Home > Uncategorized > Lesley Gore sings to Akins, Mourdock, Romney, Ryan, etc…

Lesley Gore sings to Akins, Mourdock, Romney, Ryan, etc…

M E M O R A N D U M
= = = = = = = = = =

To: Akins, Mourdock, Romney, Ryan
bcc: Women, people who love women
From: Lesley Gore
Priority: Urgent
Date: Nov. 1, 2012
RE: Upcoming election

  1. November 2, 2012 at 8:49 am

    Be sure to listen to her comment at the end. What an amazing person! And what an amazing pop song for 1964 and 2012!

  2. November 2, 2012 at 8:55 am

    Freedom cannot exist in an administrative form of governance. The true terrorists of our time are the politicians. We are not experiencing a financial crisis, per se, but more correctly a crisis of criminality. He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetuate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it.

    We don’t have to to fight to be free . . . just stop serving.

  3. November 2, 2012 at 8:58 am

    I can’t view videos. And, I think that most of our local public servants are ‘trying’ to be public servants. It’s just that they’re caught in the same fiction net that we are, and can’t see it.

  4. Plain Jane
    November 2, 2012 at 9:21 am

    I love that song. It was one of my favorite parts of “First Wives Club.”

  5. November 2, 2012 at 9:25 am

    Worth repeating:

    Forest Queen :
    Freedom cannot exist in an administrative form of governance. The true terrorists of our time are the politicians. We are not experiencing a financial crisis, per se, but more correctly a crisis of criminality. He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetuate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it.
    We don’t have to to fight to be free . . . just stop serving.

  6. Little Buddha
    November 2, 2012 at 10:15 am

    The Little Buddha strongly approves this message. And is touched deeply by this wonderful statement.

  7. Little Buddha
    November 2, 2012 at 10:16 am

    I mean the video, not the above comments.

  8. November 2, 2012 at 10:22 am

    There’s something really powerful about these crowd-share musico-political videos. And it’s nice that this one is done with the help of the artist, instead of eliciting cranky but very understandable cries of “where are my royalties.”

    This particular video is also a great reminder that we all owe a debt to the strong, outspoken women (and men, I hope) who were pushing for treating women as if they were human, way back in preherstory.

  9. sylvia scott
    November 2, 2012 at 10:38 am

    Tic Toc……This election is an important one for us all. Pass this message on to everyone you know. VOTE & let Washington hear your voice!

  10. November 2, 2012 at 11:39 am

    This is an illusion, you know? “Washington” is owned and controlled by the ruling oligarchic plutocracy. A lesson you should have learned from Obama’s last four years.

    sylvia scott :
    Tic Toc……This election is an important one for us all. Pass this message on to everyone you know. VOTE & let Washington hear your voice!

  11. November 2, 2012 at 12:14 pm

    Joe,

    Please help me understand your thinking on this by showing me where we disagree.

    First, I think every woman has a right to terminate an unwanted pregnancy.

    By his previous appointments, I believe President Obama has demonstrated that he will appoint justices to the Supreme Court who agree with that position, or at least agree with it under some limited set of circumstances. By his selection of Paul Ryan as his running mate, I believe Mitt Romney has demonstrated his willingness to appoint justices to the Supreme Court who would not believe women have a right to terminate an unwanted pregnancy, under any circumstances.

    I think there is a likelihood that more votes cast for Obama than Romney will result in a second term for Obama, while more votes cast for Romney than Obama will result in a Romney presidency.

    So, I think it makes sense for those who believe as I do to vote for President Obama, rather than to not vote at all or to vote for Mitt Romney. This is completely independent of any beliefs I may have about who has the most power in Washington — it is based entirely on my belief that the Supreme Court has the power to determine whether women have the ability to terminate their pregnancies while remaining within the law as it is applied, and my belief that the President can appoint Supreme Court justices.

    You appear to disagree. Why?

  12. November 2, 2012 at 1:23 pm

    SS
    “Vote and let D.C. (district of criminals) hear your voice.” Are you compensated in some way to post such RHETORICAL VOMIT, or are you transmitting from another planet?
    This is real life. This is not a basketball game or a night at the Roman Colosseum.
    I bet you wave the red/white/blue too, especially on that pretend-freedom day, July 4th. Celebrate Jan. 1? A celebration of Christ’s circumcision – whoop dee doo.
    IT AIN’T WORKING, let’s keep doing it ??????????????????????????????

    Suggestion only: trot on out to Centerville, when you get to the ocean, take a left, go up the hill and you may notice the chain-linked fence with the strands of barbed-wire on top, pointing in. Or, save yourself the trot, cause if you stepped into the counting inventory (census) as the PERSON, a non-thinking entity and creation of the gov’t, then not to worry, you’ll be rounded up. Lockheed Martin has the contract to tabulate the census . . . just as IBM did for the Jews. Mitch, perhaps you’d like to accompany SS, since you’re so distracted by ‘pregnancy.’

    No one is forcing you to be conscious – but it would help.

  13. Mitch
    November 2, 2012 at 1:42 pm

    FQ,

    I’d be interested in your answers to the same question I posed to Joe. I understand that you don’t feel people should vote. I understand that you don’t feel we are conscious. I understand that you don’t feel things are working. I’m just curious why, in your opinion, voting is unconnected to decisions about what the courts (legitimate or illegitimate, so let’s please not go there) can do, via the police (legitimate or illegitimate, so let’s please not go there either) to a pregnant woman choosing to terminate her pregnancy. On this plane.

  14. sylvia scott
    November 2, 2012 at 1:52 pm

    Considering the state of our country the republicans left Obama to deal with, I feel he has done a good job. I also feel that he will do a much better job in the next 4 years. If I didn’t, he would not have my vote. It really doesn’t matter what side of fence you’re on, “Politician Bashing” is just stupid & nonproductive.If you don’t like the job being done, vote for someone who can please you. If you can’t find that person, run yourself. But for the love of the the Republic, stop the endless bitching! Our Constitution states, “We the people”. It doesn’t say, we the government! If you don’t like it, CHANGE IT – or- sit back down & shut the hell up!

  15. November 2, 2012 at 3:01 pm

    When all else fails, quote the defunct and illegitimate Constitution. So, I’ll ask this question, again: What the hell does a person’s “feelings” got to do or justifying a reason for a vote? Why don’t you KNOW anything – Sylvia Scott? Every natural born American citizen has the legitimate right to “BITCH” if they want. And no one has any right telling anyone different. Certainly not someone spewing brainwashed propaganda.

    Mitch, I’m thinking about how to word my comment so as not to offend the tender feelings and limited sensibilities of most people that read this blog. You might want to recall our previous discussion regarding Deepak Chopra’s book; it sets the foundation. Actually, upon reconsideration, you should know the answer to your question about voting.

  16. November 2, 2012 at 3:28 pm

    Mitch, it’s easy enough to get caught up in issues and miss the point; kind of like seeing the trees for the forest. I fully expect Barack Obama, provided he retains the Presidency, to sell everyone out that voted for him. On the other hand, everyone can avoid the betrayal and go with the lunacy. Unless Romney folds like a wet paper bag like Obama did, I doubt the world will tolerate for very long what he and his henchmen have in store for everyone. And that observation doesn’t even include what will happen in this country when he finishes the looting and the police state. Be that as it may, it’s all irrelevant. No matter who wins or steals the Presidency it all comes out in the wash the same. Who Obama or Romney picks for the Supreme Court is already decided, your “beliefs” aside. The whole government is unconstitutional and therefore illegitimate, and continuing to vote in the hope that some miracle will mysteriously fix the problem for everyone in the face of America’s Karmic Reality is not realistic in the least. The ruling oligarchic plutocracy have nearly finished destroying everything of an value.

    I hope that clears that up. I didn’t speak to “unwanted pregnancies” because the subject is about responsibility and accountability for voting.

  17. Anonymous
    November 2, 2012 at 3:47 pm

    If the Constitution is “defunct and illegitimate” then of course there is no reason to vote, except maybe on a new Constitution. Acknowledging that one’s vote for President may end up helping to determine the makeup of the Supreme Court and thereby could have far-reaching consequences for our legal rights would only lend legitimacy to this “defunct and illegitimate” Constitution.

    So, Joe’s views on voting make perfect sense, given his belief that the Constitution is “defunct and illegitimate.” The thing is, I don’t think very many people share his view that the Constitution is “defunct and illegitimate,” and therefore few share his reasoning for why voting is supposedly worthless and/or counterproductive.

  18. Anonymous
    November 2, 2012 at 3:59 pm

    According to Joe, “the whole government is unconstitutional and therefore illegitimate.” But he also says that the Constitution itself is “defunct and illegitimate.” In other words, the problem is that the government is not following the rules that they are supposed to follow — but even if they were, Joe declares that those rules are defunct and illegitimate in the first place.

  19. Mitch
    November 2, 2012 at 4:05 pm

    Who Obama or Romney picks for the Supreme Court is already decided, your “beliefs” aside.

    Who has decided?

  20. November 2, 2012 at 5:25 pm

    SS
    Roll on over and go back to sleep.

  21. Anonymous
    November 2, 2012 at 5:43 pm

    “Who has decided?”

    As usual, the Supreme Court pick were made at Bohemian Grove, by the duly-appointed representatives of the Trilateral Commission, Bilderberg Group, Council on Foreign Relations, and Alien Reptillian High Command, during the biannual gathering of the Supreme Inner Council of the Amalgamated Society of Exalted Illuminati and Free Masons, Inc.

  22. Mitch
    November 2, 2012 at 5:46 pm

    Or maybe there’s no free will, and it was determined at the big bang? That would be a huge disappointment to the Trilateralistas, so it wouldn’t be all bad news.

  23. November 2, 2012 at 6:16 pm

    Mitch
    What you refer to as ‘courts’ are Administration Rooms – foreign vessels in dry-dock -worldwide. Every Administrative ‘court’ action is COMMERCIAL. That means admiralty/maritime law. IT IS ALL BASED ON AGREEMENTS with the artificial created entity that was created when your parents filed an application for your birth certificate. Since the ‘government’ has not provided full disclosure, every contract is fraudulent, and they are guilty of racketeering. If you sign ANYTHING on ‘government’ paperwork, they deem you to be volunteering into their system. If you go before a ‘judge’ and argue law or constitution, you will lose 100% of the time – on the premise that contracts supercede law and the constitution. You were not a party to the constitution.
    I have a question for you – why do you hang onto the fiction that is a spectacle-in- free-fall, crumbling, and tumbling down all around us. As it gets swept away, let it go, don’t hang on.

  24. November 2, 2012 at 7:04 pm

    “There are no Judicial courts in America, and there has not been since 1789. Judges do not enforce Statutes and Codes. Executive Administrators enforce Statutes and Codes. There have not been any Judges in America since 1789. There have just been Administrators.” FRC v. GE 281 US 464, Keller v. PE 261 US 428 1Stat. 138-178.
    These are Supreme Court rulings.

  25. Anonymous
    November 2, 2012 at 7:29 pm

    So, Forest Queen, the “There have not been any Judges in America since 1789.” quotation is from….?

    I ask because I have a strong hunch that you haven’t actually read the decisions you’ve listed there, and that in fact you’ve just accepting that the quoted text you pulled off one of those gold-fringed-flag-conspiracy-kook websites is, in fact, an accurate summary of what those court decisions actually said.

  26. Oscar
    November 2, 2012 at 7:53 pm

    Getting back to the origin of this thread: A little reality check. . .”You Don’t Own Me” was SUNG by Lesley Gore, who was 17, in 1964, but it was WRITTEN by a coupla guys named John Madara and David White. Their first big hit was “At the Hop” in 1957. Lesley’s first big singing hit, at 16, was “It’s My Party and I’ll Cry if I Want To.”

    You would cry too if it happened to you.

  27. Plain Jane
    November 2, 2012 at 8:33 pm

    There’s a very interesting (but grisly) JFK conspiracy documentary at Netflix, “Dark Legacy.” It makes at least a superficially good case that it was a right wing conspiracy.

  28. November 2, 2012 at 9:01 pm

    Jesus Anonymous, I’m not gonna hold your hand and walk you though this transition from tyranny to liberty on a featherbed. I have a ‘brain trust’ I can turn to anytime – one is the speaker of the house in Texas – Texas, the Lone Star state – ring a bell?

    I’m just accepting quoted text – off with your head!

  29. November 2, 2012 at 9:10 pm

    Not @ Anonymous,

    Inasmuch as every government is an artificial person, an abstraction, and a creature of the mind only, a government can interface only with other artificial persons. The imaginary, having neither actuality or substance, is foreclosed from creating and attaining parity with the tangible. The legal manifestation of this is that no government, as well as any law, agency, aspect, court etc. can concern itself with anything other than corporate, artificial persons and the contracts between them.
    Penhallow v. Doane’s Sdministraters 3 U.S. (1795)

  30. Anonymous
    November 2, 2012 at 9:18 pm

    “I’m just accepting quoted text.”

    Yeah, that’s what I thought. You saw the (unattributed) quote on a wing-nut website, accepted it as if it were a proven fact, without engaging any critical thinking whatsoever, or even an ounce of investigation, and then you just cut and pasted here along with the names of two court cases that don’t say anything remotely like the what the quote claims.

    Ever head the old saying “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence?” Well, you’re great at the “extraordinary claims” part…but sadly lacking in any evidence to back up your claims, much less the kind of solid, convincing evidence that you ought to have in hand before making such extraordinary claims.

  31. Anonymous
    November 2, 2012 at 9:28 pm

    And again, the quoted text in your #29 is widely available on wingnut websites, but no source is given for who is being quoted. Listing the court case below the quote implies that the quote is from the court case, but once again the quote is NOT from the court case.

    You really should consider reading these cases before citing them as support for the unattributed quotes you pull off of wingnut websites. You’re making a fool of yourself. Repeating the same pattern of posting more unattributed quotes followed by court cases that neither contain those quotes nor in any way back up the claims made in those quotes is not fooling anyone…except, apparently, you.

  32. November 2, 2012 at 9:36 pm

    Forest Queen is right about one thing, there is no “real” judicial system, or “justice” system. If there were most of wall street would be in prison right now. I was just watching the documentary “Inside Job,” and it illustrates very well that the weight of the law is not applied to the aristocracy. Instead of going to prison for their crimes, they were handed over a trillion dollars from the public treasury, and to pay for it, they cut services to schools and people in dire need.
    There are no conspiracies, only policies.

  33. Anonymous
    November 3, 2012 at 1:42 am

    Did anyone else notice the Romney ad before the song?

  34. Mitch
    November 3, 2012 at 7:23 am

    Again I think moviedad has it exactly right. No need for secret conspiracies in this era; they would be pointless when you have a Citizens United Supreme Court, complete ownership of the mass media by the wealthiest, and the largest “lobbying” bribe structure in history.

  35. November 3, 2012 at 7:36 am

    Plain Jane,
    The driver shot Kennedy. He was left-handed, I don’t know if that makes him right-winged.
    The choice is good or evil – labels have no use – we’re beyond that.

    Without justice, there’s just us – this is where we are.

  36. November 3, 2012 at 7:53 am

    #1) What did I first post 7 weeks ago Anon? That the corrupt would just have to set on the side-lines and watch us destroy ourselves. You’re proving my point.
    #2) I also asked for personal experiences be brought to the table, to aid our ailing society.
    I’m not the one holding onto the STATE-OWNED I dent a fiction card. I’m not the one ASS
    KING permission from some illusionary power about how to live my life.
    #3) I travel without ‘permission’ because I’ve mailed my NOTICE docs. to the Sheriffs, D.A.’s, Police Chiefs and Chief Judge in each county that I travel in. AND, Anon, these docs. contain the above court rulings. My docs. grant 10 days for any rebuttal on a paragraph by paragraph basis. I have received no rebuttals.
    #4) A recorded Affidavit/Notice stands as truth in Commerce.
    #5) Your head is so far up the Matrix Anon, that you can’t see or hear. That’s your choice – it’s called ‘free will.’
    #6) Should I ever have a momentary-lapse-of-reason, and can’t remember who I am, I’ll rattle your cage. NOT!
    #7) So, run, scurry, flee, to their nearest voting machine. You’re free to vote in your next dictator – good luck with that.

    Same question – if we can’t self-govern, then why are we here?

  37. LOL
    November 3, 2012 at 8:38 am

    Plain Jane :
    There’s a very interesting (but grisly) JFK conspiracy documentary at Netflix, “Dark Legacy.” It makes at least a superficially good case that it was a right wing conspiracy.

    There are paranoid kooks in the left wing & right wing fringe. You have to be one of them to believe that garbage.

  38. Plain Jane
    November 3, 2012 at 9:53 am

    Did you watch it LOL? If so, exactly what did you think was unbelievable about the points he made? I am a skeptical person, by nature, but found the 1st and 2nd degree, multiple connections between the people at the center who would all have to be involved in the conspiracy to murder and cover-up JFK’s murder, FBI records only recently found the proven lies they’ve told and their motives (JFK’s plans to shrink the CIA and spend less on the military) to be pretty compelling.

    It’s quite complex, of course, but key is a question that has been floating around for many years, whether GHW Bush was CIA and was the agent in charge of CIA’s anti-Castro operatives (and E. Howard Hunt) working from an island off Cuba where, coinicidentally, Zapata Oil was operating. His partner was Thomas Devine, now publicly acknowledged as a CIA agent. The Bushes had strong and deep ties to the CIA from the beginning, close personal and business ties to CIA Directors, recruiters and operatives, GWH Bush, of course, eventually becoming CIA Director. We know of the E. Howard Hunt connection to Bush (Bush brought Hunt into the Nixon White House, and his being personal assistant to CIA Director Dulles (fired by JFK over the Bay of Pigs) but was appointed to the Warren Commission to investigate the assassination. It was Gerald Ford, also a member of the Warren Commission, who appointed GHW Bush to the CIA.

  39. November 3, 2012 at 10:01 am

    #33,

    They probably select the ad based on your browsing history. Have you been watching Fox porn? (I kept getting California ballot propositions, unfortunately.)

  40. Anonymous
    November 3, 2012 at 10:04 am

    “I have received no rebuttals.”

    Those who you sent those legally meaningless documents to sent you didn’t bother to send you a reply? Gee, how surprising.

    To review, I simply asked who you were actually quoting in your comments (#24 and #29), how the court cases listed under those quotes supported the claims made in the quotes, and whether you had even read those court cases. Apparently you can’t, or won’t, answer those simple questions. Fine, that’s your prerogative. Readers can draw their own conclusions.

  41. November 3, 2012 at 12:09 pm

    Since when does “people’s agreeing” or my so-called beliefs determine truth or reality? Obama, alone, with his “Kill List” has, in and of itself, delegitimized the Constitution. And the people, for sure everyone that votes for him, validates that reality. No legitimacy, no justified right to exist – will of the people subsequently irrelevant as they become illegitimate. Second, determining the makeup of the Supreme Court is in the hands of the oligarchic plutocracy, as is ultimately the election. So, play the game and enjoy it while it lasts.

    Anonymous :
    If the Constitution is “defunct and illegitimate” then of course there is no reason to vote, except maybe on a new Constitution. Acknowledging that one’s vote for President may end up helping to determine the makeup of the Supreme Court and thereby could have far-reaching consequences for our legal rights would only lend legitimacy to this “defunct and illegitimate” Constitution.
    So, Joe’s views on voting make perfect sense, given his belief that the Constitution is “defunct and illegitimate.” The thing is, I don’t think very many people share his view that the Constitution is “defunct and illegitimate,” and therefore few share his reasoning for why voting is supposedly worthless and/or counterproductive.

  42. November 3, 2012 at 12:10 pm

    Read what I write, Mitch. I already said.

    Mitch :
    Who Obama or Romney picks for the Supreme Court is already decided, your “beliefs” aside.
    Who has decided?

  43. November 3, 2012 at 12:15 pm

    Mitch, I answered your question couched in your rather long opinion above. If the above question is the best you can do, then your question was deliberately disingenuous.

  44. November 3, 2012 at 12:24 pm

    Joe,

    The best I can come up with is that you state there are only a few rare people who “know” anything. I don’t get how that lines up with statements like “who Obama picks for the Supreme Court is already decided.” Maybe I’m being deliberately disingenous with myself, but I cannot come up with anyone who has already decided who Obama will pick for the Supreme Court, unless you’re talking about a personal God that I don’t think exists.

    I don’t think there’s a cabal running the country. I think there’s a failed system in place that amounts to much the same thing, and I think that the top percent of the top percent pretty much have their way on economic decisions, and those same people are divided (thank heavens) on social issues, so they don’t feel much need to strongly control such issues.

    But I don’t think there’s any curtain anyone else is standing behind. I think it’s pretty much out in the open: the Sheldon Adelsons, the Koch Brothers, their employees like Karl Rove are able to make and break politicians 99+ percent of the time. That doesn’t mean, at least to me, that there aren’t better and worse choices in voting.

    Call me a fool, but I’m convinced President Obama actually cares about people like me, and I’m equally convinced that Mitt Romney would be happy to squash me or anyone without even noticing the stain on his foot.

  45. November 3, 2012 at 3:20 pm

    Mitch, well I know now why you didn’t finish off our conversation of Chopra’s book – you never did get it. Too bad.

    In the above comment #41 I say: “Second, determining the makeup of the Supreme Court is in the hands of the oligarchic plutocracy, as is ultimately the election.” That is about as plain as I can put it, your unfounded beliefs aside. When the full betrayal comes you’ll be totally stricken. Unfortunately, by then it will be way too late.

    What you say in your comment (#44) are the words of a sadly, brainwashed Believer. You’re not much different than those Mitt Romney types when you get right down to the bare essence. A lesson you should have learned reading Chopra. So vote your heart out, all you’re doing is validating an already delegitimized government, but I doubt you understand what that means for you and everyone else. Anyway, you bought it, you own it. Or as Forest Queen puts it on the other thread: “We have the government we deserve – the blame is on our shoulders.” By the way, I know you don’t need my permission to vote, but do so with my blessing anyway.

  46. November 3, 2012 at 4:10 pm

    Well, thanks for spelling it out, Joe. If you are correct, I will indeed by totally stricken. (Fifteen minutes later…) Wow, I think I finally understand where your fury at all who vote comes from. You really must think the entire thing is an elaborate staged deception by dark powers. If I felt that way, I’d be just as angry.

    I don’t feel there’s anyone in particular in charge. Sure, the top 100 or 200 families control much of what happens in the economy, but I believe that’s just a result of capitalism, particularly once it captures the government. I think most of what happens these days is a tragic result of human nature, not a result of any set of people’s plans.

    Maybe yours is the more idealistic belief system — I wish I believed that there were a few bad guys running things, but I don’t.

  47. November 3, 2012 at 6:13 pm

    Anger – What anger? Only in your beliefs. A comment like this one only proves that your question really was disingenuous. Took me awhile to ferret you out, but like usual people like you just can’t help themselves. You have to care to become angry and I’m way beyond any of that. Your personal beliefs serve only your intemperate ego. What you feel is also irrelevant since your feelings are based upon age old propaganda – if anything. Chopra had it right and he labeled your kind of nonsense-based beliefs perfectly. Your comment above condemns your actions and you’re to caught up in your beliefs to know the difference. What do you “believe” causes “human nature”? What you want is to have it the way you want and not be held responsible and certainly not accountable. Unfortunately, life does not work that way. So, live and learn – with my blessings.

  48. November 3, 2012 at 6:59 pm

    Anonymous,

    YES< YES< YES< I read the court cases I cite. You could too and stop your meaningless attacks – that is not what we're here for

  49. November 3, 2012 at 8:04 pm

    Joe Blow,

    “The ultimate result of shielding men from folly, is to fill the world with fools.”
    Herbert Spencer (1820-1903). Not to mention, it’s way tiring.

  50. November 3, 2012 at 8:23 pm

    I should know better than to put words in Joe’s mouth. It would have been more appropriate to say that if I knew that a plutocratic oligarchy had already selected the next supreme court justice, I’d be angry.

    The reference to Deepak Choprah may be confusing, given that the discussion happened on a different thread. It’s to his new book, which I read at Joe’s suggestion, and enjoyed and recommend. As far as I understand it (and others may feel that’s not at all), it’s about the revelation via mystics of some capacity the universe has for goodness that many people — unhelpfully IMO — refer to as god.

    What it has to do with the topic of voting is beyond me.

    I don’t believe, know, or hypothesize that the next supreme court justice has been preselected, by a plutocratic oligarchy or any other group. I think people who do know that ought to do us the service of telling us who it will be.

  51. Anonymous
    November 3, 2012 at 8:30 pm

    FQ,

    I read the three court cases you cited yesterday, and couldn’t find anything in them that even remotely backed up the nutty (and unattributed) alleged “quotes” that you preceded them with, or the initial claims you made that those “quotes” were supposed to be providing support for

    If you really did read those court cases that leads me to ask the question — Why on earth would you cite those cases under along with the “quotes” that they neither include, nor in any way support?

    I can only conclude that you have severe problems comprehending what you read, or you’re just parroting what you’re lifting from all the wing-nut websites that include the same unattributed “quotes” followed by the same court case citations. Or both. If there’s some other explanation, I’d like to hear it, because at this point you’ve wasted at least an hour of my time peering down your fact-free pseudolegalistic conspiratorial rabbit holes.

    I gave you the benefit of the doubt that those court cases were of some significance and related in some way to the claims you were making, and out of respect I took the time to look up those cases and read them. I will not make that mistake again. My assumption will be that if you post an unattributed “quote,” followed by a court case citation, the court case will neither include nor in any way support the “quote.”

    So if you want to make a point by providing a quote, you’ll have to say who is being quoted, where, and when (as is normally the case when quoting someone, by the way), and if you’re going to cite a court case, you’ll have indicate how that case is supposed to relate to your point. Otherwise I’m not going to waste any time with your “quotes” and case citations.

    I’m sure you mean well, but I wonder if you have any idea just how deranged and confused your interpretation of history and law seems to anyone who doesn’t already share your kooky notions of the supposed significance of “gold-fringed flags” and the supposed soourge of “admiralty courts.” Maybe, for you, it’s enough to just spew all this stuff wildly and without any credible sources or logical arguments, but the reality is that all you’re managing to do is convince readers that either there is no substance behind your beliefs, or else you are just exceptionally ill-equipped to make a persuasive case for those beliefs. Again, I will allow that it might well be both.

  52. November 3, 2012 at 11:08 pm

    Anonymous,
    I scanned your post. You get to be right. Don’t waste your time reading anything I post . . you can glean nothing from them.

  53. Anonymous
    November 4, 2012 at 12:37 am

    The only thing to be gleaned from your posts on this thread is that you hold bizarre, delusional beliefs that you are clearly incapable of defending with any solid facts whatsoever, and that, as is typical with paranoid conspiracy true believers, being asked to provide any solid evidence and forced to confront the fact that you have none only makes you angry and defensive as you spiral further into your deranged, self-inflicted nightmare world. I truly pity you.

  54. November 4, 2012 at 1:21 am

    “Angry and defensive?” is you’re perception . . . and, newsflash, not my emotions. Keep your mis-guided pity – no one reading this gives a rat’s rump.
    “Self-inflicted nightmare world.” – you assume a claim without evidence for your claim. Your attacks are unfortunate for you. I don’t know you. I never granted/authorized you to judge me. Where do you get off? You’ve brought NOTHING to the table but condemnation – low frequency, dense tone. What’s your point? What’s your work to do while you’re here?
    I’ve said you could be right . . . what do you want from me?

    The intension of the party is the soul of the instrument/document. Being obedient to the Most High/Divine Spirit/Source (whatever your label) first, and having the right intent, is why it w o r k s. Something you, Anon, may not grasp in this lifetime, I don’t know.

    Peace

  55. Anonymous
    November 4, 2012 at 1:30 am

    Not angry and defensive? LOL! Re-read your 7:53 post (#36) and your most recent one (#54). If those do not reflect anger and defensiveness, what is it? Just random shrieking?

    Look, when you make your kooky claims about the legal system and other matters, are extremely insistent and holier-than-thou about all of it, but then utterly fail to provide even a shred of evidence to back up your wild claims, well, you invite the kind of judgement that now has you so squealing in indignation. Don’t want to be judged a fool, then don’t make so many foolish claims you can’t back up. It’s really that simple. Want other people to respect your views? Then earn that respect by sticking to claims that you can back up with facts. Don’t care if your beliefs are ridiculed? Fine, but then you ought to quit whining — the lack of respect for your unsubstantiated beliefs is something you have brought on yourself by so insistently claiming things that are so completely without foundation.

    If your desire is to be able to spew all this nonsense without being challenged to back it up, well, too bad, you’ve found the wrong forum for that. Like it or not, I don’t need you to “grant/authorize” me to judge you. Tough luck. But don’t fret, as I’m sure you know there are plenty of wingnut conspiracy websites and sovereign-citizen fantasy circle-jerk websites where most participants already agree with the same set of loopy pseudohistorical nonfacts that you so love to believe, and unlike here on the Herald, those fellow True Believers won’t put you in the impossible position of being called upon to provide factual evidence to back up your nonfactual claims.

  56. Just Watchin
    November 4, 2012 at 4:58 am

    Anon…….you’re wasting WAY too much time on Queenie. She’s a nut job and everyone knows it. It’s just that most people are too polite to call her out on it.

  57. November 4, 2012 at 4:38 pm

    Well, spoken. Too bad Mitch is unable to understand that. Sorry I directed you to Chopra’s book. Talk about a waste! You talked like you had some sense of what he was writing about, but as it turns out you are totally clueless – yet you run your mouth like God Almighty himself. Get the rafter out of your own eye buddy.

    You say, “What it has to do with the topic of voting is beyond me.” And I need to say nothing more. Your question was disingenuous all the way. You exposed yourself for exactly what you are – and you believe that makes me angry? What the hell do you offer anyone?

    Forest Queen :
    Joe Blow,
    “The ultimate result of shielding men from folly, is to fill the world with fools.”
    Herbert Spencer (1820-1903). Not to mention, it’s way tiring.

  58. November 4, 2012 at 5:08 pm

    Can ya feel the love?

  59. November 4, 2012 at 6:01 pm

    I can feel Joe’s love.

    Joe Blow,

    When you’re at the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s