happening required much more effort and was much slower. Today, with nearly instantaneous communications and a more spare time to pursue the politics of the day -- and many more pundits to boot -- getting anything passed realistically requires a lot more people to buy into the idea. There's a fair bit of truth to the idea that this country was largely founded by a small group of generally well-off, mostly Christian(ish), white men. In other words, the founding fathers mostly were outliers compared to the average man at the time, and it's a reflection upon their talents that the system they cooked up has worked so well for so long.

If it's any consolation, I think the modern interpretation of the constitution is still a lot closer to the original literal interpretation than modern translations of the Bible are relative to the original Hebrew and Greek.

Then again, ~200 years vs. ~2000 and all...

---Joel

[snip]

Another is that it is perfectly valid to shoot leftist weenies on sight ;-) ...Jim Thompson

-- | James E.Thompson, CTO | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at

| 1962 | GO GREEN! Recycle Congress In 2010

"Jim Thompson" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com...

Sheessshh! Obama's secret police might be listening! :-)

"Joel Koltner" wrote in news:6DXKm.181900$ snipped-for-privacy@en-nntp-01.dc.easynews.com:

"interpretation",HELL;it's FACT. Amendment IS the intended means of updating the Constitution.

No other manner is acceptable.

that would be due to moral decline and "diversity",and lack of education about American History,not because of "better communication" or people's available spare time.

Who did a DAMN great job. better than any other nation in the world.

which means diddley-squat.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

Agreed, where interpretations differ is in how far any given statement is meant to go: The 2nd amendment is an obvious example -- while people bicker all the time about whether it implies that you should be allowed to carry a handgun (and personally I think it does, even for you, Jim :-) ), almost everyone agrees that you aren't allowed to "bear arms" in the form of, e.g., a functioning howitzer in your front yard to ward off leftist liberal weenies.

Well, fair argument -- I don't have anything solid to point to that would quantify the effects of moral decline/lack of education vs. better communications/available spare time.

Yes.

Are you sure about that? Have you spent significant time living in our countries?

I doubt that if you brought over 1,000 Frenchmen and had them live in the U.S. for 5 years, all 1,000 of them would consider the U.S. better than their own nation.

Just pointing out that pretty much ALL "sacred" documents get re-interpreted over time, and while there's always a number of people who want to stick with a literal interpretation, it seems inevitable that the "living document" interpretations become the most prevalent.

---Joel

"Joel Koltner" wrote in news:nUYKm.165455$ snipped-for-privacy@en-nntp-03.dc.easynews.com:

yet Colonials did privately own cannon,even armed ships. Today,people own cannon,military aircraft,armored vehicles,yet none of them get used criminally.People even own real machine guns and "destructive devices",and none of them get used criminally.There's a bunch of folks who get together every year for a machine gun and heavy weapon shoot,with lots of onlookers.

Heck,most of the time you hear about "machine guns",it's really only a semi-auto copy that the media deliberately misinforms you about.(like the TEC-9 "assault weapon" and "AK-47's")

It's not the ownership (of ANY item)that is any problem,it's the MISUSE of it.

I don't have to LIVE there to know about it.

Our achievements show how much better our nation is. Our greater freedom.(which is declining under the assault of the socialists,along with our economy)

THAt is the path to disaster,when the "rule of law" reverts back to when kings ruled,and whatever they felt at the time was the "law",and no one had any way of knowing what the "law" was going to be in advance.

Do you even know what the concept of "written law" is ?

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

They probably weren't very thrilled with the Firearm Owners Protection Act of

1986 that banned any machine guns produced thereafter from being sold to civillians then, eh?

I agree wholeheartedly, but I'm a little leery with the idea that any and all weapons would be OK for private ownership. (Granted, the more powerful the weapon, generally the more expensive it is -- if you're an individual looking to buy a multi-million dollar missile system, you probably have enough resources to do so regardless of the legalities...)

But there's no way you'd achieve consensus on what defines "better" when it comes to the nation as a whole. E.g., clearly many people right now believe that health care is better in countries other than the U.S.

Perhaps it's a bit selfish, but my idea of asking people if they think they live in the best country on the planet is based on the query of, "For you and your family, personally, do you believe you're better off here than in any other country?" Kinda like Reagan's, "Are you better off than you were four years ago?"

Probably not the same way that you do. It's always been clear to me that there's "wiggle room" in the application of any law (and this is intentional), the question is just how much -- and whether the "wiggling" is done due for good reasons (yes, I was speeding, but I was transporting some guy who was bleeding to death to a hospital) vs. abusive ones (yes, I was speeding, but I'm the son of the police chief, you know?). See that link James had on "prosecutiruak duscretion" from yesterday.

---Joel

Not all Republicans are conservatives. Surely you've heard of Olympia Snowe or Jumpin' Jimmy Jeffords.

Annoying indeed! What make you the king of the Constitution? Why would you trust anyone else with that power? If it doesn't protect everyone it protects no one.

I hope they do a count of the guns too.

I need to stock up and flee to the hills before the storm troopers arrive. ...Jim Thompson

-- | James E.Thompson, CTO | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at

| 1962 | "What would happen to [Obama's] vanity if he didn?t have us to throw alms to? What would become of his strength if he didn?t have weaker people to dominate? What would he do with himself if he didn?t keep us around as dependents? It?s quite alright, really, I?m not criticizing him, it?s just a law of human nature."

-Ayn Rand, "Atlas Shrugged"

"Joel Koltner" wrote in news:rNZKm.160165$ snipped-for-privacy@en-nntp-09.dc.easynews.com:

Hell,no. I'm not either.It's a violation of the 2nd Amendment. Machine guns like a real AK-47 or a M-16 -are- militia weapons,thus protected under the 2nd,IF our gov't actually followed the Constitution. "militia weapons" are what the common soldiers would use. Militiamen were expected to muster with rifles,power and ammo,the same sort as what the regulars used.

you have to consider that missiles and bombs use high explosives that can not be stored in residential or commercial areas,for safety reasons. Now,armored vehicles by themselves are no threat. I note a guy armored a Bobcat and went on a destructive rampage with it,(he made his own concrete composite armor that police could not penetrate!)and others have used heavy construction vehicles to do the same.

and they'd be wrong. They aren't aware of the lengthy wait times,shortages,and limitations of that "free" or "universal" healthcare.Or the hidden costs. I note that many leaders and wealthy of other countries prefer to come to the US for their healthcare. I note CANADIANS come to the US to get procedures that they either could not get in CA,or would have to wait such log times that their illness would go from treatable to crapshoot or even death.I also note places like Oregon and Mass. have severe problems with their universal healthcare and have initiated cutbacks in services and budget cuts because they can't afford it.

Also,guess who is the leader in medical innovation and development? The US....a big lead. also in new drug development.

Again,I note that people risk their LIVES to get into the US,far more than any other nation.People who come here also have far better chances for advancement than in other countries.Many immigrants go from rags to middle class,whereas in other countries,they have barriers that restrict them.

You failed the question; Written Law means that the average person can count on a law meaning the SAME today as it did a week ago,or a year ago.It's meaning doesn't vary dependent on the whim of some bureaucrat or judge. What the Constitution meant in 1799 is what it means today.

"prosecutorial discretion" is whether the particular law is applied or not(to go to court or to drop charges),not that it's meaning changes depending on the prosecutor's mood that day.

A judge's "wiggle room" is mostly the severity of the punishment AFTER a determination of guilt or innocence. Or whether the particular law in the citation is actually applicable.

And I'm not even a lawyer.

school Civics and American History teaching must be pretty poor these days. We need to get the Marxists/socialists OUT of education and get it back to basics.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

krw wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

That is why there's an AMENDMENT PROCESS to change the Constitution to adapt to the current times. Except that Congress knows they can't get their crap passed the right way,so they count on the extreme difficulty,huge costs,and high risks of going thru the court system to overturn unconstitutional laws.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

They can count them easily enough but they have little idea where they are.