A Peculiar Exchange

Alexander S. Peak

5 March 2006

I had a most peculiar exchange over the Internet in January.  I gentleman identifying himself as James Lawrence Herren contacted me via email to share his opinions regarding liberal attacks on President Bush.  I’d had no contact with Mr. Herren previous to these emails, and none since.

Given that he has not emailed me back in over a month, I feel it’s safe to assume that this exchange has ended, and that he will have none more to add.  And given that this was originally emailed to my Towson@md.lp.org account, I’ve reason to believe that he found me either through this site or through the Libertarian Party of Maryland website.

Contained immediately below is Mr. Herren’s first email to me.  I made absolutely no change to the spelling, punctuation, or grammar of his email.  The only change that I’ve made to it is its font, which was originally written in large French Script MT;  I’ve changed his email to Times New Roman for easier reading.

  The Extreme Liberals  that is slandering our President ,is only expressing  the Wishfully Thinking of these Liberals , that there might
be a very small chance that President Bush may have, broke some Law. The Liberal Politician.s greed for power is so great Wishfully Thinking is the only Thinking  that Liiberal's are cable of.                  This Liberal Wishful Thinking has become,to be the Daily News. Voters are wise to what was once  the Freedom of The  Press is now  a Free Dumb Press          
 Thank You = James Lawrence Herren
[Address removed for Mr. Herren’s privacy]                

Seeing as how the gentleman was kind enough to share his views with me, I felt it only appropriate to reply.

I should make a note now, before sharing my reply with you, about my use herein of the term “liberal.”  Some of you may wish to point out to me that liberalism, in its classical sense, was very much in favour of small government and free trade, ideals held today by libertarians.  I’m quite aware of this, and the ideological roots of libertarianism found in classical liberalism, so this needs not be pointed out to me.  I chose to employ the modern, American use of the term “liberal,” the one implying an inclination to Big Government, as it seemed to me from Mr. Herren’s response that he would understand the term better in this sense.

Thus, I refer to President Bush as an extreme liberal, not in the classical sense (a la Locke, Smith, Jefferson, Thoreau, Nozick), but rather in the contemporary sense, as most Americans use the term (a la F.D.R., Sen. Clinton, Sen. Kennedy).

My response to Mr. Herren was as follows:

Sir,

The Constitution is the supreme Law of the Land.  Our Extreme Liberal President has signed into law a number of unconstitutional bills, including but not limited to the Bi-Partisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, the USASOCIALIST Act of 2001, the REAL ID Act of 2005 (which was attached to another, unrelated bill), etc.

This Extreme Liberal President has failed to cut spending, and has in fact increased spending.  The last budget our Extreme Liberal President signed into law was seven percent larger than the previous one, and 41% larger than Clinton’s biggest budget.  Our National Debt is now so exorbitant, it is above eight trillion, and still rising.

Most of this money is spent on things that are, you guessed it: unconstitutional.

I truly believe the Extreme Liberal President should be impeached.  Thanks for listening.

Sincerely,

Alex Peak

Granted, I take a position in my concluding paragraph that may at first appear extreme, but for objectivity, I should qualify that it’s my humble opinion that the vast majority of our federal politicians deserve impeachment.  I recognize that this will not happen, and so I don’t give much focus in my political life to fighting for it.  It’s just my personal belief that most of our politicians are poor protectors of our Constitution.

Our exchange did not end there.  Again, I’ve made no change to Mr. Harren’s email other than his font.  His spelling, punctuation, and grammar are seen below exactly as I received it.

ALEX  PEAK   YOU HAVE SENT ME EVIDENCE  THAT, YOU HAVE NEVER READ
 THE  CONSTITUTION , THAT IS AS CLOSE AS YOUR COMPUTER..  THE CONSTRUCTION
 WAS SETUP FOR LAWS TO HAVE BENEFIT   OF DEBATE AND VOTED IN TO LAW   IF
 NOT VETOED AND AGREED TO BY THE  PRESIDENT.

Honorable   SENATORS  CONGRESSMAN   
CONCERNED Citizens .
Talk  Show  Host         Your Honor
It is ,  the sore loser Democrats and ACLU  behaving as if    Above  the Law , not the  President.
The ACLU,   and   Liberal  Congressman   has interfered 
With FBI   Investigations   ( At least on  web sites and speeches   that  Could only  give Comfort    to  those that fight  us .  (INTERNET  NEWS  IS  WORLD  WIDE )
 Some  Of these politicians are experts  at  giving  Miss-information   and  Wild Statements  that could  only
Encourage  those that fight  us  to stay the course.
If a  Congressional  Hearing  would  not  Shame  these people in to   Behaving  at least  People  would  know who to vote out of Office
From  = James   Lawrence   Herren  =phone [Phone number removed for Mr. Herren’s privacy]
[Address removed for Mr. Herren’s privacy]  
Special  Notice  = Is it  fair to put those ,that defend  our Nation in  added Danger,  Than ,Already In,. All  of us Should Speak up With the  same courage  it takes to go in to battle . .

I AM IN DEPENDANT , AND NOT A REPUBLIC IAN  ,  THANKFUL THAT GORE THE 
BORE IS NOT 
PRESIDENT , 

I was glad to hear once again from Mr. Herren.  It showed me that he cares about the topic at hand.  Not to be outdone in giving the appearance of holding an extreme view, I gave the following reply.

Sir,

First, let it be noted that I am having massive difficulty figuring our what you are trying to convey.  Please pay closer attention to your syntax and grammar, as that would be quite helpful.

About this Constitution I supposedly haven’t read (which, oddly enough, you can find on both sites I manage), what part(s) specifically have I not read?  Perhaps Article I, Section 8—the section I happen to bring up most often in conversation—which enumerates the powers held by the federal government?  (Granted, additional powers have hence been granted through the amendment process.)  Or is it that I haven’t read, say, the tenth amendment, which clearly indicates that all powers not granted to the federal government (refer back to Article I, Section 8) belong to the states (or the people)?  Or how about Article I, Section 9, or the Bill of Rights, which subsequently place even further limits on government power?

The Constitution was set up with the explicit goal of limiting and dividing government power.  The last thing the Founders wanted was a giant Leviathan, and the second to last thing they wanted was a democracy.  (By the way, the word “democracy” appears nowhere in the Constitution.)  You claim not to be a Republican.  Fine, but that doesn’t change the fact that America is meant to be a Constitutional republic.  The Constitution establishes for us a system of federalism.  You may like that the socialists (e.g. Bush, Clinton) are increasing their base of power at the sake of those wonderful constitutional limitations the founders gave us, but I, sir, do not.

Lastly, you state “Some Of these politicians are experts at giving Miss-information [sic] and Wild Statements that could only Encourage those that fight us to stay the course.”  Very true.  But this doesn’t just extend to politicians, but also to talking-heads like Ms. Coulter.

Have a nice day.

Yours truly,

Alex Peak

This was, unfortunately, the conclusion of our dialogue with one another.  I received no further emails from Mr. Herren after this.

Alex Peak served as President of the College Libertarians of Towson, 2004–2006; Membership Chair, 2006–2007; and Vice President, 2007–2008.

Back to CLT Editorials