Ron Paul Proves My Freedom Continuum Theory….. Simultaneously Confirms He’s A Jerk

Ron Paul sent out a tweet today.

Interestingly enough I was just talking about this yesterday.   It is quite possible to be so far in one direction on the “Freedom Continuum” that you circle back around to the complete opposite side.

To understand the concept of a freedom continuum you must a.) know history, and b.) understand the goals of both the political left and political right.

Think of the political approaches toward society governance as a continuum, a single line beginning from the middle with points of definition along the way in both directions.  As you proceed in either direction you pass points of distinction or reference  for individual freedom.

On the far left you have the absence of individual freedom, and total governmental control, known as Communism or Totalitarianism.   The sum total of individual freedom is nil, and the value is placed upon the collective government to make all determinations in the life of the individual.

On the far right you have the absence of governmental control and individual liberty reigns supreme.  Unfortunately, at this extreme right side anarchy is the standard and survival of the fittest, biggest or strongest is the only determinative factor in life.

When you travel to both the extreme left and the extreme right you find a system where only a few people are in control of the structure of society and making all the decisions the individual person is forced to live with.   On the left it is the “State” party, on the right you find the Lords of the Flies.

In either direction “everyone might be made, or start out equal, but some are more equal than others”.

Communism => Socialism => Fascism => On the far left

Democracy <=  A Republic <=  Anarchy <= On the far right

Communism => Socialism => Fascism => * <= Democracy <= A Republic <= Anarchy 

The United States was formed as a Constitutional Republic by our founders.  To the right of a Democracy; because the rights of the individual trump the rights of the hoard, or majority.   A system of limited government where the individual states form bodies of representation (House of Representatives) to tell the Federal Government what rights they are permitted to hold over the individual.

All rights not specifically outlined (hence the constitution) as belonging to the Federal Government are retained by the States.

right_wing_extremist

About these ads
This entry was posted in 2nd Amendment, Communist, Dem Hypocrisy, Socialist, Tea Party, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

47 Responses to Ron Paul Proves My Freedom Continuum Theory….. Simultaneously Confirms He’s A Jerk

  1. Coast says:

    Honestly, if a friend of mine had PTSD, I would be very concerned about taking him/her to a gun range, handling that person a weapon, and not maintaining total control of the situation. I see his point.
    I also think his comment (live by the sword, die by the sword) was insensitive, inappropriate and not even technically correct. Kyle was not engaged in fighting a war, he was not “in battle” and thus his death was not “dying by the sword” in terms of the intent of this phrase. It was all an unfortunate act…taking and trusting someone at the range, and someone else making a stupid comment. But, it’s my opinion.

    • ytz4mee says:

      Really? I live with someone who has PTSD and not only do I regularly go to the range with him so he can supervise/correct my shooting, our daughter regularly goes to the range with him as well. Sounds like you’ve bought in to the NPR/Prog predictive programming propaganda about what PTSD “is” and how people affected by it are “supposed” to behave. The indocrination clearly works.

      • WeeWeed says:

        OMG – you shoulda seen what was on Princess Shep’s News tonight – something like 1 in 5 or so military vets, which makes umpty-million ptsd’s LOOSE on society….. I nearly puked. What a pre-planned Crock Of Shit.

      • michellc says:

        It’s frustrating isn’t it?
        I blame the movies and the media for misleading people and making it seem like anyone suffering from PTSD are crazy and dangerous and can’t be around guns or sharp objects.

        • Sharon says:

          I also blame the people for being so lazy and unwilling to THINK or investigate anything for themselves. People had better getting over needing to be spoonfed “what to think”. People who keep looking to the movies and media for their information deserve to be stupid and run over by a few trucks. The problem is, they’re going to take the rest of us down with them….when we get to the camps, they’d better not bunk us all together.

      • Coast says:

        Read my post again..”and not maintaining total control of the situation”. I also used the word “concerned”. Yes, I would be careful. As a frequent vistor to my local range, I’m not into the NPR/Prog programming…rather I’m just aware of my environment. Sorry, but that’s my opinion. It also sounds like Kyle and his two other friends were the only people at the range.

        • ytz4mee says:

          I don’t need to “read your post again”, thank you very much.
          You revealed yourself in your first sentence.

          Honestly, if a friend of mine had PTSD, I would be very concerned about taking him/her to a gun range

          Why? Why would you be “very concerned” ?
          Because you’ve bought into the propaganda.
          Enough.

          • Coast says:

            Logic minded people would always be concerned with putting a weapon into the hands of someone who has mental issues. That is why all kinds of jobs (law enforcement, etc) that involve weapons also involves an analysis of personality traits. I don’t know what problems this guy had, but he had something wrong, and Mr. Kyle paid a price for tying to be a friend. Nonetheless, there is nothing wrong with my statement of “I would be concerned about taking him/her to a gun range, handling that person a weapon, and not maintaining total control of the situation”. What propaganda am I buying…common sense? Next time I’m heading to the range, I won’t be picking up any homeless people.

  2. Sharon says:

    seems to confirm–that those who live by the sword die by the sword

    Some context for what Pa Paul is saying the quote that Pa Paul is mis-using.

    Matthew 26: 51, 52–Jesus is in Gethsemane waiting for His self-appointed judges and jury to show up with the Roman soldiers to arrest Him. A 24 hour period of escalating and illegal actions is just beginning…these hours will end in His death, the whole business being undertaken for the purpose of providing salvation for all who would believe in Him. (see John 3:18–that’s not a typo)

    So there they are in the Garden of Gethsemane, on the Mt. of Olives, just across the Kidron Valley from the eastern wall. The soldiers arrive, ready to take Jesus. Peter pulls a sword out and cuts off the ear of one of the self-appointed judges. Jesus says to Peter, “Knock it off….for all who take the sword will perish by the sword.” IOW….Peter, you are clueless. What’s happening here needs to happen. You’re out of line. I do not need your help, Peter.

    So Pa Paul has appropriated that phrase to justify his squirrelly feelings, nervously not wanting to actually be indignant about the murder of an American military hero but needing to find some squirrelly way to account for the fact that he’s not indignant.

    For me, that’s the ugliest thing this says about Pa Paul: he is NOT indignant about this murder of this American hero, and he feels compelled to gloss that over–for PR purposes.

    I do believe Congressman Paul has pulled himself a Julison.

    • czarowniczy says:

      I think the incorrect ‘live by the sword’ phrasing was changed to be self-serving to the user. In context I always believed that Christ was saying that this was meant to be and their intervention wouldn’t stop it . They’d be killed by the troop of trained soldiers who were there to take Him into custody if they tried to fight. In any event, many politicians pull phrasing out of their nether eyes when they get into an impromptu rant, Paul seems to have that ability of late. He has a politician’s grasp of religion.

      • Sharon says:

        Exactly. …. and I love your phrase “a politician’s grasp of religion.” May I steal that ;) ?

        Not all of our readers are either acquainted with or care about what’s in the Bible, so that’s why I pop in some context on things occasionally. Interest in the Bible is optional, but when someone is “using” Scriptures for political or personal reasons, it’s right to call them to account and provide context..

        A politician’s grasp of religion indeed.

        • czarowniczy says:

          Be my guest, use away. I class all politicians, and I’ve worked with them from Fed to city level, as basic whores until otherwise proven worthy of breathing the same air as my buzzards. They see something they feel will make them seem more approachable to the public (think hanging a Glade air freshener on a skunk) and, without more than cursory knowledge, they adopt it. I love the ones who show up in church with a cheat-sheet on what to do while there.

  3. yadent says:

    Notice Christ did not chastise Peter for possessing a weapon but for the SITUATION in which he used it. I do like some of what ‘Pa Paul’ has to say but like you state he has many ‘squirrelly’ moments…probably too many.

    • Sharon says:

      Exactly. On both of your statements….

    • WeeWeed says:

      Way too many squirrelly moments.

    • chevymisty says:

      Luke 22:36 Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

      37 For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the atransgressors: for the things concerning me have an end.

      38 And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough.

      So not only did Christ not chastise him for having it he told him to go out and get one. Sorry just thought I would add that little bit.

  4. Eric says:

    Even Bush had his “Herp Derp” moments while in office. You don’t take and help treat a alcoholic by putting alcohol in their face. While I hate to see such a Patriot like Kyle die like he did, it wasn’t the smartest place to take a person. PTSD is a very serious disease and “the crazy” spell can occur with anyone at any given time. I don’t know how many times I’ve had problems while dead asleep being nudged and wake up swinging because I thought someone was attacking me.

    Did Paul possibly say this at the wrong time? Definitely. Was it out of line? No.

    • michellc says:

      I think people don’t really understand PTSD and instead think of the movies showing the guy who thinks he’s back in the war zone and everyone is shooting at him.
      Not that I’m an expert, but I have known those with PTSD and it’s not like the movies, although I’m sure there are probably some who might suffer to that degree.
      Sometimes, it is nothing more than mild depression or not knowing how to fit back into the civilian world. Almost all people come home from war with some form of PTSD, you can’t witness death day in and day out without suffering some form of PTSD.
      I know it’s hard for some to understand but some people are relaxed by shooting guns, just like some go for a walk, golfing, fishing, etc. Sometimes the sound of gun fire is a form of therapy.
      I have a brother who since his teens when he’s sad, depressed, upset, he would go hunting or just go shoot tin cans, it was his way of working through his problems. My form of therapy has always been to go sit on my front porch and watch and listen to the birds or go for a walk through the woods or go throw a line in the water.
      I’ve known of people who suffered PTSD after an auto accident, the sudden death of a loved one. Yet with the military we always seem to automatically think PTSD they must think they’re still in a war zone and are going to start killing everyone thinking they’re the enemy. It’s really unfair to our men and women who fight for us to automatically think the worst about them.
      Talk to some former military, I read a comment by the one the other day who said he was diagnosed with some degree of PTSD, they’ll tell you about the different degrees.

      What Paul said was out of line, he clearly made the comparison that for one because he killed men in the war he deserved to die with a gun. He also made the comparison because he was trying to help someone, not the first one btw, that he deserved to die for being so stupid as to take a person with PTSD to shoot guns.

      • Sam says:

        From vets I’ve known and what I’ve read about PTS, you are right that sufferers don’t have delusions or visions of being back on the battlefield. What they do have is a tendency to be in a hyper-alert state most if not all of the time, because that’s what kept them alive in combat. They’ve become accustomed to being adrenaline charged and hyper-alert to the point where they need it most of the time. They may also be depressed if they’ve seen buddies die violently. Some of the things they had to do were so not normal they now have trouble recognizing normal. I don’t mean atrocities. What I mean is seeing people who should be non-combatants blown up by IEDs or acting as suicide bombers. Constant hypervigilance is very hard on the body and it produces negative chemical changes over time. Life among family and friends in the US seems too tame to many vets and they don’t have that sense of purpose they became accustomed to in the military.

        When you throw in mental instability or a disease like schizophrenia or even the psychotropic drugs used to treat depression or insomnia or anxiety and add even one of those to PTSD, you get a potentially very volatile person. Most PTSD vets don’t become violent. The few who do usually have other medical problems.

        • ytz4mee says:

          Thanks for the armchair psychology lesson. :evil:

        • michellc says:

          And who is it who gets to judge what works for them? Twitchy has a few tweets by vets who say what Kyle was doing was a form of therapy. It helped Kyle and it had helped other vets.
          I just don’t like that people are making vets out to be crazy and wanting to blame Kyle in an around about way that he was responsible for his own murder.

          I’m not a psychologist, just someone who has known vets with PTSD and know they’re not crazy. I’m also someone who doesn’t like to judge people when I haven’t walked a mile in their shoes.

  5. czarowniczy says:

    I don’t think He was for total, unilateral disarmament

    Luke 22:49 When Jesus’ followers saw what was going to happen, they said, “Lord, should we strike with our swords?”

    Matthew 26:51 With that, one of Jesus’ companions reached for his sword, drew it out and struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his ear

    Luke 22:36 He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.

  6. I don’t think Paul meant for his initial comment to come off as disrespectful. He should have thought about it more, so he could see how it would be seen as insensitive, though. His second comment is wrong. With PTSD, from what I’ve read, exposure is most certainly a treatment. It’s easy for people to judge after the fact, but I’m sure Kyle thought that he was doing the right thing and didn’t have anything to worry about. This is all assuming that Routh was, in fact, the shooter. Still seems very fishy.

    As for the continuum, it’s an interesting concept to consider political ideology as a circle or wheel that finds one extreme end connecting to another extreme end. When I look at the descriptors above, I see Communism and Socialism as essentially the same. They both have, at their core, the structure of public ownership of everything, which removes the idea of property rights and individual liberty. On the opposite side, a Republic or a Democracy are very similar to each other, however, as noted, a Republic is established to deal with the inherent problem Democracy creates … mob rule. It is not just in the representation, though, it is in the enforcement of equal protection under the law and the respect of laws over man’s whims that makes a Republic different. Anarchy, on the other hand, is diametrically opposed to Fascism, yet both can reside on either end of the left/right spectrum. Mussolini, for instance, claimed to be more of a man against both the right and left and hated the struggle over left vs. right, as he described them as “empty terminologies”,

    • sundance says:

      Your definition of Fascism is interesting. How definitions are manipulated by the media has always interested me…. A larger conversation has been happening on various forums about this. It is a specific interest of mine.

      Fascism has historically meant the State Controls the economy, but allows the private market to operate industry within the economy only they must follow the rules of the Fascists. The *ownership* is private, but the operation is State.

      With Socialism the State Controls the economy and the industry within the economy. The Ownership is State and the operation is State. The outputs are determined/divided by the State.

      With Communism the State Owns, Operates, Controls, the economy and all production principles within industry. The State controls what, when, why, how and what is done with the outcome.

      It is only recently, say within the last 25 years, that people have *redefined* fascists as you describe… It is part of the Fabian Socialist / Progressive scheme to use covert principles to overwhelm and undermine free enterprise. Slow boil the frog.

      It’s working.

      • stellap says:

        SD, your explanation of Fascism reminds me of Obamacare!

      • ytz4mee says:

        Skousen’s book “The Naked Communist” has a very good explanation of the Freedom continuum that high schoolers can understand and absorb.

      • Chip Bennett says:

        The redefinition has been so thorough and effective that Jonah Goldberg had to write a book, Liberal Fascism, to correct the disinformation.

        Also worth mentioning: the European meaning of “left” and “right” is not the American meaning of “left” and “right”. Both the European “left” and “right” fall to the left of center according to the American spectrum.

        Socialism (Liberalism), Communism (Marxism), and the “third way” Fascism are all left-wing, Statist ideologies in the American ideological spectrum.

      • sundance,

        I didn’t really define Fascism at all, other than to say that it and Anarchy are diametrically opposed, yet both could reside on either side of the political left/right spectrum. I was, essentially, agreeing with you, although I don’t think I made it as clear as I could have. Since, both Anarchy and Fascism can be on either end of a left/right spectrum, they are the interchangeable ends that complete the circle you spoke of.

        Below, Chip made a very important distinction in that European politics, as in the left vs. the right, are actually both center-left on the American political spectrum. That is a very important distinction when you consider stellap’s remark about Obamacare and the link you posted about John Mackey’s summation of Obamacare being Fascism. It is undeniable that Obamacare is tantamount to European-style Fascism. Healthcare is just the latest “slow boil” toward Fascism. We’ve been heading that way for some time. I’m sure many, here, can rattle off entire industries that are, more or less, controlled by the public (read that as government control), but owned and operated by private interests.

  7. g8rmom7 says:

    I do think Ron Paul means well but he just says things that are ‘not right’. I certainly hope his son thinks before he speaks/types.

  8. jwoop66 says:

    Shooting can be fun and requires a lot of focus. To just dismiss it as bad for someone with PTSD seems reactionary and maybe ignorant. Why is it bad for someone with PTSD? Is it the loud bang? Do we right off the bat assume the sound of gunfire is going to elicit a negative reaction? Why is that? Are all PTSD sufferers averse to gunshots? Would you let a PTSD sufferer drive a car? What if he plays the wrong song on the radio? He can kill himself or run others over. Would you let a PTSD sufferer handle a knife? Be around small children? Pets?
    I guess it all depends on the person and their reaction to different stimulous.
    Yeah, kinda ignorant of ron paul if you ask me.

    • Sharon says:

      Personally, I don’t think PTSD sufferers should be allowed to slice bread. Or clip their toddlers’ fingernails. /sarc

  9. Sharon says:

    I take people’s comments at face value, even if they are a bit convoluted or “off”….and not all of that is always excusable by assuming they mean well or just misspoke. At some point, I do believe that when people speak (and a pattern develops in how they speak and what they say) I do beleive that I am learning something about how they think and what they think about–and what they want me to think.

    Ron Paul wants me to hold Chris Kyle responsible, to some extent, for his own murder. I.will.not.

    • michellc says:

      Exactly. I honestly don’t understand how else you can take it. He insinuated that Kyle killed people with guns so he was killed with a gun. He then went on to insinuate that Kyle took a man with PTSD to shoot guns so he deserved to pay for his mistake.(Not that I think taking someone to shoot guns including one who may or may not be suffering from some form of PTSD a mistake).

  10. yankeeintx says:

    I think his statement is premature, and jumping to conclusions. It is not a fact that Routh was ever diagnosed with PTSD. We don’t know that yet. He served one tour in Iraq, and Marines are debriefed upon their return. He was not medically discharged, so if he was diagnosed with PTSD, it could not have been severe. He then deployed to Haiti, which wouldn’t have been done if he was a danger to himself or others due to PTSD. His duty status is listed as Reserve.

    For all we know maybe he just snapped because of jealousy? He came back and was an unemployed nobody, and Chris was a hero. Maybe he asked Chris for a job, and was turned down? I doubt we will ever get all the answers we want, but maybe we will get enough to calm down. I am keeping my tin foil hat close during this one, because right now it is just not adding up.

  11. Dr. Bogus Pachysandra says:

    It has been reported that the killer told his sister that, “I traded my soul for a new truck.”

  12. ThatOldGuy says:

    I’m gonna go on a limb and guess that the 77 year-old politician, like most other politicians, actors and athletes who use social networks, doesn’t manage his own facebook/twitter accounts. This is probably another ‘newsletter moment’.

    • michellc says:

      I read on twitchy that he does manage his own twitter account.
      http://twitchy.com/2013/02/04/disgusting-ron-paul-attacks-murder-victim-war-hero-chris-kyle/
      Former Texas Rep. Ron Paul has been attracting negative attention all day for a tweet he sent Monday morning regarding the death of former Navy SEAL sniper Chris Kyle at the hands of an Iraq War veteran. But get used to off-the-cuff Twitter activity from the former presidential candidate: Paul, 77, is now running his own Twitter feed, a spokesperson says.

      “He runs it,” said Campaign for Liberty communications director Megan Stiles, who is handling Paul’s press requests since he retired. She clarified that Paul started handling his own tweets “since he left office.”

      He also tried to backtrack some.
      As a veteran, I certainly recognize that this weekend’s violence and killing of Chris Kyle were a tragic and sad event. My condolences and prayers go out to Mr. Kyle’s family. Unconstitutional and unnecessary wars have endless unintended consequences. A policy of non-violence, as Christ preached, would have prevented this and similar tragedies. -REP

    • Sharon says:

      Irrelevant.

  13. howie says:

    Freedom free zones.

  14. bigjoe says:

    Maybe Ron Paul is just a nut job

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s