From: Anonymous <anon@anon.efga.org>
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 1997 04:55:48 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: 10.5
Message-ID: <a2eb53d8b0dc18a9278bb092420fa0cf@anon.efga.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



nobody since
       Nixon was been impeached for violating his oath of
       office by subverting the Constitution. This suggests
       either that everyone honors the oath or that the oath is
       meaningless.
            Suppose, in a society with a normal level of
       criminal behavior, there were no prosecutions for
       burglary. Would you infer that there were no burglaries
       in that society? Or would you infer, rather, that the
       burglary laws just weren't being enforced?

When a
       bill is proposed in Congress, our representatives almost
       never ask themselves: "Where in the Constitution do
       we get the power to enact this measure?" Instead they
       presume that they have virtually any power they
       choose to exercise. They simply feel no tension
       between their will and the Constitution that is supposed
       to restrain them. This doesn't look much like an ethos
       of limited government.