Posted on 09/23/2007 10:47:55 AM PDT by LdSentinal
Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul contends that the federal government has overreacted by limiting personal freedom in the wake of terrorist attacks six years ago, noting more people die on U.S. highways in less than a month’s time compared to the number who lost their lives on Sept. 11, 2001.
“We have been told that we have to give up our freedoms in order to be safe because terrorism is such a horrible event,” Paul said today to more than 1,000 supporters who attended a rally at a downtown Chicago hotel ballroom.
“A lot fewer lives died on 9/11 than they do in less than a month on our highways, but once again, who owns the highways? Do we own the highways? No. It’s a government institution you know. …We need to put all this in perspective.”
More than 2,970 people were reported dead in the terrorist attacks in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania. Federal highway traffic statistics show an average of 3,509 people a month were killed on the nation’s highways in 2001.
(Excerpt) Read more at weblogs.baltimoresun.com ...
If you will look deep into these complaints, a large number of those stating such also complain about the War on Drugs etc. Just take it from there....
I understand the confusion though, they quote the same play book.
Perhaps. But as I have repeatedly stated, based on the information available to me, I believe that the initial invasion of Iraq was an appropriate use of defensive and retaliatory force. Are you saying that you disagree?
bump
He seems to have forgotten about the OK City bombing, all our embassies as well as the USS Cole along with the number of mysterious plane crashes. They all seem to have ceased.
This mental dwarf doesn’t deserve to be on the stage with real candidates.
Pray for W and Our Troops
If one accepts the highways standard, yes, that's obvious.
From Address Opening the President's Second Highway Safety Conference
June 18th, 1947
In 1941, accidents on the streets and highways cost 40,000 lives.
Pearl Harbor was simply the 13th month.
Would you rule out a strike against Iran if they gain the ability to launch against us, or do we wait to see where it lands first. If we know a state has plans to deliver a nuke to agent of a terrorist group, would we wait and let it come, or knock out the source before it can even occur.
As far as your last remark, spare me the indignation, you know exactly the point to which I speak. You and the Paul crew keep telling us how "Unconstitutional" a proactive defense in the age of WMDs is. I think you would find the victims of such an act, be they military or civilian, some what at a loss for words when they found out we could have stopped the attack, but did not on some "Constitutional" point of law. I know and work with daily many individuals whom have born arms for this country, many willing over there in this "Unconstitutional" war now who would take issue with your stance. They know the score, do you?
“You are making the all too common mistake of thinking that non-inteventionism is equivalent to pacifism or never using force.”
Not my mistake. It’s my understanding that premptive use of force is controversial within certain elements of the libertarian movement. I’m not at all sure of Ron Paul’s position on premptive force. Can you enlighten?
“Well, they used to before the federal government made them stop.”
I wasn’t aware that airlines used to allow armed passengers. I knew knives used to be allowed but handguns?
“It is very easy to describe a policy by which all pilots are armed as well as certain passengers approved in advance by the airlines, resulting in dozens of armed persons on every flight.”
It’s certainly easy to describe that policy. I’m not so sure it would be so easy to implement. I’m thinking more of the airline lawyers. I have a difficult time imagining their approval. Or the approval of their public relations department. You’ve obviously seen the debate about gun-free zones, etc. I imagine the gun nazis would be all over the airlines.
BTW, I rather doubt you would find dozens of armed passengers. That’s a pretty hefty percentage compared to percentages of those with CCP.
Then there is the issue of the states. Suppose you’re leaving Texas with your trusty firearm and state approved permit. What exactly would happen when you arrive in NYC? LA? How about switching planes in Chicago? Looks to me like you’d need federal legislation to deal with the states and municipalities.
It is a bit tough supporting a Republican who runs to the Left of Kookcinch.
I suspect that many of his “supporters” are DNC Plants. No Republican is that cultish about a candidate and HilaryCare needs another Perott.
Unfortuanately for her, Ron Pat Paulson is not going to get 1% with his idiocy.
Pray for W and Our Troops
Nope.
Although I would have done it differently, both in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Flatten the infrastructure
Kill the leaders
Break the countries up on ethnic lines
Set the ethnic groups at each other's throats
Walk away
The message is pretty clear, F with us, and you personally will die, we will destroy all you hold dear, and your country will simply cease to exist.
Nation building? *spit*
Good Post. All this sh!t about RP here really makes me wonder about the sanity of Paul supporters.
“I suspect that many of his “supporters” are DNC Plants.”
You may be right. After following this for sometime I’m strongly suspicious of who his supporters really are. This anti-war “pull our troops out now” cult like following is just a bit too weird to be all Libertarians. I would think even hard-core Libertarians can see the error in turning tail and running away from this war “now”.
I think many in the ranks of his supporters are really from the loony left, anti-war crowd, who have not been able to latch on to any of the Democrats yet. And most of these I think are just getting a kick out of trying to upset the GOP Apple Cart.
Driving through the most leftist area of a very liberal Seattle to attend a Huskie game you know what political yard sign outnumbered all others and by a large margin? That’s right Ron Paul.
well, its more of a mindset (sort of like the mindset of most people on this thread) not any specific person, it’s an emphasis on interventialist foreign policy rather than fighting socialism here at home. I mean, you have people voting for guilani simply because he seems ‘tough on terror’.
The Federal governments meddling with the healthcare system along is enough for it to be more of a threat than islamic terrorism, the third party payers, liscencing monopolies, 10-12 year delay in new medications - all of these directly impact the health of our families.
Paul’s letter of marque is a brilliant idea IMO, it lets private organizations go after and track down those responsible for 9/11 without the bureaucratic stifflings and diplomatic and rules of engagement problems in the military. At least it would have been interesting to see it tried.
“Paul’s letter of marque is a brilliant idea IMO, it lets private organizations go after and track down those responsible for 9/11 without the bureaucratic stifflings and diplomatic and rules of engagement problems in the military. At least it would have been interesting to see it tried.”
A brilliant idea? Explain exactly what a Letter of Marque is and how it would work in the WOT. For extra points, you can describe the current status of such letters in light of international law.
Beyond that, we need to be active in the world in the bad places or near them to know of and respond to said threats. Coming home and hunkering down behind our borders, pulling all of our troops and personnel back inside our country is not the way to stay engaged for our defense.
It is not working now, at all. OBL has a 50 Million Dollar bounty on his head. No one has stood up to collect it. In application this is about the same as Marque and Reprisal.
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.