Big Head Press

L. Neil Smith's
Number 504, February 1, 2009

"Their dream is the impossible one, as
they must Control 300 million Americans"

  Table of Contents Contents Next Next

Letters to the Editor

Send Letters to
Note: All letters to this address will be considered for
publication unless they say explicitly Not For Publication

[Letters to the editor are welcome on any and all subjects. Sign your letter in the text body with your name and e-mail address as you wish them to appear, otherwise we will use the information in the "From:" header!]

Letter from Marc V. Ridenour

Letter from A.X. Perez

Letter from ET

Another Letter from A.X. Perez

Another Letter from Marc V. Ridenour

Yet Another Letter from A.X. Perez

Letter from Kent McManigal

To the Editor:

Obama has all of the tools necessary to implemenet his vision of a "Brave New World" Order—watch this:

Also, click on for more truly frightening information!

Marc V. Ridenour
marcvridenour -+at+-

Re: "Reality Check" by A.X. Perez

In "Reality Check" I made the statement "The difference between bad and worse is less than the difference between good and bad." I obviously meant "the difference between bad and worse is greater than the difference between good and bad." Healthy is good. A viral infection with a fever of just under 104 degrees is bad. Developing pneumonia as a secondary infection from said illness is worse. We already got the flu, the trick is to keep it from turning into pneumonia.

Meanwhile my buddy (or alternate personality) Crazy Al has heard my confession and assigned me to read Stranger in a Strange Land again as penance. By the way I have turned my students on to The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress. Let's see if my bosses offer me hemlock. Then again Anthem is one of the standards where I teach.

A.X. Perez
perez180ehs -+at+-


Re: "Taxes, Statism, Authority and Anal rape. Or Three Weddings and a Funeral?" by David Earnest

Okay, fess up: How is it that you "saw" the connivance in "Y2K," but completely missed the contrivance of the "Dot.Bomb?"

Enquiring minds want to know!


Today is Superbowl Sunday. Most Americans are more concerned today about the point spread than gun control. Tomorrow they will be more concerned about making the rent or mortgage than having their Email snooped by the FBI. They will be more worried over traffic congestion than how excessive taxes are affecting the price of gas.

This is as it should be. People should be too busy being free to think about it. Of course, some of us enjoy studying on freedom and reading and writing about it. And we should be able to do that too.

Then there are those gits who are spending today thinking about how to impose gun control, snoop Email, raise taxes and censoring what the rest of read and write. Guess it gripes them we are having fun. May they be as far from having achieved their goals next year as this, preferably further.

A.X. Perez
perez180ehs -+at+-

Barack Husein Obama seeks to silemnce all dissent

To the Editor:

In earlier letters dated 09/12/2008 & 11/28/2008, I warned that President Barack Hussein Obama (bin-Laden?) would try to crush public dissent by going after talk-radio shows, and quite possibly, the Internet, as well. Tragically, the first part of my prediction is coming to pass. In a article headlined "White House plan puts bull's-eye on talk shows", Barack Hussein Obama's (bin-Laden?) clear threat: "You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done." was quoted—and he means it.

Barack Hussein Obama (bin-Laden?) and his counterparts—Saul Alinsky, Raul and Fidel Castro, Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Jimmy Hoffa, just to mention a few corrupt thugs who attained positions of power—all seek to silence opposition—some with Gestapo and KGB secret police, others with turbas divinas divine mobs), "dignity battalions', Guardia Civils or whatever else they name their sturmtruppen. (Civilian Security Forces, too?).

This is just the beginning, folks. May God have mercy on us all. (Oh, I think I just violated another sacred canon of the Politically Correct—I mentioned God.)

Marc V. Ridenour
marcvridenour -+at+-

After careful study of the facts and even more carefully thinking out the implications of what I'm about to write I have concluded that there are circumstances in which it is ethical and moral to deny someone weapons. These are all variations of the theme that the person in question wishes to use these weapons specifically to violate the rights of others, not to defend his own rights.

This is a decision that can only be made by the person giving or selling the weapons in question. No one can or should be denied the responsibility of making this decision. Please note that this is not a denial of the would be buyer's right to be armed as an enforcement of the vendor or donor's right to dispose of his property in a manner he feels is morally responsible. No congress, court or government agency can change this.

This is quite appropriate. The fact is that too many legislators, judges and government agents are people whose custom I would feel morally bound to refuse if I was selling weapons.

Especially most advocates of gun control and the police who delight in enforcing their will.

A.X. Perez
perez180ehs -+at+-

New libertarian Meetup group

I am sending this to all the liberty lovers in my contact list. Does that make me guilty of "spamming"?

Just in case you know of anyone in the Clovis, New Mexico area who would be interested in a libertarian Meetup group, I present:

Kent McManigal
dullhawk -+at+-


Rational Review
Rational Review

Rational Review News Digest
Rational Review News Digest

Help Support TLE by patronizing our advertisers and affiliates.
We cheerfully accept donations!

to advance to the next article
  Table of Contents
to return to The Libertarian Enterprise, Number 504, February 1, 2009

Big Head Press