Who would be the most SUCCESSFUL running mate for Ron Paul?

[wormyguy]

Who would make the most successful (that is, would bring the most electoral success, not who you like the most) running mate for Ron Paul if he ran for President?

[Sola_Fide]

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTnJCmz1yID5sm2RDOuaC0E1WzNa41g4 Jan12K_9wVF-sa6omQ&t=1&usg=__Vt8Q9rOV0wOtK1t7CxYT6tSfVeU=

[wormyguy]

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTnJCmz1yID5sm2RDOuaC0E1WzNa41g4 Jan12K_9wVF-sa6omQ&t=1&usg=__Vt8Q9rOV0wOtK1t7CxYT6tSfVeU=

Hmm . . . I made the poll, and forgot about him!

[Kotin]

Some terrible choices there.. Bob Dole?? Seriously??

[wormyguy]

Some terrible choices there.. Bob Dole?? Seriously??

Last antiwar guy the Republicans nominated for President.

[Wren]

Can't really choose. I would be happy with either Peter Schiff, the Judge, or Gary Johnson

edit: why the hell are people choosing chris christie?

[wormyguy]

edit: why the hell are people choosing chris christie?

It's about who would bring the most electoral success in the general.

[KCIndy]

I voted for the judge.

He's a great public orator, very quick witted, and is very telegenic. He's also incredibly well versed in small-l libertarian ideals and can make a very rational and understandable argument in favor of smaller government.

The only drawback I can think of is that he would have to give up his TV show. :(

[Pauls' Revere]

I would like to see Peter Schiff, but I voted for Judge Napolitano and here's why. I think that although Schiff is brillant in his own right, the ticket of Paul/Schiff would be off balance and be heavily based on economics and finance. Judge Napolitano would be a great counter weight to Ron Paul in that I believe with his law experience legislation would be even more constitutionally based. Judge Napolitano also has face time in the media and could also explain events the how and why things need to be repealled etc to the public in a way they can understand that doesn't (as sometimes does) come off as quixotic (< intented).

Schiff would serve great as an advisor or a cabinet position.

[Kludge]

Mike Huckabee.

[MichelleHeart]

If Ron Paul chooses the Judge as his running mate, FOX will be forced to support him. Also, the ticket will more than likely get an explicit endorsement from Beck, Stossel, and other friends of the Judge if he's on the ticket.

[Kludge]

If Ron Paul chooses the Judge as his running mate, FOX will be forced to support him. Also, the ticket will more than likely get an explicit endorsement from Beck, Stossel, and other friends of the Judge if he's on the ticket.

Ron wouldn't be picking his running mate until after the primary when FNC would probably support him anyway.

[Eric21ND]

No Ventura?

No Walter Williams??

WTF

[wormyguy]

No Ventura?
You can't exactly nominate a "truther" for VP.


No Walter Williams??
I highly doubt he would be "successful." Come to think of it, I shouldn't have included any libertarian figures in the poll at all.

[Natalie]

I actually meant to click on The Judge.

[LibertyEagle]

Mike Huckabee.

:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:
:p

[josh.schisler]

glen bradley

[2young2vote]

Chris Christie would almost guarantee the neo-con vote. But I think Gary Jonson could be come big in the party if he goes into the debates.

[Aratus]

ms. momma grizzly

[erowe1]

Last antiwar guy the Republicans nominated for President.

Antiwar? Where did you get that idea?

[wormyguy]

Antiwar? Where did you get that idea?

I figured up the other day. If we added up the killed and wounded in the Democrat wars in this century, it would be about 1.6 million Americans, enough to fill the city of Detroit. - Bob Dole

[erowe1]

I figured up the other day. If we added up the killed and wounded in the Democrat wars in this century, it would be about 1.6 million Americans, enough to fill the city of Detroit. - Bob Dole

How does that quote indicate that he's antiwar?

[Son of Detroit]

If we're talking most successful, it has to be Chris Christie. He'd bring in the most votes.

[Wren]

If RP gets the GOP nomination, republicans will still support him because of the whole party mentality thing. I hate to say it, but RP IS old so if anything were to happen to him, I'd want someone who shared all of his views rather than a foreign policy hawk like Christie or Demint just to appeal to the neocons.

[erowe1]

If RP gets the GOP nomination, republicans will still support him because of the whole party mentality thing. I hate to say it, but RP IS old so if anything were to happen to him, I'd want someone who shared all of his views rather than a foreign policy hawk like Christie or Demint just to appeal to the neocons.

If RP were ever elected president, he wouldn't have to worry about death by natural causes. He probably wouldn't survive through inauguration day, especially if he had a mainstream VP.

[MelissaWV]

If RP were ever elected president, he wouldn't have to worry about death by natural causes. He probably wouldn't survive through inauguration day, especially if he had a mainstream VP.

I doubt this. What better way to kill a movement that swelled and learned the rules at last, than to render their choice impotent? There are plenty of non-Presidential people who influence what goes on in and around DC, and they can make sure that even items which see the strike of a Dr. Paul veto pen can still go through and become law. If Ron Paul were elected President, and people rested on their laurels, all that would have to be done is to elect a bunch of wolves in sheep's clothing to override any potential positive influence he'd have from the White House.

From there, it's only a short hop, skip, and jump to implying that the liberty movement is all talk, that nothing was accomplished, and that whatever-awful-thing happened purely because Ron Paul was President.

*That doesn't mean I don't want him to be President, by the way, but I believe the aforementioned is more likely than Dr. Paul being assassinated and made a martyr to the movement.

[Brett]

Successful, not our favorite.

Napolitano isn't popular outside of our circles, believe it or not.

I voted Chris Christie.

Paul is old, worked in congress and is experienced. historically VP choices are the opposite of these three things, young worked in an executive branch and relatively unexperienced. Obama/Biden, McCain/Palin all fit the mold.

[LibertyMage]

Jim Demint

[Agorism]

The Judge!!!!

Baldwin would be my second I think.

[FiannaPaul]

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTnJCmz1yID5sm2RDOuaC0E1WzNa41g4 Jan12K_9wVF-sa6omQ&t=1&usg=__Vt8Q9rOV0wOtK1t7CxYT6tSfVeU=

+1

[brenden.b]

I voted for Goldwater, Jr., failing to realize Jim DeMint is not on this list, which he should be. Jim DeMint is THE best option for VP.

[S.Shorland]

Napolitano because you people don't know what you've lost and so aren't angry enough.He can tell you and make you.

[fatjohn]

Chuck Norris

[phill4paul]

The Judge.

And instead of being a back ground presence he would need to be at the forefront.

He would be able to take the office of the Vice to new levels by backing up everything that RP tried to do.

We don't need another bumbling idiot in the VP post. We need a man of action that is on the same board as the President.

When was the last time we had a VP that was actually a contributor to the office as opposed to someone that was rewarded for not rocking the boat?

[Kregisen]

I voted the Judge for 1 reason alone: Glenn Beck would HAVE to endorse Paul and Napolitano...whoever Beck endorses will win the GOP nomination, no one can refute that. People say Palin is the "leader" of the tea party, but I think people like Beck even more. (I've never met any republican who doesnt like him)


Both Demint and Christie would help swallow up the neo-con vote though and are definitely great pics, and Napolitano wouldn't wanna leave his new show (plus could be a future supreme court pick), so realistically Demint and Christie could be the two best choices.

Gary Johnson is a good 4th place....young popular governor, and yet still very libertarian for the most part.


But I'm starting to agree, A Paul/Demint ticket could be unstoppable.

[Imperial]

Mitch Daniels. He has connections to the Republican establishment, leans libertarian, has a strong executive record, is well-liked by moderates as a general rule.

Overall, he doesn't stray too far from libertarianism to be unfeasible but is distinct enough to really help the ticket.

Alex Merced also makes a pretty strong argument for Nikki Haley. Haley might help Paul more than Daniels in that 1) she is female and 2) doesn't have any qualms with the social conservative crowd. She has attended CFL events in the past and is in the Sanford wing of the South Carolina Republicans, so she would be solid ideologically for a VP. In addition, she is really tight with Romney (in 2008 she was one of his higher-ups in South Carolina, and in 2010 Romney poured $42k into her campaign through like 6 PACs.) Picking her would mend fences after what is surely going to be a brusing primary if Paul somehow breaks out and wins the nomination.

Daniels also serves this role, as I know for sure that at least Gingrich really likes him. The downside to Haley is that she is staunchly perceived as a conservative firebrand- while that would be good for firing up the base, it wouldn't help with crossover appeal to the political center.

[DFF]

The Judge would make an awesome running make.

Not only is he a true libertarian Republican, in every sense of the word, with spirit of 76' credentials; but he's also a fantastic speaker.

Ron Paul unfortunately is not.

We could use the voice and charisma of the Judge to help sway potential voters.

My second choice would be Peter Schiff (why is he not in the poll?).

Like the Judge, he's a great speaker, and has a lot of charisma and quick-on-his-feet wit.

[notsure]

Dennis Kucinich... would make the more ideal, REALISTIC running mate.

[S.Shorland]

Kucinich is a horror.He buried his own city,what would he do to America? Paul only regards him because he earnestly holds his idiot ideas rather than just paying them lip service.

[malkusm]

If he were running independent, I would favor a bi-partisan ticket of Ron Paul and current Montana governor (and Democrat) Brian Schweitzer:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Schweitzer


In March 2005, Schweitzer suggested that Montana's National Guard troops be recalled from service in Iraq to assist firefighting during Montana's wildfire season. He has also gained national attention for his focus on converting Montana's vast coal reserves into fuel, which he has said is one way to wean America off of foreign oil. Schweitzer has been interviewed by 60 Minutes (first aired on February 26, 2006),[15] and Charlie Rose (March 7, 2007) regarding his work in this field.

Schweitzer is against gun control[8] and a vehement critic of the REAL ID legislation.[16]

Schweitzer signed in to Law the Montana Firearms Freedom Act on April 15, 2009 which became effective October 1, 2009. The law exempts firearms made and kept in Montana from Federal firearms regulations. It applies mostly to non-military types of firearms, along with ammunition and accessories such silencers,[17] provided that these items are manufactured in the state, and do not leave the state.

[Justinjj1]

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTnJCmz1yID5sm2RDOuaC0E1WzNa41g4 Jan12K_9wVF-sa6omQ&t=1&usg=__Vt8Q9rOV0wOtK1t7CxYT6tSfVeU=


It's a good thing that Ron Paul will never allow a warmongering chickenhawk as his VP.

[LibertyEagle]

It's a good thing that Ron Paul will never allow a warmongering chickenhawk as his VP.

LOL. He certainly beats the heck out of Kucinich or of all people, Bernie Sanders. :eek:

DeMint isn't perfect, but he's a long way from being a leftist.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

It has to be someone who shares 99% of his views, since he would be in his mid-seventies, and this country has a long history of the aristocrats assassinating Presidents who go against their interests. So, with that said the best bet would probably be someone like Judge Napolitano.

[Meatwasp]

It has to be someone who shares 99% of his views, since he would be in his mid-seventies, and this country has a long history of the aristocrats assassinating Presidents who go against their interests. So, with that said the best bet would probably be someone like Judge Napolitano.

Jeez lets not talk about assassinations. That is putting an ugly negative thought out there.

[jake]

Goldwater, strictly for the name recognition

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Jeez lets not talk about assassinations. That is putting an ugly negative thought out there.

I merely go by history dear Watson. Screw the Secret Service we need to have the Ron Paul Militia and Security Personnal guarding him. :D

[nandnor]

nvm

[anaconda]

Definitely Bob Dole. The ticket would be unstoppable.

[pacelli]

Even though I disagree with nearly every word that comes out of her mouth, the most successful running mate for RP (that is, who would increase his chances of WINNING) would be Palin. How many people did we see say that they were voting for her in 2008 and totally ignored the fact that they actually had to vote for McStain? If he chose Palin, that would lead me to re-consider voting at all, but even if RP lost the 5% of votes he got in 2008, he'd probably gain more from the Palin zombies.

[Deft9]

I'm new to the Liberty movement. Names I've noticed are Napolitano, Schiff, Lew Rockwell, and Barry Goldwater. If Rand doesn't win (god forbid), maybe they could do a Paul/Paul ticket.

[economics102]

Ron Paul's POTENTIAL is that he can be a candidate whose appeal extends beyond the usual left-right paradigm. To truly do this, though, you need to break past people's pre-conceived idea that it's gotta be liberal vs. conservative, Democrat vs. Republican.

I think the quickest way to help people make that mental shortcut is for Paul to have a liberal as his running mate. And not just any liberal. A liberal with a similar beyond-politics pedigree.

There aren't too many of those that come to mind. Ralph Nader is one. Maybe Dennis Kucinich.

I might have been foolish enough to say Bernie Sanders prior to his Audit the Fed betrayal.

When Ron Paul and Ralph Nader, two men who are perceived as being on opposite extremes of the political spectrum, when they come together, it immediately makes even the layest of laymen stop and question what's going on. It immediately breaks through the veil of Democrat vs. Republican.

[Jandrsn21]

Ron Paul's POTENTIAL is that he can be a candidate whose appeal extends beyond the usual left-right paradigm. To truly do this, though, you need to break past people's pre-conceived idea that it's gotta be liberal vs. conservative, Democrat vs. Republican.

Agreed, Ron Paul is more appealing to the left over most democrats I've seen. Antiwar, legalizing drugs ( ending the drug war, however you want to look at it ), getting government out of marriage and social issues, support for small farmers ( or pasteurization without representation as he would call it lol ) non collectivist, pro individual rights. I mean if he went head to head with Obama, especially with the two records put side by side, Paul would win, I'm saying with 60-70% of the vote!

As for the right he as decades long record of voting with the constitution 100% of the time! Caught up in the left right or not he is VERY appealing to all groups and party affiliations!

[FiannaPaul]

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTnJCmz1yID5sm2RDOuaC0E1WzNa41g4 Jan12K_9wVF-sa6omQ&t=1&usg=__Vt8Q9rOV0wOtK1t7CxYT6tSfVeU=

+1

That is if Ron is running to win. If the Paul ticket is to be taken seriously he needs a more 'mainstream' running mate. An effective administration, (i.e. one that implement some of its agenda) will need congress in its pocket. If Ron has proven anything over the years it is that he has no political clout whatsoever on the hill. DeMint, particularly if he has been majority/minority leader for 2 years, would help to square that circle

The judge sounds good but his unashamedly 'crazy' libertarian views might not wash with the masses. Much better to nominate him for the bench... or maybe he is more effective doing what he is doing

[Madly_Sane]

Some terrible choices there.. Bob Dole?? Seriously??

Family Guy, "Bob Dole, Bob Dole, Bob Dole, Bob Dole... Bob Dole... Bob Dole... Bob Do-*snore*"

[Agorism]

Jim DeMint would be contradictory on all the major issues. It would be a disfunctional campaign.

Napolitano would be someone who could be counted on.

[tsetsefly]

Can't really choose. I would be happy with either Peter Schiff, the Judge, or Gary Johnson

edit: why the hell are people choosing chris christie?

agree... wtf with 9 people voting for palin... that neocon c*** shouldn't even be in the poll...

I can't understand how people can buy her bs with how dumb she is...

Actually the more I think about it the choice must be:

1. Politics young

2. Good speaker

3. Strong personality and leadership skills

4. Anti-war(this makes or brakes a candidate, you cant have RP talking about ending the war and cutting back on military spending while his VP is a warhawk)

With this in mind it has to be napolitano or schiff. Napolitato is the pick. The guy is one of the best speakers ive seen. He is coherent and would bitch slap biden in a debate. He has law experience and his strong personality and leadership skills would be something appealing to voters who might see Paul as to old and someone who might eventually be replaced by the VP.
Also the judge is a small l libertarian :)

[pacelli]

agree... wtf with 9 people voting for palin... that neocon c*** shouldn't even be in the poll...


I did. Because I read the title of the poll: "Who would be the most SUCCESSFUL running mate for Ron Paul?"

How are you defining success? I define success as winning the republican nomination. Out of all of the candidates listed, Palin is the most popular and well-known republican, and therefore most likely to appeal to the mass of voters that worship her every move, but are generally clueless about Ron Paul's policy positions. Not to mention her co-opting of the tea party movement, which would make her appeal to all of the Glen Beck synchophants.

Yes, she is a neo-con. Yes, if Ron Paul chose her as his running mate, I'd seriously think twice about voting for him. If I had to choose one candidate who was most in-line with RP's principles and most likely to garnish grassroots support, I'd choose Napolitano. However, despite my own misgivings, I took the poll question literally, rather than engaging in magical thinking. The voting population has different standards than people on these forums. We learned this when they voted for a guy who parroted the phrase, "Yes We Can".

[tsetsefly]

I did. Because I read the title of the poll: "Who would be the most SUCCESSFUL running mate for Ron Paul?"

How are you defining success? I define success as winning the republican nomination. Out of all of the candidates listed, Palin is the most popular and well-known republican, and therefore most likely to appeal to the mass of voters that worship her every move, but are generally clueless about Ron Paul's policy positions. Not to mention her co-opting of the tea party movement, which would make her appeal to all of the Glen Beck synchophants.

Yes, she is a neo-con. Yes, if Ron Paul chose her as his running mate, I'd seriously think twice about voting for him. If I had to choose one candidate who was most in-line with RP's principles and most likely to garnish grassroots support, I'd choose Napolitano. However, despite my own misgivings, I took the poll question literally, rather than engaging in magical thinking. The voting population has different standards than people on these forums. We learned this when they voted for a guy who parroted the phrase, "Yes We Can".

How would she be the best running mate if on the big issues she clashes in a big way with Paul?
It just wouldn't work...

[AParadigmShift]

Agreed, Ron Paul is more appealing to the left over most democrats I've seen. Antiwar, legalizing drugs ( ending the drug war, however you want to look at it ), getting government out of marriage and social issues, support for small farmers ( or pasteurization without representation as he would call it lol ) non collectivist, pro individual rights. I mean if he went head to head with Obama, especially with the two records put side by side, Paul would win, I'm saying with 60-70% of the vote!

Ideologues, whether right or left don't count for beans.

The Establishment Democrats would just as soon see a fire-breathing chicken-hawk Republican - i.e. one of their own win, then see someone who would dare tamper with the machinery of state.

Just as Republicans hem and haw over libertarian talking points and fail over and over again to implement, Democrats abuse the anti-war, civil liberty minded left to their own benefit.

It would be a real test of lefty's courage of conviction to ignore the edicts of the Democratic juggernaut and vote for the likes of Paul.

But, I'm ever hopeful.

[Deborah K]

It's about who would bring the most electoral success in the general.

If you're only looking for electoral success, then your only choice on that list is Palin.

Edit: I didn't vote for her. I voted 'other'. I like Jim DeMint as well

[randolphfuller]

People will not vote for or care who the Vice Presidential nominee is. He should be someone who can guarantee carryin his large state.

[JamesButabi]

People will not vote for or care who the Vice Presidential nominee is. He should be someone who can guarantee carryin his large state.

100% disagree.

How many voted did John McCain get just cause the Palin maneuver?

I think either Demint or Huckabee is a real popular choice. Unless there is some sort of op culture icon that can woo the masses on star power alone that im missing.

[ARealConservative]

based on the present day reality of the world we live in:

Ron Paul/Oprah Winfrey 2012 would have the most success.

[Eric21ND]

Ron Paul/Jim Demint

Judge Napolitano for Attorney General

John Stossel for Press Secretary

[Captain Bryan]

Herman Cain.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herman_Cain
Listening to this dude speak at SLRC was awesome.

[JohnRego]

Schiff would serve great as an advisor or a cabinet position.

Schiff for Fed Chairman.

[Madly_Sane]

100% disagree.

How many voted did John McCain get just cause the Palin maneuver?


lol, id say a pretty high percentage, McCain is a facking retard, even most of the US public knows that (thats when you know there are issues) :o

[wormyguy]

Schiff for Fed Chairman.

IIRC the President is only allowed to choose from the current Board of Governors (although he could appoint someone new when one of their terms runs out). Schiff for Treasury Secretary could work.

[Natalie]

//

[fatjohn]

paul already hinted that he would like to see napolitano for the supreme court 4 life baby

[jscoppe]

Schiff for Fed Chairman.

Not sure if the Senate would confirm him.

Edit: and yes, Chairman has to be selected from the sitting Fed Governors.

Schiff for Treasury Secretary!

[Brooklyn Red Leg]

The Judge. Accept no substitutes.

[LDA]

I mean, the VP doesn't really do that much. I'd rather see Napolitano made a Supreme Court Justice. With that said, I voted for Napolitano.

[nakor667]

POTUS: Ron Paul
VP: Gary Johnson

Press Secretary: Tucker Carlson

State Dept: Lew Rockwell
Treasury: Peter Schiff
Defense: Jesse Ventura
Justice: Andrew Nepolitano (Bruce Fein?)
Interior: Bill Kauffman?
Agriculture: DEPARTMENT ELIMINATED?
Commerce: Grover Norquist
Labor: DEPARTMENT ELIMINATED
Health & Human Services (HHS): DEPARTMENT ELIMINATED
Housing & Human Development: DEPARTMENT ELIMINATED
Transportation: ???
Energy: ???
Education: DEPARTMENT ELIMINATED
Veterans Affairs: DEPARTMENT ELIMINATED
Homeland Security: DEPARTMENT ELIMINATED



There we go. A good start.

[Gaius1981]

Like it or not, but if Ron Paul gets the Republican nomination and hopes to win in the general election, he can't run on his hardline anti-war position. If he does, someone like John Bolton or Newt Gingrich will run as an independent against him, and divide the vote. He'd need to shift to a more moderate position on foreign policy, and put someone like Jim DeMint on his ticket. I think Paul would have broad support for ending nation building, and ending the war in Iraq, but most conservatives probably won't vote for him if they think he will significantly defund the military and weaken the national defense.

P.S. Chris Christie will never be anyone's "Nr. 2". :)

[Eric21ND]

Jim Demint would give us huge credibility among typical republican voters.

[nandnor]

nvm

[jmdrake]

I figured up the other day. If we added up the killed and wounded in the Democrat wars in this century, it would be about 1.6 million Americans, enough to fill the city of Detroit. - Bob Dole

So Bob Dole is only agaisnt Democrat wars? As I recall he voted for Gulf War I.

[jmdrake]

Like it or not, but if Ron Paul gets the Republican nomination and hopes to win in the general election, he can't run on his hardline anti-war position. If he does, someone like John Bolton or Newt Gingrich will run as an independent against him, and divide the vote. He'd need to shift to a more moderate position on foreign policy, and put someone like Jim DeMint on his ticket. I think Paul would have broad support for ending nation building, and ending the war in Iraq, but most conservatives probably won't vote for him if they think he will significantly defund the military and weaken the national defense.

P.S. Chris Christie will never be anyone's "Nr. 2". :)

Didn't you get the memo? The GOP is quietly shifting away from it's hardline neocon pro war position. Over the past year no less than 8 well known GOP figures have spoken out against the war in Afghanistan including Newt Gingrich!

http://politifi.com/news/Newt-Gingrich-Several-Top-Senators-Voice-Doubts-on-Afghan-War--935091.html

Newt's position is squishy enough that he can go either way. But the positions taken by Michael Steele, Laura Ingram, and especially Michael Savage give good cover to any anti war republican willing to dissent on that issue. Newt would not be stupid enough to run as an independent just to support a war that he has now expressed doubts about. And John Bolton is so discredited at this point that an indy run by him would be irrelevant.

[MrRichardson]

Ann Coulter! (just kidding). If Ron Paul were to win the Republican nomination for presidency, I'd like for his vice president to be someone who could be his successor. Someone who was younger and could carry on the torch of the freedom movement. Ron Paul is no spring chicken, so I'd like for his vice presidential choice to be someone who could carry on the message and run in 2016, supposing that Paul doesn't win against Obama. My vote goes to either Gary Johnson or Peter Schiff.

[ClayTrainor]

Where's my Mary Ruwart option!?!?! :o

[Deborah K]

I cant believe you guys are suggesting schiff for treasury or fed instead of actual economists. schiff is only an armchair blogger compared to serious austrian economists

Schiff was a lone voice in the night, crying out that the housing bubble was going to burst! Everyone laughed and mocked him! He predicted all of this 2 years before it happened and even put it in a book: Crash Proof, which I read and heavily promoted on this very forum when most people didn't even know who he was. The man knows economics, he's an austrian, and an avid Ron Paul supporter.

YouTube - Peter Schiff Was Right 2006 - 2007 (2nd Edition) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2I0QN-FYkpw)