Posted on 05/07/2013 8:22:51 AM PDT by rktman
It’s a response to Rand’s quote in #28 about there being no way to rule innocent men. That’s true, but a nation of innocent men, doesn’t exist. It sounds good, but that’s all.
The “ruling innocent men” is not meant to be the collective men. It is the individual man. I am difficult to rule if I am “innocent.” In this case, innocence would be defined as having not taken an action that requires a government action. So, if I am not fearful of government action I can not be “ruled” by the government.
How do you instill fear in those innocent men? You pass so many laws that you can “crack down” on everyone, whenever you please, because they are all now guilty.
In other words, you pass so many laws that each individual is now enslaved!
I understand that but it mentioned a nation of innocent men and that is what I respondedto
bttt
So what are your thoughts on Ronald Reagan supporting the over throw of the bullies in Nicaragua? Now I dont think we had boots on the ground, but it was important for us to straighten out our back yard, so to speak.
Reagan did the right thing in the wrong way. He should have told Congress to kiss his Presidential ass because the Hughes Amendment was un-Constitutional to begin with.
He’s a very smart guy indeed.I disagree with some of his positions...and agree with others but he’s a formidable intellectual ally,or opponent,depending on *your* position on a particular issue.
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.