Posted on 03/15/2008 9:13:01 AM PDT by pissant
Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), he of the quixotic GOP presidential campaign and unique policy positions, is never one to be shy about his opinions. Take the case of fallen New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer (D), whose political career fell apart this week after his liaisons with high-priced call girls became public. Spitzer resigned his office effective Monday.
Most politicians from both sides of the aisle publicly (at least) offered condolences for Spitzer and his poor family, including his three daughters, but didn't — of course — defend Spitzer's atrocious behavior.
But for Paul, Spitzer's downfall at the hands of a Justice Dept. investigation shows government at its worst. Yes, Spitzer climbed to power on the backs of political enemies he destroyed, making him not a swell guy, but he didn't deserve what happened to him. The FBI should have never been allowed to listen in to his phone call in the first place, according to the Texas Republican.
Here's the statement Paul made on the House floor last night. It's worth reading, at least for the enlightenment it gives into Paul's view of the world, which basically comes down to who controls the money:
"Madam Speaker, it has been said that 'he who lives by the sword shall die by the sword.' And in the case of Eliot Spitzer, this couldn't be more true. In his case it's the political sword, as his enemies rejoice in his downfall. Most people, it seems, believe he got exactly what he deserved.
"The illegal tools of the state brought Spitzer down, but think of all the harm done by Spitzer in using the same tools against so many other innocent people. He practiced what could be termed 'economic McCarthyism,' using illegitimate government power to build his political career on the ruined lives of others.
"No matter how morally justified his comeuppance may be, his downfall demonstrates the worst of our society. The possibility of uncovering personal moral wrongdoing is never a justification for the government to spy on our every move and to participate in sting operations.
"For government to entice a citizen to break a law with a sting operation — that is, engaging in activities that a private citizen is prohibited by law from doing — is unconscionable and should clearly be illegal.
"Though Spitzer used the same tools to destroy individuals charged with economic crimes that ended up being used against him, gloating over his downfall should not divert our attention from the fact that the government spying on American citizens is unworthy of a country claiming respect for liberty and the Fourth Amendment.
"Two wrongs do not make a right. Two wrongs make it doubly wrong.
"Sacrifice of our personal privacy has been ongoing for decades but has rapidly accelerated since 9/11. Before 9/11, the unstated goal of collecting revenue was the real reason for the erosion of our financial privacy. When 19 suicidal maniacs attacked us on 9/11, our country became convinced that further sacrifice of personal and financial privacy was required for our security.
"The driving force behind this ongoing sacrifice of our privacy has been fear and the emotional effect of war rhetoric — war on drugs, war against terrorism and the war against Third World nations in the Middle East who are claimed to be the equivalent to Hitler and Nazi Germany.
"But the real reason for all this surveillance is to build the power of the state. It arises from a virulent dislike of free people running their own lives and spending their own money. Statists always demand control of the people and their money.
"Recently we've been told that this increase in the already intolerable invasion of our privacy was justified because the purpose was to apprehend terrorists. We were told that the massive amounts of information being collected on Americans would only be used to root out terrorists. But as we can see today, this monitoring of private activities can also be used for political reasons. We should always be concerned when the government accumulates information on innocent citizens.
"Spitzer was brought down because he legally withdrew cash from a bank — not because he committed a crime. This should prompt us to reassess and hopefully reverse this trend of pervasive government intrusion in our private lives.
"We need no more Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act! No more Violent Radicalization & Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Acts! No more torture! No more Military Commissions Act! No more secret prisons and extraordinary rendition! No more abuse of habeas corpus! No more Patriot Acts!
"What we need is more government transparency and more privacy for the individual!"
bump for later....
Ron get back on your meds. You’re making Kucinich appears sane for heaven’s sake.
Its “entrapment” if it takes place over ten years?
How cynical of you...LOL. I believe slick and the witch have played all the angles that benefit them politically and monetarily. Once they are no longer so powerful, someone will expose them for the criminals they are.
Try it for a while, perhaps by Memorial day you will be perfect and can then come back and work on the rest of us.
???
Was that a personal attack? Hmmmm.... sure seemed like it.
Dang.
Being indicted and breaking the law is not "really that bad"? Is that what you mean?
Oh really??? That’s sarcasm right? How about we all just install cameras in our houses so the feds can watch us.... well... you know... if we don’t have anything to hide.
Most assuredly, if the malfeasant was a Republican - especially a white male heterosexual professional. That's the demographic of choice for a vicious 'Rat prosecutor to target.
As I understand it, Spitzer used the power of government to threaten and intimidate some innocent people. I thought Paul and the libertarians stood against that kind of government abuse.
An anarchist legislator. Now there's a concept to ponder.
Never said I was. Not sure how you got that from my comment. You seem a little sensitive for some odd reason. Weird attack on me there buddy.
You: "Now if he wants to talk about eliminating this Orwellian law requiring banks to snitch on us when we spend our own cash, I’m listening."
Now I'm confused. That's exactly what he IS talking about, isn't it?
Once again Paul proves himself to be a lunatic whackjob.
The banking transaction reporting laws were the result of banks gleely taking money from drug smugglers and cleaning it up for them.
Miami in particular was a mess. It was actually the killing of bystanders in the streets that put the pressure on the govt. Up until then not many were paying attn.
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.