Where does right begin? Where does it end?

In any State in which there is a bad organization of authority, an impersonality of laws and of the rulers who have lost their personality amid the flood of rights ever multiplying out of liberalism, I find a new right - to attack by the right of the strong, and to scatter to the winds all existing forces of order and regulation, to reconstruct all institutions and to become the sovereign lord of those who have left to us the rights of their power by laying them down voluntarily in their liberalism.

When the populace has seen that all sorts of concessions and indulgences are yielded it, in the same name of freedom it has imagined itself to be sovereign lord and has stormed its way to power, but, naturally like every other blind man, it has come upon a host of stumbling blocks. IT HAS RUSHED TO FIND A GUIDE, IT HAS NEVER HAD THE SENSE TO RETURN TO THE FORMER STATE and it has laid down its plenipotentiary powers at OUR feet. Remember the French Revolution, to which it was we who gave the name of “Great”: the secrets of its preparations are well known to us for it was wholly the work of our hands.

The word “right” is an abstract thought and proved by nothing. The word means no more than: Give me what I want in order that thereby I may have a proof that I am stronger than you.

your right, but i have included myself among the 'THEY'

The word “right” is an abstract thought and proved by nothing. The word means no more than: Give me what I want in order that thereby I may have a proof that I am stronger than you.

The word “right” is an abstract thought and proved by nothing. The word means no more than: Give me what I want in order that thereby I may have a proof that I am stronger than you.

when one puts themselves into the position of allowing or not allowing the actions of others, then why is it not righteous for others to allow or not allow your own actions? if you are to them as many other people who inhabit the street and they are the same to you, under who's elections will you carry out these orders? under who's force will they be made to obey?

the peoples i speak of are not among any one or two groups, they are among all groups that make up the people who do not see inside of themselves. who do not read from their own stories but borrow from others the stories that they will read. these peoples are the ones that have suckled from the breasts of tyranny even as they were born from angels.

as the wind changed directions and the people suddenly had their luxuries taken away, the thought of survival once again materialized. the people, left with no industries, found that their ancestors had betrayed them by taking away the knowledge of the hunter gatherers. now with no way of surviving under the ways they had grown accustomed to, the people were forced to find the old, tried and true ways of survival. the peoples built their own shelters on land that they staked out themselves under the old squatter's rights provision. then the peoples found that in order to protect their tiny plot in the world, they would need weapons greater than any intruder's weapon. for as many places there were to live, were there peoples to live there. the peoples found out that that the animals would not come to them voluntarily and lay there like a big mac to be eaten and devoured. the bullets of a gun are faster than the animals can run. every one must eat.

yet all who knew the truth were once again tucked into dark cubby holes so they could not speak it again. the hidden hand has risen up and covered the people's eyes to their own detriment. these people were brought to the hidden hand's own breasts and taught to suckle. as they drank the vile liquids that spewed from the bosom, they were deeper encapsulated in the untrue visions that were spreading thru their heads like tiny worms. each was inundated with an umbilical chord that was connected to the main trunk. now the hidden hand has become mater and pater to these once self sufficient souls.

we need to bring them back and stop meddling.

israelis have had the power in this country for many years now. isn't it funny how pelosi is an israel first person. so is harry reid, so is chriss dodd, so is barney franks. these people would like nothing more than to see americans not be able to defend themselves with their own guns from attacks.

this is a list of israel firsters in our government.

Senate
(13— 2 Republicans, 9 Democrats, 2 Independents)

Barbara Boxer (D-CA)
Benjamin Cardin (D-MD)
Norm Coleman (R-MN)
Russ Feingold (D-WI)
Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)
Herb Kohl (D-WI)
Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Joseph Lieberman (I-CT)
Carl Levin (D-MI)
Bernard Sanders (I-VT)
Charles Schumer (D-NY)
Arlen Specter (R-PA)
Ron Wyden (D-OR)

House
(30— 1 Republican, 29 Democrats)

Gary Ackerman (D-NY)
Shelley Berkley (D-NV)
Howard Berman (D-CA)
Eric Cantor (R-VA)
Stephen Cohen (D-TN)*
Susan Davis (D-CA)
Rahm Emanuel (D-IL)
Eliot Engel (D-NY)
Bob Filner (D-CA)
Barney Frank (D-MA)
Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ)*
Jane Harman (D-CA)
Paul Hodes (D-NH)*
Steve Israel (D-NY)
Steve Kagen (D-WI)*
Ronald Klein (D-FL)*
Tom Lantos (D-CA)
Sander Levin (D-MI)
Nita Lowey (D-NY)
Jerrold Nadler (D-NY)
Steve Rothman (D-NJ)
Jan Schakowsky (D-IL)
Allyson Schwartz (D-PA)
Adam Schiff (D-CA)
Brad Sherman (D-CA)
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL)
Henry Waxman (D-CA)
Anthony Weiner (D-NY)
Robert Wexler (D-FL)
John Yarmuth (D-KY)*

Freeman Points At 'Powerful
Lobby' (Guess Who?)
3-11-9

You will by now have seen the statement by Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair reporting that I have withdrawn my previous acceptance of his invitation to chair the National Intelligence Council.

I have concluded that the barrage of libelous distortions of my record would not cease upon my entry into office. The effort to smear me and to destroy my credibility would instead continue. I do not believe the National Intelligence Council could function effectively while its chair was under constant attack by unscrupulous people with a passionate attachment to the views of a political faction in a foreign country. I agreed to chair the NIC to strengthen it and protect it against politicization, not to introduce it to efforts by a special interest group to assert control over it through a protracted political campaign.

As those who know me are well aware, I have greatly enjoyed life since retiring from government. Nothing was further from my mind than a return to public service. When Admiral Blair asked me to chair the NIC I responded that I understood he was "asking me to give my freedom of speech, my leisure, the greater part of my income, subject myself to the mental colonoscopy of a polygraph, and resume a daily commute to a job with long working hours and a daily ration of political abuse." I added that I wondered "whether there wasn't some sort of downside to this offer." I was mindful that no one is indispensable; I am not an exception. It took weeks of reflection for me to conclude that, given the unprecedentedly challenging circumstances in which our country now finds itself abroad and at home, I had no choice but accept the call to return to public service. I thereupon resigned from all positions that I had held and all activities in which I was engaged. I now look forward to returning to private life, freed of all previous obligations.

I am not so immodest as to believe that this controversy was about me rather than issues of public policy. These issues had little to do with the NIC and were not at the heart of what I hoped to contribute to the quality of analysis available to President Obama and his administration. Still, I am saddened by what the controversy and the manner in which the public vitriol of those who devoted themselves to sustaining it have revealed about the state of our civil society. It is apparent that we Americans cannot any longer conduct a serious public discussion or exercise independent judgment about matters of great importance to our country as well as to our allies and friends.

The libels on me and their easily traceable email trails show conclusively that there is a powerful lobby determined to prevent any view other than its own from being aired, still less to factor in American understanding of trends and events in the Middle East. The tactics of the Israel Lobby plumb the depths of dishonor and indecency and include character assassination, selective misquotation, the willful distortion of the record, the fabrication of falsehoods, and an utter disregard for the truth. The aim of this Lobby is control of the policy process through the exercise of a veto over the appointment of people who dispute the wisdom of its views, the substitution of political correctness for analysis, and the exclusion of any and all options for decision by Americans and our government other than those that it favors.

There is a special irony in having been accused of improper regard for the opinions of foreign governments and societies by a group so clearly intent on enforcing adherence to the policies of a foreign government ­ in this case, the government of Israel. I believe that the inability of the American public to discuss, or the government to consider, any option for US policies in the Middle East opposed by the ruling faction in Israeli politics has allowed that faction to adopt and sustain policies that ultimately threaten the existence of the state of Israel. It is not permitted for anyone in the United States to say so. This is not just a tragedy for Israelis and their neighbors in the Middle East; it is doing widening damage to the national security of the United States.

The outrageous agitation that followed the leak of my pending appointment will be seen by many to raise serious questions about whether the Obama administration will be able to make its own decisions about the Middle East and related issues. I regret that my willingness to serve the new administration has ended by casting doubt on its ability to consider, let alone decide what policies might best serve the interests of the United States rather than those of a Lobby intent on enforcing the will and interests of a foreign government.

In the court of public opinion, unlike a court of law, one is guilty until proven innocent. The speeches from which quotations have been lifted from their context are available for anyone interested in the truth to read. The injustice of the accusations made against me has been obvious to those with open minds. Those who have sought to impugn my character are uninterested in any rebuttal that I or anyone else might make.

Still, for the record: I have never sought to be paid or accepted payment from any foreign government, including Saudi Arabia or China, for any service, nor have I ever spoken on behalf of a foreign government, its interests, or its policies. I have never lobbied any branch of our government for any cause, foreign or domestic. I am my own man, no one else's, and with my return to private life, I will once again ­ to my pleasure ­ serve no master other than myself. I will continue to speak out as I choose on issues of concern to me and other Americans.

I retain my respect and confidence in President Obama and DNI Blair. Our country now faces terrible challenges abroad as well as at home. Like all patriotic Americans, I continue to pray that our president can successfully lead us in surmounting them.

i think this shows how divided this country is getting these days. i would dare say that we are more divided than ever. very few can find people of like minds these days. it's a shame but it has to happen or it wouldn't have happened. look at the tower of babel in your bible. with all of the different political views out there we might as well be speaking different languages.

the only way these people get away with it is because the normal
self-called "taxpayer" has no idea about such things and puts faith in these scoundrels because they have a nice smile and have articulate speech.

it sounds like someone is getting smart! you don't pay debt with more debt and expect to fix it. the IMF's reasons for trying to get every country further into debt are not lost with me, and they aren't lost with any of the other countries. the countries that are following this practice have presidents and government members that are being paid dearly to execute this "pay debt down with debt" scheme.

i wish something like this would happen to us so everyone can see what it's like.

Imagine
By Ron Paul
3-11-9

Imagine for a moment that somewhere in the middle of Texas there was a large foreign military base, say Chinese or Russian. Imagine that thousands of armed foreign troops were constantly patrolling American streets in military vehicles. Imagine they were here under the auspices of "keeping us safe" or "promoting democracy" or "protecting their strategic interests."

Imagine that they operated outside of US law, and that the Constitution did not apply to them. Imagine that every now and then they made mistakes or acted on bad information and accidentally killed or terrorized innocent Americans, including women and children, most of the time with little to no repercussions or consequences. Imagine that they set up check points on our soil and routinely searched and ransacked entire neighborhoods of homes. Imagine if Americans were fearful of these foreign troops, and overwhelmingly thought America would be better off without their presence.

Imagine if some Americans were so angry about them being in Texas that they actually joined together to fight them off, in defense of our soil and sovereignty, because leadership in government refused or were unable to do so. Imagine that those Americans were labeled terrorists or insurgents for their defensive actions, and routinely killed, or captured and tortured by the foreign troops on our land. Imagine that the occupiers' attitude was that if they just killed enough Americans, the resistance would stop, but instead, for every American killed, ten more would take up arms against them, resulting in perpetual bloodshed. Imagine if most of the citizens of the foreign land also wanted these troops to return home. Imagine if they elected a leader who promised to bring them home and put an end to this horror.

Imagine if that leader changed his mind once he took office.

The reality is that our military presence on foreign soil is as offensive to the people that live there as armed Chinese troops would be if they were stationed in Texas. We would not stand for it here, but we have had a globe straddling empire and a very intrusive foreign policy for decades that incites a lot of hatred and resentment towards us.

According to our own CIA, our meddling in the Middle East was the prime motivation for the horrific attacks on 9/11. But instead of re-evaluating our foreign policy, we have simply escalated it. We had a right to go after those responsible for 9/11, to be sure, but why do so many Americans feel as if we have a right to a military presence in some 160 countries when we wouldn't stand for even one foreign base on our soil, for any reason? These are not embassies, mind you, these are military installations. The new administration is not materially changing anything about this. Shuffling troops around and playing with semantics does not accomplish the goals of the American people, who simply want our men and women to come home. 50,000 troops left behind in Iraq is not conducive to peace any more than 50,000 Russian soldiers would be in the United States.

Shutting down military bases and ceasing to deal with other nations with threats and violence is not isolationism. It is the opposite. Opening ourselves up to friendship, honest trade and diplomacy is the foreign policy of peace and prosperity. It is the only foreign policy that will not bankrupt us in short order, as our current actions most definitely will. I share the disappointment of the American people in the foreign policy rhetoric coming from the administration. The sad thing is, our foreign policy WILL change eventually, as Rome's did, when all budgetary and monetary tricks to fund it are exhausted.

Congressman Ron Paul of Texas enjoys a national reputation as the premier advocate for liberty in politics today.

that's the way they designed it, but according to the memos that obama unclassified so from the bush administration, bush gave himself and any future president almost unfettered powers.