Submitted by Bill St. Clair on Fri, 22 Oct 2004 12:00:00 GMT
From kaba:
"The essence of constitutionalism in a democracy is not merely to shape and condition the nature of majorities, but also to stipulate that certain things are impermissible, no matter how large and fervent a majority might want them." -- George Will
"I have seen an American general and his officers, without pay, and almost without clothes, living on roots and drinking water; and all for LIBERTY! What chance have we against such men!" -- young British officer to Colonel Watson describing the American militia rebels in Georgetown, SC

# Small World Boat Captains for Truth at - Jesus - Flash animation. How the Busheviks would slime Jesus were he running for president. Hehe. [smith2004]

# Mike Wasdin at Strike the Root - Fuck You, I Won't Do What You Tell Me! - Mr. Wasdin rages against the political machine. Bravo. [root]

I would like to make a plea to everyone reading this. I would like to ask that everyone stand up in your living rooms on election night and scream as loud as you can, "Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me!" while looking at both of the pathetic losers on your television screen. I know it will accomplish nothing, but it will be a liberating experience just the same.

Better yet, walk outside on your balcony or in your front yard and scream it to your neighbors, "Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me!" When they come out to look at the maniac outside, get them involved as well. I would like to walk out and hear, "Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me!" echoed all across America . I want that to be our battle hymn, as we fly the Gadsden flag.

Write your congressman and tell him, "Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me!" Stop a cop on the street and tell him, "Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me!" If you have kids in the government syndicate school system, pull them out and tell them, "Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me!" Call the IRS and every other alphabet agency and scream it to them, "Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me!"

# Larry Ward at Strike the Root - Anarchist Victory in the Fall Election - write in a vote for "me" in the presidential election. [root]

# Publicola - Absolutisim 101: Prior Restraint - a pretty good exposition of the fact that the gun "laws" we Second Amendment absolutists abhor aren't bad especially because they concern guns. They're bad because they legislate prior restraint, attempting to stop criminal behavior by making illegal some of the precursors often associated with that behavior. The problem, of course, is that only the intent and action of a criminal person can turn any object into a crime tool. The object itself is completely incapable of crime without the criminal person. And usually there are plenty of valid non-criminal uses for an object, including machine guns, anti-aircraft installations, shoulder-mounted heat-seeking missiles, etc. I posted the following comment:

Well said, sir. I'm one of those Second Amendment absolutists. And yes, it's the prior restraint that causes the real problem. But why do laws against murder, rape, assault, theft, etc, need to mention firearms in any way? Firearms are a powerful tool that can be used for offense or defense. So are screwdrivers, knives, fists, feet, heads, etc. There is no reason for any law to specifically mention the tool used to commit a crime. Only the severity of the crime itself, the harm done to the victim, needs to be considered.

# Chris Floyd at The Moscow Times - Hysterica Passio - more on the Busheviks declaration that their empire creates its own reality. Though I fear for my wallet and my guns should Kerry win the election in November, and though, of course, I wish I knew how to get Michael Badnarik elected, more and more, I'm thinking that anybody would be better than Bush. [lew]

First, the top Bush insider mocked the journalist and all those "in what we call the reality-based community," i.e., people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." Suskind's attempt to defend the principles of reason and enlightenment cut no ice with the Bush-man. "That's not the way the world really works anymore. We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality," he said. "And while you're studying that reality, we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors ... and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."

Anyone with any knowledge of 20th-century history will know that this same megalomaniacal outburst could have been made by a "senior adviser" to Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini or Mao. Indeed, as scholar Juan Cole points out, the dogma of the Bush Cult is identical with the "reality-creating" declaration of Mao's "Little Red Book": "It is possible to accomplish any task whatsoever." For Bush, as for Mao, "discernible reality" has no meaning: Political, cultural, economic, scientific truth -- even the fundamental processes of nature, even human nature itself -- must give way to the faith-statements of ideology, ruthlessly applied by unbending zealots.


This isn't politics as usual -- not even an extreme version of it, not McCarthyism revisited, Reaganism times two, or Nixon in a Stetson hat. There's never been anything like it in American life before: a messianic cult backed by vast corporate power, a massive cadre of religious zealots, a highly disciplined party, an overwhelming media machine and the mammoth force of history's most powerful government -- all led by men who "create new realities" out of lies, blood, theft and torment.

Their "empire" -- their Death-Cult, their power-mania -- is an old madness rising again.

# Mark Reynolds at Strike the Root - We'd Better Close the Window . . . I Feel a Draft - in applying, without a birth certificate, for a driving license, Mr. Reynolds' 18-year-old son discovered that he was required, on penalty of $250,000 and five years in prison, to register with the Selective Service. An idea for how to do that without yoking yourself to the legal fiction created by your birth certificate or entering into a contract that you in no way desire. I wonder why he's applying for a driving license when he has seen the widsom of having no birth certificate or social security card, but the article is good education in thinking about the legal fictions used to ensnare us. [root]

Well, here is my suggestion . . . . All you young fellows should go ahead and make a "good faith" effort to sign up for the Selective Service. However, since they want your signature, don't give it to them. After all, it IS your property and they have no power on earth to FORCE you into giving it up to them in order to enter into a contract with them. If you use the card that you can get at the Post Office, and you have no birth certificate, then don't fill in the date of birth. If you don't have a socialist security number, don't fill that in. And where it wants you to put your name, fill it out but USE UPPER AND LOWER CASE letters, because they want all capitals which designates a FICTION at law. And of course they want you to sign and admit that you are the fiction as stated above in the contract. Where it says "State" there is a block for two letters. I cannot fit Arkansas in that block. And as for the zip code? Why do they need it? The POST OFFICE needs zip codes. That is what they are for.

Now attach a letter and explain the above and be sure to have it notarized and do not sign it. Then send it to them registered return receipt mail. That way you have PROOF that you made a good faith effort to register.

Here is what the letter could say...

Add comment Edit post Add post