Discussion:
*Disjecta*: "Set Pieces" [Montesquieu]
(слишком старое сообщение для ответа)
Big Red Jeff Rubard
2010-01-22 01:54:35 UTC
Permalink
The *only* acceptable legal philosophy of the US Gov't is that of
Montesquieu. This you are *supposed* to believe from cradle to grave
*als* 'Ultra-American', and *could you believe* as per "Supremes" it
*pays off*. See for yourself. Or whatever. Record the results "at the
last".

http://www.constitution.org/cm/sol.htm
Jeff Rubard
2010-01-22 03:23:32 UTC
Permalink
The *only* acceptable legal philosophy of the US Gov't is that of
Montesquieu. This you are *supposed* to believe from cradle to grave
*als* 'Ultra-American', and *could you believe* as per "Supremes" it
*pays off*. See for yourself. Or whatever. Record the results "at the
last".

http://www.constitution.org/cm/sol.htm

*Troth*. And one *must needs understand* that your "legal type of
fellow" -- whatever their race, color or creed -- has "all what they
can't leave behind" on account of *extreme accuracy in pragmatics
forced upon them by various 'self-chosen people', and rightly so*.
A Kantian republic would be something to watch on a 'silver screen',
but America's "discursive republic" is not that -- and not everybody
can "set the tone" for the scene that ought to be set for the
people who *is* the times etc. Check the State Department and
friends for *extrem* magnanimity as regards your sexi ness
[Seriously, still.] and Consider Your Forebear the Authority Absolute
on "What you know about that" and other "issues of the day".
It must be done, unlike quote-unquote 'justice'.

And the highest and *mos' relevant* [districta n'at] courts say
no different as regards the *ultima ratio* of Mr. Public Record,
Montesquieu. "Cleverness and Antiquarianism in Media" buy
you no *purchase* [an 'Americanism' this, lik-a "dudgeon"] on
the "public imagination": rather, the cleverness and generosity
of an Irving Kristol or a Daniel Bell get you *some of the way*
towards a "refined understanding" of Your Current Circumstances.
Believe me on this.
Big Red Jeff Rubard
2010-01-22 21:59:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Big Red Jeff Rubard
The *only* acceptable legal philosophy of the US Gov't is that of
Montesquieu. This you are *supposed* to believe from cradle to grave
*als* 'Ultra-American', and *could you believe* as per "Supremes" it
*pays off*. See for yourself. Or whatever. Record the results "at the
last".
http://www.constitution.org/cm/sol.htm
*Troth*. And one *must needs understand* that your "legal type of
fellow" -- whatever their race, color or creed -- has "all what they
can't leave behind" on account of *extreme accuracy in pragmatics
forced upon them by various 'self-chosen people', and rightly so*.
A Kantian republic would be something to watch on a 'silver screen',
but America's "discursive republic" is not that -- and not everybody
can "set the tone" for the scene that ought to be set for the
people who *is* the times etc. Check the State Department and
friends for *extrem* magnanimity as regards your sexi ness
[Seriously, still.] and Consider Your Forebear the Authority Absolute
on "What you know about that" and other "issues of the day".
It must be done, unlike quote-unquote 'justice'.
And the highest and *mos' relevant* [districta n'at] courts say
no different as regards the *ultima ratio* of Mr. Public Record,
Montesquieu. "Cleverness and Antiquarianism in Media" buy
you no *purchase* [an 'Americanism' this, lik-a "dudgeon"] on
the "public imagination": rather, the cleverness and generosity
of an Irving Kristol or a Daniel Bell get you *some of the way*
towards a "refined understanding" of Your Current Circumstances.
Believe me on this.
AM. ENGLEESH IS JUST LIKE THAT
DOAN ASK DES
ASK THE "FATHER AND CHILD REUNION"
FMLN VAQUERO HAT REPRESENT
PRAY, MARY
Jeffrey Rubard
2022-01-21 12:26:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Big Red Jeff Rubard
Post by Big Red Jeff Rubard
The *only* acceptable legal philosophy of the US Gov't is that of
Montesquieu. This you are *supposed* to believe from cradle to grave
*als* 'Ultra-American', and *could you believe* as per "Supremes" it
*pays off*. See for yourself. Or whatever. Record the results "at the
last".
http://www.constitution.org/cm/sol.htm
*Troth*. And one *must needs understand* that your "legal type of
fellow" -- whatever their race, color or creed -- has "all what they
can't leave behind" on account of *extreme accuracy in pragmatics
forced upon them by various 'self-chosen people', and rightly so*.
A Kantian republic would be something to watch on a 'silver screen',
but America's "discursive republic" is not that -- and not everybody
can "set the tone" for the scene that ought to be set for the
people who *is* the times etc. Check the State Department and
friends for *extrem* magnanimity as regards your sexi ness
[Seriously, still.] and Consider Your Forebear the Authority Absolute
on "What you know about that" and other "issues of the day".
It must be done, unlike quote-unquote 'justice'.
And the highest and *mos' relevant* [districta n'at] courts say
no different as regards the *ultima ratio* of Mr. Public Record,
Montesquieu. "Cleverness and Antiquarianism in Media" buy
you no *purchase* [an 'Americanism' this, lik-a "dudgeon"] on
the "public imagination": rather, the cleverness and generosity
of an Irving Kristol or a Daniel Bell get you *some of the way*
towards a "refined understanding" of Your Current Circumstances.
Believe me on this.
AM. ENGLEESH IS JUST LIKE THAT
DOAN ASK DES
ASK THE "FATHER AND CHILD REUNION"
FMLN VAQUERO HAT REPRESENT
PRAY, MARY
2022 Update: I think Jeff (Tweedy) and I understand that that *single*
Montaigne reference in "War on War" is *quite enough* by itself. Do
you see the dimensions of that thought?

Loading...