I see what the problem is here. Thank the designer I live in the US of A.

---

I see what the problem is here. Thank the designer I live in the US of A.

You really are a chauvinist, aren't you;) (correct me if I'm wrong)

---

rOZZ
Music
Pictures

I see what the problem is here. Thank the designer I live in the US of A.

You really are a chauvinist, aren't you;) (correct me if I'm wrong)

Actually Julie, he is a troll. He will support any point of view that will annoy other posters. Don't take him too seriously.

---

I see what the problem is here. Thank the designer I live in the US of A.

You really are a chauvinist, aren't you;) (correct me if I'm wrong)

Actually Julie, he is a troll. He will support any point of view that will annoy other posters. Don't take him too seriously.

I see... thanx Bill:)

---

rOZZ
Music
Pictures

USA: 99% cannot tell 1% what to do.

No, it seems that the 1% tell the 99% what to do. ;-)

Cheers.

Sorry. I'm just stating American Revolutionary Thought.

The Freedom of The Individual Person, is given to him, at birth, by the "Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them" (American Declaration of Independence).

Not by a Constitution, or Majority, Party, King, etc. Hopefully the rest of the world will adopt to this Advanced and Revolutionary way of thinking.

NOTE: Before someone, who is ignorant of American History/Thinking, starts ranting about the mention of God in this Document (I am an Atheist). Many of the Signer's and possibly Writer of this Revolutionary Document were Atheist's/Agnostic's. One can read the above phrase as meaning 'The Universe'.

One does not need to believe in Natures God, they can believe in natural rights.

1% does not tell the other 99% what to do. The Constitution tells them, if it's not within the Constitution it is not law by federal standards, perhaps state, but not federal.

Perhaps some do not understand the meaning of Republic and our 10th amendment?

---

Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...

One does not need to believe in Natures God, they can believe in natural rights.

1% does not tell the other 99% what to do. The Constitution tells them, if it's not within the Constitution it is not law by federal standards, perhaps state, but not federal.

Perhaps some do not understand the meaning of Republic and our 10th amendment?

And who decides whats in the constitution? Congress. Of what consists congress? Democratically elected officials. Or if you want, people who are voted in by a minority of people (thanks low voter turnout!).

And who interprets the constitution? The Supreme Court. Exactly 9 people. But, only 5 of those 9 people have to agree in order to make it count as the 'valid' interpretation of the Constitution.

All in all you are right, 1% does not tell 99% what to do. Its even less than 1%. Much less.

USA: 99% cannot tell 1% what to do.

No, it seems that the 1% tell the 99% what to do. ;-)

Cheers.

Sorry. I'm just stating American Revolutionary Thought.

The Freedom of The Individual Person, is given to him, at birth, by the "Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them" (American Declaration of Independence).

Not by a Constitution, or Majority, Party, King, etc. Hopefully the rest of the world will adopt to this Advanced and Revolutionary way of thinking.

NOTE: Before someone, who is ignorant of American History/Thinking, starts ranting about the mention of God in this Document (I am an Atheist). Many of the Signer's and possibly Writer of this Revolutionary Document were Atheist's/Agnostic's. One can read the above phrase as meaning 'The Universe'.

One does not need to believe in Natures God, they can believe in natural rights.

1% does not tell the other 99% what to do. The Constitution tells them, if it's not within the Constitution it is not law by federal standards, perhaps state, but not federal.

Perhaps some do not understand the meaning of Republic and our 10th amendment?

Don't forget it was the 0.1% that wrote the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the Federalist papers in the first place.
And then got their 1%er friends to teach the remainder it is so wonderful.

[quote]One does not need to believe in Natures God, they can believe in natural rights.

1% does not tell the other 99% what to do. The Constitution tells them, if it's not within the Constitution it is not law by federal standards, perhaps state, but not federal.

Perhaps some do not understand the meaning of Republic and our 10th amendment?

And who decides whats in the constitution? Congress. Of what consists congress? Democratically elected officials. Or if you want, people who are voted in by a minority of people (thanks low voter turnout!).

In 1790 the last draft of the Constitution was made. It was voted on and a majority of the 13 states accepted it. Each state that has joined the Union has accepted the Constitution.

There are many ways to amend the Constitution.

You are famous for questions that have no link to topic. I'll ignore the last thought...

And who interprets the constitution? The Supreme Court. Exactly 9 people. But, only 5 of those 9 people have to agree in order to make it count as the 'valid' interpretation of the Constitution.

The Federalist Papers are the intent of our Constitution. While law takes many forms in our Country, intent should be first and foremost and intent is found in the Federalist Papers.

SCOTUS/The Supreme Court is the last stop in a long line just to find out if a law is Constitutional or not.

I take issue with 'valid'. You should fully read what the Court has to say on issues of our Constitution. Do they site the Federalist Papers? Do they site international law? One is upholding our law, the other is legislation from the bench.

All in all you are right, 1% does not tell 99% what to do. Its even less than 1%. Much less.

You have no understanding of rule of law. The law in question was about 1st amendment rights, all states have agreed to the Constitution and it's rule of law. The owners, a family biz, took a Constitutional issue to SCOTUS and won, the Constitution was upheld, regurdless of how I think we got there, we got there. Now everyone abides by this issue, the rule of law.

Corporations have no human DNA, ergo, not a person.

A person is human, homosapien, from the time of conception till that of natural death.

---

Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...

USA: 99% cannot tell 1% what to do.

No, it seems that the 1% tell the 99% what to do. ;-)

Cheers.

Sorry. I'm just stating American Revolutionary Thought.

The Freedom of The Individual Person, is given to him, at birth, by the "Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them" (American Declaration of Independence).

Not by a Constitution, or Majority, Party, King, etc. Hopefully the rest of the world will adopt to this Advanced and Revolutionary way of thinking.

NOTE: Before someone, who is ignorant of American History/Thinking, starts ranting about the mention of God in this Document (I am an Atheist). Many of the Signer's and possibly Writer of this Revolutionary Document were Atheist's/Agnostic's. One can read the above phrase as meaning 'The Universe'.

One does not need to believe in Natures God, they can believe in natural rights.

1% does not tell the other 99% what to do. The Constitution tells them, if it's not within the Constitution it is not law by federal standards, perhaps state, but not federal.

Perhaps some do not understand the meaning of Republic and our 10th amendment?

Don't forget it was the 0.1% that wrote the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the Federalist papers in the first place.
And then got their 1%er friends to teach the remainder it is so wonderful.

Wrong again. It was 3% that fought, it was 1/3 of total population that helped out. And a majority of the vote that set them free from a Kingdom, your little island.

---

Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...

You have no understanding of rule of law. The law in question was about 1st amendment rights, all states have agreed to the Constitution and it's rule of law. The owners, a family biz, took a Constitutional issue to SCOTUS and won, the Constitution was upheld, regurdless of how I think we got there, we got there. Now everyone abides by this issue, the rule of law.

It still means that 5 people decided an issue that affects a lot of people. Therefor the claim that a minority decides and imposes its will on the majority remains true.

Corporations have no human DNA, ergo, not a person.

Agreed, but again, SCOTUS decided otherwise. Legally, a corporation is as much a person as you are. Again a perfectly fine example of how a minority imposed its view on the majority.

You have no understanding of rule of law. The law in question was about 1st amendment rights, all states have agreed to the Constitution and it's rule of law. The owners, a family biz, took a Constitutional issue to SCOTUS and won, the Constitution was upheld, regurdless of how I think we got there, we got there. Now everyone abides by this issue, the rule of law.

It still means that 5 people decided an issue that affects a lot of people. Therefor the claim that a minority decides and imposes its will on the majority remains true.

Corporations have no human DNA, ergo, not a person.

Agreed, but again, SCOTUS decided otherwise. Legally, a corporation is as much a person as you are. Again a perfectly fine example of how a minority imposed its view on the majority.

Any law passed by the Court can be changed by amendment by the people themselves, you once again have no idea what you are talking about.

"Here sir, the people govern." ~Hamilton And they have the right to change that too, the elected. And impeach...

---

Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...

Agreed, but again, SCOTUS decided otherwise. Legally, a corporation is as much a person as you are. Again a perfectly fine example of how a minority imposed its view on the majority.

Мишель...

I find your understanding of American Culture/Laws/Regulations to be from European Culture/Laws/Regulations interpretation.

There is no real understanding, from you, of American Thinking/Culture. Americans really do not think as Europeans do. I think that is good. You do not.

Are you speaking for all Americans again? Because I get a lot of the information you don't like from actual living, breathing, real life Americans who think the way we do.

---

Reality Internet Personality

Any law passed by the Court can be changed by amendment by the people themselves, you once again have no idea what you are talking about.

Yes, it can, but that hasn't happened. So for now, the Citizens United ruling stands and corporations are legally deemed as people.

Мишель...

I find your understanding of American Culture/Laws/Regulations to be from European Culture/Laws/Regulations interpretation.

There is no real understanding, from you, of American Thinking/Culture. Americans really do not think as Europeans do. I think that is good. You do not.

Oh, so you mean that whatever the Supreme Court says can simply be ignored? You mean to say that the Citizens United ruling did not in fact give personhood to corporations? That it did not equal money with free speech? Or do all those words suddenly mean something completely different in American English?

Nah, I think Es is right. You are speaking for all Americans again but you are just completely unrepresentative of how Americans think. Any claim you make about America is about as valid as any claim you have made about Europe. Which is to say, not valid at all.

Agreed, but again, SCOTUS decided otherwise. Legally, a corporation is as much a person as you are. Again a perfectly fine example of how a minority imposed its view on the majority.

Мишель...

I find your understanding of American Culture/Laws/Regulations to be from European Culture/Laws/Regulations interpretation.

There is no real understanding, from you, of American Thinking/Culture. Americans really do not think as Europeans do. I think that is good. You do not.

Are you speaking for all Americans again? Because I get a lot of the information you don't like from actual living, breathing, real life Americans who think the way we do.

"Speaking for all Americans again"

Give everyone a break with that type of thinking. Actually it is not thinking. But word games.

No, its just reading what you've said. "Americans really do not think as Europeans do".

Perhaps you if that is not what you mean and you didn't mean to make a sweeping generalisations about all Americans, you should be clearer? I can only respond to what you say. Not what you think you say.

Do you really believe ALL Peoples/Cultures, in different Country's/Regions of the world, think alike? That there is no DOMINANT Culture/Thinking? That within these Cultures/Thinking, there are no people who think differently? Do you really believe your silly accusations?

I seem to be aware that there is more diversity amongst people than you are.

Stop with the silly 'erect a phony straw dog - and knock it down' word games.

Betting you can't.

What are you suggesting here? That because I pick up on what you actually say, that I playing some sort of game? How strange that you see it like that.

Note: I find you a very easy adversary.


:) :) :)

Thank you for noticing. I do make an effort to be very clear and not go over people's heads. I know sometimes I don't quite pitch it right and people misunderstand what I am trying to say, but I do really try.

Thank you! :)

---

Reality Internet Personality

Perhaps you if that is not what you mean and you didn't mean to make a sweeping generalisations about all Americans, you should be clearer? I can only respond to what you say. Not what you think you say.
.......
Thank you for noticing. I do make an effort to be very clear and not go over people's heads. I know sometimes I don't quite pitch it right and people misunderstand what I am trying to say, but I do really try.

Pot --- Kettle

---

Coffee, white & 2 sugars please :-)

Getting back on topic. I really cannot understand how anyone can turn a corporation into a person & use that to introduce laws or exemptions from laws.

Tax fiddle or a blatant attempt at dictatorship because that's what it comes across as!

---

Coffee, white & 2 sugars please :-)

Getting back on topic. I really cannot understand how anyone can turn a corporation into a person & use that to introduce laws or exemptions from laws.

Tax fiddle or a blatant attempt at dictatorship because that's what it comes across as!

SCOTUS is severely confused and trapped in the past.

Back in the dark ages, Kings granted corporations and those were essentially mini-kingdoms. SCOTUS is stuck thinking that is what corporation is. A grant to be a sovereign. (Kings then were all people)

Unfortunately, we will have to educate them via a Constitutional Amendment that a corporation is just like any other business license and conveys no special status.

---

Unfortunately, we will have to educate them via a Constitutional Amendment that a corporation is just like any other business license and conveys no special status.

In that case, you better get a move on, otherwise if many others jump onto that bandwagon, it will be too late & take the US down a road that will cause nothing but strife.

---

Unfortunately, we will have to educate them via a Constitutional Amendment that a corporation is just like any other business license and conveys no special status.

In that case, you better get a move on, otherwise if many others jump onto that bandwagon, it will be too late & take the US down a road that will cause nothing but strife.

Since Citizens United keeps the politicians in piles of cash we have reached the vertical greased slope.

---