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

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

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 27 , Apr 12 4:00 PM
    • 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 2 of 27 , Apr 12 4:15 PM
      • 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 3 of 27 , Apr 12 4:19 PM
        • 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 4 of 27 , Apr 12 4:21 PM
          • 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 5 of 27 , Apr 13 5:30 AM
            • 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 6 of 27 , Apr 13 5:49 AM
              • 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 7 of 27 , Apr 13 11:53 AM
                • 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 8 of 27 , Apr 13 5:02 PM
                  • 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 9 of 27 , Apr 13 5:07 PM
                    • 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 10 of 27 , Apr 14 8:24 AM
                      • 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.