Re: [RLC-Action] Printed Materials
- This conversation would have a point if we were setting up a new nation and were
looking for a symbol. We're not. We're Americans. We live in the United States.
The eagle is the national symbol. We keep it--just like we keep the flag.
I have profound respect for the US Constitution … obviously. Indeed, I am working to prepare a streaming web video of my recent presentation that applied my thinking on the Constitution to the war on drugs.
However, I certainly do not believe any human-construct to be perfect, or infallible. There are a number of flaws that need remedy … I could detail a few. Sadly, the slime in Washington are not interesting in strengthening the Constitution’s primary function … to impose limits on the power officials. Indeed, they work fervently to strip sidestep & weave around the constraints so long ignored … The “flaws” that I reference are holes that have allowed the slime in Washington to weave around the intended legal constraints.
I also have issues with LP purists, and am hopeful that the 2006 LP Platform Team will probably lean more towards practical solutions, and away from purist proposals. It will be interesting to see whether we can make the LP’s offering more practical.
From: RLC-Action@yahoogroups.com [mailto: RLC-Action@yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of Ray Holtorf
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 8:23 AM
Subject: Re: [RLC-Action] Constitution vs libertarianism
It's simple Guy,
I read the Constitution. I noted it's absolute
perfection - to the extent that the only flaws existed
after the first 10 Amendments. The ONLY group I saw
fighting for Constitutional restoration, was
I obviously have a number of issues with libertarian
purists - probably the greatest of which is the notion
that Nations should be borderless, and trade is not a
function of government. Those are both
semi-unConstitutional ideals. The Constitution applies
to specific states, without borders there are no
states, and no Nation. Trade regulations are clearly
established in the Constitution.
I guess I am a purist when it comes to the
Constitution - smarter men than I, with greater
vision, created it for my benefit, and they died to
give it to me. I'm not interested in only enforcing
the aspects which are part of the libertarian ideal -
allowing for exceptions to the Constitution to create
economic recovery from the Great Depression is how we
got into this mess in the first place...
--- Guy McLendon <guy@...> wrote:
> I strongly believe in both the Constitution &
> individual freedom. The
> Constitution is such an important means to an end
> that libertarians would be
> well-advised to hold tightly to most features, and
> use that precious
> resource as a legal basis for repeal of most onerous
> laws that are on the
> books today. Nonetheless, Ray's remarks are not
> sufficiently clear for me
> to make an assessment of value. If you could
> clarify your intent, and give
> an example . that'd help.
> From: RLC-Action@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto: RLC-Action@yahoogroups.com ] On
> Behalf Of John David Galt
> Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 7:20 PM
> To: RLC-Action@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [RLC-Action] Printed Materials
> Ray Holtorf wrote:
> > I do not know why you couldn't drop "free
> > and individual freedom" in favor of
> > Limited Government." I don't favor either Free
> > enterprise or individual freedom if it were ever
> to be
> > in violation of the Constitution...
> I certainly do, and I believe any real libertarian
> would too. The
> Constitution is a means to an end, not the end
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> * Visit your group "RLC-Action
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RLC-Action> " on the
> * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
> <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page