Ron Paul Institute for Peace And Prosperity

Earlier this week, I wrote about a “what if” election scenario: What if Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich, who had competed at the same time for, respectively, the Republican and Democratic presidential nomination, had instead run together on a presidential ticket? After my article was published, I was informed that Ron Paul supporting radio interviewer Scott Horton had, in an August of 2012 speech, laid out a case for Paul and Kucinich running together.

In that speech, presented after Mitt Romney and Barack Obama appeared set to be the Republican and Democratic presidential nominees, Horton proposed that, instead of throwing in the towel, Paul and Kucinich run together on a presidential ticket. Horton advocated in the speech for Paul to “keep running.” In particular, Horton suggested that Paul “get Dennis Kucinich or another principled progressive as your running mate and run a bipartisan unification campaign bringing together the best of the left and the right around your libertarian platform of peace, the Bill of Rights, and an end to all bailouts and corporate welfare.”

Check out Horton’s speech here:

One practical matter Horton did not address in the speech was how ballot access laws would affect the campaign he suggested. Ballot access laws are heavily stacked against third party and independent presidential candidates even when they have their campaigns up and running a year or more before election day. The barriers to having such a ticket on the ballot are yet stronger when a campaign is begun a little over two months before election day.

Tom Philips was a great man whose generosity knew no bounds. He opened not only his then substantial pocketbook – having been a very savvy and successful entrepreneur – but also his own home with a single intent: to nurture a new generation of journalists who were not afraid to question the “conventional wisdom.”

His mission was to break the stranglehold that the Left Wing ideologues had on the national debate and in forming the “national consensus.”

He contributed his boundless energy to this life-goal which is eminently and essentially American: to help us foster a true political dialogue on the future of this country. To give us on the “other side” at least a fighting chance to have our views known.

I was at the time a (poorly paid) working journalist, the Editorial Page Editor of the Budapest Sun in Hungary, when Tom Phillips’ generosity and the late and very great Bob Novak’s keen eye identified me as someone worthy of his Journalism Fellowship in 1998.

I was working under a brilliant mentor at the Budapest Sun – Jim Michaels who was a former US Marine and the son of the then-Editor in Chief of Forbes Magazine – and from Jim I learned everything about journalism. Not the absurd “social active” journalism churning out ideological thugs from journalism schools across the country, but actual journalism which relies on honesty, humility, and a connection with your readers (customers).

I had been published plenty of times by the time I went to work for Jim Michaels, but it was Jim who kicked my ego in the face. I remember my first unsigned op-ed as editorial page editor. Maybe 1995. I submitted it to Jim who proceeded to turn it upside-down on its head. I had been too steeped in academia (useless grad school) and was thus unmoved by the need to appeal to the reader.

Jim ripped apart my op-ed and told me that I had “buried the lede.” “Do it over! Bring your point to the front! You have an obligation to the reader!” I was crestfallen because I thought I had written a tight piece putting those so-and-sos in their place.

For me at that time it was about settling scores rather than appealing to the reader.

To Jim, who was although a solid conservative, ideology didn’t matter. Journalism mattered. We had a several year tug-of-war at the Budapest Sun, but I am grateful to Jim Michaels for teaching me real, existing journalism.

And it was around this time I applied and was accepted as a Phillips Foundation Journalism Fellow with the topic of, “Abandoning American Values in Post-Cold War US Foreign Policy.” It was all about how the Clinton Administration botched the enormous opportunity presented by the end of the Cold War to promote actual American values rather than the bogus “woke” agenda of his cronies who are, disgustingly, still with us.

The opportunity of a lifetime – a peace dividend, which is definitionally conservative – was squandered by the world of Strobe Talbott and Richard Holbrooke and all of those thugs. Toby Gati. Hillary. All of them.

Tom Phillips and Bob Novak saw value in this and to them I am eternally grateful.

The young journalists with whom I shared a couch in those days at Tom Philips’ magnificent McLean, VA, house for his autumn Phillips Foundation Fellows Retreats are people you would easily recognize in today’s conservative media. Some are doing good work and some in my opinion have fallen short. It’s not easy to make a living as a scribbler. And some of them have jumped on the Con. Inc. grift.

But that is always the risk.

Tom Phillips was all about investing in possibilities. I remember returning to several of the new classes of Phillips Fellows as an alumni and being surprised by some who were chosen. He did not invest solely in conservatives. He invested in people in whom he believed – guided by his advisors like the late John Farley, who I loved dearly and who continued to give me guidance for years including on how to start the Ron Paul Institute – and he did not have a rigorous ideological litmus test.

By the way, there are some who claim that I was not an actual journalist for some reason I have never understood. But through college and into my first professional job it was always working on a newspaper. Yes, I did spend eleven years on Capitol Hill working for Ron Paul, but I brought my fifteen years of journalism experience – including on-the-ground war reporting – to the job and it made me a far better Congressional staffer than had I been just an ideologue hired for my fealty for this or that party.

Read any of his powerful statements entered into the Congressional Record that were drafted by me informed by my journalistic background.

At the time Ron Paul had a rule that he would never hire anyone with Capitol Hill experience. He was way ahead of his time, but it was because he wanted people whose loyalty was to freedom and America rather than the swamp – a term that only later came to be fashionable.

Tom Philips was also way way way ahead of his time. He put his money where his mouth was. It took perhaps a quarter of a century after Tom’s investment in what can only be considered “alternative media” for the concept to not only take hold, but to wildly surpass the influence of the mainstream corporate media.

There is no direct connection that I know, but if you celebrate the brilliant success of a Tucker Carlson single-handedly defeating the mainstream drones like St. George slaying the dragon, you should thank Tom Phillips, whose vision and generosity one and a half generations ago paved the way for the relative freedom we are enjoying today.

It all started with Tom Phillips. One of the most unsung American heroes of our time.

Rest in peace, Mr. Phillips. Thank you for the wonderful opportunities your generosity provided me.

The United States military has a tendency to park itself in a country and not budge even after its presence has proven catastrophic or the government of the country has demanded it leave. Well, here is some good news. Daphne Psaledakis at Reuters reported Friday that the US military will be leaving Niger, just over a month after the new government of the country demanded that action.

As I wrote in August of 2018, the presence of US troops in Niger, first brought to many Americans’ attention the year before when several US Special Forces troops were killed there, has been part of an increasing US military focus on Africa. While the US government appears set to have its military exit Niger, there is no indication of a larger planned exit from the continent.

The US military leaving Niger is a good start. How about also exiting from other countries such as Iraq and Syria whose governments have long demanded the US military leave, as well as ending decades long US military presences in countries including Germany, Japan, and South Korea? At a high economic cost, the US military in these countries does nothing to defend America. To the contrary, these troops abroad serve as tripwires to potentially ensnare the US into conflicts that otherwise would be none of its business. They also continually tempt politicians and military leaders who start thinking that as long as these troops are strung out across the globe they might as well be put to use — be employed to intimidate, kill, maim, and destroy.

In the 1950s Dinah Shore sang her encouragement to “see the USA in your Chevrolet.” Decades later, some Americans would like to take that road trip in their kei trucks imported from Asia. But, for the time being, legal restrictions may cause them to limit that road trip to Texas.

Kei trucks, though increasingly popular in America, are not legally drivable on the roads of much of the country. But, this month a step was taken to expand the ability to drive the small trucks legally in America: A Texas Department of Motor Vehicles memorandum went out to licensed dealers and county tax assessor-collectors announcing that “mini vehicles,” including kei trucks, that pass current inspection requirements “can be registered and operated on public roadways.”

Check out this Monday article by Eric Peters at Eric Peters Autos to become up to date on the kei truck phenomenon and learn about the significance of the Texas memorandum. Peters is hopeful that the action taken in Texas will strike a blow for freedom that will catch on across America. He concludes his article as follows:

So, this is an important tactical victory. Very much of a piece with the one that was won when Florida ditched “mask” mandates. This led to ‘mask’ mandates being ditched in other states.

It is very important that things like this spread.

The more states that become freer, the harder it is for other states to be less free. This was precisely the purpose of the divided sovereignty built into the original American system, which was not intended to be a consolidated, centralized, one-size-fits-all regime. America was supposed to be a place in which people were free to go about their business, so long as their business was peaceful. There is nothing harmful in driving a Kei truck. If you don’t want to drive one, then don’t. But if your neighbor does, he has every right to.

And neither you nor any ‘administrator’ has any business telling him he can’t.

Hear! Hear!

Hopefully soon anyone can see the whole USA in his kei truck, should he so choose. In the meantime, there is much to see in Texas, a state roughly the size of France.

Julian Assange is very near the end of his appeal process in his effort to prevent his extradition from Great Britain to the United States, where he is set to be prosecuted for making public US government secrets — practicing journalism.

On Wednesday, US President Joe Biden made a comment that suggests there may be hope that US charges against the WikiLeaks founder will be dropped, meaning Assange can go free after years of horrid confinement in Britain. Asked about a request from the government of Australia — the country of Assange’s citizenship — that the US end its effort to prosecute Assange, Sky News reports that Biden answered, “We’re considering it.”

Biden’s answer could be virtually meaningless, as any request from another nation can be “considered” even if it is known from the beginning that it will have no influence. Yet, by not outright shutting down the possibility that the US would let Assange escape US prosecution, Biden’s comment offers a glimmer of hope for Assange.

The Vietnam War ended nearly 50 years ago. Still, the killing and maiming is not over. People continue to suffer from and succumb to injuries from the war long past. And others, often people born since the war’s end, are killed or injured by the explosion of some of the many bombs from the war that now clutter Vietnam.

A March 15 New York Times article profiles Chuck Searcy who, as a United States Army intelligence analyst in Vietnam, became disillusioned with the war. Years later, writes Seth Mydans in the article, Searcy is working in Vietnam on ameliorating the harm from the left behind bombs. Project Renew that he cofounded has been “deploying teams of de-miners, teaching schoolchildren how to stay safe, and providing prosthetics and job training to victims” for over 20 years. You can read the article here.

It is inspiring that people are dedicated to trying to minimize the long-term damage of the US government’s wars. It is unfortunate, though, that, since the Vietnam War, Americans have been suckered into allowing their government to pursue a series of devastating wars across the world. These wars, like the Vietnam War, have killed and maimed many people and then, after their conclusion, left behind new streams of suffering that flow into the future.

The world would do much better if there were a big uptick in one “illness” in America: the Vietnam Syndrome.

David Lin, in the Monday episode of the David Lin Report, asked libertarian communicator Ron Paul what nations Paul considers top adversaries or competitors internationally, suggesting that World War III could arise from conflict with one of them. In response, Paul replied that it is his own government — that of the United States — he is worried about, not Russia, China, or some other nation.

Here is the exchange between Lin and Paul:

Lin: OK, Dr. Paul, even though you may not be predicting World War III to be happening imminently, the concept of a World War III involves the US at war with an adversary. So, who do you consider America’s top adversaries or competitors even in the political sphere internationally right now

Paul: I tell you what, it’s not foreign. We took an oath to [defend the country from enemies foreign and domestic]. I don’t lay awake worrying about the Chinese invading us. I don’t worry about the Russians invading us. I worry about what our government is doing, and that’s where the real problem is. So, I can’t pick one military force because we precipitate so many problems ourselves, and, you know, if one thing is settled, we go looking for some more trouble. And I was much more optimistic when the Cold War ended, but things have deteriorated since then.

Indeed, it is the threats to Americans’ lives and liberty from their own government that Paul warned about in many speeches on the US House of Representatives floor as a member who had taken, as had his fellow members, the required oath of office Paul mentioned in the interview.

Watch here Paul’s interview, in which he also discusses matters including economic conditions in America, the Federal Reserve, and the price of gold: