The David Knight Show - INTERVIEW Ending Property Tax So You Can OWN YOUR HOME

Episode Date: June 13, 2023

Donald Rainwater, RainwaterForIndiana.com, joins to talk about his campaign for Indiana governor. Proposals for capping property tax, ending income tax, lockdowns, mandates, government schools, parental rights, corporatism in the form to toll roads — it's a broad ranging discussionFind out more about the show and where you can watch it at TheDavidKnightShow.comIf you would like to support the show and our family please consider subscribing monthly here: SubscribeStar https://www.subscribestar.com/the-david-knight-showOr you can send a donation throughMail: David Knight POB 994 Kodak, TN 37764Zelle: @[e-mail] App at: $davidknightshowBTC to: bc1qkuec29hkuye4xse9unh7nptvu3y9qmv24vanh7Money is only what YOU hold: Go to DavidKnight.gold for great deals on physical gold/silverFor 10% off Gerald Celente's prescient Trends Journal, go to TrendsJournal.com and enter the code KNIGHTBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-david-knight-show--2653468/support.

All right, welcome back. And joining us now is Donald Rainwater. He's running for governor in Indiana. And I appreciate the introduction from Carl Niemoller. He's actually descended from Pastor Martin Niemoller, the guy who said, you know, first they came for this group, and I didn't do anything about it. And he has a couple of radio stations there in Indiana,

K-A-R-L and K-A-R-L.2. And I wanted to talk to Mr. Rainwater back in 2020 when he was running for governor then. I really liked what he was doing. He was taking the lead in terms of opposing all this lockdown tyranny and the masks and all the rest of the stuff. I really liked what he was doing. So it's great to have him on his website, by the way, is rainwaterforindiana.com. Thank you for joining us, sir. Oh, well, thank you so much for having me, David. I really appreciate the opportunity. It's great to have you on.

I appreciate you getting into this fight. I know it's a difficult thing being in third parties. I've been there, done that myself. Uh, so tell us a little bit about what you're trying to accomplish there. I know that you, when you started talking about freedom in the midst of all this lockdown, everything you shot sky high in the polls there for, for a bit, and you were ahead of the curve with everybody, even the people in the libertarian party, in terms of recognizing that for the tyranny that it was, what are you trying, um, you trying to tell us how it's going in Indiana,

why you're running for governor and how it's going? Well, let's start with why I ran in 2020. Obviously, with the pandemic came a lot of government overreach, and my philosophy of government really stems from the preamble to the Declaration of Independence, where Thomas Jefferson said that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men. And I really take the position that other than the responsibility to secure our rights and to adjudicate infringements upon our rights, if you will. Government shouldn't have a whole lot more authority or responsibility than that. And I

believe in the world we live in today, we have allowed government to become our surrogate parents, our big brother, if you will. And we need to get the message out to the citizens of the United States, really around the globe, and I'm focused on Indiana, that we have unalienable rights as human beings. And unalienable means not only can they not be taken away from us, but we can't forfeit them. Even if we temporarily decide to allow someone to infringe on them, they still belong to us, and we should at any time be able to stand up and say, okay, enough's enough. I'm not allowing this infringement on my unalienable rights moving forward. I believe that's the purpose of the ninth and 10th amendment to the constitution.

And so therefore, when we saw what was going on in 2020, uh, quite frankly, we said, Hey, hold on there just a minute. Uh, we, we've got a problem here. That's right. And so we, uh, we got a problem. We got a big problem. Don't we Houston? Yeah, absolutely.

And so, you know, fast forward to today. And just like in 2020, I quoted Ronald Reagan when he said that, you know, in this present crisis, government is not the solution to the problem. Government is the problem. And then we were talking about lockdowns and infringing upon the religious liberties of people to worship as they see fit. In Indiana, the governor said, hey, we're going to close down the churches, the places of worship. I believe that's unconstitutional for any government agency to do that. And so today, we can say the same thing, only it's a different crisis. And, you know, government loves a good crisis.

They never let one go to waste. And in 2020, they utilized that crisis to create the one we're currently in, which is runaway inflation, runaway taxation in Indiana. We have real concerns with our property taxes. Several administrations ago, there was a state constitutional amendment to quote unquote cap property taxes at 1% of the assessed value of your property. The problem is, is that they can come out and reassess the property every year, and they do so. And they have inflated the property values in order to continue to raise taxes. And that is not a tax cap, and that is an infringement, in my opinion, on people's rights. You should not be taxed on your property. You should not be taxed on your income.

I'm a big proponent of abolishing the income tax, the state income tax here in Indiana. And of course, if I could snap my fingers and make something go away, I'd snap my fingers and make the IRS and the federal income tax go away as well. And when people ask me, well, how would you pay for all of the things that the government does? I say, I wouldn't. I would start cutting back what government does. And here in Indiana, I think there's an argument to be made that we can continue to fund the entitlements that government in Indiana has promised people and still cut enough budget and unnecessary bloat and waste and probably a lot of fraud in order to eliminate the state income tax. And at the very least, my proposal in 2020 was let's abolish the state property tax on

your primary residence people have been a little reticent to embrace that so i've said okay as a first step let's just change the one percent cap to a one percent cap on a maximum of the purchase price of your property. So instead of them being able to reassess every year and inflate your taxes that way, if we set a true hard cap on whatever you paid for the property, that means that as long as you own that piece of property, you never have to worry about, well, is it going to go up? And then I want to take it a step further. And eventually I'd like to see us say, you know, Indiana has a 7% sales tax. So let's put a permanent cap on property taxes of 1% of the purchase price up to a total of 7%. So you can pay 7%

when you close on your home and you're done with property taxes for the rest of the time you own that property. You can pay 1% a year for seven years and be done. That way we get rid of the real unethical issue, which is asset forfeiture. We have way too many senior citizens in Indiana on fixed incomes whose assessment keeps going up and they're being taxed out of their home yeah and we need to stop that in indiana and we've got several no i love that you've got some great ideas and that's really the value of a third party uh uh candidacy because you know the republicans and democrats are going to keep coming up with the same stuff typically what we see in each state is you've got one party that is dominant in indiana it's a republican party and even though they're dominant, they have a 7%. Uh, I don't know what your, uh, what

your sales tax is, but did you say 7% for sales tax? Yes, sir. 7% for 7% sales tax, you know, here in Tennessee, where I moved, uh, they used to have a sales tax. They got rid of the sales tax. They have reduced property taxes and stuff, and they've got a surplus. You know, they got rid of the sales tax. They have reduced property taxes and stuff. And they've got a surplus. You know, they got rid of several major taxes like that. It is doable. And I think it's important for people. You've got some great ideas there. I love the idea that you're going to cap it at 1% of the purchase price.

And, you know, because as you point out, that's the game that they play. You know, one time they'll come back and they'll say, well, we're going to mess with the rates, but we're not going to do anything about the assessed values. And then they'll come back and say, well, we're not going to do anything with the assessed values, but we're going to raise the millage rate, right? And so they keep playing this thing and it's this ratcheting effect that's happening there. So that's a great idea. I love the, you know, you can pay it out over, you know, 7% right up front, or you can pay it over a seven year period.

That's kind of like the, uh, year of Jubilee, you know, after seven years, you go burn the tax bills for your property. That's, that's a wonderful idea. And see, it's those types of things. If they would allow an open ballot, if they would allow open debates, those are the types of ideas that need to come out. And I got to say the people in Indiana, if you got somebody like Donald Rainwater who is running, if he gets your support, if he gets your vote, the Republicans are going to look at this stuff and say, what's going on with this? Maybe we should do that. I've seen that a third party effect. I've seen that in North

Carolina when I was involved with the third party, we started talking about eliminating the sales tax on food that they had. And before you knew it, the Democrats who were in control of the house were talking about doing that. But of course they wanted a landslide election. And so then they never did it, but they talked about that during the election, but you can put pressure on your politicians by supporting somebody who is going to do the kind of policies that you want to see happening there, policies like those types of things. And of course, when you talk about civil asset forfeiture, Don, we've seen a lot of Supreme Court cases that back up what you say. They just had a unanimous case where some jurisdiction came in

and you had an elderly widow who was behind her taxes, a couple of thousand dollars. They took the house, sold the house, kept all the additional over the taxes. They kept all of the money instead of just selling the house and giving her everything else. She had a lot of equity in the house because she was about to, um, you know, she was elderly and been paying on it for a long time.

They didn't give her any of the equity and we've seen that type of thing, but there's other ways that civil asset forfeiture is there as well. Right. Uh, in Indiana, talk about, uh, about that civil asset forfeiture and the drug laws. I'm sure that you're aware of that as a libertarian, right? Well, absolutely. And here again, um, for things such as simple possession, uh, they can take your vehicle if you're driving down the road and they pull you over for a, uh, a

moving violation, uh, then they search your vehicle, uh, they can, and they find cannabis or other what they would consider contraband, they can then implement asset forfeiture and take your vehicle. These are things here, again, you know, My belief, and I believe our forefathers believed that one of the key foundational truths of liberty is property ownership. strips us of our citizenship and converts us to subjects is to tax and threaten the forfeiture of our properties. And these are one of the things that I believe that we as citizens have to stand up and put a stop to. I we got some we got some comments let me interject these comments here for some listeners on rumble uh one of them says property should be taxed at the last sale price if it has to be taxed at all and that's your plan uh that's that's a great idea uh you got a lot of people are gonna like that idea and that idea needs to be adopted uh by uh anybody in case you don't win the election there ought to that ought to be adopted that's a very strong point another uh

listener white knight 29 says property tax is nothing but rent and that's absolutely right as well you never get rid of it you never own anything you know it's just a way of taking away your ownership as you just said and taking us that they, they shove us out and they've already declared that their intention is to make sure that we own nothing. Uh, so a lot of ways that they can scan that path to make sure that we own nothing, but I find it interesting, you know, in Indiana, I find it interesting that you've got so many taxes there, you know, sales tax as well as income tax and all the rest of this stuff.

People need to start holding these Republicans feet to the fire on this. That's one of the, the obvious things that every election that they run on, you know, the, the things that were not so obvious or the types of things that were happening during 2020 with those new powers that they gave themselves. Well, let's talk a little bit about that. Uh, what, if anything, do think the the government should do in terms of modifying the bureaucratic state uh the the health the public health the bureaucracies and things like that what if anything should be done at the state level to rein in those powers because we've

seen the model state health emergency powers act congress, we'd like for you all to put this stuff in legislation. They sent that out two weeks, two months rather, after the anthrax attack, which happened one week after 9-11. And then they put out a slate of legislative agenda that they wanted the states to enact. And that's what they all operated off of in 2020. Uh, what types of broad principles could we enact at the state level to keep that from happening because the mechanism of all that was that the federal government would incentivize it with funding, but then the boots on the ground would be the

state and local public health officials. What do we do to shut that type of thing down? Well, I think one of the first things that we have to do is understand that here again, the federal government, as well as the federal government to back off. And if we if here in Indiana, you're exactly right. We have a governor and a state legislature that is easily bought off. When the federal government says, do as we say, and we'll give you a big pot of money to spend, don't do as we say, and we'll withhold that money. First of all, to me, that's extortion.

It is. Obviously, if a private entity did that, they'd be under indictment. But we as citizens allow our government to do that because we evidently, in many cases, feel powerless to change it. That's why I believe, and you refer to the value of a third party. I think that's the value of ordinary citizens such as myself. I don't have a law degree. I don't have a large bank account. I sit down every day and have to figure out how I'm going to meet all the expenses of having a home and a family in the state of Indiana and the United States of America with everything that the government is screwing up. Yeah, because I think we have to stand up and put a stop to our state government with their handout. I believe that the Constitution of the United States, especially here again, the 9th and 10th Amendment, kind of created a fence, if you will, around the federal government. And at some point, the states, which are those 50 slats that make up that fence, all just fell down. And the federal government has been allowed to wander aimlessly,

or actually with very focused aim, all over the place outside of where they were supposed to be fenced in by the states. And so until we prop the states back up as that fence around the federal government and our state governments start telling the federal government, no, you're not doing this anymore. And I think one of the big mistakes that we made as a nation was uh converting our senate seats to publicly elected instead of appointed by general assembly because the states lost their power to influence what the federal government does. And I think that's somewhere where we really need to reverse that. And we need to give the power back to the states. Here again, you know, they say all government is local. But what we've done in our society is we've put all the emphasis on the

level of government furthest away from us. Everybody knows who the president is, but they don't know the name of their own city councilors. That's right. And that's something that we need to change. And one of the great ways I believe that we can change that is to encourage everyday citizens, such as myself, to get involved in government, run for office, give people a choice other than the Republicans and the Demopublicans. I hear.

Because that's where we've gone wrong. People in Indiana, we have a straight ticket voting option. We need to abolish that because it destroys the requirement for people to know who their candidates are. They just go in and they say, I'm a Republican or I'm a Democrat. They hit that straight ticket button and then they walk away. And they think they've done their job, their civic duty, and in reality, what they've done is they've abdicated their citizenship and their decision-making capabilities as a citizen to an oligarchical group of people, whether it be the Republicans or the Democrats. I find it funny that Republicans and Democrats tend to refer to libertarians, at least in Indiana, as independents.

Yeah, that is interesting. And I find that humorous, but also troubling. Well, and of course, one of the reasons that you run as a, as a third party candidate is for ballot access issues. And, uh, what is the ballot, uh, issue there in Indiana? Uh, how do you get on the ballot? How do you stay on the ballot as a political party? That's what makes it so difficult to have an independent.

I mean, as an independent, you gotta be independently wealthy, right? Uh, in order to be able to get on the ballot because you've got to get all these signatures and all the rest of this stuff, uh, you know, are the ballot access rules in Indiana, uh, pretty rigid for the party to be able to get on? Well, it's, it's an interesting conundrum, if you will, uh, in Indiana for a third party, uh, to gain ballot access, you have to either go out and get signatures or run a candidate that gets 2% of the total vote in the statewide Secretary of State's race in the off year elections. So back in 1994, the libertarian party gained a ballot access by getting, I believe the appropriate number of signatures. And since then we have maintained at least 2% in order to get on the ballot.

Now the, in order to get on the ballot. Now, the real hurdle is that in order to participate in taxpayer-funded primaries alongside the Republicans and the Democrats, we have to achieve 10% of the vote in the Secretary of State's race in the off-year elections. And needless to say, that is a steep hill to climb. And they know it. Yeah, absolutely. When we were in North Carolina, I remember they had 10% that you had to get to stay on the ballot. There's a tremendous amount of signatures that we had to get and then pay for them to get validated and all the rest of this stuff.

And then to stay on the ballot, you had to get 10% of the vote for governor or for president. So they take the two highest profile races. And then, you know, if you didn't, if you didn't get that, then you would have to get,

I think it was equivalent to 2% of the vote for president or governor or something like that to get back on the next time we took that to court and said, uh, this is kind of ridiculous because, um, you know, if, uh, you know, more than 2% voted, why would you have this 10% vote thing and make me go out and collect signatures? It should be 2%. If 2% is going to be the threshold to collect signatures to get on, it ought to be 2%, uh% for retention in terms of the votes. And they won that fight there, but they play all kinds of games. That's why I say, you know, people want to complain about how the elections are rigged. The elections are rigged,

starting with ballot access. And the next place that they rig it is getting into the debates. And the debates are typically run by Democrats or Republicans, and they don't want anybody else in there. What is the situation in Indiana? Well, we're very fortunate in Indiana. We, uh, have an independent, uh, debate commission. Okay. Uh, it was originally constructed, um, with the participation of, of several libertarian party, um, individuals. And so we are always included in the debates.

Um, I wish we had that luxury of the federal level. Yeah, absolutely. Uh, there were some questions that people had. Can you pull up those questions that people had, uh, of Mr. Rainwater? Um, let's see. see um one of the questions is can you ask mr rainwater what he would do about the indiana toll road debacle and its foreign ownership that's a big issue here in tennessee that's coming up we are one of 14 states that

doesn't have toll roads now we got a governor who wants to put the toll roads in i'm assuming uh well tell us what your position would be so i i, I think that's, there's, there's a couple of different things there. And, you know, first of all, uh, I, I believe that if you're going to, uh, privatize something, uh, such as the toll road, uh, first of all, it shouldn't be owned by a foreign corporation. Secondly, I'm not sure that I would necessarily consider a toll road something that should be privately owned. If you're going to implement a user fee, which I consider a toll, a user fee, then the government needs to be accountable for what that fee from the accountability of the citizens, to me, is very troubling. I would probably seek to get that contract revoked.

And here again, if we're going to have, you know, in a perfect world from a libertarian standpoint, all funding of government would be voluntary. We like to say that good ideas don't require force. And it's only when you have a bad

idea that you force the citizens to comply. And I feel we have a state lottery that they did very much the same thing. They implemented a state lottery. They told everybody we're going to implement the state lottery. It's going to pay for education. Yeah, it can be kind of an education in math when you play the lottery gamble, right?

Absolutely. And a few short years after implementing the lottery, they privatized it. And so here again, there's a private corporation making lots of money. The government gets a percentage cut, and there's no accountability. And these are things that if we're going to have government raising money voluntarily, whether it be on a toll road, because you can use other roads. You don't have to use the toll road. You don't have to buy lottery tickets. If we're going to implement these things, then the citizens should be able to hold government accountable for how they're run and how that money is used. And what we've found is that neither of those things are the case in the way that and

i i always tell people david the reality is is our government is a mess because we let it get this way yeah that's right it is not somebody else's fault that my government has created mass dependency. It's our fault for preferring dependency over independence and accountability. So that's a long answer to that question. I agree. I agree. You talk about, you said before, the coercion and the blackmail that we see happening with the states and how they have to turn, you know, have to refuse that in order to be able to have exercise a kind of independent state power thatmail that we've seen for the longest time at the state level. You know, do what I say about this particular policy, and we will give you all kinds of federal money that we have unlimited amounts of. We just print more of it if we need more of it, right? Go further into debt. We have no ceiling on the debt, anything. And so they're able to bribe

people. They're able to blackmail people to say, well, we're going to pull that funding away from you. And because we accepted that for such a long time, because we wanted the goodies that came with that, we essentially sold our souls. And we saw in 2020 that they took that coercion and that blackmail down to the individual. And that's the way I see this. You know, well, if we can blackmail the states, we'll blackmail you over your job. You take this jab or we're not going to let you have a job and all the rest of this stuff. Uh,

DeSantis is taken on, uh, some of the ideas that will a corporation can, um, uh, course you to take the, the jab that, um,

the government, the federal government wants you to take. Uh, he took a different position on that. That's been kind of controversial within libertarian circles. What's your position on that? Is that something that do the corporations have the, should they have the ability to coerce their employees into taking a jab or not? What do you think? Well, there is a slippery slope there because here again, we don't want government overreaching and telling business owners what they can and cannot do. We have probably more of that today than we should.

But we also need to understand that here again, from my perspective, corporations don't have an alienable rights, and people do. Yes, absolutely. And the reality is that we, and I believe this goes for education as well, David. If you don't like what your employer is forcing you to do, it may not be the best answer. It may not be the answer we want to hear. But sometimes you have to say, I am not going to allow someone else the inch that becomes the mile. I'm not going to become dependent upon an employer. I've told people we live in a

time now where what we really need to do as individuals and as citizens and as households is find ways to diversify our income so that if government or a corporation or any employer says to me, Don, you have to do this or you will lose your job. But I have the flexibility to go, let me save you some time and energy. I'm leaving today. That's right. Yeah, we need to work on our flexibility. If you don't like what your kids are being taught in the government schools or what we call public schools, and they're not, they're government education institutions, then take your kids out of the public schools. I agree.

We need to find innovative ways. And if your state government does not facilitate the ease of implementation of a privately accredited educational environment, then you need to get control of your state government and make sure that you have the ability as a parent to make the choices as to how your child is educated. Not in Indiana, they have what they call a voucher program that's supposed to allow parents choice. It's school choice, but it's not because they can only use the voucher in a state accredited school. Yeah. And that's how they get their control in.

Absolutely. With the money. And this is wrong. Yeah. These are things, but here again, I believe that we as citizens have allowed government to do this to us. And that standing at the gates with our pitchforks and our torches and yelling at the gate just isn't going to get it done. What we have to do is we have to acknowledge that the way to make change happen is to walk away from the institutions

that are being utilized to create that dependency. We need to walk away from public education. We need to walk away from government single-payer health care. We need to say, I'm going to take care of myself. Yes, it's going to be a hard road. Yes, I don't look forward to the challenges and the difficulties, but I prefer it to having be subservient to government.

I agree. And when people say, well, I'm a Republican or I'm a Democrat, you're being subservient to an organization, a private organization that you are not a member of, but you call yourself a member. And that's the biggest problem that we have today. People who don't pay dues to the Republican or Democrat parties, who don't vote at their private conventions, consider themselves to be a Republican or a Democrat when in fact they're not, which means they can be controlled and told what to do and how to think by people who couldn't care

less. I agree. And they have a very, they have a very powerful way of controlling who gets on the ballot at the state parties. That's one of the reasons why people run as independents or as third parties with that. You know, we were talking about before the bondage of property tax, and yet how do we get into that bondage of property tax? Most of that money is going to support the schools, the government-run schools that they run them very inefficiently. And yet people look at that and they say,

well, if we have a government school, a public school, that's going to relieve me. They're going to pay for everything. They'll do all the work for me. And so I'll just abdicate my responsibility for educating and raising my kids to the state. They'll do it all for me. And that's the way they always get us, isn't it? You know, through the promise that we're going to make you safe and secure, but we're going to have to give you your liberty. No, if we want liberty, we're going to have to take responsibility.

And that's a good example. We have these confiscatory property taxes that get higher and higher all the time. I got Jason Barker saying my Georgia property tax went from just over 2K a year to over 5K in just five years, but it appraised it barely over what I bought it for. So that's what's happening. We get into that trap because we want the goodies. And we don't realize that on the back end, it's going to get us. And on the back end, it's going to get us whether it's in debt or it's in taxes or if it's in both of these things. Absolutely.

And that's the key thing. We've got to wean ourself off of the government subsidies. And it's a welfare state for everybody. We all participate in this in one shape or the other. And they get those hooks into us. And they love to use the corporations and partner with them, this public-private partnership thing. I call it, you know, it's crony capitalism. I call it corruption because that's really what it is. It's really kind of economic fascism where you merge the government and the companies together.

So I'm glad to see that you understand that. And I'm glad to see that you understand the key difference between human beings and corporations. And that is that human beings have rights. Corporations are a creature of the government and they don't have those same rights. And so I really do. I'm glad that you see that. That's something that blinds a lot of people. Reason and Cato looking at that could not really understand what was happening with censorship, for example, because it's like, well, you know, I don't like the fact that I'm being censored, but these guys, they own that platform so they can do it,

but it really is a digital public square. And they said it was a digital public square and they give them legal protections for it being a digital public square. So I'm glad that you understand that. Let me ask you about another way that they're coming at us. And this is a new kind of a new issue this time around central bank digital currencies. Now this is a real weapon coming out of the federal government. And we had Christie gnome talk about the fact that many States, I don't know if Indiana was one of those had been given sample legislation that would recognize a central bank digital

currency as a usable currency, but would ban, uh, other crypto, you know, private crypto that's, um, um, that is based on, uh, um, mining and that type of thing. Now, uh, she vetoed that legislation, but it was out there with a lot of other states. And again, I don't know, maybe you do, if Indiana was one of those. DeSantis, on the other hand, went the other way. And he said in the UCC code, which is what they were recognizing, the Uniform Commercial Code, I think is what it stands for. And so they said, we're going to say that central bank digital currency from the U.S. government or any other government is not going to be recognizable as currency, but we will recognize crypto. Where do you stand on CBDC?

Do you think that's going to be an issue that is something that you want to focus on or bring attention to? And what would you, if anything, do about that? Well, I personally have a lot of concerns and am were talking about gold and silver, and I believe that that's the monetary system that we were founded under. It's the monetary system that we should still be under. I personally would love to see us get rid of the Fed and the IRS and get the government out of our transactions altogether. And I think that a federal digital currency is going in the wrong direction. I don't want my government being able to tell me that I can only spend my money at government-approved stores or on government-approved merchandise. I shudder every time I see a mother trying to spend food stamps in Indiana and being told, I'm sorry, but you're not allowed to buy that on food stamps. Because here again, government is determining what someone can and cannot do. When I turned 18, I no longer had to do as my parents dictated, and I didn't want someone to take their place.

If I want someone to tell me what I should or shouldn't do, I can pick up the phone and call my mother and she'll be more than happy to be my mother. I don't need government to do it for me. And so I would say vehemently against digital currencies implemented and run by the government. If you and I want to trade in whatever means we decide to trade in, that's a private transaction, and it should remain that way. I would say that here again, if I could get rid of the 7% sales tax in Indiana, I'd do that too. It really gets frustrating to think about just how often the government has their hand in my pocket. And I want to know what they're doing in there. I think we do know what they're doing in there. I think we do know what they're doing in there.

Absolutely. It's called theft. I'm glad to see that you are a pro-life libertarian. There were not too many of us when I was involved with the party, so I'm glad to see that you're pro-life on that. And you reference the non-aggression principle in that. And I think that's a key thing. We have a question here, uh, from one of the listeners, but how do you prevent a third party from turning into a cult like every other movement? Uh, would you think that the non-aggression principle is a part of that? How would you answer that question? I, I do, but I question i i do but i also think that here again it really pardon me we really have to speak to

personal responsibility because i wouldn't say that the other parties are cults as much as they are a replacement for our own responsibility. One of the things, as painful as it is, that my parents taught me is that I can go out here and do whatever I want as long as I'm willing to pay the consequences for my actions. And I think what we have done as human beings, and I think it's part of human nature, is we're always looking for somebody else to blame when things don't go our way. When things are good, we don't go our way. When things are good, we don't want to give credit to whether it be God Almighty

or to someone else who may have interceded on our behalf. We want to take that credit. But when things go bad, we've always got that one finger pointed somewhere. And I think that that is the problem. And so I think that the way that we ensure that a third party doesn't become just a third head on the monster of government, is that we, first of all, take responsibility ourselves to make sure that the people that we're voting for and electing are actually honestly looking to be public servants and not leaders. It always frustrates me when someone says, we need a leader we can trust.

No, we don't. That's our own. We are supposed to control our own destiny. That's right. That's right. I don't need a leader. I need a servant. I need someone. I need a security guard who will stand at the door and protect my individual rights.

That's what I want. I want somebody who may not agree with me or may not agree with my life choices, but respects the fact that I am allowed to make those and that I have to deal with the consequences. The idea that we should control government so we can tell other people how to live their lives is what got us in this mess in the first place. Oh, I think you're absolutely right. Yeah, everybody is looking for not even just a benevolent dictator, but a dictator that's part of their club, part of their party.

That's what they're looking for. I absolutely agree with you. And I think that it really is key for us to understand that without responsibility, there is no freedom. And if you're not willing to do that, if you want to be a ward of the state, you're going to live under slavery. You're going to make yourself a serf. You don't want to put that little pin in your ear and identify yourself as a

slave for the rest of your life. You know, you can do that, but I don't want to be a part of that. But the alternative is you've got to go on your own. It always reminds me of a funny thing happened on the way of the forum where he's talking about getting the forum where he's talking about getting his freedom and he's you know singing a song i i would be free to do this and be free and he goes wait a minute he stops cold turkey goes but but if i were free nothing would be free i would have to provide for everything it's like he starts for a moment

there he's got this crisis as to but do i really want my freedom or and then he comes out of it because no i really do want to be free but But he realizes, which most people don't realize, they think they can be provided for and still be free at the same time. No, you're either going to be a slave or you're going to be free. And that means that you're either going to provide for yourself. If somebody else provides for you, they're going to call all the shots. That's exactly right. Let's talk a little bit about education. I like what you have to say about minimizing the size of the state board of elections.

I've seen this progression throughout my life, and I'm sure you have as well. We've gone from my parents, where they had a one-room schoolhouse. We get local community school districts and all this kind of stuff. And then it goes to the state, and then rapidly from the state to the federal government, we've got to start going in the other direction. What would you do in Indiana? Well, the current governor, uh, prior to 2020 convinced the, uh, Indiana general assembly to convert the elected position of superintendent of public instruction to a

governor-appointed secretary of education. So one of the first things that I would do as governor is go and try to get the Indiana General Assembly to give the power back to the people of the state of Indiana. I believe that the power grab of let's make elected positions appointed by the governor is going in the wrong direction. I would make that position an elected position again. I would like to see us get rid of the state department of education altogether and allow local school districts to be autonomous.

I remember going to school now, of course, I'm an old guy, but I remember going to school, coming home and my mother saying, we're getting you a babysitter because your dad and I are going to the PTA meeting tonight, Parent Teacher Association. And it was a place where parents held teachers accountable for what their kids were being taught and teachers could hold parents accountable for whether or not they were supporting their child's education at home and we don't do that anymore that's right and and so i think we need first of all and the problem

is is in the indiana we have a section of our, an article in our constitution, our state constitution that gives the state the authority to create funding for what they call common schools. And that of course is the root of all evil yeah the the love of the control of the money that's right and uh so it's a long hard road but what we've got to do is we've got to convince people that 150 people who've been elected to the Indiana General Assembly really aren't qualified to decide what type of education your children should have. That's what your parents are for, or parent, and that's where that responsibility should lie. And so it's, you know, it's, I like to fish. I'm not very good at it, but I like to fish. And every once in a while, you'll get your fishing line

all caught up in a big knotted mess, mangled. And no matter how hard you try, you can't get it straightened out. I believe the education system, at least in the state of Indiana, is in that mangled mess. And I don't know that we can straighten it out. I think that people have to take, here again, the personal responsibility to say, I'm going to pull my kids out of government schools, and I'm going to find non-government accredited, privately accredited or non-accredited

homeschool. Lots of folks can't homeschool. Both parents work. I understand that. There are hybrid homeschools. There are opportunities for innovation where we can provide a means that parents can send their children somewhere during the day where they can be supervised, but they can receive an education that is determined and driven by the parents, not by government. And there's no, I'll be honest, I don't have all the answers, but I am certainly smart enough to know that there are people smarter than me out there that we should be getting together and talking about how do we decouple education from government. I agree. And that really is the key thing. You know, we can talk about the different parental rights bills and things like that and approaches that have been taken in Florida and other things like that. But the real key thing is the fact that the government

thinks that the kids belong to them and they keep saying it over and over again. So I think we ought to believe them when they say, the kids belong to all of us. And if that becomes their repeated mantra, I think we should take them at their word and believe that it really does. You talked about the PTA. That used to be a big part of it, but now I guess PTA means Parental Terrorist Association

because that's what the Federal Department of Justice so-called treats any parents who speak up, who don't agree with what's being done and want to have something that's different than the critical race theory or the LGBT issues that are there. And of course, that's going to be a big part when you talk about these issues. But I sense a trend there in terms of what you're saying. Personal responsibility is how we get our power of the people, and the Tenth Amendment, as you focus on your website, the Tenth Amendment is how we start to get the power of the states in terms of nullifying things. And of course, we have a situation right now, I don't

know where we stand, for example, in a conservative state like Indiana. I don't imagine you've got medical marijuana or regular marijuana legalized, but I know that for gun usage, a good example of the 10th Amendment, I think that's something to really hang on is probably the pistol brace issue. What is being done in the state of Indiana about this arbitrary gun control by executive order, by the bureaucracy under the president to ban something like pistol braces? Because once you accept that principle, there's no stopping them on anything. What is being done in Indiana with that? Right now, absolutely nothing. Wow. And I'll take that a step further, David, and tell you that in Indiana, we have red flag laws and I am not a proponent of red flag laws. I believe that the concept that government can determine me to be tin hat crazy, if you will, and then come and take my guns is a dangerous, slippery slope. mental illness and should not necessarily be able to walk around unsupervised with sharp objects or firearms.

I get that. But a law that allows government to decide when you are sane enough to possess firearms, in my opinion is unconstitutional. It does not say in the second amendment shall not be infringed unless someone determines you to be mentally deficient. And of course, if you are mentally deficient, as we saw with the Unabomber, you know, he didn't need to use a gun. And if you take away somebody's gun, they can still kill somebody with their bare hands or with an automobile, as we've seen over and over again. And the worst aspect of this was the fact that Trump said, we're going to take the guns and do the due process later. If this person is dangerous, that's the issue. And you need to have due process to determine if that person is dangerous. And we need to double down on that due process instead of getting rid of it that is the key issue i think

we've talked about a lot of things and it really is great to see you running for office again you sorted this out back in the summer of 2020 you understood what a threat all of these masks and social distancing and lockdown rules were to our liberty. Many of those things are still embedded there. We need somebody with the kind of common sense that you have, Donald, to step up, speak out, and appreciate that you are doing that in this election. So good luck to you. Anybody wants to go to his site and help him, it is rainwater for that's F O R Indiana.com rainwater for Indiana.com.

Thank you so much for what you're doing, Donald. Great talking to you and good luck. And this is the 2024 cycle, right? You're just in it. Yes, sir. Absolutely. Good. And, and I will, I do want to to real quick here just interject one other thing. If we in Indiana want to see a third party candidate really make a difference, I've determined that we really need to raise raise $2 million, we can put the fear of libertarianism in the state of Indiana, as you talked about earlier.

And so, you know, I encourage people, if you want to see libertarianism come to the forefront in Indiana for the next 18 months, I really need people's financial support. And that, again, is rainwaterforindiana.com. Click that donate button, and I guarantee you we will get the message of libertarianism out to the four corners of Indiana and every square inch in between. And you got a great message. It's about personal responsibility so that you can have liberty. And that's the key. Localism and individual liberty, working that way.

People collectively working for individual liberty. Thank you, Donald. Thank you, sir. The common man. They created Common Core to dumb down our children. They created common past to track and control us. Their commons project to make sure the commoners own nothing. And the communist future.

They see the common man as simple, unsophisticated, ordinary. But each of us has worth and dignity created in the image of God. That is what we have in common. That is what they want to take away. Their most powerful weapons are isolation, deception, intimidation. They desire to know everything about us while they hide everything from us. It's time to turn that around and expose what they want to hide. Please share the information and links you'll find at thedavidknightshow.com. Thank you for listening.

Thank you for sharing. If you can't support us financially, please keep us in your prayers. Thank you.