Congressman Ron Paul on the VT shootings
 

http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2007/tst042307.htm

"The senseless and horrific killings last week on the campus of Virginia Tech

University reinforced an uneasy feeling many Americans experienced after

September 11th: namely, that government cannot protect us. No matter how

many laws we pass, no matter how many police or federal agents we put on

the streets, a determined individual or group still can cause great harm.

Perhaps the only good that can come from these terrible killings is a

reinforced understanding that we as individuals are responsible for our safety

and the safety of our families.

"Although Virginia does allow individuals to carry concealed weapons if they

first obtain a permit, college campuses within the state are specifically

exempted. Virginia Tech, like all Virginia colleges, is therefore a gun-free

zone, at least for private individuals. And as we witnessed, it didn't matter

how many guns the police had. Only private individuals on the scene could

have prevented or lessened this tragedy. Prohibiting guns on campus made

the Virginia Tech students less safe, not more.

"The Virginia Tech tragedy may not lead directly to more gun control, but I

fear it will lead to more people control. Thanks to our media and many

government officials, Americans have become conditioned to view the state

as our protector and the solution to every problem. Whenever something

terrible happens, especially when it becomes a national news story, people

reflexively demand that government do something. This impulse almost

always leads to bad laws and the loss of liberty. It is completely at odds with

the best American traditions of self-reliance and rugged individualism.

"Do we really want to live in a world of police checkpoints, surveillance

cameras, and metal detectors? Do we really believe government can provide

total security? Do we want to involuntarily commit every disaffected,

disturbed, or alienated person who fantasizes about violence? Or can we

accept that liberty is more important than the illusion of state-provided

security?

"I fear that Congress will use this terrible event to push for more government

mandated mental health programs. The therapeutic nanny state only

encourages individuals to view themselves as victims, and reject personal

responsibility for their actions. Certainly there are legitimate organic mental

illnesses, but it is the role of doctors and families, not the government, to

diagnose and treat such illnesses.

"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."

and he's right. thanks for posting this.

Pretty good!

who is ron paul anyway?

Congressman Paul from the GOP debate
 

If anyone's curiosity is peeked, here is a youtube video of all of Ron Paul's remarks from the recent debate:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Hfa7vT02lA

I'm not a fan of politicians, in fact I think they all "suck", but Mr Paul seems to be the closest thing to a "non-sucking" politician as there is.

Ron Paul is one of the worst representatives in my state. If one views his schizophrenic voting record it is clear the man has been captured by aliens and injected with small little viral minirobots.

He may have said something relevant on this case, but I think he nuts. He wants no government whatsoever. If people have to eat contaminated food, the consumers will find out after they die after eating the tainted lettuce and the company will not flourish. This kind of thinking is scary. He needs to visit some African governments that have no control so he understands how chaos can break down a society. This is a man without a clue. He wants the government to basically disband. The armed forces, congress, and judical branch should all be run by private company kind of stuff.
Privatize the CIA, FBI... because the private sector does everything better. Then a citizens record could be sold by the private companies and big profits could be made for any individual that wishes to know something about another individual. imo, this is how the man thinks. There will be votes in the house banning the torture of babies and the vote will be like 435-1... the one vote coming from Ron Paul who thinks there are some extreme cases where babies should be tortured. I am exaggerating, but he is way out there.

Never trust anyone with two first names :D

Oh yeah?

I'll make an exception in your case :eek:

I have exaggerated. And Paul is clueless.

He would change his tune after a month in a country without a government. No he would not. He would be dead by then. Drowned in his own saliva.

Ron Paul...hmmm.
Said a lot about 9-11 in the debate, until Rudy let him have it.
Methinks this guy is crackers.

On a side note, how pathetic is it that someone has to have a veiled insult in their tag...common dreams, alternet. Insecure patheticness. LMFAO!

One more video
 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rF3Nt...rtNum%3D52468\
Here is the link to an interview Ron Paul did on CNN with Wolf Blitzer..I have no knowledge of his past voting record, or anything like that. Just watch this video and tell me if what he's saying makes sense or not.
And by the way, I'm not trying to say that he will be or should be the next President, just trying to expose some people to a man who is being intentionally marginalized/ignored by the mainstream media.

An interesting article:
http://mwcnews.net/content/view/14574/26/

I have watched this guy's voting record for years.
Im telling you he is way out there. Watch the debate where he threw the largest softball I have ever seen and Guilliana ripped that fat pitch down his throat. Made him look like the fool he is. Yes he is very close to an anarchist.
He suggested 9/11 was something that was going to happen because of the immoral reckless behavior of the US. The man is way out there. But he is running for President so he might have some handlers that make him look a wee bit sane.

Nightmare man. I swear I would leave this country if he was elected. NUTS. (The last few statements probably bought him some votes on this board.)

I was going to try to respond to this, but instead I will let this short article do it for me:

Ron Paul, CIA Big, to Rebut Giuliani at Press Confab, May 24
Wednesday, May 23, 2007 - FreeMarketNews.com


Presidential candidate Ron Paul (R-TX) will be joined by Michael Scheuer, former head of the CIA's Bin Laden Unit, to discuss flawed American foreign policy and its implications on terrorism, security and Iraq.

The press conference will be held at 9:30AM EST on Thursday, May 24 in the National Press Club Lisagor Room.

During the "First in South" GOP debate, earlier this month, Dr. Paul stated that 50 years of interventionism in the Middle East is a significant motivating tool for radical Islamists. Dr. Paul's position, though disparaged during the debate, has since received backing from numerous individuals, including others in the GOP, administration officials and - in excerpted reports - from the 9-11 Commission itself.

In the debate, Rudy Giuliani, a presidential candidate and well-known former Republican mayor of New York, called Dr. Paul's position "absurd." Giuliani is commonly characterized as a GOP "front-runner." He is also considered well-versed in foreign policy, given his supervision of the "international city" of New York and his position as its leader during 9/11. However, he stated that he had "never heard such an explanation" as Ron Paul's.

According to a limited-circulation release, Dr. Paul and Mr. Scheuer are expected to explain why Rudy Giuliani is wrong on security and foreign policy and provide documentation about the unintended consequences of interventionism - known to many in the intelligence community (and Dr. Paul as well) as "blowback."