Wednesday, June 02, 2010

1 Question for Patrick J. Charles

How come you didn't correct your Britannica interviewer after he used the word "grants"? [Read]
Posted by David Codrea at 6/02/2010 11:38:00 AM

5 comments:

straightarrow said...

I couldn't read much of it. It was a set-up from the word go. The interviewee stated conclusions that were not supported by the very research he did and he did so in a manner that suggested his conclusion logically followed when, in fact, his conclusion was a non-sequitir.

The interviewer tried his damnedest to establish by qualifiers to his questions that somehow this is a complex issue and we are all confused by it and need someone to lead us to the truth.

This issue only becomes complex when one tries to parse the words to say something they don't say. Otherwise the issue is very clear and needs no interpretation. Excepting, of course, when there is a desire to reach a conclusion that the constitution does not lend itself to.

6/02/2010 2:41 PM
Ed said...

If you want historical perspective on Article VII, Google Search "Oliver Cromwell Militia Army". Read the Wikipedia article on "New Model Army", the first Redcoats who were a full time militia not restricted to a region or garrison yet under civilian control, namely Parliament, and then the article on "Oliver Cromwell", a political leader who became a militia leader and later a British dictator intolerant of other religions.

6/02/2010 6:21 PM
Longbow said...

Where is it in statute that I have an absolute right to utilize the fingers on my hand? I cannot find one single statute in all my historical research which grants me the right to use the fingers with which I was born.

It can be logically argued then, that since so many crimes are committed by people using all those unregulated fingers, and since there are virtually NO RESTRICTIONS on their use, that Government should impose a regimen of strict finger and hand control.

After all, There is absolutely NO legal standard for all these people going around using their hands at their own whim, thereby placing our children at risk, and making our society a more dangerous place.

People who claim to support Free Finger Rights are not only mistaken, they are irrational and dangerous.

Something needs to be done and it needs to be done now!

If it saves even one child's life, wouldn't it be worth it?

Sincerely.

Longbow

Chairman, International Conference and Working Group on the Rights of the Collective Hand

Member, State Committee on Finger Control

Board Member, Congress of
Multinational Membership Institutions Everywhere in Solidarity with Healing Individuals Totally for Finger Control (COMMIE-SHIT for FC)

6/02/2010 9:07 PM
chinasyndrome said...

Only one stupid enough.

China
III

6/02/2010 9:59 PM
chinasyndrome said...

Left out link.

http://www.indystar.com/article/20100602/LOCAL0402/6020418/1001/news

6/02/2010 9:59 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)