The most convincing argument for US government funding of NPR has faded away over the decades since the media organization’s creation in the pre-internet and even quite limited cable television age. Nowadays, there is easy access to news and entertainment sources aplenty at the click of the mouse or remote control. There is no arguable need for Uncle Sam to provide a helping hand to a select media organization.

Fundamentally, though, the US government supporting NPR has been wrong from the beginning. Providing news and entertainment to Americans is an activity many steps removed from the few powers the US Constitution sets forward as delegated to the US government. Further, it is inconsistent with the tenor of the First Amendment for the US government that is prohibited from making any law abridging the freedom of the press to be selectively providing funding for one media organization, thus giving it a leg up on the competition.

Relevant for the Trump administration and Republicans in the US House of Representatives and Senate as well would be that NPR, since the 2016 presidential election, has placed a target on Trump’s back. Attacking Trump relentlessly has been pursued across NPR programs for the past eight years. How is it acceptable for the US government to be funding a media organization that has as part of its editorial policy the belittling and demonizing of this man who for most of this time period was either serving as president or running for president? Election interference anyone? Hopefully, some Democratic Congress members would join in condemning the unfairness of the situation even though their presidential candidates were the beneficiaries.

On April 9, longtime NPR employee Uri Berliner went public with his insights on how “an open-minded spirit no longer exists within NPR” and how instead there is a “distilled worldview of a very small segment of the U.S. population.” He also discussed how NPR engaged in “efforts to damage or topple Trump’s presidency.” If, like most Americans, you listen little or not at all to NPR, Berliner’s article, which you can read here, is a good introduction to some of the intense bias you have missed out on hearing.

To reach two trillion in savings, Musk and Trump would certainly find some spending cuts difficult. Eliminating US government support for NPR, in contrast, seems like something that should be an easy choice.

As reported Saturday by Timour Azhari and Ahmed Rasheed at Reuters, multiple sources have confirmed the reaching of an agreement between the US and Iraq governments for the withdrawal of US and “coalition” military forces from Iraq by the end of 2026. This withdrawal has been long demanded by the Iraq government. Azhari and Rasheed, though, added this caveat: “The U.S. and Iraq are also seeking to establish a new advisory relationship that could see some U.S. troops remain in Iraq after the drawdown.”

Iraq has been on the receiving end of US military subjugation efforts, aided by “coalition” governments, for decades. In 1991, the US military invaded Iraq in the Persian Gulf War. Though US military ground forces then withdrew from the country, US sanctions and bombings of the country brought continued death and destruction for about twelve years. Come 2003, The US military invaded Iraq again, this time overthrowing the national government and establishing an ongoing military presence that has varied in its size and the extent of its actions over the ensuing years.

Though there was much alarming talk from US government officials and people in media, at no time in this over thirty years of US military action against and occupation of Iraq did the Iraq government or the people of Iraq pose a threat to America and Americans. The US military actions against Iraq were about conquest and domination, not defense.

Hopefully, the US troops will vacate their military installations and leave Iraq. And, hopefully, we will hear soon about the same course being followed in other countries as well.

Given this situation, it is refreshing to hear from a doctor such as Peterson Pierre who brings rationality and judgement to the matter of childhood shots. This is a big contrast to doctors who just declare that parents should fall in line with keeping their children in compliance with the schedule.

In an episode earlier this month of Pierre’s thoughtful Daily Dose series concerning medical matters, Pierre offered a take different from what many parents will hear from their children’s doctors about shots on the childhood vaccine schedule. After addressing some of the overhyped benefits and overlooked risks of shots, Pierre urges parents to refrain from “blindly following” their pediatricians’ recommendations regarding shots. Watch the episode here:

Pierre in this episode and others of his show serves as an example of a doctor who thinks critically about medical issues and offers independent analysis focused on advancing good health instead of just reciting government and pharmaceutical companies’ pronouncements. Pierre’s short episodes dealing with a variety of medical topics give viewers a starting place for investigation, and probably leave many of them wishing that he were their or their children’s doctor.

Then, I read the article. Unfortunately, the rosy picture was only painted that way because most people who have an opinion on the subject were against CBDCs. That leaves 16% embracing the idea of CBDCs and around half of America not having an opinion at all.

Only 34% oppose CBDCs. That’s not a victory. That’s a decidedly awful statistic because it means we’re not doing our job in conservative and alternative media. It means we’re not reaching enough people with the truth. Because if we were reaching enough people, then the vast majority of Americans would be opposed to the oppression-enabling dystopian  vision of digital currencies controlled by the powers-that-be.

Here’s the article, and while I appreciate the sentiment that those who know about it are mostly opposed, I disagree that it’s good news in general. The push for a “Digital Dollar” is underway and if we can’t wake enough people up to the dangers, they are going to slumber their way into having it thrust upon them… and the rest of us. We must do better and make people care.

Poll: Americans Don’t Want a Central Bank Digital Currency

A poll from the Cato Institute indicates that, while about half of Americans do not have an opinion regarding whether the Federal Reserve should “begin offering a government-issued digital currency, called a ‘central bank digital currency’ (CBDC),” among those with an opinion on the matter over twice as many — 34 percent of poll participants — oppose the prospect as support it — 16 percent.

This result of the poll conducted from February 27 through March 8 in collaboration with YouGov is promising for Americans concerned about the threat a CBDC, which the Federal Reserve and big financial companies have been testing in preparation for its potential introduction, poses to freedom and privacy in America.

The poll results further indicate that, if Americans can be educated about the abusive government powers a CBDC can advance, many Americans currently undecided regarding the introduction of a CBDC will see good reason to oppose it. Emily Ekins and Jordan Gygi wrote in their May 31 in-depth Cato Institute article concerning the poll results:

Overwhelming majorities would oppose the adoption of a CBDC if it meant that the government could control what people spend their money on (74%), that the government could monitor their spending (68%), that a CBDC would abolish all U.S. cash (68%), that a CBDC would attract cyberattacks (65%), that the government could charge a tax on those who don’t spend money during recessions (64%), or that the government could freeze the digital bank accounts of political protesters (59%). Americans were marginally opposed (52%) if a CBDC could cause some people to stop using private banks, resulting in some banks going out of business.

The candidates now in second place in the Republican and Democratic presidential primaries — Ron DeSantis and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. — appear to be in the anti-CBDC camp. Hopefully, we will see more and more politicians joining them over the coming months in standing up against this threat posed by the Federal Reserve and US government.

Meanwhile, it is also important that Americans across the country educate the people they come into contact with about why a CBDC in America is unacceptable. The new poll from the Cato Institute suggests that many people will be receptive to this message.

Copyright © 2023 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.

Instead, Biden and the gang of introverts and neocon war criminals that the has surrounded himself with have done everything that can to inflict fatal damage on the economy through rash initiatives both overseas and at home. A spending spree to buy support from the bizarre constituencies that make up the Democrat Party base while also fighting an undeclared war in Europe have meant that nearly two trillion dollars has been added to the national debt under Biden’s rule, a debt that was already unsustainable at nearly $30 trillion, larger than the United States’ gross national product. Plans to cancel student loan debts will add hundreds of billions of dollars more to the red ink.

And those actions undertaken overseas, to include continuing to expand the war in Ukraine against Russia, will do immeasurable more damage. Consider how the Democratic Party has long had it in for Russian Federal President Vladimir Putin, dating back to when Putin took power in 2000 and started kicking out the western scallywags who were looting his country. Subsequently, false intelligence and other innuendoes were contrived by Hillary Clinton and her team in 2016 to implicate Donald Trump as a Russian stooge who was secretly working for Putin. When that didn’t work and Trump was elected, the Russians were accused by the media and Democrats of willy-nilly interfering in US elections more generally speaking, a much-exaggerated claim in contrast to the overwhelming silence surrounding the real electoral and policy interference, which has been coming from Israel and its fifth column inside the United States, who, not coincidentally, are the chief proponents of the war against Russia.

Placing a target on Vladimir Putin’s back appears to have an unfortunate consequence which Biden has yet to wake up to, namely the fact that the United States now has what might be described as a Ponzi scheme faux economy which is very vulnerable, particularly as much of the world has become disenchanted with the US style of global leadership. Note for example the recent state visit by French President Emmanuel Macron to Beijing, where he embraced a “global strategic partnership with China” to bring about a “multipolar” world, freed of “blocs” that is not sheltering behind “Cold War mentality.” Macron also criticized the “extraterritoriality of the US dollar.”

And threats made by the Bidens against both China and Russia have accomplished little beyond drawing the two major political and military powers closer together. Beijing and Moscow entered into a trade agreement in their own currencies in 2014 and have openly taken steps to challenge US dominance of international currency exchanges, creating instead a global multipolar trading environment. Europe aside, many nations are now eager to cut the tie that binds, which is the decades long American dominance of international financial mechanisms and also the general use of dollars to pay for oil and other energy supplies. The widespread use of petrodollars enables the buffoonish Janet Yellen at the US Treasury and the Federal Reserve banks to print unlimited unbacked fiat currency, knowing that there will always be a market for it.

Which brings us back to the Ukraine war, pursued “until we win” by Biden and his somnolent Secretary of State Antony Blinken. One of the first moves when Russia intervened in Ukraine was to block and eventually confiscate Russia’s 300 billion dollars-worth of foreign reserves in banks in the US and Europe. That sent a shock wave across currency markets all around the world. Biden and Yellen had weaponized the US’s own national currency, which hitherto had been an untouchable step in international relations for nations that were not actually at war. Countries like China and India with large economies then realized that the US Treasury Department and the dominance of the dollar as an exchange currency had now become a weapon of war and a serious threat to the economies of all other nations.

As a consequence, the US Dollar is right now being rejected by many nations as the world’s reserve currency. Some nations all over the world have agreed to use the Chinese Yuan and Indian Rupee for any-and-all international currency transactions. Saudi Arabia continues to use the petrodollar but does not demand it. Recently, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Chinese President Xi Jinping agreed to permit the Saudis to sell oil to China in Yuan. Saudi Arabia, the world’s largest oil exporter, is now allowing multiple currencies to be used to purchase its oil, a major attack on the primacy of the US dollar and it also has accepted Chinese mediation to mend fences with the US and Israel’s arch enemy Iran. And the Saudis have even more recently refused a Biden Administration request that it start pumping more oil to reduce energy costs, signaling that the shift is both political and economic in nature. Japan, a major economy, has also started purchasing oil and gas directly from Russia against the US imposed energy embargo while Brazil, another major economy, has agreed to use the Yuan in its increasing trade with China. As fewer nations utilize the US dollar, America’s ability to export and ignore its burgeoning domestic debt and inflation to other countries is being diminished.

This might have a decisive impact on the US currency as the drive to break with the petrodollar continues to grow and could produce something like a “perfect storm” impacting on the US economy. It threatens to drastically lower the standards of living of nearly all Americans within the next several years as the dollar loses value and purchasing power. As the US economy is heavily interconnected with many European economies, Europe is also likely to be a victim of the coming disaster.

The good news, of course, is that the United States will no longer be able to afford its endless wars and international interventions. Lacking its economic power, it will no longer be able to declare itself “exceptional” and the enforcer of a “rules based international order.” It would mean an ending of the funding of developments like the Ukraine proxy war and the troops will have to come home from places like Syria and Somalia. And it might even mark the ending of sending billions of dollars annually to a wealthy Israel.

Ending dollar supremacy would inevitably have an immediate impact on what passes for US foreign policy, making it more difficult for Washington to initiate and sustain Treasury Department sanctions on countries like Iran and North Korea. It could also create economic turmoil for many countries until the situation resolves itself by producing greater volatility in currency markets worldwide. The Federal Reserve Bank will no doubt respond to the unfolding crisis by acting as it always does by raising interest rates to astronomical levels, thereby hurting most the Americans who can least afford the shock therapy.

And it did not have to turn out this way. It could have been avoided. If the US, which had no horse in the race, had left Ukraine alone Vladimir Putin would not have become a symbol of defiance against the “Rules Based International Order” and he would not have worked with China to establish multipolarity in the way the financial world operates. Instead, we have a situation where Europe is being de-industrialized due to soaring energy prices and Washington’s destruction of the Nord Stream pipelines while the US is potentially confronting economic disaster as the dollar’s relevance to international trade sinks. The ultimate irony is that Russia, and also the US/Israeli arch enemy Iran, are by comparison doing quite well economically as they sell their oil and gas to anyone in any currency. One has to conclude that when US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen recently made her secret trip to Kiev to promise the despicable Volodymyr Zelensky billions of taxpayer dollars the United States might just have been better served if she had stayed in Washington and made some minimal effort to address the mounting economic problems confronting us here at home.

Article cross-posted from Ron Paul Institute.

The previous prime minister, former Goldman Sachs banker Mario Draghi, implemented one of the most restrictive – and inhuman – Covid shutdowns, which, along with supporting economically suicidal sanctions against Russia, have left Italy an economic basket case.

Replacing the bland banker will likely be Giorgia Meloni from the right-wing Sons of Italy party. Meloni will be a first for Italy: the first female prime minister. But don’t expect the Left to celebrate it: her name cannot be mentioned in the mainstream media without reference to Mussolini.

Ironically, the democratic victory of Meloni and the rest of the Italian right likely owes a great deal of gratitude to one of Europe’s most undemocratic and anti-democratic leaders: European Union Commissioner Ursula von der Leyen.

On the eve of the Italian elections, the unelected von der Leyen warned Italians that if they voted for the “wrong” parties they would be punished. Asked about the surge of the political opposition in Italy on the eve of the elections, she warned Italian voters, “we will see the result of the vote in Italy. If things go in a difficult direction — and I’ve spoken about Hungary and Poland — we have the tools.”

In other words, her message to Italian voters was “yes you can vote, but if you vote in a way I do not approve of, you will be punished.”

Italians rushed to vote in a way she did not approve of. It will be interesting to see what happens.

How does any of this relate to the United States as the US moves closer to the midterm elections? Americans have also been given warnings by the political elites that they dare not vote for the “wrong” candidates or parties.

On September 1st, President Biden issued a warning similar to that of Europe’s von der Leyen. In one of the most bizarre speeches in political history, Biden warned that Trump supporters “…are determined to take this country backwards — backwards to an America where there is no right to choose, no right to privacy, no right to contraception, no right to marry who you love. They promote authoritarian leaders, and they fan the flames of political violence that are a threat to our personal rights, to the pursuit of justice, to the rule of law, to the very soul of this country.”

He spoke on a frightening, red-lit stage with US Marines serving as props on either side of him. This was no “Checkers” speech with Nixon speaking wistfully about his cocker spaniel. No, it was a declaration of war against half of the country.

A few weeks ago Sweden threw its left-wing government out and Sunday the Italians did the same. While the political differences in Europe seem more cosmetic than substantive – for example Italy’s presumptive new prime minister supports weapons to Ukraine just like her predecessor – there is still a strong feeling of popular revolt against political elites in the air.

That doesn’t mean things will easily go our way, as there is no automatic libertarian surge. But we must study hard and take advantage of every single opportunity. People are sick of the elites? That means they are likely open to the concepts of non-interventionism and sound money. Let’s help educate them!