Posted on 08/31/2007 6:16:40 AM PDT by PlainOleAmerican
The first truth we must find is a way to swallow this - we have exactly the government we elected!
Our Republican President has a public approval rating hovering around 30% and our Democrat congress has an approval rating down around 20%. Clearly, we don’t think much of our government, but we elected them and what does that say about us?
(snip)
In my last column titled “Ron Paul—A Liberal-tarian, not a Conservative," I demonstrated how easy it is to attack any politician on his alleged voting record, demonize an entire group on the basis of a few in that group who are willing to use unethical tactics to promote their allegedly ethical candidate, and cause a firestorm of political banter, both pro and con, without ever really getting to the heart of the subject at hand.
Welcome to American politics circa 2007
(Excerpt) Read more at capitolhillcoffeehouse.com ...
On the last, I answered that.
No international law is crap the UN spews out.
Are we under the auspices of the UN, or are we a SOVERIGN nation?
-----
The Law of Nations is the extension of the Laws of Nature...those laws that give us our unalienable rights.
Which you would know if you bothered to read sources I've posted, but you have not.
----
Again, do you believe the Constitution is a living document?
There are many liberal results in Paul’s votes....
Liberal results are what counts, not constitutional talk.
ACU rating 76 out of 100. Even McCain has a higher conservative rating...
Is a vote “conservative” when it results in “liberal” policies?
Pal...
Odd, your previous post mentioned no missile.
Is that what you consider civil discourse? Mention half of the argument now and just keep adding until the original argument is forgotten?
LOL!
Can you say missle defense?
=====
We have no right to do anything on their soil without an invitation by them or a Declaration of War.
Anything less is unconstitutional.
----
BTW- Has it ever occurred to you that continually mucking around in other people's business is what's causing the problem?
BUMP!
You were saying...
And missile defense, right....
Tooth fairy would do better...
Maybe Santa....
Ah, now I see. You decree there are only two ways we can defend ourselves: -- Then insist that your opponent can only choose one,
- which if its "hunker", -- makes him an "isolationist".
-- That's not "neo-con reasoning", but it sure ain't very rational.
Rational men [lots of libertarians are rational] understand that [constitutionally speaking], we can defend ourselves against enemies, both foreign and domestic, as we see fit, - as long as we do not deny persons in the USA their rights to life, liberty, or property, - in so doing.
Oh, you think there is another option besides offensive and defensive strategies? What are the other options?
The options are only limited by our Constitution and our imaginations. We successfully won the Cold War using those options, imo.
I'll make it simple, since you clearly have no personal experience with war, battle, fighting, even on a perosnal level I suspect.
I was on the line in Germany with the 503/502nd Airborne Infantry for a couple of years in the mid-'50s. Your personal remarks make you look like a fool.
Make it personal, so that you can't miss the point.
Your family home is attacked daily by thugs in the neighborhood. Each day without response, the attcks get worse. You are certain that they will eventually kill your family if YOU don't DO SOMETHING! What are your options and label them offensive (pre-emptive), defensive (reactionary) or whatever other strategy you think exists...
Go suck an egg. -- You "clearly" imagine you can order FReepers about, thereby controlling the discussion. -- Get a grip on your strategical delusions.
You are just too funny.
I noticed you haven't bothered responding with anything resembling a logical argument.
Just rationalization:
Oooo. We have to get THEM before they get us
and ridicule.
Tooth fairy would do better... Maybe Santa....
You haven't even been near the Constitution, either. You say we can do what we want because we 'can' or we 'need to'.
Sounds more like a bully to me.
-----
Pretty sad.
The 'war' against the Barbary pirates was waged on the high seas....not the LAND.
Uh, William Eaton, US Consul to Tunis, with the US Government's approval, landed a force in Egypt, marched over land, and took the port of Derna, the first time the US flag was ever raised on foreign soil. This was in either 1804 or 1805 and part of the Barbary War.
ROFLMAO!!
I asked you for a link supporting your belief that most of Iraq is more peaceful than the average US city, and you don't seem to have that link. Thanks.
The very fact that the Constitution is amendable makes it a living document.
Sure the Constitution can be amended..
-- But its amendments cannot violate its basic principles.
"We the People" cannot give Congress, or the President, or the Supreme Court, - any more powers than we ourselves possess.
We ourselves have no power to attack our neighbor on mere supposition,
-- but in the case in question, we have more than enough reason to justify the attack on Iraq.
Paul is wrong, -- But he is not a traitor.
And yet we have done it everyday for over 200 years.
Yep, various men have been ignoring our Constitution for far too long. -- Paul isn't one of them.
We are still here. Sometimes it is bad and sometimes it is good.
I wish everything worked in a vacuum, it would make everything so easy. Alas it is not so...
Alas, alas. -- We see some of the results of "vacuum" type thinking on this thread, imo.
I stand corrected, there was ONE land expedition AFTER the Pasha of Tripoli declared war against the U.S. in 1801.
FYI- There was more than one 'Barbabry War'.
As such, we were effectively already AT war, and no acknowledgment by Congress was needed.
So tell me WHICH country has now declared war on the united States?
No sovereign nation. But a group of Islamist fundamentalists supported by various sovereign nations in the Middle-East has declared war, and attacked us, on our own soil.
And Congress passed a resolution supporting the President's War on Terror, and funded that war.
Do you believe this was wrong to do constitutionally? Yes. Do I? No. Period. End of discussion.
Enough of Ron Paul, he ain’t gone win. This is just another brain dead supporter refusing to acknowledge the truth.
And yet you brazenly laughed at my knowledge of history. A real schmuck you are.
Aw, heck. We're just having fun. Why ruin a good laugh?
You must realize how hard Paul supporters are working to alienate all conservatives by calling anyone not a libertarian a neocon...and claiming he is the second coming of the Lord of conservatism.
Are you asking if I support open borders?
Children all, is right...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.