Before we deride anyone attempting to defend or promote Peter Schiff as a “Paulite” (yes, I have considered the history of this website), let’s take a look at a few of the facts.
1. Far from a non-interventionist when it comes to foreign policy, Schiff has on numerous occasion (angering many a Ron Paul supporter) voiced his support for first strike against Iran based on actionable intelligence, and general support for the war on terror. Let’s call him a Paul-leaning pragmatist: he identifies international military spending as part of a general spending problem, and favors a more ‘bomb ‘em and get it over with’ approach to places like Afghanistan or (as mentioned) Iran.
2. Economics. If you listen to him speak about the subject, he doesn’t sound like an ideologue. The eternal enemies of economic growth and stability, to Schiff, are indeed government spending and government regulation and just about anything else government tries to do to meddle, but he identifies specific problems (high tuition, high unemployment, illegal immigration) and offers reasoned solutions based on historical facts and details (government education loans, federal minimum wage, etc.)
3. Spending, spending, spending. He identifies the stimulus as a complete joke, like many of us would. Further, he continues to point out that government can’t create jobs. It can “hire” people and pay them from a centralized, bureaucratic pool, but apart from military spending (a proper function of the federal government) this job ‘creation’ is a sham: it has to destroy jobs in the free market in order to pay for (fewer) jobs in the ‘public’ sphere.
4. Credibility. He doesn’t mince words. He’s a successful businessman. He’s Jewish (so much for the ‘Ron Paul hates Jewish bankers’ argument–Schiff was his economic adviser at a time). He understands the market, what works, what doesn’t. He has genuine fidelity to the Constitution.
His new-ish campaign slogan, send him to Washington and it will never be the same, is catchy and exciting.
Before you write off another member of the Ron Paul crowd because you don’t like Ron’s foreign policy, give candidates like Rand Paul and Peter Schiff a chance–they’re not what you think, and compared to their opponents will really shake things up in a positive way.
Check out his Youtube channel to hear it straight.
Oh, and he did predict the economic collapse, often getting derided, ignored, and mocked. To boot.
—
So when all is said and done, I’m not sure why he’s not the perfect candidate in 2010′s political climate. What do you all think?
Moe Lane
Dan McLaughlin
Dan Spencer
Jeff Emanuel
Neil Stevens
He looks like my guy
Jaimo Monday, March 29th at 9:50PM EDT (link)I’m from CT and was trying to figure out who I was going to support. I couldn’t see myself supporting McMahon, I’ve never liked Simmons.
I just wish that Schiff wasn’t downstate from me. I could help him if he wasn’t set up so far away. Hopefully he’ll have something set up in the Hartford area soon.
Unfortunately Blumenthal is treated like a God by the masses in Connecticut. He’s probably the winner by a lot.
You can definitely still help him.
Ann_W (Diary) Tuesday, March 30th at 12:08PM EDT (link)We need Republicans to know about him and Republicans to know when and where the primary is.
Here’s what I did. My friend sent out an e-mail encouraging people to get involved to defeat (then) Dodd, and said he supported Simmons. I sent back a note with all the reasons he shouldn’t support Simmons (cap and trade, card check, partial birth abortion, Jimmy Carter, likes to hand out goodies quote, etc.) Now he’s a strong Schiff supporter and has been to town Repub. mtgs passing out literature. I’ve also been putting some Schiff stuff on Facebook (the Daily Show appearance), and talking to people. When time comes closer I’m going to hand out literature to friends with the Primary date and time on it.
He is a great candidate who really knows what he’s talking about. We could all put in a little effort to help him.
I think he could beat Blumenthal by just emphasizing that Blumenthal has sued all the jobs out of CT. Do we really want to send that misunderstanding of economics to DC? I’m hoping it could be a surprising year but you don’t defeat him with a Dem lite.
“The more the plans fail, the more the planners plan.” Ronald Reagan
Definitely giving a serious look
JamesLBurns (Diary) Monday, March 29th at 10:03PM EDT (link)Going to an event on Friday (hopefully) to see him in person. I’m in the same boat of not wanting to support McMahon and the thought of putting a retread up against Blumenthal isn’t going to get me excited. I wish Schiff had some more meat on his web site. The platitudes only go so far.
Schiff Speaking
tsnew Monday, March 29th at 10:20PM EDT (link)I would love to see Peter Schiff in the senate. The manner in which he speaks (never afraid to call someone out and willing to hammer a point) would be amazing. He handles tough questions very well and never gets flustered. All those years of being laughed at on CNBC while he was predicting that the housing bubble would collapse toughened him up. It must have been brutal to go through such verbal attacks, but he stuck to his guns and he was right.
I'd take Schiff in a heartbeat over Blumenthal
thurman Tuesday, March 30th at 1:10AM EDT (link)I was soooo looking forward to seeing Dodd getting humiliated– it kills me to follow this race now
I actually find Schiff to be the most interesting candidate, and maybe he’s the only one who can catch fire somehow and defeat Blumenthal now the way the race is shaping up
Thanks for this diary
Ann_W (Diary) Tuesday, March 30th at 12:20PM EDT (link)Wouldn’t it be amazing to send someone who actually understands economics to Washington.
I definitely asked about his foreign policy ideas before deciding to support him, he’s not the same as Ron Paul.
Here’s the link to his Daily Show appearance http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-june-9-2009/peter-schiff.
“The more the plans fail, the more the planners plan.” Ronald Reagan
Something really exciting!!!
Ann_W (Diary) Tuesday, March 30th at 12:40PM EDT (link)I just realized that my “Thanks for this diary” headline wouldn’t get anyone here to watch the link I just posted.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-june-9-2009/peter-schiff
“The more the plans fail, the more the planners plan.” Ronald Reagan
Ron Paul's misunderstood foreign policy
jhonsun Wednesday, March 31st at 7:43PM EDT (link)I think a lot of Red State conservatives have misunderstood Ron Paul’s foreign policy in the first place.
Ron Paul has stated on several occasions that when our country goes to war it should be done with a Constitutional declaration by Congress. This is so that the country positively supports the action, decides on a clear goal, approves the funding, and so the President doesn’t assume too much power for the Executive branch. Ron Paul has said that under these circumstances, the United States should get in, fight to win, and then get out. Ron Paul has stated that a strong defense policy is of primary importance to our government, but like George Washington cautioned, we shouldn’t get involved in foreign wars and political entanglements. Is there something controversial about this?
With regards to the broader foreign policy question, his views are much like Thomas Jefferson’s (you know, that Marxist-liberal anti-war radical who authored the Declaration of Independence against tyrannical Britain). It is summed up in the Jefferson quote, “peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none.”
That sounds like a very generous foreign policy where we are very involved around the world in commerce and friendship, but not through endless political entanglements which are divisive, protectionist, isolationist (yes, I said isolationist. Isolationism is not RP’s view. It is non-interventionist. Google it.) Here, Ron Paul agrees not only with Jefferson, but other hippie peaceniks like George Washington, John Adams, & Senator Robert Taft.
Nowadays, we end up having to honor treaties with two or more countries who oppose each other in the same conflict. We end up arming both sides of the conflict, manipulating outcomes, and generally making enemies of both.
I think an important question for conservatives to do some soul-searching over, is how did we drift so far from the founding fathers’ obvious intentions for this country’s foreign policy? That foreign policy kept us free and prosperous (but wasn’t so great for power hungry politicians & their rich banking constituents). If you want to pinpoint the current philosophy of our modern, so-called “conservative” foreign policy, look no further than progressives like Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, & FDR. They are a far cry from our founding fathers and have left a legacy of anti-Constitutional and freedom damaging policies in their wake. Many of them persist to this day.
My conservative friends, you need to wake up. You can’t expect small government at home when you have big government abroad. It just doesn’t work that way.