Comment: Thanks for the well-thought out reasoning.

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Stossel is a utilitarian ... (see in situ)

Thanks for the well-thought out reasoning.

Tommy, very nice comments. That does help explain Stossel's viewpoint.

That also explains why he had no flame at all in his stance. The Judge was on fire, and Stossel had no light at all. He felt defeated and he KNEW it. It showed quite easily.

How do you rebut the nuclear threat being a valid reason to destroy our liberty? One question for you: isn't it the government's job (the fed gov't) to protect us from attack? After all, the president can respond militarily after an attack. And the Congress can fund the military to keep the war effort going.

Do you concede "protection" is the government's legitimate job? If not, how do you argue against it?

"It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a rEVOLution before tomorrow morning." - Henry Ford