The Libertists

First. That there be prefixed to the Constitution a declaration, that all power is originally vested in, and consequently derived from, the people. That Government is instituted and ought to be exercised for the benefit of the people; which consists in the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the right of acquiring and using property, and generally of pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety. That the people have an indubitable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to reform or change their Government, whenever it be found adverse or inadequate to the purposes of its institution. Secondly. That in article 1st, section 2, clause 3, these words be struck out, to wit: "The number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty thousand, but each State shall have at least one Representative, and until such enumeration shall be made;" and that in place thereof be inserted these words, to wit: "After the first actual enumeration, there shall be one Representati

Someone recently asked me this question. I was shocked. I had come to think the word was self-evident. So I turned to google to make sure I wasn't just a snooty upturned nose type forcing plebs to accept my jargon. Typing "define Libertist" into google and you have to go almost to the bottom before you come into the definition.  Google assumes I meant Liberttist, with two t's. A Liberttist, two t's, is a person that writes the texts that go along with an Opera and this text is called a Libretto. It, dictionary.com, tells me is derived from Libro, or book. Fair enough and completely sensical (I used 'sensical' on purpose because English professors everywhere still think it is not a word. My typing it and publishing it here, prove, gentlemen, otherwise).  But if you take out that second t the word means: one that defends Liberty. Thus my reason for shock, because I had assumed that since the word was in the name, that the clarity and purpose of modifyi

Once upon a time, the US Army had a strict no gay’s policy. The US Army’s argument was that two men attracted to each other would fraternize. This intermingling would, according to them, have a serious effect on their ability to give orders, would demoralize the troops and thus, would leave the US defenseless against communism. Of course, communism is the eventual outcome of any socialize nation, but that is a subject for a different time. This upset the gay community because it showed that there was a stigma to being gay that could be associated with deviant behavior. Of course, being gay does not make one a deviant. Yet, the idea of one being gay automatically lumped all gay people into the same bucket. The US Military and by association: the US Government, thus the voting populous, made the ridiculous assumption that they couldn’t take the chance that a gay person was actually a good, ethically consistent, person, it was easier to assume that all gay people were sex crazy de