Blogging as been nonexistent as I am phone banking and block walking like a madwoman for Ron Paul—as well as running my law firm. Today is my monthly show.

On Thursday, February 8 at 3 PM ET, I will be interviewing Dr. Walter Block. We continue down the road toward the nomination of the Republican candidate. Three candidates remain in the race. Dr. Block and I will analyze the candidacy of Congressman Ron Paul and the legacy he will leave behind regardless of the outcome.

Dr. Block now holds the Harold E. Wirth Endowed Chair in Economics at Loyola University in New Orleans. From 1979-1991, he was the Senior Economist with the Fraser Institute, and, from 1998–2002, he was a member of the Board of Trustees of the Aspen Institute. In addition to his faculty position at Loyola, Block is also a Senior Faculty member of the Ludwig von Mises Institute for Austrian Economics. His most famous work is Defending the Undefendable. Block is considered to be one of the principal economists and thinkers of the Austrian School and anarcho-capitalism in general.

Ilana Mercer will join me at the beginning of the show for some short commentary.

You can listen to the show beginning at 3 PM ET, by clicking here and then on my icon when it pops up.

Today, I will be hosting Carla Main, the author of Bulldozed: ‘Kelo,’ Eminent Domain and the American Lust for Land and Wright Gore, III whose family is chronicled in the book.

Ms. Main (her website is here) is an attorney who practiced law in New York City for ten years. She litigated a wide variety of commercial cases involving real-estate-related disputes, the First Amendment, fraud, art law, and civil rights. During her early years as a lawyer, Ms. Main represented condemning authorities in New York City and conducted public hearings at which individuals whose property was being condemned often came forward to protest the project.

Until 2005 Ms. Main was an Associate Editor of The National Law Journal, where she edited the opinion page of the paper and wrote a column on law and society. Her writing has appeared in The Wall Street Journal, Policy Review, National Review, The American Lawyer, and The New York Sun, among many other publications.

Wright Gore III’s family owns Western Seafood in Freeport, Texas. The city government in Freeport has been using eminent domain to take Western Seafood to give to a developer to build a marina. I interviewed Wright two years ago on my blog and as a guest host on another Right Talk show.

We will talk about the morality and legality of such eminent domain cases and the American Judiciary’s complicity in allowing governments to take land from some to give to others.

Ilana Mercer, the great classical liberal writer and thinker routinely joins the show with her insightful analysis of current events. She pens a popular weekly column—“Return to Reason”—for WorldNetDaily.com. With a unique audience of 8 million, the site has been rated by Alexa as the most frequented “conservative” site on the Internet. Mercer contributes to other well-known websites, and has written weekly columns for the conservative Calgary Herald and Vancouver’s North Shore News. She is a fellow at the Jerusalem Institute for Market Studies, an independent, non-profit economic policy think tank

During last night’s Republican debate, Dr. Ron Paul, the only candidate who truly understands economics, fiscal and monetary policy and the financial markets, asked the only truly probative question during that part giving candidates the opportunity to ask each other questions. Dr. Paul’s question of McCain was spot on.

McCain had angrily, and incorrectly, denied the moderator’s statement that McCain had admitted in the past that he was weak on economics. McCain’s protestations aside, Ron Paul proved the point.

Here is Dr. Paul’s question to McCain:

Cross posted at Liberty’s Brush Fire.

Sunny Lucas. Rachel Lucas, world-famous blogger has put forth her dog, Sunny as a candidate. If Ron Paul does not get the nomination and does not run in the general election, I am going to support Sunny Lucas.

Why, you ask? Because Sunny understands that most policy made by the federal government these days is no better than dog poop. Besides, she understands health care far better than Romney.

Ambac, the “nation’s second largest issuer of bonds” is being downgraded from its AAA rating according to an AP story in the Washingon Post and the American Statesman.

From the Statesman:

“Ambac and chief competitor MBIA together insure $700 billion in municipal bonds, and MBIA’s “AAA” rating is also under threat. The company issued $1 billion in bonds this week to preserve the rating, though that may not be enough to satisfy the ratings agencies. MBIA said in a statement Friday it intends to keep working toward maintaining its “AAA” rating.

Since late last year, when the agencies first raised the prospect, analysts have suggested any move to cut Ambac or MBIA below “AAA” could be disastrous. The concern is that downgrades will lead to a reduction in the value of portfolios at dozens of financial institutions, said Donald Light, a senior analyst at Celent LLC.”

From the Washington Post:

This could spark a substantial sell-off by institutional investors such as pension funds that can only invest in top-rate securities, causing their value to drop. That in turn would prompt even more selling. As the securities become less valuable, Wall Street firms could be forced to write down billions of dollars on their balance sheets, restating how much their holdings of these securities are worth. The banks, which have already suffered staggering losses, have relied heavily on bond insurance to reduce their exposure to subprime mortgage debt and other complicated securities linked to these loans.

“Everyone thinks they’re looking at the cliff over Armageddon,” said Ed Rombach, senior derivatives analyst at Thomson Financial. “If you think the write-downs have been bad so far, the next write-downs could be twice as big.”

Meanwhile, we spend billions of dollars of borrowed money every quarter in Iraq and Afghanistan to stabilize the countries of others while our own safety-nets disintegrate. A financial bloodbath is on the horizon and Bush thinks everything will be “okay” if he passes out little $500 checks to you and I for spending on junk at the mall.

May God have mercy upon us.

At Anti-War Radio.

I have seen vile slander and speculation on blogs about some of the Ron Paul newsletters put out in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s. There have been calls for Ron Paul to “apologize” and “take responsibility” for them.

Of course, he has done all this throughout the years. He has made clear that the buck stops with him at least since the first time I heard about it in 1996 when Karl Rove, at the behest of then Gov. Bush, armed liberal Democrat Lefty Morris with the information for the latter’s run against Dr. Paul.

I have read Dr. Paul’s writings created all the way back to the 1970’s and the subject newsletters—and I say “subject” because the suggestion that there are 3 decades of letters filled with the subject matter considered offensive is a gross distortion of the truth—and it is evident to me that he did not write them. They are antithetical to his gentlemanly style and to the beliefs that he has professed since the beginning.

Well, say some, the fact that he “let” the articles go out in the newsletter shows that he is a bad “manager”. That is absurd. First, he was not managing the day to day running of the newsletter. He was practicing medicine on a full-time basis and writing some of the columns in his spare time—the ones that went out under his by-line. His relationship to the newsletter business was no different than any other person who “owns” a business—but does not work “in” the business.

For instance, there is a successful entrepreneur here in Austin who owns several businesses—but neither “manages” nor “works in” any of them. He hires managers and employees. One of the businesses is a car wash. If one of the employees of the car wash calls a patron a racist name, that does not mean that the owner is a racist. It does not mean that the owner is a “bad manager”. Management was not the owner’s role. However, any good owner knows that the “buck” stops with him, and would ensure that his managers rectify the situation and discipline or terminate the employee. He would also apologize to the customer and assure them that those are not his positions. This is precisely what Dr. Paul did.

There are those who insist that he should have read the newsletters and caught the problem earlier. How do you know that he had the time or inclination to do so in light of his busy practice? I don’t have the time to read each and every letter written by attorneys I employ in my firm—and I do manage them. I may not detect a problem for years—because I have to trust the professionals I hire. Do you truly believe that the “owners” of publications read each and every article in each and every magazine?

Then I read the libertarians who take a utilitarian approach. They say that, in order to exonerate himself and prove a negative—that he did not write the newsletters—he must identify and “out” the writer(s) and throw them to the wolves. In other words, Dr. Paul must bring about the personal and professional ruination of other people to save his own butt.

Dr. Paul is a Christian who exemplifies Christian behavior more than any other political figure I have ever seen. He does not stand on the street corner preaching and praying loudly as did the self-righteous Pharisees against whom Jesus railed. He embodies the teachings of Jesus in his day to day life.

One must ask, who did the writers of the subject materials really hurt? They hurt Dr. Paul! They put ammunition in the hands of his enemies and tarred his reputation. They owe a debt to Dr. Paul and no one else.

Dr. Paul has handled their debt to him as would a Christian in accordance with the Gospel of Matthew, in which Jesus commanded that we forgive others and deal with them in a compassionate manner.

15 ¶ Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.

16 But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three awitnesses every word may be established. 17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the achurch: but if he bneglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

Note that the passage does not say that if you resolve the situation with your brother (like termination from employment coupled with forgiveness and discretion), but if the trespass is later brought up in politics and you are smeared with it, you are to forget all Christian principles and throw your brother to the wolves to save your political career.

Consider another of the parables of Jesus in Matthew:

23 ¶ Therefore is the kingdom of heaven likened unto a certain king, which would atake account of his bservants.

24 And when he had begun to reckon, one was brought unto him, which owed him ten thousand talents. 25 But forasmuch as he had not to pay, his lord commanded him to be asold, and his wife, and children, and all that he had, and payment to be made. 26 The servant therefore fell down, and worshipped him, saying, Lord, have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. 27 Then the lord of that servant was moved with compassion, and loosed him, and forgave him the debt. 28 But the same servant went out, and found one of his fellowservants, which owed him aan hundred pence: and he laid hands on him, and took him by the throat, saying, Pay me that thou owest. 29 And his fellowservant fell down at his feet, and besought him, saying, Have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. 30 And he would not: but went and cast him into prison, till he should pay the debt. 31 So when his fellowservants saw what was done, they were very asorry, and came and told unto their lord all that was done. 32 Then his lord, after that he had called him, said unto him, O thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all that adebt, because thou desiredst me: 33 Shouldest not thou also have had bcompassion on thy fellowservant, even as I had cpity on thee? 34 And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due unto him. 35 So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from your hearts aforgive not every one his brother their trespasses.

Ron Paul forgave the writer of the newletters who has caused him such trouble. He is an honorable man who refuses to sacrifice another person to his political aspirations. He shoulders the responsibility and takes the heat—rather than pointing a finger to divert wrath from himself. He has more courage and integrity than any other man in public life.

Let the nattering class continue to natter on about this. Ron Paul is building his treasure in heaven instead of on this earth. To the natterers, look further at the words of Jesus in Matthew:

23 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cummin, and have neglected the weightier provisions of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness; but these are the things you should have done without neglecting the others. 24 “You blind guides, who strain out a gnat and swallow a camel!

At Dirt Rhodes Scholar:

I worked for Ron Paul, in his Washington D.C. office, in 1998-99, seeing him almost every day, and saw absolutely no indication of him being racist, and in fact, I saw many reasons to know he is not racist. I am of Hispanic decent, and quite proud of it. My family on my mother’s side were migrant farm workers and my Great-Grandfather even rode with Pancho Villa.I am also part American-Indian.

Not only am I outspoken about my heritage, I don’t work for racists and I would never have worked on Ron Paul’s staff if I had any suspicion whatsoever that he was “racist.” And I wasn’t the only staff member of “mixed race.” There were several others and he never gave it a second thought. One of them was a young woman who is half Panamanian, with an obvious dark complexion. If Ron Paul were some kind of racist, who thinks non-whites are inferior, why would he hire her, or me? Was it some kind of elaborate, clever cover? No. The reason he did not care about our race is because he is a libertarian who sees people as individuals, not members of groups, racial or otherwise.

During my time in his office, as now in the grassroots movement, there were fundamentalist Christians (and I mean really fundamentalist), working right next to proud and opinionated atheists. There were budhists, anarcho-capitalists, Big L Libertarians, objectivists, old school “Reagan” conservatives, and people of all manner of ethnic background, all working side-by-side. I have even seen gay people in those circles. They did not agree on many things, or even like each other, to be blunt, but whatever their personal background or orientation, they all saw value in working for a strict constitutionalist and a man of deep principle and courage.

Go read the whole thing.

You can listen to it here, or on Youtube. This is Part 1 (there are 3 parts):