Big Head Press

L. Neil Smith's
Number 591, October 11, 2010

"Privacy is ultimately about liberty while
surveillance is always about control"

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publication unless they say explicitly Not For Publication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 from Valentine Michael Smith (a.k.a. Bill Koehler)

Letter from Paul Bonneau

Letter from Crazy Al

Letter from L. Neil Smith

Letter from A.X. Perez

The root of all evil and the road to victory

As long as the socialists control education they will never lose because they control the future. Government schools are the root of all evil.

If Libertarians want to win elections we must offer them what others will not and it must be of great value. (Trust me it's not freedom when the dumb asses already believe that they are free.)

So how do we win? We get a ton of money which we never had before by getting small business on our side. But what can we offer them that others will not? Think carefully. What is the greatest fear that everyone in business has?

The frivolous lawsuit! What will libertarians offer that the others do not and will not offer? If we can field candidates to run for the office of District Attorney, who do you think can file criminal charges against those who use the law to commit extortion, including their lawyers?

File a frivolous lawsuit and face a criminal charge of extortion, and your lawyer faces charges of abuse of process. We may not win but I'll bet we get a lot of attention and a lot of donations.

Valentine Michael Smith (a.k.a. Bill Koehler)

Like this? Why not pay the author!
Select amount then click "Donate Now"

Pay to Valentine Michael Smith (a.k.a. Bill Koehler)

Is the Federal government legitimate?

Not long ago I asked this question in a gun forum, using a forum poll. This forum was not particularly libertarian or anarchist. The results were that 37% said yes, 53% said no, that the federal government was not legitimate—and 10% said "Don't know, or other". There were 57 respondents.

Why ask? We know the answer, don't we?

The reason for asking is to get others to think about a very important point, a question that the state cannot bear to have asked, let alone answered. We should all be asking this question, in every forum we subscribe to—particularly the non-anarchist and non-libertarian ones.

The state's very lifeblood is the perception of legitimacy. This is the true reason all governments control "education"—to make sure budding citizens view it as the sole legitimate power over them, and to make sure any questions about it are so repressed, buried so deep, it would never occur to an ordinary citizen to ask them.

We can ask it for them.

There is no need to lead the subsequent discussion, or make sure it is going in the right direction. Just ask, and see where it goes. It is little things like this, that undermine the meme of government worship.

Plant that seed of freedom in their minds. Take a poll of your associates. Ask the question.

Paul Bonneau
2 paulbx1 dfgh net

Like this? Why not pay the author!
Select amount then click "Donate Now"

Pay to Paul Bonneau


I really don't like John C. Calhoun. Consider the following:

While Secretary of War he wanted to censure Andrew Jackson (some say he wanted to hang Old Hickory) for invading and stealing Florida. Thing is he forgot to tell this to Andrew Jackson when accepting the Colonel's offer of the vice presidency. This is just a little bit dishonest.

He was one of the early promoters of the Bank of the United States. He was one of the authors of the Tariff of Abomination as an attempt to embarass John Quincy Adams (whose vice president he was at the time,). He also pushed renewing the BUS charter early to provoke a political fight with Andy Jackson. You may note a tendency to promote autocratic institutions here, especially at his bosses' expense.

After years of supporting the Nationalist (strong central government) cause he became a s supporter of states' rights and nullification, nearly provoking a civil war over the tariff he pushed back in 1828. Now the problems with tariffs should have created an alliance between westerners and southerners. Yet....

He then brings up the Positive Good argument in defense of slavery. As people keep reminding me, slavery and its spread was a propaganda issue misdirecting people form the fight over tariffs and states rights versus strong central government. It was a distraction. Well John C. Calhoun is the person who brought it up thirty years before the War of Secession. Thirty three years later Lincoln would pretend to take the moral high ground over this issue.

For better or worse Calhoun created the monsters he professed to oppose. He's the guy who stopped the agricultural west from allying with the agricultural south and pushed them into the arms of the yankee bankers and industrialists. And he had a habit of stabbing his bosses in the back.

It's almost as if he was a time traveller trying to provoke a Civil War in the US. Hmmm.

Crazy Al
Somewhere in Far West Texas

Like this? Why not pay the author!
Select amount then click "Donate Now"

Pay to A.X. Perez

Oh No!

Seen at

"Feel-Good Morning Open Thread: 'You're a Fraud' Shouts a Patriot at 'Climate Change' Hypocrite, Al Gore", posted by Frank Ross

What's wrong with the trees in my back yard?? The leaves are turning yellow.

Oh no!! It must be climate change! Oh please, please, Mr. Gore. You've GOT to jump on your private jet and come save my trees.

L. Neil Smith

Like this? Why not pay the author!
Select amount then click "Donate Now"

Pay to L. Neil Smith

Poppa wants a whole new Bad

If you get Showtime you may have seen the "Dueling Banjos" ad for Weeds and The Big C. Basically the protagonists are telling each other their problems simultaneously. Finally one says, "You get me."

Unfortunately it is obvious that neither the Democratic or Republican Party get the Tea Party. Both want it to be merely an extremist conservative movement. The Republicans are hoping to co-opt the Tea Baggers, the Democrats want to portray and run against them as extreme right wing and probably racist nut cases. Both are hoping to neutralize the movement, like putting eggshells in coffee grounds to reduce acidity.

The Tea Bag movement is more than this. It is a rejection of the status quo the "Major Parties" have created. While obviously anti tax, they are for and against a variety of issues which I will leave to others to spell out. Most importantly, the paradigms which Democrats and Republicans are using are less and less in touch with the will of the American people.

It represents more than a demand for a "New Deal." It is a demand for a whole new game. By 2012 the moribund platforms of the Old Parties will have to be replaced by new plans or a new party will emerge to take their place. And if that doesn't work 2014 is going to get real loud.

A.X. Perez

Like this? Why not pay the author!
Select amount then click "Donate Now"

Pay to A.X. Perez


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!

Big Head Press