It would have been beyond belief just six months ago. I speak, of course, of the Ron Paul Revolutionand for purposes of this piece, I shall refer to it as exactly that, for at once it has been bringing revolutionary change to American politics, and most especially American radical politics, and is doing so at what increasingly looks like a revolutionary moment in American history. I write this as a member of the young generation that has been rallying to Ron Paul, creating a youth movement that is at least the rival of Gene McCarthys, as someone who has watched this movement emerge from a variety of angles as perhaps few who have been more intensely associated with it have been able to. I watch the rise of the Ron Paul Revolution as someone who has studied in vast detail the history of third parties and radical movements in America, and with that knowledge is only all the more awestruck by the novelty of the Paul phenomenon.

I write, also, as a Kirkianand Burkean, skeptical of libertarian gospel and loathing of revolution, yet by the very fact that I have been, however peripherally, a participant in this revolution, keenly aware of the revolutionary situation we are now in. Surely, by prudential standards, this late stage of the Bush imperium has been the most just cause for rebellion since the Wilson tyranny during and after World War I. Add to this ethical dimension the present prospect of war with Iran, and as I write this possibly with Turkey as well, with a ruling class finally awakened to the madness of the war party with its finger on the button and yet unable to stop it, but with a military which just might be compelled to intervene politically to save itself from the slaughter Bush, Cheney, Lieberman, and Podhoretz have planned for it. This, very simply, is a revolutionary situation, and the Ron Paul Revolution is a response to it.

I first became aware that something was actually happening when I attended the Future of Freedom Foundation conference early in June, and listened to Lew Rockwell discuss the incredible opportunity that now faces us. The pandemonium which followed when Ron Paul himself came to the conference was as great as it was predictableit was this speech, which became popular on YouTube, which was followed by Andrew Napolitanos fiery oratory in which he declared Paul to be the Thomas Jefferson of our day. I left this event with a very cynical analysis which nonetheless remains aptnamely that most Americans oppose just about everything for which the larger libertarian movement, except for its opposition to the Iraq war. So just as Lenin was wrong about everything but the one issue which could rally the people to him, the war, so I figured it just might be with Ron Pauls libertarian cadre.

OK, I thought, but I was with the choir when I first came to hear Ron Paul preach. Just because he became the toast of a surprising collection of talking heads after he stood his ground, Gandhian in his simple forcefulness, against the embodiment of police/state brutality, this did not a movement make. But boy, did turn out to be wrong! Less than two weeks later, I tried to attend Ron Pauls appearance on The Colbert Report, but was unable to get in at the very front of the standby line. Instead, I was treated for my efforts by an enormous ballyhoo outside The Report, where I met the Ron Paul grassroots. It was wonderful to be at an old-fashioned radical right-wing hootenanny like I had not seen since I was a teenager. Disillusioned capital-L Libertarians, Birchers, disillusioned College Democrats, conspiracy nuts, and just plain folks from the great unwasheda delightful group! Also notable for its diversity by PC standards, this group charged into Times Square after Ron Paul left The Colbert Report, chanting at the top of their lungs, with placards flailing wildly like lefties. It was glorious, and it was only the beginning.

From just that occasion, I left feeling that the Ron Paul Revolution was proving itself to be the fulfilment of an historical analogy whose possibility I had been anticipating for some years. In the first decade of the 20th century, many and varied radical movements were prospering in Russia, but were driven underground by Russias entry into the First World War, only to massively rise up from the ashes once the mustard gas hit the fan. Likewise, there were many and varied populist and patriot movements flourishing in the 90s, only to be driven underground by 9/11 and the Iraq War. I have long wondered if they also might arise, once the army found itself inevitably broken in Iraq. So what, then, was the political opening which made way for this revolution? Well recall that, late last spring, Ron Pauls stand against Giuliani at Champaran occurred within days of the first and foremost capitulation of Nancy Pelosi and the other Democratic leaders in Congress on the Bush war budget.

But something more fundamental, and intimately related, had happened as well. The leftist antiwar movement, such as it was, came as close as any movement or organization in the history of the American left, or for that matter, in politics generally, to abject surrender. This occurred directly in response to the Pelosi capitulation, at which time it became clear that the major umbrella group, United for Peace and Justice, was serving completely at the behest of the Democrats. Furthermore, and most damningly of all, this occurred largely with the takeover of the organization by the Communist Party USA, guided by the lunatic delusions of the Popular Front stratagem with its demands for rival priorities (hence the cloying insistence on Peace and Justice) all dictated by ultimate fealty to the Democratic Party. There could not have been a more a stunning monument to the failures of the past than the takeover of a seemingly genuine antiwar movement by the cult, many generations ossified, which was largely responsible for pushing American entry into the Second World War and thus ushering in the epoch of perpetual war.

In response to Pelosis surrender, the venerable Alexander Cockburn dedicated a whole issue of his Counterpunch newsletter to what he frankly entitled the failure of the antiwar movement. It was only natural in the wake of this betrayal that the masses in their frustration over this no-win war to end all no-win wars should turn to the first person they should then see speaking truth to powewhich just happened to be, by the everlasting grace of God, Ron Paul. For indeed, if the Ron Paul Revolution achieves nothing else, it will accomplish the complete remaking and realignment of the spectrum of American radical politicsin other words, the death of the left, accompanied by the complete discrediting and repudiation of Beltway libertarianism, a partisan of which actually had the unmitigated chutzpah to ask when the Revolution was first getting off the ground, Will libertarianism survive Ron Paul? If by libertarianism he meant the varied strands of apologists for the empire calling themselves libertarians Randroidism, liberventionism, Catoism, and the utterly appalling and affronting redefinition of libertarianism as pro-war liberalism by Dennis Miller and the creators of South Park, then we can now joyfully answer a resounding no!

The profound ramifications for the future of American radicalism leave, however, one section of the political spectrum deeply impacted by the Ron Paul Revolution unaccounted for, and that is, the conservative movementspecifically the element which has come to be represented by its younger members generally and YAF today in particular. By August, I had caught on C-SPAN a YAF convention in which I was struck to find the attendees overwhelmingly disillusioned by Bush and his war, with this sentiment encouraged by the speaker, Bob Novak, who with the release of his memoirs around that time had freed the same instincts in himself (though it remains baffling how one who speaks of his political awakening coming from reading Witness could remain unapologetic for his unwitting service as a lackey for the Alger Hiss of our day, Scooter Libby). Novak and his audience, in their give and take, had only kind things to say about Ron Paul, suggesting that at least some nominally principled conservatives might want to get behind him.

Now, when it comes to the conservative movement, I continue to echo John McLaughlin. When Crossfires guests were offering their New Years Resolutions for 2004, Pat Buchanan announced his resolve to write the book which became Where The Right Went Wrong. McLaughlin, in his delightful way, scolded Buchanan: The conservative movement! Youre still riding that old horse Pat?!! This sentiment was only confirmed for me late in August when I attended the disappointing proceedings of the Robert Taft Club. Richard Viguerie was entertaining if nothing else, Terry Jeffery of Human Events was surprisingly sensible until he invoked the Supreme Court bugaboo with respect to Hillary, an equally annoying practice by both the left and right/ I later had the tactile pleasure of admonishing Jeffery to his face that, contrary to his opening remarks, FDR was not a socialist, he was a fascist.

Paul Gottfried and Jim Antle were more sober about the future of the right, if at the same time they kept playing to the prejudices of this crowd, which consisted mostly of aspiring young men and women of the emerging Beltway right. My worst suspicions about this crowd were confirmed when I later learned that the one person in the crowd who was unqualified in touting Ron Paul and the now much confirmed potential of his campaign was the communications director of the National Right To Work Committee. My more recent observations of scenes from the Ron Paul Revolution, as it has totally come into its own on the heels of the stunning third quarter fundraising, have more than assured me that this curious species of post-Bush YAFism has, at best, a minor supporting role in Ron Pauls coalition, but it is nevertheless a significant phenomenon which must be addressed.

My observations of the present YAF and related conservative movement crowd from early on reminded me a great deal of the analogous phenomenon on the left, as liberalism declined and fell in the 70s and 80s the Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee (DSOC) of Michael Harrington. This group was most notable for essentially reuniting the old and new left in the wake of McCarthy and McGovernsomething which, incidentally, I feel can go far in explaining liberal/Vietnam generation assent to the Iraq War. Murray Rothbard very aptly labeled this collection of battle-scarred, mostly young McGovernites ready to take on Washington the new Browderism, referring to the Popular Front era American Communist leader Earl Browder, known for such slogans as Communism is 20th Century Americanism! Likewise it follows that these bright young things who roundly reject neo-conservatism and are now enthusiastically boring from within the conservative policy apparatus are practicing an equally foolhardy Browderism of the right. Significantly, Rothbards naming of the new Browderism came in a column in which he juxtaposed it with the newly ascendant new right in the late 70s to forecast the then-bleak future of American politics.

The bottom line in all this inside-baseball analysis of factions is that, in the end, while I am certainly optimistic about the potential of the Ron Paul Revolution, it simply can not and will not have a lasting impact on the Republican Party. This was more or less made clear to me around the same time I was closely observing the Browderism of the right with Ron Pauls relatively poor showing in the Ames Straw Poll. That Paul came in behind Nuke Mecca Tancredo is as solid an indicator as any that, at the end of the day, the Republican Party remains the War Party, Tancredos later descent into obscurity notwithstanding. And the rise of Mike Huckabee, much as it may be little more than a convenient invention of the media, is not insignificant. Even as Ron Paul shall surely be vindicated, the future of the Republican Party, if indeed it even has one, is with the left-turning Christian right which at least has the potential to adapt to America after the fall. I personally, however, foresee the Republicans literally committing suicide in 2012 running David Petraeus on a stabbed-in-the-back platform, to be succeeded in 2016 by the rise of the Spitzer-Huckabee party.

So even with setbacks like the Ames Straw Poll, the Ron Paul Revolution just kept on walking, kept on talking, marching on to freedom land. All the way, indeed, to its breathtaking and historic $5 million raised in the third quarter of 2007. Which finally brings us to October, when I attended the Mises Institute 25th Anniversary festivities in New York, the events of which disabused me of any doubt that we are indeed entering a revolutionary situation. The question which had been most pressing on my mind in the weeks and months leading up to the Mises conference was whether or not the youthful masses were being educated and having their consciousness raised by the larger foundations on which the Ron Paul Revolution stood. The answer, as ever since this Revolution began, was a resounding yes. I was stunned to see meet at this conference roughly 200 my own age and younger, many of whom I had seen before at random Ron Paul events in New York. It was also moving to see at the event a close friend of mine, a senior in high school who is probably in the top five leading the Ron Paul Revolution in the Big Apple. All in all, this was a generational moment. It dispelled any doubt Id had that this youth movement was easily the equal of Gene McCarthys.

The most surreal and breathtaking event of the weekend was going from the conference to a party being held at the then-still under construction Ron Paul HQ in New York, arriving in the middle of an impromptu appearance by Paul himself, in which he was addressing a large and tightly packed throng of mostly young people, again diverse by PC standards, with great uproar and chanting by the crowd with fists raised. In this darkened room in the Meatpacking District, I could not help but have come to mind that most vivid cinematic depiction of the romance of the Russian Revolution, the scene in the film Reds when John Reed is addressing a crowded factory at midnight debating whether to strike. This is an entirely new and novel phenomenon which not even most old fighters of the right, to say nothing of the mainstream media and establishment, has at all come to terms with if it has even grasped it at alla radical youth movement which in rallying behind a man and a platform which, while ostensibly libertarian, has more in common with the John Birch Society than with most self-identified libertarians. Could this have ever been imagined in the case of Pat Buchanan, or reaching further back in history, for that matter, of John Schmitz?

I was motivated, in part, to write these observations after reading in this journal the 1053rd rant by Paul Gottfried about how the left needs the neocons, finally taking the cake when he called John Mearsheimer a man of the left. (For the record, a very good mutual friend of both Mearsheimer and myself tells me he is quite certain Mearsheimer voted straight Republican until 2004). Specifically here, I sense that much of the failure to appreciate just what is happening out there is symptomatic of the enduring power of old grudges and old wounds. When Norah ODonnell bitterly called Ron Paul an isolationist, she was not trying to summon the ghost of Max Lerner; indeed, she probably spoke out of total ignorance of the words history, and her magnanimity on the matter when she interviewed Paul later would have been unimaginable just a few years ago. No doubt, it drives the neocons absolutely mad that the media today have not memorized Daniel Bells The Radical Right, nor do I doubt that they will very soon have some choice words to that effect. You know that Commentary, when it deigns to speak about Ron Paul, will serve up a genunine whopper!

If I should come across here as perhaps a bit too optimistic about the media and the culture, this goes to the heart of the matter of why I speak with such gusto about the Ron Paul Revolution. Whatever Ron Paul may or may not achieve in politicsmy own Burkean hope has always been that he will play the same role in this election as Norman Thomas in 1932, that is, to run on the platform closer to what would actually transpire in the next administration than the Democratic platform in each respective campaignthe true revolution that is occurring is in popular consciousness if not more broadly in culture. This is what was so stunning about what I myself witnessed in the way of raised consciousness among the Ron Paul Revolutionaries at the Mises conference, along with such instances as 2,500 Michigan students chanting at Ron Pauls prompting for the gold standard, and many such instances since and many more to come. Imagine in the wake of the 2008 election if just one in five of the number now rallying for Ron Paul go out in protest actions against the Lincoln bicentennial. Even as I write this, we are approaching the 5th of November, when the most ambitious fundraising drive for Ron Paul yet is being held on a day to honor the martyrdom of a Catholic monarchist. Who would have ever dreamed?

I write not only in approach of Guy Fawkes Day, but, just two days later, the 90th anniversary of the Russian Revolution. We do well, first, to consider just how analogous our situation has become. All too akin to the surge were several key events of the latter half of World War I the Russian spring offensive against the Austrians in 1916 which won important tactical victories but broke the army and led directly to the revolution, the simultaneous French pushback against the Germans which staved off looming defeat but led directly to the 1917 mutiny, and the German last rally of early 1918 which led directly to defeat, the Spartacist uprising, and ultimately, the Nazis. It is already a great irony that this anniversary is being marked by a pivotal and treacherous moment for the neo-conservatives, which history shall surely record as Trotskys greatest legacy (instead of his relatively petty dissent from Stalin). But the supreme irony would be if the most successful Leninists in history (yes, more than Lenin himselfif only the neocons had had to face down the White Army and the Kronstadt Sailors) were brought down by the very chain of events which led to the Bolshevik Revolution in the first place. For the record, I am not predicting that Ron Paul will lead a pitchfork wielding mob on the White House. But if Hillary is president and insists on continuing the war a la Kerensky, anything is possible.

You say you want a revolution, well, ya know . . . .

Image courtesy of the Web store where the shirt is on sale.

Pay to Play - Put your money where your mouth is and subscribe for an ad-free experience and to join the world famous Takimag comment board.

Read the rest here:

The Ron Paul Revolution - Taki's Magazine - takimag.com

Ron Paul first entered congress because of the removal of the gold standard.

That was his driving motivation for entering politics, to help stop the monetary destruction we were to face.

During multiple stints in congress amid his personal obgyn practice, Ron has fought HARD for the Auditing of the Federal Reserve.

The Federal Reserve has NEVER been audited completely. While some small audits take place, the very things we need to know have been kept as "inauditable".

Ron Paul has introduced audit the fed bills and even with overwhelming congressional support, they have been magically stuck in subcommittees until they disappear.

Well today, is VICTORY.

No longer is it stuck in committee. Paul's entire congressional career goal, to audit the monster that ruins our money, the Fed, has been completed as a congressman in the House of Representatives.

And not only was it a victory, it was a LANDSLIDE!

327-98

Naturally, all the MSM sites I had checked (wsj, nbc news, etc.) had nothing of this massive career victory.

It is up to us to reassert ourselves, Rep. Paul said during a House debate on Tuesday.

The legislation requires the Government Accountability Office to carry out comprehensive audits of the bank. It passed easily but faces an uncertain future in the Senate.

We should have privacy for the individual, but we should have openness of government all the time. Weve drifted a long way from that, Rep. Paul said Tuesday.

I think when people talk about independence and having this privacy of the central bank, it means they want secrecy, he added.

Opposition to the bill came mostly from Democrats.

It seems to me what were talking about is taking some fake punches at the Federal Reserve but not doing anything serious, said Rep. Barney Frank.

The three-time presidential candidate Paul, who is retiring at end of this session, has made a career of trying to do away with the Fed, which he blames for the government growth. Failing to accomplish that, he has pushed to make the independent central banks operations more transparent.

The Fed is already subject to annual audits, but Pauls bill goes further in requiring inspections of the banks monetary policy decision-making. And although Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke has opposed the legislation, that didnt stop it from being passed 327 to 98.

The bill will now be sent to the Senate where it falls into the hands of Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV).

Oh, it might be interesting to note that all but one Republican voted for the bill. The one who felt Rep. Pauls bill wasnt worth his vote was Rep. Bob Turner of New York.

Click to expand...

RON PAUL! :rockon:

Continued here:

Ron Paul's LANDSLIDE VICTORY! (327-98) | SVTPerformance.com

Donald Trump campaigned with a promise to put America first and to stay out of foreign conflicts. As president, Trump has followed the same interventionist policies that failed his predecessors, says former Congressman Ron Paul.

Rather than back out of the meeting, Paul wrote on Monday, Trump should have used the opportunity to declare that the US is not the policeman of the world, and that what flag flies over Crimea is none of our business.

Read more

Instead of being the president who ships lethal weapons to the Ukrainian regime, instead of being the president who insists that Crimea remain in Ukraine, instead of being the president who continues policies the American people clearly rejected at the ballot box, Trump could have blamed the Ukraine/Russia mess on the failed Obama foreign policy and charted a very different course, Paul wrote.

Crimeas majority-Russian residents voted to rejoin Russia in 2014, rather than side with the US-supported pro-Western regime in Kiev. Trumps messaging on Crimea has been inconsistent since. Before incurring the wrath of the media in June by reportedly telling world leaders that Crimea is Russian because everyone who lives there speaks Russian, Trump agreed to sell Javelin anti-tank missiles to Poroshenkos anti-Russian government.

READ MORE:Are we the baddies? Al Qaeda team plays on the same side as the US in Yemen (VIDEO)

In a press conference after last months midterm elections, Trump castigated his predecessor Barack Obama for allowing a very large part of Ukraine to be taken on his watch, not blaming Russia but not contradicting State Secretary Mike Pompeos referral to Crimea in June as under Russian occupation.

Torn between the demands of the American electorate and the influence of foreign policy experts in Washington, Trump seems to have been listening to the latter in recent months, Paul wrote.

READ MORE:Life in fear: Report says 1 in 3 US drone-strike deaths in Yemen are civilians, including children

On the campaign trail, Trump had slammed President George W. Bushs $1.9 trillion wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and promised to stay out of Syria. Since taking office, however, he signed off on multiple cruise missile strikes against Syria, continues to arm anti-government rebels there many of whom have links to Al-Qaedaand continues to hit all three countries with airstrikes, some of them deadly to civilians.

Trump responded to the tragic news of three US soldiers losing their lives to a roadside bomb in Afghanistan last week with a pledge to continue fighting the longest war in US history, because, Paul said, he listened to neoconservative experts.

Virtually every expert that I have and speak to say if we dont go there, theyre going to be fighting over here, Trump said after the fatal attack. And Ive heard it over and over again.

READ MORE:Atlantic Council fellow says US should send ships to Azov Sea (illegally) after Kerch standoff

That is the same bunkum the neocons sold us as they lied us into Iraq! countered Paul, before offering some advice to the president.

Listen to the people who elected you, who are tired of the US as the worlds police force. Let Ukraine and Russia work out their own problems. Give all your experts a pink slip and start over with a real pro-American foreign policy: non-interventionism, the former congressman from Texas wrote.

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

View original post here:

Ron Paul: Foreign interventionism isnt the America First ...

The July 1992Ron Paul Political Reportdeclares, Jury verdicts, basketball games, and even music are enough to set off black rage, it seems, and defends David Duke. The author of the newsletterpresumably Paulwrites, My youngest son is starting his fourth year in medical school. He tells me there would be no way to persuade his fellow students of the case for economic liberty.

A March 1993Survival Reportdescribes Bill Clintons supposedly illegitimate children, black and white: woods colts in backwoods slang.

Gays

The December 1989Ron Paul Political Reportcontains entries on a new form of racial terrorism, cites former Congressman Bill Dannemeyers claim that the average homosexual has 1,000 or more partners in a lifetime, and quotes Lew Rockwell, president of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, in the third person.

In January 1990, theRon Paul Political Reportcites a well-known libertarian editor who told me: The ACT-UP slogan on stickers plastered all over Manhattan is Silence=Death. But shouldnt it beSodomy= Death?

The September 1994 issue of theRon Paul Survival Reportstates that those who dont commit sodomy, who dont get blood a transfusion, and who dont swap needles, are virtually assured of not getting AIDS unless they are deliberately infected by a malicious gay.

The June 1990 issue of thePolitical Reportsays: I miss the closet. Homosexuals, not to speak of the rest of society, were far better off when social pressure forced them to hide their activities.

A January 1994 edition of theSurvival Reportstates that "gays in San Francisco do not obey the dictates of good sense," adding: "[T]hese men don't really see a reason to live past their fifties. They are not married, they have no children, and their lives are centered on new sexual partners." Also, "they enjoy the attention and pity that comes with being sick."

Survivalism and Militias

The January 1995 issue of theSurvival Reportreleased just three months before the Oklahoma City bombingcites an anti-government militias advice to other militias, including, Dont fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war, let it begin here.

The October 1992 issue of thePoliticalReportparaphrases an ex-cop who offers this strategy for protecting against urban youth:If you have to use a gun on a youth, you should leave the scene immediately, disposing of the wiped off gun as soon as possible. Such a gun cannot, of course, be registered to you, but one bought privately (through the classifieds, for example).

Conspiracies

This 1978 newslettersays the Trilateral Commission is no longer known only by those who are knowledgeable about international conspiracies, but is routinely mentioned in the daily news.

Middle East

A 1989 newslettercompares Salman Rushdie to Ernst Zundel, a Canadian Holocaust-denier.

Anti-Government Paranoia/Conspiracy Theories/Survivalism

A fundraising letter from Pauls 1984 Senate campaign in which Paul complains about the minions of Kissinger and Rockefeller and the big New York banks, and their pals in Texas who want me silenced.

The January 1988Ron Paul Political Reportapprovingly cites Dr. William C. Douglass, who believes that AIDS is a deliberately engineered hybrid developed at a World Health Organization experiment conducted at Ft. Detrick. Douglass has long been a fringe medical guru, and today claims that smoking can help you live longer!!!

The November 1989Ron Paul Political Reportreports on the Bohemian Grove and Ronald Reagans old Trilateralist agenda item of four-year terms for Congressmen.

This 1993Ron Paul Strategy Guideentitled, How to Protect Yourself from Urban Violence, is a special supplement to theRon Paul Survival Report.In the April 1993Ron Paul Survival Report, the authorwriting in the first personstates, Whether [the 1993 World Trade Center bombing] was a setup by the Israeli Mossad, as a Jewish friend of mine suspects, or was truly a retaliation by the Islamic fundamentalists, matters little. The newsletters also warns readers to do your very best to keep your family away from inner cities. If you cant, have a haven remote from the metropolitan areas.

The May 1995 issue of theRon Paul Survival Reportwarns of The Trilateralist Alan Greenspan and its author writes, Now that my five children are grown and educated, Ive listened to the many supporters whove urged me to return to office. I can now give up my medical practice, and dedicate every fiber of my being to saving our country. The newsletter also contains an advertisement for the Ron Paul congressional exploratory committee.

The September 1995 issue of theRon Paul Survival Reportasks about Black Helicopters?

The June 1996 issue of theRon Paul Survival Reportrefers to Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms officers as Jackbooted Thugs.

Jews

The November 1992Ron Paul Survival Reportdefends chess champion and Holocaust-denier Bobby Fischer, saying that the brilliant Fischer, who has all the makings of an American hero, isverypolitically incorrect on Jewish questions, for which he will never be forgiven, even though he is a Jew. Thus we are not supposed to herald him as the worlds greatest chess player.

Pat Buchanan

In January 1992, Paul writes about his consideration of a presidential bid which he dashed after Pat Buchanan expressed his intention to run. Paul wrote of the essential compatibility between [Buchanans] ideas and mine and agreed to serve as the chairman of his economic advisory committee.

A 1992 issue of theRothbard-Rockwell-Reporttells of Pauls decision to defer to Pat Buchanan in the 1992 Republican presidential primary.

Newsletter Authorship

The masthead ofMarch 1987Ron Paul Investment Letterlists the Hon. Ron Paul as Editor and Publisher and Llewellyn H. Rockwell Jr. as one of several contributing editors.

An undated personalsolicitation lettersigned by Paulasking the recipient to subscribe to his newsletter in anticipation of (presumably) the 1988 Libertarian Party Presidential nominating convention.

The April 1988Ron Paul Investment Letterlists Paul as Editor.

The May 1988Ron Paul Investment Letterlists Lew Rockwell as Editor. It also advertises books by the far-right conspiracy theorist Gary Allen, who was a contributing editor to theRon Paul Investment Letter.

Read more:

TNR Exclusive: A Collection of Ron Pauls Most Incendiary ...

Photo: Chip Somodevilla (Getty)

Are you one of the people who forgot that Ron Paul ever existed? Well, he popped up on Monday to remind the world that he is both still around and still quite racist.

Lets go ahead and zoom in on that, shall we?

Enhance...

Hmmmmmmmmm?

More than two hours after sharing his thoughts on cultural marxism Paul pulled down the extraordinarily offensive tweet, and swapped it out for something a little more benign.

Got that folks? No political correctness here!!!! If you want less racism and anti-Semitism in your life, KEEP MOVING.

I have reached out to both the Ron Paul Institute, and Pauls son, Senator Rand Paul, for their insight into this tweet, and will update this story with their responses.

Update, 3:43 p.m.: Paul has followed up on his tweet, explaining that hes not an anti-Semitic racistsomeone on his staff is.

See the article here:

Ron Paul Tweets Racist, Anti-Semitic Cartoon

Ron Paul believes the bond trading pits are giving investors a dire message about the state of the nation's economy.

According to the former Republican congressman from Texas, the recent jump in Treasury bond yields suggest the U.S. is barreling toward a potential recession and market meltdown at a faster and faster pace.

And, he sees no way to prevent it.

"We're getting awfully close. I'd be surprised if you don't have everybody agreeing with what I'm saying next year some time," he said Thursday on CNBC's "Futures Now."

His remarks came as the benchmark 10-Year Treasury yield, which moves inversely to its price, rallied to seven year highs, intensifying fears over rising inflation. It may be beneficial for personal savings accounts, but it could deliver irrevocable damage to those in adjustable mortgages, or for auto buyers looking to finance a new vehicle.

"It can be pretty well validated by looking at monetary history that when you inflate the currency, distort interest rates and live beyond your means and spend too much, there has to be an adjustment," he said. "We have the biggest bubble in the history of mankind."

Paul is a vocal libertarian known for an ardent grassroots fan base that propelled him to multiple presidential runs, as well as his grim warnings about the economy. Yet he has been warning investors for years that an epic drop of 50 percent or more will eventually hit the stock market. He predicted the February correction, but not in size and scope.

By spring, the correction was over, and the S&P 500 and Dow were hitting all-time highs again by August and September, respectively. The Dow registered its latest all-time high of 26,951.81 last Wednesday.

Paul acknowledges his prior calls for a downturn haven't come to fruition. Yet, he points out it's just a matter of time, based on the looseness of U.S. monetary policy since the 2008 financial crisis.

"I know it's going to happen," Paul said. "It will come, and the bubble is bigger than ever before."

View post:

Ron Paul: US is barreling towards a 50% or more stock ...

This column was written by Michael Crowley.A star had just been born when, a day after the May 15 Republican presidential debate in South Carolina, I met Texas Representative Ron Paul for lunch on Capitol Hill. The meeting had been scheduled for several days; but, as luck would have it, the previous night Paul had gone from an oddball obscurity to a major sensation in the political world when, answering a question about September 11, he seemed to suggest that the attacks were justified by an aggressive U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. "They attack us because we've been over there. We've been bombing Iraq for ten years," Paul explained. The ever-macho Rudy Giuliani was quick to pounce. "That's an extraordinary statement," he marveled. "And I would ask the congressman to withdraw that comment and tell us that he didn't really mean that." The crowd roared its approval. A previously flagging Giuliani suddenly enjoyed his best moment of the race.

But it was also, oddly enough, Paul's best moment. The response to his comments was fast and furious: Angry Republicans, including the party chairman in Michigan, former Senate candidate Michael Steele, and unnamed South Carolina sources cited on Fox News, called for his exclusion from future debates. Sean Hannity couldn't wait to bully Paul in a post-debate interview. John McCain even added a line to his stump speech bashing him. But the outrage was instructive: Suddenly, Republicans were taking seriously a quirky 71-year-old Texas libertarian whose national support has hovered in the zero-percent range.

Nor was the attention all negative. Far from it. Paul won several instant polls on the debate, including one at the conservative Newsmax.com and a Fox News text-message poll. Incredibly, Paul's name began beating out "Paris Hilton" as the number-one query on the popular blog-searching website Technorati. (Granted, it's possible that Paul's fervent supporters are manipulating such online metrics.) The incident prompted a feisty exchange among the ladies of ABC's "The View," of all places. And, to top it off, within a day of the debate, Paul's campaign had raised $100,000 about one-sixth of his entire haul for the first three months of 2007. Paul's spokesman says the campaign headquarters has been "inundated with phone calls" ever since 80 percent of them supportive.

When Paul ambled through the door of a cheap Mexican joint on Capitol Hill last Wednesday, he hardly looked like a freshly-minted celebrity. His slight frame, elfin face, and reserved persona suggest the doctor he used to be, not a politician. But Paul turned heads all the same. As he approached his table, a man seated nearby extended his hand with a broad smile and a hearty "congratulations." Paul explained that he had received a similar reception among his colleagues in the House. "I've had probably ten people come up to me and compliment me including people I thought were war hawks," he said. "It was a tremendous boost to the campaign."

Who would have expected it? At its outset, Paul's campaign promised to be a curiosity. The nominee of the Libertarian Party in his previous run for the presidency (in 1988), Paul seemed likely to play a predictable gadfly role using his stage time to press hoary libertarian bugaboos like the abolition of Social Security, the legalization of drugs and prostitution, and Paul's special obsession a return to the gold standard. Instead, thanks mainly to his adamant opposition to the Iraq war, he has assumed a far more serious role. In a Republican field that has marched in lockstep with George W. Bush on the war, Paul's libertarian isolationism has exposed an intraparty fissure over foreign policy that is far wider than has been acknowledged, encompassing not only disgruntled libertarians but some paleocons and social conservatives, as well as such GOP lions as William F. Buckley, George Will, and Bob Novak. As populist-isolationist Pat Buchanan wrote in an op-ed last week, Paul was "speaking intolerable truths. Understandably, Republicans do not want him back, telling the country how the party blundered into this misbegotten war."

Paul, for his part, thinks his view is commonsensical. "This is a very Republican position," he told me. "I just think the Republicans can't win unless they change their policy on Iraq."

Before Paul became an antiwar hero, his support consisted largely of libertarian activists people like Michael Badnarik, the Libertarian Party's 2004 presidential nominee. Badnarik refuses to get a driver's license (even though, he conceded to me, "I have my car operational") and warns against anyone who might try to force a smallpox or anthrax vaccination on him. ("You bring the syringe, I'll bring my .45, and we'll see who makes a bigger hole.") Badnarik recounts rallying support for Paul at a recent conference of the Free State Project, a group of libertarians who have relocated to New Hampshire in the hope of concentrating their power and more or less taking over the state government. "I asked how many people would drive without a license and not pay income taxes, and three-quarters raised their hands," Badnarik recalls. "I'm choking up. I've got my heart in my throat. And I said, 'We need to do something and Ron Paul's campaign is the shining star. We need to contribute the full two thousand dollars now. Tell all your friends.'"

More here:

Ron Paul, Rising Political Star - CBS News

Last week the United States, Mexico, and Canada agreed to replace the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) with a new United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). Sadly, instead of replacing NAFTAs managed trade with true free trade, the new USMCA expands governments control over trade.

For example, under the USMCAs rules of origin, at least 75 percent of a cars parts must be from the US, Canada, or Mexico in order to avoid tariffs. This is protectionism designed to raise prices of cars using materials from outside North America.

The USMCA also requires that 40 to 45 percent of an automobiles content be made by workers earning at least 16 dollars per hour. Like all government-set wages, this requirement will increase prices and decrease employment.

The USMCA also requires Mexico to pass legislation recognizing the right of collective bargaining. In other words, this so-called free trade agreement forces Mexico to import US-style compulsory unionism. If the Mexican legislature does not comply, the US and Canada will impose tariffs on Mexican goods.

The USMCA also requires the three countries to abide by the International Labour Organization (ILO) standards for worker rights. So, if, for example, the bureaucrats at the ILO declared that Right to Work laws violate international labor standards because they weaken collective bargaining and give Right to Work states an unfair advantage over compulsory unionism states and countries, the federal government may have to nullify all state Right to Work laws.

The USMCA also obligates the three countries to work together to improve air quality. This sounds harmless but could be used as a backdoor way to impose costly new regulations and taxes, such as a cap-and-trade scheme, on America.

This agreement also forbids the use of currency devaluation as a means of attempting to gain a competitive advantage in international trade. Enforcement of this provision will be difficult if not impossible, as no central bank will ever admit it is devaluing currency to obtain a competitive advantage in international trade. Of course, given that the very act of creating money lowers its value, the only way to stop central banks from devaluing currency is to put them out of business. Sadly, I dont think the drafters of the USMCA seek to restore free-market money.

The currency provision will likely be used to justify coordination of monetary policy between the Federal Reserve and the Mexican and Canadian central banks. This will lead to region-wide inflation and a global currency war as the US pressures Mexico and Canada to help the Fed counter other countries alleged currency manipulation and challenges to the dollars reserve currency status.

A true free trade deal would simply reduce or eliminate tariffs and other trade barriers. It would not dictate wages and labor standards, or require inter-governmental cooperation on environmental standards and monetary policy. A true free trade deal also would not, as the USMCA does, list acceptable names for types of cheeses.

Those of us who support real free trade must not let supporters of the USMCA get away with claiming the USMCA has anything to do with free trade. We must also fight the forces of protectionism that are threatening to start a destructive trade war. Also, we must work to stop the government from trying to control our economic activities through regulations, taxes, and (most importantly) control of the currency through central banking and legal tender laws.

Read more from the original source:

The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity : NAFTA 2.0 ...

Assad was supposed to be gone already. President Obama thought it would be just another regime change operation and perhaps Assad would end up like Saddam Hussein or Yanukovych. Or maybe even Gaddafi. But he was supposed to be gone. The US spent billions to get rid of him and even provided weapons and training to the kinds of radicals that attacked the United States on 9/11.

But with the help of his allies, Assad has nearly defeated this foreign-sponsored insurgency.

The US fought him every step of the way. Each time the Syrian military approached another occupied city or province, Washington and its obedient allies issued the usual warnings that Assad was not liberating territory but was actually seeking to kill more of his own people.

Remember Aleppo, where the US claimed Assad was planning mass slaughter once he regained control? As usual the neocons and the media were completely wrong. Even the UN has admitted that with Aleppo back in the hands of the Syrian government hundreds of thousands of Syrians have actually moved back. We are supposed to believe they willingly returned so that Assad could kill them?

The truth is Aleppo is being rebuilt. Christians celebrated Easter there this spring for the first time in years. There has been no slaughter once al-Qaeda and ISIS hold was broken. Believe me, if there was a slaughter we would have heard about it in the media!

So now, with the Syrian military and its allies prepare to liberate the final Syrian province of Idlib, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo again warns the Syrian government against re-taking its own territory. He Tweeted on Friday that: The three million Syrians, who have already been forced out of their homes and are now in Idlib, will suffer from this aggression. Not good. The world is watching.

President Trumps National Security Advisor, John Bolton, has also warned the Syrian government that the US will attack if it uses gas in Idlib. Of course, that warning serves as an open invitation to rebels currently holding Idlib to set off another false flag and enjoy US air support.

Bolton and Pompeo are painting Idlib as a peaceful province resisting the violence of an Assad who they claim just enjoys killing his own people. But who controls Idlib province? President Trumps own Special Envoy for the Global Coalition to Counter ISIS, Brett McGurk, said in Washington just last year that, Idlib province is the largest al-Qaeda safe-haven since 9/11, tied to directly to Ayman al Zawahiri, this is a huge problem.

Could someone please remind Pompeo and Bolton that al-Qaeda are the bad guys?

After six years of a foreign-backed regime-change operation in Syria, where hundreds of thousands have been killed and the country nearly fell into the hands of ISIS and al-Qaeda, the Syrian government is on the verge of victory. Assad is hardly a saint, but does anyone really think al-Qaeda and ISIS are preferable? After all, how many Syrians fled the country when Assad was in charge versus when the US-backed rebels started taking over?

Americans should be outraged that Pompeo and Bolton are defending al-Qaeda in Idlib. Its time for the neocons to admit they lost. It is time to give Syria back to the Syrians. It is time to pull the US troops from Syria. It is time to just leave Syria alone!

Excerpt from:

The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity : Cant We ...

Authored by Ron Paul via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity,

The term deep state has been so over-used in the past few years that it may seem meaningless. It has become standard practice to label ones political adversaries as representing the deep state as a way of avoiding the defense of ones positions. President Trump has often blamed the deep state for his political troubles. Trump supporters have created big conspiracies involving the deep state to explain why the president places neocons in key positions or fails to fulfill his campaign promises.

But the deep state is no vast and secret conspiracy theory. The deep state is real, it operates out in the open, and it is far from monolithic. The deep state is simply the permanent, unelected government that continues to expand its power regardless of how Americans vote.

There are factions of the deep state that are pleased with President Trumps policies, and in fact we might say that President Trump represents some factions of the deep state.

Other factions of the deep state are determined to undermine any of President Trumps actions they perceive as threatening. Any move toward peace with Russia is surely something they feel to be threatening. There are hundreds of billions of reasons otherwise known as dollars why the Beltway military-industrial complex is terrified of peace breaking out with Russia and will do whatever it takes to prevent that from happening.

That is why Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosensteins indictment on Friday of 12 Russian military intelligence officers for allegedly interfering in the 2016 US presidential election should immediately raise some very serious questions.

First the obvious: after more than a year of investigations which have publicly revealed zero collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, why drop this bombshell of an allegation at the end of the news cycle on the last business day before the historic Trump/Putin meeting in Helsinki? The indictment could not have been announced a month ago or in two weeks? Is it not suspicious that now no one is talking about reducing tensions with Russia but is all of a sudden thanks to Special Counsel Robert Mueller talking about increasing tensions?

Unfortunately most Americans don't seem to understand that indictments are not evidence. In fact they are often evidence-free, as is this indictment.

Did the Russian government seek to interfere in the 2016 US presidential elections? Its certainly possible, however we dont know. None of the Justice Departments assertions have been tested in a court of law, as is thankfully required by our legal system. It is not enough to make an allegation, as Mueller has done. You have to prove it.

That is why we should be very suspicious of these new indictments. Mueller knows he will never have to defend his assertions in a court of law so he can make any allegation he wants.

It is interesting that one of the Russian companies indicted by Mueller earlier this year surprised the world by actually entering a not guilty plea and demanding to see Muellers evidence. The Special Counsel proceeded to file several motions to delay the hand-over of his evidence. What does Mueller have to hide?

Meanwhile, why is no one talking about the estimated 100 elections the US government has meddled in since World War II? Maybe we need to get our own house in order?

Follow this link:

Ron Paul: The Mueller Indictments & The Triumph Of The Deep ...

You can always count on the neocons in Congress to ignore reality, ignore evidence, and ignore common sense in their endless drive to get us involved in another war. Last week, for example, Senators John McCain (R-AZ), Lindsey Graham (R-NC), Bob Menendez (D-NJ), and others joined up to introduce what Senator Graham called the sanctions bill from hell, aimed at applying crushing sanctions on Russia.

Senator Graham bragged that the bill would include everything but the kitchen sink in its attempt to ratchet up tensions with Russia.

Sen Cory Gardner (R-CO) bragged that the new sanctions bill includes my language requiring the State Department to determine whether Russia merits the designation of a State Sponsor of Terror.

Does he even know what the word terrorism means?

Sen Ben Cardin (D-MD) warns that the bill must be passed to strengthen our resolve against Vladimir Putins pattern of corroding democratic institutions and values around the world, a direct and growing threat to US national security.

What has Russia done that warrants kitchen sink sanctions that will crush the country and possibly designate it as a sponsor of terrorism? Sen. Menendez tells us: The Kremlin continues to attack our democracy, support a war criminal in Syria, and violate Ukraines sovereignty.

There is a big problem with these accusations on Russia: theyre based on outright lies and unproven accusations that continue to get more bizarre with each re-telling. How strange that when US Senators like Menendez demand that we stand by our NATO allies even if it means war, they attack Russia for doing the same in Syria. Is the Syrian president a war criminal, as he claims? We do know that his army is finally, with Russian and Iranian help, about to defeat ISIS and al-Qaeda, which with US backing for seven years have turned Syria into a smoking ruin. Does Menendez and his allies prefer ISIS in charge of Syria?

And how hypocritical for Menendez to talk about Russia violating Ukraines sovereignty. The unrest in Ukraine was started by the 2014 US-backed coup against an elected leader. We have that all on tape!

How is Russia attacking our democracy? Were still waiting for any real evidence that Russia was involved in our 2016 elections and intends to become involved in our 2018 elections. But that doesnt stop the propagandists, who claim with no proof that Russia was behind the election of Donald Trump.

These Senators claim that sanctions will bring the Russians to heel, but they are wrong. Sanctions are good at two things only: destroying the lives of innocent civilians and leading to war.

As I mentioned in an episode of my Liberty Report last week, even our own history shows that sanctions do lead to war and should not be taken lightly. In the run-up to US involvement in the War of 1812, the US was doing business with both France and the UK, which were at war with each other. When the UK decided that the US was favoring France in its commerce, it imposed sanctions on the US. What did Washington do in response? Declared war. Hence the War of 1812, which most Americans remember as that time when the British burned down the White House.

Recent polls show that the majority of Americans approve of President Trumps recent meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Among Republicans, a vast majority support the meeting. Perhaps a good defeat in November will wake these neocon warmongers up. Lets hope so!

Visit link:

The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity : Neocons ...

2:50 AM 07/26/2018

Kyle Perisic | Contributor

A Wikipedia editor placed one of the most influential libertarian Republicans on a list of American White Supremacists for three weeksbefore it was removed Wednesday.

An editor placed former Texas Rep. Ron Paul on the list of American white supremacists alongside some of the most notorious American neo-Nazis in American history, including American Nazi Party founderGeorge Lincoln Rockwell and former Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard Don Black.

The Wikipedia edits were automatically accepted, according to the edit history on Pauls Wikipedia page. Many political figures require verification from another Wikipedia-approved editor to verify the accuracy of the edits.

Paul was added to the list on July 2, seemingly after his Twitter account which isnt run by him accidentally tweeted out a cartoon that was considered racist and anti-Semitic.

Earlier today a staff member inadvertently posted an offensive cartoon on my social media. I do not make my own social media posts and when I discovered the mistake it was immediately deleted, Paul wrote in a statementon Twitter that day.

The tweet was deleted and replaced with a picture of the words Political correctness along with theinternational prohibition sign.

The original tweet linked to a Facebook post deconstructing cultural Marxism, which many on the right agree is plaguing the country and especially college campuses.

GOP Rep. Steve King of Iowa was also included in the list of American white supremacists, according to a Wikipediaarchive.

Pauls inclusion on the list brings into question, once again, the merits of sites like Facebook, Google and YouTube utilizing an open-sourced platform as a primary source of information.(RELATED: Google Search Results Describe Justice Neil Gorsuch As A Lib Owner)

Wikipedia came under fire in late June for labeling the California Republican Partys ideology as Nazism. This subsequently led to Google search results listing Nazism as the California GOPs ideology in a sidebar widget that displays other further information.

Nazism was listed as the partys ideology for all of two minutes before it was removed and yet Vice News, which first reported the story, was able to screenshot that and run the story.

The Daily Caller News Foundation reached out to Wikipedia and Ron Paul for comment and will update this article if and when a response is given.

Follow Kyle on Twitter @KylePerisic

Send tips tokyle@dailycallernewsfoundation.org

More:

Wikipedia Listed Ron Paul On White Supremacists List For ...

According to financial writer Simon Black, the federal government is spending approximately 52,000 dollars per second. This, not last years tax cuts, is the reason why the national debt has reached a record 21 trillion dollars, which is more than Americas gross domestic product (GDP).

Another ominous sign is that this year both Social Security and Medicare will have to draw down on their reserve funds to be able to pay benefits. The Social Security and Medicare trust funds will both soon be bankrupt, putting additional strains on the federal budget and American taxpayers.

The excessive debt caused by excessive spending will inevitably cause a major economic crisis. Yet, with a few notable exceptions, there is little to no desire in Washington to cut spending. Instead, both parties are committed to increasing spending on warfare and welfare while ignoring the looming entitlements crisis.

Examples of fiscal irresponsibility on Capitol Hill are easy to find. For instance, even though the Untied Stares is currently spending more on its military than the combined budgets of the next seven highest spending countries, Congress recently increased military spending by 82 billion dollars. This brings the total the US spends on a futile effort to police and democratize the world to 716 billion dollars. The US House has also recently passed a farm bill that increases spending by more than 3 billion dollars over the next five years. This bill does not take a step toward ending subsidies to wealthy farmers and even continues providing farm subsidies to non-famers! Pressure on Congress to increase spending on farm subsidies is likely to increase as famers becomes collateral damage in President Trumps trade war.

Many progressives are attacking the House farm bill because it makes some reforms to the SNAP (food stamp) program, even though the House version of bill increases the budget for food stamps by at least 1.7 billion dollars over the next five years!

When the economic crisis hits, there will be no choice but to cut spending and raise taxes. Of course, Congress is unlikely to raise taxes or cut benefits. Instead, it will rely on the Federal Reserve to do the dirty work via the inflation tax. The inflation tax is the worst type of tax because it is both hidden and regressive.

One of the worst features, if not the worst, of the tax reform plan is increasing the inflation tax by authorizing the use of chained CPI. Chained CPI hides inflations effects by claiming that rising prices do not harm Americans as long as they can still afford low-cost substitute goods to replace products they can no longer afford due to the Federal Reserves devaluation of the currency as if people forced to buy hamburger instead of steak are not negatively impacted by inflation.

Increasing federal debt will also put pressure on the Federal Reserve to keep interest rates low to prevent federal interest payments on the debt from skyrocketing. Eventually, the Feds monetization of the debt will lead to hyperinflation and a rejection of the dollars world reserve currency status. The question is when, not whether, the welfare-warfare state and the fiat currency system will end. Hopefully, those who know the truth will succeed in growing the liberty movement so we can convince Congress to gradually unwind the welfare-warfare state, restore a true free market in money, and stop trying to run the world, run the economy, and run our lives.

See the rest here:

The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity : Spending ...

Ron Paul KNOWS the score:Madlad Ron Paul Tweets A. Wyatt Mann Cartoon Blasting Jew Cultural Marxism

You make sense as does this gentleman:Richard B June 30, 2018 at 8:53 pm Just because the other person is bad doesnt make you good. But, is the other person bad? Maybe, maybe not. Lets talk about it and find out, using all of the available intellectual and social resources at our disposal while exercising our rights to free speech and assembly in the process. Oh, wait, we cant do that. And whos responsible, the Puritans? Theyre long gone.

In any event, when a group is condemned as morally bankrupt and another set up as morally superior one has to consider the source. Judaism passing itself off as morally superior is laughable. Its literally a religion of projection. Its guilty of every accusation it hurls at Whites, ie; Ethno-Supremacy; Its bad to say Master Race but Ok to say Chosen People (and did the Germans really say they were the Master Race, or is that itself a projection?). Its exclusive, not inclusive, its racist and bullying (Palestine! Hello!).

The irony is that you cant imagine the Jewish people feeling guilt not because theyre innocent, but because of their Myth of Innocence, which actually says in effect, We never do anything wrong. Things are done to us. When you live like that you become incapable of learning, change, and growth. Essential qualities today for any people with the pretention of wanting to be global leaders (or, to put it more baldly, to rule the world).

Which is why, though theyre certainly good at shame, blame, denial, projection, infiltration and subversion, theyre no damn good at social-management. Just look at the places they rule over. The sun never sets on their dysfunction. Its literally everywhere. And theyre calling US morally bankrupt?!

Its this amazing lack of self-awareness (another important quality needed to lead anything today, let alone an entire civilization) and incredible inability to admit when theyre wrong, about anything, that keeps them from seeing those moments when in fact they are wrong, ie; Whites are capable of feeling guilt exactly because they HAVE a conscience which Jews and many other non-White groups simply lack, as if they all have a morality chip missing in their DNA. In short, having a conscience that the other groups in general and Jews in particular lack makes Whites morally superior, not inferior.

And if Jews arent morally superior but insist on saying they are, in spite of all the evidence to the contrary, then what are they? Well aside from being inauthentic and dishonest, it makes them Psychopaths, of course!

Any one individual or group walking around acting as if theyre morally superior when theyre actually criminal psychopaths are DANGEROUS!And this is why so many times throughout history theyve had to be stopped. And its happening again now ON A GLOBAL SCALE!

No ones saying Whites are perfect. Kevins article makes it clear just how imperfect they are, though theres certainly lots of other evidence. Evidence we know about because Whites Dont Hide Their Imperfections! They actually make it a matter of public discourse so they can learn, change, and grow!No, were not saying Whites are perfect. But we are saying that Jews are dangerous and not just to Whites. But Whites have to think about themselves. The West is a towering human acheivement and Whites have nothing to apologize for. Only a people poisoned by envy and a lust for power would suggest otherwise. And such a people cant be morally superior to anyone.

Sure, Whites have made mistakes and given the accidents of history, its understanable weve made them. But we are the ONLY people in the history of the world who believe in and practice the idea of a Developing Conscience. Whereas the many peoples judging us arent even aware that thats possible or, to the extent theyre aware, desirable.

Again, we have nothing to apologize for and everything to be proud of. Were going to see more and more Whites express their justifiable irritation, and not just irritation, at constantly being judged by a people who we all know will never judge themselves, thereby revealing their hypocrisy and moral inferiority. When this happens their worst nightmare is going to turn into a daymare as they realize that the usual accusations dont work anymore.

Visit link:

Ron Paul Exposes The Human Suffering Of "Cultural Marxism"

John Huff

Ron Paul reiterated Tuesday that he did not write a series of newsletters that appeared under his name in the 1980s and 1990s that included controversial comments about African-Americans, including a claim that "[o]rder was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks."

Asked by CBS News and National Journal if the newsletters are fair game on Tuesday in New Hampshire, Paul responded, "I don't know whether fair is the right word."

"I mean, it's politics," he continued. "Nobody talked about it for 20 years until they found out that the message of liberty was making progress. And everybody knows I didn't write them, and it's not my sentiment, so it's sort of politics as usual."

Writing in The New Republic in 2008, reporter James Kirchick revealed some particularly incendiary passages from the monthly newsletters, which carried names like "Ron Paul's Freedom Report" and the "Ron Paul Political Report." Many of the newsletters, which were mostly written in the first person and usually didn't otherwise carry a byline, were reportedly being held in collections of extreme-right political literature.

The newsletters included a criticism of Ronald Reagan for legislation creating a federal holiday in honor of Martin Luther King Jr., who is described as a "world-class philanderer who beat up his paramours" and "seduced underage girls and boys."

"We can thank him for our annual Hate Whitey Day," one newsletter said of Reagan, according to Kirchick. The newsletters also claimed that AIDS sufferers "enjoy the attention and pity that comes with being sick," expressed support for and offered advice to the "local militias now training to defend liberty" shortly before the Oklahoma City bombing, and questioned whether the 1993 World Trade Center bombing "was a setup by the Israeli Mossad."

Kirchick revisited the newsletters in the Weekly Standard on Tuesday, writing that "Paul's lucrative and decades-long promotion of bigotry and conspiracy theories, for which he has yet to account fully, and his continuing espousal of extremist views...should make him unwelcome at any respectable forum."

Kirchick tied the newsletters to Paul's willingness to appear on the radio program of conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, who has reportedly accused the government of encouraging "homosexuality with chemicals so that people don't have children." He noted that Paul seemed open to Jones' suggestion that the military's NORTHCOM combatant command is "taking over" the nation.

Paul denied his involvement with the newsletters back in 2008, saying the controversial comments "are not mine and do not represent what I believe or have ever believed."

"When I was out of Congress and practicing medicine full-time, a newsletter was published under my name that I did not edit. Several writers contributed to the product," he said. "For over a decade, I have publicly taken moral responsibility for not paying closer attention to what went out under my name."

In 2008, the Libertarian magazine Reason (citing libertarian activists, some close to Paul) reported that Paul's chief ghostwriter for the newsletters was one Llewellyn Rockwell, Jr., who was Paul's congressional chief of staff from 1978 to 1982 and a longtime Paul confident and adviser. (Rockwell denies this.) Paul and his wife were officers of Ron Paul & Associates, the now-defunct company that published the newsletters, which reportedly earned Ron Paul & Associates nearly one million dollars over one year, according to a 1993 tax document. Paul, his family and Rockwell were listed as four of the company's 11 employees.

Paul's campaign chairman, Jesse Benton, told Hotsheet Tuesday that "We take Ron at [his] word that he did not write" the newsletters.

"So have his constituents in Texas," Benton continued. "We do so because everything he has worked and stood for forty years stands anathema to racism. We know that Dr. Paul stands for Liberty for all Americans."

Asked if the issue was fair game, Benton responded, "He has answered questions about these newsletters for 20 years, but it is reasonable that he answer them again now."

"We are confident that Americans will look to his vast, consistent and principled record, his life [as] a doctor, faithful husband and family man, and accept his answer," he added.

Excerpt from:

Ron Paul disavows racist newsletters under his name - CBS News

Look to the stock market and youd assume Wall Street was doing just fine. The S&P 500 has come back to March highs, the Dow is back to positive for 2018, and the Nasdaq is at fresh records.

Its all built on shaky foundations, said longtime market bear and former Republican Congressman Ron Paul.

This market is in the biggest bubble in the history of mankind, and when it bursts, it could cut the stock market in half, he told CNBCs Futures Now Thursday.

I see trouble ahead, and it originates with too much debt, too much spending, Paul said.

This isnt the first time Paul has made such dire warnings. During a Futures Now appearance in August 2017, he predicted a 50 percent drop in the market, a call he has doubled down on a number of times since. Since that appearance, the S&P 500 has rallied 15 percent.

Paul belongs to the Libertarian Party, a faction that emphasizes constrained government spending. He sees federal spending and monetary policy as dual forces inflating a market bubble.

The Congress spending and the Federal Reserve manipulation of monetary policy and interest rates debt is too big, the current account is in bad shape, foreign debt is bad and its not going to change, he said.

Paul isnt alone in his critique. A number of politicians have voiced concern over ballooning deficits, including current House Speaker Paul Ryan, who raised a warning on the nations debt in 2012.

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that federal deficits will average $1.2 trillion a year from 2019 to 2028, according to its April economic outlook. Its 2018 deficit estimates rose by $242 billion over previous forecasts made in June 2017. The federal agency said the revision was mainly owing to lower projected revenues tied to tax reform.

We have a president who likes to spend. He is not concerned about the deficit, said Paul.

To Paul the decision-making arm of the Fed is equally at fault in creating a market bubble.

The Fed will keep inflating, and that distorts things, Paul continued. Now theyre trying to unwind their balance sheet. I dont think theyre going to get real far on that.

The Fed is more than two years into its rate-hiking cycle. In conjunction with rate hikes, the Fed is also unloading assets from its balance sheet, which expanded to $4.5 trillion during its post-financial crisis quantitative-easing program.

Paul is not confident much will change to divert from the disaster he predicts.

The government will keep spending, and the Fed will keep inflating, and that distorts things, said Paul. When you get into a situation like this, the debt has to be eliminated. You have to liquidate the debt and the malinvestment.

Paul reiterated his call on Thursday for a potential 50 percent sell-off on the stock market.

Read more:

Ron Paul warns that this is the 'biggest bubble in the ...

In comments after Trump and Putin wrapped up a press conference together, Paul said he was delighted to see the two power players speaking while noting that the interventionist wings of the Democratic and Republican parties commonly referred to as neoconservatives are outraged by the meeting.

Paul said:

I would say that this was significant diplomacy. It has to be that the neocons arent very happy because Trump sounded pretty reasonable. And I think Trump won on this. And I dont think Putin was seen in a bad light. [Emphasis added]

Just talking to people face to face I think is so significant and I thought it was very worthwhile. The problems are still out there. [Emphasis added]

Thats the whole thing about the effort put in in this country for the anti-Russian mood, you know, is so strong. Thats a mixed deal because like I say, so many things are bipartisan. Hatred towards Russia is bipartisan and that to me is sad because you hear it constantly. [Emphasis added]

I was delighted to see them go through, have the press conference I think the world didnt suffer from the summit and hopefully it can be a beginning rather than an end. [Emphasis added]

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), one of the most vocal neoconservatives in the Senate, said Trumps press conference with Putin was disgraceful, whileFormer CIA Director John Brennan urged Republicans to impeach Trump for the meeting.

Meanwhile, Trump defended the meeting, calling his America First approach to foreign policy and relations with Russia bold American diplomacy.

John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at@JxhnBinder.

Read more:

Ron Paul: 'Trump Won' in Summit with Putin, 'Neocons Aren't ...

Former Texas Libertarian congressman and presidential candidate Ron Paul called a racist cartoon posted on his Twitter page Monday a mistake and blamed it on a staff member.

The posted tweet, which was removed after outrage on social media, appeared to attack politically correctexpectations to treat people with sensitivity. It depicted offensive images of a black man, a Latino, an Asian and a Jew punching Uncle Sam with a single red fist as they shout: Cultural Marxism!

Are you stunned by what has become of American culture? said the tweet carrying Pauls name.Well, its not an accident. Youve probably heard of cultural Marxism, but do you know what it means?

The father of Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said that the offensive cartoon was a mistake and had been inadvertently posted by a member of his staff. He did not apologize for it.

The drawing included the signature of cartoonist Ben Garrison, who is known for cartoons supporting Donald Trump.But he tweeted Monday that it totally wasnt his work, andtrolls had pasted his signature on an altered image.

A substitute tweet on Pauls page included the same cultural Marxism message but the racist cartoon was replaced with a bar through the wordspolitical correctness. Both the original and substitute tweet linked to a long Facebook explanation by Paul saying that cultural Marxism is a trick of Marxist supporters to harp ondiscrimination and exploitationthat does not exist.

Most people responding to Paul on Twitter werent buyingthe staffer did it excuse.

Paul has been accused of racism before.During his presidential campaigns, the media reported on a newsletter Paul published for many years that included severalracist and anti-gay attacks.

Here is the original post:

Ron Paul Blames Shockingly Racist, Anti-Semitic Tweet On ...

Ron Paul at the Republican National Convention in Tampa, Florida, Aug. 28, 2012. (Mark Wilson/Getty Images)

(JTA) Former Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul tweeted and then deleted a racist and anti-Semitic cartoon that he said was meant to explain cultural Marxism.

The cartoon shows four caricatures of different ethnicities including a Jewish man with a hooked nose, a black man with exaggerated lips, an Asian man with slanted eyes and a man who looks like a Neanderthal punching a cartoon of Uncle Sam with a shared red fist emblazoned with a hammer and sickle. The four men are shouting Cultural Marxism.

The beginning of the tweet reads Are you stunned by what has become of American culture?

Are you confused as to how every moral principle could be turned on its head so quickly?

Well, its not an accident.

Youve probably heard of Cultural Marxism, but do you know what it means?

Though Paul deleted the image, it had already been saved by several social media users as a screenshot.

Paul, a former congressman from Texas, later tweeted and posted on Facebook the same rant against cultural Marxism but replaced the cartoon with the words Political Correctness overlaid with the no symbol, a red circle with a line through it.

Are you stunned by what has become of American culture?Are you confused as to how every moral principle could be

Posted by Ron Paul onMonday, July 2, 2018

The termCultural Marxism has become a racist dog whistle claiming that the flood of nonwhite immigrants into America and Europe is causing a cultural decline.

The racist cartoon was created by doctoring an anti-imperialism, pro-communism cartoon by superimposing the racist and anti-Semitic images.

Paul was roundly criticized on social media for the image. Some draw parallels between the image and Nazi propaganda, according to The Hill.

In 2011, reporters exposed racist newsletters that had been sent out in Ron Pauls name in the late 1980s and early 1990s, such asRon Pauls Political Report, Ron Pauls Freedom Report, theRon Paul Survival Reportand theRon Paul Investment Letter. The newsletters also had come to light during the 2008 campaign, when Paul said that he didnt actually write the newsletters and they did not represent his views, but because they carried his name he was morally responsible for their content.

Read the original here:

Ron Paul, former presidential candidate, tweets racist and ...

Former Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul tweeted out a racist and anti-Semitic cartoon Monday before swiftly deleting it amid a backlash on social media. The cartoon featured a range of minorities depicted in stereotypical termsincluding a Jewish man with a hooked nose, a black man with large lips as well as portrayals of Asians and Latinos. The four men are shown punching up at an Uncle Sam figure together with a speech bubble that reads, Cultural Marxism!

Together, with the cartoon, Paul wrote: Are you stunned by what has become of American culture? Well, its not an accident. Youve probably heard of Cultural Marxism, but do you know what it means? More here:"

Paul soon deleted the post, replacing the cartoon with an image that had the words political correctness crossed out.

Paul, the father of current Republican senator Rand Paul, ran for president on the Libertarian Party ticket in 1988 before campaigning for the Republican nominationin both 2008 and 2012. Mondays incident is not the first time the 82-year-old has faced accusations of racism.

During both of his presidential campaigns, the media highlighted a newsletter Paul published for several years that featured a number of racially inflammatory posts.

Keep up with this story and more by subscribing now

The criminals who terrorized our citiesin riots and on every non-riot dayare not exclusively young black males, but they largely are, read one article penned in 1992 amid violence in Los Angeles.

Another post said: If you have ever been robbed by a black teenaged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be.

Former Congressman Ron Paul introduces his son, Senator Rand Paul (R-TX) during a caucus day rally at the Des Moines campaign headquarters on February 1, 2016 in Des Moines, Iowa. Pete Marovich/Getty Images

Paul has claimed that he did not know the identity of the author of those posts and defended himself against charges of racism.

Im not a racist, he told CNN in 2008. As a matter of fact, Rosa Parks is one of my heroes, Martin Luther King is a herobecause they practiced the libertarian principle of civil disobedience, nonviolence.

Paul is not the first prominent conservative to get in hot water for his tweets in recent days. GOP Representative Steve King, of Iowa, was condemned after retweeting a prominent Nazi sympathizer last month. King has refused to apologize.

Read the original here:

Ron Paul tweets racist, anti-Semitic cartoon before ...