Daily Archives: April 9, 2014

The Alex Jones Show(2nd HOUR-VIDEO Commercial Free) Thursday April 3 2014: Ron Paul
Ft. Hood Shooting -- Date: 04/03/2014 -- http://www.prisonplanet.tv/ -Today - On this Thursday, April 3 edition of the Alex Jones Show, Alex breaks down the ...

By: Ron Gibson

View post:
The Alex Jones Show(2nd HOUR-VIDEO Commercial Free) Thursday April 3 2014: Ron Paul - Video

The Mises View: WaPo Attacks Austrian Economics | Mark Thornton
The F.A. Hayek Memorial Lecture, sponsored by Butler Shaffer. Recorded at the 2014 Austrian Economics Research Conference in Auburn, Alabama, on 21 March 201...

By: Social Sciences Economics

Continue reading here:
The Mises View: WaPo Attacks Austrian Economics | Mark Thornton - Video

Ron Paul #39;s Podcast Nation #38 ~ Austrian Economics
A fantastic interview with college students, who ironically do a better job than most MSM. Dr. Paul is given ample opportunity to explain his positions on Au...

By: Social Sciences Economics

See the original post:
Ron Paul's Podcast Nation #38 ~ Austrian Economics - Video

Fear the Boom and Bust a Hayek vs. Keynes Rap Anthem
Go to for EconStories content and materials. Produced by Emergent Order. Visit us at . Econstories.tv is a plac. Go to for EconStories content and materials....

By: Social Sciences Economics

Read the original here:
Fear the Boom and Bust a Hayek vs. Keynes Rap Anthem - Video

Ron Paul: Sanctions Are Acts of War
Ron Paul on Kremlin Propaganda Channel: Sanctions Are Acts of War April 7, 2014 http://www.FreeBeacon.com.

By: Washington Free Beacon

Read the original:
Ron Paul: Sanctions Are Acts of War - Video

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

Orlando, Florida (CNN) -- A long line snaked around the perimeter of a large hotel conference room as people waited eagerly to meet a former Texas congressman who they view as an icon in the modern libertarian movement.

Ron Paul had finished delivering a nearly hour-long speech to a gathering of Florida libertarians on Friday night, and he was now signing copies of books, t-shirts, posters and even a few paintings.

Paul might have retired from Congress last year, but he hasn't gone away quietly.

The eclectic group of activists who backed the Texas Republican in his back-to-back presidential runs still support him even as it appears many of them are ready to turn to his son, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, if he follows in his dad's footsteps and runs for president in 2016.

Rand Paul, who was elected in 2010, has quickly become a national figure in his own right due to his willingness to buck traditional GOP ideology, and a strong following among young, libertarian minded voters and self-described "tea party" activists.

Rand Paul's appeal among the grassroots has helped rank him, according to early polling, as a top contender for the Republican presidential nomination if he runs. And unlike his father, Rand Paul is more closely aligned with the GOP establishment.

But as Rand Paul's star continues to rise, where does he stand among Ron Paul's most ardent supporters?

While a few attendees at the conference argued Rand Paul is too moderate, many say he strikes the right balance that the movement needs a pragmatic choice to its principled core.

Or as Chris Sankey, a 29-year-old from Tampa, put it: "Rand is running the company, and Ron's chairman of the board."

Go here to see the original:
Are Ron Paul supporters ready for Rand?

Submitted by Ron Paul via The Ron Paul Institute,

Last week we saw yet another tragedy at Ft. Hood, Texas, as a distraught Iraq war veteran killed three of his fellow soldiers before killing himself. It is nearly five years after the last Ft. Hood shooting, where 13 people were killed. These tragedies are heartbreaking and we certainly feel much sympathy for the families of the victims.

While there is much focus on the mental illness that appears to have driven many of these men to murder, what is left unsaid is the cause of the tragedy. Government officials and the media only talk about the symptoms that lead to these tragic events. They will tell us that there are people who get post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and kill themselves and others. They will all call for more government intervention into the lives of those in the military to root out and treat mental illness.

But they will never question the two causes of these tragedies: the disastrous decade-long US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that have destroyed the minds of so many service members, and the government psychiatrists who prescribe extremely dangerous psychotropic drugs to treat these damaged soldiers.

On the drugs, it is true that in almost every story we read about these kinds of mass killings, whether on a military base or in a school, the kids or veterans have been treated with these dangerous drugs. When will the medical profession wake up and realize that these drugs are often worse than the illness they are designed to treat?

We need to understand that the problem of veterans returning home with serious mental illness is increasing at an alarming rate. We are not talking about a few thousand people returning from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. We are talking about a hundred thousand people. And according to government statistics, about 20 percent of returning vets will suffer from PTSD, and a further 20 percent will suffer from traumatic brain injuries.

The numbers are significant and they are frightening. While some will ignore these statistics and point out that these wars are producing far less deaths than previous ones, the fact is these brain injuries and disorders are a living death for the victims. And increasingly, those living in such horrific circumstances, full of deadly drugs that are supposed to treat the problem but only make matters worse, are striking out against those in their communities or committing suicide.

But what of the other main cause of these tragedies? What no media or government representative will admit is that US military members are suffering horrible mental illnesses because they have been sent over and over again into senseless wars overseas. That is the real cause of this crisis. The real horror comes when these soldiers return to the US to realize that the wars have not been won and all of the suffering and dying on both sides has been in vain. Just think of how many individuals over the last 15 years would not have suffered death or injury or post-traumatic stress disorders or brain injuries if we didn't go to war unnecessarily!

The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan may be winding down, but the war against our veterans continues. Why are the people who are really guilty, those who lied us into war, not being called to task?

Unfortunately, the truth is that these same people who lied us into war in Iraq are still getting us involved unnecessarily overseas, in Syria, Egypt, Libya, Ukraine. The problem, the interventionism that creates these deeply troubled service members, continues to thrive, unpunished. And even worse: these people continue to plan our future disasters even though they will not suffer the fate of those they send to be broken on foreign battlefields.

Originally posted here:
Ron Paul: Fort Hood - An Avoidable Tragedy

When Mother Jones published a video of soon-to-be Sen. Rand Paul claiming that former vice president Dick Cheney pushed the Iraq War because of his ties to Halliburton, it was a good reminder of how much the potential 2016 presidential candidate differs from the rest of his party on foreign policy.

Unless an unpredictable international event in the next two years swallows the United States' attention span like the early years of the wars in the Middle East did, it's unclear his views, a malleable mush of his father's orthodox ban on intervention and a Reaganish devotion to "peace through strength," will matter much. Given the increasingly extracurricular role international affairs play on the list of important issues voters bring out once every four years, foreign policy seems unlikely on the surface to keep Rand Paul from the nomination if his party decides he's the one to beat. On the other hand, potential presidential candidates have been forced to air their views on international affairs quite a bit the past few months, as unforeseen events have crept into American policy discussions.

Let's unpack how foreign policy could affect Rand Paul's future political aspirations.

Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) shakes hands with a guest as he signs copies of his book "Government Bullies" at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), March 7, 2014. Reuters/Mike Theiler

There are considerable challenges in breaking with the Republican Party on foreign policy, something Rand Paul is well aware of thanks to his family's history.

Ron Paul is one of the most ideologically consistent politicians in the United States, and most of his policy ideas can end with, "because it would shrink government." On foreign policy, Ron Paul thinks the United States spends an inordinate amount. The best way to trim the budget is by stopping interventions and slashing foreign aid. While many of his fellow Republicans also advocate for a smaller government, the savings usually stop at America's shore. Paul Ryan's latest budget plan calls for extensive domestic savings, but a still-robust budget for the Pentagon.

Over his three presidential campaigns, Paul's stubbornly libertarian foreign policy lens defined his campaign -- and his supporters. Although Paul always rounded up a merry band of young libertarians to support his campaigns, the major donors, strategists and pundits in the Republican Party never took him too seriously, although his strengths as a candidate became more notable each time he tried. The rest of the political establishment never took him very seriously either. Here's a graph of news coverage of the 2012 presidential contenders in 2011.

Source: Pew Research Center

Regardless of the perception inside and outside the Republican Party, Ron Paul was doing something that resonated with a lot of people. His 2012 campaign raised more money than any other Republican candidate except for Mitt Romney. The top five employers who supported Ron Paul? The U.S. Army, the U.S. Air Force, the U.S. Navy, Google and the Department of Defense.Not only were Ron Paul's foreign policy views catching, but they were resonating with the same people tasked with carrying out that policy.

Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul seems to have picked up on the pros and cons of his father's foreign policy views. He's non-interventionist enough to appeal to libertarians, winning his dad's approval for being one of two senators to vote against the Ukraine aid package, but he's also willing to see a bit of gray in international affairs. He wrote an op-ed for Time Magazine saying that it is the United States' "role as a global leader to be the strongest nation in opposing Russias latest aggression."

Read more from the original source:
Rands Paul foreign policy views are not like the other potential 2016 candidates. Does it matter?