I looked for the value of the statements your congressman said.  It's
pretty slim pickings...

Rights, let's focus on your comments:

>It's rare, is it not, to find a politician who is claiming to be
>interested in disbanding the IRS and the illegal system of taxation?

"illegal".  Interesting.  Well, let's not get off the point - no, it's not
rare to find politicians interested in disbanding the IRS.  Sure, they're
not common.  But this is massively simplistic... you (I say you cos it's
not my country) follow this guy down his path, he disbands the IRS, and
then says, "Well, fuck you, you jobless work-shy bastards - go out and get
a job, because we're not going to support you."  Oops - you didn't know he
was talking about abolishing all welfare, did you?

>And I fail to see how you get "follow this man down the free market
>path" out of concepts such as the dissolution of the illegal Federal
>Reserve system, and a return to Government issued cash?!
>This is diametrically OPPOSED to the capital free market reign of
>terror economy we have now.....  With it's integral component of the
>welfare state....

Right.  This person was pro-free-market in his appeal for help.  No doubt
about that.  I note with some amusement your (and his) use of "illegal" as
if it's some justification.  It's illegal to jaywalk, drive over the speed
limit, smoke marijuana.  By your argument, rather than act to make a change
we should all obey the law, the Constitution, or both.

This person struck me as much more Libertarian than is good for anyone...
now where did I put that piece Chomsky wrote about what he thinks would
happen if Libertarians came to power...?

>Unless you choose to be too intellectual to have any interest in
>vulgar politics perhaps a little critical thinking WOULD be in order.

A more just and fair society will not come about through politicians.  This
man is a politician - sure, one of the most honest ones, but a politician
nonetheless.  Note that I am not claiming disinterest in *politics* - but
politics is not the sole providence of the politicians!


>However they're not going to do you any good if we are unable to act
>upon them in the absence of the Good Housekeeping Seal of approval
>Wobbly candidate for Congress.

There is no hope coming from your Congress.  None.  Nor from your
President, your courts, or anything.  The only effort will be made by the
people - that's us, guys.  And we can't just keep electing the same bunch
of dickheads to our respective governments - they're the same lot.  In
Australia, the difference between the Liberal and Labor parties is a matter
of scale... the Labor party will still fuck you over, but they'll take
slightly longer doing it.  The same applies to your Republicans and
Democrats.  But independants, almost without exception, can't offer an
alternative because once you elect them, that's it.  We're looking for
democracy here, and democracy is much more than just a vote every four years.

>If you want to boycott government altogether, either in denial of the
>rapidly unfolding facist state, or in the hopes that "someone" will
>do something about it before we are all powerless national ID card
>holders or tatooed prisoners, it's your choice.....

Oh please... "someone"s are doing things about the anti-democratic pushes
by our respective governments, but you seriously expect to find them in
Congress?

As a reminder of what this person was calling for:


>We would have no welfare for big corporations, or the "poor"

>no attacks on private property

> Under liberty, we built the greatest, freest, > most prosperous, most
> decent country on earth.

This would be the country which happily conducts covert operations to bring
down popularly-elected governments?

>They aren't natural to the free market;

And we know what *is* natural to the free market, don't we?

>After all, the UN is socialist and corrupt



+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
|alister air : helpdesk officer : information technology division |
|   university of technology sydney : australia : ph-9514 1997    |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
|"I don't mean to imply that leadership is the same as a con job. |
| The differences are substantial, in the sense that leadership   |
| pays much more and doesn't require quick wits." - Scott Adams   |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+