From: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com (roc-digest) To: roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: roc-digest V2 #92 Reply-To: roc-digest Sender: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk roc-digest Sunday, March 22 1998 Volume 02 : Number 092 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 12:52:45 -0800 (PST) From: Harry Barnett Subject: Re: Wisdom from Neal On Wed, 18 Mar 1998, Bill Vance wrote: > Either way, it beats hurrying to make a Clintonian grade mistake. I think > that makes a fair appraisal, but I'm still listening. What do you all > think? Well, since you asked... I think the Mission Statement of the NRA should be the preservation of the rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment of the individual citizen's right to keep and bear arms. To this end, they should support and defend it, and roll back the infringements on it as quickly as possible. In fact, without the Second Amendment as a foundation, the NRA loses it reason for existence, and once it goes, it will be but a few years before the organisation vanishes from drastic loss of membership, if it is not legislated out of existence first. However, self-preservation as an organizational entity doesn't play well in Peoria. You have to take the mission to the people and make it mean something to THEM. This means political action. By its very nature, this mission statement is political. To carry it out takes political action. I think this political action, if it is to remain peaceful, necessarily involves informing and persuading, "winning hearts and minds" so that the body politic subscribes to the mission statement. Persuading and informing is the business of Madison Avenue. Those guys don't work for nothing. It takes money. From whence cometh the saying, "Money is the Mother's Milk of politics." The NRA needs money to carry out their mission. How does the NRA raise money? Through two primary means: dues and donations. How do they increase the income from dues? By increasing dues, and by increasing membership. Income from an increase in dues is limited by the "crossover point". The "crossover point" is where income resulting from an increase in dues is matched by a corresponding loss in income due to a loss of membership as a result of people not getting "bang for their buck", or they can't afford it, and abandoning their membership. Once dues are at the crossover point, income from dues increases are maxxed out. OTOH, the income from membership numbers is limited only by the total population of potential members. You don't get new members from the ranks of the True Believers, you get them from the population who are non-members. Hold that thought. How do they increase the income from donations? By solicitations. This is limited by the "burn-out threshold" where donors being constantly dinged on for money start turning a deaf ear to pleas for more money. So the NRA needs to raise money by increasing membership, and increasing donations. A spokesman with favorable and widespread face-name recognition is just about the most sure-fire time-tested method for spreading the word, and increasing membership and donations. I think if you go to any bus stop with a picture of Charlton Heston and a picture of Neal Knox and take a straw poll, far more people will recognize Heston than recognize Knox. Whose name and face are more likely to increase membership (dues money)? Whose name and face are more likely to increase donations (donated money)? Far more people will be willing to part with their money for the face and name of Heston than for the face and name of Knox. Those Madison Avenue guys know this trait is their bread and butter. It's far easier to sell the NRA with Heston at the helm than it is to sell the NRA with Knox at the helm. Anyone who thinks this is an arguable point is seriously detached from reality. So the upshot of it is, no matter what you think of Heston, or whether he is "Puritan" enough to be at the head of the NRA, or whether he has "paid his dues" in the view of the holier-than-thou, his face and name will raise much more money and thus help accomplish the mission far more readily than will Knox's. Knox had his several years in the sun. It's now time for him to "put down the gavel" and support the mission, not his personal agenda. Wait and see? Why? While money and support flee and the mission becomes diffuse and incoherent? As someone said, the GOA and JPFO are looking better and better as a place to give 'til it hurts. You don't win a war with defense. You have to go on the offensive, and the sooner the better. We've already seen what Knox can do with the mission, with several years tenure at it. I seriously doubt that Heston and his staff will do worse. He might even do better. He would certainly do better if he doesn't have to keep scratching at flea bites. And anybody who thinks that one man is going to lead this 3,000,000 person organization where it doesn't want to go is seriously clueless about the fundamental nature of organizations. Heston has the face and name recognition to help the NRA, and I think it is highly doubtful that his ideological influence, whatever it is, is going to single-handedly redirect the NRA to any serious extent. That's what I think. I think it's time to fire McClellan and hire Grant. Translating the metaphor for my Conferate Brethren, it's time to fire Bragg and hire Forrest. - ----- Harry Barnett - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 14:47:23 -0800 (PST) From: Boyd Subject: Re: Swing I am fortunate to work with the warmest, most professional, most intellectually curious (and politically wrong headed ; ) people in the world here at WRQ. When a colleague passed away a few years ago (from a congenital heart problem) I was shocked at the impact it had on my life. I had new understanding of the fragility of our stay here, and of the importance of making time for personal things. In a way, Hernan Delgado helped to prepare me (as much as anything could have) for the end of my Mom's battle with Juvenile diabetes in '96. So, a public thanks to Hernan, and mom and a loud and angry scream to the bastards of PETA. Sorry, but as the only son of a juvenile diabetic I can't put it diplomatically after reading Pauls post. I sincerely hope that whoever reads this will find a diplomatic way of correcting folks who think they are being "compassionate" when they talk about bans on medical research. It can be hard to push yourself to make a point that is so unpopular, but it's worth while. Boyd Kneeland PS, As I write this a grey hatchback sits in front of my office building in the sun. Two dogs locked inside and on the outside stickers saying "the more people i meet the more I like my dog" and "fur is pain". It's a confused world, fight to make it rational. - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 14:47:23 -0800 (PST) From: Boyd Subject: Re: Swing I am fortunate to work with the warmest, most professional, most intellectually curious (and politically wrong headed ; ) people in the world here at WRQ. When a colleague passed away a few years ago (from a congenital heart problem) I was shocked at the impact it had on my life. I had new understanding of the fragility of our stay here, and of the importance of making time for personal things. In a way, Hernan Delgado helped to prepare me (as much as anything could have) for the end of my Mom's battle with Juvenile diabetes in '96. So, a public thanks to Hernan, and mom and a loud and angry scream to the bastards of PETA. Sorry, but as the only son of a juvenile diabetic I can't put it diplomatically after reading Pauls post. I sincerely hope that whoever reads this will find a diplomatic way of correcting folks who think they are being "compassionate" when they talk about bans on medical research. It can be hard to push yourself to make a point that is so unpopular, but it's worth while. Boyd Kneeland PS, As I write this a grey hatchback sits in front of my office building in the sun. Two dogs locked inside and on the outside stickers saying "the more people i meet the more I like my dog" and "fur is pain". It's a confused world, fight to make it rational. - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Mar 98 14:52:55 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Re: Wisdom from Neal I'll see your points and raise you a quibble, (or whatever).....:-) FWIW, I still think Heston needs some seasoning, or perhaps some tutilage by the membership. As a thought for optimizing the results, how about putting Heston at the helm and Knox in Heston's current position? Surrounding Heston with, "the faithfull", so to speak, so as to give him appropriate feedback/info/attitudinal adjustment etc. Some folks might like someone other than Knox, but the idea seems sound. So far he, (Heston), shows good potential, but he's still a, "loose cannon"..... On Mar 19, Harry Barnett wrote: >On Wed, 18 Mar 1998, Bill Vance wrote: > >> Either way, it beats hurrying to make a Clintonian grade mistake. I think >> that makes a fair appraisal, but I'm still listening. What do you all >> think? > >Well, since you asked... > >I think the Mission Statement of the NRA should be the preservation of >the rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment of the individual >citizen's right to keep and bear arms. To this end, they should >support and defend it, and roll back the infringements on it as quickly >as possible. > >In fact, without the Second Amendment as a foundation, the NRA loses it >reason for existence, and once it goes, it will be but a few years >before the organisation vanishes from drastic loss of membership, if it >is not legislated out of existence first. However, self-preservation >as an organizational entity doesn't play well in Peoria. You have to >take the mission to the people and make it mean something to THEM. > >This means political action. By its very nature, this mission >statement is political. To carry it out takes political action. > >I think this political action, if it is to remain peaceful, necessarily >involves informing and persuading, "winning hearts and minds" so that >the body politic subscribes to the mission statement. > >Persuading and informing is the business of Madison Avenue. Those guys >don't work for nothing. It takes money. > >>From whence cometh the saying, "Money is the Mother's Milk of politics." > >The NRA needs money to carry out their mission. > >How does the NRA raise money? Through two primary means: dues and >donations. > >How do they increase the income from dues? By increasing dues, and by >increasing membership. > >Income from an increase in dues is limited by the "crossover point". >The "crossover point" is where income resulting from an increase in >dues is matched by a corresponding loss in income due to a loss of >membership as a result of people not getting "bang for their buck", or >they can't afford it, and abandoning their membership. Once dues are >at the crossover point, income from dues increases are maxxed out. > >OTOH, the income from membership numbers is limited only by the total >population of potential members. You don't get new members from the >ranks of the True Believers, you get them from the population who are >non-members. > >Hold that thought. > >How do they increase the income from donations? By solicitations. >This is limited by the "burn-out threshold" where donors being >constantly dinged on for money start turning a deaf ear to pleas for >more money. > >So the NRA needs to raise money by increasing membership, and >increasing donations. > >A spokesman with favorable and widespread face-name recognition is just >about the most sure-fire time-tested method for spreading the word, >and increasing membership and donations. > >I think if you go to any bus stop with a picture of Charlton Heston and >a picture of Neal Knox and take a straw poll, far more people will >recognize Heston than recognize Knox. Whose name and face are more >likely to increase membership (dues money)? Whose name and face are >more likely to increase donations (donated money)? > >Far more people will be willing to part with their money for the face >and name of Heston than for the face and name of Knox. Those Madison >Avenue guys know this trait is their bread and butter. It's far easier >to sell the NRA with Heston at the helm than it is to sell the NRA with >Knox at the helm. Anyone who thinks this is an arguable point is >seriously detached from reality. > >So the upshot of it is, no matter what you think of Heston, or whether >he is "Puritan" enough to be at the head of the NRA, or whether he has >"paid his dues" in the view of the holier-than-thou, his face and name >will raise much more money and thus help accomplish the mission far >more readily than will Knox's. > >Knox had his several years in the sun. It's now time for him to "put >down the gavel" and support the mission, not his personal agenda. > >Wait and see? Why? While money and support flee and the mission >becomes diffuse and incoherent? As someone said, the GOA and JPFO are >looking better and better as a place to give 'til it hurts. You don't >win a war with defense. You have to go on the offensive, and the >sooner the better. > >We've already seen what Knox can do with the mission, with several >years tenure at it. I seriously doubt that Heston and his staff will >do worse. He might even do better. He would certainly do better if he >doesn't have to keep scratching at flea bites. And anybody who thinks >that one man is going to lead this 3,000,000 person organization where >it doesn't want to go is seriously clueless about the fundamental >nature of organizations. Heston has the face and name recognition to >help the NRA, and I think it is highly doubtful that his ideological >influence, whatever it is, is going to single-handedly redirect the NRA >to any serious extent. > >That's what I think. I think it's time to fire McClellan and hire >Grant. Translating the metaphor for my Conferate Brethren, it's time to >fire Bragg and hire Forrest. > >----- >Harry Barnett >----------------------------------------------------------------------- - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 15:11:59 -0700 From: "E.J. Totty" Subject: Re: Wisdom from Neal Neil, We ain't done with this yet. There's a few questions you haven't answered, and theres's been one to many oblique statements made concerning the principals. <><><> Analytical Mode On <><><> I want to know how it is that you are so ready to knock Knox, while heightening Heston. It seems that while you have met Knox, and you personally found a character flaw in the man, we as individuals know him through his writings and his accomplishments. In the way of Knox, we at least have a known quantity and quality. We _know_ what he thinks, and we know him by his past actions. We have seen him and know he will _not_ compromise on the Right we are organized to defend. If a known quantity is available for your selection, why on earth are you so ready to make a choice that results in a situation that will continue to support our very enemies in whatever legislative venue they happen to appear? You _know_ what I'm speaking of here, I needn't cover those details. You are a subber to NOBAN, and you've seen the splash of news about what the NRA and its ICONs have done while we weren't looking. Yet, you and others are so very ready to dump on Knox, as well as just dump him, while a vociferous adversary who really _is_ a Johnny-come-lately, propounds a questionable, and at best dangerous new course for the organization of the NRA. At least Knox isn't afraid to speak about liberty and what needs to be done. He's not going to cozy-up to our enemies and make back room deals that essentially remove our Rights, and at least he won't lie to our faces about who's the real enemy. And he won't spend money - OUR MONEY - on our enemies, so that they can get to wizz in our faces, and laugh heartily about it. That you and others are so ready to choose Heston, I have to question. And as far as the remarks that he doesn't have to answer to why he hasn't explained his past behavior and reconsile it to the present, well, that's a frigging copout. If any other person were to be elected to the NRA, whatever questionable activity that person engaged in the past would be a real bone of contention, and Heston's copout is just that: an evasion. You know me by my past posts here, and I don't monkey around with words. I'm gonna call a spade a spade. Mr. Heston is damn mole. If you cannot see that you're willingly blind. I've had that gut feeling from the start. You mark my words here and now: If he gets relected with supporting majority, your 2A Rights won't exist much past 2001. You'll have but two choices: Turn'em in, or use'em. Count on it. I've never met either man, and I haven't the willingness to do so. But at least one of them is telling the truth, even if he does have a character flaw. None of us are perfect, but at least Knox isn't evading a questionable past, at least Knox has nothing to explain about, at least we know Knox. ET - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 15:27:04 -0800 (PST) From: Harry Barnett Subject: Re: Wisdom from Neal On Thu, 19 Mar 1998, Bill Vance wrote: > > I'll see your points and raise you a quibble, (or whatever).....:-) > > FWIW, I still think Heston needs some seasoning, or perhaps some tutilage by > the membership. As a thought for optimizing the results, how about putting > Heston at the helm and Knox in Heston's current position? Surrounding > Heston with, "the faithfull", so to speak, so as to give him appropriate > feedback/info/attitudinal adjustment etc. Some folks might like someone > other than Knox, but the idea seems sound. So far he, (Heston), shows good > potential, but he's still a, "loose cannon"..... > From personal preference (and personal experience) I would tend to lean the other way. Some people (some of whom you would never expect it of) have a very difficult time "putting down the gavel" and giving their replacement their unequivocal and full support when they stand relieved of command. Knox comes off to me as someone like that, more an more as the years go by. His recent actions do nothing to counter this impression. This doesn't make him a bad guy. Everybody is corrupted by power, one way or another. It's a curse of the situation, not a character flaw. I gratefully acknowledge his past service to the organization. Because of my impression, I would prefer Knox in a staff position, not in the line, where any tendency he had to behave like a sphincter muscle would be severely restricted and neutralized for the benefit of the mission, but where he could still make a positive contribution to The Cause. Hypothetically speaking, of course. This is not to say that Knox IS a sphincter muscle, or behaves like one, only that any TENDENCY to behave like one will be neutralized. From reports of others, I only know Knox to be an all-around fine fellow and a good judge of liquor, women, and horses. No character assassination is intended. Surely, if he has the interests of the mission at heart, he could not object? And the FNG deserves his chance. Baptism by fire is the best way to "season" someone I know. And being "unseasoned" can sometimes be a benefit: he is not yet convinced that success is impossible. Consider the film "Tunes of Glory" for an example of the phenomenon of having a second-in-command who sets out to thwart the CO to make him look bad, and in his cleverness, succeeds. - ----- Harry Barnett - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 18:33:48 -0700 From: "E.J. Totty" Subject: Re: Wisdom from Neal Neil, [...] A couple of points to be made here: One is that I never authorized him to be my lobbyist. -snip- [...] I never asked Wayne La Pierre, or Tanya Metaksa to be mine either. So, what's your point? Oh, wait, I see! He's not supposed to speak at all. Mum's the word, eh? [...] His reporting of matters going on within the NRA has been shrill (to use your word) in the extreme. The manner in which he has carried out his campaign has damaged the NRA considerably, . . . [...] He has? Would you please quantify that by explicit examples? Please provide the proofs of your assertions. Since you seemingly wish to destroy his reputation, and elevate Heston's perhaps you'd care to provide a likely scenario of just what Knox has done. It seems you are privy to such exalted knowledge - obviously way above the rest of us mere mortals . . . If your knowledge is so perfect, Neil, maybe you wouldn't mind sharing it with us, like say, 10 years ago? And in the case you get the inclination to think that I'm pushing one candidtate over another, you read that wrong too. I could care less who you vote for. My beef here is the you are so obviously pro Heston, that anytime some one opens up about his prime opponent, you fire off like a burning bush, proclaiming perfect knowledge. I'm not exactly a pro Knox, but I voted for him because I know his record. If there was another candidate that I thought was better, I would have placed my vote there. ET - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 18:15:51 -0700 From: "E.J. Totty" Subject: Re: Wisdom from Neal Harry, [...] We've already seen what Knox can do with the mission, with several years tenure at it. I seriously doubt that Heston and his staff will do worse. He might even do better. He would certainly do better if he doesn't have to keep scratching at flea bites. And anybody who thinks that one man is going to lead this 3,000,000 person organization where it doesn't want to go is seriously clueless about the fundamental nature of organizations. Heston has the face and name recognition to help the NRA, and I think it is highly doubtful that his ideological influence, whatever it is, is going to single-handedly redirect the NRA to any serious extent. [...] I regards to your historian proclivities, may I entertain you with a bit NRA history? By the way, I did purchase all of the books of the Civil War that you suggested. Amazon.com is a veritable book well. Now, according to William Weir, the author of "A Well Regulated Militia, The Battle Over Gun Control", the Executive VP, Maj. Gen. Frank Orth testified before the congress, that "We do not think that any sane American, who calls himself an American, can object to placing into this bill the instrument which killed the president of the United States." That statement was made in 1968, before the 1968 gun control act was passed into law. According to Weir, the NRA could not fire him, but they muzzled him, for the rest of his term. Then, in 1974, the "Old Guard" as the hard-liners referred to them, fired 74 employees who were not sympathetic to the Old Guard's line of thinking. The Cincinati Revolt cleaned out the Old Guard, and Harlon Carter was then at the helm. Carter's team started the "I'm the NRA" campaign, with bumper stickers and other items that brought many and varied people of great diversity to the organization. According to Wier, it was tough going from then on because of a very liberal controlled press, which refused any ad from the NRA. I won't bore you with more details, except to say that the book is quite available, and needs reading by anyone who wants to know the small details behind gun control. The relevance here? The NRA didn't see it coming when the Executive VP, Maj. Gen. Frank Orth spoke, sending any hope to kill that bill to the pit. Now, what makes you think that it won't happen with Heston? ET - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 21:26:52 -0600 From: neil@jove.geol.niu.edu (Neil Dickey) Subject: Re: Wisdom from Neal "E.J. Totty" wrote: [ ... Snip, personal attacks, snivelling, and other sorts of drivel ... ] E.J., when you grow up, write to me. Perhaps then we can have an intelligent conversation. Until that happens, no useful purpose would be served either for the list or for each other to continue this thread. I don't care to have anything further to do with your part of it. The opinions which I have expressed herein are entirely my own, unless other- wise noted. No-one else should be held responsible for what I think. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- | D. N. Dickey | Virtuous motives, trammeled by inertia and | | Research Associate | timidity, are no match for armed and | | Northern Illinois Univ. | resolute wickedness. | | neil@earth.geol.niu.edu | - W. S. Churchill | | **Finger for public key** | | - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 05:20:04 -0800 (PST) From: Harry Barnett Subject: Re: Wisdom from Neal (fwd) On Thu, 19 Mar 1998, E.J. Totty wrote: > The relevance here? The NRA didn't see it coming > when the Executive VP, Maj. Gen. Frank Orth spoke, sending > any hope to kill that bill to the pit. > Now, what makes you think that it won't happen > with Heston? If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle. But it's not something I want to spend any time fretting about. Hey, you don't like the guy, go ahead and oppose him. We all have to find something to do to fill the time between birth and death. - ----- Harry Barnett - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 05:22:03 -0700 From: "E.J. Totty" Subject: Re: Wisdom from Neal At 21:26 -0600 3/19/1998, Neil Dickey wrote: >"E.J. Totty" wrote: > >[ ... Snip, personal attacks, snivelling, and other sorts of drivel ... ] > >E.J., when you grow up, write to me. Neil, Tsk, tsk, tsk. ET - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Mar 98 13:52:51 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Heads Up #77 (fwd) On Mar 21, Doug Fiedor wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] Heads Up A Weekly View from the Foothills of Appalachia March 22, 1998 #77 by: Doug Fiedor fiedor19@eos.net - ------------------------------------------------------------------ Previous Editions at: http://mmc.cns.net/headsup.html - ------------------------------------------------------------------ ORGANIZE FOR PRIVACY There was a time, a few decades ago, when=20 Americans respected each other's right to privacy. =20 Butting into someone else's business, back then, could=20 easily get one a swift punch in the nose. That applied to=20 federal agents as well. In fact, in some areas of the=20 country, back then, federal agents actually feared to=20 tread in their official capacity. They could come to=20 "visit." But, snooping around was most defiantly not=20 healthy. Since then, Americans gave up their right to=20 privacy. It all started very slowly, of course. The=20 hippies of the late 60's and early 70's caused such=20 problems that many adults thought it would be fine for the=20 police to stop and search them. Then it was all the drug=20 users and dealers, especially when they started shooting=20 at each other. Complicating everything was the federal=20 government's "Great Society" programs, which created=20 large urban slums and frequent urban unrest. And, heck,=20 the police really should constantly roust all "those"=20 people. Right? Maybe. But today, we are all "those" people! Today, the IRS has permission to scrutinize=20 every single monitory transaction Americans make. That's=20 so they can insure that we came by our money legally, you=20 see. The drug enforcement officers, Army Corps of=20 Engineers, EPA, BATF, and a series of other government=20 agencies feel free to trespass on our property at will. =20 No warrant is necessary anymore. We gave up that right. To be allowed to travel, Americans must have=20 their "papers" in order at airports and be willing to=20 submit to any search the nice officer feels is necessary. =20 Liberty and privacy is even suspended on the public=20 highways. Police regularly stop and question people at=20 "check points" for no reason whatsoever. And, if you own a business, all sorts of=20 government agents feel free to come in and snoop around=20 anytime. There is absolutely nothing government agents=20 cannot inspect, for any reason or no reason, in an=20 American business. Americans are beginning to believe things are=20 supposed to be this way. However, that is far from the=20 truth. The Fourth Amendment to the United States=20 Constitution was put there precisely because the Founding=20 Fathers had these very same problems with the agents of=20 King George. To insure there would be no=20 misunderstanding, they wrote the words of the Fourth=20 Amendment clearly: "The right of the people to be secure in their=20 persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable=20 searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no=20 Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported=20 by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the=20 place to be searched, and the persons or things to be=20 seized." That's it. There is nothing else to understand. =20 If the government agent does not have a warrant, signed by=20 a judge, which states exactly their reason for being=20 there, they are in violation of the Constitution. There=20 is no distinction made between "civil" and "criminal"=20 laws, or between laws, rules and regulations. And, most=20 assuredly, the Fourth Amendment was intended to include=20 the tax collector. We know that for a fact because one of=20 the reasons the Founding Fathers went to war was the=20 abuses of authority by the tax collectors. Now,=20 unfortunately, we have the exact same problems again. When James Madison proposed what we now call=20 the Fourth Amendment, he added another catch all=20 Amendment, today's Ninth Amendment: "The enumeration in=20 the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed=20 to deny or disparage others retained by the people." The=20 Tenth Amendment then carries this thought on to its=20 logical end: "The powers not delegated to the United=20 States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the=20 States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the=20 people." So, our right to privacy is Constitutionally=20 protected in four separate ways. The body of the=20 Constitution gives the federal government almost no=20 authority to violate the privacy of the people. The=20 Fourth Amendment protects our privacy against arbitrary=20 police action. The Ninth Amendment instructs the federal=20 government that, even when a right or liberty is not=20 discussed in the Constitution, the people still have it. =20 And the Tenth Amendment instructs the federal government=20 that all powers not mentioned in the Constitution,=20 including our rights and liberties, belong to the States=20 respectively, or to the people individually. This ain't rocket science, folks! This is easy=20 stuff to understand. Our individual right to privacy was=20 protected by the Constitution in four different ways. =20 Still, we're acting like we gave it up. Why? Actually,=20 we cannot give up our right to privacy. It is an=20 unalienable right, which means that we cannot relinquish=20 or transfer it. In truth, we just do not protect it any=20 longer. The Constitution is the highest law of the=20 land. No law may supersede the Constitution. Only a=20 Constitutional amendment my change a Constitutional=20 right. Any violation of the Constitution must be,=20 therefore, a serious breach of the law -- a violation much=20 more serious than a breach of the laws passed by Congress. In fact, a law, executive order, rule or=20 regulation contrary to the Constitution cannot be a legal=20 "law." And, in The Federalist Papers No. 78, Alexander=20 Hamilton tells us exactly that: "There is no position which depends on clearer=20 principles than that every act of a delegated authority,=20 contrary to the tenor of the commission under which it is=20 exercised, is void. No legislative act, therefore,=20 contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. To deny this=20 would be to affirm that the deputy is greater than his=20 principal; that the servant is above his master; that the=20 representatives of the people are superior to the people=20 themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers may do=20 not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they=20 forbid." One sentence there sums it up nicely: "No=20 legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution,=20 can be valid." When government violates the Constitution,=20 then, it becomes an illegal entity and relinquishes=20 Constitutional authority. This places the burden of=20 correction squarely on the shoulders of the people. To start, it is time that we demand our Fourth=20 Amendment rights -- our right to our own personal=20 privacy -- again be respected by all agencies of=20 government. There is no excuse for this wholesale=20 violation of the Constitution by government agents. This is an election year. Let's have at them. =20 Tell them: All government agents must respect the privacy=20 of all American citizens completely. There can be no=20 excuse for not putting this matter on "fast track." =20 Or -- and, this is the part the Lords and Ladies of the=20 Hill will understand best -- we will organize to defeat=20 their reelection to Congress. Even if they do this, it is time we organize for=20 some good old fashioned political action. OUR WORKERS ARE OUR BOSS Picture yourself owning a couple thousand=20 acres of nice woodland. And, while we're supposing here,=20 let's say that you are wealthy enough to hire a caretaker,=20 gardener and tree trimmer to keep the property shaped up=20 enough for your friends to enjoy as a park. What would=20 your position be, then, if your caretaker, gardener and=20 tree trimmer confronted you one day and said that they=20 flatly refuse to allow you or your friends to use vast=20 areas of your own property? Right . . . fire the bums! And, that is exactly=20 what we should do. Well, you do own vast amounts woodland, in=20 conjunction with the rest of the American people. All of=20 the so called "federal land" is actually our "public"=20 land. Much of it is under the care of the National Forest=20 Service, but it is not private property. Any property=20 that does not have a military base, fort or government=20 office on it is "public" land. That means, the land is=20 open for use by all American citizens equally. Yet, the=20 caretakers, gardeners and tree trimmers hired to work on=20 this "public" land want to close vast areas of it off from=20 its rightful owners, the American people. The Associated Press reported that they=20 obtained a 21 page memo titled, "Forest Service Natural=20 Resource Agenda." Among other things, the memo=20 recommends that Forest Service Chief Mike Dombeck make=20 appearances at big forest fires this summer to push his=20 call for forest management reforms. The memo sets up a=20 plan, recommending that the agency should take every=20 opportunity this summer to tie its new forest policy --=20 including restrictions on road building in many forests --=20 to Vice President Al Gore's clean water initiative. =20 Republicans in Congress, however, are not pleased. "It is a sad day when the Forest Service ...=20 decides to use forest fires as a movie set for 'media=20 events' to highlight the vice president's presidential=20 campaign," said Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska), chairman of=20 the House Resources Committee. "They are blatantly using this once proud=20 agency for political purposes," said Rep. Helen Chenoweth=20 (R-ID), chairman of the House Resources Subcommittee on=20 Forests. The Forest Service strategy proposes that=20 officials promote (read lobby) their natural resource=20 agenda in talks with members of Congress. Republican=20 critics say, 'hold on here!' There is a law prohibiting=20 members of the executive branch from lobbying Congress. =20 Never mind that the FBI, EPA, FDA, and others do it all=20 the time. That's another story. . . . It's still illegal. So, as per the Forest Service plan, from July 1=20 through Sept. 1, "we will take every opportunity to tie=20 with the Vice President's Clean Water Initiative and=20 indeed provide a media event for the VP to showcase the=20 initiative on national forest lands." Which means, they=20 will use Gore as an excuse to close land off to the=20 public. The memo said Dombeck should emphasize the=20 watershed protection aspects of the agenda, "especially=20 related to wildlife suppression, water quality and=20 watersheds. This should be highlighted by the chief=20 traveling to fires receiving high media coverage." Outwardly, the Forest Service planned a=20 moratorium on new logging roads and trails across millions=20 of acres of national forests. Secretly, bowing to=20 pressure from Gore's friends in the far left "green"=20 groups, the Forest Service actually plans to remove many=20 existing roads and trails from huge tracts of public land,=20 rendering vast areas inaccessible to the American public. Disclosure of the memo shows that agency=20 officials knew they would be vulnerable to complaints for=20 that action. And, now that the true extent of their real=20 scheme is known, perhaps there will be some changes. =20 Already, the Forest Service extended the public comment=20 period on the logging road proposal an additional 30=20 days -- to March 30. As American citizens, our reply to these forest=20 caretakers, gardeners and tree trimmers should be simple: =20 Get back into the woods, do your jobs and shut up! Else,=20 go find another job. We Americans must quit allowing the=20 help to boss the owners around on their own property. CALL FOR IMPEACHMENT If our television sets already had those built=20 in chips to automatically censor sexual subjects, nearly=20 one-quarter of the "news" broadcasts Americans receive=20 lately would be blacked out. And, most of that would be=20 news concerning the White House. Over the last couple=20 years, the news of the president and his wife went from=20 graft and corruption to the bent of the executive member. =20 Then, reports went to affairs in the White House, and back=20 to graft and corruption. Recently, the evening news=20 returned to other affairs in the White House, and then=20 settled on oral sex and improper groping for a while. That's our nightly news. Every night. For=20 family viewing, at dinner time. All this, and they=20 haven't even started on Hillary's peccadilloes yet. When=20 this stuff hits the Congressional Committee hearings, many=20 weeks of TV news will be considerably racier than the=20 afternoon soap operas. And, that's only the White House=20 news. There'll be trials, too. Congress noticed, but they really don't know=20 what to do about it. They must do their job and schedule=20 public hearings. But, that presents a very serious public=20 relations problem. Newt wants to soften the blow by tossing=20 the whole deal in the lap of a grandfatherly looking=20 figure in the person of Rep. Henry J. Hyde, (R-Ill.). =20 However, due to the make up of Hyde's House Judiciary=20 Committee, there's another major problem: Let's face it;=20 many Americans would laugh too much if some of the=20 characters on that Judiciary Committee were to question=20 anyone about sexual matters. Many of those clowns would=20 never, ever be taken seriously by the folks in middle=20 America. And this really is supposed to be a serious=20 subject, after all. . . . Henry Hyde says that, when it comes to=20 impeaching the president of the United States, he will=20 wait to see the results compiled by the office of the=20 independent counsel. On the other hand, the House=20 Republican leadership is not against peeking to get some=20 idea of what Starr has. Therefore, Newt and Henry Hyde=20 agreed to send a small delegation of House members over=20 to examine the independent council's evidence. Meanwhile, to freeze out some of the far-left=20 crazies on the House Judiciary Committee, the House is=20 discussing setting up a "select" committee to review the=20 looming impeachment problem. As it turns out, Henry Hyde=20 is afraid of some of the junior Republicans, too -- like=20 Bob Barr, probably -- which is a shame. Practically speaking, we think it would be=20 rather entertaining to watch the full Judiciary Committee=20 at work on the impeachment matter. These people are=20 actually allowed to vote on laws that affect all Americans=20 equally. The hearings will be watched by millions of=20 people. Therefore, it would be a very good exercise in=20 Democracy for America to see some of these people in=20 operation. A week or so of that and most of the country=20 will realize exactly what happened to the United States=20 government, how all those crazy laws got passed, and why=20 our Constitution is no longer in effect. Reports say that Henry Hyde received more=20 than 200,000 signed petitions in support of H.R. 304 --=20 the bill calling for the impeachment inquiry of President=20 Clinton. He should receive more. Rep. Hyde's address=20 is: 2110 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington,=20 D.C. 20515-1315. His telephone number is: (202) 225-4561. We are told that Speaker of the House, Newt=20 Gingrich, has a 24 hour telephone service at:=20 (202) 225-0600 for voice and (202) 225-7733 for fax. And, on the theory that one picture is worth=20 a thousand words, the pictures at the two addresses below=20 may describe volumes. These are pictures of Bill's=20 excellent travel adventures: =20 http://www.mrc.org/news/camp92.html =20 http://www.parismatch.tm.fr/news/clinton3/1.html =20 See if you can guess how many of these people work(ed) in=20 the White House. At least one has been with the=20 administration for quite some time. Hint: watch the=20 animated picture. FEDERAL SEXUAL ABUSE LAW This is certainly not the type of law we normally=20 study around here. But, when G. Gordon Liddy mentioned it=20 on his radio program last Thursday, it caught our interest. The White House, of course, is federal property. =20 Therefore, all federal laws (should) apply there. This=20 one seems very timely, so here it is almost in its=20 entirety. This is 18 USC 2244. Most applicable at the present time is section=20 "b." However, the Internet address is provided at the end=20 because we have a feeling some of these other "sections"=20 may also become applicable before this is all over, and=20 the web page provides links to full explanations of the=20 other sections. =A7 2244. Abusive sexual contact:=20 (a) Sexual Conduct in Circumstances Where=20 Sexual Acts Are Punished by This Chapter. - Whoever, in=20 the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the=20 United States or in a Federal prison, knowingly engages in=20 or causes sexual contact with or by another person, if so=20 to do would violate -=20 (1) section 2241 of this title had the=20 sexual contact been a sexual act, shall be fined under=20 this title, imprisoned not more than ten years, or both;=20 (2) section 2242 of this title had the sexual=20 contact been a sexual act, shall be fined under this title,=20 imprisoned not more than three years, or both;=20 (3) subsection (a) of section 2243 of this=20 title had the sexual contact been a sexual act, shall be=20 fined under this title, imprisoned not more than two=20 years, or both; or=20 (4) subsection (b) of section 2243 of this=20 title had the sexual contact been a sexual act, shall be=20 fined under this title, imprisoned not more than six=20 months, or both.=20 (b) In Other Circumstances. - Whoever, in the=20 special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the=20 United States or in a Federal prison, knowingly engages in=20 sexual contact with another person without that other=20 person's permission shall be fined under this title,=20 imprisoned not more than six months, or both. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/2244.shtml TWEAKING THE MEDIA By: Craig Brown Not long ago, one of our local Television=20 stations aired a news report about the chaos caused by=20 the emissions testing currently imposed on the residents=20 of Hamilton County [Ohio]. Since the long lines, expense=20 and inconsistent testing results were just the effect of=20 the testing fiasco and not the cause, was it worth the=20 cost? Beyond that, were there valid reasons for all of=20 this? I decided to call the station News Director to=20 urge that they finish this story by answering those=20 questions for their viewers. He seemed put off by this=20 request and in order to get rid of me, suggested that I=20 write him a letter outlining my concerns. The following=20 is my subsequent letter. - ----------------------------- Dear News Director: As per our discussion on the telephone, I am=20 writing to you to urge a follow-up on your emissions=20 control story. For years, your station has taken the lead in=20 shedding light on matters of concern to your viewers. =20 This is evidenced recently by your stories about the=20 corruption in the offices of the building inspector and=20 Judge Executive of Boone County, [KY] and abuses by the=20 Cincinnati Bureau of Recreation. Now I see an opportunity=20 to further serve the community by examining the problems=20 surrounding emissions testing in Hamilton County, and if=20 there are valid reasons for this testing. As you may know, Kentucky is challenging in=20 court the right of a federal regulatory agency to subject=20 citizens of the Commonwealth of Kentucky to just such=20 testing. That is why this testing isn't taking place in=20 Northern Kentucky and is unlikely to ever occur. This=20 doesn't mean that Kentuckians have more rights then our=20 neighbors in Ohio. It just means that we are demanding=20 our rights under the U.S. Constitution. And the U.S.=20 Supreme Court has made it clear that the individual states=20 aren't branch offices of the federal government. Three recent high court decisions, US vs.=20 Printz, US vs. Lopez and US vs. New York, underscore the=20 fact that federal regulations and even state laws=20 supporting such regulations cannot override the=20 Constitutional rights of citizens. It's the law of the=20 land for all of us, whether we live in Kentucky or Ohio. That is, in a thumbnail, the legal side of=20 emissions testing. And in Kentucky, a bill has been=20 introduced in the State Senate that will enable=20 individuals to challenge these regulations in the local=20 Circuit Courts for a fraction of the cost of taking such=20 suits to the higher courts. On the "greater good" sign of=20 the picture, the EPA has staked out for itself the moral=20 highground. With a propaganda machine second to none,=20 the EPA has filled the media with "studies" that have=20 shown the most grotesque consequences awaiting us if we=20 don't give up our way of life and go back to another age,=20 free of all the trappings that came from the industrial=20 revolution. When asked to support all these "studies"=20 with scientific evidence, they become vague. They cite=20 data that can't be revealed at this time and their=20 consensus of 2,500 "scientists" who support these=20 findings. On closer inspection, these "scientists"=20 consist of gynecologists, podiatrists, bankers, social=20 workers and less than 10 percent of their number having=20 anything close to a knowledge of atmospheric science. =20 On the other hand, true scientists familiar to the subject=20 reject the global warming theory, referring to it as "junk=20 science".=20 To cover the whole of EPA intrusions into our=20 lives, you could fill news hours from here to the end of=20 the year. A more practical approach to public service=20 would simply educate the public to ask questions of those=20 who would regulate our lives. One of the best questions=20 to ask, when the EPA man comes calling, is, "where's=20 your warrant?" Thank you for considering this request for more=20 information regarding emissions testing, where it came=20 from and where it leads. I will be happy to elaborate on=20 any aspect of this letter. If I don't have the answer, I=20 promise to get it for you quickly. =20 I look forward to hearing from you on this important=20 matter. - ----------------------------- Predictably, there was no reply to my letter. So=20 I called the News Director again. After some prompting,=20 he remembered having received the letter, but didn't know=20 what I thought he should do about it. When I suggested=20 that his station raise some questions as to why Ohioans=20 but not Kentuckians should be forced into emissions=20 testing and question whether such testing could be legally=20 enforced under the law, he seemed tired and told me that=20 maybe they would address it sometime in the future. I thanked him and hung up, wondering what=20 would happen if all of us had his driving curiosity. I=20 suppose that here in Kentucky, we can be thankful that our=20 media takes seriously their role as watchdogs for our=20 freedoms. The greatest enemy of tyranny is an enlightened=20 electorate. -- End -- [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - - ------------------------------ End of roc-digest V2 #92 ************************