From: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com (roc-digest) To: roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: roc-digest V2 #176 Reply-To: roc-digest Sender: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk roc-digest Thursday, August 20 1998 Volume 02 : Number 176 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1998 07:39:28 -0400 From: Tom Cloyes Subject: Fwd: The reason for the Second Amendment >Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1998 21:35:36 -0400 >From: E Pluribus Unum >X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.01 [en] (Win95; U) >To: E Pluribus Unum Email Distribution Network >Subject: The reason for the Second Amendment > >The reason for the Second Amendment > >by Alan Keyes > > > Sen. Bob Smith has succeeded in amending an upcoming >appropriations bill to beat back the latest wave of Clinton >administration disrespect for two key elements of a free citizenry -- >privacy and the right to keep and bear arms. Smith's amendment to the >Justice-State-Commerce appropriations bill would foil FBI plans to keep >records of private identifying information on law-abiding citizens who >buy guns. The amendment also forbids a proposed tax on gun purchases, >and authorizes citizens to sue if the FBI doesn't observe these >restrictions. > > Senator Smith is to be praised for keeping his eye on some balls that >might have been lost in the smoke of scandal and misinformation that the >Clinton Administration seems endlessly to emit. Actually, few things >could make the need for vigorous defense of 2nd Amendment rights clearer >than the ongoing spectacle of Clinton contempt for the citizens he is >supposed to serve. For the 2nd Amendment is really in the Constitution >to give men like Bill Clinton something to think about when their >ambition gets particularly over-inflated. > > The Second Amendment was not put into the Constitution by the Founders >merely to allow us to intimidate burglars, or hunt rabbits to our >hearts' content. This is not to say that hunting game for the family >dinner, or defending against personal dangers, were not anticipated uses >for firearms, particularly on the frontier. But these things are not the >real purpose of the Amendment. > > The Founders added the 2nd Amendment so that when, after a long train >of abuses, a government evinces a methodical design upon our natural >rights, we will have the means to protect and recover our rights. That >is why the right to keep and bear arms was included in the Bill of >Rights. > > In fact, if we make the judgment that our rights are being >systematically violated, we have not merely the right, but the duty, to >resist and overthrow the power responsible. That duty requires that we >always maintain the material capacity to resist tyranny, if necessary, >something that it is very hard to do if the government has all the >weapons. A strong case can be made, therefore, that it is a fundamental >DUTY of the free citizen to keep and bear arms. > > In our time there have been many folks who don't like to be reminded of >all this. And they try, in their painful way, to pretend that the word >"people" in the 2nd Amendment means something there that it doesn't mean >in any one of the other nine amendments in the Bill of Rights. They say >that, for some odd reason, the Founders had a lapse, and instead of >putting in "states" they put in "people." And so it refers to a right >inherent in the state government. > > This position is incoherent, and has been disproved by every piece of >legitimate historical evidence. At one point in Jefferson's letters, for >example, he is talking about the militia, and he writes, "militia -- >every able-bodied man in the state. ..." The militia was every >able-bodied man in the state. It had nothing to do with the state >government. The words "well-regulated" had to do with organizing that >militia and drilling it in the style of the 19th century, but "militia" >itself referred to the able-bodied citizens of the state or commonwealth >-- not to the state government. > > It would make no sense whatsoever to restrict the right to keep and >bear arms to state governments, since the principle on which our polity >is based, as stated in the Declaration, recognizes that any government, >at any level, can become oppressive of our rights. And we must be >prepared to defend ourselves against its abuses. > > But the movement against 2nd Amendment rights is not just a threat to >our capacity to defend ourselves physically against tyranny. It is also >part of the much more general assault on the very notion that human >beings are capable of moral responsibility. This is a second and deeper >reason that the defense of the 2nd Amendment is essential to the defense >of liberty. > > Advocates of banning guns think we can substitute material things for >human self-control, but this approach won't wash. It is the human moral >will that saves us from violence, not the presence or absence of >weapons. We should reject utterly the absurd theory that weapons are the >cause of violence. > > Consider, for example, the phony assertion that certain weapons >should be banned because "they have no purpose except to kill people." >It is people that kill people, and they can use countless kinds of >weapons to do so, if killing is in their hearts where love of justice >should be. This week a 7-year old boy in Chicago apparently used a pair >of underwear to commit murder, because he wanted a bike. > > So let's get down to the real issue: are we moral adults, or are we >moral children? If we are adults, then we have the capacity to control >our will even in the face of passion, and to be responsible for the >exercise of our natural rights. If we are only children, then all the >particularly dangerous toys must be controlled by the government. >But this "solution" implies that we can trust government with a monopoly >on guns, even though we cannot trust ourselves with them. This is not a >"solution" I trust. > > Anyone who is serious about controlling violence must recognize >that it can only be done by rooting violence out of the human heart. >That's why I don't understand those who say "save us from guns," even >while they cling to the coldly violent doctrine that human life has no >worth except what they "choose" to assign to it. > > If we want to end violence in our land, we must warm the hearts of all >Americans with a renewed dedication to the God-given equality of all >human beings. We must recapture the noble view of man as capable of >moral responsibility and self-restraint -- of assuming responsibility >for governing himself. This is the real meaning of the 2nd Amendment, >and indeed of the entire American project of ordered liberty. > > It is the business of every citizen to preserve justice in his heart, >and the material capacity, including arms, to resist tyranny. These >things constitute our character as a free people, which it is our duty >to maintain. And to fulfill our duty to be such a people we shall have >to return to the humble subjection to the authority of true moral >principle that characterized our Founders, and that characterized every >generation of Americans, until now. We must regain control of ourselves. > > Most deeply, then, the assertion of 2nd Amendment rights is the >assertion that we intend to control ourselves, and submit to the moral >order that God has decreed must govern our lives. And just as we have no >right to shirk our duty to submit to that moral order, so we have no >right to shirk our duty to preserve unto ourselves the material means >to discipline our government, if necessary, so that it remains a fit >instrument for the self-government of a free people. The preservation of >2nd Amendment rights, for the right reasons, is a moral and public duty >of every citizen. > > The Clinton Administration's flirtations with executive tyranny >should remind us that we have a duty to remain capable of disciplining >our government if necessary. Bill Clinton's comprehensive avoidance of >personal responsibility for his own actions, and our revulsion at the >kind of character which that avoidance has produced in him, should be a >kind of horrific preview of the kind of people we will all become if we >continue to let our government treat us as though we were incapable of >moral self-control. And Senator Smith's successful effort to defeat >several policies that treat us that way is precisely the kind of >principled defense of our liberty -- and of the premises of our liberty >-- that make him so worthy to be a representative of a free people. > > >Alan Keyes Web Site is http://www.AlanKeyes.com >-- >****************************************************************** > E Pluribus Unum The Central Ohio Patriot Group > P.O. Box 791 Eventline/Voicemail: (614) 823-8499 > Grove City, OH 43123 > >Meetings: Monday Evenings, 7:30pm, Ryan's Steakhouse > 3635 W. Dublin-Granville Rd. (just East of Sawmill Rd.) > >http://www.infinet.com/~eplurib eplurib@infinet.com >****************************************************************** > - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Aug 98 08:04:19 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Allegations about Reno (fwd) On Aug 16, pete_ciancia@email.mobil.com wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] [You are not going to BELIEVE this!!!] Florida Attorney Cites Reno Character Flaws USA Journal Online August 14, 1998 WASHINGTON -- A Florida attorney has charged that Attorney General Janet Reno has refused to seek an independent counsel in the 1996 Democratic fundraising scandal because of blackmail by the Clinton administration for prior flaws in her character. Jack Thompson, the last Republican to challenge Reno for her former job of district attorney in Dade County, Florida, says that because of the allegations, which he claims to substantiate, the Attorney General "is unfit to practice law, let alone serve as this country's top cop." Thompson initially questioned Reno's integrity in a letter he wrote to the Wall Street Journal, which was published on Monday. The letter answered assertions by White House lawyer Lanny Davis, who suggested that Ms. Reno was right to decline to seek the independent counsel and "everyone else" was wrong. Thompson's letter said Davis "failed to mention that it was he who vetted Reno's nomination to be attorney general from the White House in February, 1993, and thus helped usher in Reno's justice." In a separate letter to FBI Director Louis Freeh, Thompson charged that Reno "uses call girls for sex and has a string of drunk driving incidents," which he said "can be substantiated" by earlier information he says he provided to FBI field agents. That information had no bearing on Reno's initial nomination process, Thompson said, because the FBI conducted "a phony background investigation" of her while former FBI Director William Sessions still held the post at the beginning of President Clinton's first term. "One of the most fruitful of these leads," Thompson wrote in his letter to Freeh, was "provided by a Crystal Kazim, who is an organized crime call girl" Thompson claims "provided sex to Renoon a regular basis." "Additionally," he said, "six police officers who pulled Reno over for drunk driving were never contacted by the FBI." Thompson did not provide the identity of those officers to the Journal. Furthermore, Thompson asserted, because of her background in "substance abuse and criminal sexual exploits...she can be blackmailed now by a president who is known to use dirt on people to bend their will." Thompson also told Freeh that he was willing to put his law license on the line to back up his claims. And he said he believes the Wall Street Journal also knows about the charges and has verified them, "otherwise they would not have published these incendiary words." Thus far there has been no comment from Ms. Reno, the Justice Department, or the White House. - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ***** 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: Mon, 17 Aug 98 11:21:00 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Fwd: Fw: APC Sledgehammer (fwd) On Aug 17, Blackfork@aol.com wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] From: "Dan Brennan" To: "DON BLACKBURN" Subject: Fw: APC Sledgehammer Date: Mon, 10 Aug 1998 02:00:01 -0700 - -----Original Message----- From: Webforums System Date: Saturday, August 08, 1998 3:26 AM Subject: APC Sledgehammer >American Policy Center >http://www.americanpolicy.org > >If you would like to be removed from this list visit: >http://www.webforums.com/forums/g-read/msa28.154.html > > >Please do not reply to this message, >replies are not read or kept by this system. > > >COURAGEOUS CONGRESSMAN MOVES TO STOP > >CLINTON'S EXECUTIVE ORDER 13083 > > > >HE NEEDS YOUR HELP NOW! > > > > Congressman Mac Collins of Georgia has >introduced House Concurrent Resolution 299 >(H.Con.Res. 299) to rescind Clinton's Executive >Order on Federalism. > > > > Executive Order 13083: > > > >* effectively Revokes the 10th Amendment to the >Constitution > > > >* gives the Federal government almost unlimited >power to enforce regulations on the states > > > >* gives the President power to implement >international UN treaties without Senate >ratification > > > >* gives the President power to send American troops >anywhere at his whim > > > >CONGRESSMAN COLLINS' "H.CON.RES.299" > >WILL STOP E.O.13083 > > > > He now has 31 cosponsors. But he needs many >more in order to get a floor vote. House Speaker >Newt Gingrich has said he supports the Resolution - >but may now be dragging his feet to enact it. > > > >THERE MUST BE A NATIONWIDE SURGE OF OUTRAGE AGAINST >E.O.13083 AND SUPPORT FOR H.CON.RES.299!!! > > > >ACTION TO TAKE: > > > >1. CALL HOUSE SPEAKER NEWT GINGRICH > >Tell the Speaker that you want E.O 13083 rescinded. >And tell him you want his support for H.Con.Res. >299. > > > > Speaker Gingrich's phone number: (202) 255-0600 >fax number: (202) 255-7753 > > > > JAM HIS PHONES LINES!! > > > >2. CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN: Urge him to sign on as a >co-sponsor to H.Con.Res.299 and rescind E.O 13083. >Capitol Switchboard: 202) 255-3121 (just ask for >your Congressman by name and you will be connected >to his office) > > > >3. CALL YOUR STATE'S GOVERNOR: He will lose his >powers if this Executive Order becomes law. Tell >your governor to file an immediate protest to House >Speaker Gingrich. Tell your governor to demand that >E.O. 13083 be rescinded. Also call your State >Representative with the same message. (For a list >of governors, with phone numbers and addresses - go >to the APC website at > >http:\\WWW.americanpolicy.org or call the American >Policy Center at (703) 925-0881) > > > >4. SEND THIS ALERT TO AT LEAST FIVE MORE PEOPLE > > > >SPEAKER NEWT GINGRICH MUST FEEL OUR HEAT - OR >H.CON.RES.299 WILL NOT PASS. > > > >CONGRESS MUST RESCIND E.O. 13083 BEFORE AUGUST 12TH >- OR IT WILL BECOME FEDERAL LAW. > > > >DON'T LET CLINTON GET AWAY WITH REVOKING THE 10TH >AMENDMENT. > > > >STOP IT NOW!!! > > > >Powered by Webforums >Copyright 1998 Waveshift Inc. [------------------------- 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 - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1998 01:05:33 -0700 From: "Chuck Norgaard" Subject: Fw: The monster is not dead Some say long live the monster, I say "death to the monster NWO".........C. - ---------- From: preacher To: chuckrn@aone.com Subject: The monster is not dead Date: Monday, August 17, 1998 5:54 AM MONDAY AUGUST 17, 1998 Geoff Metcalf can be heard Monday-Friday on KSFO, 560AM in Northern California. Visit his web site at: http://www/ksfo560.com/Personalities/GM.htm for information about his newsletter. Words Have Meaning Everyone who was upset by the president's Executive Order 13083 on federalism has been prematurely excited by the reported "suspension." Before we all throw our shoulders out of place patting ourselves on the back over the presumed revocation of Executive Order 13083, remember, the devil is in the details, and the battle isn't over -- yet. Words have meaning. There are more questions than answers regarding the "suspension" of Clinton's 10th Amendment-killing executive order. Here's some background: When President Reagan issued his Executive Order 12612, it reasserted and strengthened the power of the states to deal wit= h federal bureaucracy run amok. Clinton's insidious EO 13083, which he trie= d to sneak in while in Birmingham, England, states "Executive Order 12612 o= f October 26, 1987, and Executive order 12875 of October 26, 1993 are revoked." Words have meaning. Clinton's EO 13095 (which was the result of unbridled anger of state organizations, governors, talk radio and reporting on the Internet -- specifically WorldNetDaily) "suspends" the previous insult of E.O. 13083, but does not "unrevoke" Reagan's effort to strengthen the states. Words have meaning. The "suspension" order did not kill the previous contentiou= s order, and it is not a "do over," but rather a "time out." T.S. Eliot onc= e wrote: "There will be time, there will be time To prepare a face to meet the fac= es that you meet; There will be time to murder and create, And time for all the works and days of hands That lift and drop a question on your plate; Time for you and time for me, And time yet for a hundred indecisions And for a hundred visions and revisions." He went on to note in his poem Lovesong of J. Alfred Prufrock: "In a minute there is time For decisions and revisions which a minute wil= l reverse." Eliot was only in his mid-20s when he wrote those words, which could have= , or have been incorporated into the Bill Clinton Standing Operating Procedures manual. The Bill of Rights is under assault by semantics sleazebags who use time like both a scalpel and bludgeon. The same administration which calls tax= es "investments," and reportedly is attempting to create new definitions and distinctions for various sexual activity, has "suspended" but not revoked= a clearly unconstitutional executive order. Words have meaning. The dictionary definition (not the president's definition) of "suspended" is "temporarily debarred, inactive, inoperative, held in abeyance." "Revoke" however means (according to the dictionary) "reverse, repeal, rescind, recall." Clinton's actions have not rescinded his previous evil deed. The President has again embraced his standing operating procedure o= f delay, stall, stonewall, and obfuscate. Words have meaning, and the devil is always in the details of what is and is not said. Congress has introduced two bills to deal with the perfidy of the executi= ve branch. HCON 229 IH is supposed to express the "sense of Congress," and H= R 4196 IH by Bob Barr, in my opinion, does the job. Not surprisingly, the shorter is better. The most important and significant sentence in the Bar= r bill (HR 4196 IH ) states "LATER ORDER OF NO FORCE OR EFFECT -- Executive Order 13083, issued May 14, 1998, shall have no force or effect." The very mechanism of the executive order, and presidential decision directives are issues which have attracted attention and derision from bo= th talk radio and the Internet. However, (and this is a routine annoyance an= d frustration) Congress has the ability, but not the will to prevent the executive branch from "making law." Congress can, and should vote to reje= ct any and all executive orders which presume to make law. The framers specifically established three branches of government: Executive; Legislative; and the Judiciary. It is the job function of the Legislative branch to make law. Frankly, Congress should rebel against executive orders for territorial imperatives, regardless of petty partisa= n concerns or agendas. If Congress is prepared to hand over their legislative function to the Executive and Judicial branches, they are accepting pay under false pretenses. Do not be lulled into a false sense of confidence by the "suspension" of E.O. 13803. Urge your congresscritters to support the Bob Barr bill HR 41= 96 IH to revoke fully E.O. 13803 so that it "shall have no force or effect." Otherwise heed the words of Eliot, and remember: "In a minute there is time For decisions and revisions which a minute wil= l reverse." Send e-mail to Geoff Metcalf Go to Geoff Metcalf's Exclusives Archive Go = to WND Exclusives Archive Go to Page One =A9 1998 Western Journalism Center - ---------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1998 14:11:55 -0400 (EDT) From: Chris Ferris Subject: Humorous Newspaper Headlines We'd Like To See (SATIRE) THIS IS A SATIRE THIS IS A SATIRE THIS IS A SATIRE THIS IS A SATIRE Mortified Marthas Flee Vineyard En Masse As Clinton Arrives To Search For Booty President's Private Wife Attacked In Oval Office By Flailing First Lady Presidentator Clinton Arrives On Martha's Vineyard With a Few Babes to Thrill President Restakes Claim To Private Wife But Keeps First Lady as Public One First Lady Starrs In Ginzu Knife Infomercial / President Afraid To Sleep President Bites Lower Lip While Viewing Spielberg's "Saving Private Lyin'" God's Lawyer Calls On Kendall To Advise Clinton to Cease Using God's Name Clinton Stars in Blockbuster Movie, "How Lyin' Fella Got His Groove Back" President Clinton's Support Undercut By New "Slashed White Thing Conspiracy" Female Supporters of President Form Conga Line at Oval Office For Their Turn Female Intern's Father Challenges Clinton To Boxing Match on White House Lawn Clinton Maintains He Still Believes In "On Her" Clinton States Desire To Leave Scandal Behind And To Do His Booty President Supports Taking (Others') Daughters At Work Day President Wants To Get Back and "Busy" With "The Job" Americans Pay Him To Do Tommy Lee Jones and U.S. Marshals Assigned To Protect All Females Taking White House Tours THIS IS A SATIRE THIS IS A SATIRE THIS IS A SATIRE THIS IS A SATIRE - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Aug 98 18:34:50 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: A Poll You Might Want To Vote In (fwd) On Aug 18, larry ball wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] Here is a poll concerning the impeachment of our beloved president. We need some votes in favor of impeaching him. Go and vote. Here is the address - http://www.herald.com [------------------------- 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 - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1998 09:54:05 -0400 (EDT) From: Chris Ferris Subject: "Spice Boy" Clinton Sings "Wannabe" (SATIRE) THIS IS A SATIRE THIS IS A SATIRE THIS IS A SATIRE THIS IS A SATIRE Sheer, unverified rumor has it that "Spice Boy" Clinton may have sung this Clintonized version of The Spice Girls' smash hit "Wannabe" to Monica Lewinsky during her job interview ... Starr could have this on tape ... ______________________________________________________________________________ Yo I'll tell you what I want, what I really really want, So tell me what you want, what you really really want, I'll tell you what I want, what I really really want, So tell me what you want, what you really really want, I wanna, I wanna, I wanna, I wanna, I wanna really really really wanna zigzig ha. If you want my future forget my past, If you wanna get with me better make it fast, Now don't go wasting my precious time, Get your act together we could be just fine. I'll tell you what I want, what I really really want, So tell me what you want, what you really really want, I wanna, I wanna, I wanna, I wanna, I wanna really really really wanna zigzig ha. If you wanna be my intern, you gotta get with Dem friends, Make it last forever, Dem friendship never ends, If you wanna be my intern, you have got to give, Taking is too easy, but that's the way it is. What do you think about that now you know how I feel, Say you can handle my love are you for real, I won't be hasty, I'll give you a try, If you really bug me then I'll say goodbye. Yo I'll tell you what I want, what I really really want, So tell me what you want, what you really really want, I wanna, I wanna, I wanna, I wanna, I wanna really really really wanna zigzig ha. If you wanna be my intern, you gotta get with Dem friends, Make it last forever, Dem friendship never ends, If you wanna be my intern, you have got to give, Taking is too easy, but that's the way it is. So here's a story from A to Z, you wanna get with me you gotta listen carefully, We got Mike McCurry who fronts for liar, me, And spinners for me, who from truth must always flee, HRC is a "just a thang" to me, 'though a real lady, and as for me you'll see, Slam your body down and wind it all around Slam your body down and wind it all around. If you wanna be my intern, you gotta get with Dem friends, Make it last forever Dem friendship never ends, If you wanna be my intern, you have got to give, Taking is too easy, but that's the way it is. If you wanna be my intern, you gotta, you gotta, you gotta, you gotta, you gotta, slam, slam, slam, slam, Slam your body down and wind it all around, Slam your body down and wind it all around, Slam your body down and wind it all around, Slam your body down zigazig ah. If you wanna be my intern. (Now we know that Monica Lewinsky, indeed, got "the job" after eighteen months of relentless "interviewing") THIS IS A SATIRE THIS IS A SATIRE THIS IS A SATIRE THIS IS A SATIRE - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1998 22:12:43 -0400 From: Tom Cloyes Subject: Fwd: Ballot Update: Volunteers Needed >Date: Wed, 19 Aug 98 10:33:15 PDT >From: announce@lp.org >Subject: Ballot Update: Volunteers Needed >Sender: announce-request@lp.org >Reply-To: announce@lp.org >To: announce@lp.org (Libertarian Party announcements) >X-Mailer: mailout v1.26 released with lsendfix 1.8 > > >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > >VOLUNTEERS URGENTLY NEEDED TO DEFEAT REPUBLICAN ATTACK! > >LP BALLOT ACCESS IN ILLINOIS DEPENDS ON STRONG GRASSROOTS EFFORT. > > >Ballot Access Update 8/18/98 > >Libertarian Party activists in Illinois learned Monday from State >Election Board representatives that they will need 10-15 Libertarian >volunteers each day for at least the next two weeks (August 24-28 & >August 31-Sept 4) to defeat the Republican challenge of the Libertarian >ballot access petition. > >Despite filing a record 61,009 signatures to meet a 25,000 signature >requirement, the ballot access petition filed by the Libertarian Party >of Illinois is being challenged by the Republican Party. The >Republicans, in a desperate attempt to keep LP candidate Jim Tobin off >the ballot, are claiming that less than 20% of the signatures filed by >the LPI are valid. Internal checks by LP officials show a validity rate >well in excess of 60%. > >Beginning Monday, August 24 (tentatively), 10-15 teams from the State >Election Board will begin checking each of the signatures and petition >pages challenged by the Republicans. The LP must supply a >representative to each team to retain its right to appeal any adverse >rulings on individual signatures. > >If a member of an election board team rules a signature invalid, an LP >representative must immediately challenge the ruling. > >IF THERE IS NO LIBERTARIAN REPRESENTATIVE PRESENT TO CHALLENGE THE >RULING, THE RULING STANDS AND *CANNOT* BE APPEALED! > >The Republicans believe that we can't field enough Libertarians to >defend against their bogus challenge. We have to prove them wrong. > >The LP of Illinois is lining up as many local volunteers as they can. >However, there is a shortage of people available during regular >business hours, which is when the checking will take place. We >anticipate that additional help will be required to defeat the >Republican challenge. > >We don't know how many out-of-state people will be needed, but it is >vital that we find out who might be available ASAP. If you are >available and are asked to come and help, travel, lodging, and meals >will be provided. > >If you would be available to come to Illinois for one of the two weeks >and help win this vital battle for liberty, please contact Steve Givot >at LPI headquarters (312-360-1040, email givot@softwarena.com), Steve >Dasbach at the national office (202-333-0008 ext 228, email >stevedasbach@compuserve.com) or Ron Crickenberger at the national >office (202-333-0008 ext 227, email roncrickenberger@compuserve.com). > >If you can't volunteer your time to help, we urgently need your financial >support to help defeat this vicious attack by the Republicans against our >candidates. If you have a recent version of Netscape or Internet Explorer, >you can charge your contribution to your Visa or MasterCard online using >the form at "http://www.lp.org/lp-ballot-access.html". Alternatively, >call any of the numbers listed above to make a credit card contribution >over the phone -- or if you have any questions about this project. Or, >contact one of us by e-mail to discuss making a pledge to this effort -- >money or time. Contributions can also be made by check or credit card >by using the form below. > >The Republicans need to learn that Libertarians don't roll over and >play dead when attacked - THEY FIGHT BACK AND WIN! > >If you can help by volunteering your time, THANK YOU! > >If you can help by contributing the dollars needed to support the >efforts of those volunteers, THANK YOU! > >With your help, we will be on the ballot in Illinois in 1998, and on >every ballot in 2000. > >*********************************************************************** > >Ballot Access Update 08/18/98 Contribution Form > >Name:________________________________________________________________ > >Address:_____________________________________________________________ > >City:_______________________________ State:____ Zip:_________________ > >Phone:____________________ E-mail:___________________________________ > >Occupation:______________________ Employer:__________________________ > >Contribution amount: > > $25 $50 $100 $250 $500 $1000 $______ > > __ check enclosed __charge to: MasterCard Visa > > (Make payable to Card Number: _________________________ > Libertarian Party) Expiration Date: _____________ > Name on Card: ________________________ > Signature:____________________________ > >Federal law requires political committees to report the name, address, >and occupation and employer for each individual whose contributions >aggregate in excess of $200 in a calendar year. Political contributions >are not tax-deductible. > >Mail to: Libertarian Party > 2600 Virginia Avenue NW, Suite 100 > Washington, DC 20037 > >*********************************************************************** > >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >Version: 2.6.2 > >iQCVAwUBNdsJI9CSe1KnQG7RAQHbIQP/VRdBI6Bd3RlAtQk/VGHUW9gvA9mUnLxY >ZLGdeocO/GgsSq5Ag0uAJT4OJcNNDTk3jrFc3IPYpGNf9HnV/QsNkUAB93tE3LrJ >6wlcR9+XNkqfcU9CHlD9wpqMtQ0o8VuSVGHYWs1U+7rBBtpQrb8TtUdJyhg8Fyz1 >BdMyfwyHE2E= >=wF7S >-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > >The Libertarian Party http://www.lp.org/ >2600 Virginia Ave. NW, Suite 100 voice: 202-333-0008 >Washington DC 20037 fax: 202-333-0072 > >For subscription changes, please mail to with the >word "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" in the subject line -- or use the WWW form. > - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Aug 98 23:17:52 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: * East Coast Alert * *** ALERT! *** The following might be a hoax, but it falls into the best people know just in case category. That Military satellite launch that blew up the other day may have had an RTG power source aboard. If so, the East Coast just got dusted with minute particles of Plutonium. Breath it and get Lung Cancer. Heard on the Art Bell Radio show this PM. If you're on the East Coast, and have a Geiger Counter, it might pay to dust it off. - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ***** 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, 20 Aug 1998 07:15:07 -0400 From: Tom Cloyes Subject: Fwd: "Mrs. Clinton's Defense of Impeachment," >Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1998 01:41:08 -0400 >From: E Pluribus Unum >X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.01 [en] (Win95; U) >To: E Pluribus Unum Email Distribution Network >Subject: "Mrs. Clinton's Defense of Impeachment," > >"Mrs. Clinton's Defense of Impeachment," >By Bob Barr, > >Dear Mrs. Clinton: > >In February 1974 the staff of the Nixon impeachment inquiry issued a >report produced by a group of lawyers and researchers assigned with >developing a scholar memorandum setting forth the "constitutional >grounds for presidential impeachment." > >You were a member of that group of lawyers and researchers, barely, I am >sure, able to conceal your dislike for President Nixon. Within the year, >Nixon would leave office disgraced , having witnessed articles of >impeachment voted against him by the House Judiciary Committee, based in >part on your report. > >Relevant Today > >I must give you and your colleagues credit. You did not appear to have >let personal animus influence your work product, at least not the final, >published report. In fact, the report you and your colleagues produced >appears objective, fair, well researched and consistent with other >materials reflecting and commenting on impeachment. And it is every bit >as relevant today as it was 23 years ago. > >I presume--but I must ask whether--you stand by your research and >analysis today. You said in 1974 that impeachment, as understood by the >framers of our constitution, reflected the long history of the term used >at least since late-14th-century England: "one of the tools used by the >English" to make government "more responsive and responsible" (page 4 of >your report). Your also noted then--clearly in response to those who >mistakenly claimed impeachment as a tool to correct "corruption in >office" that "alleged damage to the state," and was "not necessarily >limited to common law or statutory . . . Crimes" (page 7) > >You quoted James Wilson, who at the Pennsylvania ratification convention >described the executive (that is, the president) as not being above the >law, but rather "in his public character" subject to it "by impeachment" >(page 9) > >You also-quite correctly-noted then that the constitutional draftsmen >chose the terms describing the circumstances under which a president >could be impeached very carefully and deliberately. You noted that "high >crimes and misdemeanors" did not denote criminal offenses in the sense >that prosecutors employ such terms in modern trials. Rather, in your >well-researched memorandum, you correctly noted that the phrase "high >crimes and misdemeanors" as substituted for George Mason's less precise >term in an earlier draft of the Constitution: "Maladministration" (page >12 of your report). Not only that, but your further research led you to >quote Blackstone's "Commentaries on the Laws of England" in support of >your conclusion that "high crimes and misdemeanors" meant not a criminal >offense but an injury to the state or system of government (page 12). I >applaud the extent and clarity of your research. You even note that the >U.S. Supreme Court, in deciding questions of intent, must construe >phrases such as "high crimes and misdemeanors" not according to modern >usage, but >according to what the framers meant when they adopted them (page12 once >again). > >Magnificent research! > >Even Alexander Hamilton finds a place in your research. You quote from >his Federalist No. 65 that impeachment relates to "misconduct of public >men, or in other words, from the abuse or violation of public trust" >that is "of a nature . . .political [emphasis in original]" (page 13 of >your report). > >Finally, in bringing your research forward from the constitutional >drafting documents themselves, you find support for your properly broad >interpretation of "high crimes and misdemeanors" in no less a legal >scholar than Justice Joseph Story. I was in awe of your use of Justice >Story's "Commentaries on the Constitution" (1833) supporting your >proposition that "impeachment . . . applies to offenses of a political >character' . . . [that] must be examined upon very broad and >comprehensive principles of public policy and duty" (pages 16 and 17 of >your report). I could not have said it better. > >You even note that the specific instances on which impeachment has been >employed in our country's history "placed little emphasis on criminal >conduct" and were used to remove public officials who had "seriously >undermined public confidence" through their "course of conduct" (page >21). > >Clear Basis > >Mrs. Clinton, when I first raised the notion last month that the House >should take but the first step in determining whether impeachment might >lie against President Clinton for a pattern of abuse of office and >improper administration of his duties, little did I realize your >scholarly work 23 years ago would provide clear historical and legal >basis and precedent for my proposition. > >Amazingly, the words you used in your report are virtually identical to >those I use today. For example, you said in 1974, much as I did in my >March 11, 1997, letter to Judiciary Chairman Hyde, that "[i]mpeachment >is the first step in a remedial process" (page 24 of your report) to >correct "serious offenses" that "subvert" our government and "undermine >the integrity of office" (page 26) > >Thank you, Mrs. Clinton, for giving Congress a road map for beginning >our inquiry. > >Sincerely, >Bob Barr (R., GA.) >Member of Congress > >[Forwarded For Information Purposes Only - Not Necessarily Endorsed By >The Sender - A.K. Pritchard] > >[To be added to "The Republican" email list - simply ask at: >chiliast@ideasign.com] > >------------------------------ > > >A.K. Pritchard >http://www.ideasign.com/chiliast/ > > >"The right of self-defense is the first law of nature; in most >governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within >the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, >and when the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any >color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already >annihilated, is on the brink of destruction." > >-- Henry St. George Tucker, in Blackstone's 1768 >"Commentaries on the Laws of England." > >-- >****************************************************************** > E Pluribus Unum The Central Ohio Patriot Group > P.O. Box 791 Eventline/Voicemail: (614) 823-8499 > Grove City, OH 43123 > >Meetings: Monday Evenings, 7:30pm, Ryan's Steakhouse > 3635 W. Dublin-Granville Rd. (just East of Sawmill Rd.) > >http://www.infinet.com/~eplurib eplurib@infinet.com >****************************************************************** > - - ------------------------------ End of roc-digest V2 #176 *************************