[rabscuttle385]

His arguments would be acceptable if there were no such thing as strategic nuclear missiles or bio-weapons.

Sure, and his arguments about government intervention in the financial sector would be acceptable if there were no such things as collateralized debt obligations or credit default swaps.

Oh, and I forgot, the Second Amendment is also a product of "eighteenth century logic."

[Mr. Jazzy]

Oh, and I forgot, the Second Amendment is also a product of "eighteenth century logic."

Actually, the Second Amendment was based on logic from the earliest times when man could use a weapon for defense of home and hearth. The Framers were just wise enough to enshrine this truth in the form of the Second Amendment to the Constitution.

Dr. Paul is naive to a fault. Do you honestly think that if we had never entered into the world scene, if we had let other nations control events outside our borders, that we would still be as powerful a nation? If we had stayed out of WWII and allowed fascistic powers to take over all of Europe and the far East, do you think that THEY would be satisfied and leave us to ourselves? Not a chance in hell and YOU know it. The same applies to communist aggression across the globe and the enemies here in the US that seek to destroy our freedoms. Dr. Paul makes compelling speeches and articles for reading, but the prospect of his type of world outlook is not rational when dealing with irrational enemies who use their own children as weapon platforms to deliver death to anyone who disagrees with their religion.