Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty

Hysterical Over Ron Paul

December 30, 2011 by  

The frantic attacks on Ron Paul. The Iowa caucuses are just days away. And the thought that Representative Ron Paul might actually come in first has some people hysterical. Iowa governor Terry Branstad proclaimed that the results should be ignored if Paul finishes first. People need to look at “who comes in second and who comes in third” if that happens, he declared. Reaching even lower, Wall Street Journal editorial board member and columnist Dorothy Rabinowitz called Paul “the best-known of American propagandists for our enemies” in a lengthy op-ed smear. As I’ve said before, folks, next year will sure be interesting.

One way to lower unemployment. Democrats in the Senate and White House went ballistic over the House passage of a bill to cut unemployment benefits from 99 weeks to 59 weeks. Economist Alan Reynolds points out that, if they were smart, they would have rejoiced to see this happen — because it would have reduced dramatically our reported unemployment rate. You see, people who have stopped looking for work aren’t counted among the unemployed. Reynolds estimates that if benefits were cut to 59 weeks, “official” unemployment would be less than 8 percent by the November elections.

Measuring the stock market by the price of gold. Here’s an interesting way to measure the value of stocks: How many ounces of gold are they worth? When the stock market peaked in August 1999, it took 44.5 ounces of gold to buy the Dow Jones Industrial Average. Today, all it takes is 7.5 ounces. In 1980, it took only one ounce of gold to purchase the Dow — a level many pundits think we will reach again.

A wonderful Christmas present. I don’t know how it started or even how it spread, but all across the Midwest, good Samaritans went into Kmart stores and paid for Christmas presents for less fortunate parents. At one store in Indianapolis, an anonymous woman paid off the layaway orders for about 50 families. Then, on her way out of the store, she passed out $50 bills to customers and paid for two carts of toys for a woman in line at the cash register. Talk about a special Christmas present!

–Chip Wood

Chip Wood

is the geopolitical editor of He is the founder of Soundview Publications, in Atlanta, where he was also the host of an award-winning radio talk show for many years. He was the publisher of several bestselling books, including Crisis Investing by Doug Casey, None Dare Call It Conspiracy by Gary Allen and Larry Abraham and The War on Gold by Anthony Sutton. Chip is well known on the investment conference circuit where he has served as Master of Ceremonies for FreedomFest, The New Orleans Investment Conference, Sovereign Society, and The Atlanta Investment Conference.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Hysterical Over Ron Paul”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at

  • jay Lindberg

    The attacks on Ron Paul are based on the puppet strings effect. The whining puppets are fighting for their place at the public trough.

    Ron Paul is a peoples candidate, not a corporate puppet.

  • Ted Crawford

    I feel that Ron Paul is the most dangerous candidate from either party! His stance on foreign affaires in general and particularly his position on nuclear proliferation throughout the middle east and, given recent events Africa, borders on the criminal! I feel that perhaps Winston Churchill said it best. “An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last”
    I can agree, even eagerly with most of his ideas on the economy however. The two areas I I dispute are in regard to the Federal Reserve and the Gold Standard.
    I agree that the Federal Reserve was a bad idea from it’s inception and that it should immediately be audited! That being said, the institution has been around for so long that every other industrialized has developed their own. If we desolve ours now our purchasing power will be reduced to that of a third world country! It cannot succeed with unalateral application!
    I too regret that we deserted the Gold Standard, but again it’s been the accepted method for so long that to reinstate it, unalaterally, would again reduce our buying power to an unacceptable leval!

    • dan

      any one who is honestly concerned about Nukes in the hands of the crazies in Iran should perhaps wonder why they aren’t equally concerned about North Korea,who can actually deliver Nukes and are arguably LESS STABLE and MORE LIKELY to do so….

      • ronnyo

        For those who think N. Korea can deliver a nuclear weapon-need to check it out—they still don’t have the delivery capacity for a nuclear bomb———–which leads us to Iran–which even if they had a bomb, couldn’t delver it anywhere. With every other country in the world(except Russia and China) on top of this—Iran has little chance of succeeding in anything remotely regarded as a threat. Some of you people have bought into the “saber rattling” that keep tensions at a high level and keeps the Defense Dept overly funded(check out the Defense Dept spending before the wars)—–if you recall the mythical “Weapons of Mass Destruction”–you’ll see the same unsubstantiated rhetoric that produced the fear that caused the war in Iraq. Haven’t we learned anything yet??—I guess not!!
        That Ron Paul would draw down our military is one of the main reasons why I–along with many other Americans—choose to support him. We cannot continue to afford to be the world policemen!!!!

        • Joe H.

          WRONG! north Korea launched a missile last year that could have reached the shores of Alaska if not self destructed!! Or are you one that thinks Alaska isn’t part of the US???

          • John Gould

            I’ve got a great idea. Why don’t we just attack every country that has nuclear capabilities. That’ll keep us safe. We need to use our “intelligence” responsibly and respectfully. Stop using fear as motivation to kill thousands of civilians. Don’t fall for the proWAR propaganda that big business keeps dishing out. Those guys are making a fortune on these unconstitutional battles. If you don’t vote for Ron invest heavily in oil and defense technology corporations because those stocks will soar. The whole concept of “forced freedom” is BS. Mind your own damned business.

      • vic

        exactly, dan! should we attack n. korea, india, pakistan, china or russia? they all have nukes and are NOT our friends. Ron Paul is the best and last hope for this country.

        • Ted Crawford

          In the first place India is an ally, secondly none of the others have made any overt threats against us or our allies. North Koreas program, while unsetteling, is years behind Irans and they are not actively expanding their influience to other nations!

          • Joe H.

            Are you really that naive??? North Korea is AHEAD of Iran by at least 5 years. They have already demonstrated the ability to hit Alaska and quite EASILY Japan already!! I don’t worry about Iran as Isreal will take them out before they actually achieve nuke launch capability, they have no choice!!! That is not to say it is any of our business!!!
            with N. Korea getting a new leader, I would watch them a whole lot CLOSER now!! Kim Jung Un has to still make a name for himself. It could be by peaceful means, or it could be by unpeaceful means!!!

    • Lawrence Ekdahl

      Re: Paul’s foreign policy, His is the only sane one. Why do you think the USA has the right to dictate to other nations how they should run their country. Iran, Syria, Afganistan, Packistan, Korea and many other nations have not made war against us. Until they do and the congress declares war we have no right to invade their lands.

    • ronnyo

      Pretty soon we’re going to see the delayed effects of the European debt crisis–the countries who are defaulting have been mirroring American business models for years and see where it got them—–and guess who has more debt than all of them put together???
      If the situation continues on its’ present course, America will also default on its’ debt–then where will you be??——————rampant inflation will soon demand that we stabilize our currency(which we cannot)–so the only thing left would be to institute a gold standard–and if you think there is an alternative –please tell me about it———In the short term–a lot of pain for every American–in the long term–getting back to paying for actual value for something you buy–slow process of stabilizing the work force to accommodate increased value spending– with jobs created–quality jobs that reflect growth because of Deflation –not Inflation. You may disagree with this analogy, but the time is quickly upon us that will force us to make a decision about just this kind of radical solution–whether we like it or not.
      As far as I’m concerned –Ron Paul gives me the most confidence that I will survive this—just with his Fed policies.

    • ChristyK

      No fiat currency has lasted more than 42 years. I believe that we completely went off the gold standard in 1973 (or very close to that). What does that say about our currency? I do think that our currency is slightly more stable because it is the world reserve currency. Most likely our currency will remain at least marginally feasable until the world drops us as the world reserve currency (which has been talked about for years). At that point we will almost instantly go into hyperinflation, collapsing our economy.

      Ron Paul’s idea is to allow a competing currency (rather than instantly abolishing the Fed) based on something substantial such as gold. This would allow individuals & markets to slowly move away from the fiat currency and manipulative central banks. It would also give us a currency to move to when our fiat currency fails (as always happens).

      I used to be uncomfortable with Ron Paul’s foreign policy. Seeing our country fall apart started me reading the constitution, Federalist Papers, and othe history. I saw how our founders wanted us to be non-interventionist (just like Paul). “Friends with all nations, Entangling alliances with none”. This allowed me to look at how we have dealt with other nations over the past ~100 years and the results. I want us to be safe, but we keep supporting dictators and then fighting them. I believe our interventionism (no matter how well intentioned) has actually made the world less safe and is destroying our economy by being overextended (the cause of the fall of almost all empires). We would be much safer pulling most of our troops home. We are in more than 120 nations and in over 800 bases. Why could we possibly need more than 10 foreign bases? If the troops were home, they could defend our borders and we would have America and constitution loving individuals home in our country to protect us from harm intended by foreigners and our own government. We could then greatly reduce our military spending (now more than all other nations combined) saving our economy from bankruptcy. We can’t defend ourselves if we are broke.

      Countries like Iran will be less able to recruit suicide bombers (probably the only way they could deliver a nuke) if we are not surrounding their country with troops and bombing their people and others of their faith. True, this would not reduce the Iranian leader’s murderous thoughts, but it would reduce their power/control and reduce their ability to attack us while increasing our ability to defend ourselves. It would also make other, less extreme people/countries more friendly.

    • Oh My

      Could you be buying into the Anti-Paul PROPAGANDA? The reason there is so much of it is because they are scared to death of Ron Paul BECAUSE he is the ONLY CONSTITUTIONALIST candidate running, Democratic or Republican! The Constitution scares them to death because it TAKES THEIR POWER AWAY, so they must DISREGARD IT AT ALL COSTS. This is why they are attacking Ron Paul SO VICIOUSLY AND anyone who supports him as well, labeling them as “Domestic terrorists,” which, of course is their most RIDICULOUS LIE YET!

      • Joe H.

        Oh My,
        just think how much better off we would be right now had Kennedy lived and his plan to put us back on the gold standard had gone through!! We wouldn’t be anywheres near the debt we are now!! then consider what it would be like right now if we had had constitutional conservatives in control allong the years since!!! government would be about HALF the size it is, debt would be low, and the dollar would still be the strongest currency in the world!!!

    • metalflyer11

      Ron Paul the most dangerous candidate??? Yes, you are right. He is the most dangerous to the Power Elite of the world who want to control everything. The tactic of FEAR is what have people freaked out about Ron Paul’s foreign policy. From birth we have been led to believe that we must constantly fight wars to defend our freedoms. Making this fake assumption that everyone envy us and they want to destroy us. From the cold war communist to the muslim terrorists. It is allways a propaganda to suit someones purpose. These tactics have been used brilliantly through history to move big masses to war and achieve control. Do you really think Iran is out to get us??? Really???? We are the only country in the world that has ever used a nuclear weapon on another country. We have attacked and invaded more countries than any other country in history. Whe have military bases practically everywhere. Iran has never invaded or threatened to invade anyone. Ironically the Rothschilds Red Shield controlled Central Bank is not yet in Iran. But Yes we have one it is called The Federal Reserve which is not allowed by our constitution but it still remains.
      Remember a nuclear weapon for a country is like for an individual owning firearms. If you do not have one the ones that do bully you around. This is why Israel being such a tiny country can bully a much larger country like Iran into war. Take the nukes away from Israel and let them go alone to see if they continue the war threats. They will probably make friends instead.
      Remember “War is a Racket” it only serves the interests of a few at the expese and demise of many. Dwight Eisenhower warned us about the “Military Industrial Complex” that was forming back then to serve the interest of the corporations. The same continues today(Cold War ends inmediately the War on Terror begins).
      We lost control of our Country long ago. The last president that tried to take it back paid with his life. Will it happen again if Ron Paul wins? I think it could but the murder or a fake natural death card will not be very believable this time around this is why they are trying very hard to discredit him and if they can they will steal his nomination. I believe we are in the most critical point in the USA history if we realy want to come out of the brainwashing and save the Republic but it is up to us WE THE PEOPLE…….

  • Gayle

    I’m doing what a lot of people are doing. Turning off the media and look into the person’s background. So far Ron Paul has stood his ground. The more they attack the better he looks. What we need now in my opinion is someone like him to derail us off this liberal/progressive track and bring us back to our Republic.

    • Oh My


  • Jon

    I must admit that I am not in favor of all Mr. Paul’s ideas. However, there is an old adage that a person should be judged, not by his friends, but by the caliber of his enemies. The US media is only approved of my 10% or so of the people. The numbers are even worse for Congress. If those two bodies oppose Mr. Paul, that means that 90% of Americans are against that opposition. The enmity of such dis-functional groups could well be a plus. I am of the mind that anything or anyone opposed to by our current government and their lackeys is definitely worth a second look.

    • dan

      I often find myself at odds with Doctor Paul , but when I go back and research what he has said in the past (thank Google for you-tube) and seriously consider the merits of his arguments and positions….
      I’m forced to be intellectually honest and concede …. and NO ONE
      hates to be wrong/mistaken more than I do. The problem with most people
      is that they cannot admit when they’re wrong…which is why there is
      soooo much conflict in this world. It all boils down in it’s simplest terms to the golden rule:
      Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

      • Bob Marshall

        I think you hit it on the head. Everyone who has read the Constitution should do just that and see what the founders said in the quotes and warnings they left us. The same way Ron Paul has spoken of for 30 years.Americas real danger is within. Islam, Communist and Socialist organizations.A president who has ties to all of these as well as the Nation of Islam.the Supreme Court removed the Bible, prayers and any mention of the Ten Commandments, yet allows some schools to teach Islam. We even have radical Islamic bases and communes across the US. The FBI has not listed them on the list of terrorist.Why not? The US bombed Iraq back into the stone age for Israel. Now, are we to do the same to Iran.A nation who although having some radical Muslims mostly speak Persian, not Arabic like Saudi Arabia. America had better wake up to the dangers present in this country today.if we chose to be in denial as to the dangers from radical Islam inside this country and chose to remain ignorant we do deserve to lose our freedoms and liberties.

  • Roger

    Paul tells it like it is and some people are afraid of him as they are not used to hearing things that our government has been doing so wrong for so many years despite the party in control at the time. He is not a flip-flopper but a man of conviction. Some consider his views radical especially when it comes to foreign policy but we have been “doing it wrong” for so many years that any new ideas on how to “do it right” are not easy to accept. That said, more and more voters are slowly and consistently embracing his way of thinking. Problem is he may just be too honest, too idealistic to fit into the political landscape in Washington making it difficult for him to be effective assuming he received the nomination. If in fact he does, Paul would need to choose a running mate to “balance out” his views in order to make him more electable. Bottomline Paul is a serious candidate and many more are just now coming aboard with the media sadly lacking behind!

    • Oh My

      We need to totally ignore the so called “media.” They are run by the Elite and the Elite are just playing “Good cop, Bad cop” with the American people. They actually control BOTH PARTIES. They vet ALL CANDIDATES FOR PRESIDENT to make sure that they believe according to the Progressive “agenda.” This way it makes ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENCE WHICH PARTY or WHICH CANDIDATE WINS, BECAUSE BOTH PARTIES ARE ACTUALLY FOR THE SAME AGENDA. I believe that somehow Ron Paul has escaped their “vetting” process, maybe because they never took him seriously or thought, AS THE “MEDIA” WILL *ASSURE* YOU, THAT HE HAS NO CHANCE OF WINNING. Well, he not only has a “chance” of winning, but he is running at the top of the poles right now. Why? Because people are beginning to wake up to the fact that Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate who is NOT “one of ‘them.’” Thank God for him, but just be aware that if you support Ron Paul, the government will deem you to be a “nutcase,” “mentally unstable,” and a “domestic terrorist,” which, of course is ridiculous, (and they know it), but that’s all they have. When people lie, all they have is to personally attack the person who doesn’t see it their way BECAUSE it is impossible to DISPROVE the TRUTH, (something they know very little about).

  • JayP

    This idea that Ron Paul’s foreign policy is dangerous is quite strange. No one ever says WHY it is dangerous, they just says it’s dangerous.
    If Iran were to develop a nuclear weapon and attempt to use it against Israel they would be defeated immediately. Israel has an impressive missile defense system and Israel has nuclear weapons too so they would be able to defeat an attack from Iran.
    The United States would be able to do the same thing in Iran that we did in Iraq in the first week of the invasion in 2003. The USA could have won that war and secured Iraq in less than a month. I am a 1980′s Marine Corps veteran and I was appalled when the Bush administration stopped the Marines from taking Fallujah when they got there during the initial ground assault. The Marines could have easily secured Fallujah like they did every other city they went into. The reason for not taking Fallujah was that the Bush administration wanted to train the Iraqi’s how to do that and let them take Fallujah with us. “ABSURD” That allowed a massive buildup of resistance in Fallujah because training the Iraqi’s would take months. I knew at that moment that we had no intention of winning in Iraq. Common sense would tell anyone that it would be best to secure the entire area first and then go about humanitarian and nation building goals. One doesn’t need a West Point degree to see that and I don’t have one either. The United States could unilaterally defeat Iran in less than a month IF we wanted to and without using nuclear weapons.
    People talk about dangerous foreign policy and then ignore the fact that WE are helping Al Qaeda in Libya and we knew that we were way back in March 2011, that’s when it was revealed to the public at any rate. How is it that we can be fighting them in Iraq and helping them in Libya? There is plenty of documentation available and a quick internet search for “US helping Al Qaeda in Libya” will yield about 34,200,000 results (0.27 seconds).
    I think dangerous foreign policy is the practice of running around the world performing regime changes in the name of God and in the name of democracy. A country must want to be free and willing to fight for it and ask for our help. If we go in and destroy their government and give them something they are not willing to fight for and didn’t ask for then they will lose it as soon as we are gone. There are plenty of tyrants we ignore so there is a lot of hypocrisy there. How are we making allies anywhere with that logic?
    I am certainly no fan of Iran but they have expressed the desire for talks with the US concerning their nuclear program and other things, we have brushed aside those requests. Maybe I am wrong but I think we could accomplish a lot by sitting at the negotiations table with Iran and any other country we are at odds with for that matter. If that fails then go to war but we have rejected all requests for talks.
    I am an infantry Marine, an 0311 ground pounder. I believe in a strong military, a strong defense and a strong offense when necessary. I also believe that war should be the last option. That is apparently dangerous foreign policy but that is the policy I prefer.
    I support an audit of the Fed and also holding people accountable for fraud. I believe the Fed was intended to get us away from the gold standard. So if we got back to the gold standard, in time we could get away from the FED. The FED gives us a fiat money which is the source of many of our money problems.
    Actually Libya had their own banking system, not part of IMF, that was based on a gold standard. There was virtually no debt in Libya when we took over there, excuse me, when NATO took over. Incidentally, the central bank in Libya was the first thing that the Al Qaeda rebels went after and they formed their own central bank in March 2011, months before the Libya was secured. That is an odd tactic and should be looked at, actually that is the first time in history that has ever happened. Usually rebels take over a country and then structure is set up.
    I think Ron Paul sounds so scary because it sounds strange to do things constitutionally. We are so used to our presidents and our congress over-stepping the bounds of the constitution to “protect us” that we find it strange and scary to actually abide by the constitution. The Neo-Cons mostly and some Liberals don’t like that idea and panic because they see Americans are waking up to that fact. Hopefully enough of us will wake up in time and the constitution can be restored.

    • david w

      very well said-thanx

  • Don the Canuck


    This is a common thing among people who have actually taken the time to dig into what RP is exactly saying. His positions require that the People also change, not just the political process. We have to realize that Ron Paul is a catalyst for the population to remember what made America great. Personal responsibility, Freedom and self-interest which create the proper environment for excellence. This can only work if a majority of people are still willing to fend for themselves and not take for granted the efforts of others. Have the America people lost their desire to identify themselves with what was great about America, or do they wish to continue to become enslaved by big gov’t and corporations.

    It is clear that the establishment does not like RP, because he goes against their desire to control everything and everyone. the test here will be whether enough people will actually spend the few hours necessary to truly read the depth of his message and whether they will be awakened to his call for a return to values that will never be subject to expiry by time alone.

    As a Canadian who truly appreciates the integrity and honesty of this statesman, I am hoping that his message will allow America to move forward by moving back to the core values that made it such a great nation.


  • Dan

    Ron Paul is NOT a conservative. Many in the media are stating that Ron Paul is a liberal. Ron Paul is not a liberal. Ron Paul is a point removed from an anarchist and I firmly believe that. He would be dangerous as a president, much more so than Obama and I hate Obama.

    • Don the Canuck


      It is fine to state that someone is not something or other, but it is better to actually back that up with facts. Why would he be dangerous as president? Be precise and make sure you have factual information to back you up, and your opinion will be considered with much enthusiasm.

      • Dan

        My statement is not made to have others agree or disagree with it thus it needs to “facts” to back it up. It is merely my feeling about Ron Paul. You and others can look for your own facts and determine your own conclusions just as I have done.

        • Joe H.

          excuse me but feelings without facts are the ramblings of a fool!!!

        • JayP

          con·ser·va·tive (kn-sûrv-tv)
          1. Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change.

          Ron Paul IS indeed a Conservative. The reason he is not considered a Conservative by Neo-Cons and RINO’s is that we have strayed so far away from traditional views and values by ignoring the constitution for so long that it is going to take a lot of change to return to traditional views and values. Since his goal is to return to the traditional views and values our founding fathers gave us then he is by definition a Conservative and true Republicans and conservatives recognize that.

  • ronnyo

    The fact that Ron Paul is steadily gaining support across the whole voting spectrum—is very scary to people on both sides of the isle—they each stand to lose many things if his policies are implemented–which is as much an attraction for me as his policies themselves——and it seems that the more of what appears on the surface to be “negative press”–that the other candidates and media are giving him–is actually assisting his campaign immensely–the fact that may people who have not heard of Ron Paul-or his policies–are now getting a first hand view of what they really are(which is more than he could have done on his own)–and seems to be processing that information to a logical conclusion and realize that his positions are not that radical after all(given the current state of affairs)———-so I would say to the media—keep it up—Ron Paul has “no dirt” so it’s just about his policies and I think his policies will withstand the scrutiny—and you’ll be helping him gain support. It’s ironic that the media would not give him equal time–and when they do now and get negative–it backfires on them and turns into a positive.
    For those that are still on the fence and haven’t decided who they’re going to support—remember one thing–Ron Paul represents CHANGE–and change is what the vast majority have said in no uncertain terms–that you want——–a vote for anyone else in this election(including Obama) agrueably represents the STATUS QUO——Either CHANGE or the STATUS QUO–by definition–you can’t have both!!

    • david w

      you hit the nail on the head! STATUS QUO is so powerful and corrupt, they do not take kindly to outsiders sniffing at their mountain of wealth.

  • George

    Many call Dr. Paul an isolationist. He just doesn’t believe in invading other sovereign governments because we disagree with them. However, he endorses economic activity with other countries; he doesn’t believe in invading them first. He is ready to take up arms in the defense of the USA, but it has to be a justifiable danger, not an imagined one.

  • Kevin Beck

    I would be pleased if the doofi in the “mainstream” media would just report the facts instead of basing all their opinions about the one candidate for President that will work to reduce government on the thought that he may have some viewpoints different from their own. And this goes double for the mealy-mouthed sock-puppets at the top of the Republican Establishment, an entity that those at the top claim doesn’t exist.

    If not now, when? If not us, who?

    Besides: What other candidate for President has proposed reducing government spending to match revenues?

    • Joe H.

      Kevin Beck,
      What other candidate for president has suggested cutting his OWN salary by one third??? surely not Gingrich or Romney!!! If they get elected, they would probably want a RAISE!! Ron Paul has suggested cutting the presidents salary by one third and I greatly respect him for it!!

  • Dennis Wright

    Dr. Paul supports the small government, deregulation, and unbalanced tax code that is central to so called Reganomics. It is not hysteria to point out we have had these policies since the 1980s and they are central to our economic problems today. It is not hysteria to point out the philosophy of government embodied in so called Reaganomics that lead to recessions/depressions in 1819, 1837, 1888, 1932, and 2008.

    It is also not hysteria to point out we had a recession in the middle of the Reagan Administration and a stock market crash. It might be more than a bit of euphoric recall to a say we had a good or great economy under Reagan. It remains difficult to see Dr. Paul offers anything different than this philosophy of government and economics.

    • JayP

      Our problem is not small government, deregulation and unbalanced taxes. Our problem is fiat money, massive government spending money faster than they can print it while demanding even more, threatening little old ladies will lose their Social Security if the evil Republicans don’t agree to even more spending.

  • Ted Crawford

    I too hope that Ron Paul wins in Iowa! They have acurately predicted “1″ of the last “44″ Presidents! The odds are in our favor!

  • david w

    hopefully it is 2 for 45

  • joe

    Ron Paul is the only true American(USA)in the race for POTUS. WHY has
    no one mentioned that he tried for years to get HR 1146 passed to preserve
    our sovereignty? Well – maybe it was HR 1149. Sorry – but my 81 year old
    brain tends to forget.


Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.