Who enforces adherence to the Constitution?

[Guest]

. . . .

 

[cloudy]

You should post your naked ass AV again.

You know, to dispel any cheeto crumb rumors.

Ask, and you shall receive.

(and nary a cheeto in sight)

 

[3113]

Ask, and you shall receive.

(and nary a cheeto in sight)

There are many threads that don't conclude well, but I'd call this a happy ending

 

[3113]

Fuck you, I have no sandals.

oh no Liar! Say it ain't so! We must look into getting you a pair of Birkenstocks ASAP!

 

[amicus]

To merely insert closing chordage to this thread, I sound an E Flat Minor, to note the "Usual Suspects" thus far on this final page, and their yet another thread assassination by intent and nastiness.

All because someone dared speak with honesty about the Consitution of the United States... and of course, that is a clarion call to those who oppose human individual freedom, a free market and a free society.

All the BK's & BF's can now rest on their laurels and gird their stringy loins for further mischief.

And the computer says I write like James Joyce...I wonder why?

heh.



The Amicus

 

[bronzeage]

To merely insert closing chordage to this thread, I sound an E Flat Minor, to note the "Usual Suspects" thus far on this final page, and their yet another thread assassination by intent and nastiness.

All because someone dared speak with honesty about the Consitution of the United States... and of course, that is a clarion call to those who oppose human individual freedom, a free market and a free society.

All the BK's & BF's can now rest on their laurels and gird their stringy loins for further mischief.

And the computer says I write like James Joyce...I wonder why?

heh.



The Amicus

Don't feel bad. It was just a Socratic debate that went off the rails in the first couple exchanges.

Not everybody can be Socrates.

 

[Stella_Omega]

And the computer says I write like James Joyce...I wonder why?

heh.

That "I write like" service is a marketing gimmick, intended to coax needy, unpublishable, old fucks to a self-publishing service.

That's why it says you write like James Joyce.

 

[amicus]

Nice, informative investigation, but my reference was satire, to understand that, a reading of Joyce would be necessary.

less convinced about the nature of the relationship between the site's creator, Dmitry Chestnykh, and the unquestionably-fraudulent Michael Hyatt. Chestnykh describes his methods and intentions here.

Chestnykh modeled the site on software for e-mail spam filters. This means that the site's text analysis is largely keyword based. Even if you write in short, declarative, Hemingwayesque sentences, its your word choice that may determine your comparison.
Most writers will tell you, though, that the most telling signs of influence come from punctuation, rhythm and structure. I Write Like does account for some elements of style by things such as number of words per sentence.

~~~

Regardless of this particular 'scam', computer analysis of comparative style seems to me to be a valid avenue of research. It has long been used in cypher creation and encryption analysis and was even used in world war two, to identify the 'fist' of individual radio morse code operators.

dididah didahdahdit dididah didahdit dididit!



amicus

 

[Stella_Omega]

Yes, if you type in; "Thee, thee, thee thee" it will tell you you write like William Shakespeare.

If you try "woman's blood" you get Margaret Atwood. The word "Ichor" gives you Lovecraft, "bite kiss blood" gives you Anne Rice.

The only other female writers the programmer seems to know about are JK Rowling and Stephanie Meyer. No Ayn Rand, Gertrude Stein, or Collette.

 

[3113]

The only other female writers the programmer seems to know about are JK Rowling and Stephanie Meyer. No Ayn Rand, Gertrude Stein, or Collette.

No wonder it told me I was writing like JK Rowling rather than Anais Nin! I was so disappointed. (Well, not entirely. I figure as Rowling I could make a ton of money! )

 

[bronzeage]

Yes, if you type in; "Thee, thee, thee thee" it will tell you you write like William Shakespeare.

If you try "woman's blood" you get Margaret Atwood. The word "Ichor" gives you Lovecraft, "bite kiss blood" gives you Anne Rice.

The only other female writers the programmer seems to know about are JK Rowling and Stephanie Meyer. No Ayn Rand, Gertrude Stein, or Collette.

It said I write like Danielle Steel, whoever the hell she is.

 

[TE999]

Wow! You really turned over a rock, squarejohn! Nothing like a good ol' smarm fest about the Founding Documents to liven up the boredom.

Any good Liberal Progressive knows that the Constitution's a living document that needs to be updated periodically to reflect the rapid changes in society. Those old white men couldn't have possibly known all the things that are needed and granted to Americans nowdays via our warmhearted politicians and benificent government.

The Constitution's a nice document, but it belongs in a museum. Our 21st Century society has moved way beyond it's outdated precepts into a brave new world of flexible values, indifferent mores, international laws and customs, alternative languages, class warfare, politicians-for-life and an Imperial Presidency.

So long America, it was a noble experiment in governing, but as all other forms of government in the past it succumbed to human venality, greed, sloth, lust, avarice and narcissisim.

'If you give a man a fish, he can eat for a day. When he wants another fish tomorrow, some politician will give him another one of yours'.

 

[Guest]

. . . .

 

[Stella_Omega]

It said I write like Danielle Steel, whoever the hell she is.

Did you mention designer clothing? (I'm pretty sure that's what she's known for)

 

[slave_]

Did you mention designer clothing? (I'm pretty sure that's what she's known for)

LMAO! *cough*

 

[Dragonlipz]

Nice, informative investigation, but my reference was satire, to understand that, a reading of Joyce would be necessary.



~~~

Regardless of this particular 'scam', computer analysis of comparative style seems to me to be a valid avenue of research. It has long been used in cypher creation and encryption analysis and was even used in world war two, to identify the 'fist' of individual radio morse code operators.

dididah didahdahdit dididah didahdit dididit!



amicus

To understand Joyce is way past your capability.....best stick to Beck U....more your style....

 

[Dragonlipz]

Give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day.

Teach a man to fish and he will sit in a boat and drink beer all day.

Or lie his ass off about what he caught......maybe both......

 

[Dragonlipz]

To merely insert closing chordage to this thread, I sound an E Flat Minor, to note the "Usual Suspects" thus far on this final page, and their yet another thread assassination by intent and nastiness.

All because someone dared speak with honesty about the Consitution of the United States... and of course, that is a clarion call to those who oppose human individual freedom, a free market and a free society.

All the BK's & BF's can now rest on their laurels and gird their stringy loins for further mischief.

And the computer says I write like James Joyce...I wonder why?

heh.



The Amicus

It says that because you're a pea brain.....the fact that you repeat shit like that proves it, whether or not you believe it........

 

[3113]

Any good Liberal Progressive knows that the Constitution's a living document that needs to be updated periodically to reflect the rapid changes in society. Those old white men couldn't have possibly known all the things that are needed and granted to Americans nowdays via our warmhearted politicians and benificent government.

So...you think we should have retained slaves and slavery? Kept women from voting? And what has this to do with whether the attorney general enforces the constitution or not?

Oh, and it's not liberals who believed this. It was the founding fathers themselves! "Those who will come after us will be as wise as we are, and as able to take care of themselves as we have been." --Thomas Jefferson to Pierre Samuel Dupont de Nemours, 1811.

In other words, the Founding Fathers had faith in us governing ourselves as needed. That's why we get to elect our leaders to lead us, rather than having the most conservative folk elect someone like a pope who leads us exactly as we were led back in the 18th century, with laws that haven't changed since the 18th century.

I'd think you'd know that TE999. Saying that you think that everything the Founding Fathers put in place was perfect and need never have been changed isn't a conservative idea. It's a fucking stupid idea that not even you really believe. So, please, stop trying to be divisive and insult liberals. I wouldn't insult your patriotism because you're a conservative, why insult mine? That's really uncalled for and shameful, even for you. Believe me, I've done the research, and the Founding Fathers were brilliant enough to know that things would change, in some cases would have to change and--in a few cases, they even wanted them to change. Like slavery coming to an end. A thing they couldn't manage then, but knew future generations would have to tackle, and likely would.

I don't believe they'd have wanted it any other way. What stagnates dies. After all, 1776 was all about them leaving the old behind, transforming and evolving. After doing that, why would you imagine that they would see such a thing as bad? Or unnecessary? Most parents want their children to develop beyond them, not live the exact same life in the exact same world. And most men of great ideas want those ideas to take off and develop, not remain stuck in their infancy.

 

[Guest]

. . . .

 

[Guest]

. . . .

 

[squarejohn]

Wow! You really turned over a rock, squarejohn! Nothing like a good ol' smarm fest about the Founding Documents to liven up the boredom.

Any good Liberal Progressive knows that the Constitution's a living document that needs to be updated periodically to reflect the rapid changes in society. Those old white men couldn't have possibly known all the things that are needed and granted to Americans nowdays via our warmhearted politicians and benificent government.

The Constitution's a nice document, but it belongs in a museum. Our 21st Century society has moved way beyond it's outdated precepts into a brave new world of flexible values, indifferent mores, international laws and customs, alternative languages, class warfare, politicians-for-life and an Imperial Presidency.

So long America, it was a noble experiment in governing, but as all other forms of government in the past it succumbed to human venality, greed, sloth, lust, avarice and narcissisim.

'If you give a man a fish, he can eat for a day. When he wants another fish tomorrow, some politician will give him another one of yours'.

I could not have said it better.

 

[squarejohn]

So...you think we should have retained slaves and slavery? Kept women from voting? And what has this to do with whether the attorney general enforces the constitution or not?

Oh, and it's not liberals who believed this. It was the founding fathers themselves! "Those who will come after us will be as wise as we are, and as able to take care of themselves as we have been." --Thomas Jefferson to Pierre Samuel Dupont de Nemours, 1811.

In other words, the Founding Fathers had faith in us governing ourselves as needed. That's why we get to elect our leaders to lead us, rather than having the most conservative folk elect someone like a pope who leads us exactly as we were led back in the 18th century, with laws that haven't changed since the 18th century.

I'd think you'd know that TE999. Saying that you think that everything the Founding Fathers put in place was perfect and need never have been changed isn't a conservative idea. It's a fucking stupid idea that not even you really believe. So, please, stop trying to be divisive and insult liberals. I wouldn't insult your patriotism because you're a conservative, why insult mine? That's really uncalled for and shameful, even for you. Believe me, I've done the research, and the Founding Fathers were brilliant enough to know that things would change, in some cases would have to change and--in a few cases, they even wanted them to change. Like slavery coming to an end. A thing they couldn't manage then, but knew future generations would have to tackle, and likely would.

I don't believe they'd have wanted it any other way. What stagnates dies. After all, 1776 was all about them leaving the old behind, transforming and evolving. After doing that, why would you imagine that they would see such a thing as bad? Or unnecessary? Most parents want their children to develop beyond them, not live the exact same life in the exact same world. And most men of great ideas want those ideas to take off and develop, not remain stuck in their infancy.

The Constitution is based on principles, not on what's happening at the moment. Are you really saying that the right of free speech, of a right to defend yourself and own property, to name a few, is too old fashioned, too stagnant, for our Brave New World, that they should be modified or done away with entirely.

Should the laws of physics be ignored because they've been around too long? Snap out of it!!!

 

[squarejohn]

dididah didahdahdit dididah didahdit dididit!



amicus

Your message made me laugh, amicus. Very apt reply to some of the posts around here.

 

[Guest]

. . . .