Re: Netscape download requirements

[David Sternlight <david@sternlight.com>]

At 3:25 PM -0700 7/19/96, Sandy Sandfort wrote:
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>                          SANDY SANDFORT
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
>
>C'punks,
>
>On Fri, 19 Jul 1996, David Sternlight wrote:
>
>> At 1:47 AM -0700 7/19/96, Cerridwyn Llewyellyn wrote:
>>
>> >Allow the government to think that we think it has the right to give
>> >us their permission and we've lost everything.  The government should
>> >need OUR permission, not the other way 'round.
>>
>> ...This is a (as far as it goes) a democracy, not a 'Llewyellyn
>> and those who agree with him' dictatorship.
>
>Actually, for what it's worth, this (meaning the US) is a
>Constitutionally limited democratic republic, NOT a dictatorship
>of the majority, the proletariate, etc.  That has been tried and
>failed too many times to mention.  Read the Ninth and Tenth
>Amendments to the Constitution for further enlightenment.

I've been around for so long that I knew when I typed the above someone
would try to take my words literally in order to avoid my point and pick
the above nit. My point stands--this is not a 'whoever and those who agree
with him' dictatorship. The administration has the legislative permission
the Constitution provides for through our elected representatives, and a
few who disagree have no standing to say that the government should ask
their permission yet again.

If they disagree with what Congress and the administration have done, there
are well-established ways to petition Congress to change it. If they fail,
t.s.--that's the way our system works. YOU don't get to force your will on
the wider population, nor do YOU get to tell them that they are poor
benighted fools who should agree with YOUR views on civil liberties. To
assert otherwise is fascism, authoritarianism, dictatorship, pick one.

David