Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/10/20

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] You Can Photograph That Federal Building
From: mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner)
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 01:30:52 -0400

Coincidently I don't know why other than I'm search engining things half the
day but yesterday I came upon the fact that in those early days the
Republicans were the democrats.
In other words if you are a republican in those days you'd be a democrat
now. Unless you get real conservative after living a few hundred years and
that happens.

Oh I was reading a comic book about George Washington. In the real world.
Paper. Ink. So it was not the internet. But the outernet.

Proving once again "its always what you don't think".
And just when you think you know what's going on. You don't.


--------------------
Mark William Rabiner Photography
http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/
Cars:   http://tinyurl.com/2f7ptxb
mark at rabinergroup.com



> From: Adam Bridge <abridge at gmail.com>
> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 21:17:42 -0700
> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
> Subject: Re: [Leica] You Can Photograph That Federal Building
> 
> Well, if it's literally meant "separation of Church and State" then
> she's right: those precise words don't exist in the 1st Amendment.
> However, the meaning of those words is contained in the very first
> sentence of the 1st Amendment. The phrase appears to originate with
> some dufus with radical ideas named Jefferson, as in Thomas Jefferson
> the fellow who wrote the "Declaration of Independence". You can read
> about it here if you're interested:
> 
> <http://www.usconstitution.net/jeffwall.html>
> 
> Thomas Jefferson was a Republican as opposed to the Federalists when
> things in the new United States were every bit as nasty as they are
> right now. It was Jefferson's refusal to have a Justice of the Peace
> for the District of Columbia granted his position that lead to Marbry
> vs Madison and the beginning of the US Supreme Court's power of
> judicial review.
> 
> I'm sure a real lawyer could do a better job than I.
> 
> I respond to the list only to try to make explicit for non-US folks
> what all the fuss is about.
> 
> Adam Bridge
> 
> 
> On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 1:51 PM, John Nebel <john.nebel at csdco.com> 
> wrote:
>> Law prof says she was right!
>> 
>> <http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2010/10/what-if-christine-odonnell-wer
>> e-right.html>
>> 
>> On 10/19/2010 10:15 PM, Richard Man wrote:
>>> 
>>> Well, we have people running for Congress that does not know about the
>>> First
>>> Amendment - "what do you mean the Constitution says there is separation 
>>> of
>>> Church and State," so what do you expect from Hire-a-Cop?
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 6:58 PM, slobodan Dimitrov
>>> <s.dimitrov at charter.net>wrote:
>>> 
>>>> It reminds me of Germany, to this day!
>>>> S.d.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Oct 19, 2010, at 6:15 PM, scleroplex wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> ?isn't it an amazing country that one actually needs to go to court to
>>>> make
>>>>> 
>>>>> it clear that one can take photos of public buildings and courthouses?!
>>>>> reminds me of the soviet union.
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Leica Users Group.
>>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Leica Users Group.
>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information




In reply to: Message from abridge at gmail.com (Adam Bridge) ([Leica] You Can Photograph That Federal Building)