Just so everyone knows, in this article the guy plays down claims made by Peter Schiff about the economy. So that everyone knows, Peter Schiff was the main outspoken person prior to the mortgage crisis who predicted that there would be a market crash. He has consistently said since that like the housing market bubble, there is another bubble building in the treasury bond market. Though this has yet to pop, it is coming - he says. The author of this article says that the crash not happening is evidence that Peter Schiff is wrong.
However, Schiff has not said specifically when these things will happen, just general trends.
Yes, I watch Peter Schiff's videos - but only because his predictions about the economy come true. No economic adviser should be worth listening to if their predictions don't come true. This is one of the fewwwwwwwwwwwww people that has been a leader in getting it right the last couple of years. So I don't easily buy an article that goes to say Peter Schiff is wrong, along with Ron Paul
Schiff spends his days spouting nonsense that we're going to have another bust, every day! He's bound to be right eventually. If I keep liquibetting on the underdog in major tournaments, I'm sure I'll get a few right. Doesn't mean I know the next up-and-comer (or anything about SC2 for that matter).
Yeah! All nonsense!
Also, Ron Paul killed it at the Jay Leno interview! Joe Rogan too!
You know what's nice about this interview, Leno actually gives Ron Paul space to speak. Quite unlike Hannity's interview. This isn't exclusive to Ron Paul though. I've become increasingly frustrated with interviews on major networks where if there is an opposing view very little effort is taken to let their interviewee speak. Instead the interviewer is combative and spends most of their time lecturing the person they're supposed to be interviewing.
I'm thinking in particular of an Christopher Hitchens interview where he finally demanded to know why they even bothered to put him on the show as they persisted to lecture to him the entire time and never let him get a word in edgewise. And I say that as a person who strongly disagrees with Hitchens and yet I still find this method of "interviewing" extremely irritating.
Edit In another news, Ann Coulter actually making sense. In most case I absolutely despise the woman although I do have a soft spot for O'Reilly despite his buffoonery. But here's Coulter and O'Reilly's reaction to Gingerich wanting subpoena the courts/ rebalancing the balance of powers.
This might have been posted already, but Nate Silver (who made a name for himself, in politics, in 2008 during the Obama Clinton primary) has come out with his model for predicting Iowa.
On the previous topic of the MSM manipulating public opinion, how about that "mistake" by Fox News inserting a picture of Obama in place of Romney showing poll numbers the other day lol. Honest mistake or subliminal manipulation? :D
Congressman Ron Paul appeared on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno last night. Paul received a standing ovation when he entered the room and continuous cheers from the supportive audience during the three segments allotted to him by Leno. The appearance came at a time when Congressman Paul is under serious coordinated attack from Conservative Establishment talking heads on talk radio and other mediums because of his non-interventionist foreign policy beliefs.
Unlike other sound bite news interviews on the major networks, in this appearance Paul had sufficient time to express his libertarian views to a large mainstream audience. This conversation was largely an educational opportunity for Congressman Paul to promote his brand of liberty, but he also made some major news during the interview. When asked about his rivals in the Presidential race, Paul said about Congresswoman Michele Bachmann.
This could be similar to the 2008 primaries, with Newt playing the role of Mccain, Paul playing the role of Huckabee and Romney playing himself. Like Mccain, Gingrich's campaign was kind of on the brink earlier in the year with some key people dropping out, but now he is showing up in the polls at crunch time when it matters. Paul could pull off a win in Iowa like Huckabee but not get any real support outside of the rural states. Mitt Romney will go smooth sailing into another 2nd place finish.
I hope that's not the case because that means Gingrich will get the nomination, and I'd prefer a bucket of vomit over Gingrich. That would be the darkest timeline. Gingrich appears to be doing well in Florida polls which is not a good sign =[
On December 18 2011 11:50 Keyboard Warrior wrote: Ron Paul is very articulate and intense and cool. If only he tone down a bit on religion
He hasn't been that loud on religion...and you would think people would care more about this anti-war stance than his own personal religious belief. Oh and btw Obama is pretty religious too yet, you don't see him force his religious beliefs onto us now do you?
Wow. I need to cleanse my mind after reading several comment section on some of these articles on Republican candidates. I swear most of them consist of hurling insults at each other. Any sort of comment is met with troll, Paultard, Paulbot, Paulcultists, neo-con idiots, kool-aid drinking, fear mongering lunatic, lefty talking points, and idiot RINO's.
Thank you to Team Liquid for keeping this a sanctuary for reasonable discussion and disagreement!
I read this to remember why I'm happy with Canada.
But cool interview by Leno with RP.
I wonder if the Republicans will get a clear leader in time to do something useful in the election. I hope that it's a good race, I love hearing the promises that come out when it's a close one
I really don't understand how people are saying if Ron Paul wins Iowa it will be good news for Romney, even if Newt gets 2nd. Whoever comes out on top in Iowa will get much needed funding and possibly support nationwide. As for Romney wins New Hampshire, so? Doesn't mean anything if he can't carry Florida, or South Carolina.
I might even vote him over Obama if he gets the nomination. It's going to be a battle though between Gingrich and Romney and him though (if i could vote)
Here are a couple videos that I strongly agree with.
My only issue with this video is that the threat of Iran isn't so dramatic as a nuke going off in Manhattan but I do believe that Iran is a real threat to the US. Even if you completely agree with Ron Paul's foreign policy, there are other important points that really make Ron Paul completely unacceptable as president.
And the rest of the candidates are such jokes that I think any rational person can see are complete garbage. All candidates that have a shot at the nomination are so bad I'm almost thinking it would be better for Obama to win so at least the right won't simply turn into cheerleaders and so that capitalism won't be blamed for the coming disaster.
On December 18 2011 12:57 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: I really don't understand how people are saying if Ron Paul wins Iowa it will be good news for Romney, even if Newt gets 2nd. Whoever comes out on top in Iowa will get much needed funding and possibly support nationwide. As for Romney wins New Hampshire, so? Doesn't mean anything if he can't carry Florida, or South Carolina.
If Newt cant win Iowa after the substantial lead he had there, in a state many consider perfectly hostile to Romney, then people are going to start to doubt Gingrich's overall electability. Frankly a third place Romney finish is more impressive than a 2nd place Gingrich, which builds momentum.
Ron Paul is never going to have a vibrant national campaign.
Ron Paul can't "tone down" on his religious beliefs. It would be political suicide. He would never get elected in this country. That's about as moderate as you're going to see a U.S. politician get.
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-forum/rotfl.gif)
