Why Ron Paul Lost the Nomination

Peter Schiff is interviewed by people who don't understand their guests positions. [Youtube]

The fact that Peter has been interviewed so frequently in recent times is great and it is testimony to the fact that there is a demand for more and diverse voices on this ever-elusive subject. I completely encourage more discussion and debate on this topic of economics.

[For another angle on the Obama election, etc. check out this Nov 8 2008 radio broadcast]

There are seriously neglected yet valid points of view to be exploited.
And that's what I wanted to criticize....

The questions they ask are fine, and the conversation is never lame, and the point Peter makes is allowed to be heard. But....

If CNBC agreed with his position they would help promote it. Instead, they ask a question, allow Schiff to respond, and then follow up with short injections of obvious non-knowledgeable questions or outright ridiculous remarks. The video contains a few remarks like "I don't disagree with what you're saying [Peter]," "gold has no inherent value [CNBC]," "i love talking to you because sometimes it makes sense [CNBC]

I can only assume that the purpose of airing the interview and Peter's positions is genuine on some level, yet purposefully displayed to lead the viewer. If you tell a lie long enough you start to believe it as they say. Likewise, so long as any notions like that of Peter Schiff are displayed as politically unfeasible, political suicide, irrational, fringe, or misguided, and so long as those ideas that are promoted by most of the mainstream press and other political leaders, which are in obvious and stark contrast to Schiff's ideas, one can expect the general populace, short of thinking for themselves, to continue their blissful march off the edge of a cliff.

So essentially, it is reminiscent of the reaction to Ron Paul's campaign, not only did the Republican Party shut out Ron Paul and make it known that they don't believe what Ron Paul believes, the media was no help and only helped to remove Ron Paul from any spotlight and thereby deprive the voters of a more rounded discussion on the issues. (Not that the major media is ever a good example of educational material)

One can only trust that the viewers can think for themselves on some level and I hope they make it known that the treatment of such reasonable voices has been unjust and undeserving. Peter Schiff and those like him are continuing to gain popularity due to the reality of the situation. As it becomes clearer that their positions are closer to the truth than people may have wanted to admit in the past, interviews such these have become more prevalent and respectful. (Looking at older media on this same material one can see the attitude towards Schiff's positions as undeniably hostile. Ron Paul's Presidential Debate youtube clips are evidence that he was right on target, thought the press at the time either ignored him or downplayed his remarks. Attacking him gained nothing and doing so only served to give Ron Paul more media which is not what any of those in the establishment wanted to see.)

Just as Peter has been given more airtime lately, Paul has also been interviewed as a representative of the millions of people who support and acknowledge the validity of the arguments they put forth. The demand is there, the price will get cheaper and more people will buy in, but the market is being stripped of its power and replaced with red-tape and political monitors. What can we expect in the next election?

Having seen what the Party was like in the primaries this time around, it will be difficult to participate next time around, but if there is another Ron Paul, I may go once again to help gain such a person the nomination.