Ron Paul: So what if Crimea secedes?

posted at 8:41 pm on March 18, 2014 by Jazz Shaw

It’s been a while since we had a good session of pointing out how wrong-headed my quasi-isolationist tendencies are, so what better occasion than right after Ron Paul publishes another screed on the evils of meddling in the affairs of other nations? The Texan took to the pages of USA Today this week to pose the question of the day… Crimea Secedes. So what?

Residents of Crimea voted over the weekend on whether they would remain an autonomous region of Ukraine or join the Russian Federation. In so doing, they joined a number of countries and regions — including recently Scotland, Catalonia and Venice — that are seeking to secede from what they view as unresponsive or oppressive governments.

These latter three are proceeding without much notice, while the overwhelming Crimea vote to secede from Ukraine has incensed U.S. and European Union officials, and has led NATO closer to conflict with Russia than since the height of the Cold War.

There are some obvious points in his opening salvo which leave Paul open to criticism, but he settles in later to ask two questions which are worth taking a swing at. The first deals with the purist form of American isolationism.

Why does the U.S. care which flag will be hoisted on a small piece of land thousands of miles away?

This is pretty much the prototypical isolationist question, and the answer generally depends on which country you’re asking about. In a previous article, I took a stab at the question, What does the West owe Ukraine? And the answer – at least according to several foreign policy experts – is a bit more complicated than some might think. The Ukraine has proven themselves an unreliable ally to the West nearly as much as they have to Russia. And that’s looking at the question for the entirety of the Ukraine, not just the significantly smaller slice of it in Crimea.

And what does the West get in return, assuming we go to the mat on this one and stick up for a unified, unpartitioned Ukraine? It seems to be an open question as to precisely how much they know their own identity at this point and how solidified their internal instincts are. There are many nations with internal factions yearning to be free, but as we’ve seen in Egypt, among other places, those freedom fighters don’t automatically translate in to democracy minded, America loving patriots in all cases.

The second question Paul asks has no doubt drawn even more fire.

Critics point to the Russian “occupation” of Crimea as evidence that no fair vote could have taken place. Where were these people when an election held in an Iraq occupied by U.S. troops was called a “triumph of democracy”?

Leaving aside for the moment the not-too-subtle shot at the Iraq war, it does leave us with the question of whether or not the Crimea denizens might actually have some interest in rejoining Russia in some fashion. Allahpundit covered some of Ron Paul’s arguments about self-determination already, summed up thusly:

It’s “Reason” editor Matt Welch who challenges Paul on the uselessness of trying to hold a free and fair election in a province that’s being threatened by 80,000 Russian troops across the border. Paul’s among people who respect the non-interventionist approach to foreign policy, in other words, and even they seemingly can’t believe that he’s trying to frame this as a matter of “self-determination.” Even if the election were free and fair, remember that Crimea has an ethnic Russian majority in no small part because Stalin purged it of its Tatars decades ago.

Granted, they both raise a valid question of how “open” an election is when there are tens of thousands of foreign troops looking on, but in the case of Crimea it does leave room to wonder. The population in that area is significantly more ethnic Russian as well as being Russian speaking. But it goes deeper than that. Ukraine has been in all sorts of trouble. They are torn between the Russian Bear and the EU looking to find a victory in that nation. Ukraine is broke, and everyone seems to acknowledge that even if they fully join the EU they will need massive amounts of cash infusions just to keep their heads above water.

Further, situated where they are, they find themselves on the brink of potential military action at any moment. They have essentially no military force to speak of, and will be too weak to stand up to much of an assault from either direction. Russia, on the other hand, while not still a “superpower” in their own right, is still at least the number two nuclear force on the planet and maintains a substantial military capability. Is it so entirely crazy to think that those two factors in particular might leave some of the ethnic Russians in Crimea considering the benefits of throwing in their lot with Mother Russia?

It’s not a given in either case, but certainly worth thinking about. Ron Paul, as always, will go much further than he needs in the argument and fly the flag of keeping 100% hands off in all situations. I don’t agree with that, though sensible restraint is always a good idea before any sort of military engagement where possible. But when it comes to Crimea, are Paul’s underlying questions really that crazy?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Do I think that the world is a better, more peaceful, and safer place when the United States retreats and repeatedly demonstrates itself to be weak and unwilling to back up its threats?

Resist We Much on March 18, 2014 at 9:51 PM

Then maybe… just maybe… we shouldn’t go around making so many thr… errr… commitments… so many commitments around the globe.

Just a thought…

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 9:56 PM

Like so many things Ron Paul, there are some legitimate points; but the crazy just bleeds through.

No doubt he’ll crush any of Rand’s presidential ambitions.

chris0christies0donut on March 18, 2014 at 9:52 PM

Yip, we will be back to electing some big government douche that didn’t have the cajonies to join the military when he was a young man, but as an old man he is more than willing to put other Americans lives in danger for foreign government.

MoreLiberty on March 18, 2014 at 9:57 PM

Well realistically, what can anyone do about the Crimea or the likely coming invasion/occupation of Eastern Ukraine? Sanctions aren’t going to do a damn thing.

sharrukin on March 18, 2014 at 9:44 PM

Unless someone wants to go to war with Russia, Crimea is now part of Russia and they’re not giving it back.

As I recall it took us several months to put our military in place before starting the first Iraq war. I see no such troop movements going on now.

Kaffa on March 18, 2014 at 9:57 PM

Sorry to those offended, but I’m just so over “country.”

fatlibertarianinokc on March 18, 2014 at 9:55 PM

To paraphrase Edmund Burke one can only love his country if his country is lovable, and the Obama America is about as ugly as it gets.

VorDaj on March 18, 2014 at 9:58 PM

It’s legitimate role is so far afield fom what it is doing as to be irrelevant to it.

VorDaj on March 18, 2014 at 9:51 PM

I guess we’ll have to disagree on that.

kcewa on March 18, 2014 at 9:58 PM

not aggressively expanding NATO (or a replacement for NATO if some of the western European’s wouldn’t go along) into Eastern Europe when we had a chance.

kcewa on March 18, 2014 at 9:55 PM

How can the US respond militarily in the Ukraine without the Europeans?

If the answer is that they cannot then why extend an assurance of defending the Ukraine if it is nothing more than bluff?

sharrukin on March 18, 2014 at 9:59 PM

IMO if we had stood up to Putin each step of the way it wouldn’t have come to this. We made a big mistake by thinking that we could do business with a gangster state and in not aggressively expanding NATO (or a replacement for NATO if some of the western European’s wouldn’t go along) into Eastern Europe when we had a chance.

kcewa on March 18, 2014 at 9:55 PM

We tried expanding NATO into Ukraine.

And their parliament, elected in elections that everyone appeared to agree at the time were free and fair, voted to reject NATO.

Were we supposed to instigate a coup d’etat in the Ukraine to bring in a pro-NATO, pro-EU government…?

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 10:00 PM

As I recall it took us several months to put our military in place before starting the first Iraq war. I see no such troop movements going on now.

Kaffa on March 18, 2014 at 9:57 PM

No one is going to do anything and that includes if the Russians move into the Eastern Ukraine.

sharrukin on March 18, 2014 at 10:00 PM

Sorry to those offended, but I’m just so over “country.”

fatlibertarianinokc on March 18, 2014 at 9:55 PM

It’s not a teenage crush. You can’t get “over” it.

kcewa on March 18, 2014 at 10:01 PM

Putin didn’t incinerate 3,000 Americans on 911.

So the US then allies with the Al-Nusra Front and Al-Qaeda in Syria against Putin and this is supposed to make sense? The US helps the radical Muslims in Libya, and helps put the Muslim Brotherhood into power in Egypt and these are the geniuses that also want to get involved in the Ukraine? Sharia law is now enshrined in Iraq and Afghanistan with Karzai sounding more like an enemy than an ally, and the same brain-trust that brought this to fruition is on the job with the Ukrainian situation.

sharrukin on March 18, 2014 at 9:34 PM

Radical Islam and radical left are allies in material and en-iformatio, so this is hardly surprising that Obama and the EU support Salafis and abhor Russia.

Note that the same people who were happy to be pro-Soviet propagandists in the Commie times, are now suddenly playing “gravely concerned” about today’s Russia and their laws against sodomite propaganda. Wonder why?

What should be concerning is that many of so called “conservatives” are towing the line of the far left for Al Qaeda and against Russia, which is puzzling, since Russia is not an enemy of the free world but a capitalist and free-market country which happens to still host the traditional beliefs about family cell.

Take Juan McCain, who met Al-Nusra reps, and then went off to hug a troglodyte neo-nazi party leader in Ukraine. You have to be absolutely bunkers to call this man a patriot. What makes him a patriot? How is hating nominal Russians in Crimea who want out of Khruchev’s artificial decree, while tongue kissing Ukrainian neo-nazis and Al-Nusra front Jihadi mass murderers, a conservative ideal? How do his actions benefit America?

Masih ad-Dajjal on March 18, 2014 at 10:02 PM

Say what you say of Ron he is consistent. Scotland is having a referendum to secede from England , Quebec wants to secede from canada and every conservative part of a blue state wants to secede to start a new state. But Crimea full of Russians wants to be part of Russia. Oh no that can’t happen. Lol. People are truly funny.

coolrepublica on March 18, 2014 at 10:02 PM

I will not support any more discretionary wars that we have no intention of winning. If the federal government wants to fight someone let them send some of the bloated bureaucracy that’s suffocating us here at home. Or how adopt some of the militarized police?

claudius on March 18, 2014 at 9:33 PM

Excellent idea! Let’s send the IRS, the NSA and the rest of the DC fascists over there to fight the war if they want one so bad. That will teach Putin.

FloatingRock on March 18, 2014 at 10:02 PM

Well realistically, what can anyone do about the Crimea or the likely coming invasion/occupation of Eastern Ukraine? Sanctions aren’t going to do a damn thing.

sharrukin on March 18, 2014 at 9:44 PM

In theory, we could not contest the plebiscite in Crimea, encourage their parliament to expel pro-Russian members, and rush through a vote on NATO membership.

In theory…

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 10:02 PM

Excellent idea! Let’s send the IRS, the NSA and the rest of the DC fascists over there to fight the war if they want one so bad. That will teach Putin.

FloatingRock on March 18, 2014 at 10:02 PM

Teach him… what? To fill out paperwork in triplicate…?

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 10:03 PM

Read the piece.

Resist We Much on March 18, 2014 at 9:42 PM

I read enough of it already.

VorDaj on March 18, 2014 at 9:46 PM

Obviously not enough if you think the question is actually about Iraq. He is ridiculing the reflexive riposte to everything having to do with foreign policy and the attempts made to excuse the illegal, criminal, and/or barbarous acts of foreign leaders/countries/terrorist organisations with the whine:

But, what about Iraq? Huh? Huh? The United States can’t condemn the actions of X because of Iraq.’

Such leaves people like Ron Paul in the position of not condemning the invasion and occupation of Ukraine by Russia because ‘What about Iraq?!?!?’

If you opposed the invasion and occupation of Iraq, then you must, to be consistent and intellectually honest, condemn the invasion and occupation of Crimea.

The failure to condemn Putin by many of those that opposed the Iraq war leaves me with the impression that their opposition wasn’t principled; instead, it was just another opportunity to blame America first. Evidently, ‘imperialism’ is only bad when we do it.

At least, I am consistent.

Resist We Much on March 18, 2014 at 10:04 PM

This guy (the Dad) lost me in 2008, when he stated in
one of the Republican debates that all drugs should be
Legal. Yes, that included Heroin and Cocaine.

Yeah, he wants to go after the Federal reserve.
Big deal…he’s so far out on Neptune on so
many other topics, his few good ideas get lost
in the Fog….and Yes, Rand would never get out
from under the Media assault that would take place…

ToddPA on March 18, 2014 at 10:05 PM

I always thought it was the threat of losing tax dollars that scared them. It’s similar to a slave owner worried about his slaves leaving him. There’s no bigger slave owner than a government which steals money from it’s citizens via income and property taxes. We’re simply cattle. Cattle too stupid to have the right of secession. Too stupid to read a book that tells you fake weight loss secrets. We’re so utterly stupid we need these tyrants to steal from us, take our property, beat the hell out of us and leave us for dead.

Sorry to those offended, but I’m just so over “country.”

fatlibertarianinokc on March 18, 2014 at 9:55 PM

True. They are so connected to the machine, it appears that can’t think for themselves. They need big brother to tell them what to eat, what not to put in their bodies, they need big government to protect them…even from themselves. We are nothing like the people who escaped tyranny and made their way to the new world. Those people were strong, and had endurance and drive. Now these fools get their little boxers in a bunch and get all scared like timid little mice. All things come to an end, even mountain ranges crumble, glaciers advance and retreat, nations form and fall.

MoreLiberty on March 18, 2014 at 10:06 PM

Putin didn’t incinerate 3,000 Americans on 911.

So the US then allies with the Al-Nusra Front and Al-Qaeda in Syria against Putin and this is supposed to make sense? The US helps the radical Muslims in Libya, and helps put the Muslim Brotherhood into power in Egypt and these are the geniuses that also want to get involved in the Ukraine? Sharia law is now enshrined in Iraq and Afghanistan with Karzai sounding more like an enemy than an ally, and the same brain-trust that brought this to fruition is on the job with the Ukrainian situation.

Why is this not reassuring?

These people are past experts at screwing things up!

sharrukin on March 18, 2014 at 9:34 PM

+1

FloatingRock on March 18, 2014 at 10:06 PM

This guy (the Dad) lost me in 2008, when he stated in
one of the Republican debates that all drugs should be
Legal. Yes, that included Heroin and Cocaine.

ToddPA on March 18, 2014 at 10:05 PM

Exactly what part of the US Constitution do you believe authorizes the US Government to make heroin and cocaine illegal…?

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 10:07 PM

Then maybe… just maybe… we shouldn’t go around making so many thr… errr… commitments… so many commitments around the globe.

Just a thought…

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 9:56 PM

Drawing red lines, promising ‘very strong’ actions, etc, only to be proven as someone who is unwilling to act on their threats is incredibly dangerous.

As I have tried to explain to people in the US, the one thing that Europeans hate more than a strong United States is a weak one. Nature abhors a vacuum and, history has repeatedly shown, that when the United States retreats, goes wobbly, become feckless, the mischief makers around the world swing into action.

Resist We Much on March 18, 2014 at 10:09 PM

Say what you say of Ron he is consistent. Scotland is having a referendum to secede from England , Quebec wants to secede from canada and every conservative part of a blue state wants to secede to start a new state. But Crimea full of Russians wants to be part of Russia. Oh no that can’t happen. Lol. People are truly funny.

coolrepublica on March 18, 2014 at 10:02 PM

Agreed.

MoreLiberty on March 18, 2014 at 10:09 PM

Note that the same people who were happy to be pro-Soviet propagandists in the Commie times, are now suddenly playing “gravely concerned” about today’s Russia and their laws against sodomite propaganda. Wonder why?

Because Moscow On The Potomac is where the new Soviets reside.

What should be concerning is that many of so called “conservatives” are towing the line of the far left for Al Qaeda and against Russia, which is puzzling, since Russia is not an enemy of the free world but a capitalist and free-market country which happens to still host the traditional beliefs about family cell.

The traditions of the Cold War play a part and I suspect that the inability to win in Iraq, Afghanistan and against the terrorist groups create a great deal of frustration. Russia is a much easier enemy to grasp than non-state actors and religious fanatics who the US government keeps giving cash and weapons to.

Take Juan McCain, who met Al-Nusra reps, and then went off to hug a troglodyte neo-nazi party leader in Ukraine. You have to be absolutely bunkers to call this man a patriot. What makes him a patriot? How is hating nominal Russians in Crimea who want out of Khruchev’s artificial decree, while tongue kissing Ukrainian neo-nazis and Al-Nusra front Jihadi mass murderers, a conservative ideal? How do his actions benefit America?

Masih ad-Dajjal on March 18, 2014 at 10:02 PM

They don’t and most people know that, but Russia is a problem they can deal with, while Islam can be defeated in what way exactly?

sharrukin on March 18, 2014 at 10:09 PM

And their parliament, elected in elections that everyone appeared to agree at the time were free and fair, voted to reject NATO.

Were we supposed to instigate a coup d’etat in the Ukraine to bring in a pro-NATO, pro-EU government…?

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 10:00 PM

That was after Yanukovych’s election. I don’t think anyone believes he did that without pressure and bribes from Russia.

kcewa on March 18, 2014 at 10:10 PM

Exactly what part of the US Constitution do you believe authorizes the US Government to make heroin and cocaine illegal…?

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 10:07 PM

Just like a liberal that loves big government, he can’t point it out. What these people fail to recognize is that there is something called the 10th Amendment. If it’s not in the US Constitution is should be a state issue, and I would hope that the STATES would out law these drugs.

MoreLiberty on March 18, 2014 at 10:12 PM

Sorry to those offended, but I’m just so over “country.”

fatlibertarianinokc on March 18, 2014 at 9:55 PM

lol! Sorry… I’m just so over nihilists.

thatsafactjack on March 18, 2014 at 10:13 PM

I don’t agree with that, though sensible restraint is always a good idea before any sort of military engagement where possible. But when it comes to Crimea, are Paul’s underlying questions really that crazy?

When your position revolves around pointing at an referendum (and not, as Paul filthily insinuates, a fair election for particular leaders like that held in Iraq in 2005) orchestrated by the ex-KGB to ratify their recent invasion of a country, a day before its annexation by Russia, then yes, you really are that despicable and crazy.

HitNRun on March 18, 2014 at 10:13 PM

Exactly what part of the US Constitution do you believe authorizes the US Government to make heroin and cocaine illegal…?

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 10:07 PM

Same one that made untaxed whiskey illegal?

sharrukin on March 18, 2014 at 10:14 PM

Exactly what part of the US Constitution do you believe authorizes the US Government to make heroin and cocaine illegal…?

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 10:07 PM

The Sanity Clause. Never read it? Yeah, me neither,
it’s not in there…just thought I’d pass that along
to you…

ToddPA on March 18, 2014 at 10:14 PM

Exactly what part of the US Constitution do you believe authorizes the US Government to make heroin and cocaine illegal…?

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 10:07 PM

Just like a liberal that loves big government, he can’t point it out. What these people fail to recognize is that there is something called the 10th Amendment. If it’s not in the US Constitution is should be a state issue, and I would hope that the STATES would out law these drugs.

MoreLiberty on March 18, 2014 at 10:12 PM

The same one that people like you claims allows the government to change the meaning of marriage.

astonerii on March 18, 2014 at 10:14 PM

Say what you say of Ron he is consistent.

coolrepublica on March 18, 2014 at 10:02 PM

Ron condemned the US invasion of Iraq.

He has remained strangely silent on the issue of Russian invasion of Crimea.

Resist We Much on March 18, 2014 at 10:17 PM

Same one that made untaxed whiskey illegal?

sharrukin on March 18, 2014 at 10:14 PM

So I guess these weren’t needed right:
18th Amendment
And the
21st Amendment.

MoreLiberty on March 18, 2014 at 10:18 PM

Say what you say of Ron he is consistent. Scotland is having a referendum to secede from England , Quebec wants to secede from canada and every conservative part of a blue state wants to secede to start a new state. But Crimea full of Russians wants to be part of Russia. Oh no that can’t happen. Lol. People are truly funny.

coolrepublica on March 18, 2014 at 10:02 PM

If the Russians in Crimea were going about it the same way as the Quebecois, the Scots and the Catlalans it might be different.

Besides it’s Russia’s actions that are at question here. If Ireland had paratroops in Glasgow and France had tanks in Quebec City it might be different.

kcewa on March 18, 2014 at 10:18 PM

Same one that made untaxed whiskey illegal?

sharrukin on March 18, 2014 at 10:14 PM

You mean if I pay the taxes on heroin and cocaine, then it’s okay?

Wow. I’ll keep that in mind…

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 10:20 PM

They might (depending on which founding father you’re talking about) disapprove of some of it’s actions. But would not approve of weakening it’s ability to perform it’s legitimate role. And that’s what Snowden is doing.

kcewa on March 18, 2014 at 9:48 PM

I think the founding fathers would be horrified by the NSA and would kill everybody involved, especially those at the top, until they surrendered unconditionally.

FloatingRock on March 18, 2014 at 10:20 PM

The same one that people like you claims allows the government to change the meaning of marriage.

astonerii on March 18, 2014 at 10:14 PM

Wrong again douche. My view is that the government should not be involved with defining marriage period. I should not have to ask permission from the king – your govt – the get married via a license. Additionally, churches, and or businesses should not be forced to recognize anyone marriage or divorce. I don’t need permission from some government to get married to my wife.

MoreLiberty on March 18, 2014 at 10:21 PM

Exactly what part of the US Constitution do you believe authorizes the US Government to make heroin and cocaine illegal…?
JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 10:07 PM

In which states are heroin or cocaine legal?

kcewa on March 18, 2014 at 10:22 PM

In which states are heroin or cocaine legal?

kcewa on March 18, 2014 at 10:22 PM

Precisely. You don’t need the federal government to do that, it’s a states right issues. Let the states take care of it.

MoreLiberty on March 18, 2014 at 10:24 PM

Say what you say of Ron he is consistent. Scotland is having a referendum to secede from England , Quebec wants to secede from canada and every conservative part of a blue state wants to secede to start a new state. But Crimea full of Russians wants to be part of Russia. Oh no that can’t happen. Lol. People are truly funny.

coolrepublica on March 18, 2014 at 10:02 PM

Small difference you might want to at least acknowledge; no one just invaded Scotland, Quebec or the red parts of blue states with an occupying military force. Not in recent history, anyway. :)

Midas on March 18, 2014 at 10:25 PM

If the Russians in Crimea were going about it the same way as the Quebecois, the Scots and the Catlalans it might be different.

kcewa on March 18, 2014 at 10:18 PM

And herein lies the problem. If Russia were to pull its troops out… if the UN, or whatever governing body, were to put election monitors in there… if every democratic control you can think of was instituted in Crimea, and you then held a referendum…

…it’s likely they would still vote for secession, and then accession to the Russian Federation.

And where then are we? Putin looks every bit the hero at that point…

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 10:26 PM

I think the founding fathers would be horrified by the NSA and would kill everybody involved, especially those at the top, until they surrendered unconditionally.

FloatingRock on March 18, 2014 at 10:20 PM

Can’t we let them rest in peace and make our arguments on merit? Not on what we think they would have thought?

If you’re for killing everyone involved…well, I hope you reconsider when you sober up.

kcewa on March 18, 2014 at 10:26 PM

In which states are heroin or cocaine legal?

kcewa on March 18, 2014 at 10:22 PM

If a state wanted to, as a few now have done with pot, could they?

Midas on March 18, 2014 at 10:26 PM

In which states are heroin or cocaine legal?

kcewa on March 18, 2014 at 10:22 PM

I’ve only ever heard Ron Paul argue against federal prohibition. Perhaps you have links to where he does otherwise…?

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 10:27 PM

Drawing red lines, promising ‘very strong’ actions, etc, only to be proven as someone who is unwilling to act on their threats is incredibly dangerous.

Resist We Much on March 18, 2014 at 10:09 PM

That’s why it stupid to draw red lines unless you have the intention and wherewithal to back it up. Let the stupid people, Obama and his neocon allies, pay the price for their stupid red lines, not the American people.

FloatingRock on March 18, 2014 at 10:27 PM

Besides it’s Russia’s actions that are at question here. If Ireland had paratroops in Glasgow and France had tanks in Quebec City it might be different.

kcewa on March 18, 2014 at 10:18 PM

And if America had tanks in Kosovo? Would that make the referendum illegal or illegitimate?

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-24798397

They started smashing ballot boxes, throwing ballot papers around, insulting members of the election commission, and one older woman was seriously injured because one of the attackers hit her with a chair.

another woman had also been injured, her leg was broken

This of course was recognized by the west.

That Crimean vote however, was an OUTRAGE I tell you!

sharrukin on March 18, 2014 at 10:28 PM

And herein lies the problem. If Russia were to pull its troops out… if the UN, or whatever governing body, were to put election monitors in there… if every democratic control you can think of was instituted in Crimea, and you then held a referendum…

…it’s likely they would still vote for secession, and then accession to the Russian Federation.

And where then are we? Putin looks every bit the hero at that point…

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 10:26 PM

I guess that is a problem, because there’s no way you can know that, eh? I had heard that huge numbers of people simply didn’t vote out of protest, and that in some areas the turnout was far greater than 100%, so the ‘vote’ that was taken really means nothing in terms of projecting what would really happen absent a military occupation.

Midas on March 18, 2014 at 10:29 PM

The Sanity Clause. Never read it? Yeah, me neither,
it’s not in there…just thought I’d pass that along
to you…

ToddPA on March 18, 2014 at 10:14 PM

So, I’ll take that as “I can’t point to any provision in the US Constitution that authorizes the USG to prohibit heroin and cocaine, and instead stand in favor of extra-constitutional law”.

‘Bout what I expected…

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 10:30 PM

And where then are we? Putin looks every bit the hero at that point…

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 10:26 PM

I have no problem with him looking the hero to the Russians in Crimea.

If they had seceded legally and without the help of Russian troops and if they had then allowed the Ukranians to join the real world instead of Putin’s czarist fantasy world that would have been fine.

I think they blew that opportunity.

kcewa on March 18, 2014 at 10:31 PM

But in the end, it doesn’t matter – it is what it is. We’re not going to war to change it. Will a war get started that drags us into it whether we want it or not? Who knows. The point is that our foreign policy stance of late seems to undeniably convince folks like Putin that they can literally do whatever the hell they want with impunity, so… yeah, chances are probably higher than they might otherwise be that this will go very badly. Doesn’t mean they will, of course.

Midas on March 18, 2014 at 10:32 PM

We made a big mistake by thinking that we could do business with a gangster state

kcewa on March 18, 2014 at 9:55 PM

You mean electing Obama and his regime? I agree, but I knew it was a bad idea all along.

Mimzey on March 18, 2014 at 10:33 PM

We made a big mistake by thinking that we could do business with a gangster state

kcewa on March 18, 2014 at 9:55 PM

You mean electing Obama and his regime? I agree, but I knew it was a bad idea all along.

Mimzey on March 18, 2014 at 10:33 PM

lol

Midas on March 18, 2014 at 10:34 PM

I’ve only ever heard Ron Paul argue against federal prohibition. Perhaps you have links to where he does otherwise…?

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 10:27 PM

The Federal gov’t has the right to act against interstate crime doesn’t it? If all the states legalized drugs then Paul would be right. Or if the states where it is legal could find a way to see that it wasn’t traded across state lines (see gambling, prostitution and Nevada) then the feds wouldn’t be involved.

kcewa on March 18, 2014 at 10:35 PM

I guess that is a problem, because there’s no way you can know that, eh?

Midas on March 18, 2014 at 10:29 PM

This is a region that self-identified as 60% Russian. Are you saying that there is any strong possibility of them voting “NO” in a referendum…?

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 10:35 PM

You mean electing Obama and his regime? I agree, but I knew it was a bad idea all along.

Mimzey on March 18, 2014 at 10:33 PM

Those gangsters too, yes.

kcewa on March 18, 2014 at 10:36 PM

The Federal gov’t has the right to act against interstate crime doesn’t it?

kcewa on March 18, 2014 at 10:35 PM

Just where is the Interstate Crime Clause located? Is it somewhere near the Good and Proper Clause…?

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 10:37 PM

Paul is like a man living in an old hotel and not caring what is happening to the other rooms or their tenants. Suddenly the one next door opens a meth lab and burns down the entire hotel. This explains Paul’s whole foreign policy. The man is almost a hermit mentality. I am worried that his son may harbor some of the same stupidity that the father does. Paul is like the broken clock in that he is right twice a day. Unfortunately the things he is right about are not that important and the things he is wrong about are world changing.

inspectorudy on March 18, 2014 at 10:39 PM

Reason numero UNO why I don’t support Rand Paul for president.
I really can’t trust that the ‘apple’ fell far from the ‘tree’.

annoyinglittletwerp on March 18, 2014 at 8:48 PM

I sure wouldn’t want to be sized up by my parents’ politics. My father was an Archie Bunker Democratic.

slickwillie2001 on March 18, 2014 at 10:39 PM

The Sanity Clause. Never read it? Yeah, me neither,
it’s not in there…just thought I’d pass that along
to you…

ToddPA on March 18, 2014 at 10:14 PM

So, I’ll take that as “I can’t point to any provision in the US Constitution that authorizes the USG to prohibit heroin and cocaine, and instead stand in favor of extra-constitutional law”.

‘Bout what I expected…

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 10:30 PM

Hmmmm, well I guess I gave you the wrong impression.

My POV has nothing to do with Constitutional Law, or
Extra Constitutional Law…

..I just think Ron Paul, or anyone who advocates this,
is Certifiable…sorry if the Sanity Clause reference
threw you.

ToddPA on March 18, 2014 at 10:40 PM

Such leaves people like Ron Paul in the position of not condemning the invasion and occupation of Ukraine by Russia because ‘What about Iraq?!?!?’
If you opposed the invasion and occupation of Iraq, then you must, to be consistent and intellectually honest, condemn the invasion and occupation of Crimea.
The failure to condemn Putin by many of those that opposed the Iraq war leaves me with the impression that their opposition wasn’t principled; instead, it was just another opportunity to blame America first. Evidently, ‘imperialism’ is only bad when we do it.
At least, I am consistent.
Resist We Much on March 18, 2014 at 10:04 PM

Although I agree it should be condemned, I think Paul’s point is not that the invasion is a good thing but that it really has nothing to do with us (and we can’t and won’t do anything about it anyway) and that we are a in a particularly poor position to criticize Russia because of our invasion of Iraq. And invading Iraq is not the same as Russia invading their back yard…that does not make it right, but apples and oranges there.

iwasbornwithit on March 18, 2014 at 10:41 PM

If they had seceded legally

kcewa on March 18, 2014 at 10:31 PM

Seceded legally?? That an amusing one, if only from a philosophical standpoint.

But it is additionally amusing that we are discussing “legal secession”, regarding a nation where a democratically elected leader was just chased out in a coup d’etat…

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 10:41 PM

Just where is the Interstate Crime Clause located? Is it somewhere near the Good and Proper Clause…?

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 10:37 PM

If I understand you correctly, you find that the fed has no valid laws to enforce beyond international laws or border issues?

Mimzey on March 18, 2014 at 10:41 PM

My POV has nothing to do with Constitutional Law, or
Extra Constitutional Law…

ToddPA on March 18, 2014 at 10:40 PM

Your lack of respect for the US Constitution and the authority it grants is duly noted…

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 10:42 PM

The Sanity Clause. Never read it? Yeah, me neither,
it’s not in there…just thought I’d pass that along
to you…

ToddPA on March 18, 2014 at 10:14 PM

Actually I think the first 10 amendments were added as a sanity clause. And the separation of powers part. And the Senate.

We’re finding out that Sanity clauses don’t work if the people are corrupt.

kcewa on March 18, 2014 at 10:42 PM

Ron condemned the US invasion of Iraq.

Resist We Much on March 18, 2014 at 10:17 PM

In hindsight it’s too bad we didn’t listen, don’t you think?

FloatingRock on March 18, 2014 at 10:45 PM

a coup d’etat…

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 10:41 PM

Coup d’etat? By the parliament removing the President? That’s amusing.

kcewa on March 18, 2014 at 10:45 PM

My POV has nothing to do with Constitutional Law, or
Extra Constitutional Law…

ToddPA on March 18, 2014 at 10:40 PM

Your lack of respect for the US Constitution and the authority it grants is duly noted…

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 10:42 PM

Okaaayyy then.

ToddPA on March 18, 2014 at 10:48 PM

If I understand you correctly, you find that the fed has no valid laws to enforce beyond international laws or border issues?

Mimzey on March 18, 2014 at 10:41 PM

Treason, counterfeiting, bribery, and piracy are all outlined in the written text of the Constitution, which explicitly delegates to Congress the authority to deal with them.

I don’t believe in “international laws” per se (I mean, where is the international Congress that passed these international laws), but laws dealing exclusively with foreigners and foreign relations are clearly the purview of Congress. So, it is in their authority to pass immigration and espionage statutes. Likewise, if they want to prohibit importation of cocaine or heroin, I suppose they have a legitimate claim to be able to exercise that authority.

But for cocaine or heroin, produced in the US, not shipped across state lines, I fail to see from where they derive their authority to say boo at it…

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 10:48 PM

Small difference you might want to at least acknowledge; no one just invaded Scotland, Quebec or the red parts of blue states with an occupying military force. Not in recent history, anyway. :)

Midas on March 18, 2014 at 10:25 PM

But another small difference you might want to acknowledge is that America and the EU isn’t trying to overthrow the Democratically elected government of Canada or any of it’s provinces. If Russia helped fascists in Canada overthrow the Canadian government, would we stand by and do nothing?

FloatingRock on March 18, 2014 at 10:52 PM

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 10:48 PM

Thanks for the clarification..I just popped into this thread. I think it’s a kinda grey area..but not really. I know of little if any cocaine or heroin production originating in this country. It would get complicated. If illegal import of those drugs was an area of the fed, how would you tell one from the other?

Mimzey on March 18, 2014 at 10:53 PM

Coup d’etat? By the parliament removing the President? That’s amusing.

kcewa on March 18, 2014 at 10:45 PM

By armed thugs in the street.

In addition…

According to Article 111 of the Ukrainian constitution, the President can only be impeached from office by parliament through “no less than three-quarters of its constitutional composition.” On February 22, 2014 the Ukrainian parliament voted 328-0 to impeach President Yanukovych who fled to Russia the night prior. However for an effective impeachment under constitutional rules the 449-seated parliament would have needed 337 votes to remove Yanukovych from office. Thus under the current constitution, Yanukovych is still the incumbent and legitimate President of the Ukraine.

But that same constitution is used as a reason as to why the Crimean vote is illegal.

sharrukin on March 18, 2014 at 10:53 PM

If illegal import of those drugs was an area of the fed, how would you tell one from the other?

Mimzey on March 18, 2014 at 10:53 PM

Which, I would argue, makes even prohibition of importation a bad policy.

Just not unconstitutional…

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 10:56 PM

That’s why it stupid to draw red lines unless you have the intention and wherewithal to back it up. Let the stupid people, Obama and his neocon allies, pay the price for their stupid red lines, not the American people.

FloatingRock on March 18, 2014 at 10:27 PM

Agreed, but the American people will almost certainly pay the price for their stupidity down the road.

Resist We Much on March 18, 2014 at 10:57 PM

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 10:48 PM

And, again, cocaine and heroin are illegal in every state, so there is no “need” for the Feds to criminalize, notwithstanding their lack of Constitutional authority.

iwasbornwithit on March 18, 2014 at 10:57 PM

And, again, cocaine and heroin are illegal in every state, so there is no “need” for the Feds to criminalize, notwithstanding their lack of Constitutional authority.

iwasbornwithit on March 18, 2014 at 10:57 PM

Well then, let us get down to business, and give the DEA and the Drug Czar’s office their walking papers.

And then see just how many of the states are just how dedicated to prohibition…

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 10:59 PM

Can’t we let them rest in peace and make our arguments on merit? Not on what we think they would have thought?

If you’re for killing everyone involved…well, I hope you reconsider when you sober up.

kcewa on March 18, 2014 at 10:26 PM

You’re the one that mentioned the founding fathers and the NSA, I was responding to you. And I didn’t say that I want to kill everybody at the NSA, I said that I thought the founding fathers would have unless the agents of tyranny surrendered. The NSA is a thousand times worse than anything the King ever did and I think if the NSA had existed back then then the Sons of Liberty probably would have burned down NSA facilities or something instead of throwing tea in the harbor.

FloatingRock on March 18, 2014 at 11:03 PM

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 10:59 PM

Sounds good to me!

iwasbornwithit on March 18, 2014 at 11:06 PM

I guess that is a problem, because there’s no way you can know that, eh? I had heard that huge numbers of people simply didn’t vote out of protest, and that in some areas the turnout was far greater than 100%, so the ‘vote’ that was taken really means nothing in terms of projecting what would really happen absent a military occupation.

Midas on March 18, 2014 at 10:29 PM

But on the other hand it’s likely that if the EU and US had held such a vote in Crimea before the coup in the Ukraine that the results would be different than after the coup. We’ll never know without a time machine throwing the prime-directive to the wind. The vote in Crimea is certainly suspect, but the coup is even more so.

FloatingRock on March 18, 2014 at 11:12 PM

JohnGalt23 & MoreLiberty,

Thank you. Excellent points all around. I for one am disappointed with Rand’s rush to sound ‘”mainstream” on foreign policy, Its looking more and more like the foreign policy debate in the primaries will be about arbitrary lines and sanctions without a voice that restrains military adventurism.

chuckfinlay on March 18, 2014 at 11:14 PM

I just think Ron Paul, or anyone who advocates this,
is Certifiable…sorry if the Sanity Clause reference
threw you.

ToddPA on March 18, 2014 at 10:40 PM

Oh, and just so we’re clear, ending drug prohibition is a position that has been adopted by conservatives like Wm F Buckley, Milt Friedman, and George Schultz.

Certifiable all, I suppose…?

JohnGalt23 on March 18, 2014 at 11:25 PM

I won’t support any military action until we get a decent commander-in-chief, and that could be a long time. I’m really hoping ALL of the troops are out of Afghanistan asap.

cimbri on March 18, 2014 at 11:29 PM

You mean electing Obama and his regime? I agree, but I knew it was a bad idea all along.

Mimzey on March 18, 2014 at 10:33 PM

Those gangsters too, yes.

kcewa on March 18, 2014 at 10:36 PM

That’s the thing: This is a conflict between Obama, Sorros, Mondale-Republican neocons and the tyrannical EU government on one side, most of them bought and paid for by the military industrial complex, statists all, and Putin and his cronies on the other. In the old days the USSR was clearly the bad guy and the US obviously the good guy, but the US isn’t as good anymore, our economy is essentially fascist now and the EU socialist, and the USSR is gone and Russia isn’t as communist as the USSR was.

Regular folks in the Ukrain, Crimea, the US and EU are just pawns in the game of life.

If there is any truth that the EU and US and billionaire tycoons from the West were behind the coup in the Ukraine, that was at least as undemocratic as the Crimea vote. Considering that the US government went to the extreme of supporting Al Qaeda affiliated rebels in Syria against Russia, the fascist/socialist US/EU governments have been sticking their fingers in Russia’s eyes a lot lately. What the heck for? The Cold War is over.

I’m for the self determination of pawns everywhere. I have no idea if the vote in Crimea was fair and free or not but I think it’s plausible. If that’s really what the people in Crimea want, why not? If other regions follow suit, and hopefully without the troops next time, I’m all for it. And conversely, if Mexico wants to become a US territory I might support that, too, and someday in a generation or two if Mexico gets its act together then I might support statehood, depending on circumstances.

If more countries want to join Russia than the US or the EU, maybe the US and the EU aren’t viewed as the good guys anymore and it’s time for some national-introspection.

FloatingRock on March 18, 2014 at 11:47 PM

Critics point to the Russian “occupation” of Crimea as evidence that no fair vote could have taken place. Where were these people when an election held in an Iraq occupied by U.S. troops was called a “triumph of democracy”?

Every so often, I come across an idiocy like this from Ron Paul that makes my jaw drop.

It should be perfectly obvious why the two are hardly the same thing, but RWM puts it well:

As to the vote, there is a difference between Iraq and Crimea. The Iraqi people were not voting on whether to become part of a country whose soldiers were there – United States or another coalition force. The Kurds weren’t holding a referendum on declaring their independence from Iraq proper. The Iraqis were voting for those that would represent them in their own national government. The United States wasn’t acting in a provocative or intimidating way in order to influence the vote one way or another.

Resist We Much on March 18, 2014 at 9:07 PM

Nor is it the first time the US has done something like this. We also sponsored similar elections in post-WW2 Germany, post-WW2 Japan, and in Afghanistan. In none of these cases did we try to leverage our troops to influence the election for our own profit.

Seriously, if you can’t be proud of your country when they’re trying to help another country set up a representative government and leave, when can you be proud of your country?

There Goes the Neighborhood on March 18, 2014 at 11:47 PM

You’re the one that mentioned the founding fathers and the NSA, I was responding to you.
FloatingRock on March 18, 2014 at 11:03 PM

My post is below – I didn’t mention the founding fathers. VorDaj did.

Rand, this is your time. If you want to be taken seriously as a CINC you need to speak now.

This isolationism will be the cause of war. And attacking the NSA will see that we enter it unprepared.

Put down the pipe and show us that you’re able to see reality through the ideological fog you were raised in.

kcewa on March 18, 2014 at 9:37 PM

kcewa on March 18, 2014 at 11:54 PM

Russia’s ideologist Alexandr Dugin on how Russia sees the Modern West.
http://www.radixjournal.com/journal/2014/3/18/the-war-on-russia

Know Thy Enemy and all.

flawedskull on March 18, 2014 at 11:55 PM

If the doddering old fool suspects for a moment that was fair vote, I hope he sent congratulations to Kim Jong Un on his 100% election.

But there is no provision in Ukraine’s constitution for a “referendum of secession” anyway, so the point is moot. Apparently Ron Paul feels little things like national constitutions are expendable, too.

AND we have a Memorandum of Understanding with Ukraine to respect and guarantee her territorial integrity, granted when they voluntarily surrendered their Soviet-era nukes. Of course, we know what Ron Paul thinks of our NATO commitments.

And if Paul and his isolationist kid think Putin will be satisfied with Sudetenland Crimea Ukraine, they will be proved wrong yet again.

Adjoran on March 19, 2014 at 12:02 AM

Agreed, but the American people will almost certainly pay the price for their stupidity down the road.

Resist We Much on March 18, 2014 at 10:57 PM

Maybe, but as far as I’m concerned if the east part of the Ukraine wants to join Russia too, preferably without any troops/thugs during the vote, either Russia’s or ours, more power the people of east Ukraine. If everybody wants to join Russia instead of the USA then maybe the USA isn’t as great as it used to be and we should reflect on that. I would suggest that we should be a freer country with a less-powerful central government and stronger local governments. I think American technology, especially the Internet, is a powerful force for freedom and liberty in the world that enables the decentralization of power. It can also be used for tyranny, and unfortunately that is the path the US is currently on. Let’s spread the Internet, the free-Internet, not the abomination DC-fascists have created but the real thing, encrypted and free, to the world and make it impossible for tyrants to stop. Instead, American fascists are leading the way in ways to capture the Internet and use it as a tool of tyranny and centralization.

FloatingRock on March 19, 2014 at 12:04 AM

My post is below – I didn’t mention the founding fathers. VorDaj did.

Rand, this is your time. If you want to be taken seriously as a CINC you need to speak now.

This isolationism will be the cause of war. And attacking the NSA will see that we enter it unprepared.

Put down the pipe and show us that you’re able to see reality through the ideological fog you were raised in.

kcewa on March 18, 2014 at 9:37 PM

kcewa on March 18, 2014 at 11:54 PM

That’s not the comment I responded to, I responded to another comment of yours in which you did mention the founding fathers.

They might (depending on which founding father you’re talking about) disapprove of some of it’s actions. But would not approve of weakening it’s ability to perform it’s legitimate role. And that’s what Snowden is doing.

kcewa on March 18, 2014 at 9:48 PM

You made it sound like the founding fathers would have approved of the NSA but might have tweaked it, and I don’t think that’s even remotely true. I think they would have been deeply offended, more so than at anything the King did.

FloatingRock on March 19, 2014 at 12:20 AM

The fundamental issue is: after the Cold War, are we still at (cold) war with Russia?

During the Cold War, everyone sane agreed we were in a conflict with the Soviet Union, but the question was: is this because they are Communist, or because they are Russian? After the Cold War, that was more pointed: are we now at peace with them (because they are no longer Communist) or still in conflict with them (because they are still Russian)?

As a practical matter, the “continuing conflict” crowd won, or NATO would not be extending deep into Russia’s sphere of influence.

But for those who were up for a war on Communism but not against Russia, this is all crazy. We have nothing to fight for.

David Blue on March 19, 2014 at 12:28 AM

1000 hours of history classes summarized into a 3 minute video

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=14d_1348362692

This is why our Founding Fathers didn’t want anything to do with Entangling alliances

roflmmfao

donabernathy on March 19, 2014 at 12:32 AM

What the heck for? The Cold War is over.

In the eyes of the Russians, it has never been over. While Russia is no longer interested in ‘spreading Communism to the four corners of the Earth’ and ‘making the world safe for democracy,’ it still desires the power and influence that it had when it was one of two superpowers. Putin isn’t a Communist. He’s more of a Fascist and, of course, he is a hardcore Nationalist.

Numerous Russians have spoken over the years asserting that the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the Soviet Union were humiliating, ‘a catastrophe,’ and a ‘tragedy,’ they were merely battles in a longer war.

Russia (and indeed other countries in that region of the world, especially China) takes a long view. In the US, history is a couple of or three centuries or so. In Russia and China, that’s almost modern times.

Resist We Much on March 19, 2014 at 12:35 AM

The McCain/Obama plan………spend the blood of our sons from Kansas, the Dakotas, Virginia and the Carolina’s in order to straighten out the borders of Europe.

roflmmfao

donabernathy on March 19, 2014 at 12:40 AM

Western Ukraine is another matter. It sounds like they prefer the EU over Russia and if Russia tries to annex a part of the Ukraine that doesn’t really want it, I’ll probably join those calling for war. Some of my ancestors were Prussian-German farmers that either lived around Oddessa, Ukraine, or at least travelled through there when they migrated to the US. I’ve never been there but have some slight identity with the country over the years and have done a little research. I want what’s best for the country and it’s people. I might have some distant relatives in the county, I haven’t actually researched it that far. If eastern Ukraine wants to join Russia, and it’s on the up and up, I wish them the best. I hope Russia, whether under Putin or his successor, will prosper, but not through force.

It’s too bad that fascists and socialists are in charge of the world and there is no force for freedom and liberty anymore that the Ukraine and Crimea, and maybe even the people of Russia, would enthusiastically vote to join.

FloatingRock on March 19, 2014 at 12:52 AM

I’ll probably join those calling for war.

I am not calling for war.

Resist We Much on March 19, 2014 at 12:53 AM

I meant that I hope the people of Russia prosper, not necessarily the government.

FloatingRock on March 19, 2014 at 12:56 AM

I wonder if the “New World Order” and/or “One World Government” chicken little wing of the Ron Paul fans enjoy the inconsistency irony of erasing more sovereignty by the largest political land mass (and very recent largest national expansionist) on the planet.

anuts on March 19, 2014 at 1:08 AM

I am not calling for war.

Resist We Much on March 19, 2014 at 12:53 AM

Well if Russia tries to reform the USSR by force it means war.

If some of the former soviet countries are unhappy with the EU, (I think the EU sucks), and would rather voluntarily go back to Russia, are you against it? I’m not saying any of them are, I have no idea. Maybe if there is any question in some of these countries they should vote on it and make the wishes of the people known. I really don’t care what American fascists or European socialists think, I care what the people of the respective countries think. If they prefer Russia over the European Union, maybe the EU should try not to suck so bad in the future.

FloatingRock on March 19, 2014 at 1:08 AM

Maybe the east-block countries should form their own union to compete with the EU and Russia, ideally a more libertarian, less statist union with sound-money and everything that America could have been if our government hadn’t been captured by big-business, big-labor and to a decreasing extent, big-religion.

FloatingRock on March 19, 2014 at 1:13 AM

In case any Europeans read this, what I hate is the EU tyranny, not the people of Europe or the various countries. I’m not a fan of European governments in general but I like the ethnic charm of the various European countries and hope they save themselves from Islamization as well as the homogenization affect that the EU is hastening.

FloatingRock on March 19, 2014 at 1:27 AM

You made it sound like the founding fathers would have approved of the NSA but might have tweaked it, and I don’t think that’s even remotely true. I think they would have been deeply offended, more so than at anything the King did.

FloatingRock on March 19, 2014 at 12:20 AM

I don’t think it’s possible for us to know.

kcewa on March 19, 2014 at 1:31 AM

Maybe the east-block countries should form their own union to compete with the EU and Russia, ideally a more libertarian, less statist union with sound-money and everything that America could have been if our government hadn’t been captured by big-business, big-labor and to a decreasing extent, big-religion.

FloatingRock on March 19, 2014 at 1:13 AM

That was Bush’s idea.

kcewa on March 19, 2014 at 1:32 AM

I don’t think it’s possible for us to know.

kcewa on March 19, 2014 at 1:31 AM

Of course it’s not—-oh, except I suppose that Bill of Rights thing spells it out perfectly clearly.

FloatingRock on March 19, 2014 at 1:40 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3