 Obviously Ron Paul needs no introduction but I just want to talk about a couple of things about him unlike anybody else that I ever met in politics and I unfortunately met a lot of people in politics. Ron Paul is actually exactly the same in private as he is in public and he's a man, you know we know him of course as a physician, as a congressman, author of many books, eloquent spokesman for liberty, champion of sound money, but also one of my favorite things about Ron Paul is he's an Austrian economist. When he was in medical school he first encountered F.A. Hayek's The Road to Serfdom, started reading everything and he's read everything, Mises, Rothbard, Hayek, Bombaveric, Manger, everybody. So as it turns out of course he's the only man in Washington who actually knows any economics. And people would gradually, even in the Congress, come to him, even the congressman would come to him and ask him what the heck was happening, whether they paid any attention except in their private lives to what he had to say, you know that's another question. But as we've talked about at this conference, in his political campaigns he's always used his political campaigns as educational missions. He's the only man, I think this is many ways in which Ron Paul is unique in the history of American politics, he's the only guy not to have a power, the desire to rule other people. He doesn't want power, he doesn't actually want to run anybody's life, he'd like to enable us to run our own lives. So there are certainly many things I could say about him, I'll just mention something I said a few years ago, I think that future generations will look back on this as the age of Ron Paul. We have only begun to see with this, with the younger generation and more and more kids to come, just the very beginning of what this man has accomplished and how lucky we are, all of us, to be living in the age of Ron Paul, helped me welcome this great man. Thank you very much. Thank you. What a delight. Thank you very much. Thank you, Lou, for the introduction and congratulations and congratulations to the Mises Institute. Thirty great years. You know, Lou mentioned about me being in Washington and being a good congressman and a lot of times, even this evening, somebody came up and said, you know, you're the best congressman in Washington, D.C., and I have to say, yeah, that's nice, but the competition isn't all that great, you know. So it's a relative term, you know, but it is wonderful to be here and it's wonderful to celebrate an important event. And I'm delighted to be here with so many friends and colleagues and supporters. Now one thing that I have admonished so many on the campaign trails and the crowds that we would get out is this is very serious business, you know, fighting for liberty. You don't know what's going to happen and if you dwell on the problems, you can get pretty depressed over there. So I think it's important, but I think really what we should do is continue to do it. But what I advise people is that you ought to have some fun doing it because if if you dwell on all the negatives, you can get burned out pretty fast. But Lou's learned this lesson. He puts things together and he has a, and they have fun and enjoyment because you don't know exactly what's going to happen tomorrow. And I think dealing and associating with like-minded people is a great way to do it. And that is the reason why these events are so good. You get to meet people that have the same interests and the same goals, even though you're not, you know, dwelling on exactly what is going to happen tomorrow the next day. Now, the other question that a lot of people ask me about being in Washington, I've been in there in the Congress off and on for 23 years and they said, how did you survive? You know, isn't it very frustrating how you put up with these people? And I said, I've never been frustrated. I just have real low expectations when I go to Washington. You know, you just can't expect to change the world in a day or two. But quite frankly, I've been honestly pleased with what has happened. I never, I never dreamed that anybody would pay any attention to what I've ever said. I figured, well, you know, it may be in the cards for me to go to Congress, although that was never my goal. My goal was never, I never decided one day I want to run for Congress and I'm going to go to Congress. Matter of fact, Carol told me when I told her that I was going to run for Congress, she says, what in the world would you want to do that for? And of course, I said, I need to talk off these things and I need to express all these views and I've heard about this monetary policy. And she says, yeah, but this is danger stuff. You could end up getting elected. But I is shorter. She didn't know anything about politics. I'm not going to get elected. I said, well, I'm going to tell them people aren't going to be interested. But her assessment, even back then, back in the seventies was that people want to hear the truth and they're going to be impressed and they're going to end up electing you. So that was a bit of a disruption that disrupted my career in medicine. Although I wasn't satisfied to stay in Washington, you know, for long periods of time, you know, earn credit and seniority and become a chairman of a committee and this sort of thing. So after seven years of being there, I decided to go back to medicine. Now, you know, there's there's been a few things in the media that it can become pretty disturbing when you're in politics. You know, sometimes the media doesn't treat you all that fair. Have you ever noticed that every once in a while? It isn't. So but but this is a real mixed bag, you know, out there. Some supporters, you know, they get over the top at times. They almost paint me as this as this saint. Well, let me tell you, I'm not a saint, but on the other side of the point, that that article that came out said I was the most corrupt individual in Washington to see. That's not true either. So so it is somewhere in between there that that counts. But I do have to make a confession. I have contributed to some corruption. Matter of fact, there are two individuals in this audience that participated in this corruption. And that is I got three individuals that are really hard core and they don't think a whole lot about the government. They ended up working for the government because I asked them to worked on my staff, took a federal check and was part of the system. But I won't even name names. One of them runs the Mises Institute, but I won't mention his name. And the other person used to have this thing called the rendit review or something. But I nobody knows who he is either. But I wouldn't wouldn't pick on anybody like that. But of course, there's some rationalizations on how we can do that. I have to do that myself. So that's that's obvious. But of course, if I had my way about the the kind of congressman we would have, we'd be up there three months out of the year. The pay would be about one tenth of what we get. We could still keep a job. I could have still practiced medicine and still have gone to Congress and that's the kind of Congress we ought to have. You know, in the last several years, I would say five years, my life has changed and I think the freedom movement has changed. And I hope I contributed a little bit, but it took a lot more than that. It took groups like the Mises Institute and many others. It took so many of you who have participated either directly by teaching and participating in the Mises Institute, contributing money. And this is all that it has been so, so important. But the campaign took a dramatic change five years ago. This campaign for liberty, this whole issue. And when I meet so many young people or new people I had not met before, I frequently ask, when did you get interested? When did you get concerned and pay attention to the campaign? And, you know, one of the incidents that they mentioned the most, if there was one moment they bring up this subject about this little confrontation with the former mayor of New York City, Giuliani. Does anybody remember that guy? So Giuliani, you know, who made it into the news the other day. He's he's around, but not that much. But but he he still owes a million and a half dollars on his on his debt from from that campaign before as as other members of other candidates of the has run for the presidency. But not only did something happen back then in oh eight, but as that campaign wound down and it became evident that there was a recession which so many in this audience knew there really was a recession going on even before it was announced officially by the government that there was a recession going on. But that was dramatic. That is a big event. Although I believe our downturn in the economy started sooner. I believe it started 10 years ago. If you look at some pretty good statistics about real income and even real wealth in the stock market, if you want to take it and look at the the gold price as a reflection of something very significant going on for 10 years, but it wasn't recognized by a large number of people until oh eight. And that is when something something really happened that was different. After that campaign was over, it was the first time I started getting phone calls from so many of the media. They didn't have to worry about campaign going on. But there was got to be a very special interest, you know, in in the Austrian economics and also the many individuals who were able to talk about the bubble formation and why. So there was a lot more credibility again by all of us by that recession coming and and lingering. But it's it's dangerous, but it's also a wonderful, a wonderful opportunity for us to present our case. One of the most common things that I heard during the campaign, especially this go around because we did a little bit better this time, you know, our numbers kept growing and we used to talk about tens of thousands, a hundred thousand, but we literally can document millions of people now, not only in the Republican primary, but outside the primary. But I do get I do get a lot of advice, believe it or not, from various sources and and the one advice from those individuals who are much more conventional Republicans than many of you in this audience, and they'll come up and they'll have a smile and face and Ron, they'll say, Ron, you know, I really like what you're doing. You're on the right track, cut this spending and balance the budget. That's what we really need. But you could do so much better if you would just change your foreign policy. So I mentioned that one time in a college audience and I acknowledged, I said, you know, if I would have changed my foreign policy, how many of you would be here today? So where the conventional wisdom of the ordinary Republican was that the foreign policy was a disaster. It really has opened up the doors to bring so many more people into our camp that we can document. I think the primaries we probably generated about one point eight million in the Republican primary and quite frankly, some of our issues the toughest place to sell these issues would be in the Republican primary. You know, when it comes to Patriot Act and Civil Liberties and and the war, the war position. But if you go outside the Republican primary, all of a sudden you see a tremendous amount of support. When Carol and I walk through the airports, most of the time people who stop us are not what we would look at and say, oh, yeah, he looks like, you know, a Republican businessman. You don't see that it is it's working class people. Many times minorities and they are very enthusiastic. And it's usually they come from a different group that I don't think the Republican Party have any idea on how attractive the freedom philosophy is. And if they did, it would be wise for them to change their way and appeal to more people with the freedom philosophy. You know, the the media, I've been asked by some and I don't come down too hard on on the media. And a lot of people say you should come down hard on the media. But I sort of ignore them. I figure, you know, complaining, complaining about what what goods are going to do. And besides, there are alternatives. You know, we have educational opportunities. We have the Internet and so much other things. But but the media really wasn't quite fair, you know, to tell you the truth. And if you take the other day, they came out and they said that the Republican team, the current Republican team, they were getting large audience, seven, eight and nine thousand people out. And that was great news. They finally got up to those amounts. But just think, you know, when we're in Philadelphia in oh, eight, you know, Independence Hall, we had over five thousand people there of young people yelling and screaming cold weather. And no, nobody reported it. This year, we went back to Philadelphia and we we had a nice turnout. It we were expecting a bigger one, but it wasn't bigger this time. But if you think it's cold tonight, you should have seen what we had there. It was colding and pouring down, raining and they still came out because there there is a starvation. I'll tell you for the message of liberty and we should all be enthusiastic about the changes that are occurring in this country and to keep this thing going. The the one the one time I probably should have done a little bit more complaining about the debates where I was a non-existent person. And that was somebody added up. I said, you know, I don't think I had that much time tonight. And they said, no, you didn't. You had eighty nine seconds and all. But we were able to turn that around. Those eighty nine seconds probably got more play than the twenty minutes that everybody else got. And also, I think that got me on a couple of shows. There were two people in the media that generally wanted more fair play. And one was Jay Leno. He had me on, I think, in the last five years, four or five times. I think it was three times in the last year and a half. And he is a very nice, decent person. And I don't know exactly where his politics are. But he he is one that just thinks it's not nice to not treat people fairly. So I always liked him. But also from from another spectrum is John Stewart. John Stewart did the same thing. He he thought that fairness and he was a little bit more honest in his approach. So this is, you know, beneficial to be able to turn some of these things around. One of the things, of course, and I've talked about so much is has been the reception by the young people, the young generation going to the campuses and getting nice crowds out. And these this was not automatic. It had it took some work and effort and promotion. And and I thought the staff did an excellent job. But I had one week where I was at university. Well, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas A&M is considered pretty conventional, conservative, Republican. And we had a very nice, nice turnout. It wasn't one of our biggest, but it was good. You know, we were satisfied with four to five thousand people. So but within that same week or shortly thereafter, we went to Berkeley and people said, what are you going to Berkeley for? Well, it turned out that was our biggest turnout. Eighty five hundred people came out in Berkeley. And a lot of people made the point about that and said, wouldn't have happened in the 1960s. Berkeley was a different place. But this is a different world. And this is a different different system. We're seeing the end of an era, the beginning of a new one. We're seeing the ends of craziness in the beginning of the Austrian School of Economic Thought. That's what we're getting to. There was there was one show where I mentioned Austrian economics. And and I think it was Chris Wallace that had me on that Sunday. And he gave me a nice interview. He was challenging. He first pressed me real. And it was probably 20 minutes or so, which was pretty good for a Sunday morning. And he challenged me on the hurricane funding. We had just heard a big hurricane in Texas and we had a big vote to save everybody in Texas and from this hurricane. So I voted against the funding, you know, that and that. He says, what in the world are you doing? How do you and actually he gave me time to explain it. And I looked at that not too long. I said, hmm, that sounds like a pretty good explanation. I think I agree with that. But but then then he went on. He says, what's this business about Austrian economics? He says he sort of screwed up his face. And so he gave me a chance to say a little thing about an Austrian economic. So the message the message is getting out. Now, even in no seven, it was seven or maybe beginning of eight. We were at the University of Michigan, not exactly a conservative university. But that was the place I told the story where the young people were out there and they already had heard about the Fed and yelling and screaming. But that was the place where they started burning Federal Reserve notes. So so I thought, well, we're we're making progress here. But, you know, then we said then we started, you know, I would throw names out if I'd mentioned Austrian economics. Let's start clapping and cheering. And I'd mentioned Mises and Mises would draw a cheer and Rothbard would. But then he got really over the top. One time I mentioned Lou Rockwell and they started cheering. Lou Rockwell. I mean, what was going on here? Yeah, it's it is a new world and it's changing. And we should be very pleased with it. But the message I think is so wonderful. I have my limitations and I know what they are. And I get my critics. Why don't you do it this way? Why don't you say this way? All kinds of suggestions. But the one place where I am very, very confident in that is the message of liberty, the ones that we have put together and that we generally agree with. That is the correct message. That is the road to peace and prosperity. And nobody can take that away from us. When I first went to Congress, I spent most of my interest at the beginning, at least it was it was on monetary policy. And I told the story so many times about the breakdown of Brent and Woods was predicted by the Austrian economists. And it happened and that was a big event and that I got involved in speaking out. But over the years, I became and became much more interested in in the foreign policy and could see how this all came together. Why the Federal Reserve is key to the runaway welfare spending and also the war spending. They can't fight these wars without a Federal Reserve. It's such a fake and a fraud and we have to talk about it. But the foreign policy is so devastating to us. It's devastating to our economy. It's devastating to the debt is devastating to our civil liberties. And believe me, these young people are interested in this issue on the college campuses. That might be the issue. I mean, there's several issues that we get a lot of applause for. But the anti-war message is applauded by young people. And let's hope this country wakes up and continues to applaud that issue. But the applause is loud for the Federal Reserve and the Fed and go after the Fed. But also the next thing that we we get a lot of response from is on the privacy issue that it's your privacy. It's government secrecy that we have to attack. We have to return your privacy and we have to deal with making sure that this Internet is isn't overtaken and regulated by our federal government. But the students, the students have responded in a very favorable manner. And this is this is where we should be really excited about because I see this there's a transition going on. But the groundwork has been laid, not by me. I mean, I observed it and I have had called attention to it. But this has been done by institutions like like the Mises Institute and other other groups and other teachers. So many teachers here, how many people here have been participating in lecturing and teaching? And this has been going on for a long time. I frequently mention Leonard Reid because Leonard Reid had a lot of influence on me when I was trying to find out what was going on. He at least could provide the books and the literature for me. But we didn't have obviously the Internet and certainly the universities weren't teaching us, you know, the right kind of economics. But but today, you know, it is so much more available to us. I felt fortunate in my life to be able to have practice medicine for a long time. And sometimes I sort of wished I did a little bit more. But anyway, I feel blessed that I was able to do this, maintain a family life and participate in medicine as well as in politics. But over these years, you know, I was able to hear Mises is probably close to his last lecture and it was on socialism at the University of Houston. Then, of course, I one time had dinner with with Hayek and I got to know Murray Rothbard along with Lou getting to know Murray so much so well and St. Holds became a good friend. I became a good friend of Leonard Reid's. So I really feel like, you know, I had this opportunity to visit people that maybe today, not everybody in the country knows about it, but the people in the universities, the young people, in spite of their teachers in many ways, are starting to know these names. And I keep thinking, you know, you know, when we would read back and read about Adam Smith and Ricardo and other economists of the past, I feel, you know, so lucky that I was able to spend some time with them and to to enjoy this. So this is one one thing where I believe we are making great progress. You know, when we did when we did our campaigning and there were many times when we believe we were doing better than the reports. So sometimes I don't know if you'd agree, but every once in a while it didn't look like they always counted the votes, you know. But, you know, the votes, the votes were important. It was a measuring rod. But if let's say we did actually did a lot better than we got credit for, you know what, in the long run, it probably doesn't matter that much. It matters that we know about it and it matters that we're winning something a lot more important than a single primary where they cheat aside some votes. Well, we're winning as we are winning the hearts and mind of a whole new generation. And that's where we should celebrate. Our foreign policy, though, is something that we should be dealing with. That is the one issue I will be doing various things next year. I have not made any firm decisions, but I've had a lot of a lot of people talking to me on the different opportunities. But one thing that I will be working on is trying to continue to get information out about what's really going on in foreign policy because I think it is so important and it's a time bomb waiting. I think our government, our government, including both parties, obviously, they have an obsessive compulsive disorder when it comes to Iran. I mean, they are. It is it is literally to me like a sickness that they're able to just dwell on on this bomb that Iran doesn't have, you know. But just think of what's happened since 9-11 on on a change in policy. Now, Washington accepts and the American people accept preemptive war. That is, it is technically our policy that we can start a war anytime we want, not only that, without congressional approval. And what do we have now? What else has happened? The Congress voted and gave approval to the president to use the military to arrest American citizens and hold them indefinitely and never have a trial. This this is really, really bad. And how many times have you heard in these wonderful, wonderful debates they have had recently? Do they ever bring it up? I mean, do you ever have a commentator say, hey, what do you think about some of these things? What do you think about Obama's hit kill list? There was a policy now that the president has a kill list and he can assassinate anybody he wants, including American citizen. No discussion whatsoever. So this this to me is a dangerous, dangerous step. Although I see so much good progress, I see also danger on the horizon. It makes it even more crucial that we're successful in what we're trying to do. Fortunately, we still have a little bit of time. But that time may run out quickly. It may run out in a month. It may run out any year. It may run out in five years. So the more time we have to persuade more people to our side, I do not work on the assumption that all of a sudden we're going to have a new Congress and we're going to start repealing. I've never I've never believed that for a minute. But that that doesn't mean that things can't change. Things are going to break down and then there's going to be opportunities. And the best thing that probably can happen is when the government totally loses credibility and their money doesn't work and everybody goes on their own and people become independent and there will be de facto nullification. It will just flat out ignore the feds. And that that is a possibility. But the real danger is they will cling to power because that is all that they know is clinging to the power and using that power to suppress the people. But I am convinced that we do live in a new era, something different and better than ever before. And in the history, in the history of mankind, I see things that are different. And it has to do with a better understanding. I think we understand economics now better than they did in the 19th century. The 20th century is as bad as it was for war. There was an economic advancement by the intellectuals under understanding economic policy. So we have advanced in economic understanding. But one one thing that I would like to see in the new era and this would change everything. And that is just think of the scientific achievement of man. No, whatever period you go back to, there's been steady progress, but nothing super industrial revolution has been a fantastic stimulus to to new development, scientific and technological development. And actually, the standard of living has gone up for many, not everybody, because there's still a lot of people throughout the 20th century still suffered and they still do. And more people are starting to suffer. But technology and science, although it helped in many ways to improve our standard of living, just think of the misuse of technology. The misuse of technology has the technology in the science has been taken in the 20th century to become a century of murder and killing and war like we had never seen before. It wasn't hundreds of thousands. It wasn't millions. It's hundreds of millions of people that we killed each other with all this advancement. So is the human race really improving or are we stagnating? And what has happened? What has happened to us? Because we've never once taken technology and used it to promote peace. And that is what I think is going to be different. We need to do two things. We need to we need to deny one thing to governments. It needs to be a message spread around the world and never grant the government any government the authority to initiate violence against anybody. There are people or anybody else. If we have that principle, then how do we spread spread that principle? How do we spread this spread this message? And how do we use technology and science? We use the internet and that that is the way the message got. And for once, we would be able, hopefully, to get around the control of the message, the lion and the conniving by the collusion between those who give us our news and information and the government and the government schools. And this is going to change. Just think of what could happen if we had a magnificent revolution and magnification of a very healthy movement in this country. Our home already today, the homeschooling movement and the private school movement to circumvent what's going on in our public education. So there's reason to believe that this is a special time. It is it is a new era. It is different, but it will not not be easy, but it's going to be better and easier than ever before. Because now it isn't so difficult to talk to people. Lou was telling me that there's quite a few pilot groups of the Mises Institute around the world, and they do communicate with us. And we get a lot of messages and a lot of invitations. And and so this this is something that's never happened before. And it is so quick. Now, one one thing that I did get a little personal charge out of, I have to admit, was when Ronny was campaigning in Poland. I don't know if anybody saw that. But here's Ronny campaigning in Poland. And there's a big Ron Paul sign up there in Poland. And the wrong people out there with umbrellas trying to hide it from him, like, if he doesn't see it, everything is going to be OK. As long as he doesn't see it, it's OK. But I hope he saw it to tell the truth. And I hope he said to himself, can I ever get away from that? Ron Paul. So but there is a lot, a lot of a good activity going on. And I think this is also also wonderful. But we do have to change our change our attitude. We need we need to understand what freedom is all about and what what a free society is is about. I am convinced that when people hear and the true explanation of what liberty is all about and why you don't compromise on it, that it is the only message that can bring people together. It's the only message that can bring different people of different persuasions and different personal attitudes and different religious values. The more the smaller the government, the better the chance is for people to get along, you know, even in a religious sense. Some of the countries where the governments weren't really that strong. There's been times in our history where Jews and Christians and Muslims actually live together, you know, until outsiders come in and right now we are the outsiders. And that is why it's our responsibility to do something about these outsiders and change people's mind and say enough of this, enough of these wars, get our people home and get our troops home. If we want to change the world, set a good example for the world. But the principle to me is non-intervention. Stay out of intervening. There is one there's one word and if I'm not mistaken, I think I have a disagreement with Murray Rothbard on this. And that is he liked the word isolationism. And some people still like it. And I understand why they might like it. But I can tell you politically, it doesn't help anybody because because I am not an isolationist. If you believe in free markets, you don't want to isolate yourself from the world, you want to engage in the world. It's just that you want to isolate our weapons and bring our weapons home. That's what you want to isolate. So that is one area that we should look into and apply these principles. If you apply the principles of liberty and non-intervention, we don't intervene and the founders understood this. Don't get involved in entangling the lines. Don't get involved in the internal affairs of other nations. Mind our own business, trade with people. But that's not isolationism, trade, communicate. You know, we have a foreign policy today that is so sad. What we do is because we are the powerhouse of the world and everybody's intimidated. We go to countries and we tell them, look, you do this. And if you do it, we'll give you a lot of money. If you don't, we're going to bomb you. And sometimes you take a country like Pakistan. We do both. We give money and we bomb them. And also to be tough. See, I didn't win the presidency because I wasn't tough enough. I didn't say, you know, I will never take anything off the table when it comes to dealing with the Iranians. Well, the only they're lying because they what they're saying is they're not going to take a nuclear weapon off the table. But guess what? They take diplomacy off the table. So it makes no sense. But this whole, this whole wonderful idea about liberty, how it brings people together, because it's the use of liberty. If people have different lifestyles and different religions and different intellectual pursuits, if they want their liberty, that brings you together. You know, and I think it's, you know, it answers so many questions. Same way with economic policy. We have had a nation now for over 100 years where we think freedom, there's two kinds of freedoms. You have personal freedom, so you can go to your own church and have some civil liberties. And then somebody else defends economic liberty. And they're usually two different groups. But why do they have to? Why shouldn't liberty be all one thing? Why shouldn't economic liberty and personal liberty be the same thing? And why shouldn't that give us a sensible foreign policy? It would solve so many problems and it wouldn't cost us very much money either. And that is what we should set our goals for. So my my suggestion is is for Lew Rockwell to continue to do exactly what he's doing with your help. And for everybody to assume responsibility when I talk to the young people on campus is they want to know, what should I do? What should I do? And I use a lot of cliches from Leonard Reed. You guys study and learn and know what's going on. But I do put a little bit of a burden on people. And this is a good crowd to put a burden on you as well. Because the world isn't run by a large majority of people. The world has always been run by a small number of people. But if you become knowledgeable enough, knowledgeable enough to come up to a Mises Institute dinner and sit out in the cold and listen to a former member of Congress, I mean, the burden has to be very great on your shoulders. You have more responsibility than the average person that never thinks about these things. Maybe they don't vote. Sometimes they do vote, but they don't really know what's going on. And they haven't figured it out that the government's lying to them. So they listen to this stuff and oh, yeah, there's there. There's al-Qaeda in Iraq and we have to go to war and we have to do all these things so they listen to all this. But our job is to make sure that people, you know, seek out the truth. If you take if you if you take 100 percent of the people, I don't think 100 percent of the people are evil. I think most people are basically inclined to not want to go fight wars. Our countries have basically, you know, try, you know, when you take a vote, even before Persian Gulf war and these other wars, the large majority of the people say, no, we don't want to do it. But they they change their mind because of war propaganda. And this is one healthy thing that's happening. And this is one healthy thing I see with the young people. They don't believe their government. They question everything and they are not going to be bamboozled into believing all this. So we we have this, you know, wonderful opportunity. And if they do not believe the government and we then have this opportunity, the five percent who are really the evil people, they they get into position. They want power. Libertarians have a more difficult time because there's no natural way where we want to have power over people. But those who see the vacuum want power over people. And then they gravitate and they get in these positions of authoritarianism and they're the ones who promote the war. But then they lie and the problem is there's too many people that are naive and gullible. So what we need are our five percent or our 10 percent. And that's where we're gaining on them. You know, we we're living in a time where, you know, when our time has come, you know, and and and people are willing to listen. It's a message that's going to be acceptable. So what we need to do is work on that and how do you do it? Whatever you know how to do it, you know, you do it on your own. You participate any way you want. You support the Mises Institute. You start another one. And this is what's what's neat about what's going on. There are so many, so many groups. There's been a couple of groups that are outgrowth of our campaign. The one group that I really think is doing a great job is the Young Americans for Liberty, and these are on campuses. We have we have now three hundred and fifty chapters on campuses around the country, and they are energizing, you know, a lot of people. Now, I don't know what the number is, but my guess is that that YAL is getting close to maybe where the Young Americans for Freedom, the Buckley Group, probably peaked out, you know, and they're they're gone. But so and I think YAL is going to continue to grow. They've been instrumental in trying to get young people out. And, you know, I have made one trip to a campus since the election, and I was a little bit personally curious about, you know, what will the response be like? I'm not a candidate. People do like politics. It's easier to raise money for politics than it is for education. And I was wondering, you know, what's it going to be like? So I had a business group invited me to go out to Salt Lake City. And I said, well, I'll come if you can get me, you know, on a college campus. There is a Utah Valley University, and that was not too far from where the speaking engagement was. So we had it had a rally there and YAL and different groups got out. And the turnout was great. I mean, we had over four thousand young people came out and wildly enthusiastic about this message and believe me, I don't talk to them about government loans and government anything. And they hear it and I've always been sort of baffled. You know, I talk about the problems. They're serious and unemployment and inflation, loss of liberties. And we have the federal government arresting American citizens, starting all these wars. And yet so many people will become more optimistic. I can't tell you how many young people come up and say, you know, I feel like there's hope now. I'm optimistic. I never was. I never want to pay attention. And it must not be that I think they want to hear the truth. I think even the bad news is good news in that there is an answer. And that answer is the answer in liberty. And that is what we can present. We can do it. We're on the precipice of a great change of a new era. If we just can get that message out and turn it around and say, technology is going to be used not to kill people in a massive way, but to stop these wars and present the case for liberty. Thank you very much.