Election after election people in the media throw out spurious assertions that Libertarian Party candidates cause Republicans to lose. So it was little surprise to come across an article published last week with the title “Relieved by Roy Moore’s defeat? Thank a Libertarian.” What was surprising was that this article was published at the website of the United States Libertarian Party.
In the article credited as written by party staff, Libertarian National Committee Chairman Nicholas Sarwark is quoted as saying the following in regard to the defeat of Republican nominee Roy Moore by Democratic nominee Doug Jones in the United States Senate special election last week in Alabama: “If you’re happy that Roy Moore was not elected to the Senate, thank write-in candidates like Libertarian Ron Bishop.”
Some people are expressing concern that notoriously anti-marijuana United States Attorney General Jeff Sessions will go on a marijuana prohibition enforcement rampage if a US law restraint on Department of Justice spending for prosecuting individuals complying with state medical marijuana laws lapses. But, over at Reason, Jacob Sullum presents four reasons why the lapsing of the restraint will likely lead to little or no change in regard to US government enforcement of marijuana laws in states that have legalized medical or recreational marijuana.
Soon after word came out Monday that someone had detonated a bomb in a pedestrian tunnel of the New York City subway system, people were saying the alleged bomber should not be afforded respect for his constitutional rights and should be shipped off to the United States military’s Guantanamo prison in Cuba. Fox News Senior Judicial Analyst Andrew Napolitano, however, argues in a new video commentary that it is important that the US government respect alleged bomber Akayed Ullah’s rights guaranteed under the US Constitution — including rights to be represented by a lawyer and to have a jury trial.
Interviewed Tuesday at RT, Ron Paul described the foreign policy mission of the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity (RPI), which Paul founded in 2013 after completing his final term in the United States House of Representatives. Paul explains that RPI, of which Paul is chairman, has as a goal challenging interventionist United States foreign policy through changing people’s minds in the face of opposition, including from deep state and military-industrial complex influence in the media and the US Congress.
“[A]t the institute,” says Paul, “we believe that our role should be to develop friendships and trade with countries.” Paul continues:
Most every country in the world is imperfect, including ours. But, our immediate goal should be to improve ourselves and not pretend that we can tell other people how to live and who should run their countries.
Libertarian communicator and former presidential candidate Ron Paul says he is optimistic that philosophic changes taking place in America will lead to greater government respect for liberty. Paul made the assessment in a recent interview with host Marc Clair at the Lions of Liberty podcast regarding Paul’s new book The Revolution at Ten Years. “The philosophy comes first, and I think that’s where we excel,” says Paul.
After noting that Ron Paul has “broken down ways to deescalate North Korea,” Alex Jones on Tuesday asked Paul, who was a guest on the Alex Jones Show, if Paul would accept a request from President Donald Trump that Paul travel to North Korea as a peace envoy. In response, Paul first noted that he thinks the odds of the request being made “are pretty slim.” Paul, who is chairman of the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity, then proceeded to affirm that he would be “delighted to participate” should the request be to take part in “an honest attempt to try to have better relations and work out some problems with North Korea.”
I was a guest today at the Ron Paul Liberty Report. The topic of the episode is the Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission case being considered by the Supreme Court of the United States. At issue in the case is a state government prohibiting a bakery from refusing to design and create a custom cake for a celebration of a wedding because the wedding is of two people of the same sex.