Read up, it's your country

[septemberannie]

It's your country and it has some of the greatest ideas behind it that have ever surfaced in human history.  We need to keep the spirit of the American Constitution alive as the founding fathers intended.  We're too distracted now.  I call to you: PAY ATTENTION!

Comments

[abstractform]

When I was on the Democrat's panel for the mock debates at CNU in 2004, I was glad to see the Libertarian's entry into the second debate. They definitely took us off the usual talking points, and to be honest, I found our mock debates had more substance than the real ones. Granted, they arrested the Green and Liberatarian candidates when they showed up for the Presidential debates... never mind.

In my eyes, there's a legitimate conservative that believes in small government and peacefully neutral foreign policies like George Washington, and then there are others that I consider sock puppets for the rich strip-mining everyone underneath them. Kucinich and Gravel are my favorites, but I would rather have Ron Paul than nearly any other of the runners up on either side. I'm just not a libertarian because I think checks and balances are needed all around, including on would-be robber barons from government regulation. But at this point, I think real libertarians would do more good than harm. Ron Paul definitely has something to bring to the debate.

Funny, I was just quoting George Washington in my personal op-ed a few weeks ago.

[septemberannie]

Yes, this is the only conservative I've seen who doesn't lean toward the 'sock puppets for the rich' side. I also like Kucinich and Gravel, but Ron Paul has so far stood out in my mind beyond party lines.

I can see where checks and balances are needed all around, and I think that's where I have the biggest hang-ups with libertarianism also. It becomes a philosophical problem...when you let human nature run as free as possible, and the market run as free as possible, what are the boundaries on corruption therein?

But then I do really like this Ron Paul quote: "Freedom is not defined by safety. Freedom is defined by the ability of citizens to live without government interference. Government cannot create a world without risks, nor would we really wish to live in such a fictional place. Only a totalitarian society would even claim absolute safety as a worthy ideal, because it would require total state control over its citizens’ lives. Liberty has meaning only if we still believe in it when terrible things happen and a false government security blanket beckons."

If we take more control away from the federal government, and put more into our own hands, and more at the state level, could we as a citizenry become more aware as a whole of those who unfairly run corporations? I don't know if we could keep that checked and balanced without overarching regulation.

I do agree that we have to be conscious of political dealings of businesses and vice versa and to that degree there should be regulation. An honest free market cannot be run otherwise and at this point things have really gone too far. It would be harmful not to recognize this

I like what Ron Paul talks about because he wants to slowly reverse damage, and put more power in the hands of the state governments, because they're closer to the people..which is then transferring more power to the people themselves.

I'm not sure how far he'll get, but it is good to hear the ideas from someone this high up.