All right, y'all, welcome to the Scott Horton Show.
I am the Director of the Libertarian Institute, Editorial Director of Antiwar.com, author of the book Fool's Errand, Time to End the War in Afghanistan, and I've recorded more than 5,000 interviews going back to 2003, all of which are available at scotthorton.org.
You can also sign up for the podcast feed.
The full archive is also available at youtube.com slash scotthorton show.
All right, you guys on the line, I have got the great Dan McAdams, the indispensable Dan McAdams, Director of the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity, and of course, co-host of the Great Liberty Report with the great Dr. Ron Paul, four days a week, and ronpaulinstitute.org is the website.
Of course, welcome back.
How are you doing, Dan?
Hey, Scott, thanks for having me back on.
Very happy to have you here, and by indispensable, I mean you're good on everything, and including things that nobody else knows anything about at all, like what the hell is going on in Belarus.
First of all, where's Belarus?
Between Russia and what?
So people listening have got their imaginary map set straight here.
Well, it's just west of Russia.
It's just below the Baltic, so it's definitely an extremely strategically important country, particularly to Russia, but also to NATO, which has been a member of the Partnership for Peace for a number of years as well.
So very important, probably more so than Ukraine, ultimately, in terms of strategic importance in the region.
And what was that partnership you mentioned there?
Remember the Partnership for Peace that was launched among countries that were not necessarily going into NATO, but were cooperating with NATO, such as Ukraine.
You're talking about, was this George W. Bush years?
Yeah.
Yeah, that's when it started.
And Belarus had signed on to that?
Yeah, they participated in it, but it was sort of a pre-NATO.
Pre-NATO kind of thing, and all the countries, including the Central European countries that eventually went on to join NATO.
So the reason I'm saying it is it's definitely between east and west, if one considers West Russia the east.
Well, I think the common narrative, I don't know if they talk about it on TV really, but the common narrative, I guess, in the Washington Post would be that it's a sock puppet regime of the Russians, no?
Well, just like everything the Washington Post writes, that's utter rubbish.
That's not the case at all.
In fact, part, a lot of the problems with Belarus have to do with the at least 20 year extremely tense and difficult relations with Russia.
It's a long story, but no, it is not the sock puppet of Putin by any stretch.
Putin probably wouldn't mind that, and in fact he's openly desired that for a long time.
But it is not the case.
All right.
Well, so tell us all you know about the president.
He's just been reelected.
That's the current controversy, of course, is the status of the election and the makings of what could be a color-coded revolution type situation, or at least an attempted one brewing.
But can you give us a bit of the background first here about Lukashenko and, you know, his role?
He's been president for how long?
26 years.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Since 94, I guess.
I mean, I'd rather start by saying what's not happening in Belarus, because what's not happening, I hate to disappoint all those people involved with the Students for Liberty and other for liberty groups that love the idea that every time people go on the street, it's to demand a libertarian form of government.
But what's not happening in Belarus, I'm sorry to say, there is not a revolution for libertarian principles happening, just like on Maidan, there was not a revolution for libertarian principles happening.
Something very different is afoot.
And I was just actually refreshing my memory, looking at all the propaganda the Students for Liberty put out about Maidan.
We are all Ukrainians.
Remember that video?
Yeah, they were.
They were talking about sock puppets.
They were the sock puppets of U.S. foreign policy at the time.
And what did they get for it?
Did they get a libertarian society in Ukraine?
No, they got a bunch of friggin Nazis.
Yeah.
And a war that killed 10,000 people.
Exactly.
Civilians.
Yeah.
So what's not happening in Belarus is a pro-liberty, pro-democracy revolution.
What is happening, as you suggest in your opening, is yet another U.S. push to overthrow Lukashenko with a twist.
Now this has a twist.
This is as a plot twist.
And I've been writing about Belarus for over 20 years.
You can look back to a piece I wrote in 2001 on LewRockwell.com.
I monitored the elections in 2006, the presidential elections in 2006, on the ground in Belarus.
And I've been interested in it a long time.
Let's go back a couple of months really quick, because your listeners may remember, may not, because frankly, Belarus is not on all of our minds, day in and day out, right?
But what happened back in June is that all of NATO's sock puppets started talking about a slipper revolution happening in Belarus.
The Atlantic Council was talking about it.
RFE, RL were talking about it.
All of these various front groups.
A slipper revolution, you say?
Yeah.
A slipper revolution.
And there were pictures of people holding their slippers back in May.
And you could see it in, you know, there are several, several articles written about it.
And that was prepping the ground for what was about to happen, certainly with the elections in August.
So the prepping it, the U.S. has, the U.S. government has funded at least 34 different projects in Belarus just this year, including a project, almost a half a million dollars to directly fund opposition parties.
And you can find it on NED's website, increasing party capacity and citizen outreach and issue advocacy to enable a broad, diverse group of political activists representing democratic political parties, dah, dah, dah, dah, dah, to help outreach.
So literally helping political parties in Belarus oppose the government.
So, you know, us libertarians and non-interventionists would say, OK, obviously we're not doing this out of the goodness of our heart, and I shouldn't say we, but the U.S. government is not doing this out of the goodness of its heart.
It's invested a lot of money in Belarus over the years trying to overthrow the government unsuccessfully.
Ultimately, it's been a big waste of money.
My guess is that this will also fizzle.
And I hate to give the plot away to those students for liberty drooling at the thought of winning this one.
But Russia and Putin will not allow Belarus to go to go west, to go NATO.
It's not going to happen.
It's considered it would be, you know, like allowing China to take over Mexico.
It's not going to happen.
But what might happen is things could get uglier, and this is certainly where they've had these things.
They've had these so-called revolts in Belarus often.
But this seems to be a little bit more, a little bit more spicy, a little bit more bloody.
So things could get worse before they get better.
All right.
Now, so it's funny to me that they would continue with this branding of everything has to have a color or flag, a cedar tree or some slippers or some orange or some yellow or some pink or whatever, like they've done in all these color coded revolutions.
What a giveaway.
It's like they're just taunting the FSB that I bet your spies can't wreck our plans here.
You know what I mean?
What are they doing?
Yeah.
But it is helpful.
I mean, it gives it an identity.
It gives a brand identity.
And I mean, we do that in all sorts of political movements.
You try to find something, a galvanizing idea around around something that may be a more complex phenomenon.
And I guess the short answer is because it does work.
These things do work.
They have not worked in Belarus.
And I was in the middle of the so-called denim revolution in 2006.
And I was sitting on the main square in Belarus when the Western media were breathlessly reporting about the thousands in the street screaming about denim.
And I'm looking around and there's just a couple of guys drinking beer and doing very little at all.
So it's very hyped up.
They want us to be something.
Here's something that's important to remember.
Just a couple of months ago, Mike Pompeo took a little trip out to Belarus.
And, you know, we've had we have not had full diplomatic relations with Belarus in a long time since, I think, the Clinton presidency.
We've had an acting ambassador, but never full relations.
Well, Pompeo took a little trip out there and sat down with Lukashenko, and they talked about closing our relations with Belarus.
We were supposed to, in August, exchange full ambassadors.
That doesn't look like it's going to happen unless something radical changes.
But this is this.
This is this is a game.
I mean, if your listeners are really interested in what's happening beyond the cartoon caricature of Belarus, I know your listeners are smart, so they are interested.
What is happening is what what Lukashenko has done for years is he's tried to play both sides.
Pompeo kissed up to Washington to go back to Putin and say, hey, you know, here's what I got.
And the Pompeo trip had to do with oil.
He agreed in the most asinine way you can imagine to actually buy U.S. oil instead of this heavily subsidized Russian oil coming from next door.
These kinds of little things.
It really is.
I mean, if you were a psychologist, you know, Lukashenko is like the kid brother and he's always being kicked around by Putin, the big brother.
He always gets the trophies, always gets the gold medals, you know, and poor old Lukey is always in second place.
But so why then, Dan, are the Americans playing both sides and trying to overthrow this guy right when he's cozying up to us?
Well, because that's what they do.
You know, it's like the it's like the mythical snake allowing a frog to cross the river on its back and turning and eating him.
You know, this is this is what they do.
You know, you must form policy doesn't change.
Was it Tom?
Was Tom Woods right?
You know, no matter who you vote for, you always get John McCain.
Yeah.
And though these people running things, it's never enough.
What about what about Gaddafi?
Remember in the 2000s, he turned.
He became our best buddy.
He gave away his nukes.
I mean, there were a couple of things, though, right, where he had refused to buy some armored personnel carriers from John McCain and a couple of things where he was still the wacky colonel, the unreliable or like.
But if you take Ukraine in 2013, you had Yanukovych tell the Americans in the EU, no, never mind.
I'm not going to sign your deal after all, now that you changed the terms on me.
There's a pretty clear cause and effect between that decision and their plan to overthrow him.
And I forgot if it was you or someone else who had suggested that they changed the terms in order to provoke that reaction by him because they would rather have a coup than have him go along at that point.
So that would be a complication, of course, but I just wonder if these guys just met and he told Pompeo, sure, sure, whatever you want, and then Pompeo pulls the trigger on a color coded revolution against him anyway, then I mean, I guess that does sound like something the Americans would do.
But it also sounds kind of asinine, even though it does.
But yeah, but let's not forget, and I won't say a name, but a good friend of mine has done has done work for countries, including countries in Central and Eastern Europe.
And his experience is similar to mine.
These countries, they have a strong mix of ignorance and arrogance.
And so if someone theoretically went to Lukashenko and said, listen, you're going to if you suck up to Pompeo, you're going to get a knife up your rear end like Gaddafi got.
He would laugh you out of the out of out of the office.
Are you kidding?
Don't be insane.
You're stupid.
You know, these, you know, people who warned Yanukovych, you're going to get a rose revolution.
You've got this is what you're going to get if you keep doing this.
No, you got your nuts.
This is insane.
Nobody would ever.
This is Ukraine.
Who do you think you're talking to?
And this is the case.
So we can't assume that these actors in the region or anywhere really, even our own actors are operating in a rational way.
You know, a lot of times they're they're they're operating, you know, in a in a in an echo chamber.
So yeah.
You ever see that movie War Inc, a John Cusack movie from the Bush years there?
I don't think I have.
So they the premise of it is they don't even have the army anymore.
They just hire Blackwater to do the whole war.
And they call it Tamerlane Industries, which is funny.
And then they invade Turakistan because in Turakistan they've decided that they're going to have their own oil pipeline that goes from here to there or something instead of doing it America's way.
And then it's Dick Cheney, pardon me.
It's Dan Aykroyd as Dick Cheney.
And it's just it's funny.
I should watch it.
Not the best movie, but the premise is wonderful.
But yeah, that kind of a thing, right, where, you know, this guy, yeah, he wants to cooperate with us, but not quite enough.
We're going to go ahead and overthrow him.
There's even a scene where the guy, the leader says, oh, I'm backed by America today.
Maybe they'll kill me tomorrow.
Who knows?
You know, that's exactly it.
It's dangerous to be the friend of America because they definitely will sell you out.
But if you're the enemy of America, there's a chance they'll buy you.
Right.
That's a shortening of John Laughlin's phrase from a few years ago.
Right.
Hey, I'll check it out.
The Libertarian Institute, that's me and my friends, have published three great books this year.
First is No Quarter, The Ravings of William Norman Grigg.
He was the best one of us.
Now he's gone, but this great collection is a truly fitting legacy for his fight for freedom.
I know you'll love it.
Then there's Coming to Palestine by the great Sheldon Richman.
It's a collection of 40 important essays he's written over the years about the truth behind the Israel-Palestine conflict.
You'll learn so much and highly value this definitive libertarian take on the dispossession of the Palestinians and the reality of their brutal occupation.
And last but not least is The Great Ron Paul, The Scott Horton Show Interviews, 2004-2019.
Interview transcripts of all of my interviews of the good doctor over the years on all the wars, money, taxes, the police state, and more.
So how do you like that?
Pretty good, right?
Find them all at libertarianinstitute.org slash books.
Hey, you guys may know I'm involved in some Libertarian Party politics this year, but you can't hear or read about that at the Libertarian Institute due to 501c3 rules and such.
So make sure to sign up for the interviews feed at scotthorton.org and keep an eye on my blog at scotthorton.org slash stress.
Hey y'all, Scott here.
If you want a real education in history and economics, you should check out Tom Woods's Liberty Classroom.
Tom and a really great group of professors and experts have put together an entire education of everything they didn't teach you in school, but should have.
Follow through from the link in the margin at scotthorton.org for Tom Woods's Liberty Classroom.
Okay, so now there's this, let's talk about the object of the color-coded revolution here.
I don't know if slippers are a color, beige maybe?
And so you have this woman, Svetlana Tikhanouskaya is the best I can do.
And she is the wife of a guy who was a political blogger who was arrested last month and is facing three years in prison, says the Reuters here.
And so she decided once he was arrested, well, screw this, I'm going to go ahead and run for president.
So I was wondering if you know very much about them.
There's obviously always, in all of these color-coded revolutions, there are, you know, you could even call them mass movements of people who wish they had won the election.
I guess with the exception of Belarus so six, but in most cases they're able to turn out a bunch of people who are dissatisfied and make a movement out of it.
And of course they usually have, you know, some pretty severe criticisms of their government.
Many of which are legitimate and understandable.
And but so I just wonder whether these people are parachuted in by the CIA or how domestically rooted is their power and influence in this kind of thing, do you know?
Well, you know, we've had that for three and a half years here.
We've had a group of people who lost the elections, who've done everything, including using the intelligence services and the FBI to attempt to overthrow the results of the election.
And you know, there's not this sort of, there's not the idea that, you know, if you recognize that, it means you support Trump.
It means that you recognize reality, that we have the same thing going on in our soil.
It used to be when you lost an election, you know, you said, oh crap, you know, I better, we better refine our message and try harder next time.
And now, especially when you have the influx of so much money.
And as I understand this blogger, and it may be true, it may not be true.
I don't know.
None of us know.
But apparently he was caught with a couple of hundred thousand bucks in his apartment and the authorities said, well, where'd you get this dough?
You know, and if it is true, my guess is he got it from the NED, right?
Here's some money to pass around.
We've spent millions there every year to overthrow the government.
Maybe they planted it on him.
I don't know.
But it's sort of irrelevant at the end of the day, you know, because if you get bogged down with these sort of minute details, when you miss the big picture, which is that this, as Ukraine, remember what the head of the National Endowment for Democracy wrote just before Maidan, Ukraine is the prize, you know, and the same is threatened.
Is that the Washington Post piece you're talking about there?
Yeah, exactly.
Yeah.
And where he, where he says at the end, and if Putin doesn't like it, he might find himself on the short end of one of these here in Moscow real soon, too.
Wow.
Oh, that's sure not to provoke the supposed most dangerous person in the world.
Yeah, it's an arrogant thing.
And I mean, if push comes to shove, you know, Lukashenko may end up getting overthrown by Russia, not by Pompeo.
Yeah.
You know, because Russia has had enough of this, of the kid brother kicking sand in his older brother's eyes, acting like a badass, making deals behind big brother's back.
And you know, there is a huge, also a huge difference between Belarus and Ukraine in terms of ethnicity.
You do have in Western Ukraine, a very separate group who identifies with Lithuania, identifies with Poland ethnically, in terms of religion, in terms of history.
They're very, very different people from those in Eastern Ukraine.
And that can be exploited, and it was exploited for Maidan.
You don't have that in Belarus.
Belarusians are essentially Russians.
You know, they have historically been Russians.
The only time you actually see the flag of Belarus that's being carried around is by the protesters, because as in Ukraine, generally the protest leaders are extreme nationalists.
And that's why they refuse to allow people to speak Russian.
You have to speak Belarusian, although everyone speaks Russian in the entire country.
So there are some big differences, but there are some similarities in that this opposition is coming from the extreme right.
And I saw this in 2006, when I was on the eve of the elections, when I monitored the elections there.
They had a concert past the mandatory quiet period before the election.
The opposition had a big concert full of very skinhead-ish looking people, very aggressive.
I had a translator with me.
The themes and the lyrics of the song were very aggressively nationalistic, a real rough bunch of people out there.
And I suspect that that theme is still strong in this current movement.
Well, you know, there's really, you know, old resentments left over across Eastern Europe from the Soviet days, right, where, you know, the reason there's so many ethnic Russians in Ukraine, for example, is because Stalin moved them there.
And you know, my wife and her family, for example, they're from Odessa.
They don't even know Ukrainian.
They were only allowed to know Russian.
Only my wife's aunt knew Ukrainian.
All the rest of them only knew Russian, the only language they were allowed to speak.
And it was all imposed on them under the communist regime.
Well, there's a lot of right-wing resentment about that still, you know.
Yeah.
But the Soviets were brilliant at using nationalism as a tool to divide and conquer.
And that's why they moved people around.
That's why they, you know, a lot of ethnic Russians moved into the Baltics.
It was to dilute, you know, a lot of these populations, and it worked well for quite a while until it didn't.
And here we are dealing with the consequences all these generations later still, of course, too.
Yeah, and we can't leave well enough alone here in the U.S.
If we just leave these people alone, they'd be able to sort it out themselves.
Yeah.
I mean, and this is a real problem, too, that I don't know if you could even overstate how big of a problem it is that in the entire post-Cold War era in Europe, but also across the world, democracy means bowing down and submission to American violence.
It means you do what we say or we'll kill you.
And all in the name of this is what it means when people govern themselves and have regular elections and a rule of law and supposed, you know, natural and civil rights that must be respected and all of the best things about the American traditions they invoke as, one, the cause of their actions, which, as you said, no, it's always, of course, vested interests involved in all of this.
But then it's also becomes the excuse for anything negative that happens, because this is what is so exceptional about us is how democratic we are.
And so we can do any tyrannical thing to you and it's still OK now for the rest of the world that, well, not the rest of the world, but for the parts of the world who have never had real regular elections and a real rule of law rather than just ruling dynasties of powerful families and these kinds of things in their history.
What the hell kind of example is this to follow?
You know, and when that's the whole excuse for the thing is we're only doing this for your own good to set you free.
Yeah, right.
That's why we're so resented.
But, you know, as you were saying that great little speech there, I was thinking about our own elections and how I don't know that we've ever had real elections in the U.S. where we have serious choices, you know, back to the no matter who you vote for, you get John McCain, you know, Adam Dick, who, you know, you know, Adam, and he's a senior fellow.
He just put a piece out that we put up on the RPI website saying that, well, apparently both Trump and Biden support regime change in Belarus.
There you have in a nutshell, no matter who you vote for.
And, you know, these countries elections aren't perfect.
I will say that I've done a lot of election monitoring and I would say the 2006 elections were some of the cleanest I ever I ever witnessed.
And the OSCE was bitching and bellyaching about it.
But they also put out their report the day before the elections occurred.
So it's not always the best practice when you're an election monitor to report before the elections happen.
But they were it didn't matter what was going to happen.
They had to be on free and unfair.
But, yeah, there are going to be problems.
We've got a lot of problems with our own elections.
And the more I think about it and we've got some friends out in Austin who are heavily involved in in dealing with vote fraud issues.
And we've got a big problem here in the U.S.
And it's not often talked about, but it is serious.
So I'm always in favor of cleaning up our own house, cleaning up our own issues.
And I know you share that view before we go around bullying other people overseas.
Right.
I mean, anyone you don't have to be any kind of partisan or ideologue to be worried as hell about the nature of American voting machines, where the only way to do a recount is just to hit enter again.
It gives you the same number again.
And there's no real counting going on other than on a piece of silicone that cannot truly be monitored independently in any way.
And when it was first invented, the Brazilians had a system.
I don't know if they still do, but they had a system where, yeah, you vote electronically, but you actually see the computer or the machine fill out your ballot, a real paper ballot in front of you and drop it in the bin.
So they'll have the instantaneous results for tonight, but they'll also be able to prove it the day after tomorrow.
What's wrong with that?
Yeah.
And why wouldn't everyone be suspicious that that's not how we do it here?
Yeah.
Yeah.
It's nuts.
It is nuts.
We've got a lot of big problems.
You know, you know, I'm reminded to all this Eastern European stuff.
I look at I always remember Pat Buchanan talking about how men Ukraine, that's east of what we used to call Eastern Europe.
That's not even Eastern Europe.
That's really Russia's sphere of influence going all the way back.
America always recognize it as such.
And I'm looking at the map of here's Ukraine and here's Belarus and all this stuff.
And I'm reminded of the, you know, the thesis, really the title of Gareth Porter's book on Vietnam, The Perils of Dominance, where the reason we got into that war is because America was, in truth, so much more powerful than even the Russians and the Chinese combined.
And they knew it.
And so what are they going to do about it?
We are going to be able to go in there and do whatever we want and have our way.
And it's going to be easy and all this kind of thing.
And that's what it seems like to me here, where they're playing with such fire.
But they really don't realize how hot it is the way that you and I do.
And meanwhile, we've been fighting.
We've been fighting guys with bare feet for 20 years in Afghanistan, and we still lost so much for that.
We're so strong we can beat the hell out of everyone.
Yeah, exactly.
We not only can we not defeat the Russians, we can't defeat the Russians enemies in Afghanistan for them, no matter how hard we try for a generation.
I mean, why can't they see there's a better way?
Well, you know why they can't?
Because there's a lot of money in Washington for having a militaristic foreign policy.
And that is sadly what it's all about.
And that's why both parties are out on the scam.
There's tons of money to pass out.
It's stolen from us.
It's given to the rich.
And that's just how it is.
And, you know, as Dr.
Paul would say, if you were here until we go broke and we're pretty close to that anyway.
Right.
OK, so let me ask you about this in Europe, in Eastern Europe and in, you know, that entire theater, it seems pretty easy, you know, is just kind of abstraction to me.
Not real numbers, but it makes sense to me that the military industries would be by far the most powerful actors there in determining what American policy should be.
But on China, it always kind of throws me for a loop.
That the shipbuilders and long range bomber makers, Lockheed especially, but, you know, the big 10 military industrial complex firms, I see what they have to gain in this.
I see what the Marine Corps and the Navy have to gain from building up a big Cold War policy against China.
That's obvious.
But aren't there also still in America one million American corporations that have, OK, let's say 100 big and powerful, wealthy corporations that have such extensive ties and trade with China that have nothing to do with militarism and there are only threatened by militarism?
That where is their lobby?
Where is all the business, all the big businesses, never mind regular people, regular people don't count.
I know that.
Where are the giant firms that have a bigger interest in peace with China and where is their complaint and where is their lobby trying to impress upon Trump and Biden for that matter that we're going way too far with this hawkishness, that we have way too much to lose?
Yeah, it's a it's a great it's a great point that you make.
And it's a big question.
And, you know, I think a lot of these corporations are highly risk averse.
They're afraid of, you know, how the pendulum may swing.
They're afraid to stand up.
They don't want to be looked at as as unpatriotic.
And both main political parties make it seem as if you're unpatriotic, if you don't want to have a nuclear war with China.
You know, I mean, talk about insanity.
But but you're right.
And not only do they all have a stake in it, but we all have a stake in it.
Trade with China, you know, trade guarantees that there will be no war.
And it also free trade brings, as you know, prosperity to both sides.
Right.
And as Harry Brown used to say that, hey, you if you want to punish the Chinese government for being a communist government by not trading with them, then what are you doing other than adopting essentially communistic policies here and saying that America has to become more like China to prevent us from doing trade with people in a country that we don't like the government of?
That doesn't make any sense at all.
It's a good point.
And ironically, the Chinese are better capitalists than we are, because while we're building up only our military industrial complex, they're going off to Africa and South America and doing business deals.
Right.
Well, that was how Dr.
Paul's better at it than we are.
Yeah.
Dr.
Paul slammed him in the primary.
So good on this.
This is way.
Let me get this straight.
We've got to borrow a trillion dollars from China, the Communist Party dictatorship in China so that we can afford to back the dictator in Pakistan to help us fight the war for democracy in Afghanistan.
I got that about right.
Everybody on stage here, they didn't know what to do with that.
Yeah, exactly.
That's great, man.
I miss those days.
Yeah.
Anyways, by the way, speaking of which, right around this time of year would be Dr.
Paul's birthday and he's turning 85.
Right.
What day is it?
It is this month.
It is this month.
It's his birthday.
And we're hoping the Mises Institute is hoping to have a celebration in November here in Lake Jackson.
But as you know, this is a pretty weird year.
And if you'd asked me a month ago if it was going to happen, I'd say it's just for sure.
But now who knows?
I mean, everything's canceled, even though the numbers in Texas are getting better every day.
Everything's being canceled.
So, you know, we were not able to do our conferences this year.
Mises had to cut back its conferences and its meetings.
Well, we were going to have one right.
The Libertarian Institute and the Ron Paul Institute were going to team up this spring.
Yeah.
And then the you know what hit the fan.
Yeah.
So we're going to have to reset that for next year.
But yeah, let's hope.
Yeah.
And, you know, usually we or I don't know about usually, but some of the time anyway, there's a great birthday event for Dr.
Paul down there in Lake Jackson.
So we're definitely missing that this time, although I was invited to be part of a Mises caucus event where they're going to be celebrating Dr.
Paul's birthday and doing a big money bomb and all this kind of thing.
And I'm pretty sure that's on the 20th.
Huh.
Interesting.
I haven't seen that.
Oh.
Well, I should find out more about that and send it to you.
Yeah.
Sounds good.
Sounds great.
Yeah.
All right.
Well, listen, it's always great to talk to you.
I won't keep you.
It's Friday afternoon.
And I know you have important things to do, but I will tell you how much I appreciate you, Dan.
You're really great.
Well, great.
It's great talking to you again, Scott.
Take care.
You're the best.
All right, you guys.
That is the great Dan McAdams, director of the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity.
That, of course, is RonPaulInstitute.org, and he's co-host of the Ron Paul Liberty Report.
And you can find all of those, of course, at RonPaulLibertyReport.com, four days a week.
Best show on the Internet.
The Scott Horton Show, Antiwar Radio, can be heard on KPFK, 90.7 FM in L.A., APSRadio.com, Antiwar.com, ScottHorton.org, and LibertarianInstitute.org.
