Apropos election: Fwd: RULE OF FLAW by L. Neil Smith

From: Russell Whitaker (russ_whitaker@yahoo.com)
Date: Fri Nov 10 2000 - 12:57:04 MST


Note when reading this that Senator-elect Hillary just
announced (I was listening to the radio when reading
this) that she would be introducing
legislation to abolish the Electoral College...

Neil's web presence:


Do You Yahoo!?
Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one Place.

attached mail follows:

>From: "L. Neil Smith" <lneil@ezlink.com>
>To: "000 L. Neil Smith" <lneil@ezlink.com>
>Subject: RULE OF FLAW by L. Neil Smith
>Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 10:45:37 -0700
>by L. Neil Smith <mailto:lneil@ezlink.com>
>[*Please see "A Special Request from L. Neil Smith", below]
>Special to _The Libertarian Enterprise_
> I have no particular use for George W. Bush, let me make that
>"perfectly clear", right up front. I am not now nor have I ever been a
>Republican, even when I campaigned hard for Barry Goldwater back in
> However I do have a reason that's unimpeachable (if you'll pardon
>the expression) for disliking the slimy gang of collectivists to whom
>my mentor, Robert LeFevre, used to refer as "Socialist Party A". They
>don't like the rules when the rules don't serve their purpose. We all
>feel that way from time to time. But when the rules don't serve their
>purpose, they expect everyone else to let them whine their way out of
> We saw this phenomenon at work all throughout the eight miserable
>years of the Clinton regime. The President (the Democratic president,
>that is) couldn't be tarred and feathered and driven from office for
>the high crimes and misdemeanors (including sexual harrassment, theft,
>graft, influence peddling, perjury, obstruction of justice, blackmail,
>treason, rape, and mass murder) that no one really bothers to deny he
> His wife, the Woman with One Eyebrow, couldn't be jailed for her
>various low crimes -- accepting bribes disguised as investment advice,
>conducting public meetings in secret, concealing evidence connected
>with a homicide -- because, well, because she's the Woman with One
> Of course the reason they offer, loudly, incessantly, for why the
>rules others follow shouldn't apply equally to them is that there's a
>"greater cause" to be considered. What they won't tell you is that the
>"greater cause" they have in mind is seizing absolute ownership and
>control of your life and all the products of your life. Adolf Hitler
>slaughtered millions in that "greater cause", so did Joseph Stalin,
>Mao Tse Tung, and Pol Pot. Waco Willie and his culture-genocidal
>hordes simply aren't about to let a silly thing like the United States
>Constitution stand in their way, let alone a little statute here and
> Their attitude toward the proper outcome of the election of 2000
>is exactly the same as their attitude toward, let's say, the Second
>Amendment. Despite their egalitarian rhetoric, they hate, loathe, and
>despise the distributed power that ownership of personal arms bestows
>on each and every one of We the People, so they want us all to ignore
>the clearly written prohibition on any government interference with
>the unalienable individual, civil, Constitutional, and human right of
>every man, woman, and responsible child to obtain, own, and carry,
>openly or concealed, any weapon -- rifle, shotgun, handgun,
>machinegun, _anything_ -- any time, any place, without asking anyone's
> A Republican victory, however slim it turns out to be, thrusts a
>big stick into their bicycle spokes, and they know it. Having suffered
>nearly a decade of Clintonism -- due to the cowardice and hesitancy of
>"Socialist Party B", the Republicans -- advocates of liberty of every
>stripe are highly unlikely to tolerate such failures of resolve any
> They understand that it was the Milquetoast tactic practiced by
>the George Bush Junior campaign that brought about the sorry mess of
>November, 2000 (just as it brought about the well-earned defeats of
>George Bush Senior and of Robert Dole). They will run away with a
>victory now, realizing, at long last, that the task before us is not
>to feebly defend ourselves from each socialist assault on our lives as
>it's contrived in Congress or the legislatures, but to undercut every
>move the enemies of liberty can make with a single sweeping strategy:
>demanding stringent, swift, and energetic enforcement of the Bill of
> Socialist Party A understands that, too, which is why it's trying
>to steal this election at any cost. Their present contention is that
>our lives must be totally re-engineered not only for cripples and
>illiterates, but that the electoral process itself is fatally flawed
>if it fails to accommodate the hopelessly stupid. Yet if it weren't
>the infamous Palm Beach "butterfly" ballots, rest assured, it would be
>any other excuse they could think of. Just like you, I've seen those
>ballots (they were used in my home state for years). Anyone confused
>enough to mess up a ballot like that -- and then complain about it --
>is admitting publicly that he (or she) has the intelligence of an
> Which pretty much accounts for their choice of political parties.
>My answer -- if they want to play like that -- is that anyone who can
>be confused by such a ballot is clearly disqualified to vote, and that
>anyone who voted for Albert Gore should be disqualified on the same
> Another thing: in any conflict between the electoral vote and the
>popular vote, there _is_ no popular vote. The system as it exists was
>developed to allow a loose confederation of equal sovereign nations to
>choose a single leader, a confederation all but destroyed by a fascist
>dictatorship in the 1860s. For the last 140 years, decent individuals
>in this civilization have been struggling to reestablish that loose
>confederation. Abolishing the Electoral College is a step in the wrong
> The claim that the election of 2000 proves that each of our votes
>counts is untrue. If the Democrats have their way, it will have proven
>only that the whining of 19,000 morons outweighs the best efforts and
>most reasoned opinions of the millions who are forced to pay for their
>* A SPECIAL REQUEST FROM L. NEIL SMITH: My first work of non-fiction,
>_Lever Action_, is nearing completion. My publisher, Mountain Media
>(the same folks who brought you Vin Suprynowicz's splendid _Send in
>the Waco Killers_), have asked me for "blurbs" to put on the back
>cover. If you have enjoyed my essays, speeches, or novels and would
>like a chance to say so to those thinking about buying my latest book,
>please write a sentence or two about it, click on the address below,
>and send it to Deke Castleman at <mailto:editor@huntingtonpress.com>.

Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:50:20 MDT