Tuesday, July 21, 2009


Potpourri Por Favor

* A bunch of Ron Paul fans have been griping about this WSJ article on the Fed, and I assumed they were just being touchy. But seriously just read the first three paragraphs. That might as well have titled it, "Give me a B! Give me an E! Give me an N!..."

In case you don't see the big deal, consider this excerpt:
"Rallying one charge is Ron Paul, an iconoclastic Texas Republican who wants to abolish the central bank entirely. Mr. Paul's economic ideas sometimes make him the target of ridicule -- in the new film "Bruno," shock comedian Sacha Baron Cohen tries to seduce the startled congressman in a hidden-camera scene while discussing economic theory.

Still, Mr. Paul has persuaded nearly two-thirds of the House to co-sponsor a bill requiring far-reaching congressional audits of the Fed."

So my question is, what the heck is that "Still" doing? Are these clowns really suggesting that other Congressmen shouldn't have supported Ron Paul's bill, since he suffered ridicule at the hands of a comedian? How about this, "President Barack Obama is meeting with fierce criticism, with some commentators--such as Ann Coulter--suggesting he remove his temple from his anus. Still, Obama enjoys strong support from the Congressional Black Caucus."

* Von Pepe sends me this link of Bernanke explaining that he has no idea where the Fed's $500,000,000,000 went, after he gave it to some other central bankers. And this is the guy who says he needs more oversight over the financial sector, to prevent systemic risks and such.

* At MasterResource I have another summary of the economics of climate change, and the relation to policy activism. Most of it is recycled (ha ha) but I dwell a bit more on how economic models deal with uncertainty, if you care.

in the new film "Bruno," shock comedian Sacha Baron Cohen tries to seduce the startled congressman in a hidden-camera scene while discussing economic theory.

I don't understand what this has to do with anything either way, but is this true at all? I only remember this part of their interaction (paraphrasing: I watched it translated):
Bruno: I love your clothes.
Paul: Oh, it is only an ordinary suit. My message however is all but ordinary.

I thought it was a very classy way to change the subject.
We should all be encouraged because the WSJ article is typical. I go to liberal blogs and beg them please please please to stop the name-calling and to produce just one argument against the ABCT (I’ve been waiting 36 years). They never do.

Have you ever heard a single opponent of the ABCT demonstrate an understanding of (or even a familiarity with) our argument regarding the disruption in the capital structure caused by fiat money dilution?

Our opponents have absolutely nothing in the way of facts, evidence or logic to use against us. They are pathetic. We are winning.
I don't know if this is on topic enough, but a few months ago, Yves_Smith on Naked Capitalism promoted Ron Paul's bill yet, despite ALL the names dropped in her post, she didn't once mention Ron Paul, the originator and primary sponsor of the bill.

He just don't get no respect...
Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Subscribe to Posts [Atom]