[Clyde Slick]

On 19 Sep, 11:54, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:
On Sep 18, 8:36*pm, Clyde Slick wrote:





On 18 Sep, 13:27, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"

wrote:
On Sep 17, 8:55*am, Clyde Slick wrote:

I swore to defend the Supreme Law of the land. *In that Supreme Law
there is a form of government specified.

I swore to defend that form of government by swearing to defend the
Constitution. The government itself *is* people.

"...that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in
vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom
-- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people,
shall not perish from the earth."

of the people, it belongs to us
by the people, our forefathers devised it, we the people choose its
leadership
for the poeple, it is to serve our needs.

Perfect. "we the people choose its leadership". You've just admitted
that the government is people.

So we agree after all.

http://showcase.netins.net/web/creat...gettysburg.htm

Abraham Lincoln acknowledged that court opinions were binding upon the
specific parties involved and "entitled to very high respect and
consideration...by all other departments of the government."

departments of the governmet are entities, not people.

How does a department give something "very high respect and
consideration"?



Read the Gettysburg address to see what Lincoln said about the
government.
That he hoped it shall not persih from this earth.
He was talking about the US Government as an institution,
hopefully that it would exist in perpetuity,
he was not talking about the people running it at that
moment in time.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Sep 19, 8:47*pm, Clyde Slick wrote:
On 19 Sep, 11:54, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"

So is what you have been saying all this time that you think I took an
oath to an empty shell of an entity? That I swore an oath to the
Department of Justice, but not to the people that make up that
department?

yep!
you got it

LOL!

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Sep 19, 8:47*pm, Clyde Slick wrote:
On 19 Sep, 13:20, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"

wrote:
On Sep 18, 8:38*pm, Clyde Slick wrote:

Being that your definition of government is
different than the one I use, this is just pointless.

As I said, you win.

My oath is to a bunch of empty "entities".

that you think they are empty, that's your problem.
********************************

So is what you have been saying all this time that you think I took an
oath to an empty shell of an entity? That I swore an oath to the
Department of Justice, but not to the people that make up that
department?

yep!
you got it

*******************************

It sounds to me like you agree that the oath is to a form of
government and not to the government itself.

Whatever, Clyde: you "win".

[Clyde Slick]

On 20 Sep, 13:41, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:
On Sep 19, 8:47*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On 19 Sep, 13:20, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"

wrote:
On Sep 18, 8:38*pm, Clyde Slick wrote:

Being that your definition of government is
different than the one I use, this is just pointless.

As I said, you win.

My oath is to a bunch of empty "entities".

that you think they are empty, that's your problem.

********************************

So is what you have been saying all this time that you think I took an
oath to an empty shell of an entity? That I swore an oath to the
Department of Justice, but not to the people that make up that
department?

yep!
you got it

*******************************

It sounds to me like you agree that the oath is to a form of
government and not to the government itself.



The government 'itself' are the enatities and institutions of
government.
Let's consider a Department of Labor pool vehicle.
the Secretary of Labor does not own it, a
'form' of governement does not own it,
the entity known as the US Government owns it.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Sep 20, 5:14*pm, Clyde Slick wrote:
On 20 Sep, 13:41, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"





wrote:
On Sep 19, 8:47*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On 19 Sep, 13:20, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"

wrote:
On Sep 18, 8:38*pm, Clyde Slick wrote:

Being that your definition of government is
different than the one I use, this is just pointless.

As I said, you win.

My oath is to a bunch of empty "entities".

that you think they are empty, that's your problem.

********************************

So is what you have been saying all this time that you think I took an
oath to an empty shell of an entity? That I swore an oath to the
Department of Justice, but not to the people that make up that
department?

yep!
you got it

*******************************

It sounds to me like you agree that the oath is to a form of
government and not to the government itself.

The government 'itself' are the enatities and institutions of
government.
Let's consider a Department of Labor pool vehicle.
the Secretary of Labor does not own it, a
'form' of governement does not own it,
the entity known as the US Government owns it.

So I've sworn an oath to a fleet of Chrysler "K" cars.

I got it, Clyde. We can drop it now. You "win".