Comments on: Andrew Napolitano: Man is free, and must be vigilant http://wichitaliberty.org/liberty/andrew-napolitano-man-is-free-and-must-be-vigilant/ Individual liberty, limited government, and free markets in Wichita and Kansas Tue, 07 Feb 2012 21:12:20 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: Lauren http://wichitaliberty.org/liberty/andrew-napolitano-man-is-free-and-must-be-vigilant/comment-page-1/#comment-163228 Lauren Sat, 31 Jul 2010 14:44:44 +0000 http://wichitaliberty.org/?p=9924#comment-163228 Bob, the depth in your posts and diversity of your topics amaze me. Bob, the depth in your posts and diversity of your topics amaze me.

]]> By: Ann H. http://wichitaliberty.org/liberty/andrew-napolitano-man-is-free-and-must-be-vigilant/comment-page-1/#comment-162733 Ann H. Fri, 30 Jul 2010 05:28:04 +0000 http://wichitaliberty.org/?p=9924#comment-162733 I generally like Judge Napolitano and believe he has a lot of good things to say. But I think that, at least in Bob's summary here (I obviously didn't attend the speech itself), Napolitano's too hard on Adams. (Most of what I know about Adams comes from David McCullough's biography of him, so hopefully it gives a faithful portrayal.) The Alien and Sedition Acts may have been a mistake, but they were not really indicative of what Adams believed generally nor should they be allowed to define Adams's outlook. He believed much more in freedom and limited government than most politicians today, even Republicans. On the other hand, you can take the idea of freedom too far. Again according to McCullough's book, Jefferson, whom Napolitano praises here for his ideas on freedom, supported the French Revolution, not just for a time, but even during the Reign of Terror. In this, Jefferson took his support too far--into mistaking license for freedom. I personally would agree that we need government for freedom, because without the protections of the rule of law and a just and limited government to enforce it, our rights can be trampled on by anyone, as happened during the French Revolution. What we need is a good balance between government and individual freedom. We simply have way too much government and too little individual freedom today. I generally like Judge Napolitano and believe he has a lot of good things to say. But I think that, at least in Bob’s summary here (I obviously didn’t attend the speech itself), Napolitano’s too hard on Adams. (Most of what I know about Adams comes from David McCullough’s biography of him, so hopefully it gives a faithful portrayal.) The Alien and Sedition Acts may have been a mistake, but they were not really indicative of what Adams believed generally nor should they be allowed to define Adams’s outlook. He believed much more in freedom and limited government than most politicians today, even Republicans.

On the other hand, you can take the idea of freedom too far. Again according to McCullough’s book, Jefferson, whom Napolitano praises here for his ideas on freedom, supported the French Revolution, not just for a time, but even during the Reign of Terror. In this, Jefferson took his support too far–into mistaking license for freedom. I personally would agree that we need government for freedom, because without the protections of the rule of law and a just and limited government to enforce it, our rights can be trampled on by anyone, as happened during the French Revolution. What we need is a good balance between government and individual freedom. We simply have way too much government and too little individual freedom today.

]]>