THE LIBERTARIAN ENTERPRISE
Number 701, December 16, 2012
"There have been just too many repetitions, too
many elements in common, too many coincidences.
As a consequence, I believe that Americans have
obeyed their last gun law."
Send Letters to firstname.lastname@example.org
Re: "Moo" by L. Neil Smith
I just finished reading "MOO" by Neil, and I just have one criticism of his idea of a bill of rights penalty clause: why wouldn't "they" just completely ignore it like everything else in there they find inconvenient?
P. Scott Williams
To which Mr. Smith replied:
Of course they'll ignore it—until the first one is arrested and jailed—there are sheriffs willing to do that.
L. Neil Smith
Call for Prometheus Award Best Novel nominations
If you have found a 2012 novel that might be worthy of nomination for the Prometheus Award for Best Novel, please let us know!
The Best Novel finalist judging committee is entering its final two months of work, and we are eager to find any other works worth nominating.
Please send any suggestions (or formal nominations) to Michael Grossberg, Best Novel finalist committee chair, at email@example.com
Please include the following information: the title of the novel, the author, the publisher and the month/year of publication. (It helps a lot if you also can provide any contact info—email address, websites, phones) of the publisher and/or the author.)
Just as an update, here is the list of 2012 nominations so far:
2012 Prometheus Best Novel Nominees:
Was that worth reading?
Re: "WND: Leave Lennon Alone" by L. Neil Smith
Your Editorness ...
I've never been sure whether I'd have liked John Lennon if I met him in person. The following YouTube recording, though, sent to me by my daughter after she read my article about him last week, has me thinking maybe I would.
L. Neil Smith
Was that worth reading?
I just wtote this to a guy on a FaceBook warrior site who thinks it's too late and nothing we do can save us from the end of civilization. Having changed his name to avoid more embarrassment than he's gotten already,here is my reply:
I don't know who you are, but you're like that one, inevitable character in disaster movies, on the bus, train, airplane, dirigible, or whatever, who screams "We're all going to die!" and has to bitch-slapped by a stewardess.
I am so sick and tired of conservatives who would rather lie down and give up than actually DO anything, I could puke. Years ago, I spent several months as the resident firearms expert on a radio program, here in northern Colorado, listening to phone calls from conservatives who actually _resented_ me for presenting solutions to problems. If it weren't for them and their ilk, we'd have a free country by now.
The other side, the Donkey Boys, is weak and stupid. If the "other other side", the Elephant Men, which is equally weak and stupid, hadn't given us their weakest and stupidest candidate to vote for, things would be changing for the better, right now.
As it is, our Marxoid overlords know that they have only a narrow window in which to work their will on us. If we oppose them at every turn, their time will pass, and regaining our free country will begin. Take two steps right now: join Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (you don't have to be Jewish—I'm not) at www.jpfo.org
Then go buy and read my book Down With Power: Libertarian Policy in a Time of Crisis, available from Amazon,com or B&N.com in dead-tree or e-book format. It's one of those underground "silent" bestsellers, like _Unintended Consequences_ and it could be the only thing standing between all of us and a FEMA concentration camp.
As you read it, you'll find plenty of things to do.
So do them.
L. Neil Smith
Was that worth reading?
NRA Victory for Self-Defense and the Second Amendment: Federal Court Strikes Down Illinois Ban on Carrying Handguns In Public
The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ruled today that
Illinois' total ban on carrying firearms for self-defense outside the home
or business is unconstitutional. To review the Shepard v. Madigan Seventh
Circuit Court of Appeals decision, click here.
The NRA funded Shepard case
involves lead plaintiff Mary Shepard, an Illinois resident and trained gun
owner, who is licensed to carry a concealed handgun in both Utah and
Florida. The National Rifle Association is funding this case. The Illinois
State Rifle and Pistol Association is a co-plaintiff in this case. All of
the court filings in this case can be viewed at
A sister case, Moore v. Madigan, was also decided in the same opinion. That case was sponsored by the Second Amendment Foundation.
On September 28, 2009, while working as the treasurer of her church, Ms. Shepard and an 83-year-old co-worker were viciously attacked and beaten by a six-foot-three-inch, 245 pound man with a violent past and a criminal record. Ms. Shepard and her co-worker were lucky to survive, as each of them suffered major injuries to the head, neck and upper body. Ms. Shepard's injuries required extensive surgeries and she continues physical therapy to this day attempting to recover from her injuries.
In today's decision, Judge Richard Posner ruled that Illinois' ban on carriage is unconstitutional. The Judge went on to say, "One doesn't have to be a historian to realize that a right to keep and bear arms for personal self-defense in the eighteenth century could not rationally have been limited to the home. . . . Twenty-first century Illinois has no hostile Indians. But a Chicagoan is a good deal more likely to be attacked on a sidewalk than in his apartment on the 35th floor."
The court also held:
More news to come as the decision is further analyzed.
Please help us get the word out!
Michel & Associates, P.C., Attorneys at Law
A Little Bit of Truth
The best thing that could happen with the so called "Fiscal Cliff" is for The United States to go over it. Assuming raising taxes is necessary (which is a lie) and that cutting spending is necessary (which it is) and that both must be carried out to painful degrees to be effective going over the "Cliff" is the best thing that could be done at this time.
It was the best thing that could be done back when the legislative booby trap creating it was enacted. However, it was also political suicide. So Congress and the President put it off for two years and tried to think of a better idea that didn't involve involuntary retirement on 6 November 2012. Now they are scrambling for a more palatable solution (or at least placebo to make things look like they're trying) that will save their careers.
So let's go over the "Cliff." Let's see if your elected representatives have enough hormone to admit that going over the "Cliff" is a good and necessary first step to saving the Federal Government's finances and keeping the economy going under their rules. Then on 4 November 2014 we can have a real election over whether the American people want to keep playing out the same old game with the same old rules or admit it's time for a New deal (to coin a phrase) of the cards.
Neale Osborn and others have said pretty much the same thing in the past, let me just add my voice and my phrasing to theirs.
To which Mr. Osborn replied:
Here's the problem. Not to take the Republican side of things, but the DEMOCRATS have refused to do their Constitutional duty for 4 years. Not one fucking budget proposed by them when they ran the House, where budgets must, by Constitutional rules, begin. Once the Republicans too control of the House, the Dems, under Harry Reid, have refused to bring them to a vote. So, for four years, with no one listening to the Republicans (Paul Ryan had a decent start) when they tried to force one. I am not saying their plans would have worked, but at least they tried to make a start.
But the one thing ALL of us are overlooking is that the socialist party "D" WANTS us over the cliff. It keeps them from having to vote to cut military spending (which they want to do in order to spend more on welfare) OR to give across the board tax hikes (which they want because every penny WE keep is a penny THEY cannot spend). The so-called "Cliff" is the goal. And their response to it will be "No we have NO CHOICE but to raise taxes to protect us." The other thing is the president is trying to get his hands on the debt ceiling. He wants to be able to raise our borrowing limits with no oversight. Sadly, even if it would be a good idea (which it wouldn't, with a man who, in 4 years, has obligated us to more debt than ALL presidents before him COMBINED have done, can have that much power over our debt.
We need to do one of two things. Repudiate our debt- telling the entire world to fuck off, we're not paying you, so live with it. Or we can cut everything to the bone, raise taxes for period of time (with a mandatory sunset clause requiring 90% vote to renew them) and pay debt down fast. And the cuts cannot simply be to rates of increase, but to actual spending. Cut SSI payments for all new recipients, cut out COLAs. Cut welfare payments out pretty much completely. Close ALL overseas bases, and sell off the property we own there. Sell off federal lands to private citizens (dirt cheap). Lay off soldiers and sailors.
Our third option would be a revolution. I know how I vote!