Ron Paul on Eliot Spitzer: He acted badly but didn't deserve this

[CactusCarlos]

http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/0308/Ron_Paul_on_Eliot_Spitzer__He_acted_badly_but_didnt_deserve_this.html

Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), he of the quixotic GOP presidential campaign and unique policy positions, is never one to be shy about his opinions. Take the case of fallen New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer (D), whose political career fell apart this week after his liaisons with high-priced call girls became public. Spitzer resigned his office effective Monday.

Most politicians from both sides of the aisle publicly (at least) offered condolences for Spitzer and his poor family, including his three daughters, but didn't — of course — defend Spitzer's atrocious behavior.

But for Paul, Spitzer's downfall at the hands of a Justice Dept. investigation shows government at its worst. Yes, Spitzer climbed to power on the backs of political enemies he destroyed, making him not a swell guy, but he didn't deserve what happened to him. The FBI should have never been allowed to listen in to his phone call in the first place, according to the Texas Republican.

Here's the statement Paul made on the House floor last night. It's worth reading, at least for the enlightenment it gives into Paul's view of the world, which basically comes down to who controls the money:

"Madam Speaker, it has been said that 'he who lives by the sword shall die by the sword.'  And in the case of Eliot Spitzer, this couldn't be more true. In his case it's the political sword, as his enemies rejoice in his downfall. Most people, it seems, believe he got exactly what he deserved.

"The illegal tools of the state brought Spitzer down, but think of all the harm done by Spitzer in using the same tools against so many other innocent people. He practiced what could be termed 'economic McCarthyism,' using illegitimate government power to build his political career on the ruined lives of others.

"No matter how morally justified his comeuppance may be, his downfall demonstrates the worst of our society. The possibility of uncovering personal moral wrongdoing is never a justification for the government to spy on our every move and to participate in sting operations.

"For government to entice a citizen to break a law with a sting operation — that is, engaging in activities that a private citizen is prohibited by law from doing — is unconscionable and should clearly be illegal.



"Though Spitzer used the same tools to destroy individuals charged with economic crimes that ended up being used against him, gloating over his downfall should not divert our attention from the fact that the government spying on American citizens is unworthy of a country claiming respect for liberty and the Fourth Amendment.

"Two wrongs do not make a right. Two wrongs make it doubly wrong.

"Sacrifice of our personal privacy has been ongoing for decades but has rapidly accelerated since 9/11. Before 9/11, the unstated goal of collecting revenue was the real reason for the erosion of our financial privacy. When 19 suicidal maniacs attacked us on 9/11, our country became convinced that further sacrifice of personal and financial privacy was required for our security.

"The driving force behind this ongoing sacrifice of our privacy has been fear and the emotional effect of war rhetoric — war on drugs, war against terrorism and the war against Third World nations in the Middle East who are claimed to be the equivalent to Hitler and Nazi Germany.

"But the real reason for all this surveillance is to build the power of the state. It arises from a virulent dislike of free people running their own lives and spending their own money. Statists always demand control of the people and their money.

"Recently we've been told that this increase in the already intolerable invasion of our privacy was justified because the purpose was to apprehend terrorists. We were told that the massive amounts of information being collected on Americans would only be used to root out terrorists. But as we can see today, this monitoring of private activities can also be used for political reasons. We should always be concerned when the government accumulates information on innocent citizens.

"Spitzer was brought down because he legally withdrew cash from a bank — not because he committed a crime. This should prompt us to reassess and hopefully reverse this trend of pervasive government intrusion in our private lives.

"We need no more Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act! No more Violent Radicalization & Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Acts! No more torture! No more Military Commissions Act! No more secret prisons and extraordinary rendition! No more abuse of habeas corpus! No more Patriot Acts!

"What we need is more government transparency and more privacy for the individual

[formerlurker]

Well he was breaking the law Dr. No.  You don't like the law then change it.

Wait, my bad .... if he changes it then he will have nothing to whine about and that is pretty much the entire political platform of the La-la-libertarian party.

[Tess Anderson]

The Libertarian Party will never have much credibility until its members decide to lay off the bong, Paul sounds crazy as a loon again here  - he's more upset that the government "spied On" Spitzer than of what Spitzer actually did.

[asdf2231]

Oh FFS...

I swear the guy is clinically nuts.

[TheSarge]

Why is it that the brand of Libertarianism Dr. Nutz is selling sounds like Anarchy?

[DumbAss Tanker]

Sounds like there may be some skeletons in the closet of the Doctor or his political patrons.

[Carl]

Why is it that the brand of Libertarianism Dr. Nutz is selling sounds like Anarchy?

It is basically anarchy,the utopian dream of an unrealistic mind that is kissing cousins to another utopian dream called Marxism.
That type of Libertarianism thinks that people will self regulate and self police behaviors for the common good.
Marxism (socialism) believes that all economics should be shared for the common good.

Neither is possible due to human nature.

[RightCoast]

Ron Who??

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

What illegal powers are being referred to here?

Forbidding interstate prostitution is well within the bounds of the commerce clause.

Not using money for interstate crimes is well within the bounds of the commerce clause.

Enforcing these laws aren't a government privilege, they are an obligation.

Yet, amid all of Spitzer's abuse of his power--a supposed liberaltardian bugbear--by unjustly targetting successful corporations--a supposed libertardian darling--Ron Paul seems to have been silent throughout the years. It would have been well within Paul's purview to demand the fed step-in and relieve the abuses being heaped by a state authority (think civil rights enforcement). Alas the innerwbz is empty of such calls by Dr. No-Brains.

Ron Paul proves yet again that his only one true guiding principle is a Jeremiah Wrightish loathing for all things American.

[Tess Anderson]

Sounds like there may be some skeletons in the closet of the Doctor or his political patrons.

Or some more hate-filled racist newsletters that have his name and signature all over them, but he'll claim not to have been aware of.

He is like Wright in the sense that both of them a loons but of a different color. WE, the "hate America" mentality is there and also the paranoia - CT nutjobs, the both of them. Spitzer was just a scumbag.