"..do not necessarily..." Which means that it could imply it, right?
If you were right, anyone who entered the Publishers Clearing House Sweepstakes would need some kind of official permission to disassociate themselves with said program.
You don't find an analogy comparing the Constitution with a contest to be somewhat...idiotic? What are you joining when you send in your Publishers Clearing House entry?
In other words, you're wrong - as usual...
Because you say so? That always seems to be the only reason why anyone is wrong - because you say they are. Well, thanks for clearing that up for us.
And as usual with you, any doubt benefits the government, rather than the States or their people - right?
You don't find an analogy comparing the Constitution with a contest to be somewhat...idiotic? What are you joining when you send in your Publishers Clearing House entry?
And you don't find your argument, which can't withstand a 'Publishers Clearing House' test, "somewhat...idiotic?" Typical liberalism...
Because you say so? That always seems to be the only reason why anyone is wrong - because you say they are. Well, thanks for clearing that up for us.
Tell us again why the State of Rhode Island and the Providence Plantations was NOT a member of the union, from approximately 1788 until 1790. By all means, please enlighten us - you bull sh!t artist...
;>)