http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/…

First batch here.

Here is the second. Like the first batch, they are well-considered and interesting throughout; they will surely make many readers continue to wish fervently for a Paul presidency.

Thanks again to Rep. Paul for his time and insights, and to all of you for the good questions.

Q: What is the first thing the country should do about its monetary policy?

A: We should immediately audit the Federal Reserve. I am the ranking member of the Monetary Policy subcommittee in the U.S. Congress, yet I can get more information about the internal workings of the C.I.A. than I can about our central bank. This secrecy is fundamentally wrong, and I believe that people from all over the ideological political spectrum can agree on that.

Bloomberg News this month has gone to court compel the Fed to disclose securities the central bank is accepting on behalf of American taxpayers as collateral for trillions of dollars of loans to banks. Expanding transparency is critical and could be done very quickly.

Q: What are your expectations for the next four years under an Obama administration? How might President Obama’s interventionist economic policies impact our lives?

A: Unfortunately, I don’t expect many good things. I do expect a lot of spending and even more debt. To really cut spending and balance our budget, we need to change foreign policy. Obama’s rhetoric on foreign policy is better than what we have gotten recently, but don’t expect any real change.

He may be more likely to wind things down in Iraq, but he’s still planning on keeping troops there for a least 16 more months. He wants money for Georgia and more troops in Afghanistan. He isn’t going to bring home our 30,000 troops from Korea or our 50,000 soldiers in Germany, and he won’t close any of our 700 foreign bases. At the same time, he is planning even bigger spending here at home. I hope I’m wrong, but if this spending and debt continue, the dollar is going to crash and we will see the middle class in this country take a grave hit.

Q: Do you deny global warming? Is Obama right to invest money in green technology? If you don’t deny it, and don’t think Obama is right, what is your solution?

Read More…

http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/…

Do you love the smell of libertarianism in the morning? If so, today is a good day for you.

Ron Paul

Last week we solicited your questions for Congressman Ron Paul.

There was such a big response (more than 400 comments) that we have split Paul’s answers into two batches, the first of which is posted below.

Thanks to Paul for his answers and all of you for your good questions.

Q: What was your first thought when you found out McCain chose Palin as his running mate?

A: At first, I thought it was a pretty savvy choice from a political perspective. I also knew that she had said some nice things about me in the past. At the same time, I knew that to be on the ticket, she would have to toe the line on foreign policy and the war, so that tempered a lot of my enthusiasm.

Q: Who in Congress would you consider to be your closest peer(s)?

A: There are a lot of members who I work with on a variety of different issues. Walter Jones is a good friend and works with me on foreign policy. Often on spending, if there is a 432-3 vote, the other two congressmen voting with me are Jeff Flake and Paul Broun. A lot of times, I work with Democrats on civil liberties issues.

I guess my point is that people from all over the political spectrum can side with liberty and the Constitution. The goal is to get a majority to vote that way most of the time.

Read More…

www.newswithviews.com

While millions of Americans watched the 2008 Republican Convention on television, the well-staged event wasn’t all peaceful and enthusiastic, according to several delegates attending the St. Paul, Minnesota event.

Several delegates — who are avowed Ron Paul supporters — claim they were treated shabbily at best, harshly at worst.

“While almost every other GOP contender for president was permitted to speak at the convention, Ron Paul was not. The word was that Paul was invited, with the natural caveat that he (like the other speakers) endorse McCain for president, which Paul was reportedly unwilling to do,” said a McCain delegate from West Virginia.

“Instead, Paul held a separate ‘convention’ for one afternoon at the Minneapolis Convention Center,” said the WV delegate.

The McCain campaign and the Republican National Committee were unnecessarily nervous about the presence of Ron Paul delegates at the XCel Energy Center, and sometimes that fact was reflected in unwarranted actions, such as someone yanking away a banner proclaiming the word “Liberty” being held by a handful of Paul delegates outside the building, according to several delegates.

In fact, several told NewsWithViews.com that while the Rep. Paul delegates demonstrated little, if any, support for McCain throughout the convention — mostly sitting quietly on their hands while the rest of the crowd erupted around them — they caused no problems and were respectful and polite, including the Paul delegates from West Virginia.

“The Ron Paul movement has brought thousands of young people into the political process — shouldn’t the GOP find ways to welcome them rather than alienate them?” said “Patrick,” a delegate and Ron Paul supporter from Maine.

The actions of the GOP should surprise no one, but it’s worth documenting anyway.

www.lewrockwell.com

Writes Ken Harwood: “As you know:

“About a dozen Massachusetts supporters of the Texas Congressman and GOP upstart decided to back McCain only an hour before the delegates began to cast votes for the presidential pick.“We decided the best course of action was to give a little to get a lot,” said Chris Blanc, a Cambridge resident who supports Paul. “The Massachusetts GOP really wanted to show unanimous support.”

“The four Ron Paul Nevada delegates all voted for John McCain, too. Then they claimed victory: we showed them that they can’t take us for granted.

“Huh? Mass madness.

“One of those four had even solicited (& received) donations from the Las Vegas RP Meetup Group to help pay her way to St. Paul.”

http://www.lasvegassun.com/

Washington — In the end, the revolution would be fought from within.

Nevada’s loyal supporters of one-time presidential hopeful Ron Paul, who pushed so hard for a seat at the table at the Republican National Convention, decided when their moment arrived last week to break bread rather than dishes.

On the third night of the convention, when the state Republican Party chairman stood in the hall and announced Nevada would be casting all of its 34 delegates for Sen. John McCain, it was because the Paul supporters made it so.

Paul delegate Chris Bunce said Friday they decided not to spoil the party. Bunce knew Republicans from Nevada, a swing state this election year, wanted desperately to present a unified front for McCain.

The Paul supporters had to decide — make a point or make peace?

Their few votes would not bring the congressman’s suspended campaign for the presidency any closer to its goal. Nor would they stop the ascension of McCain. Had they abstained, which under party rules was the only act of opposition they were allowed, it would be a symbolic act.

So Bunce and the other Paul delegates decided to use the political capital they had gained during the months-long war with the state party to try to generate a little more.

“We gave an olive branch,” he said.

This was not an easy gesture.

The Paul contingent has battled the state Republican Party all year. After a few of them were ultimately invited to St. Paul, they arrived only to feel like unwanted cousins.

Bunce and Chris Dyer tell a funny story about trying to sit next to each other on the floor of the convention, only to be told by state party leaders they must sit in their assigned seats, separated from each other.

When the state finally relented on the last night of the convention, Bunce was already on a plane home.

“I understand their fears,” Bunce said. “They think we’re all crazy.”

Bunce ends a lot of sentences that way — with the acknowledgment that most people think the Paul people are crazy.

They’re tired of being kooks. They want to be players.

I really don’t know what to say about the Nevada delegates, especially after I used up a lot of my energy being upset with the similar route the Massachusetts’ delegates opted to take.

They caved, plain and simple.

Weak. Disappointing. Heart-breaking.

http://news.bostonherald.com/

In a last-minute show of unity, Bay State Ron Paul supporters decided to throw their votes behind Sen. John McCain last night.

About a dozen Massachusetts supporters of the Texas Congressman and GOP upstart decided to back McCain only an hour before the delegates began to cast votes for the presidential pick.

“We decided the best course of action was to give a little to get a lot,” said Chris Blanc, a Cambridge resident who supports Paul. “The Massachusetts GOP really wanted to show unanimous support.”

Paul, shunned by the Republican convention because he wouldn’t endorse McCain, has been holding daily “counter rallies” in Minnesota where devoted supporters hiss when McCain’s name is uttered.

Rep. Paul Loscocco (R-Holliston) worked with Paul sympathizers to join the delegation so all 43 delegate votes would go to McCain.

“Give a little to get a lot”? Mr. Blanc, you get nothing and took two steps backwards. Bending to the will of GOP was not what you and the other delegates were sent there to do. Thank you for undermining all the hard work and dedication of Ron Paul supporters in and outside the boundaries of Massachusetts. I’m very disappointed.

My hat goes off to the delegates of Alaska, Oregon, Washington and West Virginia who stood their ground.

http://www.antiwar.com/…

Mr. Speaker, I regret that due to the unexpected last-minute appearance of this measure on the legislative calendar this week, a prior commitment has prevented me from voting on the FISA amendments. I have strongly opposed every previous FISA overhaul attempt and I certainly would have voted against this one as well.

The main reason I oppose this latest version is that it still clearly violates the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution by allowing the federal government to engage in the bulk collection of American citizens’ communications without a search warrant. That US citizens can have their private communication intercepted by the government without a search warrant is anti-American, deeply disturbing, and completely unacceptable.

In addition to gutting the fourth amendment, this measure will deprive Americans who have had their rights violated by telecommunication companies involved in the Administration’s illegal wiretapping program the right to seek redress in the courts for the wrongs committed against them. Worse, this measure provides for retroactive immunity, whereby individuals or organizations that broke the law as it existed are granted immunity for prior illegal actions once the law has been changed. Ex post facto laws have long been considered anathema in free societies under rule of law. Our Founding Fathers recognized this, including in Article I section 9 of the Constitution that “No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.” How is this FISA bill not a variation of ex post facto? That alone should give pause to supporters of this measure.

Mr. Speaker, we should understand that decimating the protections that our Constitution provides us against the government is far more dangerous to the future of this country than whatever external threats may exist. We can protect this country without violating the Constitution and I urge my colleagues to reconsider their support for this measure.

He missed the vote because he was speaking at the Montana state GOP convention.