Byrd of WV dead at 92
in [Design]
|
Prev: Archie
Next: Flexible Jumper operations
From: Greegor on 29 Jun 2010 03:25 JA > The 5th says we can't deprive BP of their property JA > without due process of law, yet we just did. Due process would be the 6th Amendment. Right against self incrimination is 5th Amendment.
From: Jim Yanik on 29 Jun 2010 08:50 Tim Wescott <tim(a)seemywebsite.com> wrote in news:q5adnVNVssIP4bTRnZ2dnUVZ_hqdnZ2d(a)web-ster.com: > On 06/28/2010 07:07 PM, dagmargoodboat(a)yahoo.com wrote: >> On Jun 28, 4:36 pm, Tim Wescott<t...(a)seemywebsite.com> wrote: >>> On 06/28/2010 01:37 PM, Jim Yanik wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> Tim Wescott<t...(a)seemywebsite.com> wrote in >>>> news:y8WdnT0T99dLRrXRnZ2dnUVZ_gmdnZ2d(a)web-ster.com: >>> >>>>> On 06/28/2010 09:13 AM, Jim Thompson wrote: >>>>>> On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 08:40:26 -0700, John Larkin >>>>>> <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>> >>>>>>> On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 11:34:22 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell" >>>>>>> <mike.terr...(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >>> >>>>>>>> www.wvgazette.com/News/201006280099 >>> >>>>>>> Will the KKK furnish an honor guard? >>> >>>>>>> John >>> >>>>>> Doesn't exist anymore. But maybe we should bring it back to >>>>>> round up liberals (and Californicators ;-) >>> >>>>> Check your assumptions: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KKK. >>> >>>>> There may be a local chapter near you, ready to welcome you with >>>>> open arms. >>> >>>> if you value the Constitution and it's principles,"liberals" aka >>>> "progressives",are the main threat to it and America. >>> >>> I think that one of my Libertarian friends put it best: Democrats >>> and Republicans may disagree on which part of the constitution >>> doesn't matter, but they both think that parts of it should be >>> dispensed with, and neither of them, on getting into office, drag >>> their feet on tearing up the parts that they feel get in the way. >> >> >> The Constitution's a control system, brilliant, with various >> feedbacks designed to keep government from railing. The designed >> feedbacks have been defeated, and that's a BIG problem. The whole >> original architecture was redundant, granular powers (the States), >> and self- governing (as in "self-limiting," as well as the other >> sense) and we've subverted that. >> >> You could say we've gone from an interactive "personal computer >> model" of government to a batch-processing "mainframe model." >> Economically that fails, inherently. >> >> >>> Do you like the second amendment but not the fourth? Vote >>> Republican! Value the fourth and fifth amendments? Vote Democrat! >>> Value the whole damn constitution, especially the first amendment? >>> Vote really carefully, because you don't have many allies in >>> Washington. >> >> Amen on the "not many allies"--we're working on fixing that. >> >> But as to the amendments, the current administration is after all of >> them. >> >> The 4th says you have the right to be secure in your papers and >> effects, just not your medical records any more. >> The 5th says we can't deprive BP of their property without due >> process of law, yet we just did. >> The 1st says you have the right to free speech, but the House just >> passed HR-5175 (the DISCLOSE Act), which is particularly designed to >> silence the TEA Party movement. >> >> Really, despite the label, I don't think of these guys in power as >> Democrats--they're something new. Something scary. > > Unless there's something new that I don't know about, the prez said > "BP really ought to put a bazzilion dollars into escrow" and BP said > "OK" -- i.e. BP caved before there was even an order to do anything. > > In fact, I recall reading late last week that there's a shareholder > lawsuit brewing against BP precisely for doing that. > > And I'd be a lot less worried about the DISCLOSE act if it were > even-handed between unions and corporations -- I'm not nearly as > concerned about big unions vs. big corporations as I'm concerned about > big anything vs. little ol' me. Big corporations are where innovation > goes to die, big unions have no purpose without big corporations, and > we'd all be better off if we didn't have these corporate entities > (corporations _and_ unions) growing ever larger and taking over the > world. > > The older I get the less far-fetched and paranoid I find the science > fiction that posits a future world that's controlled by corporations, > not governments. > "corporations" are just groups of people. Like Citizens United;they make no product,provide no services for sale,but are a group of people who merged their funds to make a movie that was blocked by the McCain-Feingold law. OTOH,unions are well-known for their violence and oppression,like SEIU. you must not be very informed about today's unions. -- Jim Yanik jyanik at localnet dot com
From: dagmargoodboat on 29 Jun 2010 11:12 On Jun 29, 2:25 am, Greegor <greego...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > JA > The 5th says we can't deprive BP of their property > JA > without due process of law, yet we just did. > > Due process would be the 6th Amendment. > Right against self incrimination is 5th Amendment. No, I'm quite sure... "...nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." --Fifth Amendment though Obamacare violates the 5th Amendment right against self- incrimination too, in my view, since you have to report yourself annually to the IRS. If you lie that's perjury, if you don't answer that's a crime, and if you don't have "insurance" that's a crime too. -- Cheers, James Arthur
From: Tim Wescott on 29 Jun 2010 11:47 On 06/28/2010 05:39 PM, Jim Thompson wrote: > On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 19:30:42 -0500, Jim Yanik<jyanik(a)abuse.gov> > wrote: > >> Tim Wescott<tim(a)seemywebsite.com> wrote in news:JYidnWZG0- >> yHi7TRnZ2dnUVZ_uydnZ2d(a)web-ster.com: >> >>> On 06/28/2010 01:37 PM, Jim Yanik wrote: >>>> Tim Wescott<tim(a)seemywebsite.com> wrote in >>>> news:y8WdnT0T99dLRrXRnZ2dnUVZ_gmdnZ2d(a)web-ster.com: >>>> >>>>> On 06/28/2010 09:13 AM, Jim Thompson wrote: >>>>>> On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 08:40:26 -0700, John Larkin >>>>>> <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 11:34:22 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell" >>>>>>> <mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> www.wvgazette.com/News/201006280099 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Will the KKK furnish an honor guard? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> John >>>>>> >>>>>> Doesn't exist anymore. But maybe we should bring it back to round up >>>>>> liberals (and Californicators ;-) >>>>> >>>>> Check your assumptions: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KKK. >>>>> >>>>> There may be a local chapter near you, ready to welcome you with open >>>>> arms. >>>>> >>>> >>>> if you value the Constitution and it's principles,"liberals" aka >>>> "progressives",are the main threat to it and America. >>> >>> I think that one of my Libertarian friends put it best: Democrats and >>> Republicans may disagree on which part of the constitution doesn't >>> matter, but they both think that parts of it should be dispensed with, >>> and neither of them, on getting into office, drag their feet on tearing >>> up the parts that they feel get in the way. >>> >>> Do you like the second amendment but not the fourth? Vote Republican! >>> Value the fourth and fifth amendments? Vote Democrat! Value the whole >>> damn constitution, especially the first amendment? Vote really >>> carefully, because you don't have many allies in Washington. >>> >> >> DemocRATs are pro-5th amendment ?? Hardly. They're the ones who select >> SCOTUS "justices" that brought us the Kelo ruling. >> They are the ones who select SCOTUS "justices" that believe in a "living >> Constitution" that is interpreted differently depending on popular opinion >> of the time,instead of WRITTEN LAW,the basis for the Constitution. >> If you value the Constitution,you don't vote for people who select such >> judges. >> >> DemocRATs are the party of Michael Moore and George Soros,the Party of >> "progressives" that are actually communists bent on destroying the >> Constitution,when not simply ignoring it. >> DemocRATs are the ones who believe in a World Government,in UN >> supremacy,subjugating the US to "International Law" coming from a corrupt >> and biased UN. >> >> the worst Republicans are the ones who are RINOs,who lean "liberal". >> Like McCain. >> >> I believe you may be willfully blind. > > Naaaah! Now be fair. Tim is simply willfully ignorant ;-) > > How'd you like that J.P. Stevens diatribe on "guns are bad", never > mind what the Constitution says :-( Thank you Mr. "the KKK doesn't exist any more". -- Tim Wescott Wescott Design Services http://www.wescottdesign.com Do you need to implement control loops in software? "Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" was written for you. See details at http://www.wescottdesign.com/actfes/actfes.html
From: dagmargoodboat on 29 Jun 2010 11:52
On Jun 28, 11:11 pm, "Joel Koltner" <zapwireDASHgro...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > <dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message > > news:ff2f144f-d8d9-4783-aed0-efbc8357e9f2(a)f6g2000vbl.googlegroups.com... > > >The 5th says we can't deprive BP of their property without due process > >of law, yet we just did. > > One step closer to mob rule? :-) > > > The 1st says you have the right to free speech, but the House just > > passed HR-5175 (the DISCLOSE Act), which is particularly designed to > > silence the TEA Party movement. > > Not that I necessarily think the DISCLOSE act is a good idea, but how is > requiring political ads to be clearly labeled as to their sponsors going to > silence the tea partiers? > > ---Joel Because the "clearly labeled" procedure is onerous, onerous enough that the unions demanded exemption, and the NRA got one too. The Democrats aren't afraid of big corporations--that's a ruse. They already get the bulk of contributions from, for example, Wall Street. And, besides, big companies can't afford to take political positions-- would Kentucky Fried Chicken want to alienate half its customers? No, of course not. They fear--especially this election--the wrath of small business owners, and of citizens groups who happen to be incorporated, esp. many of the Tea Party chapters. (They're usually "non-profit political advocacy organizations," and incorporate under IRS 501(c)(3) as required by law for various activities, like fund-raising.) Grassroots organizations who get any corporate contributions for TWO years prior have to have the CEO(s) of the contributing corporations personally appear in their ads, identify themselves, and say "I'm Joe xxxx of ABC, and I endorse this message." The effect is to gobble up all your ad time, to where you've got no time to say anything. IOW the government is telling you what you must say, in the brief time that your precious dollars have paid for. Most liberal outfits are exempted by design, including unions. The law applies even if you merely print up flyers on your own printer, so that Thomas Paine's revolution-inspiring "Common Sense" would not have been permitted. The idea that it's encouraging greater disclosure is simply false--the various information is already required to be disclosed to the FEC in regular filings. The measure was written by the two Democrats--Chris Van Hollen and Chuck Schumer, in charge of the Democrats' re-election efforts in the House and Senate respectively, in direct contradiction to and deliberate defiance of the Supreme Court's recent "Citizens United" decision. It's lawless. The bill itself was another one of these recent affairs conducted completely behind closed doors, then amended with a giant extra load of junk two hours before the vote, then crammed through without discussion or disclosure. "Disclosure?" Indeed. Astonishingly, many Democrats have said quite plainly that they know it's unconstitutional, but that it'll last long enough to get them through the next election or two. That's all they need, they say. IOW, the party controlling Congress has brazenly muzzled opponents, whilst exempting their supporters, all in hopes of perpetuating their power in the next election. It's quite ghastly. James Arthur |