Thread: Ron Paul on the Issues

100K To Attend Ron Paul Festival!



Published on May 31, 2012 by matlarson10

**HELP SPREAD THIS VIDEO AND MESSAGE!**

Donate at https://secure.ronpaul2012.com/

Please Visit:
Home
LibertyVlogger.com
Ron Paul 2012 - Real Change For Americans | Facebook

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/Ken...gop-convention

Paul Festival 2012 - Tribute to Ron Paul and Grassroots Activism - Home

'Ron Paul Festival' Could Bring 100k Supporters to GOP Convention

By Kenneth T. Walsh
May 31, 2012

Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul speaks during a campaign rally at the Grand Sierra Hotel in Reno, Nevada.

More details are emerging about the plans of Ron Paul supporters to stage a special "Ron Paul Festival" leading up to the Republican National Convention in Tampa this August.

The festival is to feature speeches, rallies, and entertainment for the three days immediately prior to the opening of the GOP convention. Organizers say they expect up to 100,000 people to attend.

[Gingrich: Ron Paul 'Biggest Danger' For Romney in Tampa.]

The event is to be held at the Florida State Fairgrounds, not far from the convention site in Tampa.

Organizers also say that they expect an appearance by Paul, the lone remaining challenger to Mitt Romney for the GOP nomination, and possibly his son, Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, if the crowd at the festival is sufficiently large.

Some Republican party officials and Romney supporters are concerned that the festival might be a prelude to demonstrations on the streets and protests on the convention floor by disappointed Paul backers who don't support Romney as the presumptive nominee.

But festival organizer Bryan Siemon told Business Insider, "Hopefully, the festival is where they'll get all of the yelling and screaming out," so by the time they get to the convention, they will heed Paul's call for civility and respect for their political adversaries.

Ken Walsh covers the White House and politics for U.S. News. He writes the daily blog "Ken Walsh's Washington" and is the author of "The Presidency" column for the U.S. News Weekly. He can be reached at kwalsh@usnews and on Facebook and Twitter.

'Ron Paul Festival' Could Bring 100k Supporters to GOP Convention - Ken Walsh's Washington (usnews.com)

Bilderbergs wish for Ron Paul



Published on Jun 1, 2012 by 1776umphreys

Following the first day of the "Palm Tree Conference," Bilderberg 2012 those who were invited were greeted to jeers and heckling from over 200 protesters, some of which were streaming the day's events live over the internet. Sadly, networks like Fox News, NBC, CBS, ABC, and CNN; all of which have studios in Washington D.C an almost thirty minute drive away from the Westfields Marriott Hotel in Chantilly Virginia.

As the members filed into the hotel, veteran reporter Jim Tucker has heard from one of his sources inside Bilderberg that some of the attendees are not too fond of Texas Congressman Dr. Ron Paul, and his historic impact in getting Americans politically involved and interested in the liberty movement. Tucker is reporting that, some attendees were discussing what they would do the Presidential nominee and his supporters.

I'll let Mr. Tucker explain their wishes to send Paul to the french capitol....

ANYBODY BUT ROMNEY

By Dr. Patrick Jonston

June 2, 2012

NewsWithViews.com

[Disclaimer: The opinion expressed in this article are those of Dr. Patrick Johnston and not the opinion of NewsWithViews, it's staff and other writers.]
The year is 1999.

Clinton’s cigars and his mistress’ stained dresses are all that’s on the media’s mind. Christian conservatives are as giddy as a five-year-old on the eve of a Disney vacation. They are itchin’ to put an “R” in the White House.

Their rallying cry? “Anybody but Clinton.”

Nevermind that Texas Governor G. W. Bush endorsed abortion in cases of rape, incest, and maternal health. Nevermind that he appointed pro-abortion candidates to the judicial bench when he was governor of Texas. Nevermind that he endorsed same-sex “civil unions,” which was basically marriage by another name. Anybody but Clinton.

When G.W. Bush won the White House from Bill Clinton, he did things that only Clinton could dream of doing Bush

•- Increased federal debt
•- Increased federal spending … at the fastest rate in 30 years
•- Increased farm subsidies and other welfare programs
•- Increased funding of abortion and Planned Parenthood to record-high levels
•- Increased government control of education, which was a colossal failure
•- Increased funding for the National Endowment of the Arts (remember the crucifix in a jar of urine, or the bullwhip penetrating the sodomite?)
•- Promoted more open sodomites to public office
•- Installed John Roberts to Supreme Court, who had worked to further the homosexual agenda
•- Installed Sam Alito to the Supreme Court, who had issued five radical pro-abortion rulings (including ruling that New Jersey’s Partial Birth Abortion ban was “unconstitutional” and cited Roe v. Wade approvingly in the process)
•- Passed the largest entitlement program in a generation, hastening Medicare’s bankruptcy

Bush’s liberal policies while governor of Texas dwarfed compared to his exploits as president.

Why couldn’t Clinton do these things? Because of a Republican Congress. How could Bush do these things? Because of a Republican Congress! The Republicans resisted Clinton’s leftist agenda, but stood faithfully by their man G. W. Bush when he outdid the socialist programs of Marxist Bill Clinton.

Fast-forward to 2012.

“Anybody but Obama” is now the motto of all the conservatives who are lining up to hold their noses and endorse Mitt Romney.

• Even though Romney single-handedly, illegally, and unconstitutionally put Massachusetts on the map as the first state to hand out marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
• Even though he passed Romneycare which included $50 co-pay, taxpayer-funded abortions – all of this supposedly three years after his “pro-life conversion.”
• Even though under Romney’s leadership, employment in Massachusetts was the worst in the nation and the size of the state government grew to astronomical proportions.

If you judge a candidate by what he does and not what he says on the campaign trail, who would be the face of legalized gay marriage, tax-payer funded child-killing, and BIG government?

Mitt Romney

Romney could run as Obama’s running mate, and yet Christian conservatives have the audacity to hold their noses and endorse this man? If they had lived in Germany in the 1930’s, would they have endorsed Nazism for fear of Communism? Would they have voted for Hitler as the lesser-of-two-evils over the Boogeyman Stalin?

Answer that question, Gary Bauer, Richard Land, James Dobson, Franklin Graham, Jerry Falwell, Cal Thomas, Pat Robertson, Tony Perkins, Paul Weyrich, Dr. John Willke, Patrick Mahoney, Marvin Olaski, and all you other Judases who’ve betrayed your cause and your people for a seat at the RINO table?

If Christians follow their pathetic finger-in-the-wind leaders to the polls to pull the lever for Romney, we will well-publicize our indictment. The salt’s loss of savor will have been broadcast to all. Judgment will begin at the House of God, and we deserve it.

The best hope for freedom is not in Washington, D.C. It’s in our living rooms, our churches, and our statehouses. We must prepare our families and churches for the looming judgment. States must exercise their sovereignty and ban abortion, resist federal control over healthcare and education, and put our Ten Commandments monuments back up in our halls and schoolhouses.

We must get our kids out of the godless government schools. We must get our people off of the federal handouts. We must build local and state governments that can sustain us when the federal government goes bankrupt and the dollar implodes, when the entitlement checks stop coming in and the rioters start wreaking havoc, and when God’s gavel falls against us for the shedding of innocent blood.

When we rebuild, let’s rebuild not on the shifting sands of relative morality, secular humanism, and pragmatism. Let’s rebuild on the sure foundation of the Word of God, the standard of morality and justice without which posterity will not be free.

© 2012 Patrick Johnston - All Rights Reserved

Patrick Johnston and his wife Elizabeth reside in Zanesville, Ohio, with their six young home-schooled children. Patrick is a family practice physician and founder of the Association of Pro-life Physicians, which is dedicated to restoring a remnant of physicians in our communities who are convinced that life begins at conception and who will not commit nor refer for abortions (www.ProLifePhysicians.org).

He founded the Alliance to Reform Education Funding to fight public school levies and promote Christian home-schooling (www.StopSchoolLevies.org). Dr. Johnston is committed to revival in the church, and the restoration of Biblical law and constitutional government in America. Dr. Johnston is currently campaigning for State Representative for District 94 in Ohio.

Their family ministry - Website: www.RightRemedy.org.

E-mail: docjohnston@rightremedy.org

Dr. Patrick Johnston -- Anybody but Romney

The Latest Leftist Smear of Patriots and Constitutionalists

by Thomas J. DiLorenzo

The communistic rabble-rousers at the left-wing hate group known as the Southern Poverty Law Center have produced yet another libelous smear of well-meaning Americans who would like to see their Constitution enforced. This time the smears, lies, false innuendo, character assassination, and hate are directed at all those who believe that part of the definition of an American patriot is one who believes in the founding fathers’ philosophy of limited constitutional government.

The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) is a far-left hate group whose modus operandi is to attempt to censor criticisms of big government in America by calling people names. If you are a Jeffersonian who believes that limited and decentralized government is better than unlimited, centralized, monopolistic government, then they will label you a racist, a slavery defender, or worse. If you are a Ron Paul constitutionalist, they will insinuate that you are probably a terrorist who would like to blow up government buildings. If you are not a leftist, then you are, by definition, a "hater." If you are a critic of the welfare state, it is because you hate poor people. If you are a critic of the government school bureaucracy, it is because you hate children. If you are a critic of racial hiring quotas (which are supposedly illegal under the Civil Rights Act of 1964), then you are a racist. If you oppose socialized medicine, it is because you hate sick people. If you are a critic of the Ponzi scheme known as "social security," it is because you hate old people. There cannot possibly be any intellectual reasons to doubt government intervention; all criticisms of intervention are motivated by hate and nothing else according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.

With the advent of the TEA Party and the Republican takeover of the U.S. House of Representatives, the SPLC issued one of its cartoonish "intelligence reports" on "The Year in Hate," bemoaning the "explosive growth" of "the radical right." Everyone on the "right" is a "radical extremist." There are no radicals or extremists on the left in the eyes of the extreme radical communists at the SPLC.

A recent SPLC "intelligence report" attacks so-called "patriot groups" in America. As is its usual practice, the SPLC digs up a tiny piece of information about one or two mentally deranged lunatics somewhere in America who gripe about the government and supposedly claim to be "patriots," and then insinuate in their "report" that ALL individuals and groups who label themselves as patriots are probably just as crazy – if not dangerous.

An earlier example of this sleazy and dishonest tactic is how the SPLC issued an "intelligence report" on "radical right-wing extremists" who were running for political office throughout America in 2008. This report included a picture and brief description of a man who clearly sounded like a mentally deranged crackpot who was running for town council in a small village of a couple hundred people in a Western state. Then right next to that was a picture and similarly ominous warning about one Rand Paul, who at the time was running for the U.S. Senate in Kentucky. Get it: Crazy Mountain Man = Rand Paul = Ron Paul.

According to the SPLC the "patriot groups" are characterized by "a proliferation of demonizing conspiracy theories." They are "conspiracy-minded groups that see the federal government as their primary enemy." That is, they are accused of spreading conspiracy theories about governmental misbehavior, with the clear implication that these people are crazy. But of course there are political conspiracies. American antitrust laws contain the words "conspiracies in restraint of trade." Nearly everything that goes on in Washington, D.C. is in fact a conspiracy on the part of some special interest group and a member or members of Congress who design legislation to benefit that group at the expense of the general public. For example, when President George W. Bush imposed 35 percent tariffs on steel imports, it was the result of a conspiracy by domestic steel manufacturers and their unions, along with their congressional supporters. The higher price of steel benefited them at the expense of all purchasers of steel and products made of steel, which became more expensive because of the tariff.

Political conspiracies are pervasive, but the SPLC wants people to believe that the kind of conspiracies the "patriot groups" believe in are of a different kind – that they are of the "Martians have been living among us for 50 years and the government has been covering it up" variety. Anyone who is skeptical about the alleged "virtues" of unlimited governmental growth is simply crazy – or so the SPLC would have the public believe.

An integral part of the Obama administration’s strategy for remaining in power is to recruit surrogate groups to suggest that any criticism of the administration’s policies are probably the work of racists who simply cannot tolerate a (half) black president. Thus, the SPLC condemns the patriot groups as being motivated primarily by "the prospect of four more years under a black president." Presumably, a black conservative or libertarian president would be just as alarming to the patriot groups according to the SPLC.

Not only are patriot groups supposedly motivated by racism; some of them are also probably conspiring to murder the president according to the SPLC, which soberly announced in its "report" on patriot groups that "an angry backlash developed that included several plots to murder Obama." Such plots are said to be the work of unnamed "Patriot and hate groups." The SPLC "report" cites as one of its main sources of information on patriot groups a convicted felon described as "a longtime neo-Nazi."

The SPLC’s patriot group report is ridiculously sloppy in its methodology in that it includes as "groups" such things as a single individual with an internet radio show that bemoans the loss of constitutional liberty in America, or a book about the decline of constitutional liberty. Two "patriot groups" that are especially demonized are Oath Keepers, an organization of current and former military and law enforcement and firefighting personnel, whose members pledge to reaffirm their oath to defend and protect the U.S. Constitution, and the Constitution Party.

Instead of relying on the fevered ramblings of a former neo-Nazi/convicted felon, as the SPLC "researchers" do, if one wants to know what a patriot group like Oath Keepers is about, a good place to start would be the organization’s own Web site. Reading what is on the Web site explains why the SPLC is so alarmed about the spreading popularity of Oath Keepers.

Unlike Nazi war criminals who famously pleaded that they were "only following orders," Oath Keepers clearly states that "we won’t just follow orders" if those orders involve violating the clear language of the U.S. Constitution. These are men and women who all took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution, not destroy it. The organization publishes a "Declaration of Orders We Will NOT Obey" which is a listing of ten things that are clear violations of the Constitution. In other words, these are people who believe that the police and the military should never become an armed goon squad for lawless, criminal, and tyrannical politicians. The SPLC apparently disagrees with them quite vehemently.

What is it that Oath Keepers believes the police and the military should not do? They should not assist in confiscating firearms from law-abiding Americans for one thing. Nor would they conduct warrantless searches of the American people, in violation of the Fourth Amendment. The military should not be used to detain American citizens as "enemy combatants." If they are accused of a crime by the government, then they should be treated like anyone else who is so accused and be put on trial before a civilian jury.

The Constitution only allows for the imposition of martial law in any state if it is first requested by the governor and legislature of that state. Oath Keepers pledges to enforce that part of the Constitution as well. Nor will Oath Keepers use deadly force against the people of any state who peacefully resist the federal government when it passes legislation that is clearly unconstitutional. Oath Keepers believes the federal government has no legitimate authority to murder dissenters, in other words. Or to blockade American cities, force any Americans into detention camps, as was done to Japanese-Americans during World War II and as neoconservative celebrity pundit Michelle Malkin advocated for Muslim-Americans in her recent book, In Defense of Internment.

Oath Keepers opposes the use of any foreign troops, under the auspices of the United Nations or anyone else, on American soil; oppose the confiscation of private property; and they pledge to defend the free speech rights of the American people by refusing to follow orders to censor free political speech.

In light of all of this, it is easy to see why the SPLC is so alarmed that it smears Oath Keepers with language about presidential assassination and terrorism. Like the Obama administration, the SPLC favors the unlimited and explosive growth of government so that America moves closer and closer to totalitarian control. Oath Keepers favors constitutional freedom, the mortal enemy of totalitarians everywhere.

It is equally easy to understand why the SPLC would also issue an over-the-top, hate-filled attack on the Constitution Party and everyone associated with it. On its Web site the Constitution Party publishes its "preamble" which declares, in the language of the Declaration of Independence, that all human beings have God-given rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It then states that "freedom to own, use, exchange, control, protect, and freely dispose of property is a natural, necessary aid" in realizing our "inalienable rights" as human beings. And, moreover, "that the legitimate function of government is to secure these rights through the preservation of domestic tranquility, the maintenance of a strong national defense [as opposed to offense], and the promotion of equal justice for all."

Even more shocking to the communistic rabble-rousers at the SPLC must be the next statement in the Constitution Party’s preamble that "history makes clear that left unchecked, it is the nature of the government to usurp the liberty of its citizens . . . . therefore, it is essential to bind government with the chains of the Constitution and carefully divide and limit government powers to those assigned by the consent of the governed."

It should be obvious to anyone reading this article that if the SPLC had its way, and Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Thomas Paine, and George Washington were to come back to life, they would immediately be designated as "enemy combatants" and sent to the Guantanamo Bay Gulag to rot. In case anyone doubts this, it is useful to recall how, upon assuming office, the Nazi-esque Secretary of Fatherland Security, Janet Napolitano, issued a "report" about potential "terrorist" organizations that included just about every conservative and libertarian think tank in America, even the Heritage Foundation. The source of Napolitano’s "report" was the Southern Poverty Law Center. This was their wish list. It was a bold attempt to censor, once and for all, all voices of dissent to the unlimited, unconstitutional growth of government. A political firestorm forced Napolitano to ditch the "report," even pulling it off the internet. The incident was very revealing, however, in that it demonstrated how the state would like to use the "war on terror" as an all-purpose excuse to destroy freedom of political speech, and how the Southern Poverty Law Center (which does not even practice poverty law, by the way) is one of its primary tools of tyranny. What any of these political activities by the SPLC has to do with "poverty law" – the ostensible reason for the organization’s tax exemption – is anyone’s guess.

June 2, 2012

Thomas J. DiLorenzo [send him mail] is professor of economics at Loyola College in Maryland and the author of The Real Lincoln; Lincoln Unmasked: What You’re Not Supposed To Know about Dishonest Abe and How Capitalism Saved America. His latest book is Hamilton’s Curse: How Jefferson’s Archenemy Betrayed the American Revolution – And What It Means for America Today. His next book is entitled Organized Crime: The Unvarnished Truth About Government.

Copyright © 2012 by LewRockwell.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.


http://lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo229.html

Ron Paul Is Coming To Fort Worth, Tx This Thursday!

Submitted by Ron Paul SWAGGG on Sat, 06/02/2012 - 19:18in

Ron Paul 2012

This is via Jordan Page's Facebook: "RON PAUL IS COMING TO FORT WORTH, TX THIS THURSDAY!!!

Join us for A Concert for Liberty with Ron Paul and Jordan Page."

Here is the Facebook Event Page- https://www.facebook.com/events/300386266719482/

..and the description on the Event Page is:

"Congressman Ron Paul will speak at the Texas Liberty Concert in conjunction with his appearance at the TX State Republican Convention.

The event will be held at The River Ranch in the Fort Worth Stockyards 500 NE 23rd Street Fort Worth, TX on Thursday, June 7th, 2012 from 6:30 pm to 10 pm. Jordan Page, a leading musician and songwriter in the Ron Paul movement will perform live from 7:15 to 8:15 after which Ron Paul will address the crowd. Tickets are $20 which covers parking, 2 drinks (sodas, bottled water or beer), and the show. It is recommended to purchase tickets online in advance as this event is expected to sell out. To purchase in advance, visit and print your receipt as your ticket:


https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/websc...=EWSQ8R3V8EKVY


Ron Paul Is Coming To Fort Worth, Tx This Thursday! | Peace . Gold . Liberty | Ron Paul 2012

Ron Paul campaign statement on Louisiana GOP convention

Angel Clark
Wilmington Elections 2012 Examiner
June 2, 2012

The Ron Paul 2012 Presidential campaign released the following statement concerning the outcome of the Louisiana State Republican Convention. Below please find comments from National Campaign Manager John Tate:

“The Ron Paul campaign condemns the unfortunate activities that took place at the Louisiana Republican State Convention in Shreveport.

“However, we also wish to highlight and applaud the fact that the convention ended on a high note reflective of the cooperation all Republicans wish to see toward the mutual aim of defeating President Obama in the November general election.

“The unnecessary conflict, and positive conclusion as we understand it, transpired as follows.

“LAGOP officials ignored the vast majority of duly elected delegates and attempted to use illegally adopted rules to deny Ron Paul supporters an opportunity to attend the Republican National Convention in Tampa. Louisiana has 46 delegates. Five were pledged to Mitt Romney based on the March 23rd primary result and Rick Santorum received 10, meaning most delegates were contestable at the state convention.

“Delegates to the state convention were chosen at caucus meetings on April 28th. Ron Paul slates won four of six congressional district contests. Of the approximately 180 delegates attending the state convention, 113 voted to remove the LAGOP chairman when he failed to respond to requests for information and other motions from delegates. Nearly two-thirds of the delegates began physically moving their chairs, literally turning their back on the GOP chair appointed by the party hierarchy.

“In another instance, State Central Committeeman and Ron Paul supporter Henry Herford Jr. of Franklin Parrish was attacked by some security officials who didn’t realize that the body had voted out the previous chairman. Mr. Herford has a prosthetic hip and according to a doctor at the scene it appears as though the prosthetic was dislocated and may require replacement. The injury occurred as he was beginning to call to order the newly re-formed convention.

“In yet another instance, Ron Paul supporter Alex Helwig, Chairman of the Rules Committee who made the motion to remove the chair, was arrested by Shreveport police and released. During his brief detainment, some of his fingers were broken and when he returned to the event he was walking with aid of a cane.

“By 10:50 a.m. today, the newly formed convention completed its work. Newly-elected national delegates met with the Romney campaign’s Louisiana Chairman, Scott Sewell, who graciously said ‘that he supported the effort and would do everything he could to make sure the delegation was seated’ in Tampa.

“Despite the divisiveness that characterized the Louisiana state convention initially, we are thankful that the Paul and Romney campaigns took the high road to guarantee the enfranchisement of Republicans whose candidate preferences differ.

“Republicans of goodwill agree that following the spirited primary season, the general election presents us with an opportunity to defeat Obama and place the nation on a path to recovery.

“Our thoughts and prayers are with those who were injured at the convention. And, we thank all responsible convention participants for ending the day on a more unified note.”

If you wish to ensure you receive email updates to all of Angel's articles please subscribe clicking the link above or join her Facebook Fan Page. Angel is also the Wilmington Prepper Examiner and the Wilmington Civil Rights Examiner. You can read Angel's last article here. Feel free to comment below and follow Angel on her Twitter! You may listen to Angel LIVE Monday through Friday from 5-7 pm EST on RadioFreedom.us. You may learn more about her Talk Radio Topics and the Radio Freedom News Network on The Angel Clark Show Fan Page!

Ron Paul campaign statement on Louisiana GOP convention - Wilmington Elections 2012 | Examiner.com

Why Do Economists Say that Ron Paul Would Be the Best President for the Economy?

Posted on June 2, 2012 by WashingtonsBlog

PhD Economists Endorse Ron Paul

A number of well-known PhD economists – such as Marc Faber, Thomas Woods and Paul Craig Roberts – support Ron Paul, believing that he would help the American economy more than any other presidential candidate.

Why?

I interviewed one well-known Ron Paul supporter – Dr. Walter E. Block – to find out.

Block is an Eminent Scholar Endowed Chair and Professor of Economics at Loyola University in New Orleans, received his PhD in economics from Columbia University, and is a senior fellow at the Ludwig von Mises Institute. He has written 8 books and more than 300 scholarly articles and reviews, and co-edited dozens of books on economics.

Block just published a book called Ron Paul for President in 2012: Yes to Ron Paul and Liberty.

We asked Professor Block 10 questions related to Ron Paul. [Our follow-up comments are in brackets.]

1. Ron Paul doesn’t support government bailouts for the big banks. But if the big banks fail, won’t it drive us into another depression?

[WEB] No. In the Austrian economic view, depressions are caused by big banks (the Fed) artificially lowering interest rates.

[Austrian economists believe that lowering interest rates too far gives a false signal to businesses to gear up production and invest more, which causes a "misallocation" of resources and unsustainable bubbles ... which always lead to crashes when the bubble bursts.

In addition, top economists have said that failing to let the big banks fail when they make bad bets which lead to insolvency is preventing economic recovery.]

2. Wasn’t the Great Depression a “liquidity crisis” which was made much worse by so many bank failures?

[WEB] Read Rothbard’s America’s Great Depression on this.

[This has never been a liquidity crisis; it has always been an insolvency crisis.]

3. Paul wants to end the Federal Reserve, or at least reduce its powers. But isn’t the Fed – as the “lender of last resort” – critical for keeping us out of a depression by providing stimulus to the economy when consumers and small businesses are tapped out?

[WEB] The fed as lender of last resort is a buttress of sorts, but only because we have fractional reserve banking.

If we have 100% demand deposit banking (see below) this function wouldn’t be needed

[We agree with professor Block. And it should be noted that we no longer even have fractional reserve banking ... we now have fictional reserve banking.]
4. Isn’t the best chance of prosperity for the most people available when the government somewhat plans the economy, and operates the “levers” of economic policy to push more money into the system when things are getting tight?

[WEB] No, that’s central Sovietized planning. Prosperity comes from laissez faire capitalism.

[While many may assume that laissez faire capitalism is a bad thing, and is the cause of our problems, the truth is that we don't currently have real capitalism at all. Instead, we have - depending on the label one uses - crony capitalism, fascism, communist style socialism, kleptocracy, oligarchy or banana republic style corruption. In fact, both liberals and conservatives despise crony capitalism.]

5. Isn’t the Fed – an independent governmental agency – vital for overseeing the big banks as a watchdog, and acting “independently” of the temptations of politicians to promote monetary policy which will help them get re-elected?

[WEB] “Independent govt agency” is a recipe for disaster. Suppose they make a mistake … there would be no market forces that can force them into bankruptcy?

[Indeed.]

6. Paul is a “non-interventionist”, who wants to avoid wars that President Obama and Mitt Romney say we need to fight. But isn’t war a necessary form of “military Keynesianism” … i.e. a vital way to stimulate our economy and so keep us out of an even deeper recession? Wouldn’t cutting military spending destroy our economy?

[WEB] Read my new book on this:

Block, Walter E. 2012. Ron Paul for President in 2012: Yes to Ron Paul and Liberty. Ishi Press; Amazon.com: Ron Paul for President in 2012: Yes to Ron Paul and Liberty (9784871873239): Walter E. Block, Rafi Farber, Ron Paul, Lew Rockwell, Tom Woods: Books; BARNES & NOBLE | Ron Paul For President In 2012 by Walter E. Block, Ishi Press | Paperback.

[Many top economists say that the claim that war is good for the economy is a myth made up out of whole cloth.]

7. “Austerians” – as Paul Krugman call them – want to reduce our national debt. But isn’t it true – as both liberal and conservative economists have said – that “debt doesn’t matter”? And don’t we have to spend a little more now to get our economy out of the ditch, and then we’ll be more frugal later … when things are stable?

[WEB] We monetize that debt, which creates inflation, lowers interest rates, created booms and then busts.

8. Isn’t the “business cycle” largely responsible for the bad economy? Aren’t “booms” and “busts” part of the nature of things, like seasons?

[WEB] No, they emanate from the Fed. In the fully free society, there would be no such thing as the business cycle. See Rothbard’s Depressions: Their Cause and Cure.

9. Radicals think that we should let our most important companies fail if they’ve made dumb bets, or even that we should put Wall Street executives in jail for “fraud”. But wouldn’t both things undermine people’s trust in our economy, and depress our economy even more?

[WEB] No business should be too big to fail. Trust in the economy is highly overvalued. I oppose putting executives in jail for losing money, unless they are guilty of actual fraud.

[Happy talk and band-aid fixes cannot fix the economy. Blind trust in the stability of banks which have made foolish gambles is not helpful. But restoring trust in the honesty of one another - by prosecuting financial fraud - is vital. Conservative free market advocates and liberals both agree on this basic point.]

10. The May jobs report is a disaster. Paul Krugman (who – like the chairmen of the Fed – advocate blowing bubble after bubble in order to minimize the damage from the bursting of previous bubbles) and other Keynesians blame a failure of the government to spend more, and to do more quantitative easing and other monetary stimulus of the economy.

Do you think that government spending and stimulus are the solution to unemployment? Do you think that the government should blow another bubble in order to increase unemployment?

[WEB] These bubbles only cause inflation. They do nothing to rectify our problems. the Fed should stop this. We ought to end the Fed, and adopt a 100% dollar back gold standard.

[Even the "Central Banks' Central Bank" - the Bureau of International Settlements - slammed the Fed and other central banks for blowing bubbles and using other "gimmicks" which only make the economy worse.]

Postscript: Dr. Block provided the following bibliography for those wishing to learn more about the pitfalls of fractional reserve banking:

Bagus, 2003; Bagus, Howden and Block, forthcoming; Barnett and Block, 2005, 2008, 2009; Baxendale, 2010; Block, 2008; Block and Caplan, 2008; Block and Garschina, 1996; Block and Humphries, 2008; Block and Posner, 2008; Davidson, 2008; Davidson and Block, 2011; Hanke, 2008; Hoppe, 1994; Hoppe, Hulsmann and Block, 1998; Huerta de Soto, 1995, 1998, 2001, 2006, 2010; Hulsmann, 1996, 2000, 2002a, 2002b, 2003, 2008; Murphy, 2010; North, 2009; Polleit, 2010; Reisman, 1996, 2009; Rothbard, 1975; 1990, 1991, 1993; Salerno, 2010A, 2010B, 2011.

Bagus, Philipp. 2003, ‘The Commons and the Tragedy of Banking’, November 12, The Commons and the Tragedy of Banking - Philipp Bagus - Mises Daily
Bagus, Philipp, David Howden and Walter E. Block. Forthcoming. “Deposits, Loans and Banking: Clarifying the Debate,” American Journal of Economics and Sociology
Barnett, William II and Walter Block. 2005. “In defense of fiduciary media— a comment; or, what’s wrong with “clown” or play money?” Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics; Vol. 8, No. 2, Summer, pp. 55-69; http://mises.org/journals/qjae/pdf/qjae8_2_4.pdf

Barnett, William and Walter Block. 2008. “Time deposits, dimensions and fraud,” Journal of Business Ethics; www.WalterBlock.com/publications; SpringerLink - electronic journals, protocols and books. www.WalterBlock.com/publications

Barnett, William and Walter Block. 2009. “Financial Intermediaries, the Intertemporal-Carry Trade, and Austrian Business Cycles; or; Crash and Carry: Can Fraudulent Time deposits lead to an Austrian Business Cycle? Yes.” Journal Etica e Politica / Ethics & Politics; Vol. XI, No. 1, pp. 455-469; http://www2.units.it/~etica/2009_1/BARNETT_BLOCK.pdf

Baxendale, Tony. 2010. Free Banking, the Balance Sheet and Contract Law Approach; March 15; Free Banking, the Balance Sheet and Contract Law Approach » The Cobden Centre

Block, Walter and Bryan Caplan. 2008. “Walter Block versus Bryan Caplan on Fractional Reserve Banking.” Nov 1; Walter Block versus Brian Caplan on Fractional Reserve Banking by Walter Block

Block, Walter and Kenneth M. Garschina. 1996. “Hayek, Business Cycles and Fractional Reserve Banking: Continuing the De-Homoginization Process,” Review of Austrian Economics, Vol. 9, No. 1, 1995, pp. 77-94; http://www.mises.org/journals/rae/pdf/rae9_1_3.pdf.
Block, Walter and John Humphries. 2008. “Humphries vs Block on fractional reserve banking.” November 17; John Humphreys v Walter Block on FR-banking « Australian Libertarian Society
Block, Walter versus Eric Posner. 2008. “Posner vs. Block on fractional reserve banking.” November, 29; Posner vs. Block by Walter Block
Davidson, Laura. 2008. “Fractional Reserve Banking Is Indeed Fraudulent,” November 17;

Fractional Reserve Banking Is Indeed Fraudulent by Laura Davidson

Davidson, Laura and Walter E. Block. 2011. “The Case Against Fiduciary Media: Ethics Is The Key,” The Journal of Business Ethics. Vol. 98, Issue 3, pp. 505-511;

Journal of Business Ethics, Volume 98, Number 3 - SpringerLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0590-2; 10.1007/s10551-010-0590-2
Hanke, Steve. 2008. “Banking Crises: Plus Ça Change…” GlobeAsia, November, pp. 168-169; http://www.freemarketfoundation.com/Hanke%5CBanking%20Crises–Plus%20%C3%87a%20Change,% 20November%202008.pdf

Hoppe, Hans-Hermann. 1994. “How is Fiat Money Possible? or, The Devolution of Money and Credit,” Review of Austrian Economics, 7(2), pp. 49-74.

Hoppe, Hans-Hermann, with Guido Hulsmann and Walter Block. 1998. “Against Fiduciary Media,” Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 19-50, http://www.mises.org/journals/qjae/pdf/qjae1_1_2.pdf

Huerta de Soto, Jesús. 1995. “A Critical Analysis of Central Banks and Fractional-Reserve Free Banking from the Austrian Perspective,” Review of Austrian Economics, 8(2), pp. 25-38.

Huerta de Soto, Jesús. 1998, ‘A Critical Note on Fractional-Reserve Free Banking’, The Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics 1(4), 25-49.

Huerta de Soto, Jesús. 2001. “A Critical Note on Fractional Reserve Free Banking,” The Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics, Vol. 1, No. 4, Fall, pp. 34-35

Huerta de Soto, Jesús. 2006. Money, Bank Credit and Economic Cycles (Ludwig von Mises Institute, Auburn AL.)

Huerta de Soto, Jesús. 2010. “Economic Recessions, Banking Reform, and the Future of Capitalism.” Economic Recessions, Banking Reform, and the Future of Capitalism - Jesus Huerta de Soto - Mises Daily

Hülsmann, Jorg Guido. 1996, ‘Free Banking and the Free Bankers’, Review of Austrian Economics 9(1), 3-53.

Hulsmann, Jorg Guido. 2000. “Banks Cannot Create Money”, The Independent Review: A Journal of Political Economy, vol. 5, no. 1, summer, 101—110; http://www.independent.org/pdf/tir/tir_05_1_hulsman.pdf

Hulsmann, Jorg Guido. 2002a. “Free Banking and the Free Bankers.” Review of Austrian Economics. Vol. 9, No. 1. pp. 3-53; http://www.mises.org/journals/rae/pdf/rae9_1_1.pdf

Hulsmann, Jorg Guido. 2002b. “Free Banking Fractional Reserves: Reply to Pascal Salin.” Review of Austrian Economics, Vol. 1, No. 3.
http://www.mises.org/journals/qjae/pdf/qjae1_3_8.pdf

Hulsmann, Jorg Guido. 2003. “Has Fractional-Reserve Banking Really Passed the Market Test?,” Independent Review 7/3, Winter, 399-422. Has Fractional-Reserve Banking Really Passed the Market Test?: The Independent Review: The Independent Institute

Hülsmann, Jorg Guido. 2008. The Ethics of Money Production Auburn AL: Ludwig von Mises Institute

Murphy, Robert P. 2011. The Fractional-Reserve Banking Question.” June 14; The Fractional-Reserve Banking Question - Robert P. Murphy - Mises Daily
North, Gary. 2009. “What Is Money? Part 5: Fractional Reserve Banking.” October 10;

What Is Money?, Part 5 by Gary North

Polleit, Thorsten. 2010. “The Faults of Fractional-Reserve Banking.” December 23;

The Faults of Fractional-Reserve Banking - Thorsten Polleit - Mises Daily

Reisman, George. 1996. Capitalism. Ottawa, Il.: Jameson Books; pp. 954-963

Reisman, George. 2009. “A Pro-Free-Market Program for Economic Recovery,” November 20; A Pro-Free-Market Program for Economic Recovery - George Reisman - Mises Daily

Rothbard, Murray N. [1963] 1975. America’s Great Depression (Sheed and Ward, Kansas City).

Rothbard, Murray N. 1990. What Has Government Done to Our Money?, Auburn, AL: Ludwig von Mises Institute; http://www.mises.org/rothbard/rothmoney.pdf

Rothbard, Murray N. [1962] 1991. “The Case for a 100 Percent Gold Dollar,” In Search of a Monetary Constitution, Leland B. Yeager, ed., Cambridge, MA:

Harvard University Press, pp. 94-136, and Auburn, AL: Ludwig von Mises Institute. See also “The Logic of Action One” pp. 364-384; The Case for a 100 Percent Gold Dollar - Murray N. Rothbard - Mises Daily

Rothbard, Murray N. [1962] 1993. Man, Economy, and State. Ludwig von Mises Institute, Auburn, AL

Rothbard, Murray N. The Myth of Free Banking in Scotland, Review of Austrian Economics; http://mises.org/journals/rae/pdf/RAE2_1_15.pdf

Salerno, Joseph T. Salerno. 2010A. Money, Sound and Unsound. Auburn, Ludwig von Mises Institute

Salerno, Joseph T. 2010B. “White contra Mises on Fiduciary Media,” May 14;

White contra Mises on Fiduciary Media - Joseph T. Salerno - Mises Daily

Joseph T. Salerno. 2011. “Dr. Joseph Salerno Explains Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About Money (But Were Afraid to Ask)”, The Daily Bell, July 3;

The Daily Bell - Dr. Joseph Salerno Explains Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About Money (But Were Afraid to Ask)


Why Do Economists Say that Ron Paul Would Be the Best President for the Economy? - Washington's Blog

Now Obama's eligibility being challenged in FL.

Submitted by Mary1 on Sat, 06/02/2012 - 20:57

First Arizona, then Georgia, and now... Florida.


Obama's eligibility is coming under increasing attack.


Attorney Larry Klayman: Florida Judge Sets June Court Hearing For Obama Ballot Challenge | Birther Report: Obama Release Your Records


What is your take on the latest findings of the Cold Case Posse? Do you know about the results of Zullo's investigation in Hawaii last week? Did you watch the March 1, 2012 press conference from Arpaio (it's available on youtube). Did you watch subsequent interviews? (Are you willing to risk a barrage of ad hominem attacks for even commenting on this issue?)


» Arizona Law Hot on the Trail of Obama’s Documents Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!


Patriots and friends, you should be informed about this story; it's going to explode (as in, MSM coverage) or implode (as in, bye bye Mike Zullo and Sheriff Joe, RIP) within the next few weeks, as I see it, and either way we should absolutely know as many details as we can before they are (poof!) gone.

Now Obama's eligibility being challenged in FL. | Peace . Gold . Liberty | Ron Paul 2012