From: Blanc <blancw@cnw.com>
Date: Sun, 2 Nov 1997 17:31:26 +0800
To: cypherpunks@ssz.com
Subject: Re: effective GACK fighting (fwd)
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19971102004545.006cba90@cnw.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Jim Choate wrote:

>But, why do we need a lawyer? We have the right to represent ourselves, why
>let somebody who has a intimate stake in the status quo represent us?

Well, first of all I was being facetious, because of how people are always
saying we need Leadership (tm) and need to elect another President in order
to have a more Perfect Union.   But I said we need a "good" lawyer - a
libertarian lawyer - because I expect that it would take someone who had
studied the legal system and made it their project to be well-educated and
articulate on these matters, to be able to successfully represent the
Consitutional values which we subscribe to.   Maybe not.  I myself don't
think I could do it, although I would lend all kinds of backend support to
whoever would, and frankly I don't think I would select you, either, Jim,
because I don't think your arguments would be effective.   I would be
thrilled if someone like Tocqueville existed.   He would get my vote.

>Has there ever been a law suite brought against the Supreme Court or
>Congress claiming their actions were unconstitutional? The amendment
>relating to taxation for a start, repeal individual taxation and return to
>the system originaly intended by the founding fathers. 

I don't know.   But this is the sort of issue I was thinking of.

>Also, let's start something relating to the 2nd. We should also move to [.
. . ]

Okay, you first. heh.  You're being quite free with your recommendations.
Remember, right now we're just a bunch of people sitting around their
computers talking.  Don't count your chickens before they hatch.