From: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com (roc-digest) To: roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: roc-digest V2 #393 Reply-To: roc-digest Sender: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk roc-digest Sunday, October 15 2000 Volume 02 : Number 393 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 11 Oct 00 12:44:15 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: A maverick takes on public schooling [MUST READ] (fwd) On Oct 10, Archibald Bard wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] When Cornwallis surrendered on Oct 17, 1781, did he surrender to THE UNITED STATES? No, in fact he surrendered 13 times, to the regiment leaders of each of the states. In 1783, Benjamin Franklin went to France. There, a treaty was signed by King George's representative, which came to be known as The Treaty of Paris. In it, King George relinquished his sovereignty and passed it to The 13 FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES, THE PEOPLE AND THEIR POSTERITY, FOREVER! Independent from England, and Independent from each other. They were then, and are now, Republics, technically NATIONS. I recently found a copy of the Treaty of Paris on the United States Congress web page of international treaties. It is STILL recognized by International Law! Treaty of Paris http://www.foxinternet.net/web/amerika/treaty.htm Archibald Bard Pro Libertate - For Freedom ICQ 83834746 A VOTE FOR DEMO/REPUBS IS TO ENDORSE THEIR POLICIES OF DEPRIVATION OF YOUR FREEDOMS! BUCHANAN-Reform http://www.buchananreform.com/default.asp - ----- Original Message ----- From: "The Republican" To: Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2000 10:52 PM Subject: A maverick takes on public schooling > > http://www.csmonitor.com/durable/2000/10/10/fp21s2-csm.shtml > > A maverick takes on public schooling > > Interview / John Taylor Gatto > > > By Amanda Paulson > Special to The Christian Science Monitor > > John Taylor Gatto had just been named New York State Teacher of the Year > nine years ago when he made a shocking announcement. After teaching 26 > years in New York City public schools, he was quitting, saying he could no > longer continue to "hurt kids." > > Since then, Mr. Gatto has written and lectured extensively on the negative > effects of compulsory schooling. His newest book, "The Underground History > of Education" (Oxford Village Press), will be published in January. > Sections of the book are available online at www.johntaylorgatto.com > > The following are excerpts from a recent Monitor interview: > > On why he wrote the book: > > I had a need after 30 years of fairly successful teaching, with all kinds > of kids, to understand why the business had evolved the way it had. The > first thing I learned was that the school world is not independent, but a > subordinate industry to government and industry and commerce. > > On education before school became compulsory: > > My own reading from the first 120 years of American national history is > exactly the same as Alexis de Tocqueville's reading. He says flatly this is > the best-educated nation in the Western world, bar none.... It's just > dazzling what people can do for themselves when the boot of the government > is off their back. > > Everybody understood what the homeschoolers understand today - [compulsory > school is] nonsense. It becomes a destructive activity to lock people up > and drill them and confine them with low-level abstractions. > > On testing: > > There's no teacher worth his or her salt who, inside of a period at the > start of the year, doesn't know who's going to get the As, who's going to > get the Bs, who's going to cause trouble.... How do you know when you get a > good haircut? You look in the mirror. > > What we've allowed to happen is for normal good judgment and wisdom to be > set aside for some kind of mathematical wizardry. > > There's nothing a standardized test measures other than your ability to > score well on the next standardized test. > > Some assumptions he says are made in modern schooling: > > *Government school is a central force for social cohesion ... and a > bureaucratized public order is our only defense against chaos and anarchy. > > *The certifiable expertise of schoolteachers is superior to that of lay > people. > > *Compelling children to assemble in mandated groups, for mandated > intervals, with mandated texts ... does not interfere with academic > learning. > > *Children will inevitably grow apart from parents in beliefs as they grow > older, and this process must be encouraged. > > On the role of the teacher: > > The balance of responsibility was [once] divided much differently. The > assumption was that the kid would do 90 percent of the work and the teacher > 10 percent. Sometime around the turn of the 20th century, that assumption > was deliberately reversed. Each time you intervene in a kid's learning past > an allowable minimum, you're actually impeding the process. > > On curriculum: > > There's no scientific evidence justifying any particular subject selection, > any sequence of subjects, any internal arrangements of time. There is no > body of knowledge inaccessible to a motivated elementary school student. > The rationing of learning by age - and usually it's by social class and age > - is indefensible. > > Delinquent behavior is a reaction to the structure of schooling. It's not > some innate characteristic of large groups of children. School makes > children angry because it's a consistently dishonest place and a visibly > unfair place. > > On the future of schools: > > I see great hope for educational advancement or spiritual advancement. I've > traveled 1.4 million miles in 50 states and seven foreign countries, and > while I've seen a lot less hope overseas, [here] I see effective reform and > resistance everywhere. > > The most effective of all, bar none, is the homeschool revolution. > Approximately 2 million people from all social classes and all religious > and cultural backgrounds have, in effect, set up private labs of education. > > What makes a good school? > > That the school part is de-emphasized. Furthermore you have to believe that > everybody wants the best. Everybody wants to learn. They'd like to have > worthwhile meaningful work to do. > > On what kids are capable of: > > I taught 13-year-olds from [the inner city] using the same text and > methodology that was used on me at Cornell and Columbia. I pushed them > harder than I was pushed. I never accepted second-rate work without taking > the kid aside and showing him why it was second-rate. > > > > [Forwarded For Information Purposes Only - Not > Necessarily Endorsed By The Sender - A.K. Pritchard] > > ------------------------------ > > A.K. Pritchard > http://www.ideasign.com/chiliast/ > http://rosie.acmecity.com/songfest/189/ > > To subscribe to "The Republican" email list - just ask! > therepublican@ideasign.com > > > "....teachers who conform to the traditional institutional mode are > out of place. They might find fulfillment as tap-dance instructers, > or guards in maximum security prisons or propreiters of reducing > salons, or agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation - - but > they damage teaching, children, and themselves by staying in > the classroom." > > (NEA book, Schools For the 70's And Beyond) [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA! - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!! - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Oct 00 12:40:08 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: 7 Varieties of Gun Control Advocates (fwd) On Oct 11, Steve Moser wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] Second Amendment 7 Varieties of Gun Control Advocates by Gus Cotey, Jr. The right of decent private citizens to personally possess, transport, and responsibly use arms without government interference is the ultimate freedom and the main pillar supporting all other liberties. Few cultures have allowed their general population access to weapons, the tools of power, to the same degree as the United States. Instead, most societies have restricted the keeping and bearing of arms to a select few power brokers and their agents, often resulting in oppression on a grand scale. Despite a massive amount of historical evidence to the contrary, there is a substantial body of Americans, many occupying positions of influence, who contend that the abrogation of the Second Amendment is the quickest path to domestic tranquility. Since this is as absurd as advocating blood-letting as a cure for anemia, it would seem advisable to question the motives and mentalities of the gun control advocates themselves. In my observation, weapon prohibitionists can be broken down into seven major categories. Even though their motives may vary they all pose a mortalthreat to liberty. Elitists Many of those in favor of oppressive firearms legislation are are best classed as elitists. Elitists frequently identify with a peer group based on wealth, power, rank, social status, occupation, education, ethnic group, etc. and perceive themselves and their peers as inherently superior to and more responsible than the "common people", thus more deserving of certain rights. Since elitists practically consider those outside their class or caste as members of another species, that most anti-elitist list of laws, the Bill of Rights is viewed by them as anathema. Naturally, theSecond Amendment is their first target as it serves as the supporting structure for other nine amendments. Authoritarians Another type of individual who favors the restriction of private gun ownership is the authoritarian. Authoritarian personalities are characterized by their belief in unquestioning obedience to an authority figure or group and a disdain for individual freedom of action, expression, and judgement. Those with authoritarian personalities function well in symbiosis with elitists occupying positions of power. Because authoritarians repress their desires for autonomy they harbor a deep resentment toward free and independent thinkers. Of course authoritarians do not want firearms in the hands of the general population as this constitutes a major obstacle to fulfilling their pathological and obsessive desire to control people. Criminals It goes without saying that career criminals would like to see the public disarmed for obvious reasons. A well-armed population makes crimes such as assault, robbery, and burglary hazardous for the perpetrator and this is bad for "business." Also, it would seem that even non-violentor "white collar" criminals live in constant fear of retribution from the public that they financially bleed and would therefore prefer that the public be disarmed. Evidence supporting this hypothesis can be gathered by studying the Second Amendment voting records of those legislators who have been convicted of willful misconduct. The Fearful Cowards by definition are easily or excessively frightened by things and situations that are recognized as dangerous, difficult, or painful. It therefore stands to reason that the mere thought of guns and the circumstances in which they are employed causes them abnormal amounts of stress. Rather than admit their weakness to themselves or others, some fearful types jump on the anti-gun bandwagon and purport moral superiority to those "barbaric"enough to employ lethal force against armed assailants by claiming various humanitarian and pragmatic motives for allowing evil to remain unchecked. In reality, many of these individuals harbor an envy induced resentment toward anyone with the means, skill, and will to successfully stand up to criminal aggression. The desire to assert oneself exists in nearly everyone, wimps included, so cowards seek out tame enemies against whom they can ply their pitiful brand of machismo. Instead of the sociopaths who commit acts of wanton aggression with guns, guns themselves and responsible gun owners are the main targets of their attacks. After all, real criminals are dangerous, so cowards prefer doing battle with inanimate objects that do not have a will of their own and decent law-abiding people whose high level of integrity and self discipline prevent them from physically lashing out against mere verbal assailants, however obnoxious they may be. Ideological Chamelions Ideological chameleons follow the simple social strategy of avoiding controversy and confrontation by espousing the beliefs of the people in their immediate vicinity or advocating the philosophy of those who scream the loudest in a debate. Quite a few supposedly pro Second Amendment public officials have shown themselves to be ideological chameleons when they supported restrictions on the private possession of military style semiautomatic rifles following recent atrocities in which such firearms were employed. Like their reptilian namesake, people who merely blend in with the ambient philosophical foliage seem to have little insight into the moral and social ramifications of their actions. Political and/or economic gain along with avoidance of confrontation are their only goals. Security Monopolists Security monopolists are those members and representatives of public and private security providing concerns who want the means of self protection out of private hands so that they can command high fees for protecting the citizenry against the rising tide of crime. These profiteers stand to loose a great deal of capital if citizens can efficiently defend themselves.To the security monopolist, each criminal who enters and exits the revolving door of justice is a renewable source of revenue providing jobs for police, social workers, victim counsellors, judges, prison employees, security guards, burglar alarm installers, locksmiths, and others employed by the security monopolies or their satellite organizations. No wonder it is so common for an honest citizen to be more ruthlessly hounded by the authorities when he shoots a criminal in self defense than a criminal who shoots honest citizens. The Disfunctional Unworldly Just as a limb will weaken and atrophy if not used, so will aspects of the mind fail to develop if nothing in one's environment exists to challenge them. People who have led excessively sheltered lives tend to have a difficult time understanding certain cause and effect relationships and an even harder time appreciating just how cruel the world can be. These dysfunctionally unworldly types are truly perplexed at the very notion of firearms ownership with regard to defense. To them, tyranny and crime are things that happen in other places far removed from their "civilized" universe. Also, they do not understand the value of private property and why some people would fight for theirs since they never had to work hard to acquire what they possess. While those suffering from dysfunctional unworldliness are most often people who have been born into considerable wealth, this condition is also common in members of the clergy, academicians, practioners of the arts, and others who have spent much of their lives cloistered in a safe and pampering environment. While many of these people may be quite talented and intelligent in some ways, their extreme naivety makes them easy prey for the tyrants who use them for the financial support and favorable advertisement of their regimes. Needless to say, the anti-gun movement is well represented and financed by the dysfunctionally unworldly. The price of liberty is eternal vigilance, and it behooves all vigilant lovers of liberty to know and be able to recognize the various types of arms prohibitionists and understand their differing but equally dangerous motives. Acquiring knowledge of one's foes is the first step toward defeating them. We must never forget that a threat to private firearms ownership is a threat to all freedoms. Jews for the Presevation of Firearms Ownership [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA! - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!! - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Oct 00 09:33:16 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: [Lis-LEAF] Fw: THE LIGHTHOUSE: October 10, 2000 (fwd) Now here's a decosion everyone can use..... On Oct 11, Tee wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] >Subject: [Lis-LEAF] Fw: THE LIGHTHOUSE: October 10, 2000 > >Thought you would find this announcement about this judicial immunity case >interesting. It is worth further attention. > >--Jon > >------------------------ > From: "David J. Theroux" > Subject: THE LIGHTHOUSE: October 10, 2000 > Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 15:04:42 -0500 > To: Lighthouse list members > > >THE LIGHTHOUSE >"Enlightening Ideas for Public Policy..." >VOL. 2, ISSUE 39 >October 10, 2000 > >Welcome to The Lighthouse, the e-mail newsletter of The Independent >Institute, the non-partisan, public policy research organization >. We provide you with updates of the >Institute's current research publications, events and media programs. > >------------------------------------------------------------- > >IN THIS WEEK'S ISSUE: >1. Holding Bureaucrats Personally Accountable: A 1st Amendment Victory >2. The Independent Review: Fall Issue Now Available >3. Public Health vs. The Nanny State? -- Next Independent Policy >Forum (10/26/00) > >------------------------------------------------------------- > >HOLDING BUREAUCRATS PERSONALLY ACCOUNTABLE: A 1st Amendment Victory > >The legal doctrine of "sovereign immunity" -- and its modern cousin, >"qualified immunity" -- has historically allowed government >bureaucrats to escape full accountability for misdeeds they have >perpetrated under the guise of government "policy." Thus, a recent >decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals -- ruling that a group >of government bureaucrats may be held personally liable for >outrageous constitutional violations -- is news worthy of celebration. > >The facts of the case attest to the need for strong checks on >government power. Three Berkeley, Calif., residents had campaigned >against a proposed homeless shelter in their neighborhood. At the >behest of local "housing rights" activists, who said the anti-shelter >campaign was discriminatory and violated the Fair Housing Act, the >U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) got into the >act. HUD officials demanded interviews with the three anti-shelter >neighbors, told their neighbors they had violated the law, and >ordered them to give HUD all materials -- including the names, >addresses and phone numbers of other opponents of the shelter -- that >they had collected for their campaign. To the "Berkeley Three," HUD's >harassment violated their freedom of speech. To the appeals court, >"qualified immunity" of government bureaucrats did not apply here; >the Berkeley Three may proceed with their First Amendment lawsuit >against the HUD officials and seek monetary damages. > >This ruling, although unusual by today's standards, harks back to >another early legal tradition: the idea that citizens can hold >government officials personally liable for improper conduct. In 1763, >John Wilkes, a member of Britain's parliament, was the subject of an >outrageous search and seizure warrant issued by Secretary of State >Lord Halifax, after Wilkes published an anonymous attack on the >government. Wilkes then sued Halifax and other officials and was >awarded a sum comparable to $20 million today. Americans were so >enraptured with this refutation of unrestrained government power that >they made Wilkes a hero and followed in his footsteps, suing >government officials for unreasonable search and seizures. > >Since the 19th century, however, this common-law tradition has nearly >withered away. The creation of the exclusionary rule has replaced >Wilkes's remedy with an inferior one. While the exclusionary rule >brings some satisfaction to criminals who are the subject of >unreasonable searches and seizures, it does nothing for the innocent. >Furthermore, the 20th century has seen the rise of the doctrine of >"qualified immunity," which the U.S. Supreme Court explains "seeks to >ensure that [government] defendants 'reasonably can anticipate when >their conduct may give rise to liability,' by attaching liability >only if '[t]he contours of the right [violated are] sufficiently >clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is >doing violates that right.'" > >The Ninth Circuit's recent ruling that HUD officials were not acting >reasonably when they violated the First Amendment rights of the >Berkeley Three is refreshing because it rekindles the idea that civil >liability can be a restraint on government power. In an era when >bureaucratic violations of the rule of law have become routine, it is >an idea long overdue. > >For the Ninth Circuit's opinion, see >http://www.independent.org/tii/lighthouse/LHLink2-39-1.html. >For a press release by supporters of the Berkeley Three, the Center >for Individual Rights, see "HUD Officials Declared Personally >Liable..." at >http://www.independent.org/tii/lighthouse/LHLink2-39-2.html. > >For more information on bureaucratic accountability, see the >Independent Institute book CUTTING GREEN TAPE: Toxic Pollutants, >Environmental Regulation and the Law, edited by Richard Stroup and >Roger Meiners, at >http://www.independent.org/tii/lighthouse/LHLink2-39-3.html. > >For accountability in law enforcement, see the Independent Institute >book TO SERVE AND PROTECT: Privatization and Community in Criminal >Justice, by Bruce Benson, at >http://www.independent.org/tii/lighthouse/LHLink2-39-4.html. > >For information on lack of bureaucratic accountability and other >causes of government failure, see the Independent Institute book >BEYOND POLITICS: Markets, Welfare, and the Failure of Bureaucracy, by >William C. Mitchell and Randy T. Simmons, at >http://www.independent.org/tii/lighthouse/LHLink2-39-5.html. > >------------------------------------------------------------- > >THE INDEPENDENT REVIEW: Fall Issue Now Available > >* Why did urban rioters of the 1960s target small businesses -- and >why have so many commentators rationalized the mob violence? >* Are some school-choice proposals more promising than others? >* Have economists been too quiet on Medicare reform? >* Is taxation morally defensible? >* How did racism affect employment on the early railroads? >* Why do government bureaucracies in general, and public education in >particular, produce such deplorable outcomes? >* Why did Reaganomics turn out as it did? > >These topics and more are discussed in the Fall 2000 issue of THE >INDEPENDENT REVIEW: A Journal of Political Economy, the Independent >Institute's 160-page quarterly. Contributors to the fall issue >include Jonathan Bean, John Merrifield, Robert Helms, Edward Feser, >David Bernstein, Hans Sherrer, James Payne, Alan Reynolds, Paul Craig >Roberts, Jennifer Roback Morse, Jeffrey Rogers Hummel, Philip >Perlmuter, and others. > >For a summary and links to selected articles (pdf) and book reviews=20 >(html), see >http://www.independent.org/tii/lighthouse/LHLink2-39-6.html. > >To recommend THE INDEPENDENT REVIEW to your library, please see >http://www.independent.org/tii/lighthouse/LHLink2-39-7.html. > >------------------------------------------------------------- > >PUBLIC HEALTH vs. THE NANNY STATE? -- Next Independent Policy Forum (10/26= /00) > >Barely a day goes by without some news of the latest public health >"threat." Serious health hazards, we are told, lurk around every >corner -- in water supplies, air, soil, beverages, fast food, >second-hand smoke, cellular phones, and food irradiation, just to >name a handful. And yet, Americans today live longer than ever! Are >markets and private decision-making providing the answers? Or are >these dangers real, immediate, and a legitimate mandate for >government control? Can we reduce or eliminate health risks without >government dictates? How does politics distort perceptions about >public health? Will Americans succumb to or rebel against the growing >Nanny State's neo-Puritanism and attack on individual choice and >responsibility? JACOB SULLUM and THOMAS DiLORENZO will discuss these >timely and important issues. > >SPEAKERS: > > - Jacob Sullum (Senior Editor, Reason magazine; Author, FOR YOUR >OWN GOOD: The Anti-Smoking Crusade and the Tyranny of Public Health) > > - Thomas DiLorenzo (Professor of Economics, Loyola College of >Maryland; Co-author, FROM PATHOLOGY TO POLITICS: Public Health in >America) > >WHEN: > Thursday, October 26, 2000 > Reception and book signing: 6:30 p.m. > Program: 7:00 - 8:30 p.m. > >WHERE: > The Independent Institute Conference Center > 100 Swan Way > Oakland, CA 94621-1428 > For a map and directions, see > http://www.independent.org/tii/tii_info/about.html#map > >TICKETS: > $30.00 per person: includes one copy of either Jacob Sullum's >book, FOR YOUR OWN GOOD, or Thomas DiLorenzo's book, FROM PATHOLOGY >TO POLITICS. Admission without book is $10 per person ($7 for >Independent Institute Associate Members) > >About FOR YOUR OWN GOOD: The Anti-Smoking Crusade and the Tyranny of >Public Health: > >"Sullum is meticulously logical, and his conclusions are implicit in >everything he argues. FOR YOUR OWN GOOD has made us think about >totalitarianism in this most unlikely context." > - NEW YORK TIMES > >"Intriguing and worthwhile, this book marshals an impressive array of >facts and arguments. Thoughtful and articulate." > - NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE > >About FROM PATHOLOGY TO POLITICS: Public Health in America: > >"FROM PATHOLOGY TO POLITICS argues that public health has become a >bureaucracy that feels the need to perpetuate itself by expanding >into new areas that are more often than not, just plain 'politically >correct.'" > - WALL STREET JOURNAL > >For more information about this event, see >http://www.independent.org/tii/lighthouse/LHLink2-39-8.html. > >------------------------------------------------------------- > >If you enjoy receiving THE LIGHTHOUSE ... please help us support it. > >Your supporting Independent Associate Membership enables us to reach >thousands of other people. So, please make a contribution to The >Independent Institute. See >http://www.independent.org/tii/lighthouse/LHLink2-39-9.html to >donate, or contact Ms. Priscilla Busch by phone at 510-632-1366 x105, >fax to 510-568-6040, email to , or snail mail >to The Independent Institute, 100 Swan Way, Oakland, CA 94621-1428. >All contributions are tax-deductible. Thank you! > >------------------------------------------------------------- > >For previous issues of THE LIGHTHOUSE, see >http://www.independent.org/tii/lighthouse/LHLink2-39-10.html. > >------------------------------------------------------------- > >For information on books and other publications from The Independent >Institute, see >http://www.independent.org/tii/lighthouse/LHLink2-39-11.html. > >------------------------------------------------------------- > >For information on The Independent Institute's upcoming Independent >Policy Forums, see >http://www.independent.org/tii/lighthouse/LHLink2-39-12.html. > >----------------------------------------------------------------- > >To subscribe (or unsubscribe) to The Lighthouse, please go to >http://www.independent.org/subscribe.html, choose "subscribe" (or >"unsubscribe"), enter your e-mail address and select The Lighthouse. >Or, either send an e-mail message to >independent-list-request@free-market.net with the words "unsubscribe" >in the body of the message, or e-mail independent@free-market.net and >ask to be unsubscribed. > >Copyright =A9 2000 The Independent Institute >100 Swan Way >Oakland, CA 94621-1428 >(510) 632-1366 phone >(510) 568-6040 fax >info@independent.org >http://www.independent.org >Constitution Society, 1731 Howe Av #370, Sacramento, CA 95825 >916/568-1022, 916/450-7941VM Date: 10/11/00 Time: 13:40:13 >http://www.constitution.org/ mailto:jon.roland@constitution.org [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA! - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!! - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Oct 00 09:28:54 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: For those of you in the Newark, NJ area: ANJRPC sues Montclair - press conference (fwd) Hmmm, maybe we could use this to get Eddie Eagle programs etc., implemented? On Oct 11, Terry M. Wintroub wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] If anyone in the Princeton-Lawrenceville-Trenton area is going and wants a passenger or wants company on the train, let me know. I'm pretty sure the hotel is just a short walk from Newark's Penn station and I think the walk is all indoors. Terry Wintroub - -------- Original Message -------- Subject: ANJRPC sues Montclair - press conference Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 12:00:12 EDT Reply-To: Nancy Ross To: NJGunSmart Members PLEASE PLAN TO COME TO THE PRESS CONFERENCE ON FRIDAY: ANJRPC SUES MONTCLAIR BOARD OF EDUCATION FOR VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS PRESS CONFERENCE Friday, October 13, at 11:00 am Robert Treat Hotel, 50 Park Place, Newark Essex Room The Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs (ANJRPC), Moms for Gun Safety, and residents of Montclair are filing suit against the Montclair Board of Education and the Superintendent of Public Schools for violation of their civil rights. In June, the "Million Moms" organization obtained permission from the Montclair schools system's Department of Instruction to distribute a leaflet for a June 8 rally for the Smart Gun bill, S-2045. The leaflets were given to students to take home to their parents. However, when Moms for Gun Safety asked the Department of Instruction for permission to distribute a leaflet announcing a rally against the bill, they were denied the right to so. The suit charges the Board of Education with violation of equal protection of the law as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment and infringement of the right to freely speak and associate as guaranteed by the First and Fourteenth Amendments. According to Harry Kresky, ANJRPC attorney, "When it comes to polarizing issues such as gun control, the death penalty, sexual orientation, and abortion, it is critical that the public schools remain neutral and open to all points of view. Our constitution demands nothing less." ANJRPC spokeswoman Nancy Ross said, "Public schools are supposed to present objective and fair arguments on controversial issues, so that students can make informed decisions. In Montclair, the Board of Education did the opposite. They took a position in favor of particular legislation, presenting the students with only one argument and one opinion. This is not only unconstitutional, it's bad education policy and harmful." This lawsuit is groundbreaking in that it seeks to enjoin the Board of Education from taking political positions and using its influence over students to push a particular political agenda. For more information, call Nancy Ross at 201-842-1322. [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA! - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!! - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Oct 00 08:48:35 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: THE WAY WE SEE IT - NATIONAL SECTION (fwd) On Oct 15, APLsauce@aol.com wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] GRASSROOTS ALLIANCE presents THE WAY WE SEE IT NATIONAL SECTION shep shepardson, editor email address aplsauce@AOL.com, P.O. Box 3251 Holiday Fl 34690 10/16/00 Tel. 727 943 2438 ================================= Political Activists aren t fighting the system, they are fighting those in office who are corrupting an important inherited system.... ==================================== With Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff For the story behind the story... Wednesday October 11, 2000; 1:50 PM EDT Hillary's Campaign Recruiting Secret Operatives On Monday Hillary Clinton's Senate campaign spokesman said he had no idea what her opponent Rick Lazio was talking about when he charged that Clinton operatives were tailing him and his wife, videotaping their every move in public. The next day Mrs. Clinton came clean - sort of, telling reporters, "That's something that happens in campaigns. I know that it happens in every campaign that I'm aware of." Really? Tell it to Jaime Sneider, editorial page editor for Columbia University's Daily Spectator newspaper. Last month Mrs. Clinton visited Columbia for what appeared to be a routine campaign stop. But what transpired between Hillary 2000 and Mr. Sneider was anything but routine. Sneider tells NewsMax.com that he got a bizarre series of phone calls shortly before the first lady's visit from a woman who would identify herself only as Hillary's "leader of student volunteer efforts." She wanted to speak to any "pro-Hillary Democrats" who might be on staff. Sneider initially bristled, telling NewsMax.com that he found the presumption that anyone on his staff might be biased "objectionable on its face." However, later that day the Hillary operative called back. His interest piqued, Sneider asked the woman to identify herself by name. She refused, complaining, "Do you really need to know that?" The first lady's mystery operative repeated her earlier request to speak with a "pro-Hillary Democrat," adding this time that she knew Sneider was "fairly conservative" politically. How did this woman know so much about him, Sneider wondered - especially since she insisted on remaining anonymous herself. He asked what she had in mind for her Columbia University Hillary 2000 volunteers. "She told me this too was 'a secret,'" Sneider said, "and that she could 'only tell the person working with [the campaign].'" When he pressed again for her full identity, the woman shot back, "Is that really relevant?" Later that same day, Sneider was contacted at his private number, where the same campaign operative informed him that the "pro-Hillary Democrat" would have to have press credentials. Realizing there was only one way to find out what was going on, Sneider persuaded a member of his staff to go along. Scheduling conflicts ultimately prevented the Daily Spectator's Hillary 2000 volunteer from joining the team - so Sneider never did learn exactly what they had in mind for their "pro-Hillary Democrat" with press credentials. In an initial interview with Hillary's gang, Sneider's recruit was told that the mission was "a party secret." In the recent past, Clinton has camouflaged political operatives as average Janes and Joes for campaign commercials. Sometimes they infiltrate crowds at Hillary's appearances to boost support. Mrs. Clinton's Nassau County coordinator never mentioned her connection to the campaign when she was quoted in the New York Times after last year's Israeli Day parade. She told the paper that "hate-filled Lazio supporters" had pushed and shoved her. During the height of last summer's flap over Hillary's history of behind-t he-scenes anti-Semitic outbursts, Team Clinton recruited prominent Jews to contact reporters to say they believed her denials. Those who accepted the assignment were told to keep the Clinton campaign's role in the project a secret. Sneider still wonders about what kind of "secret mission" the folks at Hillary 2000 had in mind. Whatever it was, undoubtedly it happens, as Mrs. Clinton would say, in every campaign. (Editor s note: Hillary s action are indicative of just what is going on in our various levels of government. Beginning next week we will be talking about the disease that has infected the people in our governments and how to recognize the disease and how we, as citizens, can help stamp it out by using the Constitution.) ================================= ADVISORY FROM THE COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: (202) 225-3625 October 12, 2000 No. FC-23 Archer Announces Release of 2000 Edition of "Overview of Entitlement Programs" Congressman Bill Archer (R-TX), Chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, today announced the release of the 2000 edition of the Committee print entitled "Overview of Entitle-ment Programs," informally known as the"Green Book." This document, prepared by the staff of the Committee on Ways and Means for the use of its Members and their staffs, has been revised and updated periodically since 1981. This book is primarily an overview of entitlement programs within the jurisdiction of the Commit-tee. The Green Book integrates a description of each program with current data describing the population served by the program, an analysis of interactions with other programs, and historical information relating to each program. It also contains data and discussion on other matters of interest to the Committee, including trust funds, the budget, and immigration as well as a thorough study of the socioeconomic conditions of families and children. Finally, the document presents the most recent and relevant data on family income and wealth in this country. The Committee has requested the Superin-tendent of Documents to make the Committee print available for sale to the general public. The price of the 2000 Green Book is $60 per copy. Orders may be placed with the Superintendent of Documents by calling (202) 512-1808 between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, and referring to the above title. The Green Book will also be available on the World Wide Web at "http://waysandmeans.house.gov". ========================================= THE BIG JOKE - CANDIDATE INTERVIEWS I have listened to and video-taped many programs since March of this year and have come to this conclusion. Most of these so-called interviews or candidate forums have done nothing more than show how candidates will dance around questions. I have read newspaper recommendations about which candidates to vote for and their reasons why. My biggest complaint is that the people in control of such activities are completely unqualified. However, there is one bright spot in all of these and that bright spot s name is Tom Jackson, a columnist for one of our local newspapers and a sometimes moderator for some of our candidate forums. His style? He asks questions of the candidates and then when any candidate begins the verbal dancing, will stop the nonsense and tell the candidate he or she is avoiding answering the question. If the session is opened to audience questioning, he soon jumps on any of the audience who tries to make a speech rather than asking the question. We need more Tom Jacksons to show us how to get things done. Keep up the good work, Tom. [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA! - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!! - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - ------------------------------ End of roc-digest V2 #393 *************************