Comments

Ron Paul, in my opinion, is still one of the ONLY freethinkers left in the Beltway. I assume that there are more freethinkers than Paul, but have no evidence to prove that there are. One of the disagreements I have with "Big L's" is that they are holding on to a non-interventionist policy that was only feasible when the US had an ocean on either side and the subsequent two month warning of invasion that it afforded. We no longer live in a world where we can wait for the invasion of our shores. Thanks for the link, bro. Korn on the Kobra

Yes. Aha. Big "L" meaning big "L" Libertarian. I'm still not decided on the issue between Libertarians and neocons here. Their arguments both appear magnificent when I hear them. I think I'm still waiting for a wonderful new category to appear that makes it all obvious. We can't wait for invasion, I agree. But I wonder how many of our interventions make trouble more likely. To be sure, I won't argue that our going into the Middle East recently is the cause of terrorism. That's just plain psychotic. But if you look at this long-term, I'm not sure. There is no totally safe polity. Any polity can go bad. You give this country an ability to keep us perfectly safe, and it could be used against us as well as for us. So I don't want to see too much power consolidated. If we took the Second Amendment more seriously and everyone were armed, nobody would bother with an invasion as it would be too costly. If you could take it, you could never hold it. Anyway, whether or not I agree with Paul on this one, I think people need to hear his case.

Yeah, I fit into exactly none of the political parties at present. I'm an independent--which I suppose is like being "non-denominational." Muslims, the radically consistent ones, have been lopping off limbs since the crusades, and so I think we'd be dealing with them sooner or later. Though, I think we came on their radar screens back when Jews returned to Israel after WWII. Kobra