The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity
Subscribe to the Institute View Us on YouTube Follow Us On Twitter Join Us on Facebook Join Us at Google Plus

Search Results

for:

Adam Dick

Knock, Knock. We’re from the Government, and We Want Your Family’s Blood

undefined

Talk about creepy. The Georgia Department of Public Health has announced that it, the United Sates Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and county health boards are together sending teams of government agents to randomly selected homes in two Georgia counties. These teams of government agents are charged with asking questions, including about household members’ health, and extracting blood from all the people living in the homes. The reason given for the home visits is — you may have guessed it — coronavirus.

J. Scott Trubey writes at the Atlanta Journal-Constitution that the government agencies are seeking the blood to test for “antibodies to the novel coronavirus to pinpoint who might have had COVID-19 and estimate how widely the virus has traveled.”

People who live at the 420 randomly selected homes are free, Trubey writes, to refuse the questioning and blood drawing by the government inquisition and phlebotomy teams that show up at their front doors. But, in reality, people often find it hard to muster the courage to say “no” to government agents who accost them in person “asking” them to comply. People are intimidated. They think that even if they say “no” the requested action will still be taken anyway plus they will suffer additional consequences for resisting. That aids police efforts both to get people to say incriminating things and to obtain “permission” to search people and property, even from people who know evidence of a crime is likely to be found.
read on...

Blood in the Streets, in Businesses, in Religious Sanctuaries, in Homes

undefined

Over the last few weeks, politicians at the local, state, and national levels of government have been increasingly asserting extraordinary power in the name of fighting coronavirus. As the power exercise continues to ramp up, and as the time people suffer lost liberty and lost income runs on, expect the crackdown to increasingly involve physical violence.

The longer the crackdown continues at its present or an increased intensity, the more the situation will look like a war between the enforcers of the mandates and the people who refuse to give up for so long so much of what gives life meaning.

Here is how I put it in my March 25 article concerning the drastic steps then being ordered by Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti to shut down businesses the city government terms “nonessential”:
Garcetti and other government officials across America are ramping up the threats against people who are attempting to do no more than proceed with living their lives. In the short term, the harsh tactics the government officials pursue may rather easily yield success for their goals of massively suppressing the expression of human freedom. But, with time, the resistance to the oppressive restraints will grow. Many people will not take well to being caged for a long time. Governments will need to exercise greater and greater force to try to keep the people down. There will be blood in the streets and blood in the businesses.
It is now approaching two weeks later, and the tyrannical actions in the name of countering coronavirus continue to expand across America.
read on...

Will Jacob Hornberger Sweep Upcoming Libertarian Presidential Primaries and Caucuses? If He Does, How Much Will It Matter?

undefined

Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) has been racking up wins in state-level contests of the race for the Democratic presidential nomination. Much less mentioned in the media is that Libertarian presidential candidate Jacob Hornberger won the February 8 Iowa Libertarian caucus with 47 percent of the vote. This put Hornberger far ahead of other candidates for the nomination, including Lincoln Chafee — a former governor and United States senator — who came in second with 13 percent.

Writing about his victory in Iowa, Hornberger noted that he will also be participating in upcoming Libertarian presidential nomination state-level votes:
On Super Tuesday, March 3, I will be on the ballot in three states — North Carolina, Massachusetts, and California. The following week, I will be the only LP presidential candidate on the ballot in the Missouri primary election. More will come after that.
The results from Iowa suggest that we could see a Hornberger sweep in upcoming Libertarian presidential primaries and caucuses.

Hornberger, in a November 8 post at his campaign website, announced a campaign strategy that places much focus on winning “big” the North Carolina Libertarian Party presidential primary, where he has spent much time campaigning. And, from his comments since his Iowa win, it appears that Hornberger’s campaign is planning to put significant effort into doing well in other 2020 Libertarian presidential primaries and caucuses as well.
read on...

Shutter the US Embassy in Iraq

undefined

This week, amid protests by people upset with United States intervention in Iraq, individuals forced their way into and damaged the US embassy compound in Baghdad. In response, US Secretary of Defense Mark Esper declared on Tuesday that 750 additional US troops would be deployed immediately to the Middle East, and it was reported that anonymous US officials said thousands more could be sent there soon.
read on...

Jonathan Turley Versus the Impeachment Steamroller

undefined

Following up on his previous call for caution in the effort in the United States House of Representatives to impeach President Donald Trump, George Washington University Law Professor Jonathan Turley on Wednesday presented to the House Judiciary Committee oral testimony and an extensive written statement regarding the case as it now stands for impeaching the president. Unlike other witnesses at the hearing, Turley did not give the deed his blessing.

There was quite a backlash against Turley for presenting his contrary opinion at the committee hearing. In a Thursday The Hill editorial, Turley writes:

Before I finished my testimony, my home and office were inundated with threatening messages and demands that I be fired from George Washington University for arguing that, while a case for impeachment can be made, it has not been made on this record.

Further, notes Turley: “Some of the most heated attacks came from Democratic members of the House Judiciary Committee.” He proceeds in his editorial to discuss comments from committee member Eric Swalwell (D-CA) and chairman Jerry Nadler (D-NY) as examples. Turley notes that these and other “attacks” at the hearing were “demonstrably false.” Yet, because Turley was not allowed to respond, the attacks were “then picked up eagerly by others.”


read on...

Pinning an ‘Antisemite’ Label on President Trump

undefined

In a Friday The Intercept editorial, Mehdi Hasan wrote that President Donald Trump “and his acolytes” have been “banging their anti-Semitic drum in plain sight” since United States House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s September 24 announcement of an impeachment inquiry in regard to Trump. But, Hasan then offers no substantial evidence to back this bold claim.
read on...

Tulsi Gabbard’s Military Nonsense

undefined

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI), in a Thursday interview with host Chris Cuomo at CNN, reacted to criticism from fellow Democratic presidential candidate Sen Kamala Harris (D-CA), after the candidates’ dust-up in a debate the day before, by stating, "the only response that I have heard her and her campaign give is to push out smear attacks on me, claim that I am somehow some kind of foreign agent or a traitor to my country, the country that I love, the country that I put my life on the line to serve, the country that I still serve today as a soldier in the Army National Guard."

This statement from Gabbard is nonsense. Soldiers serving in the National Guard and other parts of the United States military in military interventions as has Gabbard are not serving their country. They are serving the exertion of power by the US government. Indeed, Gabbard in the interview expresses her opposition to the sending of the US military members “to fight in these wasteful, counterproductive regime change wars.”

So, while Gabbard disparages a list of the US government’s military interventions overseas, she has nothing but praise for the carrying out of those wars by military members. In the interview she calls military members her “fellow brothers and sisters in uniform.”
read on...

Revisiting Ron Paul’s 1988 Case for Drug Legalization

undefined

Ron Paul helped many people discover libertarian ideas in his presidential campaigns. For me, during Dr. Paul’s 1988 presidential campaign, things worked the other way around. I was already familiar with libertarianism. And that familiarity led me to learn about Ron Paul.

When Dr. Paul came through San Antonio, Texas in that campaign, I went to find out more about this man who was seeking the presidency under the Libertarian Party banner. Dr. Paul, that evening, presented an informative and interesting extemporaneous exploration of current events and his approach to them rooted in libertarian ideas.

One of the things I valued most from the event was a pamphlet written by Dr. Paul that I brought home with me. That pamphlet, titled The Case for Drug Legalization, presented a strong, multifaceted argument for drug legalization that has held up well over the ensuing decades.

It was an argument that Dr. Paul was bold to present in his 1988 presidential campaign. 1988 was eight years before California voters approved Proposition 215 for legal medical marijuana that gave a big boost to rolling back marijuana prohibition across the country, a process that continues forward yet remains far from completion. 1988 was also at the end of two terms of President Ronald Reagan, an adamant drug warrior who helped expand the drug war in America with bipartisan support in Congress.
read on...

Countering Technology Companies’ Crackdown on Alternative Voices

undefined

There was bound to be a major pushback. Widespread use of the internet has helped make all sorts of information much cheaper to create and easier to access. That has been a boon for people seeking to communicate and receive information that would not have been readily available in the days when radio, TV, and newspapers were the overwhelming means of mass distribution of information about current events. At the same time, the internet-facilitated alternative voices boom threatens the interests of people who benefit from limiting the availability of information and commentary about current events to within a much narrower range.
read on...


Authors

Tags