Paul: The Fear Factor

This is probably one of the best things I have heard from a politician in a long time, and I am not even a Ron Paul supporter. :thumbs:

 

Everyone quotes Franklin that "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." (No one ever seems to mind asking (requiring) their children to give up a little liberty for their temporary safety when it comes to things like not playing in the street ... In other words, the whole concept is fundamentally flawed.)

Why doesn't anyone quote the Franklin saying that Liberty is possible only for virtuous people?

 

Once again, someone who admits no fear is concerned that the things he thinks he is smart enough to know not to be afraid of, may cause fear in all us lesser human beings.

Makes Paul a fearmonger, as well. Just of a different type.

 

If Liberty is possible for only virtuous people, then it is certainly absent from the White House and Congress.

 

So being fearful in a plane with Muslim extremists is irrational? When the entire house and senate, and all of Europe told us that there were WMD, my fear was irrational? It is easy for Ron Paul to sit there after the fact and accuse every one of fearmongering but I would like every one to go back to 9/12/01 and tell me that they didnt feel fear.

 

He says let there be guns on the plane, problem solved. Try taking out an angry captain with a .45 with your box cutter.

 

So far as I can tell, that is not a constitutional issue. I thought you were a constitutionalist.

But pretend it is not children. No one seems to mind giving up their right to drive on the left side of the road, or their right to blow through stop lights at intersections. The fact is, as you well know in spite of your comments, that there are no unfettered rights.

But that wasn't really my point. My point was about the selective invoking of Franklin.

 

This is true, as well as for most citizens.

 

I think we are witnessing an evolution of convenience. Since when is driving a privilege granted? I think that is pure and utter nonsense, and I think you do too. I don't know why you bring that up. I am not sure you have any idea what rights and privileges are, and how they are determined. It seems your whole system here is based on convenience, perhaps namely, supporting Ron Paul. But I would like to see some reasonable defense of your idea of rights vs privileges.

 

Well driving became a privilege granted when the American people consented to allow the government to license it.

 

Not true. We are all flawed. However, most American citizens are hard working, honest, and live by the rules. Most want to help others in need. There will always be a minority who are out for themselves and accomplish nothing, but this is a minority.

The pinnacle of the unvirtuous are those in the White House and Congress. They are self centered, power hungry leeches on the American people.

It seems odd that a rare good politician like Ron Paul is raked over the coals here, and those in power are praised. What does that say? Have we reached the point where self centered, power hungry politicians are virtuous over those who have integrity?

 

But a very very powerful minority. And they have accomplished more than most people are willing to admit. Or so it would seem.

Indeed they are an unvirtuous lot but in the global scheme of things they are just mid level management working to, in thier own words "anticipate, manage and constrain our reactions" for their elite one worlder overlords.

Not to me. It's taken the global elite (the absolute pinnacle of unvirtuousness) alot of small steps in the decades old process of conditioing Americans into yielding their liberties and soveriegnty bit by bit to their beloved one world government.

It says we've gotten to comfortable and cozy with the "big lie".

 

I think you have an overinflated view of depraved humanity. Most citizens will (and do) cheat whenever they can get away with it. I bet tax fraud in this country is participated in by way more than half the citizens. Not to mention the ones who engage in immoral behavior (everything from open manifestations of depravity to secret lust). We are not a "vast majority" virituous citizenry when abortion is approved and homosexuality is condoned. These things are incompatible with virtue. Man is a sinner and that means without virtue, and it shows in every arena of life.

The Bible defines virtuous for us by comparing it to the character of God. That is the only reasonable definition, and if someone disagrees, I would argue that they are not reasonable, meaning rational. Sin has so affected humanity that we don't think right, and we don't even notice that things are askance. God has set the standard for virtue.

I am not sure that they are any worse than teh drug dealers, corrupt cops, adulterers, or anyone else that lives within a few miles of all of us. That's not a high bar, granted, but there's not much difference.

I am not sure how virtuous Ron Paul is yet. I don't know enough about it. I am not greatly impressed by what I have seen, but the jury is still out for me. I think some of his positions are thoughtless and inconsistent based on what I have read. What I have seen has been fairly poorly argued. I hope he does better. He seems better than many, which again, isn't a high bar. The current administration and Congress is grossly immoral and without defense in the vast majority of areas.

 

But in spite of all that gross immorality we're still supposed to forget what our founding documents say and be in submission to our public servants according to Romans 13 right?