Ron Paul Mega-Thread (Mergeness)

Discussion in 'Legal' started by brighamr, Jun 5, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Marshall

    Marshall Member

    Dec 26, 2002
    Oklahoma, Green Country

    You know, it's ironic. I had just, about 45 minutes ago since the thread became disrupted, PM'ed Lone and was expressing some views that I haven't expressed here, or at least to the degree. The irony is that much of what I typed to Lone was, to the point, of what you just posted.

    I am not as pro Patriot Act as I let on. What I am is, pro "anti terrorist." I am pro "non FUBAR America." I am pro "don't want to see another 9-11 or worse." I am pro "anti-Islamic Jihad." I very much realize the possibility of the slippery slope and, I don't want to slide, at all.

    What I have is a personal dilemma, I'll admit it. One I am sure a lot of folks have and probably a lot of folks on this board have as well even if they won't say so. I want my cake and eat it too. Sorry, but I'm selfish that way when it comes to this nation. I want it to bow to no other nation or entity. I want it to be free from harm, destruction, threats, terror, etc. I want the best for this country. I also want our rights protected, our freedoms protected and our liberties protected. A dirty bomb threatens all of the above. If we have a nuke go off in this country, it's my belief we'll see more freedoms and liberties go by the wayside than we have ever imagined to date. I see that as a great threat and one that needs to be prevented for our freedoms and liberties and our citizenries safety, of course. However, I don't know how to do both perfectly. So, I become an optimist that say's, "OK, I'll give a smidgen, not be selfish, be realistic and let the Govt have the ability to fight a defensive war with a little more offense." I know, there's a risk, no doubt. There's a risk if I don't as well.

    Half of what I debate here is half of what I think. I could debate the other side as well and feel as justified in my take on it. Seriously. The whole reason I started debating this was because of Lone's "Fred Voted for the Patriot Act" business. My point in all of this was, I don't see that as making Fred, or any other candidate that voted for it after 9-11, a bad choice for President of the USA. I can certainly understand why all but one Senator voted for the act. I do not see it as a negative against their record, elephant or donkey.

    Am I for it? Yes and No. Yes for what it helps, no for the slope it creates. As you say, there's not much it has done, in itself, to harm us or threaten us or our liberties. So yes, I have a dilemma. But I do not have a dilemma in standing behind a Senator running for President that voted for it. And that is how this all started.

    Anyway, we're closer in out thinking than you know. But since you've made the climb over the fence and I have not fully done so, we're still a somewhat apart.

    I appreciate your post.
  2. Sry0fcr

    Sry0fcr Member

    Sep 25, 2005
    Houston, Republic of Texas
    For some of us it is. If someone can't adhere to our Constitutional principles in times of crisis IMO they're not fit for public service.
  3. Matt King

    Matt King Member

    Apr 17, 2006

    Marshall, I have no problems with LEO's searching people's bags if the authorities have probable cause that that person is up to no good. However, you have to make sure that they don't step over the line, and IMHO, the Patriot Act has made it much easier for Law Enforcement to abuse their power.
  4. brighamr

    brighamr Member

    Nov 28, 2006
    somewhere between utah and canada
    Sorry to "yell" but when you have 64 pages of back and forth bickering, you kind of have to stand out. To all the people who feel that discussion of RP's points need to be considered, argued, discussed and broken down into every possible detail... Why don't you start your own thread? I can guarantee this one will be closed soon, so you might as well start your own anyway.

    As for those who have filled this thread talking to one or two people for several pages, why don't you take it to PMs? The rest of the people who already support RP don't need to hash out and defend everything he has to say. Read my first post in this thread, you know, the one that I started.

    ever hear of hijacking? :rolleyes:

    As for what we can talk about now, why not RP's ongoing campaign?

    SO, back on topic:

  5. helpless

    helpless Member

    Sep 3, 2006
  6. Art Eatman

    Art Eatman Moderator Emeritus

    Dec 22, 2002
    Terlingua, TX; Thomasville,GA
    Thirty pages is more than enugh.

    The suggestion seems valid that when there are but a very few posting to a thread, it should go to PM or email.

    A re-start with a summary of Paul's positions seems reasonable.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice