|
|
1) Must a power of attorney be registered with the county in which it
was created, and must it be done within 30 days of creation?
2) What is the status of an "unregistered" power of attorney document?
Is it still valid?
3) What exactly is "certif
|
|
|
>> >> >> > What is wrong with the oath of office as the founding
fathers
>> >> >> > wrote it?
>> >> > Ah, another Kwestion Kenny Kakes Kan't answer!!
>> >> Maybe because "The Foundig [sic] Fathers" didn't write one
DIPSHIT!
>> > Read the Const
|
|
|
Carole queries:
> > My other question remains unanswered. What is wrong with the
> > presidential oath of office the way the founding fathers provided it?
And Chas sez:
> Enough so that every President has added to it.
>
> Chas
In other wor
|
|
|
"Carol Lee Smith," the dragonslayer, <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1050118203140.29740A-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
> On Mon, 17 Jan 2005, Ken Smith wrote:
[...]
> > >>Your argument here must fail, on the grounds of its l
|
|
|
" jls" <jls1016@bellsouth.net> wrote
>> > My other question remains unanswered. What is wrong with the
>> > presidential oath of office the way the founding fathers provided it?
>> Enough so that every President has added to it.
> In other words, eve
|
|
|
"Carol Lee Smith" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote
>> Why would Christians deny someone the free practice of their religion?
> Why indeed?
> But we see it all the time.
In what regard?
> What is wrong with the secular oath of office as it was
> origina
|
|
|
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005, jls wrote:
> "Carol Lee Smith," the dragonslayer, <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message
> news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1050118203140.29740A-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
> > On Mon, 17 Jan 2005, Ken Smith wrote:
> [...]
> > > >>Your ar
|
|
|
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005, Chas wrote:
> "Carol Lee Smith" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote
> > So, if someone decided it was necessary to kill a live chicken during
> > their inaugural because it was the free practice of their religion, no one
> > would objec
|
|
|
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005, Chas wrote:
> <lanruvi2@yahoo.com> wrote
> > To that, I can only reply: I would imagine any sane Christian
> > or Jewish person or Muslim person might reflect on how they would feel
> > were a president include "so help me Zara
|
|
|
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Ken Smith wrote:
> krp wrote:
> >> Mike Newdow is technically correct when he says that the installation of
> >>"under God" is a state endorsement of religion -- and also, having a
> >>clergyman say a prayer during the Inau
|
|
|
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Ken Smith wrote:
> krp wrote:
> > "Ken Smith" <forget@it.com> wrote in message news:41ED3368.6090001@it.com...
> >> You're not paying attention, Ken. The issue was whether the "oath" as
> >>written into the Constitution w
|
|
|
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005, krp wrote:
> "Ken Smith" <forget@it.com> wrote in message news:41EC421A.2070505@it.com...
> > Carol Lee Smith wrote:
> >> On Mon, 17 Jan 2005, Ken Smith wrote:
> >>>Chas wrote:
> >>>>"Carol Lee Smith" <human@csd.uwm.edu
|
|
|
In <4FACd.22687$3m6.20460@attbi_s51>,
Brent P <tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS@yahoo.com> wrote:
*In article <slrnctlf84.24k.hillary@manx.misty.com>, Hillary Israeli wrote:
*>
*> That's always been my understanding. Is there any jurisdiction in the USA
|
|
|
<lanruvi2@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1106080845.253272.62880@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> What difference does it make what a subject header says?
None Lannie NONE at all. Just MIGHT give you a clue as to WHAT is being
discussed. Bu
|
|
|
<lanruvi2@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1106081206.603751.315960@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Mr. Kenneth R. Pangborn said:
>
> "Ah but he DID make appeal to the 'founding fathers' in his brief
> Carol... He
> just missed what they actual
|
|
|
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005, krp wrote:
> "Carol Lee Smith" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message
> news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1050117160800.20041C-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
> > On Mon, 17 Jan 2005, Ken Smith wrote:
> >> Chas wrote:
> >> > "Carol Lee Smit
|
|
|
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005, krp wrote:
> "Ken Smith" <forget@it.com> wrote in message news:41EBC221.3060109@it.com...
> > Chas wrote:
> >> "Carol Lee Smith" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote
> >>>>>>>What is wrong with the oath of office as the founding fath
|
|
|
<lanruvi2@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1106080194.969032.14610@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> That's odd. I never saw anything of the sort.
Yes in your POOR little CONFUSED world Lannie he WON the lawsuit on the
oath! However here in th
|
|
|
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005, Chas wrote:
> "Carol Lee Smith" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote
> > What does that have to do with the presidential oath of office as written
> > by the Founding Fathers?
> Nothing that would stop any 'oath-taker' from adding what
|
|
|
"Ken Smith" <forget@it.com> wrote in message news:41ED3457.4040502@it.com...
>>>>>Read the Constitution lately?
>>>>
>>>> Yes Carol I have and the PLEDGE isn't in there.
>>>>
>>>>So we jumped to the oath of office. NOW- Carol since we are on
|
|
|
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005, Ken Smith wrote:
> Carol Lee Smith wrote:
> > On Mon, 17 Jan 2005, Ken Smith wrote:
> >>Chas wrote:
> >>>"Carol Lee Smith" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote
> >>>>>>>>What is wrong with the oath of office as the founding father
|
|
|
"Ken Smith" <forget@it.com> wrote in message news:41ED344F.4070503@it.com...
>> Carol - I dare say that the founding fathers also RE-WROTE it when
>> actually TAKING IT! SUE CAROL SUE SUE SUE SUE SUE SUE SUE SUE!
>> Gotta SUE as the are tryy
|
|
|
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 23:28:59 -0600, an orbiting mind control laser caused "Dane
Metcalfe" <quack_deala@hotmail.com> to write:
>> The big question I have now is, what is the purpose of law enforcement?
>> To be a royal pain in the ass for American cit
|
|
|
"Ken Smith" <forget@it.com> wrote in message news:41ED3368.6090001@it.com...
> You're not paying attention, Ken. The issue was whether the "oath" as
> written into the Constitution was an "oath or affirmation," and in not one
> but three separ
|
|
|
"Carol Lee Smith" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote
> So, if someone decided it was necessary to kill a live chicken during
> their inaugural because it was the free practice of their religion, no one
> would object?
Well; there's always Newdow- now that Fa
|
|
|
"Buster" <courtservices@webtv.net> wrote:
>Are we truly "Stoopid Amedicans"? Think about it. Some of our lending
>institutions give preference to illegal immigrants for mortgage and
>other loans in prejudice of our own citizens;
Gee, really??? Car
|
|
|
On 18/1/05 8:33 am, in article BE127A41.42A06%sufaud@hotmail.com, "sufaud"
<sufaud@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Vatican lawyers rake in cash as 'widow wars' go beyond the grave
> By John Phillips in Rome
>
> The Independent
> 18 January 2005
>
> Roma
|
|
|
"Jonathan Kamens" <jik@kamens.brookline.ma.us> wrote in message
news:cshqjf$6dp$1@jik.kamens.brookline.ma.us...
> scharf@hotmail.com writes:
> If you're stuck with a mortgage company which charges for the privilege
> of finding out how much it'll c
|
|
|
<scharf@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1106005901.439590.253680@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> I ran into a similar issue with Citimortgage, but it was a little
> strange. They would provide a payoff statement for free, but only by
> mail. T
|
|
|
humbubba@smart.net
>krp wrote:
>> "Ken Smith" <forget@it.com> wrote in message news:41EC421A.2070505@it.com...
>>
>>>Carol Lee Smith wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Mon, 17 Jan 2005, Ken Smith wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Chas wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>"Carol Lee Smith" <human
|
|
|
"JPB" <news{@}europa{.}demon{.}co{.}uk> wrote in message
news:cshjn2$7cq$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk...
> Paul Nutteing wrote:
>
> > also thread "Prosecutors Fallacy ... " revisited.
>
> Ah, an old favourite.
>
> >
> > For n loci 1..... 6 (9,10,1
|
|
|
>krp wrote
">READ THE SUBJECT HEADER of this thread Carol PLEDGE... What partt of that
word confuses you?? Oh I know it is the FACT that your claim that the Pledge
was written by the "FOUNDING FATHERS" and that it is "IN THE CONSTITUTION" has
b
|
|
|
As if we didn't have enough problems with illegal immigrants flooding
our country with the refuse they brought with them from Mexico or South
America or wherever they come from; now they're posting a revised
version of the old chain letter in newsgroup
|
|
|
"Sam" <sammy@nospammy.com> wrote in message
news:slvqu09u5p6d9nrnkr4a2k414i9t1hg4ln@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 08:24:39 -0800, Jon Beaver <jbeaver@NO.com> wrote:
>
> >On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:11:47 -0500, RHR <RHR@nospammy.com> wrote:
> >
> >
|
|
|
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 14:46:51 -0600, "Ryan Lankford, Libertarian
Warrior" <RyanLankford@NOSPAMmsn.comNOSPAM>, wrote:
>On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 00:33:13 -0500, "Citizen_Cain"
><noemailhere@askmenicely.invaild> wrote:
>
>>Or is the paperwork still going th
|
|
|
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 08:24:39 -0800, Jon Beaver <jbeaver@NO.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:11:47 -0500, RHR <RHR@nospammy.com> wrote:
>
>
>>1. Has Jon Beaver and his brother (son?) been posting?
>
>My ears were itching, so I thought I'd drop
|
|
|
Daedalus <jade@net-kooks.org>
sednews:u71ru0dgmdvup3moquehb976i30srhbl3e@4ax.com:
> On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 14:46:51 -0600, "Ryan Lankford, Libertarian
> Warrior" <RyanLankford@NOSPAMmsn.comNOSPAM>, wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 00:33:13 -0500, "Cit
|
|
|
I've seen agreements that specifically provide that a facsimile copy is
the same as an original, but don't know of any precedent saying it is
automatically so.
The problem with a pdf or any electronic version is that they are
immediately suspect due t
|
|
|
Chas wrote:
> <el_roachmeister@yahoo.com> wrote
>
>>.....An example
>>now is the tsunami disaster. How many lawsuits are going to be filed
>>from that disaster?
>
> You want to sue the Indian Ocean?
> Somebody didn't dig a tsunami shelter big en
|
|
|
krp wrote:
> "Ken Smith" <forget@it.com> wrote in message news:41EBC4A2.8090700@it.com...
>
>>>>>>>>What is wrong with the oath of office as the founding fathers wrote
>>>>>>>>it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>Ah, another Kwestion Kenny Kakes Kan't answer!!
>>>>
|
|
|
krp wrote:
> "Carol Lee Smith" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message
> news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1050117155949.20041A-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
>>On Mon, 17 Jan 2005, krp wrote:
[snip]
>>>Me "research impaired? Carol it is YOU who is CLUELESS.. I
|
|
|
krp wrote:
> "Ken Smith" <forget@it.com> wrote in message news:41EC421A.2070505@it.com...
>
>>Carol Lee Smith wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 17 Jan 2005, Ken Smith wrote:
>>>
>>>>Chas wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>"Carol Lee Smith" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote
>>>>
>>>
|
|
|
In article <slrncuqu7h.s20.hillary@manx.misty.com>, Hillary Israeli wrote:
> In <4FACd.22687$3m6.20460@attbi_s51>,
> Brent P <tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> *In article <slrnctlf84.24k.hillary@manx.misty.com>, Hillary Israeli wrote:
|
|
|
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:20:53 -0600, someone wrote:
>The cited judgment was a reversal of the Summary Judgment granted to
>Countrywide by the lower court.
><cut>
>So, the question is: What was the FINAL outcome? Were Countrywide's
>practices ultim
|
|
|
"Harry" <hmags@NOexcite.com> wrote in message
news:Nv6Hd.3043$8Z1.2089@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
> That's a very good question. As I read the string, kenny-kakes, you are
> the one who proferred the opinion that the Constitution doesn't conta
|
|
|
"Carol Lee Smith" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1050117161440.20041D-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
>> http://history.vineyard.net/pledge.htm
>>Now - - - here is MY BET! I bet that tomorrow YOU will .claim you NEVER
>> s
|
|
|
"Carol Lee Smith" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1050117161440.20041D-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
> On Mon, 17 Jan 2005, Kenneth R. Pangborn, aka: KennyKakes, aka: krp wrote:
>
>> "Carol Lee Smith" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrot
|
|
|
"Carol Lee Smith" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1050117162024.20041E-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
> On Mon, 17 Jan 2005, krp wrote:
>
>> >> > Endorsing neutrality in matters of government is not being anti-Xn,
>> >> > ant
|
|
|
"Carol Lee Smith" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1050117160508.20041B-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
> On Mon, 17 Jan 2005, Chas wrote:
>
>> "Carol Lee Smith" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote
>> > > >> > What is wrong with the oath
|
|
|
"Carol Lee Smith" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1050117155949.20041A-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
> On Mon, 17 Jan 2005, krp wrote:
>
>> "Carol Lee Smith" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message
>> news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1050116
|
|
|
"Carol Lee Smith" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1050117164155.20041G-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
> On 17 Jan 2005 lanruvi2@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>> > >> > What is wrong with the oath of office as the founding fathers
>> wro
|
