Special to L. Neil Smith’s The Libertarian Enterprise

Send Letters to editor@ncc-1776.org
Note: All letters to this address will be considered for
publication unless they say explicitly Not For Publication

Elizabeth Warren is building an anti-crypto army. Some conservatives are on board. - POLITICO

Elizabeth Warren is building an anti-crypto army. Some conservatives are on board.

I hope this harridan hugs an incoming terrorist with a suicide bomb belt at the southern border!

Ditto for her RINO fellow travelers.

BTW the Harridan is worth 12 Million. Being a career politician is living proof that crime pays.

Jeff Fullerton
[email protected]

My Real Feelings on the Holy Thursday Massacre - YouTube

Latest Kamp Kenan

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOHdKQrjLqM

This could be a watershed event like the time Maryland DNR went on a confiscation spree in 1992 that resulted in a lot of blowback from bad publicity and sweeping changes that in many ways were a big win for reptile hobbyists in that state.

Jeff Fullerton
[email protected]

The VERY BEST by Larkin Rose

I AM YOUR KING!

The VERY BEST by Larkin Rose

THIS is the VERY BEST that Larkin Rose has ever done!

The next logical step for him is discovery of L. Neil Smith's Covenant of Unanimous Consent because the Covenant is a PERSONAL Declaration of how I (the Signatory) intend to conduct interpersonal relations* based on the Non-Aggression Principle and "The Bare Minimum" that two people need to agree upon in order to live together peacefully and productively.

*Excerpt:

...THE UNDERSIGNED Witnesses to the Lesson of History -- that no Form of political Governance may be relied upon to secure the individual Rights of Life, Liberty, or Property -- now therefore establish and provide certain fundamental Precepts measuring our Conduct toward one another, and toward others:

Dennis Wilson
[email protected]

HM Rose is at least as legit as the emperor Joshua Norton. — Editor

counting the cost

The overturning of Roe v. Wade in the Dobbs case continues to disturb me a year later. This has nothing to do with my opinion on the right or wrong of abortion. It has to do with the idea that since the original Constitution does not state that a woman has the right to get an abortion, no such right is guaranteed under the Constitution. This is dangerous because it goes against the 9th Amendment, which states "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

This junking of the 9th Amendment may not seem like aa big deal.

At least until you realize that the Constitution nowhere contains a right to educate yourself, to get medical attention, to protect your life, property, and liberty from criminals. Notice I did not say get these things from the government, but to do them for yourself. By the way, the right to government assistance in obtaining these ends is not in the Constitution either. These are all rights not enumerated in the Constitution, though almost all people would claim -the right to private self- defense, privately obtained education and medical attention, and many also claim that the benefits of these rights should be provided by the government. By junking the Ninth Amendment, Dobbs essentially places Federal recognition of these rights, or rather, their protection in jeopardy.

So, if you think Dobbs and its restriction of abortion rights is good law. tell me, is it worth the potential cost in rights and liberties?

Albert Perez
[email protected]