Big pharma is thrilled today after the FDA has rescinded permission for the emergency use of hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of Covid-19. This after two “prestigious” medical journals have recently been forced to withdraw publication of articles critical of the use of hydroxychloroquine. The trials cited by the FDA did not include the critical component zinc according to critics, and was thus doomed to fail. That leaves enormously expensive new drugs in trial and the elusive vaccine as the “only way” to end the coronahysteria. Meanwhile states are pushing the idea of a “second wave” and are eyeing another shutdown. Watch today’s Liberty Report:

Sometimes a video can communicate important political ideas very well and quickly. That is the case with the two-minute video “No New Normal” at the Essential People YouTube page.

Starting off, it seems as if the video, like many others, is promoting that people make all sorts of sacrifices, changing their lives drastically and painfully, to counter coronavirus. Then, the video takes a quick turn, harshly criticizing the coronavirus crackdown and the “new normal” of dystopian restrictions on human actions that people in government and media often assert must persist. At the same time, the video denounces Bill Gates who has been a prominent backer of the crackdown and promoter of the “new normal.”

The video also provides a haunting visual demonstration of the dehumanizing nature of the masks and other face coverings that some governments and businesses are mandating people wear.

The video was posted in April, before a much increased recognition that coronavirus is way less threatening to most people than proclaimed through the imposing of coronavirus restrictions in America and before the United States, state, and local governments began their much-touted ramping down of their coronavirus crackdowns. Yet, unfortunately, the video still very much addresses the current state of intense restrictions in America and the continued ominous talk of subjecting people to a “new normal” forever.

Much of the ramp-down has been glacial in pace. It has also been accompanied by the introduction and expansion of attacks on liberty in the name of countering coronavirus, such as surveillance programs termed “contract tracing” and mandates that people wear masks. Meanwhile, some politicians are working hard to ensure a significant portion of restrictions enacted in the name of countering coronavirus stick around no matter what. Plus, there is the persistent threat of starting a new round of full-out crackdowns to deal with a “second wave” of coronavirus, another disease, or some other future “emergency.”

The lyrics in the song played in the video say, “wake me up when it’s all over.” Unfortunately, there are people, including in government and the media, who want to make sure the precoronavirus “old normal” never returns.

Watch the video here:

It seems that University of Chicago professors are much in the news this week. We recently discussed the controversy of posting by University of Chicago Professor Brian Leiter saying that military leaders should “depose” President Donald Trump and jail him.

Now another Chicago professor is under fire. Notably, while no one called for Leiter to be fired for wistfully discussing a military coup, there is a chorus of writers and academics calling for the canning of Harald Uhlig, the senior editor of the prestigious the Journal of Political Economy. Uhlig is also the Bruce Allen and Barbara Ritzenthaler Professor in Economics at the University of Chicago.

The reason is that Uhlig had the audacity to criticize Black Lives Matters and the movement to Defund The Police. Joining this effort is New York Times’ Paul Krugman, who is striking out at someone for giving his opposing view — an intolerant position that has now appears to be official policy at the New York Times. It is all part of the new order where writers call for censorship, academics call for removing academic freedoms, artists call for art removal, and politicians call for dismantling police.

Uhlig wrote on Twitter Monday night: “Too bad, but #blacklivesmatter per its core organization @Blklivesmatter just torpedoed itself, with its full-fledged support of #defundthepolice.”

He added:

“Suuuure. They knew this is non-starter, and tried a sensible Orwell 1984 of saying oh, it just means funding schools (who isn’t in favor of that?!?).But no, the so-called ‘activists’ did not want that. Back to truly ‘defunding’ thus, according to their website. Sigh. #GeorgeFloyd and his family really didn’t deserve being taken advantage of by flat-earthers and creationists. Oh well. Time for sensible adults to enter back into the room and have serious, earnest, respectful conversations about it all: e.g. policy reform proposals by @TheDemocrat and national healing.”

His comments immediately led to an effort to get him fired including the ever-present online petition where viewpoint intolerance is some how strengthened by numbers. Leading this ignoble, anti-free speech effort are academics like University of Michigan professor Justin Wolfers who teaches in the Ford Public Policy school but appears to have a strikingly low tolerance for opposing views on public policy.

Uhlig is accused of “trivializing the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement” and “hurting and marginalizing people of color and their allies in the economics profession.” He is also being denounced because he did not support the NFL kneelers. In 2017, he wrote

 In any case, it is pretty clear, that the current kneeling and the current defense-of-freedom-of-speech is not about some courageous act of standing up for democratic values.

I would so love that to be true, really. Instead, it is all just Anti-Trump-ism.

A letter calling for Uhlig’s ouster states, “Prof. Uhlig’s comments published on his blog and Twitter posts dated June 8th, trivializing the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement and drawing parallels between the BLM movement and the Ku Klux Klan, are outrageous and unacceptable.”

The KKK accusation appears to be derived from a blog post in which he asked: “Would you defend football players waving the confederate flag and dressing in Ku Klux Klan garb during the playing of the national anthem?” That does not “draw a comparison” between the movements. It makes a standard comparison between acts of expression, a typical “slippery slope” argument used in countless academic and legal works.

Krugman however does not seem even slightly interested in the context and instead cried “white privilege” – a label that now routinely precedes terminations of editors, academics, and others who disagree with a new orthodoxy:

Krugman called him ‘yet another privileged white man’ in a series of tweets:

Uhlig was called a racist by academics like University of Victoria economist Rob Gillezeau who wrote: “Racists shouldn’t be allowed to gatekeep our profession.”

I understand that Uhlig’s writings upset people. Academics often upset people, sometimes by design, in advancing unpopular perspectives. I can also understand why people would be uniquely ticked when they read a posting mocking the protests like this one:

Look: I understand, that some out there still wish to go and protest and say #defundpolice and all kinds of stuff, while you are still young and responsibility does not matter. Enjoy! Express yourself! Just don’t break anything, ok? And be back by 8 pm.

Much like a recent controversy of a UCLA professor it was a mocking tone that many would not have taken. However, this is a political debate that is raging around the country and many on both sides are using superheated or ironic or mocking language. What we have not seen are demands to can academics using such language on the other side like fellow Chicago Professor Leiter.

Nevertheless, Uhlig issued an apology:

My tweets in recent days and an old blog post have apparently irritated a lot of people. That was far from my intention: let me apologize for that. Did I choose my words and comparisons wisely? I did not. My apology, once again. Let me also make clear that all these are just my views, not pronouncements by the JPE and most certainly not the @UChicago or my department.

The attack on Uhlig as “white privilege” has become a common refrain. We recently discussed how the President of the Minneapolis City Council dismissed anyone who voices concerns over defunding or dismantling the police as just voicing their bias from a “place of privilege.” Thus, to object to this radical proposal is now proof of privilege.

None of this matter with the wave of intolerance sweeping over our campuses, where academics call for the punishment of fellow academics for voicing opposing views. Professors like Jennifer Doleac, an economics professor at Texas A&M University, tweeted “Yep, lead editor at a top journal. Hopefully not for much longer.” It is that simple.

Figures like Klugman are not just the loudest voices, they are now the only voices that seem to appear on the pages of newspapers like the New York Times. What was striking about the recent controversy over the column by Sen. Tom Cotten was not just the writers at the New York Times calling for the resignation of their editors and barring future columns with such opposing views. It was the silence of the other writers who did not utter a word as their newspaper yielded to these demands. As I discussed earlier, however, history has shown that today’s rebels often become tomorrow’s reactionaries. Such attacks on individuals like Uhlig will not stop with him. It becomes an insatiable appetite as the intolerance for opposing views grows.

Recently, protesters took over a precinct in Seattle and declared it the People’s autonomous zone. I was struck by one flier of one of the protesters that read “I support this, but what’s next?”

For those who are joining calls for sack editors and fire academics, it is a question that should concentrate their minds.

Reprinted with permission from JonathanTurley.org.

It seems that University of Chicago professors are much in the news this week. We recently discussed the controversy of posting by University of Chicago Professor Brian Leiter saying that military leaders should “depose” President Donald Trump and jail him.

Now another Chicago professor is under fire. Notably, while no one called for Leiter to be fired for wistfully discussing a military coup, there is a chorus of writers and academics calling for the canning of Harald Uhlig, the senior editor of the prestigious the Journal of Political Economy. Uhlig is also the Bruce Allen and Barbara Ritzenthaler Professor in Economics at the University of Chicago.

The reason is that Uhlig had the audacity to criticize Black Lives Matters and the movement to Defund The Police. Joining this effort is New York Times’ Paul Krugman, who is striking out at someone for giving his opposing view — an intolerant position that has now appears to be official policy at the New York Times. It is all part of the new order where writers call for censorship, academics call for removing academic freedoms, artists call for art removal, and politicians call for dismantling police.

Uhlig wrote on Twitter Monday night: “Too bad, but #blacklivesmatter per its core organization @Blklivesmatter just torpedoed itself, with its full-fledged support of #defundthepolice.”

He added:

“Suuuure. They knew this is non-starter, and tried a sensible Orwell 1984 of saying oh, it just means funding schools (who isn’t in favor of that?!?).But no, the so-called ‘activists’ did not want that. Back to truly ‘defunding’ thus, according to their website. Sigh. #GeorgeFloyd and his family really didn’t deserve being taken advantage of by flat-earthers and creationists. Oh well. Time for sensible adults to enter back into the room and have serious, earnest, respectful conversations about it all: e.g. policy reform proposals by @TheDemocrat and national healing.”

His comments immediately led to an effort to get him fired including the ever-present online petition where viewpoint intolerance is some how strengthened by numbers. Leading this ignoble, anti-free speech effort are academics like University of Michigan professor Justin Wolfers who teaches in the Ford Public Policy school but appears to have a strikingly low tolerance for opposing views on public policy.

Uhlig is accused of “trivializing the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement” and “hurting and marginalizing people of color and their allies in the economics profession.” He is also being denounced because he did not support the NFL kneelers. In 2017, he wrote

 In any case, it is pretty clear, that the current kneeling and the current defense-of-freedom-of-speech is not about some courageous act of standing up for democratic values.

I would so love that to be true, really. Instead, it is all just Anti-Trump-ism.

A letter calling for Uhlig’s ouster states, “Prof. Uhlig’s comments published on his blog and Twitter posts dated June 8th, trivializing the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement and drawing parallels between the BLM movement and the Ku Klux Klan, are outrageous and unacceptable.”

The KKK accusation appears to be derived from a blog post in which he asked: “Would you defend football players waving the confederate flag and dressing in Ku Klux Klan garb during the playing of the national anthem?” That does not “draw a comparison” between the movements. It makes a standard comparison between acts of expression, a typical “slippery slope” argument used in countless academic and legal works.

Krugman however does not seem even slightly interested in the context and instead cried “white privilege” – a label that now routinely precedes terminations of editors, academics, and others who disagree with a new orthodoxy:

Krugman called him ‘yet another privileged white man’ in a series of tweets:

Uhlig was called a racist by academics like University of Victoria economist Rob Gillezeau who wrote: “Racists shouldn’t be allowed to gatekeep our profession.”

I understand that Uhlig’s writings upset people. Academics often upset people, sometimes by design, in advancing unpopular perspectives. I can also understand why people would be uniquely ticked when they read a posting mocking the protests like this one:

Look: I understand, that some out there still wish to go and protest and say #defundpolice and all kinds of stuff, while you are still young and responsibility does not matter. Enjoy! Express yourself! Just don’t break anything, ok? And be back by 8 pm.

Much like a recent controversy of a UCLA professor it was a mocking tone that many would not have taken. However, this is a political debate that is raging around the country and many on both sides are using superheated or ironic or mocking language. What we have not seen are demands to can academics using such language on the other side like fellow Chicago Professor Leiter.

Nevertheless, Uhlig issued an apology:

My tweets in recent days and an old blog post have apparently irritated a lot of people. That was far from my intention: let me apologize for that. Did I choose my words and comparisons wisely? I did not. My apology, once again. Let me also make clear that all these are just my views, not pronouncements by the JPE and most certainly not the @UChicago or my department.

The attack on Uhlig as “white privilege” has become a common refrain. We recently discussed how the President of the Minneapolis City Council dismissed anyone who voices concerns over defunding or dismantling the police as just voicing their bias from a “place of privilege.” Thus, to object to this radical proposal is now proof of privilege.

None of this matter with the wave of intolerance sweeping over our campuses, where academics call for the punishment of fellow academics for voicing opposing views. Professors like Jennifer Doleac, an economics professor at Texas A&M University, tweeted “Yep, lead editor at a top journal. Hopefully not for much longer.” It is that simple.

Figures like Klugman are not just the loudest voices, they are now the only voices that seem to appear on the pages of newspapers like the New York Times. What was striking about the recent controversy over the column by Sen. Tom Cotten was not just the writers at the New York Times calling for the resignation of their editors and barring future columns with such opposing views. It was the silence of the other writers who did not utter a word as their newspaper yielded to these demands. As I discussed earlier, however, history has shown that today’s rebels often become tomorrow’s reactionaries. Such attacks on individuals like Uhlig will not stop with him. It becomes an insatiable appetite as the intolerance for opposing views grows.

Recently, protesters took over a precinct in Seattle and declared it the People’s autonomous zone. I was struck by one flier of one of the protesters that read “I support this, but what’s next?”

For those who are joining calls for sack editors and fire academics, it is a question that should concentrate their minds.

Reprinted with permission from JonathanTurley.org.

It seems that University of Chicago professors are much in the news this week. We recently discussed the controversy of posting by University of Chicago Professor Brian Leiter saying that military leaders should “depose” President Donald Trump and jail him.

Now another Chicago professor is under fire. Notably, while no one called for Leiter to be fired for wistfully discussing a military coup, there is a chorus of writers and academics calling for the canning of Harald Uhlig, the senior editor of the prestigious the Journal of Political Economy. Uhlig is also the Bruce Allen and Barbara Ritzenthaler Professor in Economics at the University of Chicago.

The reason is that Uhlig had the audacity to criticize Black Lives Matters and the movement to Defund The Police. Joining this effort is New York Times’ Paul Krugman, who is striking out at someone for giving his opposing view — an intolerant position that has now appears to be official policy at the New York Times. It is all part of the new order where writers call for censorship, academics call for removing academic freedoms, artists call for art removal, and politicians call for dismantling police.

Uhlig wrote on Twitter Monday night: “Too bad, but #blacklivesmatter per its core organization @Blklivesmatter just torpedoed itself, with its full-fledged support of #defundthepolice.”

He added:

“Suuuure. They knew this is non-starter, and tried a sensible Orwell 1984 of saying oh, it just means funding schools (who isn’t in favor of that?!?).But no, the so-called ‘activists’ did not want that. Back to truly ‘defunding’ thus, according to their website. Sigh. #GeorgeFloyd and his family really didn’t deserve being taken advantage of by flat-earthers and creationists. Oh well. Time for sensible adults to enter back into the room and have serious, earnest, respectful conversations about it all: e.g. policy reform proposals by @TheDemocrat and national healing.”

His comments immediately led to an effort to get him fired including the ever-present online petition where viewpoint intolerance is some how strengthened by numbers. Leading this ignoble, anti-free speech effort are academics like University of Michigan professor Justin Wolfers who teaches in the Ford Public Policy school but appears to have a strikingly low tolerance for opposing views on public policy.

Uhlig is accused of “trivializing the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement” and “hurting and marginalizing people of color and their allies in the economics profession.” He is also being denounced because he did not support the NFL kneelers. In 2017, he wrote

 In any case, it is pretty clear, that the current kneeling and the current defense-of-freedom-of-speech is not about some courageous act of standing up for democratic values.

I would so love that to be true, really. Instead, it is all just Anti-Trump-ism.

A letter calling for Uhlig’s ouster states, “Prof. Uhlig’s comments published on his blog and Twitter posts dated June 8th, trivializing the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement and drawing parallels between the BLM movement and the Ku Klux Klan, are outrageous and unacceptable.”

The KKK accusation appears to be derived from a blog post in which he asked: “Would you defend football players waving the confederate flag and dressing in Ku Klux Klan garb during the playing of the national anthem?” That does not “draw a comparison” between the movements. It makes a standard comparison between acts of expression, a typical “slippery slope” argument used in countless academic and legal works.

Krugman however does not seem even slightly interested in the context and instead cried “white privilege” – a label that now routinely precedes terminations of editors, academics, and others who disagree with a new orthodoxy:

Krugman called him ‘yet another privileged white man’ in a series of tweets:

Uhlig was called a racist by academics like University of Victoria economist Rob Gillezeau who wrote: “Racists shouldn’t be allowed to gatekeep our profession.”

I understand that Uhlig’s writings upset people. Academics often upset people, sometimes by design, in advancing unpopular perspectives. I can also understand why people would be uniquely ticked when they read a posting mocking the protests like this one:

Look: I understand, that some out there still wish to go and protest and say #defundpolice and all kinds of stuff, while you are still young and responsibility does not matter. Enjoy! Express yourself! Just don’t break anything, ok? And be back by 8 pm.

Much like a recent controversy of a UCLA professor it was a mocking tone that many would not have taken. However, this is a political debate that is raging around the country and many on both sides are using superheated or ironic or mocking language. What we have not seen are demands to can academics using such language on the other side like fellow Chicago Professor Leiter.

Nevertheless, Uhlig issued an apology:

My tweets in recent days and an old blog post have apparently irritated a lot of people. That was far from my intention: let me apologize for that. Did I choose my words and comparisons wisely? I did not. My apology, once again. Let me also make clear that all these are just my views, not pronouncements by the JPE and most certainly not the @UChicago or my department.

The attack on Uhlig as “white privilege” has become a common refrain. We recently discussed how the President of the Minneapolis City Council dismissed anyone who voices concerns over defunding or dismantling the police as just voicing their bias from a “place of privilege.” Thus, to object to this radical proposal is now proof of privilege.

None of this matter with the wave of intolerance sweeping over our campuses, where academics call for the punishment of fellow academics for voicing opposing views. Professors like Jennifer Doleac, an economics professor at Texas A&M University, tweeted “Yep, lead editor at a top journal. Hopefully not for much longer.” It is that simple.

Figures like Klugman are not just the loudest voices, they are now the only voices that seem to appear on the pages of newspapers like the New York Times. What was striking about the recent controversy over the column by Sen. Tom Cotten was not just the writers at the New York Times calling for the resignation of their editors and barring future columns with such opposing views. It was the silence of the other writers who did not utter a word as their newspaper yielded to these demands. As I discussed earlier, however, history has shown that today’s rebels often become tomorrow’s reactionaries. Such attacks on individuals like Uhlig will not stop with him. It becomes an insatiable appetite as the intolerance for opposing views grows.

Recently, protesters took over a precinct in Seattle and declared it the People’s autonomous zone. I was struck by one flier of one of the protesters that read “I support this, but what’s next?”

For those who are joining calls for sack editors and fire academics, it is a question that should concentrate their minds.

Reprinted with permission from JonathanTurley.org.

Just when it seemed we might get a moment without Covid hysteria or riot hysteria, Dr. Fauci is back and telling us that this coronavirus is his “worst nightmare.” But he assured attendees at a vaccine industry conference that there’s a lot of profit to be made when the vaccine comes out. Plus in today’s Liberty Report: A “Texas spike” or just hype? WHO’s new mask guidelines are a farce. And…you might be a psychopath! Today on the Liberty Report:

The shutdown and forced house arrest of the US was predicated on the assumption that the coronavirus could be spread from those without symptoms to others. The World Health Organization now says the research does not support such a thesis. Meanwhile the US economy is ruined and millions are suffering from depression and worse. Also in today’s program: Pelosi’s virtue signalling backfires, Minneapolis city council member explains why cops are a sign of “privilege,” and are the police really racist? Watch today’s Liberty Report:

From Minneapolis, where police killed a black man in their custody, and across the country there are cries to defund and disband police forces. The Minneapolis city council already voted in a veto-proof majority to get rid of its police department. But are supporters of this new mass-movement just reacting to relentless media hype and propaganda? Do they really have a plan to protect life and liberty without government police officers? Watch today’s Liberty Report:

Suddenly there is no talk about coronavirus. Reputable doctors in Italy, the UK, and elsewhere are claiming the virus hardly exists any longer. Just over a week ago much of America faced jail if they dared break the “social distancing” rules put in place by tyrannical governors and other public officials. Now tens of thousands gather to protest a police killing with impunity. And the spikes they warned about in areas where restrictions were eased are not happening. So what is happening? Also, what to make of the Trump/Mattis/Esper spat over US troops deployed against rioters in the US? Watch today’s Liberty Report:

Hundreds of US cities have been turned into war zones, with looting, murder, and mayhem unleashed on a level we have not seen in more than a generation. President Trump is threatening to call US troops to the street. Will de facto martial law calm the chaos, or will it be pouring gasoline onto the flame? Watch today’s Liberty Report:

As we’ve been saying on the Ron Paul Liberty Report for some time, in this period of coronavirus and the naked power-grabs by authoritarian politicians from all levels of government, if there is any hope to claw back some of our liberties it will come from the bottom up.

Politicians are drunk on power and they are not about to enter any kind of 12 step program. 

But throughout the country it is the people who are fighting back. And they are scoring tremendous victories. On a small scale, a hundred flowers are blooming daily as Americans who perhaps yesterday were not at all political, or who went along to get along, are realizing what is at stake and are standing up.

The elites laughed at the “flyover country” folks in places like the Lake of the Ozarks who ignored demands that they practice “social distancing” and wear masks in public over Memorial Day weekend and simply went out and had a good time. In fact the elites and the sycophants openly wished these people would contract Covid and die as punishment for ignoring the orders of their “betters.”

That’s how sick things have become.

Here in Texas the speaker of the house Dennis Bonnen – ostensibly a conservative Republican – has warned us lowly citizens that if we want big daddy government to allow us to conduct business again in this state, we need to bow down and scrape. 

He told USA Today that if we don’t wear masks whenever we go outside, we can’t have our freedom back:

I don’t know what message they are sending other than the message of stupidity that they’re not going to wear a face covering in public. Well, pick it. Either you want the economy open or you want to be selfish and not wear a face covering when you are out in the public.

The corrupt Dennis Bonnen may think he can push Texans around, but perhaps he’s had his own mask on too tight and is suffering from hypoxia. 

Down here in Brazoria county a strong independent spirit runs through the vibrant and active homeschool movement. In fact Texas homeschoolers and particularly Brazoria County homeschoolers have been the backbone of Ron Paul country. 

Earlier this month, a group of homeschoolers mobilized and began challenging the ridiculous closures of playgrounds throughout Brazoria County through direct action.

It is the most outrageous abuse of power to deny children the ability to go outside in the sun, help virus-killing vitamin D to flow through their systems, and get the exercise that is most directly associated with a healthy immune system and resistance to coronavirus. 

Government restricting children from that which keeps them healthy is not “science” – it’s criminal.

So this group, the “Park Patriots,” took action. First they descended on a park in Lake Jackson, Ron Paul’s hometown, and after the city workers called the police on them they gave the police a lesson in the law and law enforcement. They ended up at city hall and successfully got the vice mayor to admit that there was no force of law behind the forced shutdown of parks. Officials pretended they had the authority to deny citizens the facilities they were forced to pay for, but in the end a “guideline” is quite different than a law.

The mothers returned to the park and let their kids loose on the playground. Victory indeed.

Today the “Park Patriots” struck again, trudging up to Angleton’s “Freedom Park” to again let their homeschooled kids loose on the taped up playground – and to reclaim their freedom.

As they arrived they began dismantling the tape and the other impediments to children using the facilities:

The orange fencing keeping children from enjoying the park that their parents paid for ended up exactly where it belonged:

One of the children – in this case your author’s own daughter – relished the idea of smashing through the ridiculous “caution” tape on the swings:

Once again it was city workers who called the police on the people who pay their salaries – notice a pattern here? – and soon enough some squad cars showed up. 

What followed was the greatest example of how citizens can reclaim their own liberty by simply standing up to authoritarians. By simply working up the courage to say, “we’re not going to take this anymore.” Here is a short video of the essence of the exchange between the homeschool mothers and fathers of Brazoria County when the police tried to strong-arm them to leave the park:

Ironic how the officer with “We The People” tattooed across his arm showed up with such contempt for the actual people. One of the homeschool fathers hit the perfect note when he reminded the officer that it was in fact the park itself that belonged to the same “We The People” he was wearing on his arm.

Also of interest is that when the officer’s falsely asserted authority to remove the children from the park was obliterated by the excellent rhetoric of the parents, how only response was the bizarre “y’all anti-vaxxers?” Bad move, officer!

Finally, the officer, totally defeated by the arguments of the parents, turned heel and walked away, leaving his colleague dumbfounded and alone. She also turned around and walked away. 

One group of parents broke off to go to the city hall to directly challenge authorities and the other group remained at the park. 

Eventually the officer returned to the homeschoolers remaining at the park. He tried to act friendly at this point. “The chief of police has decided that you can remain at the park.”

Victory:

And thanks to these brave and dedicated homeschoolers, “Freedom Park” is free again:

We can all make a difference. We can all fight for our freedom, one small battle at a time. We can all help defeat the tyrants.

And finally: Don’t mess with Texas…homeschoolers!

As we’ve been saying on the Ron Paul Liberty Report for some time, in this period of coronavirus and the naked power-grabs by authoritarian politicians from all levels of government, if there is any hope to claw back some of our liberties it will come from the bottom up.

Politicians are drunk on power and they are not about to enter any kind of 12 step program. 

But throughout the country it is the people who are fighting back. And they are scoring tremendous victories. On a small scale, a hundred flowers are blooming daily as Americans who perhaps yesterday were not at all political, or who went along to get along, are realizing what is at stake and are standing up.

The elites laughed at the “flyover country” folks in places like the Lake of the Ozarks who ignored demands that they practice “social distancing” and wear masks in public over Memorial Day weekend and simply went out and had a good time. In fact the elites and the sycophants openly wished these people would contract Covid and die as punishment for ignoring the orders of their “betters.”

That’s how sick things have become.

Here in Texas the speaker of the house Dennis Bonnen – ostensibly a conservative Republican – has warned us lowly citizens that if we want big daddy government to allow us to conduct business again in this state, we need to bow down and scrape. 

He told USA Today that if we don’t wear masks whenever we go outside, we can’t have our freedom back:

I don’t know what message they are sending other than the message of stupidity that they’re not going to wear a face covering in public. Well, pick it. Either you want the economy open or you want to be selfish and not wear a face covering when you are out in the public.

The corrupt Dennis Bonnen may think he can push Texans around, but perhaps he’s had his own mask on too tight and is suffering from hypoxia. 

Down here in Brazoria county a strong independent spirit runs through the vibrant and active homeschool movement. In fact Texas homeschoolers and particularly Brazoria County homeschoolers have been the backbone of Ron Paul country. 

Earlier this month, a group of homeschoolers mobilized and began challenging the ridiculous closures of playgrounds throughout Brazoria County through direct action.

It is the most outrageous abuse of power to deny children the ability to go outside in the sun, help virus-killing vitamin D to flow through their systems, and get the exercise that is most directly associated with a healthy immune system and resistance to coronavirus. 

Government restricting children from that which keeps them healthy is not “science” – it’s criminal.

So this group, the “Park Patriots,” took action. First they descended on a park in Lake Jackson, Ron Paul’s hometown, and after the city workers called the police on them they gave the police a lesson in the law and law enforcement. They ended up at city hall and successfully got the vice mayor to admit that there was no force of law behind the forced shutdown of parks. Officials pretended they had the authority to deny citizens the facilities they were forced to pay for, but in the end a “guideline” is quite different than a law.

The mothers returned to the park and let their kids loose on the playground. Victory indeed.

Today the “Park Patriots” struck again, trudging up to Angleton’s “Freedom Park” to again let their homeschooled kids loose on the taped up playground – and to reclaim their freedom.

As they arrived they began dismantling the tape and the other impediments to children using the facilities:

The orange fencing keeping children from enjoying the park that their parents paid for ended up exactly where it belonged:

One of the children – in this case your author’s own daughter – relished the idea of smashing through the ridiculous “caution” tape on the swings:

Once again it was city workers who called the police on the people who pay their salaries – notice a pattern here? – and soon enough some squad cars showed up. 

What followed was the greatest example of how citizens can reclaim their own liberty by simply standing up to authoritarians. By simply working up the courage to say, “we’re not going to take this anymore.” Here is a short video of the essence of the exchange between the homeschool mothers and fathers of Brazoria County when the police tried to strong-arm them to leave the park:

Ironic how the officer with “We The People” tattooed across his arm showed up with such contempt for the actual people. One of the homeschool fathers hit the perfect note when he reminded the officer that it was in fact the park itself that belonged to the same “We The People” he was wearing on his arm.

Also of interest is that when the officer’s falsely asserted authority to remove the children from the park was obliterated by the excellent rhetoric of the parents, how only response was the bizarre “y’all anti-vaxxers?” Bad move, officer!

Finally, the officer, totally defeated by the arguments of the parents, turned heel and walked away, leaving his colleague dumbfounded and alone. She also turned around and walked away. 

One group of parents broke off to go to the city hall to directly challenge authorities and the other group remained at the park. 

Eventually the officer returned to the homeschoolers remaining at the park. He tried to act friendly at this point. “The chief of police has decided that you can remain at the park.”

Victory:

And thanks to these brave and dedicated homeschoolers, “Freedom Park” is free again:

We can all make a difference. We can all fight for our freedom, one small battle at a time. We can all help defeat the tyrants.

And finally: Don’t mess with Texas…homeschoolers!