One Political PlazaSM - Home of politics
That is not rhetorical! Where do you stand???
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 next>>
Jan 15, 2019 22:05:48   #
Mikeyavelli (a regular here)
 
ron vrooman wrote:
A Constitutional Republic form of government that we have, enumerates the responsibilities of government. Government is not incorporated as it forfeits its sovereignty when incorporating. The beneficiaries( I am one of them) hold the sovereignty within our Republic and the government is servant to the creators. The United States of America has several founding documents all 4 corners on the table. There is no other upon this planet, where the people are supreme over government.
Since 1861 the bogus corporate governance has been working to overthrow our Constitutional Republic.

The Donald is the main reason it did not happen. 41 now dead, thank God, 42, 43, 44 need to be tried and if found guilty punished for their diabolical efforts.

You are completely clear to me. You are my enemy.
A Constitutional Republic form of government that ... (show quote)

Wow!

| Reply
Jan 15, 2019 22:08:17   #
Mikeyavelli (a regular here)
 
The Critical Critic wrote:
Your patience is admirable, Ron. But Mr. Green is either pulling your chain, or he is hopelessly lost.


Dong reen doesn't know what he doesn't know, but he makes the mistake of thinking that we don't know what Dong reen doesn't know.
Big mistake, Dong reen.

| Reply
Jan 16, 2019 07:26:54   #
The Critical Critic (a regular here)
 
Mikeyavelli wrote:
Dong reen doesn't know what he doesn't know, but he makes the mistake of thinking that we don't know what Dong reen doesn't know.
Big mistake, Dong reen.

Lol !!


| Reply
Jan 16, 2019 09:10:05   #
dongreen76
 
[quote=ron vrooman]Still typing words but incapable of typing yes or no.

Yes the laws are clear Lincoln broke them in 1861 and no one has fixed them yet. We only have color of law a legal fiction brought to us by the BAR.[/quote
So by your analysis Abraham Lincoln was the traitor-huh`? This is why I think "YOU PEOPLE" should shut up.You do not comphrehend what you converse of,by your analysis I am your enemy,Lincoln was your enemy.The word Confederate is self explanatory-The prefix syllable -CON -meaning against,and the transitive of the word federal - federate , meaning a controlling centrist of some type of establishised UNION.There fore since I am with the established Union and you Identify with the CONFEDERATE,and you declare me and Lincoln your enemy - that makes you the law breaker and the traitor.Your coharts as much as Identified themselves as such - The CONFEDERATE STATES OF AMERICA, Are you sure want to stand by this seditionisim,At least they understood what Ideas they represented.At least they knew they were the Rebels-from the word rebellous,which means to verse some idea,or authority.



| Reply
Jan 16, 2019 11:02:21   #
ron vrooman
 
I did not analyze Lincoln. Nor did I define him as traitor. I deny your conclusions.
Articles of Confederation came before Constitution and is still 4 corners on the table. you are my enemy. You identified yourself and I named you.

I do not identify with the Confederacy nor do I stand by sedition nor treason.
Treason takes two to make. I wonder how many would stand with me against you and your ilk?


The two cases filed into the one supreme Court of Article III state two of my positions.
Unlike you I have the courage of my convictions and actually "stand and deliver."

[quote=dongreen76][quote=ron vrooman]Still typing words but incapable of typing yes or no.

Yes the laws are clear Lincoln broke them in 1861 and no one has fixed them yet. We only have color of law a legal fiction brought to us by the BAR.[/quote
So by your analysis Abraham Lincoln was the traitor-huh`? This is why I think "YOU PEOPLE" should shut up.You do not comphrehend what you converse of,by your analysis I am your enemy,Lincoln was your enemy.The word Confederate is self explanatory-The prefix syllable -CON -meaning against,and the transitive of the word federal - federate , meaning a controlling centrist of some type of establishised UNION.There fore since I am with the established Union and you Identify with the CONFEDERATE,and you declare me and Lincoln your enemy - that makes you the law breaker and the traitor.Your coharts as much as Identified themselves as such - The CONFEDERATE STATES OF AMERICA, Are you sure want to stand by this seditionisim,At least they understood what Ideas they represented.At least they knew they were the Rebels-from the word rebellous,which means to verse some idea,or authority.[/quote]

Attached file:
(Download)

| Reply
Jan 16, 2019 11:50:53   #
The Critical Critic (a regular here)
 
ron vrooman wrote:
I do not identify with the Confederacy nor do I stand by sedition nor treason. Treason takes two to make. I wonder how many would stand with me against you and your ilk?

I’m one.

| Reply
Jan 16, 2019 11:54:28   #
ron vrooman
 
thank you

The Critical Critic wrote:
I’m one.

| Reply
Jan 16, 2019 12:42:31   #
dongreen76
 
ron vrooman wrote:
I did not analyze Lincoln. Nor did I define him as traitor. I deny your conclusions.
Articles of Confederation came before Constitution and is still 4 corners on the table. you are my enemy. You identified yourself and I named you.

I do not identify with the Confederacy nor do I stand by sedition nor treason.
Treason takes two to make. I wonder how many would stand with me against you and your ilk?


The two cases filed into the one supreme Court of Article III state two of my positions.
Unlike you I have the courage of my convictions and actually "stand and deliver."
I did not analyze Lincoln. Nor did I define him as... (show quote)

The articles we're no longer germaine as of 1789.The US constituion displaced it.You said Lincoln broke the law - What? , articles of confederation laws that were not revelant any more.Lincoln owed allegiance to the Constitution that was ratified in 1789, not the governing document that existed prior to that date.When the president of the United States , whom takes a sworn solemn oath to abide by protect the principles and values that the Constituion adheres-that constituion that the mandate of the Democracy has decreed,if he does not adhere to this ,he can be construed as treasonous.You implied Lincoln to be a traitor.At least you are advocating,Constructionism,as opposed to THE MAGNA CARTER - still in all,that is nothing to be proud of,because it is questionable whether the Articles of Confederation resembles more or less totaltarisim more so than the king's laws,The Magna Carter- the articles of confederation does not allow for women's rights,nor for nig-negroes rights,and other imperfections that does not corroborate the principles of a free,just, equal society- furthermore - you are abreast with the confederatecy,within the Articles,it had no provisions for the abolishment of slavery,The south wanted it sustained.It also had no provisions to eliminate the in-equality of women, just to mention a few descrepancies for those trying to adhere to the philosophies of trying to be a free country.

| Reply
Jan 16, 2019 13:45:46   #
ron vrooman
 
You're like talking to a bucket of rocks. You just keep writing ignorant prose. The Constitution brings forth the Articles of Confederation. It is not Democracy. I am done with you.

dongreen76 wrote:
The articles we're no longer germaine as of 1789.The US constituion displaced it.You said Lincoln broke the law - What? , articles of confederation laws that were not revelant any more.Lincoln owed allegiance to the Constitution that was ratified in 1789, not the governing document that existed prior to that date.When the president of the United States , whom takes a sworn solemn oath to abide by protect the principles and values that the Constituion adheres-that constituion that the mandate of the Democracy has decreed,if he does not adhere to this ,he can be construed as treasonous.You implied Lincoln to be a traitor.At least you are advocating,Constructionism,as opposed to THE MAGNA CARTER - still in all,that is nothing to be proud of,because it is questionable whether the Articles of Confederation resembles more or less totaltarisim more so than the king's laws,The Magna Carter- the articles of confederation does not allow for women's rights,nor for nig-negroes rights,and other imperfections that does not corroborate the principles of a free,just, equal society- furthermore - you are abreast with the confederatecy,within the Articles,it had no provisions for the abolishment of slavery,The south wanted it sustained.It also had no provisions to eliminate the in-equality of women, just to mention a few descrepancies for those trying to adhere to the philosophies of trying to be a free country.
The articles we're no longer germaine as of 1789.T... (show quote)

| Reply
Jan 16, 2019 16:40:53   #
dongreen76
 
The Critical Critic wrote:
I’m one.


Answer your question by looking at the President "The Donald"'s approval rating- and you will ascertain how many ilk are in accord with you.How many Nationalist/ facist the country harbors.


Whew !!!! about 40%, that's a formidable lot,I shudder to say.In order to try to salvage the concept of free Democracies,they should start weeding out promugating subversives like you -this should diminish this Leviathan feat considerably in order to keep it from festering.

| Reply
Jan 16, 2019 17:37:38   #
The Critical Critic (a regular here)
 
dongreen76 wrote:
Answer your question by looking at the President "The Donald"'s approval rating- and you will ascertain how many ilk are in accord with you.How many Nationalist/ facist the country harbors.

What question was it that I asked?
Quote:
Whew !!!! about 40%, that's a formidable lot,I shudder to say.In order to try to salvage the concept of free Democracies,they should start weeding out promugating subversives like you -this should diminish this Leviathan feat considerably in order to keep it from festering.

You should get a dictionary to go with your thesaurus.

| Reply
Jan 16, 2019 17:46:42   #
ron vrooman
 
The Critical Critic wrote:
You should get a dictionary to go with your thesaurus.



| Reply
Jan 16, 2019 19:33:26   #
dongreen76
 
ron vrooman wrote:
You're like talking to a bucket of rocks. You just keep writing ignorant prose. The Constitution brings forth the Articles of Confederation. It is not Democracy. I am done with you.

What did I give you as a definition of CONFEDERATE ! it means succinctly against,as oppose to PROFEDERATE - have you ever heard of the expression "the pro's and cons"- of an issue.Therefore what brought on the articles of confederation was the Magna Carter, This was desention against the King's rule.While opposing the king we were under the articles of confederation,the same type of Confederacy that made the south engage the north( the civil war).The tool used to desent against the king were the laws the colonies used until the nation could fight a (Revolutionary) war to achieve it's independence.It was done that way to be less antagonistic toward the ruling body,the Brits and it's Magna charter.When successfully engaging in the war of Independence and this had been achieved ; this brought forth the Constitution as we know it today more or less.Why do you think it is no longer known as Confederate articles,it's got no centrist force to CON - FEDERATE against-
and yes,I would be so `tickle pink`if you'd be done with me

| Reply
Jan 16, 2019 19:50:30   #
ron vrooman
 
We have 890 views and damned few that made a stand. I find that sad. No Loki, no Linda Joy. Maybe they missed it. Would someone give them a heads up?

| Reply
Jan 16, 2019 20:08:31   #
dongreen76
 
ron vrooman wrote:
We have 890 views and damned few that made a stand. I find that sad. No Loki, no Linda Joy. Maybe they missed it. Would someone give them a heads up?


Well ,Ron VA ! VA ! rrooman they're like you,and are like most of "YOU PEOPLE".They are so stubbornly self righteous,so arrogant,so vain,so superior,so supremacists.the thought of a nig..... negro with the audacity to even think one such as I could hold debate with their highness.. es...asssss

| Reply
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 next>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2019 IDF International Technologies, Inc.