Big Head Press

L. Neil Smith's
Number 647, December 4, 2011

"Fascism" is a 20th century variation on the system
Adam Smith denounced as "mercantilism". Not only
will it not fix what's wrong with America now,
it is what's wrong with America now.

Previous Previous Table of Contents Contents Next Next

Letters to the Editor

Bookmark and Share

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publication unless they say explicitly Not For Publication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 L. Neil Smith

Letter from Wayne Grantham

Letter from

The Repulsive Mr. Clinton

Dear Ken,

To my disgust, but not my surprise, when showed up in my Inbox Monday morning, it featured a fawning interview with Bill Clinton, who basically endorsed the Presidential candidacy of Newt Gingrich—which should give Gingrich-supporters pause—and went on to prescribe some remedies for what's ailing this country.

I would have written this letter to about it, but, interestingly, like many a liberal publication, they provided no way to do it, knowing perfectly well what their readers would have to say about helping Waco Willie pimp his latest scrawlings.

It was the same old crap. The technical term for the partnership arrangement Bill Clinton proposes between business and government— to nobody's astonishment—is "fascism", a 20th century variation on the system Adam Smith denounced as "mercantilism". Not only will it not fix what's wrong with America now, it is what's wrong with America now.

Typically, Clinton heaps vague and formless praise on small businesses and the middle class—and then opposes any relief from the crippling burden of taxation and regulaton he helped to maintain as President. Only a "progressive" will break both your legs and then make fun of you because you can't walk. Clinton's just more subtle— and crueller.

Toward the end of Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand proposes a Constitutional amendment formally separating economy and state. That's exactly what we need now, and nothing else will do. Somebody should tell Clinton—except that he already knows.

L. Neil Smith

Was that worth reading?
Then why not:

Antonio Villa Grossa, el alcalde del Pueblo de Los Angeles, said today that last night's raid 'pon the Occupy LA pig sty in the park next to City Hall, was LAPD's finest hour. Excuse me while I wipe down my monitor of the Diet Coke that just blew out of my mouth and nose!

LAPD has very few "fine hours." From their having run and hid during the various racial riots (having allowed the rioters to run mindlessly in the streets, burning, busting things up and looting stores, and admonishing the property owners not to retaliateto the post baxabaw riots, to the insane attacks on innocents at the May Day gathering a few years ago, to the lockdown of thousands in the San Fernando Valley a couple of years ago over a mentally unstable cop who shot himself and made up a story about having been attacked, LAPD makes the Keystone Kops look positively Sherlock Holmesian by comparison.

Following the nazification of police departments throughout the country, most of LAPD is militarized, jack-booted and armed and armored. LAPD has to be canned en mass and replaced by an armed citizenry, each individual of which has the sense to protect his own family and property responsibly.

Wayne Grantham

Was that worth reading?
Then why not:

Madness, Utter Madness

I really thought it would be all but impossible to top Gunwalker as a violation of American rights. I mean, the arming of foreign criminals to create a pretext to deny honest Americans their rights seemed pretty hard to beat.

Turns out that our senators are more creative than one would expect.As originally planned the National Defense Authorization Act they hoped to pass would have allowed the military to detain American citizens without charges as long as they want and to seize them any where in the World, even the United States even if they are not in a hot combat zone.

"We don't need no stinkin' Bill of Rights."

Presumably the intent of this "act" is to fight terrorism. This is ironic as this act so thoroughly anti (not merely un) constitutional that it is an act of war and terrorism against the US. The first people the military would have to detain under it would be the Senators and Congressmen who voted for it.

How can anyone be so stupid?

A.X. Perez

Was that worth reading?
Then why not:

Big Head Press