All Episodes
Previous Next
April 10, 2024 - Ron Paul Liberty Report
25:20
Smackdown! Rand HAMMERS Mitch On 'Isolationism' Accusation!

Senator Paul put out a scorcher of an article in response to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's accusation that Rand was an "isolationist." We'll unpack the sizzler in today's show. Also today - Democrats are calling on Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor to step down so Biden can name a "younger" replacement in case he loses his re-election bid. Does this seem a bit tawdry and unseemly?

|

Time Text
Markets Jumping Around 00:06:01
Hello, everybody, and thank you for tuning in to the Liberty Report.
With us today, we have Daniel McAdams, our co-host.
Daniel, good to see you this morning.
How are you, Dr. Paul?
Very well, thank you.
We have an exciting program today.
That's right.
And we have an exciting weekend because we're busy doing some work over the weekend.
And that will be interesting.
But before we get started, even getting into some of our program today, I wanted to talk a little bit about the markets because the markets were jumping around.
I'll tell you.
I've told people in the past that one of the things I look at early on is what the value of the dollar is in relationship to the gold.
And a lot of times, and I'm always tempted to say it, and I frequently do because everybody says, what's the gold price?
What's the gold price?
But really, we should condition ourselves to always think, what is the dollar doing in relation to gold?
And when the value of the gold goes up, the value of the dollar goes down.
And that's certainly what was happening this morning.
And it went big time because the CPI came up and everybody was expecting it.
And the Fed doesn't tell the truth.
They come up with false statistics.
So they've been promising all along, well, we're going to lower interest rates, you know, at least once next month or two.
And the markets anticipated that, but that's all fodder for, you know, Wall Street.
Wall Street likes that.
So when the CPI came out this morning, one-tenth of 1%, it was exciting because that was, oh, they missed it.
And all of a sudden, that means the Fed is not going to lower interest rates.
It looks like the market is overwhelming and on and on.
And gold was in a position for a correction because it's been soaring so much in relationship to the dollar.
But that did happen.
And rates went up.
So the value of bonds went down.
And people were really excited on that in the stock market, you know, down three, $500, and it's still shaky.
Because even as we speak, it could change rapidly.
And by the end of the day, who knows what it's going to be?
Because when markets get to the point, they get very shaky because it's all been based on false information.
And most people know they can't fully trust the Fed.
But, you know, it'd be a rough time if you were a trader in this business.
I couldn't do it because I wouldn't trust anything the government tells.
This is a day where it would pay out for the people to look at it that way because they have to adjust rather rapidly.
But the CPI came out, you know, it was a slightly, you know, when you look at a percentage, it looks like a little bit, but for financial reasons, it sounds like a big deal.
And I think that what we're going to see is a continuation of this adjustment.
And that means that the so-called price of both gold and silver will vary a lot.
And it's also one of the reasons we work with Birch Gold, because they talk about what's going on a long time before the markets get real shaky.
They try to prepare people.
But believe me, the ball game is not over.
It's just getting started.
We're in like the second inning.
And it's going to be ups and downs.
And it's basically going to follow the trend that has occurred since I first started really paying attention.
And that was in 1971 when gold was $35 an ounce.
Even though I prepare myself, I tell people what I think is going to happen, even though that happens, when it happens, I still say, wow, what are they doing?
Here it is, $2,000 plus dollars in relationship to gold.
And it's going to continue this way because they will not look at the evil that the Fed does, nor do they look at the evil that the politicians do, and the spending of the money and our foreign policy and all this, and why the debt and the spending is going to be there.
And that's why this attack is going to be on.
But it's also the main reason why I ask people to consider, you know, if you have not made your plans and trying to protect yourself, because I get the question a lot, how do you protect yourself?
How do you protect yourself?
Well, you know, my first answer is fight for liberty, because if we had our liberties, we could take care of ourselves a lot better.
But that is not on the horizon.
People can do that as individuals and they can try to work it out, but it doesn't happen easily.
So I think that's the one thing is to, you know, fight for our freedom.
But in the meantime, I think it would be wise to see what Birch Gold has to say, because if you text Ron 989898, you can get some material from Birch.
It's material they send out for information in understanding this issue.
And they do that.
They don't charge you for this.
So if you're in need of some information, because I read all the information I can ever find on all this, because it's so much in flux, and you have the government and the lying in competition with the market that demands a certain correction.
I think today I would say because of these corrections, it's a recognition of the chaos.
And that is the reason that right now people are very concerned and very worried.
So once again, if you're looking for a little more information and you want to get in contact with Birch Gold, text Ron 989898, and they'll send you material and they don't send you a bill with it.
And now we're going to move into our program.
Senator McConnell's Stance 00:15:34
And I think this Daniel McAdams has snuck something in on me.
He wanted to talk about my family again.
So I don't know, Daniel, what are we going to say?
Yeah, I know you'll say nice things.
Well, you know, we talked last week about Mitch McConnell, the Senate Republican minority leader, and he said, yes, I'm going to give up my position as a leader, but I'm going to stick around because I've got to fight those isolationists in my party.
They're a danger.
They're a growing threat.
You wrote about it this week in your column, and he specifically singled out someone named Senator Rand Paul.
And he said, I bet if you asked him, he'd even admit that he's an isolationist.
Well, Senator Paul responded today in a local Kentucky paper, and it was a smackdown to beat all SmackDown.
Let's put this on.
Great headline.
Anytime McConnell wants to debate his Ukraine first policy with me in Kentucky, bring it on, is what Senator Paul said.
And you go to the next one.
This is where he opens his piece.
He says, Mitch McConnell has pledged to fight GOP isolationism in the remainder of his career.
I doubt that his self-appointed quest will improve support among Kentucky voters.
In fact, McConnell has the lowest approval rate of any federally elected official ever.
A recent Monmouth University poll showed McConnell with a 6% approval rate and a 60% disapproval rate.
So, anytime he wants to debate his Ukraine first policy with me in Kentucky, bring it on, he says.
You know, this argument's been going on for a long time because there was a time when there was a slightly different interpretation of isolationism.
Some people hoped that that term would represent isolating our weapons, but then it turned into isolationism as a negative term, and that you were against freedom, free trade, free travel, and you know, people getting along together in a voluntary way.
And that, of course, is what we support.
And this is something that they've been arguing about.
And in Washington, unfortunately, the people who at least partially would agree with McConnell, we have Republicans that will go along.
I mean, he was the leader of the Senate for all those years.
So, and he was spending the money, and he was also wanting to interfere in the relationships with other countries.
And this is something that comes to an end because it ends badly.
And I think that what we have to do, though, is make sure people understand that you can have non-interventionism, which is a term I use.
Rand uses a slightly different term.
Non-intervention means that we mind our own business, but it means you get along with people voluntarily.
And how do you solve the arguments and difficulties?
In a free market, a libertarian society, you have to have honor and respect and voluntary obedience to what you agree to, and that is the contract.
If you didn't have recognition of a contract, the market doesn't work.
And that's one of the big problems we have today because the government regulates all contracts and they rule over them.
They say, oh, no, that contract's no good.
And the government, matter of fact, the government sets the standard by never obeying their contracts.
And that's where it is.
But this thing is getting messy.
I think there's going to be more debates like this.
I was delighted to read this because he didn't avoid the challenge that McConnell threw out to him.
Yeah, absolutely.
Well, if we go back to that, but here's how he further explained it in that first clip.
He says, one thing's for certain: Kentuckians know that McConnell is not fiscally conservative.
Put that first clip up if you can.
In the past year, now here's the particulars.
In the past year, McConnell voted for Biden's trillion-dollar infrastructure plan, Biden's trillion-dollar spending bills, and nearly $200 billion for Ukraine.
The total deficit from Biden-McConnell spending spree will be one and a half to two trillion dollars this year.
He also added, and I didn't put it up here as a clip, but it's worth mentioning about McConnell.
During McConnell's tenure as leader of the GOP caucus, he's voted for and cheered U.S. military intervention in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and now Ukraine.
McConnell, like McCain and the other neocons, believes that anyone who opposes military or monetary foreign interventionism is somehow an isolationist.
And I would just add to what Senator Paul says: every one of those projects that he points out that McConnell enthusiastically supported ended up as abject failures, extraordinarily costly, multi-trillion dollar failures.
So everything McConnell has embraced overseas has failed.
Yet anyone who opposes him embracing yet another failure is an isolationist.
All he has left is to call names.
You know, back to my argument about understanding what these terms mean.
But a libertarian free market position is in many ways.
I think you would agree.
It's exactly the opposite of what he's accusing us of doing, isolationism.
Because I think if you really want to get along with people, you have to be willing to talk to people.
The whole thing is, there's so many special interests involved, and I think that's big government all over.
Do you have to deal just with our country and getting along with another country?
No, you have the states to deal with, and you have the federal government, then you have all the international governments, and then you have the monetary system, which is universal, where the dollar is chief currency, the reserve currency.
So there's so many opportunities for this, and it sets the stage for the use of this intervention for the material benefits of certain groups.
And that's why you have special groups, because we want democracy.
So if we just get 51% of the special groups to agree that we're going to use the government for our benefits, all of a sudden you have what we have now, runaway deficits.
And until we change our attitude about that and our understanding of that, this thing gets worse.
Yeah.
Well, I think Senator Paul characterizes it about like you do.
If he could put up that next clip, I think it's a great way.
It's a great pifty way that he's described it.
He said, McConnell wishes to characterize my policies as isolationist.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Where he preaches belligerence with all, banning companies with international ownership and trade sanctions across the globe, I continue to advocate for international commerce and active diplomacy with our adversaries.
So, as Rand is pointing out, we are the opposite of isolationists.
We want to engage the world.
He's the isolationist.
And there was a headline this morning worth looking at because you're seeing the consequence of this on Hedge.
China ditches U.S. farmers for Brazilian ones to protest of land ownership rules.
Well, that's been going on.
We own a lot of land around the world, and if there's a disagreement or something, you know, work it out, have a contract and an agreement on this.
But we have a lot of people who are protectionists.
You know, companies, usually it's to protect somebody's industry, but it's also protect political power.
So China, you know, they're participating in the corn business.
And guess what?
They're going to buy from Brazil.
So in a way, this is really radical.
They sort of one-upped the U.S. by going toward a free market approach, you know, at least an more open approach to go and talk to other people.
So I just don't see why their eyes can't be open.
But they've been conditioned for 100 years about why you have to have intervention.
You couldn't trust the market.
I mean, it's untrustworthy because they'll make too many mistakes.
Oh, yeah, we want to put everybody in government so when they make a mistake, they don't miss anybody to punish.
Everybody gets punished because of when the government controls all this.
Yeah.
Well, it was a great takedown.
We're glad to see that he responded to it.
I think it's going to resonate well with the people of Kentucky and the people of the U.S. because I think Senator Paul recognizes that there is a shift taking place and that it's in our favor right now and it's up to us to try to make the case.
And I think it's great that we have the opportunity.
Well, let's move on to our second one.
It's kind of a strange story.
I say kind of a sad story.
If you skip one and go to the FT article on Justice Sotomayor, if we can.
This came out in FT, I think yesterday.
You sent it over and I looked at it and read it.
And why U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor is facing calls to retire.
And I first saw Dr. Paul and I thought, did she have a scandal?
She'd been falling asleep on the job.
And actually, it's a lot sadder than that.
They're panicking.
And, you know, this is like everything else they've been doing lately.
They're in a panic mode.
And that's when you generally make mistakes.
And this is probably a big mistake, just like all the way they were treating Trump.
It backfires and usually would help Trump.
You know, one of the most outlandish quotes I've ever heard along this line was from the president when the president I'm talking about is Biden.
Everybody knows this.
He's talking to a black man, and evidently he was, I don't think the person he was talking to was outlandish.
He was just sort of having a conversation.
He says, well, and Biden gets mad.
He says, if you don't vote for me, you ain't black.
I mean, what is the implication?
That is such an insult.
You know, and everybody belongs to a group.
You know, I remember Walter Williams, a black professor who was raised in the slums by single parents in Philadelphia, who went on to get a PhD and teaching a lot, had a long teaching career.
And I used to, I always liked when he expressed himself.
He says, well, I never needed a black leader.
So everybody wants a black leader.
So, I mean, they think they do.
They're the promoters that want to.
So now they're saying, you ain't Hispanic, and we don't want you anymore.
We've used you.
And it's like throwing you out in the dirt.
And there was one professor that sort of took up herself, but not the politician.
This is pragmatism.
Even the ones that were a lot older.
What if you're 75 and you're in the Senate?
You can do a lot of harm.
But they wouldn't dare think about, well, we better get out of here because this is a bigger deal.
This is the Supreme Court.
So I wouldn't know her record.
Obviously, she's liberal, and I don't know whether she has any independence.
But the whole thing is the system shouldn't be this way.
It has nothing to do with her talent, you know.
And like you said, you didn't know why they were doing this.
You had to look around.
What horrible thing did she do?
Did she rob in a bank or something?
Well, let's look at what they say because these two paragraphs, I picked them on purpose to put up here because the juxtaposition is so poignant.
So it starts out by saying, when Barack Obama nominated Sonia Sotomayor, if we can put that up, to the U.S. Supreme Court in 2009, he said that when, quote, she ascends those marble steps to assume her seat, America will have taken another important step toward realizing the ideal that is etched above the entrance, equal justice under the law.
And of course, what he meant is it's the first Hispanic woman to serve as a chief justice.
I mean, as a justice on the Supreme Court.
So he felt like there was history being made.
And then the next paragraph says, 15 years later, a debate has risen over whether the 69-year-old Sotomayor Mayor, the court's first Hispanic justice, should retire before the 2024 general election in order to give U.S. President Joe Biden the chance to replace her with a younger liberal.
And as you say, that term is perfect.
They used her up, and now they want to throw her out.
You know, then he couched these terms when they brought her in, equal justice and all this.
But is this equal treatment?
Is this even courteous?
You know, and it undermines it.
It just devalues their belief on somebody that belongs to a minority.
We, as libertarians, have no problem with that.
We don't believe people get their rights from a collective group.
You get it as an individual.
So people shouldn't see this.
This whole thing that people should be colorblind, today we have the least colorblind society.
I mean, color approach to it.
Everything is color, you know, and statistics and promotions, everything else.
So I think, you know, I can't help but say that, you know, on the immediate, not her philosophy on law, but as far as this skirmish, this political skirmish goes, she's getting ripped off.
Yeah, yeah.
And who knows what she'll have to do because you could put a lot of heat on a person like that and there'll be plenty of bribes.
Yeah, yeah.
Well, it's like you said before the show when we were talking about it.
This isn't about all of the ideals they pretend to espouse.
It's all about power.
They're afraid if they don't get the power now, they won't have it into the future.
That's all they really care about.
Yes, and it's a good example of thinking of people in the collective versus the individual.
And we could get a lot further along.
If people would be introduced at least and paid attention to the principles of liberty that was introduced in a very significant manner, you know, a couple hundred years ago, I think a few people got together and they fought for trying to engrave that into our system by writing a constitution, which many even then knew that there would be shortcomings because if you don't have a moral society and you have people doing this,
yeah, we have a Supreme Court, imperfect, but it sort of worked.
But then they turn around and they treat people like this.
Oh, yeah, we need a real good Hispanic.
We need a real good black to do this.
And it's like the other thing that Walter Williams would say, he says he saw it as an insult because even he, and you have to remember, he was seeing this from a black person, that he was concerned that if he gets a job, is he getting it because they're feeling sorry for him because he's black?
Public Interest Paradox 00:02:40
I mean, it has to be the worst insult.
Well, speaking of insults, here's Senator Blumenthal.
He's from Connecticut.
I think he's one of the real bad guys, but put him up.
He's an authoritarian.
So he's quoted in the article.
Richard Blumenthal, the 78-year-old Democratic senator from Connecticut, told NBC this week that Sodomayor was a, quote, fully functioning justice, but justices also had to, quote, keep in mind the larger national and public interest in making sure that the court looks and thinks like America, he said, adding, graveyards are full of indispensable people, ourselves and this body included.
So this is sort of a passive-aggressive way of saying, yeah, she's doing an okay job.
She's doing what we want, but she's going to have to take one for the team.
You've got to crack a few eggs to make an omelet, right?
That's what he's saying.
You know, and the word he used in there that really annoys me, public.
Yeah.
Public engineer.
Who is the public engineer?
They think they're the public interest, and they will define what the public interest is.
And that to me is exactly opposite of what a free society is all about.
It's your interest, and you do what you want if you don't hurt people.
And you don't have to be part of the public.
I mean, yes, if all people had good opinions and followed the principles of liberty, the public would be beneficial.
But to say the public interest, that means you have to have majority support.
And that's why you have detriment of pure democracy because it becomes the dictatorship of a majority.
Yeah.
Well, we probably wouldn't have appreciated or agreed with many of her opinions written on the bench.
However, this really does seem unseen.
Yeah, it'll be interesting to see what happens.
And she has a challenge, but maybe she's real comfortable with herself.
You know, Ginsburg, they tried to move her out.
But she said they couldn't do that too, or she was comfortable enough just staying.
Just staying, yeah.
Well, we'll see what happens.
I'm going to close out, Dr. Paul, by thanking our viewers again for watching us.
As Dr. Paul said, we've got a great conference together with the Mises Institute over the weekend.
We'll be doing our summer conference, which we'll announce as soon as we, if we survive from this weekend's conference, we'll announce that very soon after we get back.
That'll be our DC conference, RPI, our big event of the year.
So we're looking forward to that.
And we're looking forward to you guys coming back next time on the Liberty Report.
Very good.
And like always, I want to personally thank you for tuning into the Liberty Report because it's very important to all of us.
Closing Out with Dr. Paul 00:00:49
And reaching people is important, and that is why we try to promote these principles.
And we have a lot of people doing it.
I'm always impressed with people who do pay attention and listen to our programs.
And they go off and do their thing too to spread the message.
And some are very creative.
And that's why when people used to ask me at my rallies, they say, all right, you told us that, and we agree.
What should I do?
And always being a smart guy, I said, do whatever you want to do.
But I'm serious.
Do what you do.
Everybody has talents.
And there's something I wished I could sing and promote what I believe in, but I can't sing.
And so there's a lot of things.
And I can't play the game of politics in Washington, so I have to do other things.
And one is visiting on a daily basis with people that I believe are very sincere in promoting the cause of liberty.
Export Selection