Liberty Maven

Ben Franklin has said, “Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.” I can’t help but think of George Bush and Rudy Giuliani as the wolves and Ron Paul as the lamb.

Ron Paul seems to be well-armed with the truth. He has continuously and unabashedly spoken out against our current foreign policy of interventionism while Rudy Giuliani and George Bush have preached a stay the course mentality. The difference lies in the arguments used to back up each of the arguments.

George Bush is a walking contradiction. In the span of a single press conference he demonstrated he is rather two faced when speaking about our current (his own) foreign policy. On May 24th, 2007 Bush is quoted as saying:

“And this concept about, ‘Well, maybe, you know, let us kind of just leave them alone and maybe they’ll be all right,’ is naïve. These people attacked us before we were in Iraq. They viciously attacked us before we were in Iraq. And they’ve been attacking ever since. They are a threat to your children…”

First, he focuses on Iraq alone and not our general foreign policy (as Ron Paul does). Then he invokes the always effective in arguments, “threat to your children” line. But let me focus on his claim that leaving them alone is naive. The following is a quote from Osama Bin Laden himself published in newspapers around the country (including here in the Seattle Post Intelligencer PDF). This was just days prior to George Bush getting re-elected:

“To the American people, my talk to you is about the best way to avoid another Manhattan, about the war, its reasons, and its consequences. I tell you: Security is an important element of human life and free people do not give up their security. Unlike what Bush says that we hate freedom, let him tell us why we didn’t attack Sweden, for example.”

So Osama Bin Laden himself is refuting Rudy and George. To make matters worse in the same press conference quoted above, a few questions later George Bush said:

“Yesterday, in my speech, I quoted quotes from Osama bin Laden. And the reason I did was, is that I want the American people to hear what he has to say — not what I say, what he says. And in my judgment, we ought to be taking the words of the enemy seriously.”

So, if we are to take the words of our enemy seriously then why are we not moving towards a foreign policy of non-interventionism, as Ron Paul suggests? By doing so, we can eliminate the reason, by Bin Laden’s own admission, why we were attacked, and will be targeted in the future.

Rudy Giuliani is no better. In response to Ron Paul’s suggestion that he read some books and educate himself on the real reasons behind the 9-11 attacks, the Giulani campaign released the following statement:

“It is extraordinary and reckless to claim that the United States invited the attacks on September 11th. And to further declare Rudy Giuliani needs to be educated on September 11th when millions of people around the world saw him dealing with these terrorist attacks firsthand is just as absurd.”

Just because Rudy dealt with the attacks does not make him an expert on why they occurred. His campaign claiming again that Ron Paul believes the United States (his generic term referring to the American People) invited the attacks is itself absurd. Ron Paul has been steadfast that it was/is our interventionist nation building foreign policy of the past 30 years as the reason. I recommend anyone who calls themselves patriotic to read the following transcript of a speech made by Ron Paul in the House of Representatives on May 22, 2007:

In The Name of Patriotism (Who are the Patriots?) by Ron Paul

Taking these arguments into consideration, first ask whom you believe Benjamin Franklin would classify as the wolf and the lamb? And then ask yourself the same question.