Skip to comments.
I want my country back(HARRY BROWNE BARF ALERT)
World Net Daily ^
| December 5, 2002
| Harry Browne
Posted on 12/06/2002 5:19:32 AM PST by Sparta
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 121-136 next last
To: smallstuff
Just kidding with you. My real opinion is this. In the last century, we witnessed barbarism at the hands of governments on a horrific scale; Hitler, Stalin,the Kims, Pol Pot,Pinochet, the list goes on. In an age where you and I discuss current events over a computer from my home office, there is no more room on such a small and civilized planet. Its my firm belief that sadamm Hussein is a monster of the highest order. Atilla, Ho Chi Minh, and a Hutu chieftain have nothing on this devil. Its time the Husseins, Kims, Assads,etc. of the world understood; no more genocide, no more dictatorships. Fantasy? Maybe, but we have to start somewhere, and as result, school age girls in Kabul are learning to read. Are we supposed to be the worlds policeman? Probably not, but again, we have to start somewhere. Did you know that one of Husseins main tools of opression is rape? The thought of one of my family members in the hands of that regime makes my blood run cold. Saddam has to go, and this family backs our leader in his crusade to rid, at least that region, of despots, and those who would harm us. Blind faith? You bet. But consider the alternative; the suicide bomber so prevalent in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, arrives at the Galleria Mall in St Louis. Just my opinion of course, and I was just funnin' you about the gas prices.
To: Sparta
I am the walrus. Coo-koo catchoo.
Browne is a dope and he is smoking too much of it.
62
posted on
12/06/2002 6:50:54 AM PST
by
jjm2111
To: Catspaw
Harry was actually spouting this trash on 9/12/2001.
63
posted on
12/06/2002 6:51:45 AM PST
by
jjm2111
To: cardinal4
Hitler, Stalin,the Kims, Pol Pot,
Pinochet Its despicable to compare a hero like Pinochet with those monsters.
64
posted on
12/06/2002 6:51:51 AM PST
by
weikel
To: weikel
I believe that rational individuals seeking their enlightened self interest is a good thing . . .Few people are solely or even consistently rational. A great many people are emotional, intuitive, and mystical much of the time. And what does "enlightened" mean? It means something entirely different to a religious person than it means to a Randian atheist.
Even the people--perhaps especially the people--who are convinced they are rational and enlightened are generally emotional, pigheaded, and dangerously ignorant in their biases much of the time.
A wise person is a humble person and would never be so smug or proud as to insist he consistently sees and thinks rationally or even that rational thought always yields the best answer. A wise conservative understands that some human institutions that proud "rational" free-thinkers disdain as irrational and unprogressive are actually of fundamental importance to the stability and health of any society. Chief among these are religion and the traditional family. These institutions are not "reasoned" into existence. They grow organically over decades, centuries, and even millennia in response to felt human need. They prove their worth by their staying power.
The worst times in the lives of any people are when these institutions are attacked by intellectual do-gooders (perhaps we should call them "can do it betters") bent on creating a more rational society by excising the "bad" elements of tradition and so-called superstition.
Ayn Rand and her objectivist acolytes are "can do it better" intellectuals. They are far from humble. They are Jocobin-style ideologues who would cheer the elimination of every tradition and institution of time-tested value (e.g., religion, the nuclear mom and pop family, etc) that they adjudge irrational, superstitious, and unenlightened just as quickly as Marx sought to destroy these same institutions in the name of "progressivism."
Wise, careful conservatives honor the balance and the tension between the rational and the intuitive, and always keep a sharp eye on ideologues who are overbalanced to one tendency or the other. In paraphrase of Reagan's oft-repeated dictum I might say the most frightening phrase in the English language is, "I'm a rational and enlightened person and I'm here to help you overhaul your society."
To: weikel
Excellent post.
66
posted on
12/06/2002 6:53:30 AM PST
by
jjm2111
To: weikel
Its despicable to compare a hero like Pinochet with those monsters.Then why wont he come clean about the 1000s of people missing under his regime?
"Senator for Life"?? Gimme a break.
To: u-89
One of the legitimate functions of government is defending the property of its citizens. There is no excuse for not protecting it from militarily weak states like the tribes with flags Saudis. At the very least our government should allow those who lose property in such incidents to raise mercenary forces.
68
posted on
12/06/2002 6:54:39 AM PST
by
weikel
To: weikel
We need to make a horrible example of the Saudi ruling class so nobody commits terrorism against America for 500 years.That statement, I agree 100% with.
To: Kevin Curry
Im not consistently rational but I try. I would agree that most people are fundamentally irrational. Family is an organic institution ill agree. Organized religion is ussually a means to part suckers from their money. Religions that don't maintain themselves by force( like Islam) tend to eventually get replaced by the next religion with better marketing.
70
posted on
12/06/2002 6:59:44 AM PST
by
weikel
To: cardinal4
You mean the 1000s of wannabe NKVD types missing under his regime many who were imported from Cuba and the Soviet block? Yeah my heart bleeds for them( sarcasm).
71
posted on
12/06/2002 7:00:53 AM PST
by
weikel
To: weikel
"...btw the Arabs actually liked us when they were Beduin nomads..." If I may, your Majesty, Arabs and Bedouins are two separate peoples. They are close, but not one in the same. Arabs gave up their nomadic ways centuries ago.
72
posted on
12/06/2002 7:04:18 AM PST
by
jjm2111
To: weikel
I think you mean you're a 'monarchist' not a 'minarchist'.
73
posted on
12/06/2002 7:05:25 AM PST
by
smpc
To: Sgt. Fury
Over the past two years I have watched as the Bush administration has implemented every statist assault on freedom that Clinton could not have passed in his wildest dreams. Like what?
74
posted on
12/06/2002 7:05:39 AM PST
by
jjm2111
To: Sparta
To: Sparta
"Somebody please call the WAAMBULANCE." Why the "Barf Alert"? What did Browne write that was untrue? Do you believe stretching our military resources across the entire globe is actually a smart thing to do? This is so typical. Someone criticizes the government when a Democrat is in office and "conservatives" cheer. Someone criticizes the government when a Republican is in office and "conservatives" jeer. Care to explain?
To: weikel
Yes I will agree many of those people were Marxists, but a lot of them werent. Like Argentina, they went overboard. I dont know what your connection to Chile is, but we had friends in Argentina who had a family member disappear while in Santiago. His crime? No one knows, he wasnt subversive in Buenos Aires, he was an airline employee on an overnight in Santiago. Petitioning every possible body for help both in Argentina and in Chile, as well as several world bodies, resulted in nothing but stonewalling from Pinochets Interior people. This would have '83 or early '84. As of '89, my last contact with the family, there had been no word at all from the Chileans, who at the time, were getting ready to oust Augusto.
To: JohnnyOla and HymanRoth
While Browne's foreign policy ideas are wacked, his opposition to the WoD is not. Prohibition II and the REAL governmental abuses that accompany it does not work. Lots of people do drugs. Outlawing drugs is like outlawing guns. It doesn't work.
There are way more government abuses w/ the WoD than all of the imaginary ones in the PATRIOT act and in the Dept. of Homeland Security.
78
posted on
12/06/2002 7:10:52 AM PST
by
jjm2111
To: Sgt. Fury
What's the Our Lady of Peace Act?
79
posted on
12/06/2002 7:11:12 AM PST
by
jjm2111
To: smpc
Both actually could see how you would get confused I did mean minarchist where I said and then added in paratheses that I also prefer a monarchy.
80
posted on
12/06/2002 7:11:43 AM PST
by
weikel
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 121-136 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson