Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [RLC-Action] Mechanical Engineering - Good, Good, Good ... Good Vibrations

Expand Messages
  • Jeff Palmer
    ... strategy; ... Whitehouse. Would the RLC endorse him? In a word, HELLNO! ... philosophical leg to stand on. You decide. Liberty, including freedom of
    Message 1 of 27 , Apr 12, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Message
      > OK, several have given their opinions on the MinuteMen, so let's get on to strategy; 
       
      > 1) Tancredo talks like he would like to ride this issue into the Whitehouse.  Would the RLC endorse him? 
       
      In a word, HELLNO!
       
      > 4) Libertarians believe in open borders; maybe we don't even have a philosophical leg to stand on.  You decide. 
       
      Liberty, including freedom of movement, is always the correct "philosophical leg".  However, given our lack of unanimity on this issue, we should choose to avoid focusing on this issue altogether.

      Jeff Palmer - jap@...
       * * *
      Quote of the Week:  “Our government has kept us in a perpetual state of fear - kept us in a continuous stampede of patriotic fervor - with the cry of grave national emergency.  Always there has been some terrible evil at home or some monstrous foreign power that was going to gobble us up if we did not blindly rally behind it.” -- Gen. Douglas MacArthur


      --
      No virus found in this outgoing message.
      Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
      Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.7 - Release Date: 4/12/2005

    • John Pankratz
      Speaking of engineering, It should be obvious to all that you do not independently change one variable in a complex system without necessarily changing
      Message 2 of 27 , Apr 12, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Speaking of engineering,

        It should be obvious to all that you do not independently change one
        variable in a complex system without necessarily changing
        numerous dependent variables. Changing one variable inevitably
        introduces instability that results in the system settling
        down to a new state with many other factors having changed as well.

        If we allow freedom at our borders we also have to do away with the
        welfare state, end the so-called "war on drugs"
        and stop interfering with the affairs of other sovereign nations (in
        other words stop making enemies.)

        All the above are libertarian principles. The libertarian philosophy is
        of a single piece. You cannot implement part of it
        without implementing all of it. To do otherwise is to force instability
        and cause other, undesireable changes,
        not the least of which would be invasion by muslim terrorists and drug
        smugglers.
        ......

        I did have another thought. Although I disapprove very much the Mexican
        government's role in the informal
        invasion we are experiencing, and I do not rejoice in the present
        situation in the least, I do think we may be witnessing
        an example of what happens when enough individuals defy the law so that
        government enforcement breaks down.
        It reminds me of a more positive example when Yeltsin climbed on a tank
        and defied the Soviet army, to the cheers
        of the crowds. If only the American people as a whole had such gumption
        in demaning a return to constitutional government..

        ........................




        Jeff Palmer wrote:

        >> OK, several have given their opinions on the MinuteMen, so let's get
        > on to strategy;
        >
        >> 1) Tancredo talks like he would like to ride this issue into the
        > Whitehouse. Would the RLC endorse him?
        >
        > In a word, HELLNO!
        >
        >> 4) Libertarians believe in open borders; maybe we don't even have a
        > philosophical leg to stand on. You decide.
        >
        > Liberty, including freedom of movement, is always the correct
        > "philosophical leg". However, given our lack of unanimity on this
        > issue, we should choose to avoid focusing on this issue altogether.
        >
        > Jeff Palmer - jap@...
        > * * *
        > Quote of the Week: “Our government has kept us in a perpetual state
        > of fear - kept us in a continuous stampede of patriotic fervor - with
        > the cry of grave national emergency. Always there has been some
        > terrible evil at home or some monstrous foreign power that was going
        > to gobble us up if we did not blindly rally behind it.” -- Gen.
        > Douglas MacArthur
        >
        >
        > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
        > *Yahoo! Groups Links*
        >
        > * To visit your group on the web, go to:
        > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RLC-Action/
        >
        > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        > RLC-Action-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        > <mailto:RLC-Action-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
        >
        > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
        > Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
        >
        >
        >
        > --
        > No virus found in this outgoing message.
        > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
        > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.7 - Release Date: 4/12/2005
        >
      • DGHarrison
        It is good to think in terms of liberty, but I think we really must avoid utopian concepts of liberty. If America were to enact every conceivable libertarian
        Message 3 of 27 , Apr 12, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          It is good to think in terms of liberty, but I think we really must avoid utopian concepts of liberty. If America were to enact every conceivable libertarian principle across the board, there is no guarantee that anyone else in the world would play by our rules. In fact, we know the rest of the world will not play by our rules. They prove it daily. And any utopian shift to open borders, etc., will have the hordes taking advantage of us in new ways. The destructive waves of Huns and Khans that swept across Europe and Asia depended upon "civilization" to drop its guard. "Hey, look at us! We're civilized. We don't need no stinking broad swords. Let us pound our weapons into ploughs and reap the dividends of peace throughout the land!" There were many "peace dividends" throughout human history, and all were spent badly, at the cost of the civilizations themselves. Today, we only read about great civilizations from the dusty archaeological relics that were not destroyed by the hordes. I think we're stuck in guarded liberty, or we have no liberty at all. Ding ... dong ... is everyone awake now?

          Those who still think open borders are such a great idea, let's say you leave your houses and vehicles unlocked from now on. Next time you have a wedding feast, or a barbecue, or an open bar for your job promotion, just put an announcement in the paper telling everyone that you won't be checking the guest list or invitations. Let me know how that works out for ya.

          Doug Harrison
          Minnesota

          John Pankratz wrote:
          Speaking of engineering,
          
          It should be obvious to all that you do not independently change one 
          variable in a complex system without necessarily changing
          numerous dependent variables.  Changing one variable inevitably 
          introduces instability that results in the system settling
          down to a new state with many other factors having changed as well.
          
          If we allow freedom at our borders we also have to do away with the 
          welfare state, end the so-called "war on drugs"
           and stop interfering with the affairs of other sovereign nations (in 
          other words stop making enemies.)
          
          All the above are libertarian principles. The libertarian philosophy is 
          of a single piece. You cannot implement part of it
          without implementing all of it. To do otherwise is to force  instability 
          and cause other, undesireable changes,
          not the least of which would be invasion by muslim terrorists and drug 
          smugglers.
          ......
          
          I did have another thought. Although I disapprove very much the Mexican 
          government's role in the informal
          invasion we are experiencing, and I do not rejoice in the present 
          situation in the least, I do think we may be witnessing
          an example of what happens when enough individuals defy the law so that 
          government enforcement breaks down.
          It reminds me of a more positive example when Yeltsin climbed on a tank 
          and defied the Soviet army, to the cheers
          of the crowds.  If only the American people as a whole had such gumption 
          in demaning a return to constitutional government..
          
          ........................
          
          
          
          
          Jeff Palmer wrote:
          
            
          OK, several have given their opinions on the MinuteMen, so let's get 
                
          on to strategy; 
           
              
          1) Tancredo talks like he would like to ride this issue into the 
                
          Whitehouse.  Would the RLC endorse him? 
           
          In a word, HELLNO!
           
              
          4) Libertarians believe in open borders; maybe we don't even have a 
                
          philosophical leg to stand on.  You decide. 
           
          Liberty, including freedom of movement, is always the correct 
          "philosophical leg".  However, given our lack of unanimity on this 
          issue, we should choose to avoid focusing on this issue altogether.
          
          Jeff Palmer - jap@...
           * * *
          Quote of the Week:  “Our government has kept us in a perpetual state 
          of fear - kept us in a continuous stampede of patriotic fervor - with 
          the cry of grave national emergency.  Always there has been some 
          terrible evil at home or some monstrous foreign power that was going 
          to gobble us up if we did not blindly rally behind it.” -- Gen. 
          Douglas MacArthur
          
          
          ------------------------------------------------------------------------
          *Yahoo! Groups Links*
          
              * To visit your group on the web, go to:
                http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RLC-Action/
                 
              * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                RLC-Action-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                <mailto:RLC-Action-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
                 
              * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
                Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
          
          
          
          --
          No virus found in this outgoing message.
          Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
          Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.7 - Release Date: 4/12/2005
          
              
          
          
          ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
          DonorsChoose. A simple way to provide underprivileged children resources 
          often lacking in public schools. Fund a student project in NYC/NC today!
          http://us.click.yahoo.com/EHLuJD/.WnJAA/cUmLAA/PdSolB/TM
          --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 
          
           
          Yahoo! Groups Links
          
          <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
              http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RLC-Action/
          
          <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              RLC-Action-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
          
          <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
              http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
           
          
          
          
          
            
        • blood_pasta
          Why is it that the freedom of movement applies only collectively, but not individually? That is, why is it I have the right to live in other countries
          Message 4 of 27 , Apr 12, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            Why is it that the "freedom of movement" applies only collectively,
            but not individually?

            That is, why is it I have the right to live in other countries
            without their permission, but not the right to pitch a tent in other
            peoples' backyards without permission?

            Realistically, there's no ethically salient libertarian position on
            immigration. Either we foist open borders upon the masses (against
            their will) and allow them to be overrun with all the problems that
            immigrants bring with them from the Third World, or we seal the
            borders so that business has to move for cheap labor.

            For the record, I don't consider myself a libertarian, but I do
            consider myself a libertarian-leaning conservative. One of my big
            beefs with the LP is that it opposes the UN because it liquidates the
            rights of nations, but then the LP goes on to support various other
            institutions that liquidate the rights of nations, such as open
            borders. Why have borders at all if we're just going to knock them
            down?

            Open borders is a big political loser for the LP. The RLC shouldn't
            touch that issue with a twenty foot pole. I can say with relatively
            certainty that immigration can be in 2008 what welfare reform was in
            1992 -- whoever runs farthest to the right can win.

            --- In RLC-Action@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Palmer" <jap@h...> wrote:
            > > OK, several have given their opinions on the MinuteMen, so let's
            get on to
            > strategy;
            >
            > > 1) Tancredo talks like he would like to ride this issue into the
            > Whitehouse. Would the RLC endorse him?
            >
            > In a word, HELLNO!
            >
            > > 4) Libertarians believe in open borders; maybe we don't even have
            a
            > philosophical leg to stand on. You decide.
            >
            > Liberty, including freedom of movement, is always the
            correct "philosophical
            > leg". However, given our lack of unanimity on this issue, we
            should choose
            > to avoid focusing on this issue altogether.
            > Jeff Palmer - jap@h...
            > * * *
            > Quote of the Week: "Our government has kept us in a perpetual
            state of fear
            > - kept us in a continuous stampede of patriotic fervor - with the
            cry of
            > grave national emergency. Always there has been some terrible evil
            at home
            > or some monstrous foreign power that was going to gobble us up if
            we did not
            > blindly rally behind it." -- Gen. Douglas MacArthur
            >
            >
            > --
            > No virus found in this outgoing message.
            > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
            > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.7 - Release Date: 4/12/2005
          • Guy McLendon
            FYI ... to whomever it may concern ... my guess is there s more than a 50% chance the LP will water down their 100% open borders plank in 2006 ... to
            Message 5 of 27 , Apr 12, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              FYI ... to whomever it may concern ... my guess is there's more than a 50% chance the LP will water down their 100% open borders plank in 2006 ... to acknowledge Constitutional authorization for border security, and validity of reason to exercise this authority for purposes of protecting public health & national security.
               
              ----- Original Message -----
              Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 12:49 PM
              Subject: Re: [RLC-Action] Mechanical Engineering - Good, Good, Good ... Good Vibrations

              OK, several have given their opinions on the MinuteMen, so let's get on to strategy;
               
              1) Tancredo talks like he would like to ride this issue into the Whitehouse.  Would the RLC endorse him?
              2) Every state has this problem.  Let's get to networking with groups that are working on this issue in our states.
              3) Democrats and Republicans don't seem able to handle this issue.  Can the RLC forge new ground here?
              4) Libertarians believe in open borders; maybe we don't even have a philosophical leg to stand on.  You decide.
               
              But at least you have to start thinking in these terms.  Guy's first email talked about issues that resonate with a broad swath of the public.  This might not be something that we can use, but the issue is becoming red hot.  It's starting to resonate, and ringing like a bell.
               
              Chuck Seberg 
            • Guy McLendon
              John, I just read an article titled Critique of Libertarianism ... written by a Green Party activist. The article is pretty convincing on the point that
              Message 6 of 27 , Apr 12, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                John,

                I just read an article titled "Critique of Libertarianism" ... written by a
                Green Party activist. The article is pretty convincing on the point that
                it's not really possible to fully implement a fully "free society" ... just
                as it's thermodynamically impossible to build an ideal "Carnot Engine".
                That's why the Constitution, in its wisdom, has some non-libertarian
                features.

                I very much like your point about lack of independence between variables in
                complex systems ... such ideas are very familar to process control
                engineers, and probably to physicians. Sadly ... the professionals who
                operate the government are, I'm guessing, less attuned to such complex
                interactions.

                Guy

                ----- Original Message -----
                From: "John Pankratz" <pankratz@...>
                To: <RLC-Action@yahoogroups.com>
                Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 2:19 PM
                Subject: Re: [RLC-Action] Mechanical Engineering - Good, Good, Good ... Good
                Vibrations


                >
                > Speaking of engineering,
                >
                > It should be obvious to all that you do not independently change one
                > variable in a complex system without necessarily changing
                > numerous dependent variables. Changing one variable inevitably
                > introduces instability that results in the system settling
                > down to a new state with many other factors having changed as well.
                >
                > If we allow freedom at our borders we also have to do away with the
                > welfare state, end the so-called "war on drugs"
                > and stop interfering with the affairs of other sovereign nations (in
                > other words stop making enemies.)
              • F Worley
                I don t believe in open boarders. Never have. As you said other elements of libertarianism must be in place and you rightly point out they are not. However,
                Message 7 of 27 , Apr 12, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  I don't believe in open boarders.  Never have.  As you said other elements of libertarianism must be in place and you rightly point out they are not.
                   
                  However, I cannot support open borders unless other nations do the same.  The Mexico issue is truly a perfect example of the world's hipocrasy.  America is held to one standard and the rest of the world to another.
                   
                  Frank

                  John Pankratz <pankratz@...> wrote:

                  Speaking of engineering,

                  It should be obvious to all that you do not independently change one
                  variable in a complex system without necessarily changing
                  numerous dependent variables. Changing one variable inevitably
                  introduces instability that results in the system settling
                  down to a new state with many other factors having changed as well.

                  If we allow freedom at our borders we also have to do away with the
                  welfare state, end the so-called "war on drugs"
                  and stop interfering with the affairs of other sovereign nations (in
                  other words stop making enemies.)

                  All the above are libertarian principles. The libertarian philosophy is
                  of a single piece. You cannot implement part of it
                  without implementing all of it. To do otherwise is to force instability
                  and cause other, undesireable changes,
                  not the least of which would be invasion by muslim terrorists and drug
                  smugglers.
                  ......

                  I did have another thought. Although I disapprove very much the Mexican
                  government's role in the informal
                  invasion we are experiencing, and I do not rejoice in the present
                  situation in the least, I do think we may be witnessing
                  an example of what happens when enough individuals defy the law so that
                  government enforcement breaks down.
                  It reminds me of a more positive example when Yeltsin climbed on a tank
                  and defied the Soviet army, to the cheers
                  of the crowds. If only the American people as a whole had such gumption
                  in demaning a return to constitutional government..

                  ........................




                  Jeff Palmer wrote:

                  >> OK, several have given their opinions on the MinuteMen, so let's get
                  > on to strategy;
                  >
                  >> 1) Tancredo talks like he would like to ride this issue into the
                  > Whitehouse. Would the RLC endorse him?
                  >
                  > In a word, HELLNO!
                  >
                  >> 4) Libertarians believe in open borders; maybe we don't even have a
                  > philosophical leg to stand on. You decide.
                  >
                  > Liberty, including freedom of movement, is always the correct
                  > "philosophical leg". However, given our lack of unanimity on this
                  > issue, we should choose to avoid focusing on this issue altogether.
                  >
                  > Jeff Palmer - jap@...
                  > * * *
                  > Quote of the Week: �Our government has kept us in a perpetual state
                  > of fear - kept us in a continuous stampede of patriotic fervor - with
                  > the cry of grave national emergency. Always there has been some
                  > terrible evil at home or some monstrous foreign power that was going
                  > to gobble us up if we did not blindly rally behind it.� -- Gen.
                  > Douglas MacArthur
                  >
                  >
                  > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  > *Yahoo! Groups Links*
                  >
                  > * To visit your group on the web, go to:
                  > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RLC-Action/
                  >
                  > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                  > RLC-Action-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                  >
                  >
                  > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
                  > Service .
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > --
                  > No virus found in this outgoing message.
                  > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
                  > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.7 - Release Date: 4/12/2005
                  >



                  ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
                  DonorsChoose. A simple way to provide underprivileged children resources
                  often lacking in public schools. Fund a student project in NYC/NC today!
                  http://us.click.yahoo.com/EHLuJD/.WnJAA/cUmLAA/PdSolB/TM
                  --------------------------------------------------------------------~->


                  Yahoo! Groups Links

                  <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
                  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RLC-Action/

                  <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                  RLC-Action-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                  <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
                  http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




                • F Worley
                  If the LP would get a sane foriegn policy, borders included, I might actually consider rejoining them. No offense to my friends in the RLC but between budget
                  Message 8 of 27 , Apr 12, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    If the LP would get a sane foriegn policy, borders included, I might actually consider rejoining them.
                     
                    No offense to my friends in the RLC but between budget deficits, Terri Shiavo and other issues, I've just about had it with the GOP and the DEMS ain't getting my vote.
                     
                    But I digress, where do we stand on this issue of the Minute Men?
                     
                    Frank

                    Guy McLendon <guy@...> wrote:
                    FYI ... to whomever it may concern ... my guess is there's more than a 50% chance the LP will water down their 100% open borders plank in 2006 ... to acknowledge Constitutional authorization for border security, and validity of reason to exercise this authority for purposes of protecting public health & national security.
                     
                    ----- Original Message -----
                    Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 12:49 PM
                    Subject: Re: [RLC-Action] Mechanical Engineering - Good, Good, Good ... Good Vibrations

                    OK, several have given their opinions on the MinuteMen, so let's get on to strategy;
                     
                    1) Tancredo talks like he would like to ride this issue into the Whitehouse.  Would the RLC endorse him?
                    2) Every state has this problem.  Let's get to networking with groups that are working on this issue in our states.
                    3) Democrats and Republicans don't seem able to handle this issue.  Can the RLC forge new ground here?
                    4) Libertarians believe in open borders; maybe we don't even have a philosophical leg to stand on.  You decide.
                     
                    But at least you have to start thinking in these terms.  Guy's first email talked about issues that resonate with a broad swath of the public.  This might not be something that we can use, but the issue is becoming red hot.  It's starting to resonate, and ringing like a bell.
                     
                    Chuck Seberg 
                  • F Worley
                    Let me correct myself, I might not support open borders even if other nations did the same, I just would be more willing to consider it if that were the case
                    Message 9 of 27 , Apr 12, 2005
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Let me correct myself, I might not support open borders even if other nations did the same, I just would be more willing to consider it if that were the case and it isn't.
                       
                      Frank

                      F Worley <worley_f2003@...> wrote:
                      I don't believe in open boarders.  Never have.  As you said other elements of libertarianism must be in place and you rightly point out they are not.
                       
                      However, I cannot support open borders unless other nations do the same.  The Mexico issue is truly a perfect example of the world's hipocrasy.  America is held to one standard and the rest of the world to another.
                       
                      Frank

                      John Pankratz <pankratz@...> wrote:

                      Speaking of engineering,

                      It should be obvious to all that you do not independently change one
                      variable in a complex system without necessarily changing
                      numerous dependent variables. Changing one variable inevitably
                      introduces instability that results in the system settling
                      down to a new state with many other factors having changed as well.

                      If we allow freedom at our borders we also have to do away with the
                      welfare state, end the so-called "war on drugs"
                      and stop interfering with the affairs of other sovereign nations (in
                      other words stop making enemies.)

                      All the above are libertarian principles. The libertarian philosophy is
                      of a single piece. You cannot implement part of it
                      without implementing all of it. To do otherwise is to force instability
                      and cause other, undesireable changes,
                      not the least of which would be invasion by muslim terrorists and drug
                      smugglers.
                      ......

                      I did have another thought. Although I disapprove very much the Mexican
                      government's role in the informal
                      invasion we are experiencing, and I do not rejoice in the present
                      situation in the least, I do think we may be witnessing
                      an example of what happens when enough individuals defy the law so that
                      government enforcement breaks down.
                      It reminds me of a more positive example when Yeltsin climbed on a tank
                      and defied the Soviet army, to the cheers
                      of the crowds. If only the American people as a whole had such gumption
                      in demaning a return to constitutional government..

                      ........................




                      Jeff Palmer wrote:

                      >> OK, several have given their opinions on the MinuteMen, so let's get
                      > on to strategy;
                      >
                      >> 1) Tancredo talks like he would like to ride this issue into the
                      > Whitehouse. Would the RLC endorse him?
                      >
                      > In a word, HELLNO!
                      >
                      >> 4) Libertarians believe in open borders; maybe we don't even have a
                      > philosophical leg to stand on. You decide.
                      >
                      > Liberty, including freedom of movement, is always the correct
                      > "philosophical leg". However, given our lack of unanimity on this
                      > issue, we should choose to avoid focusing on this issue altogether.
                      >
                      > Jeff Palmer - jap@...
                      > * * *
                      > Quote of the Week: �Our government has kept us in a perpetual state
                      > of fear - kept us in a continuous stampede of patriotic fervor - with
                      > the cry of grave national emergency. Always there has been some
                      > terrible evil at home or some monstrous foreign power that was going
                      > to gobble us up if we did not blindly rally behind it.� -- Gen.
                      > Douglas MacArthur
                      >
                      >
                      > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      > *Yahoo! Groups Links*
                      >
                      > * To visit your group on the web, go to:
                      > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RLC-Action/
                      >
                      > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                      > RLC-Action-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                      >
                      >
                      > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
                      > Service .
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > --
                      > No virus found in this outgoing message.
                      > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
                      > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.7 - Release Date: 4/12/2005
                      >



                      ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
                      DonorsChoose. A simple way to provide underprivileged children resources
                      often lacking in public schools. Fund a student project in NYC/NC today!
                      http://us.click.yahoo.com/EHLuJD/.WnJAA/cUmLAA/PdSolB/TM
                      --------------------------------------------------------------------~->


                      Yahoo! Groups Links

                      <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
                      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RLC-Action/

                      <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                      RLC-Action-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                      <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
                      http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




                    • Alan R. Weiss
                      Study Karl Rove, and attack him the way he has attacked liberty. One of Karl s main tactics, used successful with Bush campaigns in Texas and then again in the
                      Message 10 of 27 , Apr 13, 2005
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Study Karl Rove, and attack him the way he has
                        attacked liberty.

                        One of Karl's main tactics, used successful with Bush
                        campaigns in Texas and then again in the Bush for
                        President bids, was to focus on a very small number of
                        issues, and hammer away on those. Another tactic was
                        to attack the STRENGTH of the other guy - not their
                        weaknesses. Attack McCain on his support for Vietnam
                        vets. Attack Kerry for his war record. Attack Ann
                        Richards for her inclusion of gays into society. Turn
                        the strength to sawdust, so to speak.

                        It sems to me the linchpin is Karl Rove, and NOT the
                        "neo-cons" (many are being sidelined ... Wolfowitz to
                        the World Bank is an example. The Neo-cons were never
                        "in control", they were just the proxy for Rove and
                        Bush so that attention was paid to them).

                        Attack Rove. The very basis of the Republican Party
                        is at stake. The memory of Goldwater is fading with
                        time. We must not let that fade. Ron Paul is getting
                        older, bless him, and we need to "step on the gas" and
                        acceleate the battle. Time is growing short.

                        On immigration: the Zetas in Nuevo Laredo are a
                        paramilitary operation kidnapping Americans from
                        Laredo who visit Mexico. Immigration is a key
                        weakness in the Bush-Rove strategy, a linchpin.
                        Attacking them on this is smart politics, especially
                        since Bush-Rove is cultivating immigrants as voters.
                        However, polls show that Mexican-Americans and
                        Hispanics in general who are citizens are - surprise!
                        - anti-immigration!

                        Libertarians are for the free-flow of individuals.
                        Immigrants who come to the USA to work and who value
                        the Bill of Rights are to be applauded. But just as
                        we have NO love or sympathy for Americans who would
                        abort the Bill of Rights, neither should we be blinded
                        to immigrants who have no idea what the Bill of Rights
                        means. Our criteria is this: are you a 'new real
                        American', fully briefed on liberty and cherishing
                        thereof, or are you just another problem?

                        Alan

                        --- Guy McLendon <guy@...> wrote:

                        > Everyone,
                        >
                        > There's a mathematical idea that one studies in
                        > mechanical engineering that
                        > seems applicable to social reform: vibrations.
                        >
                        > In order to make social change occur, a large
                        > amplitude must exist <e.g.,
                        > large public outcry over some injustice(s)>
                        >
                        > To gain the large amplitude, one must apply a
                        > "forcing function" <e.g.,
                        > message conveyed over broadcast media> to the system
                        > <e.g., public opinion>
                        > being stimulated. That forcing function must
                        > stimulate the system's natural
                        > frequency <an issue that resonates> ... in order to
                        > build the large
                        > amplitude. When you apply a forcing function that
                        > coincides with a system's
                        > natural frequency, the amplitude builds to maximum
                        > ...
                        >
                        > Example: a car is stuck in a pot hole, and a little
                        > old man attempts to
                        > push the car out. One big heave, a single push on
                        > the bumper, fails to push
                        > the car out. However, if the little old man "rocks"
                        > the car ... giving a
                        > little push, waiting for the car to recoil in the
                        > pothole ... give another
                        > little push ... let the car recoil further ... tire
                        > in the pothole ... give
                        > another little push ... Only then can the little old
                        > man rock the car out of
                        > the pot hole. The timing of the old man's push must
                        > coincide with the
                        > natural frequency of the pothole's geometry.
                        >
                        > What does that have to do with WTPC and the overall
                        > freedom-movement?
                        >
                        > Suppose WTPC focuses only upon the election reform
                        > issue ... that issue will
                        > certainly resonate with anyone who's ever spend
                        > hours petitioning to get a
                        > non-incumbent party on the ballot. However, Joe
                        > Six-pack will probably
                        > respond with a blank stare ... My point? The target
                        > audience is far too
                        > small to bring a legislative majority.
                        >
                        > Ever heard of targeted marketing?
                        >
                        > Now, suppose we focus on the war-on-drugs ... that
                        > certainly resonates with
                        > anyone who's ever been unjustly jailed for drug
                        > usage. However, many of
                        > those folks have been stripped of the right to vote
                        > <not a coincidence, I'm
                        > sure>. Seems like a "damped system" if the output
                        > we're looking for is to
                        > vote in an election ... Even if we stimulate those
                        > citizens who've been
                        > released from unjust imprisonment, their ability to
                        > vote is being stymied.
                        > The point there is that the "vote" response of such
                        > folks is being dampened.
                        > However, as a new friend of mine educated me ...
                        > folks who have been
                        > released from prison can very much react to "lobby"
                        > response ... even
                        > thought their "vote" response is stymied.
                        >
                        > <PS ... as an aside ... when/if freedom-movement
                        > gains power, we should
                        > consider restoration of the right to vote to
                        > convicts who've "paid their
                        > due" to society.>
                        >
                        > In order to win a legislative majority on many
                        > issues that need attention, a
                        > majority of pro-freedom office-holders must first be
                        > holding office. I'm
                        > thinking the freedom movement's first order of
                        > business is to identify those
                        > issues that can be leveraged to gain a legislative
                        > majority.
                        >
                        > Suppose we focus on all those folks who were lied to
                        > about why the US went
                        > to war in Iraq, and have sons, daughters, friends or
                        > neighbors who've been
                        > wounded or killed to fight in this undeclared war
                        > .... Those folks vote,
                        > they've not had their right to vote unjustly
                        > stripped away, and there's a
                        > bunch of them.
                        >
                        > [PS ... as an aside ... it sickens me to have an
                        > exchange with a citizen
                        > whose child is fighting in the Middle East, and I
                        > convey that I believe that
                        > child is fighting for purposes other than for
                        > "freedom". It's got to be
                        > painful for a parent of a child fighting there to
                        > consider their child may
                        > lose their life for some other reason.]
                        >
                        > "Violation of the US Constitution" as an issue
                        > certainly SHOULD have broad
                        > appeal ... and, it may depending upon how the
                        > packaged is wrapped. However,
                        > just by itself, Joe Six-pack is probably not gonna
                        > have the government's
                        > psy-op brainwash undone merely by hearing academic
                        > constitutional
                        > clarifications. Somehow, we need to wrap the
                        > Constitution-topic in an
                        > emotional wrapper in order for it to resonate.
                        >
                        > A winning campaign needs to develop a series of
                        > "one-two punches" [clich�
                        > from boxing sport] ... For example, maybe the
                        > war-on-drugs issue won't win
                        > electoral success at the ballot box. However, a
                        > large block of citizens who
                        > spent time unjustly for drug possession charges may
                        > somehow rally/lobby
                        > around some subset of the "Constitution topic" ...
                        > in a way that would
                        > elicit a voting response from the countless Joe
                        > Six-pack's out there ...
                        >
                        > The neo-cons have a deadly grip on American politics
                        > ... somehow, the chosen
                        > "Constitution-topic" probably needs to communicate
                        > to the evangelical
                        > movement some aspect about how cherished ideals have
                        > been betrayed by the
                        > neo-cons. For instance, many citizens have lost
                        > friends, or children of
                        > friends, to an undeclared war in Iraq. It's pretty
                        > clear the Congress never
                        > had the power to delegate the responsibility to
                        > declare war to the
                        > President, and yet they did. If we can somehow turn
                        > evangelical Christian
                        > sentiment into a massive feeling of indignation over
                        > having been betrayed,
                        > then we may build the type of amplitude that I'm
                        > attempting to describe.
                        >
                        > Perhaps, if the national outcry *** over the loss of
                        > ~2000 young boys &
                        > girls together with maybe 10,000 wounded *** results
                        > in a large-amplitude,
                        > tsunami-sized backlash that allows the citizenry to
                        > regain control of our
                        > government ... then, perhaps those kids may have not
                        > lost their lives in
                        > vain ... perhaps, only then, will their lives really
                        > have been lost in the
                        > cause of freedom.
                        >
                        > In all the above, do the ideas suggest I'm drinking
                        > Drano, or just whistling
                        > Dixie?
                        >
                        > Respectfully yours,
                        > Guy McLendon
                        > www.libertycoalition.us
                        >
                        > PS ... I realize the polls there at WTPC are not
                        > totally final, but I'm
                        > very glad the vote is heavily favoring this:
                        > cooperate with existing
                        > freedom-movement organizations, and do not attempt
                        > to create yet another 3rd
                        > party. While WTPC works to help all
                        > freedom-movement organizations, you
                        > have my full support. I'm looking forward to seeing
                        > an update to the
                        > group's Yahoo Group description.
                        >
                        >
                        >




                        __________________________________
                        Do you Yahoo!?
                        Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
                        http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
                      • Ray Holtorf
                        I did a non-scientific poll on border security within on of our RLC groups not too long ago and found out securing our borders - in opposition to traditional
                        Message 11 of 27 , Apr 13, 2005
                        • 0 Attachment
                          I did a non-scientific poll on border security within
                          on of our RLC groups not too long ago and found out
                          securing our borders - in opposition to traditional
                          libertarian dogma - was VERY popular. FORTUNATELY we
                          are not a democratic organization, and our adherence
                          to the principle of forwarding libertarianism within
                          the Republican Party SHOULD prevent us from making
                          securing our borders a priority issue - no matter how
                          much I personally agree!

                          Tancredo seems to believe in operating the government
                          through religious tenets rather than Constitutionally
                          limited ones. Personally, I don't think he is an
                          option - I think his liberty index rating is very poor
                          on social issues, and not all that great on economic.

                          My view on this as a Presidential issue in '08 is that
                          there will be a MUCH larger unwashed and disaffected
                          middle in the '08 election. The parties will move even
                          farther left and right to secure their base, and what
                          happens in the middle could be DAMN interesting.

                          Ray


                          --- Chuck Seberg <pusherprop3@...> wrote:
                          > OK, several have given their opinions on the
                          > MinuteMen, so let's get on to strategy;
                          >
                          > 1) Tancredo talks like he would like to ride this
                          > issue into the Whitehouse. Would the RLC endorse
                          > him?
                          > 2) Every state has this problem. Let's get to
                          > networking with groups that are working on this
                          > issue in our states.
                          > 3) Democrats and Republicans don't seem able to
                          > handle this issue. Can the RLC forge new ground
                          > here?
                          > 4) Libertarians believe in open borders; maybe we
                          > don't even have a philosophical leg to stand on.
                          > You decide.
                          >
                          > But at least you have to start thinking in these
                          > terms. Guy's first email talked about issues that
                          > resonate with a broad swath of the public. This
                          > might not be something that we can use, but the
                          > issue is becoming red hot. It's starting to
                          > resonate, and ringing like a bell.
                          >
                          > Chuck Seberg

                          Ray HoltorfDirector, National Board, Republican Liberty Caucus (www.rlc.org)Ray@.../Ray"Promoters of big government programs should note that there are no famous quotes from brilliant people extolling increasing the size or power of government."



                          __________________________________
                          Do you Yahoo!?
                          Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
                          http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
                        • bill Jambura
                          Frank, My sentiments exactly about the LP. The Republicans are the equal opposites of the Democrats, but no less damaging to our Constitution, liberty and
                          Message 12 of 27 , Apr 13, 2005
                          • 0 Attachment

                            Frank,

                             

                            My sentiments exactly about the LP.  The Republicans are the equal opposites of the Democrats, but no less damaging to our Constitution, liberty and freedoms. 

                             

                            In this dialogue of e-mails I, and many of you, may have received the e-mail cautioning us against looking like we hate Hispanics if we defend our borders.  That is an excellent diversion.  Here's an answer to the bigotry vs. national sovereignty debate.

                             

                            The best way to defend our border without being bigots is to do what we’ve done all over the world—land mines. 

                             

                            1. We’ve put them on every other continent of our world with great success—because they are an extremely effective perimeter defense. 
                            2. They don't require feeding or a massive payroll to manage them.  Nor can they be bribed.
                            3. They are nondiscriminatory—they don't care about race, religion, ethnic background, sexual orientation, and whatever other bemoanings bleeding heart liberals can come up with.  They just don't like being stepped on.
                            4. They will not harm you unless you step on them.  And you have to go out of your way to step on them.  It’s freedom of choice.   If you don’t want to get blown up, don’t go there; or you can choose to achieve upward mobility on a one-time trip.
                            5. And, to be a good neighbor, let’s tell Mr. Fox to update his illegal immigration pamphlet so that his swarming hoards know that they may become commingled with desert dirt if they try to sneak across our borders and dance in our mine fields.
                            6.  And, to be a good neighbor, we can put up signs (in all the romance languages of course) to identify the first several miles of American soil along the Mexican border as a: “NO GO ZONE—Recommend you use a controlled entry point for your safe crossing”. 
                             
                            On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 16:19:18 -0700 (PDT) F Worley <> writes:
                            If the LP would get a sane foriegn policy, borders included, I might actually consider rejoining them.
                             
                            No offense to my friends in the RLC but between budget deficits, Terri Shiavo and other issues, I've just about had it with the GOP and the DEMS ain't getting my vote.
                             
                            But I digress, where do we stand on this issue of the Minute Men?
                             
                            Frank

                            Guy McLendon <guy@...> wrote:
                            FYI ... to whomever it may concern ... my guess is there's more than a 50% chance the LP will water down their 100% open borders plank in 2006 ... to acknowledge Constitutional authorization for border security, and validity of reason to exercise this authority for purposes of protecting public health & national security.
                             
                            ----- Original Message -----
                            Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 12:49 PM
                            Subject: Re: [RLC-Action] Mechanical Engineering - Good, Good, Good ... Good Vibrations

                            OK, several have given their opinions on the MinuteMen, so let's get on to strategy;
                             
                            1) Tancredo talks like he would like to ride this issue into the Whitehouse.  Would the RLC endorse him?
                            2) Every state has this problem.  Let's get to networking with groups that are working on this issue in our states.
                            3) Democrats and Republicans don't seem able to handle this issue.  Can the RLC forge new ground here?
                            4) Libertarians believe in open borders; maybe we don't even have a philosophical leg to stand on.  You decide.
                             
                            But at least you have to start thinking in these terms.  Guy's first email talked about issues that resonate with a broad swath of the public.  This might not be something that we can use, but the issue is becoming red hot.  It's starting to resonate, and ringing like a bell.
                             
                            Chuck Seberg 
                             
                          • F Worley
                            Actually Bill, I was the one that cautioned about the race issue. It was not intended as a diversion in anyway, just a caution as I work it the business of
                            Message 13 of 27 , Apr 13, 2005
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Actually Bill,
                               
                              I was the one that cautioned about the race issue.  It was not intended as a diversion in anyway, just a caution as I work it the business of crafting messages and can see how easily a message can be misconstrured.  (I've made the mistake myself a number of times).
                               
                              In our minds, the landmine idea makes perfect sense.  A simple matter of choice.  But we have to remember that the rest of the world, and the rest of the nation, does not think like we do.
                               
                              If we placed landmines it would kill innocent children who have not freely chosen to cross the boarder, and therefore, it would not accomplish our aim.
                               
                              Patroling the boarders is the right idea, but we as a group, should also make our voices heard.  An easy way to do that is to hammer away at the fact the policies of the Mexican government towards illegal aliens, US visitors and others are inconsistant with their demands on the U.S.
                               
                              We are a nation of immigrants and should continue to welcome those, LOUDLY that come legally, and denounce those who do not, and the governments that sponsor them.
                               
                              Frank Worley


                              bill Jambura <jambura@...> wrote:

                              Frank,

                               

                              My sentiments exactly about the LP.  The Republicans are the equal opposites of the Democrats, but no less damaging to our Constitution, liberty and freedoms. 

                               

                              In this dialogue of e-mails I, and many of you, may have received the e-mail cautioning us against looking like we hate Hispanics if we defend our borders.  That is an excellent diversion.  Here's an answer to the bigotry vs. national sovereignty debate.

                               

                              The best way to defend our border without being bigots is to do what we�ve done all over the world�land mines. 

                               

                              1. We�ve put them on every other continent of our world with great success�because they are an extremely effective perimeter defense. 
                              2. They don't require feeding or a massive payroll to manage them.  Nor can they be bribed.
                              3. They are nondiscriminatory�they don't care about race, religion, ethnic background, sexual orientation, and whatever other bemoanings bleeding heart liberals can come up with.  They just don't like being stepped on.
                              4. They will not harm you unless you step on them.  And you have to go out of your way to step on them.  It�s freedom of choice.   If you don�t want to get blown up, don�t go there; or you can choose to achieve upward mobility on a one-time trip.
                              5. And, to be a good neighbor, let�s tell Mr. Fox to update his illegal immigration pamphlet so that his swarming hoards know that they may become commingled with desert dirt if they try to sneak across our borders and dance in our mine fields.
                              6.  And, to be a good neighbor, we can put up signs (in all the romance languages of course) to identify the first several miles of American soil along the Mexican border as a: �NO GO ZONE�Recommend you use a controlled entry point for your safe crossing�. 
                               
                              On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 16:19:18 -0700 (PDT) F Worley <> writes:
                              If the LP would get a sane foriegn policy, borders included, I might actually consider rejoining them.
                               
                              No offense to my friends in the RLC but between budget deficits, Terri Shiavo and other issues, I've just about had it with the GOP and the DEMS ain't getting my vote.
                               
                              But I digress, where do we stand on this issue of the Minute Men?
                               
                              Frank

                              Guy McLendon <guy@...> wrote:
                              FYI ... to whomever it may concern ... my guess is there's more than a 50% chance the LP will water down their 100% open borders plank in 2006 ... to acknowledge Constitutional authorization for border security, and validity of reason to exercise this authority for purposes of protecting public health & national security.
                               
                              ----- Original Message -----
                              Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 12:49 PM
                              Subject: Re: [RLC-Action] Mechanical Engineering - Good, Good, Good ... Good Vibrations

                              OK, several have given their opinions on the MinuteMen, so let's get on to strategy;
                               
                              1) Tancredo talks like he would like to ride this issue into the Whitehouse.  Would the RLC endorse him?
                              2) Every state has this problem.  Let's get to networking with groups that are working on this issue in our states.
                              3) Democrats and Republicans don't seem able to handle this issue.  Can the RLC forge new ground here?
                              4) Libertarians believe in open borders; maybe we don't even have a philosophical leg to stand on.  You decide.
                               
                              But at least you have to start thinking in these terms.  Guy's first email talked about issues that resonate with a broad swath of the public.  This might not be something that we can use, but the issue is becoming red hot.  It's starting to resonate, and ringing like a bell.
                               
                              Chuck Seberg 
                               
                            • Jeff Palmer
                              This a topic is better suited for RLC-Discuss. Jeff Palmer - jap@highstream.net * * * Quote of the Week: “Washington is a city of southern efficiency and
                              Message 14 of 27 , Apr 13, 2005
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Message
                                This a topic is better suited for RLC-Discuss.

                                Jeff Palmer - jap@...
                                 * * *
                                Quote of the Week:  “Washington is a city of southern efficiency and northern charm.” -- John F. Kennedy 

                                -----Original Message-----
                                From: F Worley [mailto:worley_f2003@...]
                                Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2005 8:03 PM
                                To: bill Jambura; sfgresh@...; rex2wheeler@...; jeff@...; indmtn@...; Republican-Liberty@...; westmiller@...; rlc@...; pusherprop3@...; alanrweiss78726@...; blood_pasta@...
                                Cc: RLC-Action@yahoogroups.com
                                Subject: Re: [RLC-Action] Mechanical Engineering - Good, Good, Good ... Good Vibrations

                                Actually Bill, 

                                I was the one that cautioned about the race issue.  It was not intended as a diversion in anyway, just a caution as I work it the business of crafting messages and can see how easily a message can be misconstrured.  (I've made the mistake myself a number of times). 

                                In our minds, the landmine idea makes perfect sense.  A simple matter of choice.  But we have to remember that the rest of the world, and the rest of the nation, does not think like we do. 

                                If we placed landmines it would kill innocent children who have not freely chosen to cross the boarder, and therefore, it would not accomplish our aim. 

                                Patroling the boarders is the right idea, but we as a group, should also make our voices heard.  An easy way to do that is to hammer away at the fact the policies of the Mexican government towards illegal aliens, US visitors and others are inconsistant with their demands on the U.S. 

                                We are a nation of immigrants and should continue to welcome those, LOUDLY that come legally, and denounce those who do not, and the governments that sponsor them. 

                                Frank Worley


                                --
                                No virus found in this outgoing message.
                                Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
                                Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.7 - Release Date: 4/12/2005

                              • bill Jambura
                                Frank, The first thing any nation does whether they are at peace, and especially when they are at war, is to secure their borders. America is the first nation
                                Message 15 of 27 , Apr 14, 2005
                                • 0 Attachment

                                  Frank,

                                   

                                  The first thing any nation does whether they are at peace, and especially when they are at war, is to secure their borders.  

                                   

                                  America is the first nation in history that’s not doing that!  Like it or not, America is deep into two global (world) wars simultaneously—the WW on Terror and the WW on Drugs—where it’s been established that international trafficking in illegal drugs is a major funding source for terrorists.

                                   

                                  In any war, innocent civilians suffer much greater loses than the armed combatants. It’s the tragedy of war.  That’s why our Constitution has very strict procedures for how we can go to as a nation.  How our elected officials usurped our Constitution to get us into these good sounding, aimless wars is different debate worth having, but for now, we’re in those world wars nonetheless.  And also, that’s why the Powel Doctrine opposed nation building.  Instead, he called for clearly defined missions (void of mission creep) with a well defined victory criteria and exist strategy.

                                   

                                  Let’s compare Iraq to America’s southern border. 

                                   

                                  First, Iraq: It’s estimated that over 100,000 innocent Iraqi civilians were killed thus far—some in their homes, others at their businesses or on the streets in the cross fire.  They didn’t go out of their way to march cross an international border to get killed.  They simply suffered the consequence of being born in the wrong place at the wrong time.

                                     

                                  Now as for America’s southern border: If we secured it with mines (on our side only), only international criminals would go out of their way to cross an international border to dance through a minefield.  In every war, civilians flee away from the front line of battle; they don’t march into it.  We have an international right to secure our borders. Until they are secure, we’ll never know who is coming across our borders to do us harm, and everyone who crosses our borders illegally is by definition a criminal. That’s why every nation in the world (except us, for some reason) is serious about securing their border.

                                   

                                  Bill
                                   
                                  On Wed, 13 Apr 2005 17:02:32 -0700 (PDT) F Worley <worley_f2003@...> writes:
                                  Actually Bill,
                                   
                                  I was the one that cautioned about the race issue.  It was not intended as a diversion in anyway, just a caution as I work it the business of crafting messages and can see how easily a message can be misconstrured.  (I've made the mistake myself a number of times).
                                   
                                  In our minds, the landmine idea makes perfect sense.  A simple matter of choice.  But we have to remember that the rest of the world, and the rest of the nation, does not think like we do.
                                   
                                  If we placed landmines it would kill innocent children who have not freely chosen to cross the boarder, and therefore, it would not accomplish our aim.
                                   
                                  Patroling the boarders is the right idea, but we as a group, should also make our voices heard.  An easy way to do that is to hammer away at the fact the policies of the Mexican government towards illegal aliens, US visitors and others are inconsistant with their demands on the U.S.
                                   
                                  We are a nation of immigrants and should continue to welcome those, LOUDLY that come legally, and denounce those who do not, and the governments that sponsor them.
                                   
                                  Frank Worley


                                  bill Jambura <jambura@...> wrote:

                                  Frank,

                                   

                                  My sentiments exactly about the LP.  The Republicans are the equal opposites of the Democrats, but no less damaging to our Constitution, liberty and freedoms. 

                                   

                                  In this dialogue of e-mails I, and many of you, may have received the e-mail cautioning us against looking like we hate Hispanics if we defend our borders.  That is an excellent diversion.  Here's an answer to the bigotry vs. national sovereignty debate.

                                   

                                  The best way to defend our border without being bigots is to do what weve done all over the worldland mines. 

                                   

                                  1. Weve put them on every other continent of our world with great successbecause they are an extremely effective perimeter defense. 
                                  2. They don't require feeding or a massive payroll to manage them.  Nor can they be bribed.
                                  3. They are nondiscriminatorythey don't care about race, religion, ethnic background, sexual orientation, and whatever other bemoanings bleeding heart liberals can come up with.  They just don't like being stepped on.
                                  4. They will not harm you unless you step on them.  And you have to go out of your way to step on them.  Its freedom of choice.   If you dont want to get blown up, dont go there; or you can choose to achieve upward mobility on a one-time trip.
                                  5. And, to be a good neighbor, lets tell Mr. Fox to update his illegal immigration pamphlet so that his swarming hoards know that they may become commingled with desert dirt if they try to sneak across our borders and dance in our mine fields.
                                  6.  And, to be a good neighbor, we can put up signs (in all the romance languages of course) to identify the first several miles of American soil along the Mexican border as a: NO GO ZONERecommend you use a controlled entry point for your safe crossing. 
                                   
                                  On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 16:19:18 -0700 (PDT) F Worley <> writes:
                                  If the LP would get a sane foriegn policy, borders included, I might actually consider rejoining them.
                                   
                                  No offense to my friends in the RLC but between budget deficits, Terri Shiavo and other issues, I've just about had it with the GOP and the DEMS ain't getting my vote.
                                   
                                  But I digress, where do we stand on this issue of the Minute Men?
                                   
                                  Frank

                                  Guy McLendon <guy@...> wrote:
                                  FYI ... to whomever it may concern ... my guess is there's more than a 50% chance the LP will water down their 100% open borders plank in 2006 ... to acknowledge Constitutional authorization for border security, and validity of reason to exercise this authority for purposes of protecting public health & national security.
                                   
                                  ----- Original Message -----
                                  Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 12:49 PM
                                  Subject: Re: [RLC-Action] Mechanical Engineering - Good, Good, Good ... Good Vibrations

                                  OK, several have given their opinions on the MinuteMen, so let's get on to strategy;
                                   
                                  1) Tancredo talks like he would like to ride this issue into the Whitehouse.  Would the RLC endorse him?
                                  2) Every state has this problem.  Let's get to networking with groups that are working on this issue in our states.
                                  3) Democrats and Republicans don't seem able to handle this issue.  Can the RLC forge new ground here?
                                  4) Libertarians believe in open borders; maybe we don't even have a philosophical leg to stand on.  You decide.
                                   
                                  But at least you have to start thinking in these terms.  Guy's first email talked about issues that resonate with a broad swath of the public.  This might not be something that we can use, but the issue is becoming red hot.  It's starting to resonate, and ringing like a bell.
                                   
                                  Chuck Seberg 
                                   
                                   
                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.