Blogs » J.Q. Tomanek of Victoria » A community or mob?

Subscribe


I hope you are watching the GOP debates. Yes, some of the questions seem to be repeats. CNN’s Tea Party debate last night was better than the prior ones in my opinion. Maybe that had something to with allowing questions from the public rather than set-up questions that try to frame them. Yes, it is called a debate, but it really isn’t a debate. It is really talking points. I mean really, how do you expect to have a debate when there are like 50 people at the podium and not near everyone gets a chance to speak on an issue.

The most comical clashes were between Romney and Perry. The best and worst answers were from Paul I think. I like his approach to health care with community, associations, churches, etc. stepping up and providing charity to those in need. I would like him to take a step further and offer his explanation on whether or not he thinks Americans are a community or mob. What I mean is, does he think Americans will offer their talents for the good of another? We are pretty far down the moral block from when we were founded. I remember reading a book on Robert E. Lee and his leadership during the Civil War. He fought for the South but was not for slavery. In fact, he fought for similar reasons Ron Paul campaigns on, state’s rights. He was for the freeing of slaves, but not for the overnight decision to free the black population. He had some good reasons for thinking this way. One was the fact that in some cases slaves were treated better in the South than free African Americans were in the North. Please note, I am merely giving historical data here; I am not saying he was right or wrong. His concern was that the slave population was not ready to fend for themselves because of lack training, education, skills, etc. to provide for their family. His idea was that they needed to be provided for while they learned how to provide for themselves.

This brings my concern for Paul’s health care thoughts. Is the public ready to open their wallets, provide their talents, and come together for the care of a person? That is a good question considering we already take the life of the unborn for reasons as trivial as college, weight gain, and vacation. If a man cannot be responsible enough to care for his unborn child, how in the world will he be able to help care for a neighbor or acquaintance? Yes, trivial when compared to human life.

Paul also had the worst answer considering the war. I agree with him on the ends but not the means. Going or not going to war should be based on whether or not it is the last resort for legitimate self-defense. He may agree with this, I don’t know. But his response is because America should not be policing the world. To say that Americans caused the war, I find ridiculous. The likes of OBL, and those who mastermind the likes of 9-11, are not acting like reasonable people. I think Paul could have a point if it was the people of Iraq or Afghanistan that want to attack us, but it is small groups of people that enjoy terrorizing innocent people. For someone as smart as Paul, I think he misses this point.

Anyways, these are just some thoughts. What is your reaction after your wheels have turned for a little while?