cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Snooky1953
Senior Contributor

Re: So ignorant it's typical of dumbed down serfs

The individual states controlled their own military during WW2????  Gee, I didn't know that.  The right always quotes the Constitution and gives their interpretation of what it says and usually, they use it LITERALLY.  BUT I WOULD REALLY LIKE YOU TO ELABORATE ON YOU LAST STATEMENT ABOUT WW2 AND THE STATES.

GreaTOne_65
Senior Contributor

Re: Maybe Dr. "Bogus" should have clued you in...

Did you read MY link? I think not, but I did start to read your's, and realized there was nothing in that article that could be made sence of. If there is, would you please point it out?

GreaTOne_65
Senior Contributor

Re: Maybe Dr. "Bogus" should have clued you in...

Bull$hit! Now I know your just blowin' smoke.

johnaa
Advisor

So typical of dumbed down serfs

  That's what I thought, you don't know American History, Government, understand the Constitution and will resist reality. 

 

   You have the greatest library at your disposal, the web, If you cared enough to learn about it you would HELP YOURSELF.  I learned long ago it is foolish and counter productive to try to force information on someone resistant to reality.  Just read the Constitution for starters.

 

  BTW  You  made a remark about taking the Constitution literally.  It is the supreme law of the land.  Next time a cop gives you a ticket ask him about taking the law literally.  

bruce MN
Advisor

Re: So typical of dumbed down serfs

RE: literal reading.

 

I was thinking about that last night  and the other big populatrand important document that many people in this country swear by...the New Testament of The Bible.  At least the guys who forged and wrote The Constitution were there, as witnesses to it and the times.  And I'd be quite certain that there was a stenographic record of all of the proceedings taken and teh conversations that surrounded them that sits somewhere in some archives yet today.

 

That opposed to something that was written over 200 years after the events that it chronicles took place.  With the keynote chapters being composed by 4 different authors, each who provides a considerabley different account of the events being chronicled, and yet for millions of people, thousands of of whom shape important policies seemingly everywhere based on what they unerringly hold to be in it, insist that every word is to be taken literally.

 

 

 

 

Taylor ECIL
Senior Contributor

Re: Maybe Dr. "Bogus" should have clued you in...

It is the English bill of rights. In the bill of rights you will find parallels to ours.

Yes I read both of yours and do not understand how people from the south keeping blacks as slaves after the civil war enhances your argument. The first one comes across as rather presumptuous that this professor is smarter than all the judges federal and supreme courts. I would believe that I would have read that argument in at least one dissenting argument in at least one supreme court case, and I have seen some pretty far reaching arguments on a lot of supreme court cases

bruce MN
Advisor

No small irony, I suppose,....

....that's it's come to the point where some from the midst of the little people would be offering up a disillussioned prospect of shaping our laws and rules on the basis of the essential handbook for a few centuries of  fuedalism.  Your not the first soul I've encountered who would have tried to pose it as some great liberator of the average Joe English or Welsh subject.  And most of it was repeaeld relatively soon enough  to the degree that the bulk of it didn't stay in effect as long as our Constitution has.

 

No different though, I suppose, than the decades of continued harsh servitude that took place in the south (and actually moved it's way northward where it hadn't been before) here after the Emancipation and the end of the unfortunate hostilities having been perfectly acceptable to those who weren't directly affected.

 

But it's become cool to talk about while banking on the assurance that hardly anybody knows hardly anything about it,  other than what disingenious co-optive factions say it is.

 

It was a great document and a big, important change from unquestioned, absolute Monarchal power over every one and  domain over everything.  But I'd be careful about posing it as some ultimate, foresightful model.  We aren't likely going to face the prospect of fuedalism in our big picture future.  Although there could be a real argument for it being here already in the food business.  But it won't spread across all of society, because  fascism will circumvent it.  With fuedalism his Lordship, out of his own self-interest, has to see to it that the serfs are supplicated to some degree. The fascist has no interest in that,....practical or emotional.  Good for the prole if he can survive, but not a problem if he doesn't,  as all can be replaced.

 

That's the battle that needs to be waged.  Not against each other, givng up on and destroying the true concept of liberty.  We ain't up against the crown (on it's own), or against each other.  We're up against the wind.. 

Taylor ECIL
Senior Contributor

Re: So typical of dumbed down serfs

How about literal reading of the laws, like New York who forgot to exempt their own police from the 7 round mag ban?

 

http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=news%2Flocal%2Fnew_york&id=8958116

 

Politicians sometimes should not be allowed to make laws.

 

bruce MN
Advisor

Re: So typical of dumbed down serfs

Sounds like maybe one guy must have read Mark and the another John and the later thought that all those rules were for everybody else

r3020
Senior Advisor

Re: So typical of dumbed down serfs


@bruce MN wrote:

Sounds like maybe one guy must have read Mark and the another John and the later thought that all those rules were for everybody else


Mark and John might not agree completely on every detail but their message is the same from both, The way to salvation is through Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior. Just as the second amendment is constant on one message, the right to keep a bear arms shall not be infringed.