(Miscellaneous Internet Libernet Reprints) Editor's Introduction: These reprints reprints are from Libernet mail-list postings which individually appeared in one of the daily Libernet batch mailings. When one participates in the Libernet mail-list, a policy file is sent stating: "ATTRIBUTION: Libernet messages are frequently reprinted in other publications, along with an acknowledgement of the posting party. If you do not wish this to happen, please indicate so in your posting. Otherwise, it is assumed that all postings to Libernet may be reproduced provided ackowledgement of the author is given." It is this paragraph that "authorizes" this reprint. If the posting has a copyright and has distribution restrictions, their terms are retained and published below and adhered to. If you want to subscribe to Libernet, send email to libernet-request@dartmouth.edu and follow the instructions you receive in reply. Contents The titles that follow have been created or copied by the editor for ShareDebate International. * Utah Lawmakers Lead Charge Against D.C. [Quick leap instructions: do a find for "Entry-1" * Introduction to Libertarianism [Quick leap instructions: do a find for "Entry-2" * Laissez Faire Books [Quick leap instructions: do a find for "Entry-3" * ACLU supports hush Rush Bill [Quick leap instructions: do a find for "Entry-4" * Global Warming Did Not Occur [Quick leap instructions: do a find for "Entry-5" * A new Bill of Rights worded to reflect what's actually happened to the original [Quick leap instructions: do a find for "Entry-6" * How to Argue with Liberals on Whether any Bill of Right is Obsolete [Quick leap instructions: do a find for "Entry-7" [Miscellaneous Libernet Posting Follows] ====================================================== Miscellaneous Libernet Entry-1 ====================================================== Date: Thu, 03 Mar 94 16:24:22 PST From: Terry Liberty-Parker Subject: Succession? (Xpost LEGAL_LAW) To: libernet@Dartmouth.EDU X-Fido-Echo: LIBERTY To: Libernet Date: 3 Mar 94 08:04:08 * Forwarded by Terry Liberty-Parker (1:382/91.49) * Area : AEN_NEWS (AEN_NEWS) * Original Area: Legal * Original From: MARK OSTERMAN (1:285/27) The following article is republished without permission. It was discovered on my Fax machine this morning and I have no clue as to the publisher, date, or source as I did not even get a polling number from the transmiting Fax. It was in retyped form. If anyone can verify, I would appreciate it. WEST'S LEADERS WARN WASHINGTON: GIVE US LIBERTY --- OR ELSE UTAH LAWMAKERS LEAD CHARGE AGAINST D.C. By Christopher Smith DENVER -- Evoking Revolutionary War analogies, Utah politicians Sunday urged fellow Western state leaders to declare their independence from Uncle Sam. "We have to send another shot heard round the world," Utah House of Representative Speaker Rob Bishop, R-Brigham City, said in the keynote address of the Western States Summit held here. "Washington D.C., is 70 square miles surrounded by reality. It's time reality took control." Sponsored by members of the Utah Legislature, the first-ever conference turned into a revival-style meeting of 200 ranchers, county commissioners, miners, legislators and recreationists from across the western United States who gave every speaker a standing ovation Sunday afternoon. The prevailing them: Break the bonds of federal "tyranny" and reclaim states' rights to govern. "Let's make the 20th Amendment not the most unused amendment but instead the most important section of the Bill of Rights," said Bishop, referring to the portion of the Constitution that reserves for states those powers not specifically delegated to the federal government. Bishop, a teacher of U.S. government from Brigham City, railed against federal arrogance. He chastised the federal government for restricting access to public lands, compared federal grazing reforms to the colonial Sugar Act tax and complained of state legislatures being forced to pay for federal programs they don't want. But just how the Western land "stake-holders," as they refer to themselves, will dam Uncle Sam's seemingly unending flood of regulatory edicts was drowned in the summit's opening day rhetoric. Even Bishop acknowledged: "Venting our frustrations is easy. But to take action, it's gut- check time." Republican Rep. Met Johnson, leader of the Utah Legislature's so-called "cowboy caucus," says proposals for putting Uncle Sam back into his rightful constitutional place range from diplomacy to near- insurrection. "Some are gentle, some are a little spicy and some are red-hot," said the New Harmony rancher who coordinated the two-day summit session. Fellow Utah House members Mel Brown, R-Midvale, Bradley Johnson, R-Aurora, and Jim Gowans, D-Tooele, were organizing stakeholders for a videotaped message to President Clinton, extolling their complaints against Potomac rule. "We've become territories managed by a ruler as remote as the king of England," said Bill Howell of Price, director of the Southeastern Utah Association of Local Governments. "We are witnessing a modern American tragedy." Facing a sea of cowboy hats, Garfield County Commissioner Louise Liston of Escalante told the audience that the culture of the rural West is being "systematically destroyed" by "nature lovers and suitcase saviors." "It comes down to wise use vs. no use," said the rancher's wife and retired schoolteacher. "Let's not forget the most valuable resource on our lands is the human resource." A sample of some of the fight-back strategies being considered could be found in the back of the Stapleton Plaza Hotel Hallroom, which was adorned with flags from 17 states west of the Mississippi. There, the Bountiful based National Federal Lands Conference was selling books with titles such as Fight Back & Win: A Rancher's Guide and The Toxicity of Environmentalism. Videotapes instructed "positive confrontational strategies" and "how to use the power of county government to restore private property rights." Several participants wore buttons supporting "Clinton- Free Zones." A White House phone list was circulated encouraging stakeholders to join a "Fire Babbitt Phone-In," a campaign to oust Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt. Today, attorneys will coach the local-government officials on drafting comprehensive land-use plans that specify local customs and cultures derived from the use of federal lands. Participants also will grill U.S. Sens. Bob Bennett of Utah, Malcolm Wallop of Wyoming and Hank Brown of Colorado on Washington's ongoing remodeling of the traditional West. (Continued next message...) * CmpQwk 1.40j #360 * Washington, D.C.: America's work-free drug place! -+- Maximus 2.01wb + Origin: Three boxes keep us free: ballot, jury and cartridge (1:285/27) ====================================================== Date: Thu, 10 Mar 94 16:10:20 EST From: ccomp!root@eddie.mit.edu Subject: Succession? (Xpost LEGAL_LAW) To: libernet@Dartmouth.EDU > > > X-Fido-Echo: LIBERTY > To: Libernet > Date: 3 Mar 94 08:04:08 > > * Forwarded by Terry Liberty-Parker (1:382/91.49) > * Area : AEN_NEWS (AEN_NEWS) > * Original Area: Legal > * Original From: MARK OSTERMAN (1:285/27) > > > The following article is republished without > permission. It was discovered on my Fax machine this > morning and I have no clue as to the publisher, date, > or source as I did not even get a polling number from > the transmiting Fax. It was in retyped form. If > anyone can verify, I would appreciate it. > > WEST'S LEADERS WARN WASHINGTON: > GIVE US LIBERTY --- OR ELSE > > UTAH LAWMAKERS LEAD CHARGE AGAINST D.C. > > [ article ommitted to save space ] > I just wanted to let you all know that this is *FOR REAL*!!! The rally was in February, and was a meeting of the _Western States' Coallition_, held at the state house in Salt Lake City, Utah. I called the state house in Utah and spoke with Rep. Bishop's secretary (named Clay) to get verification, and he affirmed the report. If any of you would care to confirm this for yourselves, you can reach Rep. Bishop's office at (801) 538-1612. Happy Revolution (or is that gunpowder I smell? ;-) [ShareDebate International Editor's note: tangent postscript omitted to save space] ====================================================== Miscellaneous Libernet Entry-2 ====================================================== Date: Fri, 18 Mar 1994 12:27:56 -0500 (EST) From: "BILL WOOLSEY (2-5161)" Subject: Introduction to Libertarianism To: libernet@Dartmouth.EDU Introduction to Libertarianism Libertarianism is a political perspective that is skeptical about government across the board. Libertarians are fiscally conservative and socially tolerant, so they are different from modern conservatives and liberals. While many conservatives share the libertarian skepticism of government in general, modern conservatism tends to favor using the criminal justice system to promote traditional moral values. And while many liberals favor social toleration (so libertarianism is sometimes called "classical" or "market" liberalism), modern liberalism still favors the failed "tax and spend" policies of big government. Many excellent books and publications are available from Laissez-Faire Books (call 800-326-099) for those interested in learning more about libertarianism. _Market Liberalism: A Paradigm for the 21st Century_, edited by David Boaz and Edward H. Crane and published by the Cato Institute, advocates specific libertarian reforms in the areas of economic, social, and foreign policy. The Cato Institute (1000 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 2001) is a major libertarian think tank that publishes books, journals, and policy studies and organizes conferences. _Reason_ is a monthly magazine published by the Reason Foundation. It is dedicated to "Free Minds and Free Markets" and is the leading libertarian periodical. The Reason Foundation has also sponsored studies on the privatization of various government services. Subscriptions: PO Box 526, Mt. Morris, IL 61054-7868 ($26 per year). Other books provide a more general introduction to libertarian ideas. _Free to Choose: A Personal Statement_ by Milton and Rose Friedman is an introduction to a libertarian perspective on the economy. It was also made into a multi-episode PBS documentary. The Friedmans are strongly libertarian, favoring much less government across the board. Milton Friedman won the Nobel prize in economics and was an economics columnist for _Newsweek_ for many years. _Crisis and Leviathan: Critical Episodes in the Growth of American Government_ by Robert A. Higgs describes the growth of government in the United States despite the libertarian ideals expressed in the Declaration of Independence and the Founding Fathers' skepticism of government across the board. Robert Higgs is a professor at Seattle University. Still other books provide an introduction to an even stricter libertarian view of the proper role of government. _Liberty and Nature: An Aristotelian Defense of Liberal Order_ by Douglass R. Rassmussen and Douglas J. Den Uly is a rigorous philosophical defense of a government that is strictly limited to the defense individual rights to life, liberty, and property. It will be of special interest to those attracted by the writings of novelist Ayn Rand. Rassmussen is professor of philosophy at St. John's University and Den Uyl is a professor of philosophy at Bellarmine College. _The Machinery of Freedom: A Guide to Radical Capitalism_ by David Friedman argues that most government activities should be privatized today and that all government activities can be privatized in the future. Friedman's approach is very practical. He explains the reasons why political "solutions" have had adverse consequences and describes the benefits that everyone would obtain if government was rolled back across the board. David Friedman is professor of law and economics at University of Chicago School of Law. There are also organizations aimed at promoting libertarianism through the political process. The Libertarian Party is the third largest party in the United States and promotes libertarian change by running candidates for public office. LP members currently hold about 100 offices. For more information: Libertarian Party, 1528 Pennsylvania Ave. SE, Washington D.C. 20003. The Republican Liberty Caucus promotes libertarianism within the Republican Party by cultivating "socially tolerant and fiscally conservative" Republicans. For more information: Republican Liberty Caucus, 1717 Apalachee Parkway, Suite 434, Tallahassee, Fla. 32301. Posted by: Bill Woolsey Vice Chair, Charleston County LP (WoolseyW@Citadel.edu) ====================================================== Miscellaneous Libernet Entry-3 ====================================================== Date: 22 Mar 94 09:33:08 EST From: Chris Whitten <74217.1631@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Laissez Faire Books To: Libernet _____________________________________________________ LAISSEZ FAIRE BOOKS _____________________________________________________ Many of you are probably already familiar with the Laissez Faire Books catalog. If you're not--let me give you a quick introduction to who we are. (If you're already a customer, please don't skip over this, I want to ask your advice.) For just over 20 years, Laissez Faire has been a central source for libertarian books and tapes. We carry a wide selection of books on liberty... authors such as Ayn Rand, Thomas Jefferson, Ludwig von Mises, F.A. Hayek, Murray Rothbard, H.L. Mencken, Dave Barry, P.J. O'Rourke, Thomas Sowell, Thomas Szasz, Milton Friedman and many others... we offer books on education, the Founding Fathers, drug policy, objectivism, philosophy, gun control, economics, free- market health care, science fiction, humor, politics, investment, and much more. Since just last June I've been the Managing Editor for Laissez Faire Books. Over the past few months I've been looking into the possibilities for offering our products electronically. I have to admit, this is all very new to me--that's why I am asking for your advice. We are already planning on posting some of our new book reviews here on libernet. We would probably only be showing you a reduced version of what appears in the catalog--but we would be posting it here first. Libernet readers would get to hear about the new books before regular catalog readers. We're also looking into ways to offer our complete catalog on-line, and ways for you to order electronically. But we still have a long way to go. I would like to hear your comments and/or questions. I would welcome any advice you can give. (Chris Whitten, 74217.1631@compuserve.com) If you're not already on our "snail mail" list for the catalog: sign up. It's free. Call 1-800-326-0996, or write to 938 Howard Street, #202, San Francisco, CA, 94103. Thanks for your time. ====================================================== Miscellaneous Libernet Entry-4 ====================================================== Date: Tue, 08 Mar 94 10:47:00 PST From: James Donald Subject: ACLU supports hush Rush Bill To: libernet The ACLU now supports the "Hush Rush" Bill. (They gave congressional testimony in support of "Hush Rush") This bill would require radio and television broadcasters to be "fair" and to give equal time to "all" points of view, with government bureaucrats deciding what is fair, and what points of view are sufficiently important to count as "all". The ACLU recently attacked the second amendment. Spy Magazine recently commented that those who attack the second amendment really seek to attack the first, and joked that MTV may talk about lighting fires and killing children, but Janet Reno actually does something about it. ------------------------------------------------------- We have the right to defend ourselves and our property, because of the kind of animals that we are. True law derives from this right, not from the arbitrary power of the omnipotent state. James A. Donald jamesd@netcom.com ------------------------------------------------------- ====================================================== Miscellaneous Libernet Entry-5 ====================================================== Date: Fri, 4 Mar 1994 13:48:48 -0500 (EST) From: Kevin Brook Subject: Global Warming Did Not Occur To: libernet@Dartmouth.EDU Liberals, Greens, and Democrats like Al Gore often use "the threat of global warming" as an excuse to expand the government's role in environmental regulation. However, noted scientists recently have found that global warming is merely a fiction. While recycling efforts and lower pollution rates are commendable projects, the "doom and gloom" predictions of the liberals have not come true. This is not the first time I have come across a refutation of global warming in the news, but it certainly was in a notable source: USA TODAY, March 4, 1994 issue, page 3A: "NO GLOBAL WARMING: A new study casts doubt on fears the world is in imminent danger from global warming or ozone depletion. Satellite data show that despite high levels of carbon-dioxide emissions, there have been insignificant temperature changes over the past 15 years. Frederic Seitz, former president of the National Academy of Sciences, said his study also shows the lifetime of atmospheric carbon dioxide, considered a major factor in global warming, is about 10 years, not the widely-believed 50 years." Environmental pollution is a trespass on you and I, but if the government turned over some of its lands to conservation groups and non-profit organizations, any pollution which would be incurred by the general public or by businesses would be considered a violation of private property. I do not feel "denationalizing the National Parks" is a big issue to think about when we have more serious problems facing us, but I did feel that the article above shows that facts, statistics, and observations refute the theory of global warming quite clearly. We do not need more government regulation, we need less. I therefore would object to raising the EPA to a cabinet-level status, as some Democrats have proposed. Kevin Brook Libertarian Party of Connecticut, Western 5th District Coordinator ====================================================== Miscellaneous Libernet Entry-6 ====================================================== Date: Mon, 7 Mar 1994 19:49:00 -0500 From: mnemosyne.cs.du.edu.cs.du.edu !canrem.com!financial.opportunities (Financial Opportunities) Subject: A new Bill of Rights to go with the Con-Con? To: bolis.sf-bay.org!act Thought you happy folks would appreciate this item, found here on CRS. It's a wry look at a "revised" Bill of Rights [perhaps "prophetic", if the Con-Con convenes!] Cheers! John W. NEW THE^BILL OF RIGHTS Nearly everything has changed in the United States since the Bill of Rights was written and adopted. We still see the original words when we read those first 10 Amendments to the Constitution, yet the meaning is vastly different now. And no wonder. We've gone from a country of a few million to a few hundred million. The nation's desire to band together was replaced by revulsion of togetherness. We exchanged a birthright of justice for a magic bullet, and replaced the Pioneer Spirit with the Pioneer Stereo. We're not the people who founded this country and our Bill of Rights should reflect this. As we approach the 21st Century, it's time to bring the wording up to date showing what we are and who we are. AMENDMENT I Congress shall make no law establishing religion, but shall act as if it did; and shall make no laws abridging the freedom of speech, unless such speech can be construed as "commercial speech" or "irresponsible speech" or "offensive speech;" or shall abridge the right of the people to peaceably assemble where and when permitted; or shall abridge the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances, under proper procedures. It shall be unlawful to cry "Fire!" in a theatre occupied by three or more persons, unless such persons shall belong to a class declared Protected by one or more divisions of Federal, State or Local government, in which case the number of persons shall be one or more. AMENDMENT II A well-regulated military force shall be maintained under control of the President, and no political entity within the United States shall maintain a military force beyond Presidential control. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall be determined by the Congress and the States and the Cities and the Counties and the Towns (and someone named Fred.) AMENDMENT III No soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner, unless such house is believed to have been used, or believed may be used, for some purpose contrary to law or public policy. AMENDMENT IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures may not be suspended except to protect public welfare. Any place or conveyance shall be subject to search by law enforcement forces of any political entity, and any such places or conveyances, or any property within them, may be confiscated without judicial proceeding if believed to be used in a manner contrary to law. AMENDMENT V Any person may be held to answer for a crime of any kind upon any suspicion whatever; and may be put in jeopardy of life or liberty by the state courts, by the federal judiciary, and while incarcerated; and may be compelled to be a witness against himself by the forced submission of his body or any portion thereof, and by testimony in proceedings excluding actual trial. Private property forfeited under judicial process shall become the exclusive property of the judicial authority and shall be immune from seizure by injured parties. AMENDMENT VI In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to avoid prosecution by exhausting the legal process and its practitioners. Failure to succeed shall result in speedy plea-bargaining resulting in lesser charges. Convicted persons shall be entitled to appeal until sentence is completed. It shall be unlawful to bar or deter an incompetent person from service on a jury. AMENDMENT VII In civil suits, where a contesting party is a person whose private life may interest the public, the right of trial in the Press shall not be abridged. AMENDMENT VIII Sufficient bail may be required to ensure that dangerous persons remain in custody pending trial. There shall be no right of the public to be afforded protection from dangerous persons, and such protection shall be dependent upon incarceration facilities available. AMENDMENT IX The enumeration in The Constitution of certain rights shall be construed to deny or discourage others which may from time to time be extended by the branches of Federal, State or Local government, unless such rights shall themselves become enacted by Amendment. AMENDMENT X The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution shall be deemed to be powers residing in persons holding appointment therein through the Civil Service, and may be delegated to the States and local Governments as determined by the public interest. The public interest shall be determined by the Civil Service. ------------------------------------------------------- The Pen is mightier than the Sword. The Court is mightier than the Pen. The Sword is mightier than the Court. - Rey Barry - ------------------------------------------------------- [What a *great* sig.!] ------------------------------ ====================================================== Miscellaneous Libernet Entry-7 ====================================================== Date: Thu, 10 Mar 94 02:29:48 PST From: Clay Conrad Subject: A new Bill of Rights to go with the Con-Con? To: libernet@Dartmouth.EDU X-Fido-Echo: LIBERTY To: Libernet (A. J. Teel, Sui Juris) Date: 9 Mar 94 19:31:52 A friend of mine in NH recently offered me this argument, that I have found very successful with ACLU type liberals: -------- Yes, the 2d Amendment is obsolete. When it was written there were no such things as street sweepers, machine guns, drug gangs or uzis. We should repeal the 2d Amendment. The first is also obsolete, though. When it was written there were no color pornographic magazines, hard core videotapes, or xxx movie theatres. We should repeal the 1st Amendment. The 4th Amendment is obsolete. When it was written there was no such thing as electronic transmission, paper shredders, drugs were legal, etc. It was not so necessary to be able to gain instant access to people's houses and evidence in those older, simpler times. We should repeal the 4th Amendment. ..... Similar arguments can be made for all of the bill of rights. If the 2d is obsolete due to changes in society, why is the trial by jury not obsolete, now that evidence has gotten so technical? Can laypeople really understand advanced forensic evidence? Maybe we need to repeal the 5th, 6th and 7th amendments. -And the 8th amendment? Today, we really need to get tough. Get rid of it. -The 9th and 10th have been de facto repealed anyway, but let's get formal and pull out the old eraser. That was then, this is now. The Civil War amendments changed all that - we don't need them in the 1990's. -Anybody who accepts the 2d amendment argument should accept the others as well. We might as well keep the 3d - it's the only one that anybody obeys anymore anyway. --- Maximus 2.00 * Origin: LibertyBBS Austin,Tx(512)326-9491 (1:382/91.49) -- Forwarded from the LIBERTY echo via dehnbase.fidonet.org ------------------------------ ### [End of Miscellaneous Libernet Postings] ###