Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

COMING POLICE STATE
Fiedor Report On the News #305 ^ | 3-9-03 | Ron Paul

Posted on 03/08/2003 9:29:27 AM PST by forest

[NOTE: This text was first published in the March 7, 1997 newsletter. It was an important message in 1997, but seems even more important today.]

Last week we gave Rep. Ron Paul's toll-free Legislative Update number (1-888-322-1414) and suggested that readers listen to his message "The Coming Police State." We were told by a lot of people that they missed it.

Originally, that message was part of a one hour speech Rep. Paul made on the floor of the House. And, thanks to Jeff in Michigan, we have the complete text. Below is the shortened version of Rep. Paul's speech recorded as the "Legislative Update:"

-----------------------------

Centralizing power and consistently expanding the role of the Government requires an army of bureaucrats and a taxing authority upon which a police state thrives. There are over 100 laws on the books permitting private property seizure without due process of law. We have made it easy to seize any property by absurdly claiming the property itself committed the crime. The RICO mentality relating to law enforcement permits even the casual bystander to suffer severely from the police state mentality.

The drug war hysteria and the war on gun ownership started by Roosevelt in 1934 have expanded Federal police power to the point that more than 10 percent of all of our police are Federal. The Constitution names but three Federal crimes, so where is the justification? Talk about swarms of officers to harass our people and eat out their substance. We have hovering over us daily the Federal police from the EPA, OSHA, FBI, CIA, DEA, EEOC, ADA, F&WL, INS, BATF, and worst of all, the IRS. Even criticizing the IRS makes me cringe that it might precipitate an audit. It seems that all administrations, to some degree, used the power of the agencies to reward or punish financial backers or political enemies.

So much [of] that had its origin in the 1930's, it was then that the FBI's role changed from friendly investigator helping local authorities to that of national police force.

We live in an age where the fear of an IRS registered letter bearing news of an audit surpasses the fear of a street mugging. The police are supposed to be our friend and the Federal Government the guarantor of our liberties. Ask the blacks in the inner city of Los Angeles if they trust the police and revere the FBI and the CIA. We should not have to cringe when a Federal agent appears at the door of our business. We should not even see them there.

A Congress sworn to uphold the Constitution ought to be protecting our right to our property, not confiscating it. Congress ought to protect our right to own a weapon of self-defense, not systematically and viciously attacking that right.

Congress ought to guarantee all voluntary association, not regulate and dictate every economic transaction. We should not allow Congress to give credence to inane politically correct rules generated by egalitarian misfits. Setting quotas ought to insult each of us.

We need no more centralized police efforts. We need no more wiretaps that have become epidemic in this last decade. We have had enough Wacos and Ruby Ridges.

-----------------------------

<http://www.house.gov/paul>

 END


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; Philosophy; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 1bureaucrats; 2taxingauthority; 3policestate; batfadnausea; catholiclist; congreslost; fedcops10per; federalpolice; irsthreat; laws100toseize; newfbi; nocentralcops; norubyridge; nowaco; nowiretaps; politpunish; ronpaul; roosevelt34
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 401-444 next last
Centralized power requires an army of bureaucrats and tax.

100 laws for seizure sans due process.

Assume the property committed the crime.

Police state mentaily.

Starting with FDR in 34, Fed cops are now 10%. FBI now nat'l cops.

IRS is a political threat force.

Congress has left us.

We need no more centralized police efforts. We need no more wiretaps that have become epidemic in this last decade. We have had enough Wacos and Ruby Ridges.

1 posted on 03/08/2003 9:29:27 AM PST by forest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: forest
Unfortunately for Rep. Paul, he doesn't seem to realize that libertarianism leads to totalitarianism.
2 posted on 03/08/2003 9:33:57 AM PST by HumanaeVitae
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: forest
Ron Paul has his fans.I think he's a bit out of touch with our fight against Islamofacism.
3 posted on 03/08/2003 9:34:26 AM PST by MEG33
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: forest
The author should have been Doug Fiedor, who quoted Ron Paul.

Sorry.

Forest

4 posted on 03/08/2003 9:50:20 AM PST by forest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HumanaeVitae
You are way off there. Ron Paul is the best and most sensible person in Congress.
5 posted on 03/08/2003 9:51:48 AM PST by forest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MEG33
Ron Paul has his fans.I think he's a bit out of touch with our fight against Islamofacism.

WAAAAAY out of touch.

6 posted on 03/08/2003 9:53:14 AM PST by Texas Mom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Torie
Hey look!

It's the police state coming again!

7 posted on 03/08/2003 9:53:27 AM PST by Luis Gonzalez (The Ever So Humble Banana Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: forest
Different strokes.
8 posted on 03/08/2003 9:54:36 AM PST by MEG33
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: forest
You are way off there. Ron Paul is the best and most sensible person in Congress.

I use to think the same thing but not anymore. I know Ron Paul personally, have worked to get him elected several times but not anymore. This boy needs a reality check.

9 posted on 03/08/2003 9:55:02 AM PST by Texas Mom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: forest
Nope.

Libertarianism = no widely agreed-upon and enforced moral standards = natural human impulse towards depravity takes over = widespread depravity and social breakdown = chaos = rise of iron-fisted tryant to restore order = totalitarianism = bloodbath.

See Revolution, French.

10 posted on 03/08/2003 9:58:53 AM PST by HumanaeVitae
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez
Run! RUN! The Police State is Coming!

It's weaving all over the road! It must be drunk! It is knocking over all my trashcans!

It keeps playing salsa music until 2am!

The Police State Is Coming! Again! Sort of! Kinda!


/tongue-in-cheek
11 posted on 03/08/2003 9:59:28 AM PST by Republicanus_Tyrannus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MEG33
"Different strokes."

Whatcha talkin' 'bout Meg? I don't know nuthin' 'bout this.

12 posted on 03/08/2003 9:59:34 AM PST by Luis Gonzalez (The Ever So Humble Banana Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: HumanaeVitae
YOU ARE EXACTLY RIGHT. Libertarianism is anarchy. It is just as much a threat as the Democrat/Communist/Marxist ideology.

"Statesmen, my dear Sir, may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is Religion and Morality alone, which can establish the Principles upon which Freedom can securely stand. John Adams

"The only foundation of a free Constitution is pure Virtue, and if this cannot be inspired into our People in a greater Measure, than they have it now, they may change their Rulers and the forms of Government, but they will not obtain a lasting liberty." John Adams

"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams

"Religion and virtue are the only foundations, not only of all free government, but of social felicity under all governments and in all the combinations of human society." John Adams

"The highest glory of the American Revolution was this; it connected in one indissoluble bond the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity. John Quincy Adams

"From the day of the Declaration...they (the American people) were bound by the laws of God, which they all, and by the laws of The Gospel, which they nearly all, acknowledge as the rules of their conduct." John Quincy Adams

"Man, considered as a creature, must necessarily be subject to the laws of his Creator, for he is entirely a dependent being....And, consequently, as man depends absolutely upon his Maker for everything, it is necessary that he should in all points conform to his Maker's will...this will of his Maker is called the law of nature. These laws laid down by God are the eternal immutable laws of good and evil...This law of nature dictated by God himself, is of course superior in obligation to any other. It is binding over all the globe, in all countries, and at all times: no human laws are of any validity if contrary to this... Sir William Blackstone

"Blasphemy against the Almighty is denying his being or providence, or uttering contumelious reproaches on our Savior Christ. It is punished, at common law by fine and imprisonment, for Christianity is part of the laws of the land. Sir William Blackstone

"The preservation of Christianity as a national religion is abstracted from its own intrinsic truth, of the utmost consequence to the civil state, which a single instance will sufficiently demonstrate. Sir William Blackstone

"I have carefully examined the evidences of the Christian religion, and if I was sitting as a juror upon its authenticity I would unhesitatingly give my verdict in its favor. I can prove its truth as clearly as any proposition ever submitted to the mind of man. Alexander Hamilton

"It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here." Patrick Henry

"The Bible is worth all other books which have ever been printed." Patrick Henry

"Bad men cannot make good citizens. A vitiated state of morals, a corrupted public conscience are incompatible with freedom." Patrick Henry

"It is when people forget God that tyrants forge their chains." Patrick Henry

"Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers. John Jay

"Religion is the only solid basis of good morals; therefore education should teach the precepts of religion, and the duties of man toward God." Gouverneur Morris

"If thou wouldst rule well, thou must rule for God, and to do that, thou must be ruled by him....Those who will not be governed by God will be ruled by tyrants." William Penn

"By removing the Bible from schools we would be wasting so much time and money in punishing criminals and so little pains to prevent crime. Take the Bible out of our schools and there would be an explosion in crime." Benjamin Rush

As we can see here, our founders did not endorse or embrace libertarianism in the least. Our Founders understood that laws must reflect Almighty God's Moral Precepts.

Libertarianism is a religion of self indulgence and hedonism. It teaches that the person can decide for himself what is right and wrong, and has to answer to no one.

It is humanistic to the core.

Libertarians believe abortion, homosexuality, fornication, adultery, sexual perversions, prostitution, drug use, gambling ect... are all things that should be practiced and enjoyed.

They hate and despise authority, and they blame government and laws for their problems.

GOD MAKES LAW. MAN's LAW MUST REFLECT GOD'S LAW.

Our Founders understood this principle. They had laws that protected the moral fabric of our nation, because they understood that a good nation must have morality. They took it for granted that the people were moral, that is why the constitution worked.

The hippies of the 1960's were not moral, their immoral/ammoral lifestyle is incompatable with the constitution.

If our founders had only known what we have become, they would have drafted a much different constitution.

Way back in 1815, The Pennsylvania Supreme Court decided an important case, here are excerpts from that case: It reflects the case law of the day, and the attitude on which our nation was founded.)

This court is...invested with power to punish not only open violations of decency and morality, but also whatever secretly tends to undermine the principles of society... Whatever tends to the destruction of morality, in general, may be punishable criminally. Crimes are public offenses, not because they are perpetrated publically, but because their effect is to injure the public. Buglary, though done in secret, is a public offense; and secretly destroying fences is indictable.

Hence it follows, that an offense may be punishable, if in it's nature and by it's example, it tends to the corruption or morals; although it not be committed in public.

Although every immoral act, such as lying, ect... is not indictable, yet where the offense charged is destructive of morality in general...it is punishable at common law. The destruction of morality renders the power of government invalid...

No man is permitted to corrupt the morals of the people, secret poision cannot be thus desseminated.

Remember:

"It is when people forget God that tyrants forge their chains."

13 posted on 03/08/2003 10:02:45 AM PST by FF578 (Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just and His justice cannot sleep forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez
Giggle
14 posted on 03/08/2003 10:03:21 AM PST by MEG33
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: forest
We need no more centralized police efforts. We need no more wiretaps that have become epidemic in this last decade. We have had enough Wacos and Ruby Ridges.

Very clever launching an article like this now on the eve of war when wiretaps can do the most good to root out terrorists in and on our own soil kinda makes a person wonder if theres a hidden agenda

Assume the property committed the crime.

On the other hand i agree that confiscating property for growing a feild of mary jane or setting up one of those pesky amphedamine labs seems a little much maybe we should just do away with those laws that forbid people from giving drugs to kids on school property too .Just to make it fair to that shifty eyed guy whos feeding that little 10 yar old crack for the first time

As far as the gun issue goes [imho] I think if you done the crime and you did your time you should be allowed to own a gun again and if you do the crime of killing someone with the gun the first time [unless its self defense] you either get life or the chair.

15 posted on 03/08/2003 10:11:14 AM PST by ATOMIC_PUNK ("He is a moss-gatherer, and I have been a stone doomed to rolling." Gandalf)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez
That's why I keep my doors locked.
16 posted on 03/08/2003 10:11:25 AM PST by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: HumanaeVitae
"Libertarianism = no widely agreed-upon and enforced moral standards = natural human impulse towards depravity takes over = widespread depravity and social breakdown = chaos = rise of iron-fisted tryant to restore order = totalitarianism = bloodbath."

America functions within a moral framework, meaningful only when attached to a Creator. To quote George Washington in his farewell address, where he warned his country against any attempt to build a moral framework apart from God:

"Of all disputations and habits that lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensible supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness-These finest props of duties of men and citizens...And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on the minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience, both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in the exclusion of religious principle."

And the framers of the Declaration of Independence certainly did NOT, when they referred to God, envision the theocracy of Islam, where religious belief is a compulsion.

17 posted on 03/08/2003 10:12:06 AM PST by TheClintons-STILLAnti-American
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Torie
I don't want to sound ignorant here, but are they going to rename an existing State, or are we going to create a whole new one?
18 posted on 03/08/2003 10:14:56 AM PST by Luis Gonzalez (The Ever So Humble Banana Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: FF578
Great list of quotes...THANKS!
19 posted on 03/08/2003 10:15:05 AM PST by TheClintons-STILLAnti-American
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez
Why don't we just annex Cuba?
20 posted on 03/08/2003 10:24:53 AM PST by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Torie
There's a lot of merit to that suggestion, we wouldn't have to spend a lot of time and energy into implementing police state rules and regs there, we'd just have to fine tune the existing ones and open up a bunch of Krispy Kremes.
21 posted on 03/08/2003 10:27:45 AM PST by Luis Gonzalez (The Ever So Humble Banana Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: TheClintons-STILLAnti-American
I'm not talking about a theocracy. Listen to libertarians. They want to legalize: prostitution, hard drugs, assisted suicide, pornography, simulated child pornography; some will even argue for private ownership of nuclear weapons and contractual slavery.

You're right that morals matter. And in many cases, those morals must be imposed.

22 posted on 03/08/2003 10:50:53 AM PST by HumanaeVitae
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: MEG33
bit out of touch with our fight against Islamofacism.

What does the word "fascism" mean?

23 posted on 03/08/2003 10:51:08 AM PST by AdamSelene235 (Like all the jolly good fellows, I drink my whiskey clear.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: forest
You are way off there. Ron Paul is the best and most sensible person in Congress.

Really? What has he accomplished?

24 posted on 03/08/2003 10:52:43 AM PST by Kevin Curry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez
Refute Pauls article, - or, - take your inane, baiting asides to the back room. - It's the FR way.
25 posted on 03/08/2003 10:59:21 AM PST by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Comment #26 Removed by Moderator

Comment #27 Removed by Moderator

To: forest
Just ask yourself if we, the people, are truly in charge of the country. We may have been at one time, but haven't been for decades (going back to your example of FDR). Do we control the government or do they control us? This trickles down to the local governments. Pay their ransom fees, er property taxes, or have your house taken away.
28 posted on 03/08/2003 11:01:54 AM PST by af_vet_rr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FF578
Refute Pauls article, - or, - take your inane, baiting asides to the back room. - It's the FR way.
29 posted on 03/08/2003 11:02:00 AM PST by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: AdamSelene235
Fascism is oppressive, dictatorial control. Islamofascism wishes to impose sharia,Taliban like rule over the whole world.
30 posted on 03/08/2003 11:03:33 AM PST by MEG33
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: forest
Paul / Tancredo in 2004
31 posted on 03/08/2003 11:06:09 AM PST by WhiteGuy (Cynical)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kevin Curry
Really? What has he accomplished?
24 -kc-

I see his greatest accomplishment as pointing out, - on the floor of congress, the hypocrisy of socialist fools.
32 posted on 03/08/2003 11:07:55 AM PST by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: forest; HumanaeVitae; Texas Mom; FF578
Alright, so you guys don't like libertarianism, nor are you big fans of Ron Paul. I've got no real beef with that, but why don't you at least address the issues that RP raises. If he's talking so much "crazy" right now, then why is he wrong about the fed's and the police state.

Ball's in your court . . .

33 posted on 03/08/2003 11:12:13 AM PST by realpatriot71 (legalize freedom!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Itchy trigger finger?

Did I miss the memo?

When did you become head hall monitor?
34 posted on 03/08/2003 11:20:55 AM PST by Luis Gonzalez (The Ever So Humble Banana Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: realpatriot71
They won't, and can't, - make a logical argument to Paul's article.

None of the anti-libertarian fanatics on FR ever has. - So it goes.
35 posted on 03/08/2003 11:21:46 AM PST by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez
You should know the rules Luis.

- I don't much care what you say. - But if you're gonna ridicule Paul, & libertarians, I what to be able to answer in kind. -- I can't do that here. - Take to the backroom, where I can.
36 posted on 03/08/2003 11:26:19 AM PST by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: realpatriot71
I give the same argument to the Lincoln-haters as I do here.

The reason for the centralization of the federal government was not legislative; it was economic. It was a byproduct of the Industrial Revolution.

The IR centralized power in the hands of a few industrialists and bankers (yes, I know that sounds left-wing, but hear me out) because the kind of technology that enabled the kind of productivity gains that scale-economies crate were extraordinarily expensive. I mean here, massive factories, coal mines, coke mines, etc. Only a few people could afford to finance them. However, the economies of scale that they produced forced everyone with inferior cost structures out of business. Right? So most everyone was more or less working for a small number of people.

So, to counter the natural centralization that the IR brought, people had to organize and use the only instrument they had available--the Federal Government--to counter the centralizing power of industry. Modern day libertarians seem to have this weird idea that FDR took over in a putsch; he was elected four times, three times overwhelmingly. Why? Because people finally got a breakthrough, a way to control their lives which before had been more or less at the whim of industrialists.

Now, what does this matter? Well, guess what...the Information Revolution is unwinding the Industrial Revolution. The computer you're typing into has a massive amount of scale economic power. You have exactly as much scale-economic power in a computer to publish something that everyone in the world with a computer to see as the New York Times does. That's an awesome amount of power. Another example--fuel cells. Once fuel cells become widely available, people will need the public-energy structure less and less...because they'll have a private source of energy right in their homes.

The entire story of the 20th Century was the centralization of scale-economic power; the story of the 21st Century is the democratization of scale-economic power.

So, I'm not really worried about the "coming tyranny". The inexorable effect of the scale-economic revolution will be more federalism, lower taxes, etc. Individualizing technology will drive it in the same way as collectivizing technology drove the 20th Century.

What's the main danger? In the same way that collectivism united with industrial-revolution type technology to create all the atrocities of the 20th Century (the Holocaust, etc.), libertarian personalism will unite with individualizing scale-economic policies (think biotechnology) to create new kinds of horrors.

Evil and good start in the human soul; technology just amplifies which one we as a people choose.

37 posted on 03/08/2003 11:34:13 AM PST by HumanaeVitae
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Baiting? A bit.

Mainly having a little fun with Chicken Little Paul.

I am not going to spend my time refuting him upon your order since so many others have done so in a much more well-ordered manner than I could have.

If you cannot see the humor in my response, I am more than willing to explain it to you. But then I would be even less funny than I already am.

My criticism is with the hysteria that so infuses the article posted.

A criticism which, although being almost absurdly non-offensive and lighthearted to an extreme - has moved you into the Glowering Arguement Mode - which you must admit is a bit of an overreaction.

38 posted on 03/08/2003 11:34:20 AM PST by Republicanus_Tyrannus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
So.

I will refute.

This was posted in 1997? That was what, six years ago?

For this article to need point by point refuting - the article itself must seem prescient. It must have outlined developments which should have taken place since its initial publication.

It has not.

There are no goose-stepping hordes of Federal Polize knocking on doorways with truncheons.

There is no law on the books making "certain" speech - outside of conspiracy- illegal. (and before you try to jump on that aside - conspiracy has ALWAYS been illegal in the US).

There has not been anyone in America dragged off to concentration camps for saying rude things - or even the "wrong" things in social situations.

In short - this article posits a police state. It claims that such a thing is imminent.

And it states such six years ago.

Therefore, tpaine, it is incorrect in its overall meaning.

Does that suffice for you? (I gave it my old college try)
39 posted on 03/08/2003 11:44:26 AM PST by Republicanus_Tyrannus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: HumanaeVitae
" Libertarianism = no widely agreed-upon and enforced moral standards = natural human impulse towards depravity takes over ... "

Your premises are false.

In fact, I think that you intentionally misrepesent libertarian ideas of morality for the purpose of promoting your religeous view.
Lying for the cross is still lying.

This is why I think that you are intellectually dishonest.

1. the initiation of force and fraud are widely agreed upon by libertarians and most others as immoral- you know that, you've been around here long enough.

2.If humans are so depraved, how is it that the species still exists. Would'nt we have followed our natural inclinations to our doom by now?

Maybe people are neither all good nor all evil but have the capacity for each. If we need restraint imposed on us, why is the church or the state any more moral than a tyrant?

In my view, we should be pretty much left alone until and unless we do harm others through the initiation of force and fraud. Then and only then it is the duty of the state to intervene.

40 posted on 03/08/2003 11:45:03 AM PST by artisan001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Republicanus_Tyrannus
Glowering? - Get real, and read what I posted to Luis.
-- 'Bait' in the backroom, where your silly attempts at humor can be answered in kind.
41 posted on 03/08/2003 11:48:35 AM PST by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
He talks? That's it?

Anything else?

42 posted on 03/08/2003 11:51:38 AM PST by Kevin Curry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: artisan001
If humans are so depraved, how is it that the species still exists.

Governments exist at all levels: family, tribe, village, city, state, and nation. Laws are promulgated and enforced in one fashion or another.

43 posted on 03/08/2003 11:53:35 AM PST by Kevin Curry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: HumanaeVitae
Actually, it seems more like Republicans are leading us to totalitarianism quite effectively. I haven't noticed any libertarians assaulting the Constitution lately.
44 posted on 03/08/2003 11:54:54 AM PST by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
Libertarians are parasites. They require a healthy host such as the "fascist" United States to sustain them.
45 posted on 03/08/2003 11:56:15 AM PST by Kevin Curry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Okay, now this is really getting odd and infuriating.

A single post does not require this level of offense.

I suggest you chill out before you start telling us what kind of responses are "allowed" to threads. Your posts are close - very close - to trolling.

I have offered no insult. I have done nothing contrary to the Free Republic rules. I have merely interjected a slightly humorous response. That in no way is a flame.

You're losing sight of what this forum is - we DO get to disagree, ya know. If you don't like being ribbed, I suggest you post in the "No Dissent Or Humor Allowed" forums - but Alas! There are none according to FORUM RULES.
46 posted on 03/08/2003 11:58:26 AM PST by Republicanus_Tyrannus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: HumanaeVitae
In the same way that collectivism united with industrial-revolution type technology to create all the atrocities of the 20th Century (the Holocaust, etc.), libertarian personalism will unite with individualizing scale-economic policies (think biotechnology) to create new kinds of horrors.


-- Mind boggling idiocy to claim "libertarian personalism?" will create "horrors?"....
Explain, please, -- we need more humor here.


47 posted on 03/08/2003 12:04:24 PM PST by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: artisan001
1. the initiation of force and fraud are widely agreed upon by libertarians and most others as immoral- you know that, you've been around here long enough.

Hoo, boyski. Now you've done it.

Let me ask you a question, artisan. Do you have a right to own a nuclear weapon?

48 posted on 03/08/2003 12:06:26 PM PST by HumanaeVitae
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Republicanus_Tyrannus
My my, --- where's that humor now?
- See why "take it to the backroom" is such good advice?
49 posted on 03/08/2003 12:09:26 PM PST by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Republicanus_Tyrannus
Your old 'college try' is end to end straw men - points Paul never made in his article.
Try again, without cheating.
50 posted on 03/08/2003 12:15:30 PM PST by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 401-444 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson