In
regards to John Webster's article "Pro-Life vs "Pro-Choice", he makes an
unsupportable and unprovable statement, which I know to be FALSE!
In the 3rd paragraph he states "... society has the right ..." NOWHERE
in the recorded History of Man, has "society" been endowed by its creator
with ANY "RIGHTS'! However, the article is good, as it states the
pros & cons in a rational fashion. I agree, and with your 2¢
too.
The
saying "evil wins when good men do nothing" is what has caused our present
state of affairs! Tyrants cannot even come to power if people would/could
just say "no" to any irrational postulation at its inception. The
sorry thing about it is (like the 3-strikes law) it is stated (TOUTED)
as one thing & implemented as another, eg: Social Security
it doesn't benefit "social" & it isn't secure! It is not an "insurance
policy" so, now that this info is proven, why don't people correct the
issue?? and get rid of it? 3-x was touted as to remove VIOLENT criminals
yet proof exists that 78% are Non-Violent cases!!! Yet it is costing
the "people" billions! With NO "return" on the alleged investment!
Isn't this proof that Gov't is Criminal?!! OR, people just choose
to be stupid? And if they have chosen to be stupid (do we need any
more proof?) don't they deserve to suffer the consequences of that stupidity?....
Since
we have documented evidence that the U.S. Constitution is
Null & Void, ie: Lincoln's General Order 100, The Reconstruction
Acts of 1867, and §5(b) of the Trading With the Enemy Act of Oct.
6, 1917 (12 U.S.C. §95a & 95b), then the proof that the "14th
Amend." created a new set of Bylaws; why do we allow the Teachers
to continue the false teaching that the aforesaid piece of shitpaper has
any validity!!??....
Eric; Calipatria, California
I
agree that society doesn't have rights. I also agree that the U.S.
Constitution lacks validity. Indeed, it is void
from its inception.
editor
Dear Sam,
Little
is happening, & yet things are getting complicated. It is a cliché
that libertarians are like Republicans on economic issues, but like Democrats
on social issues. Those who want to create a theocracy should join
Buchanan in a Christian conservative party to the right of the Republicans.
It is another cliché that both the Republicans & the Democrats
serve the corporations. Libertarians resent the Democrats because
it is their role to throw bones to the workers in the form of public education,
health care, & social security. Under Clinton, the corporations
thrived. And the failure of the Monica circus was a major blow to
social conservatives. So, libertarians should prefer the Clinton
camp -- Bill, Hillary, & Al -- to anyone else in the two major parties.
Al stood by Bill, for his own selfish reasons, when the Democrats wanted
to join the conservatives in stoning Bill for adultery. So circumstances
have made Al a symbol of social liberalism. Hillary stood by her
man, when the conservatives wanted her to divorce him out of moral outrage
(a strange interpretation of Christian marital morality -- perhaps they
expected her to enter a convent), because Hillary really is a social liberal,
& really doesn't care if her husband fools around, but she can't admit
it, in an insanely hypocritical society. So she's driven to invoke
Freud to explain her husband's "sins." So anyone who believes in
social freedom must start from the Clinton camp & move toward third
parties. The hypocrisy of Bush the cocaine user who runs the Texas
police state, where drug users are crucified is unacceptable from a libertarian
point of view.
Ventura
wants to develop Reform as a libertarian party. He wants to keep
Buchanan out of Reform. He wants to keep his promise not to run for
president before 04. He needs to develop Reform from the ground up
-- winning local & state elections. He could also use a party
spokesperson to run for president & get 5% of the vote -- both promoting
libertarianism in presidential debates, & collecting $13 million for
04. The obvious place to look is Hollywood. Cybel Shepherd
is thinking of running for president as a Freedom of Choice candidate.
Ventura could help Reform by recruiting Shepherd, & trying to absorb
Freedom of Choice, & socially liberal women who support choice, into
Reform. But Shepherd should be encouraged to run for, say, governor
or senator, somewhere -- against anyone but Al or Hillary, since Shepherd's
broader liberal appeal could possibly act as a spoiler, if she did manage
to get 5%, & throw the election to hypocritical police state leader
Bush, or frank police state leader Giuliani. So Ventura needs to
find another actor to run for president -- a libertarian who will not hurt
Gore more than Bush (not, e.g., Beatty). Then Ventura will have to
worry about competing with the figure he has built up later on. But
that's politics.
Third
parties need a proportional representation system. Reform must advocate
changing state constitutions, & ultimately the US constitution -- it
ain't working.
Sincerely,
Elliot
Frontiersman@ida.net |
Frontiersman,
479 E. 700 N., Firth, Idaho 83236
Also see The Pharos Connection at http://www.ida.net/users/pharos/ |
November 1999
Page 3
|
|