21 responses to “Ron Paul calls for Federal Reserve Audit at the Cato Institute”

  1. birth injury news

    I know this if off topic but I’m looking into starting my own
    blog and was curious what all is needed to get setup? I’m assuming having a blog
    like yours would cost a pretty penny? I’m not very internet smart
    so I’m not 100% sure. Any suggestions or advice would be greatly appreciated.
    Kudos

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. Killing the Economy One Fraud at a Time – The Fed | ChrisLittleton.com

    [...] I am very confused by the response of Chairman Bernanke to questioning by Congressman Ron Paul. To a seemingly near off the cuff question by Congressman Paul on Federal Reserve money provided to [...]

    »crosslinked«

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. Jason

    Matt,

    “Normal people try to conform, and reasonable people do not conform, and look for alternatives. Therefore all progress belongs to unreasonable people.” ~Dr Bernard Shaw

    You can try and stop the revolution but it’s already here Matt and Ron Paul is the lone dissenter.

    “Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it’s realized our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy.” ~Congressman Ron Paul

    Dr Paul, much respect for you sir. I and some of my friends in Iraq have read your book “The Revolution” and agree 100%.
    /salute

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. Matt

    wth Ron Paul?

    “It wasn’t because all of the sudden, the people woke up and decided the Federal Reserve indeed needed to be audited and we needed to know more about the Federal Reserve. It had to do with the TARP funds.”

    Really? Is that your genius assessment Ron? Ummm, FYI TARP funds are administered through the TREASURY you propagandist, bandying about inflammatory words with no causal relationship. If it had to do with the TARP funds you would audit the treasury? I am sure there is some tangential relationship, but come on, TARP was approved by Congress and allocated through the Treasury.

    By this logic we should be auditing Congress’ idiocy in voting for it and Treasury’s administration of it. If you are going to provide your assessment, please try to insure it makes sense.

    On a serious note, you gotta work on getting rid of the ‘uh’ when you speak, it would make this transcript twice as long if they were included.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. Matt

      And please, don’t give me this ‘TARP is taxpayer money and went to protect banks, and the Federal Reserve is the central bank’. By that line of reasoning, you might as well pick any bank or any congress, or any treasury. There are better reasons why the Fed came under review, this is just a terrible reason, one of which i assume only had a self-serving or ill-informed rationale for providing.

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      1. Nate Y

        “I am sure there is some tangential relationship, but come on, TARP was approved by Congress and allocated through the Treasury.”

        This leaves out a crucial step. Here I’ll fix it for you…

        There is a direct relationship. TARP was approved by Congress, allocated through the Treasury, and funded by the Federal Reserve.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        1. Matt

          Umm, isn’t EVERYTHING funded by the Federal Reserve? What were they supposed to do if CONGRESS PASSED THE BILL, the Fed just arbitrarily says ‘nah, sorry government, we aren’t funding it?’ How is TARP any different than anything else Congress has ever passed that requires funding?

          I just don’t think anyone thought ‘OMG WE PASSED TARP LETS AUDIT THE FED’ – except maybe Ron Paul. It demonstrates his disconnect, normal folks would have thought to Audit the treasury.

          However, Ron Paul probably also thought ‘OMG WE PASSED THE STIMULUS BILL LETS AUDIT THE FED’ and thought that was logical too.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          1. longshotlouie

            We want to know where the money is, and the FED says that they do not have to tell.

            Pretty simple.

            What is the worst that can happen if the FED is fully audited?

            Report this comment

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          2. Nate Y

            “What were they supposed to do if CONGRESS PASSED THE BILL, the Fed just arbitrarily says ‘nah, sorry government, we aren’t funding it?’”

            Yes. The Fed is fully able to say “NO” to the Congress. They don’t have to fund whatever legislation the Congress passes. In fact, they’re supposed to do say “NO” in order to prevent Congress from borrowing and spending the country into ruin. The Fed is supposed to be independent of Congress/politics, not beholden to them. Of course, it is a completely politicized institution almost always working in collusion with government.

            Report this comment

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          3. a no brainer

            They love to say that they want to keep the politics out of the equation, but isn’t the FED chair a political appointment?

            Report this comment

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          4. Matt

            “Yes. The Fed is fully able to say “NO” to the Congress. They don’t have to fund whatever legislation the Congress passes.”

            What the heck? Since when did the Fed become responsible for vetoing public policy – which is what they would be doing if they pick and choose among what policies, that Congress has appropriated, to fund? ‘Hmmmm, ok we will fund the war, but no on TARP, ok and we think FEMA is important so we will give you money for that, but that’s a no on the stimulus package.’ Entertaining that thought is ludicrous.

            Like I originally said, noone is going to think ‘OMG TARP PASSED AND THE FED ACTUALLY GAVE THE MONEY TO THE TREASURY THAT CONGRESS APPROVED, THEREFORE AUDIT THE FED!’.

            Report this comment

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          5. Nate Y

            You must remember that deficit financing (mainly made possible through the Fed) is not the only way for Congress to fund it’s endeavors. Congress could do so openly and honestly through taxes. Of course, they wouldn’t be able to get away with it for long. The Federal Reserve System serves to confuse, bewilder, and blind the people to the facts. It has obviously done so to you.

            Report this comment

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      2. longshotlouie

        Wow, nitpicking and whining really are your forte.

        Who administers the TARP funds, Matt?

        And the Congress will be ‘audited’, around election time.

        Would you go ahead and list all of the ‘better reasons’ why the FED should be under review (audited)?

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        1. Matt

          Best reason? To silence all of the conspiracy theorists.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          1. longshotlouie

            good enough reason, except it would have the opposite effect and that is why we have your ilk fighting it.

            No such thing as a conspiracy, right matt?

            Report this comment

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          2. Matt

            Dude, im not fighting an audit, but I am fighting silly statements.

            If you aren’t for the conspiracy then you must be part of the conspiracy, right louie?

            Report this comment

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          3. a no brainer

            Fighting silly statements? Such a noble cause.

            ‘For the conspiracy’ and ‘Part of the conspiracy’ are the same.

            Right, matt?

            Report this comment

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          4. longshotlouie

            lmao

            Report this comment

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          5. Matt

            Then what do you call the person arguing with the person who is fighting silly statements and pointing out inaccuracies? :)

            Report this comment

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          6. longshotlouie

            How does one fight silly statements by making them?

            Oh yeah, the same way the FED fights inflation, by inflating.

            gotcha

            Report this comment

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  5. longshotlouie

    By the 1940′s this revolution in “new economics” had infiltrated the universities and permeated economic thinking to the point that all opposing views were effectively rooted out of the higher educational system in this country. A generation of economic students were completely indoctrinated in the essentials of this new economic catechism. By 1950, the majority of universities and professors were teaching this new economic doctrine, textbooks reflected the accepted doctrine and the students were oblivious to just what they were being taught since it was the only accepted school of economic thought presented.

    The truth of the matter is that so-called new economic theory was not new at all, but a revival of core socialist patterns of economic thought that were formulated during the second half of the 1800′s. This core socialist pattern involved government intervention into economic affairs that would gradually lead to government intervention into social affairs; the outcome of which would be a transformation of the entire political structure of the country.
    http://www.1776solution.blogspot.com/

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0