All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 7, 2023 - Ron Paul Liberty Report
35:22
Desperation? Biden Warns Trump To Rule As 'Dictator'

With 'Russiagate" dead and buried (for now), President Biden is looking for new scares to warn voters off Trump. "He'll be a dictator," is the new mantra. Meanwhile the reality is that all presidents rule as dictators. Also today: how about that Republican debate? Finally: MTG lets loose on the evil NDAA and limp Republican dealmakers.

|

Time Text
Why They Want a Dictator 00:15:21
Hello, everybody, and thank you for tuning in to the Liberty Report.
With us today is Daniel McAdams, our co-host.
Daniel, good to see you this morning.
Happy Thursday, Dr. Paul.
Okay, you've been doing your homework.
I've been checking up, making sure we deliver the goods.
You know, it's not difficult to find things to say that other people haven't said because we want to tell the truth.
It's how do you make it up and how do you spin it?
You know, that's what politics came to me understanding.
It's all spin.
It's all demagoguing what they do.
And it's never, every once in a while you come across somebody that's going to speak plainly and they get people's attention.
But this week, you know, somebody wants to paint Trump as a bad person.
And he has his faults, but the people who are claiming he's a really, really bad person, they have their faults too.
They have their faults too.
But I've always maintained that all this noise we hear comes from people, and especially this guy, I think he used to be a governor of New Jersey.
I think he's jealous.
They start off with jealousy because I always saw Christie as a guy that wanted to demagogue and lost and pushing around.
He's sort of a political bully.
And he's been doing this.
But when Trump outdid him, he used some of the same techniques.
Some people even point out that in some ways they were similar, you know, the shouting and putting people down.
So that happened.
And now we have Christie very upset.
He's really not running for president.
I think he's not an idiot.
He doesn't think, oh, you know what?
There's going to be an upset and I'm going to be president.
But his victory will be if they can destroy Trump and they'll do anything.
So he's part of that crowd.
And the Democrats probably love him for it because he's doing a lot of the dirty work.
So that's what's going on.
And so somebody comes along and calls Trump a dictator.
And I thought, well, big deal.
Don't they all dictate?
I mean, that's what government's all about.
And some are much worse than others, dictating one thing.
If you dictate the proper policy, that's all right.
But others want to see dictator, but they want to paint him as Hitler, Mussolini or somebody like that that's going to come in.
And he has his shortcomings.
He has his economic shortcomings, foreign policy, and it works.
But compared to what?
Compared to what?
Because that's what ends up in campaigns.
Compared to what?
What's going on?
But yes, they have done it, and the media loves it.
And then the other day, Trump didn't bash him strong enough to say, oh, Trump's over now.
He didn't answer their questions.
Now he says he'll be dictator for a day.
That's something that almost anybody might say.
If I just had one day, I would be a dictator and close the Fed down a few other days.
There you go.
But anyway, he's the dictator of the day, the month.
And some people, unfortunately, sort of like that idea.
They don't want somebody pussyfooting around.
They want somebody because they feel like it's been done.
We don't have a Department of Justice.
When they look at what's been done to Trump and a Republican and what has happened, people like January 6th and the court cases going on there, that is really dictatorial and they dictate.
And when it comes to political punishment, they call it weaponizing it.
Well, I hadn't used that word much, but I think I know what they're talking about, unfortunately.
And right now, you know, this is an issue, but I don't think, you know, who knows?
In the next day or two, there might be somebody paraphrasing this.
It's going to help Trump.
Most of this stuff, it's over the top.
When it's over the top, they say, oh, Trump is going to be like Hitler.
Oh, yeah, he was the guy that, you know, went along with the right to life people and did his best appointing judges so they'd stop abortion, you know, this sort of thing.
All of a sudden, but I think this is what's happened.
His enemies are over the top, and they did overkill, and they destroyed a structure which is justice in this system in our country.
And it's undermined it, and people don't trust it.
People probably, number-wise, even with the dissension between Republicans and Democrats, they have more trust in Trump than they do in the government telling us a straight story.
Yeah, and you know, it's the old thing projection.
You know, Biden warning that Trump will rule as a dictator.
These last three years of Biden have, he doesn't have a lot of ground to stand on.
As you say, the January 6th, the weaponization of the Justice Department, sending American troops and weapons to war without a declaration of war, bypassing Congress.
So, yeah, he probably knows what it looks like.
But here's what we're talking about.
This is from Politico, if he can put up that first clip.
It almost smacks of desperation, Dr. Paul, in my view.
They no longer have Russia 8.
They can't run on that anymore, at least for now.
Trump's dictator remark puts 2024 campaign right where Biden wants it.
And we have no illusions about political.
They're definitely in the bag for Biden and the Democrats.
We go to them because occasionally they get some facts right, but we know what their spin is about.
So they're basically thrilled that Biden finally has something to scare Americans about.
And if you go to the next one, this is what it's all about.
After Trump told a Fox News town hall that he would not be a dictator upon returning to office, quote, other than day one, the Biden campaign pounced.
It highlighted Trump's remarks as another moment in which the GOP frontrunner showcased his undemocratic and dangerous plans for the second, possible second term.
And here's what he actually said, though, Dr. Paul.
Here's his, I'm going to be a dictator on day one.
He said, I want to close the border and I want to drill, drill, drill, Trump said.
Other than that, I'm not a dictator.
So when you actually drill down to what he said, on day one, he's going to close the border and start drilling for oil.
That's hardly, I think, would scare the voters.
You know, I was during the campaigning and getting a little bit of traction that they had to, on occasion, address what I was saying because people sort of, there were a few that liked it.
But the one criticism they had, because I didn't think that I had, you know, it wasn't vicious and mean and nasty.
I didn't feel like they were doing that.
I felt like they had to go after me.
But the one word they use is, if we had Ron Paul there, it would be so dangerous.
Dangerous, yeah.
He'd probably be a very dangerous person.
Oh, you'd protect civil liberties.
Yeah, people would have to be careful what they're doing.
That whole thing.
But I would be too dangerous, so they couldn't consider this.
And this is something that, you know, we could go on and on.
And you made the point correctly at the beginning.
If you look at the last three years, if you want to talk about dictatorial, you know, for years, the word I used mostly, and that's what a dictator is, they're authoritarians.
They have no restraints.
And now people pick and choose.
And some of the worst people in Congress that violate the Constitution the most, you know, still know that they had come up.
Those Republicans, they did this, and they don't even believe in the Constitution.
And they're people that, you know, are the worst ones in the world.
But so they still play that game.
But what's neat is a lot of people are starting to wake up and they just dismiss that.
And I always remember the one young guy that talked to me after a debate.
I said, the other person said this.
Why don't you go to talk to them?
He says, yeah, he said the same thing.
He said, but I don't believe him.
So believing, and right now, there's a healthy skepticism of what our government is doing.
And there is a lot of partisanship.
But the truth is, there's a lot of people who say it's just the runaway government, the runaway spending, the runaway wars, all of this activity.
And there's a beginning to be, that's why people are thinking, what we need is another option.
We need a third option.
I said, well, no, we probably need just one option.
Exactly.
Have two parties instead of three.
Well, I mean, I think, and you said this before when we were talking about what we want to talk about today on the show, which is that, yeah, he probably will be an authoritarian and like a dictator, but that's because that seems what American people want.
What are you going to do about jobs?
What are you going to do about this?
What are you going to do about that?
They want a president to be a dictator.
But now here's from the politico article.
And this just goes to show, you know, rejection, hypocrisy, whatever, put on the next clip.
So here's the beef in Biden's beef with Trump.
So Biden has expressed his fear to confidants that Trump would have unchecked power if he were returned to office.
According to three people, Trump would likely have at least one Republican-controlled chamber in Congress.
Biden has that.
A conservative Supreme Court, the allegiance of a true believer, staff members and GOP state officials, and the knowledge he could be impeached twice and charged criminally in four jurisdictions and still claim power.
Now, here's the part that I highlighted.
He'd view this as a mandate.
Biden has said privately.
Well, guess what?
When you run for an elective office and people vote for you and you win, that's called a mandate, right?
What is it not if it's not a mandate?
Of course, the thing that we put up at the top is a mandate to follow the rules of the Constitution.
That's a difference because too often then they drift over and they redefine all these words.
And mandate means that we can do anything, anything we want.
Anything you want.
And power is very seductive.
And it seems like they drift over some of the greatest speeches.
But I think it's worse now than it was when I was in Congress.
It's worse now than maybe over the last hundred years.
It's never been perfect, obviously, but there certainly is a difference of the way it was and the way it was started.
And it certainly is the difference between the one guiding document that we were supposed to use and the founders realizing that that will be the test.
It's going to be a test of the people, whether they even care about our outline and our mandates about what our mandates, the founders had were to restrain the government.
That's the mandate.
Not to mandate a power.
And there's, of course, big difference.
Yeah, absolutely.
Well, let's talk a little bit about the so-called debate last night.
I didn't watch it.
You didn't watch it.
But I did go onto Twitter and we went onto Zero Hedge to read what may have happened.
I mean, it's completely inconsequential.
It almost seems like a charade.
You know, he's ahead by 60 points, Donald Trump is, but they're still having the charaded of a debate.
Well, let's put this next.
This is Zero Hedge's take on it.
It's worth reading.
I think they did a pretty good job of summarizing it.
First, final GOP debate post-mortem.
Haley hammered, DeSantis dud, Christie questioned.
Ramaswamy outs the real enemy.
And you can see on this chart, Trump is in the green.
He's not only not being hurt by attacks, but he's still surging in the polls.
The funny thing is, down if you look toward the bottom, everyone talks about the great Nikki Haley surge.
She went from five to ten.
Okay, well, she gained a little, but guess what?
She's still 50 points behind Trump.
So I think they're just desperate to give the appearance that there's some kind of a race going on here.
But I don't know what you're I know you didn't watch it, but you've been reading about it.
The tip off of the best line was in the headline there.
Where is the real enemy?
So this fits into my argument that it isn't, you know, the Republicans are angels and the Democrats are bad people.
And yet they're all the same, basically, even though you can't paint everybody that way because there are some good Democrats that on occasion do really great things, you know, when they stand up against the bullies and all.
But, you know, when everybody was talking about the real enemy, Trump, Trump, you know, and all this stuff, why didn't you hit Trump harder?
But, of course, Ramaswamy hit Hannah on the head because this is what we've been trying to point out.
There are people that are behind the scenes and they're never out front.
You know, I guess not many people until recently ever heard the name Soros.
And all of a sudden, we find that the real enemy is called the deep state, but there's a lot of, nobody can precisely define the pre-state, the police state.
But the police state, you know, is something that people talk about because it's secret government that pulls the strings and they have economic power behind them and they have government power behind them and they wheel and deal.
So this is why, in a way, what's going on right now, I mean, do we really have a president?
Or is the deep state, you know, very, they're probably more influential than ever.
I mean, if I think the deep state probably fears Trump because he was probably very independent of the deep state, even though he too will have to recognize it because the deep state is so powerful.
But I'll tell you, the deep state is very powerful.
And like the point I make on it is if you have Republicans or Democrats in the office, and no matter what they say about the central bank, you know, they're both might criticize, but they're both for it.
Deep State's Grip 00:02:01
And it'll be interesting to see if the Argentinians actually get ahead of us on this because their new president says, I'm going to get rid of their central bank.
But I'm not overly optimistic.
I'm going to hold my breath.
Well, you know, on Ramaswamy, he said, the enemy is not Trump.
The enemy is not Biden.
The enemy is the deep state.
And that is a pretty bold statement.
And you know, I go back and forth on Ramaswamy.
There's so much to like about him.
The fact that he's a breath of fresh air, he feels like a generational change in the Republican Party because you have Haley, you have the flatulent Chris Christie, you have DeSantis who disappointed everyone, including us up there.
They feel like the old guard.
It really feels like they're partying like it's 1999, you know, old school.
And you have Ramaswamy come up and he's throwing out a lot of new ideas.
And, you know, I'm not being obsequious.
That's what you did in 08 and 12.
No one else is saying this.
That's what Ramaswamy is doing now.
And there are a lot of things that annoy me about him.
I think he panders a lot too much.
But nevertheless, he's a breath of fresh air when he comes up there, just dropping this line.
None of the three of them would say that.
Certainly, if they did, you wouldn't believe them.
But coming up and saying that was powerful.
But I have to say, the moment of the debate that was A, a huge risk that he took with a potentially huge payoff, and he gambled right, which is that he took Nikki Haley to task because everyone, remember the last debate?
Oh, Nikki Haley really showed her foreign policy chops on this one.
Well, he took her to task on that.
And he did something that I know you said over and over, if you want to vote to bomb a place, you got to be able to find it on the map.
And Ramaswamy essentially did that.
And we have the clip.
And just watch the look on Nikki Haley's face.
Supposedly with these amazing foreign policy chops, she's brilliant at it.
Look at the look on her face when Ramaswamy, you might want to put on your ear piece here, Dr. Paul.
Ramaswamy calls her out on this.
This is a brilliant moment.
Nikki Haley's Embarrassing Moment 00:03:19
Person to say we need a reasonable peace deal in Ukraine.
Now a lot of the neocons are quietly coming along to that position with the exceptions of Nikki Haley and Joe Biden who still support this, what I believe is pointless war in Ukraine.
And I think those with foreign policy experience, one thing that Joe Biden and Nikki Haley have in common is that neither of them could even state for you three provinces in eastern Ukraine that they want to send our troops to actually fight for.
Look at that.
This is what I want people to understand.
These people have, I mean, she has no idea what the hell the names of those provinces are, but she wants to send our sons and daughters and our troops and our military equipment to go fight it.
So reject this myth that they've been selling you that somebody had a cup of coffee, stint at the UN, and then makes $8 million after has real foreign policy experience.
It takes an outsider to see this through.
Look at the blank expression.
She doesn't know the names of the provinces that she wants to actually fight for.
And there's a puppet man.
That was brilliant.
Look at her blank expression.
She doesn't even know the provinces where she wants us to fight in.
That's a moment.
What I like about this is he's using a very important principle.
And that is when you're debating things.
And sometimes I think about this when they debate the abortion issue.
You should define what you're talking about.
And the one thing you never do, you never hear, and especially the pro-abortionists, you should never define what an abortion is all about.
I mean, are we dealing with human life?
Are we dealing with the destruction of a human life?
Are we denying rights to individual, a human life that is alive?
No, just ask the question.
You know, one thing that they're not allowed to do, it's never been done because it's grotesque.
And that is show an abortion.
And it is horrible, but that's what they want to be in denial.
I had somebody that worked for me for a little while, just locums, and then he went off to a place where they were doing abortion.
Then he came back to visit me.
And I said, are you doing abortions?
Yes, he wasn't a bad guy.
He bought into it.
So he was doing abortion.
I said, doesn't it bother you?
He says, no, not unless I see the fetus.
Oh, geez.
I mean, it just in the denial like it.
And, you know, then the dumbest thing they use, and nobody asks a question, oh, they're taking away our reproductive rights.
Now, why would you not be allowed to reproduce by an anti-abortion law?
It has nothing to do with it.
It's the destruction of the rights of a human being.
But that is tough, but that's why I like this.
He was saying, well, define what you're doing.
Exactly.
Define it.
What does this mean?
Is this not a war?
And then she has this blank expression.
How upset did they get me when it get at me when I made them vote on whether going into the Middle East, that was the beginning of a 15-year war that was happening?
How dare you make them vote on it?
Well, I've got another Nikki clip because, you know, I mean, it's astonishing for me to hear people saying that she's surging, that she has this big base of support.
Literally, nobody likes her because she is not that smart.
Let's put it that way, charitably.
Why She's Surging 00:02:28
You know, I remember last time her big thing was, you can't go on social media unless you use your real name.
And then everyone pointed out, Nikki, you're not using your own real name.
This is a fake name.
You made it up.
So, but this is a good one.
Now, this is Nikki Haley at her finest.
She's furious with TikTok.
She's furious, and you'll never guess why.
Let's put this next clip on and listen while she's so mad, so mad at TikTok.
We really do need to ban TikTok once and for all.
And let me tell you why.
For every 30 minutes that someone watches TikTok, every day, they become 17% more anti-Semitic, more pro-homophobic.
You turn it off because that's enough.
Anti-Semitic.
This is amazing.
For every 30 minutes you watch TikTok, you become 17% more anti-Semitic.
And she figured that out somehow.
I have to say, I don't want to put him on the spot, but our intrepid Friday host had a comment on this, and I think it's a good question.
Chris Rossini said, so after a few hours, you're 100% anti-Semitic?
And then he asked a good question, can you go over 100% if you keep watching after that?
You know, I've worried about a new technology coming in, and she uses it, and that's this artificial intelligence.
You know, it's so artificial when they put it together.
It's no common sense.
Artificial intelligence means it comes out of a machine and not out of a brain.
Yeah, I don't know that she's got much of a brain going on there.
But yeah, I guess if you listen more than a half an hour or so, I mean, just be careful.
I mean, it's just so goofy and it's just so dumb.
But I don't know, did you have anything more you wanted to say about the debates?
I didn't really, except, you know, hats off to Ramaswamy in a way.
I mean, it's good for him.
You know, no, I think the debates are important enough.
And every once in a while, we would not know about Ramaswamy.
And he has a lot to contribute.
He does.
And he probably has learned a lot.
He's somebody that probably will learn and know what the limits are.
And he's obviously very, very bright.
And he is willing to speak his piece.
And he stands out like that.
And I predict he's not going to win the presidency, but I predict that you haven't heard the last of him.
Yeah, I hope not.
And he's going to be around.
Because if they were smart, they'd put him in an administration.
I don't think Haley will do that.
National Defense Bill Under Radar 00:11:59
No, no, I don't think she will.
So let's move on to the final thing.
And I mean, there is a lot today, but the NDAA is again cruising in under the radar.
The National Defense Authorization Bill is cruising in under the radar.
However, there's one member of Congress who's not about to let it cruise in without a scream or two, and that's Marjorie Taylor Greene.
She is a mixed bag on a lot of things, but I tell you what, there's no one in the house, I think, that speaks their mind like Marjorie Taylor Greene does.
And if you try to pull the wool over her eyes, she just reminds me of the classic Southern woman.
If you try to pull the wool over her eyes, she's going to call you on it.
And put up that next clip.
Don't start playing it right away.
If you can scroll up a little, because this is a great little, yeah, here.
So she wrote a post on X, and she says, it's outrageous.
The leadership is asking members of the NDAA conference to sign the 3,000-page report, which is being released behind closed doors without ever getting the chance to read it.
Now, before we read it, before we listen to what she has to say, we need to talk about, I think, the procedures, because a lot of Americans don't understand.
Yes, and I've complained about this before because it's a farce.
Because we're taught in grade school, the civics lessons.
Oh, this bill for taxes is introduced in the House and the Senate has certain responsibilities.
They get together and they work it out.
And if they don't agree, they have a conference report and work out the differences.
And then it goes to the president for signature.
But it essentially never happens that way because what gets written up is usually pressured by the special interest, the money, and where is the money gone.
And, you know, like the military-industrial complex, why she has a tough job because she's not going to kowtow to them.
And she's fighting it for the right reason.
But they have, when a bill is passed in the House, to bring it to the floor, you have to take it to the Rules Committee.
This might be after the committee would be in the banking committee and work on something weeks and weeks on details of everything else.
And so you send a bill that has shortcomings and all of them, maybe some good stuff.
So you have to go through the Rules Committee.
The first thing they could do is just strike everything except the clause that has the bill and rewrite the whole thing after all of that time.
But I don't think you get taught that in government schools.
So that is a big problem.
But then the other day, matter of fact, I think it came up up there, happens all the time.
It's the conference report.
The House passes something.
The Senate passes something.
Oh, well, they won $100,000 and this one wants $75,000.
We'll split the difference and do it.
It's supposed to be split the difference and settle it.
But now they commit and they rewrite, but this is usually sneakier.
They put stuff in there that really changes the nature of the bill, but it's always very small.
I remember back in the 70s, they were working on a Monetary Control Act, which was very, very bad.
And I had a staffer on at that time that was a detailed person, read that bill thoroughly, just found about two phrases that changed everything about what the Fed could do and how much they could monetize.
And yet it ended up, I think, basically it said they could monetize anything they want, all foreign operations too.
So that got snuck in there.
And we were able to point it out, but we couldn't stop it.
But that's the way it operates.
So it's not the proper procedures for Congress will not be taught in a government school.
That should be the conclusion.
But they're now arguing over money for and policy for our borders.
And it's been a good argument because they are abused.
They permitted and invited an invasion.
If you talk about somebody coming into our country, the doors were just wide open.
The cost would punish our veterans and all the nonsense going on there.
So they've done that.
And yet, what they have to do now, they want money for the borders and money to stop, like Green would stop him from going to Ukraine, that sort of thing.
So I got to thinking, well, what do I think is going to happen?
Well, record shows that both sides will get some of what they want.
Exactly.
But let's hope that's not true.
I said in my note, I said, I hope it's different this time.
But even if it's different, let's say the Republicans win the argument and they get more border patrol.
And if it's done correctly, that's proper.
But this whole thing that say they don't put any money into the Ukraine war.
Well, what happens?
Well, next month there's going to be a slaughter someplace and it will maybe be next door to Ukraine.
They'll do something that the people will melt and say, well, we can't.
We can't avoid it, you know, doing it.
But the general rule is if you have an argument like this and there's really a bitter argument, they might hide it and then somehow or another, you know, maybe it'll be out in the open, one half, the other half is done under the table, you know, but they end up getting the money.
They have different mechanisms for taking care of their friends.
No kidding.
Well, let's listen to Marjorie Taylor Greene for about a minute and a half because she, no, she's put on the, she's put on the rules, or the, I'm sorry, she's put on the conference committee, which means you should have a say.
And so this is a good little bit.
I mean, really for Americans, this is a good little bit of behind the scenes of how things really work in D.C. Let's listen to Marjorie Taylor Greene.
I had been assigned.
The NDAA is complete.
I had been assigned to be a conferee on the conference.
Here we're going to follow me.
We're getting it all there.
And we didn't get to participate at all.
As a matter of fact, the whole NDAA deal was made between Speaker Johnson, Chuck Schumer, and the HAFS committee.
And people like me, we didn't get to participate.
And we were appointed to participate to make sure no money for abortion, no money for trans.
For members like me standing up for Americans who are sick and tired of funding the Ukraine war, we had taken the $300 million out of the defense bill.
Well, let me tell you what the final product is and the deal that was made.
So the policy is in place that funding is there for abortion travel.
The policy is still in place for trans and the military and everything that goes with it.
Democrat trans policy, Democrat abortion policy.
$300 million for Ukraine is back in the NDA, even though I had worked hard to take it out.
It's back in.
And furthermore, here's the worst news.
It gets a clean FISA extension through April.
No change to the FISA court whatsoever.
Nothing changed.
And that deal was made also.
So just wanted to give you a heads up.
I'll be flat out no to this NDAA.
And I think it's outrageous that this happened with our Republican control.
That's great.
Isn't that so blatant to bring that up?
And, you know, they should suspect the people getting annoyed with this kind of stuff.
But here it is, 3,000 pages.
And they start by saying nobody's going to read it.
And she was on the committee.
Yeah, on the committee.
And she's the one that's supposed to help bring it together, but they had to get rid of her somehow or another, so they just exclude everybody from doing it.
But, you know, they are so blatant.
But that's essentially when it gets really, really serious because indirectly most of this stuff is related to foreign policy, you know, and declaration of war.
They're just, you know, so open about it.
Just think of Truman.
Truman did a couple things, but not many.
But the worst thing was he established immediately, just shortly after the UN was established, that shortly after World War II ended, he said, well, we have to do this to save the world.
And he says, well, no, this is, somebody asked him about the war.
He said, this is not a war.
This is just a police action.
Golly.
So they get away with that, but they shouldn't.
You need more people like Green in there.
And there are a few, but it really boils down to a prevailing attitude, a philosophy of society, what comes out of our universities, what comes out of the very rich lobbyists going on.
The system, the system is rotten, you know, because the lobbyists are really running.
It's all about the deep state.
I mean, it's just incredible.
And I'm glad she did it.
Speaker Johnson is supposed to be a fighter for Republican causes.
All the abortion money's in there.
All the Ukraine money's in there.
And the FISA.
That's the big thing, because that was supposed to at least be a fight to extend that eavesdropping on American citizens.
That should have been a fight.
Nope, they roll over on that as well.
It's disgusting.
It is.
Who owns the justice system?
Not the people.
Yeah, well, I just want to close by thanking everyone for watching the show today.
Our numbers are a little slow.
I know it's Christmas time.
Everyone's shopping.
Take a little time off of Amazon or wherever you're shopping.
Watch the Liberty Report.
It only takes a half an hour to keep up on what's going on.
And those of you that are watching, we definitely, especially this time of year, appreciate you watching the program.
Very, very good.
And I, too, want to thank our viewers for supporting us because we couldn't do it without you.
We still do it.
We do look at the numbers and we're very much encouraged.
But if you can promote our program and get a few more people, it would be helpful.
But we also know that total numbers aren't the difference.
But I know that is true.
You don't have to have 51% to change opinion.
But an attitude is a little bit different, prevailing attitudes.
Right now, the prevailing attitude of this country, because they haven't even thought about it, is how could an economic system work without the Federal Reserve?
You know, the attitude is the prevailing attitude, and that's established over many, many years.
And if you think of many of our problems, many of those things started 100 years ago or more in the progressive era.
1913 was a bad year, and the prevailing attitude has changed a lot since 1913.
But just knowing about it helps us try to figure out and understand what happened.
And it makes it difficult to change it.
It's not going to be easy, but it does set the stage for when it gets so difficult it doesn't work.
Hopefully there will be a time where the remnant of those who believe in liberty will have an influence in rebuilding our free society.
Export Selection