In a front-page editorial Thursday, the publisher of the New Hampshire Union Leader told readers of the statewide daily that "Ron Paul is a dangerous man." While the Republican presidential candidate's libertarian views on domestic issues are attractive to some voters, the editorial conceded, "it is Paul's position on issues of our national security that are truly dangerous."
“I would put our legislative and foreign policy accomplishments in our first two years against any president — with the possible exceptions of Johnson, FDR, and Lincoln — just in terms of what we've gotten done in modern history.” So spake Barack Obama, in an interview with 60 Minutes earlier this month.
The stuff of establishment Republicans’ worst nightmares is now coming to pass: they can no longer depict Ron Paul as a “fringe” candidate. Even they have been compelled by events to acknowledge that the Texas Congressman could very well finish in first place in the Iowa caucuses.
I found the following passage in a book by Thomas Dick, The Philosophy of a Future State, published in Brookfield, Massachusetts, in 1830. It struck me as being as relevant to our present state of belief in life after death as anything argued today. And it is a particularly important contemporary issue since children in American public schools are taught the humanist doctrine that there is no afterlife, and that present existence is all that there is. Thomas Dick writes:
The old chestnut has it that there is seldom any great loss without some small gain.
We’ve lost the incalculably precious, ancient right to habeas corpus with the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2012; the bill has passed both houses of Congress and awaits only Obama's signature to become law. If he endorses the bill as promised, he’ll legalize a wholly unconstitutional horror: The President may declare anyone a “terrorist” without presenting a scintilla of evidence. Nor is his victim any longer entitled to a trial.