Good line. I like it.
You are indeed a Paul supporter.
This is the future of our nation, not a political stunt.
Good line. I like it.
You are indeed a Paul supporter.
This is the future of our nation, not a political stunt.
Who said anything about surrendering?
Remember, it was our inept and clueless government that gave the terrorists the openings they needed, in terms of visas (Visa Express), drivers licenses, inept border officials, poor communication, lackadaisical overstay prosecution, and so on, and yet you think that having American soldiers driving around a foreign country is the answer to the terrorist threat?
Ron Paul supported arming pilots in 2002 and earlier through a wave of obstructionism imposed on pilots by anti-gun Norm Mineta.
I said the responsibility for protecting passengers falls with the airline, not the government--and not the passengers. The airline's responsible for the aircraft and the passengers. If we wouldn't have been dependent on the federal government to set all the rules, which meant no guns & no resistance, then the terrorists may well have had second thoughts, because the airlines would have had the responsibility. But we assumed the government was going to take care of us. After 9/11, instead of moving toward the direction of personal responsibility & private property & 2nd amendment, we moved in the opposite direction. We turned it over to the federal government. Private industry protects their property all the time. But here is one example when the federal government was involved and they messed it up.
Of course the federal government messed it up. That's just what they do.
>This is the future of our nation, not a political stunt.<
Explain the future of our nation when we do have any national sovereignty left to trade away. Bush hates the fact that we have any now.