Big Head Press

L. Neil Smith's
Number 495, November 30, 2008

"The Thought Police have arrived."

  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publication unless they say explicitly Not For Publication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 Linda Cirincione

Letter from Joan Trofino

Letter from Crazy Al

Letter from L. Neil Smith

Letter from Dave Earnest


Re: "The Crimes of Sarah Palin" by L. Neil Smith

You may be right about the reaction of some liberal females... I haven't heard the same types of comments you have. Or perhaps (more likely IMO) there are just idiotic comments made by extremists (& idiots) on both sides. I think you really picked the wrong (worst!) person to use as an example. All of the negative comments I've heard about Sarah Palin have been totally accurate.

To call Sarah Palin a 'real woman' is incredibly absurd IMO. She is an absolute no-nothing moron—literally & politically. (Her knowledge of Russia is based on the ability to see it across the water...? Africa is a country...?) She supports censorship, Israel (the Zionist agenda), the bankers/corporate elitists, religious influence on government, (need I go on?)... & is merely another tool of those in power. She may have come from a working-class background, but she is an elite-'wannabe' & cares nothing for those she has already mentally left behind. There is no way, under any circumstances, that I would ever consider voting for her—or even want to know her as a person. Most of the republicans, libertarians, constitutionalists & independents that I know, both male AND female, feel the same way about her.

That said.... I also dislike Hillary intensely. I find them equally repellant. (As do most of the people I know.)

My dislike of both of these women has nothing whatsoever to do with supposedly resenting women with 'power' (although I have met people who actually are resentful/afraid of women with 'power' when I worked in a large corporation & also owned a small business). My dislike of these two women has to do with their political views/manipulations, their lack of personal integrity, their lack of regard for the condition & future of the non-elite in terms of the effects of their policies, their lack of regard for the Constitution, their ties to the NWO & its agenda, & the fact that both seem to embody the concept of 'evil' (although Hillary, obviously, has way more experience in that arena).

And btw—I am NOT a liberal, although I am pro-choice.

I am philosophically a libertarian (see note below). Owning/using guns & being pro-choice ARE totally compatible (& libertarian) positions. I respect other people's choices for their own lives & bodies & I expect others to respect my choices. I can respect Palin's choice regarding her last child. But I also expect her (& the government) to respect the right of everyone to make their own choices in this regard. I do NOT respect anyone who would attempt to limit the choices of others by putting their own religious (or personal) views into government laws & regulations.

Linda Cirincione
lindac15 -+at+-

[Note: I did run for office as a libertarian Republican this year. As did several other libertarians that I know. If Ron Paul considers that a more effective way to actually gain political positions, then it's worth a try. It seems to have worked for those in the Republican Libertarian Caucus & it's worth trying to take back the party from the religious right extremists & the fascists/corporatists who control it now. It sure hasn't worked out too well trying to run as 3rd party candidates, although I hope that will change in the future. I also don't care for the new leadership/direction of the Libertarian party & the fact that they did not put Ron Paul on the ballot as the Libertarian party candidate—as the Constitutionalist party did in Montana. The Constitutionalists believe in too much religious influence on the law for my tastes (ie. re: freedom of choice & victimless crime laws). Most other 3rd parties are too small, ineffective +/or have been co-opted.]

Re: "The Crimes of Sarah Palin" by L. Neil Smith

Mr. Smith:

You are one of the few journalists willing to write a truthful article about Sarah Palin which I read in the Las Vegas Review Journal 11/21/08. Bravo for your courage and insights into one of the most hateful bashings any female candidate has endured most especially from her own gender as well as her own party (Peggy Noonan).

I agree with all of your premises except one you failed to mention she is also a beautiful lady and as such stirs primal jealousy from many women... too bad some of my gender is still in their hearts a "bunch of teenagers...."

Joan Trofino
jtrofino -+at+-

After much careful meditation I have concluded that the Le Mat revolver is the prototype of the perfect home defense weapon.

The weapon in question (if it's ever produced) would have an eight inch long .45 caliber barrel over a matching length 20 gauge shot barrel.

It would be a break top 9 round revolver using the shotgun barrel as its cylinder pin. Opening the barrel would eject the pistol casings and raise the shot shell up just enough so that it could be pulled out by the user. Haven't decided if the revolver part of weapon should be chambered for .45 LC or .45 ACP (using full moon or third moon clips).

Of course bringing this gun into production and making it readily available would require repealing at least part of the Gangster Weapons Act. This would be a good thing, perhaps those of you mechanically inclined can work on perfecting the design while those more inclined to play politics can work on this repeal. Maybe you can get rid of the entire law meant to disarm Depression Era potential revolutionaries and people can get my second choice home defense weapon, a twelve to fourteen inch gas operated semiauto 10 gauge shotgun.

Of course we still have to work on affording our tools and toys, but that's another story.

Crazy Al
perez180ehs -+at+-

PS: My good friend A.X. Perez (or is he my other personality? I forget) lent me the us of his address for this. Nice guy, if a little naive.

[Sounds like a cool idea!—Editor]

Footnote from A.X. Perez:

The weapons chosen for household defense by my buddy Crazy Al (or is he my other personality? I forget.) were chosen to meet the following criteria:

A. Large and heavy enough to positively affect recoil and accuracy (that's why Crazy Al likes gas operated semiauto shotguns in stead of pump actions) and have a decent sight radius.

B. Short enough to be handy in close quarters and to be hard for an intruder to grab and rassle over (Crazy Al's phrasing and spelling.).

C. Large caliber for obvious reasons. Al tells me that the shotgun and shot barrel in pistol should be loaded with No. 6 shot. Claims will do job art household ranges while reducing risks of overpenatration. Claims that's why he favors ten gauge over twelve. he thinks the larger bore will make up for the smaller shot.

Crazy Al's ideas are all "book larnin'" and theory but they sound reasonable to me.

Please read this article from the International Hearald Tribune:

A fiery Czech is poised to be the face of Europe
By Dan Bilefsky
Tuesday, November 25, 2008

PRAGUE: In the 1980s, a Communist secret police agent infiltrated clandestine economics seminars hosted by Vaclav Klaus, a fiery future leader of the Czech Republic, who had come under suspicion for extolling free market virtues. Rather than reporting on Marxist heresy, the agent was most struck by Klaus's now famous arrogance.

"His behavior and attitudes reveal that he feels like a rejected genius," the agent noted in his report, which has since been made public. "He shows that whomever does not agree with his views is stupid and incompetent."

L. Neil Smith



The purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible victory in defense. (waiting for attack)

The sword is more important than the shield, and skill is more important than either.. The final weapon is the brain. All else is supplemental.

1. Don't pick a fight with an old man. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.

2. If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck.

3. I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy.

4. When seconds count, the cops are just minutes away.

5. A reporter did a human-interest piece on the Texas Rangers. The reporter recognized the Colt Model 1911 the Ranger was carrying and asked him 'Why do you carry a 45?' The Ranger responded, 'Because they don't make a 46.'

6. The old sheriff was attending an awards dinner when a lady commented on his wearing his sidearm. 'Sheriff, I see you have your pistol. Are you expecting trouble?' 'No Ma'am. If I were expecting trouble, I would have brought my shotgun.'

7. Beware the man who only has one gun. HE PROBABLY KNOWS HOW TO USE IT!!!

But wait, there's more!

I was once asked by a lady visiting if I had a gun in the house. I said I did. She said 'Well I certainly hope it isn't loaded!' To which I said, of course it is loaded, can't work without bullets!' She then asked, 'Are you that afraid of someone evil coming into your house?' My reply was, 'No not at all. I am not afraid of the house catching fire either, but I have fire extinguishers around, and they are all loaded too.' To which I'll add, having a gun in the house that isn't loaded is like having a car in the garage without gas in the tank.

HAVE A NICE DAY But don't Monkey with Me....

And Remember:

I'm a firm believer of the 2nd Amendment!
If you are too, please forward.

Forwarded to TLE by Dave Earnest
earnest_dave -+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 495, November 30, 2008

Big Head Press