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!"
Very well put.
OMG! You actually “read” the article. And, you actually comprehended the story.
As usual, Ron Paul is right on this issue. If posters would read the whole article, their comments might change.
Ron Paul is a parnoid, dumbed down arse.
It’s WHY he keeps LOSING.
Eventually he’ll stop.
Great little essay on the dangers of ever-expanding government power. Ron Paul may not be correct on the specifics of every controversy, but he certainly is generally a very helpful skeptic when it comes to government abuse of civil liberties.
I guess we can assume, Ron Paul might pardon Spitzer if he were POTUS.
“He acted badly but didn’t deserve this”
Please show me where Ron Paul said this? This statement is some blogger’s mis-guided interpretation.
And that was Ron Paul's point. If we defend the methods when they work in our favor, we lose the moral authority to oppose the methods when they don't.
Personally, I don't want a federal government that might possibly be controlled by the Clinton's again to have any more power than absolutely necessary. I find it perplexing that I am in the minority of Freepers in that respect. (I'm also curious as to why everyone is excited about an unpopular and potentially beatable Democrat being replaced with a popular and less beatable Democrat)
“I guess we can assume, Ron Paul might pardon Spitzer if he were POTUS.”
I guess we can assume that you did not read the article or have problems with reading comprehension. Ron Paul never stated what is “headlined”. Read, for a change!
On what grounds? I would guess that there are plenty of "moderate" GOP members who vote against the GOP leadership's position more frequently than Paul. The GOP needs a libertarian conscience, even though there are significant issues where not everyone will agree with Dr. Paul.
Too much for you?
Well, there's always the evergreen Interferring with a Police Officer.
We've given them so many Due Causes to use, you can't leave your house without doing SOMETHING that would allow them to arrest you.
DManA said: Please explain how the government enticed him into using hookers?
We're asking for the same information, preferably without the cynicism or inflammation.
I just get pissed at watching American citizens hand over without any resistance whatsoever, the liberties that our forefathers fought and died for. The worst part is that they think this bunch of Quisling bureaucrats is going to provide them with everlasting financial and physical security! These bright eyed wishful thinkers then call RP an idiot when it is their brain that’s numb.
I don’t know if he’s making a charge of entrapement (with out explanation) or if he just used the wrong word.
As far as the rest of what you said, no argument here.
“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.
Too much for you?
We have laws. They are in place to have a civilized society. Is that TOO MUCH for your pointy little head to absorb? I suspect it is. GROW UP!
Only if he were HOCUS POTUS...
Like in Spitzer's case? He's still a nut job. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
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.