The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Ron Paul, Basketball Star? Watch Him Dribble Paul Krugman, Shoot 3-Pointer.

Posted on | May 2, 2012 | 13 Comments

by Smitty

This is just excellent.

Ron Paul actually walks back his position in End the Fed, which is highly interesting.
Krugman, you miserable eclownomist, just retire: “I don’t believe in monetary policies that perpetuate depression.” Yes, you do. Fool.

via Red Alexandria


13 Responses to “Ron Paul, Basketball Star? Watch Him Dribble Paul Krugman, Shoot 3-Pointer.”

  1. Ford Prefect
    May 2nd, 2012 @ 9:36 am

    If you look up “pseudointellectual” in the dictionary you’ll see a picture of Krugman next to the definition.  Interestingly enough, look up “sanctimonious”, “phony”, “poseur”, and “ignorant” and you can see other pictures of him as well.

  2. Pathfinder's wife
    May 2nd, 2012 @ 9:57 am

    If we could somehow harness Paul’s (Ron, not Krug) good ideas and excellent insights and then manage to keep him from going too loose cannon the rest of the time, I really do think he has a place in a Republican administration.
    Yeah, he’s got some negatives, but he also makes a hell of a lot of sense some times, and perhaps that shouldn’t be thrown out (and he is the big name recognition politico, so that has to be taken into consideration).
    Just keep him reined in on some of the “oh boy” stuff.

  3. Anamika
    May 2nd, 2012 @ 10:42 am

    Clown! Fool! Smitty is getting hysteric now.  Namecalling doesn’t make an argument.

  4. Adobe_Walls
    May 2nd, 2012 @ 10:57 am


  5. Pathfinder's wife
    May 2nd, 2012 @ 12:03 pm

    Quit being hysterical.

  6. Ron Paul Vs. Paul Krugman On Monetary Policy (Video) « Red Alexandria
    May 2nd, 2012 @ 12:09 pm

    […] Thanks for the link Smitty! Rate this: Share this:EmailFacebookPinterestPrintTwitterLike this:LikeBe the first to like […]

  7. The Wondering Jew
    May 2nd, 2012 @ 12:55 pm

    Ron Paul just destroyed him there.  Krugman, please pick up what’s left of your dignity on the way out. . .

  8. Thane_Eichenauer
    May 2nd, 2012 @ 12:56 pm

    I wouldn’t say that Ron Paul walked back his position.  He does not advocate the elimination of the Federal Reserve but a 1 year phase out.  I would be happy with a 3 month or even a three week (or even a 3 day) phase out of the Federal Reserve.  I think gradual phase outs are are part of modern politics called nuance.

  9. Chuck
    May 2nd, 2012 @ 1:03 pm

     In what non-English speaking sphere is a “phase out” not an elimination?

  10. Thane_Eichenauer
    May 2nd, 2012 @ 1:12 pm

    I imagine is has to do with the use of gotcha journalism and not with the language being used.

  11. Pathfinder's wife
    May 2nd, 2012 @ 2:20 pm

    I don’t think he was being nuanced, because he gave a reason in this interview for why he’s now promoting a 1 year phase out — that actually, imhao, makes more sense than his previous stance.
    It still doesn’t change his basic stance, so it wasn’t a complete walk back.

    Either way, I wish he would be listened to and followed on some of his stances (and conversely wish he wasn’t quite so, so, so… on his negatives — to the point nobody wants to listen to his good ideas).

  12. Thane_Eichenauer
    May 2nd, 2012 @ 8:04 pm

    I don’t think that the media avoids Ron Paul’s good ideas due to what some folks think of Ron Paul’s bad ideas.  At the very best (such as this Bloomberg segment) the media can get two people talking about the same issue for 13 minutes with a few clarifying questions thrown in.  

    Assuming that Ron Paul’s “bad ideas” are his foreign policy I only wish that they could get someone to talk foreign policy issues for 13 minutes with him but oddly that doesn’t happen.  I continue to wonder when coverage will pick up on the $72,000 Paul Krugman challenge by Robert Murphy. 

  13. T Daniel
    May 2nd, 2012 @ 9:45 pm