Below is my interview with Peter Schiff on his radio show. I learned something about going on a radio show with someone that has a mute button. In listening to the replay, I realize that at many points when Peter was talking, and I was raising an objection, I was simply muted out.
There was a guy sitting in my office during the interview, when I completed the interview,his comment to me after hearing only my end of the interview was, "Boy, you guys really went at it." But, sadly, none of that was heard on the interview.
There are comments from me and then a seeming flow into Peter's comments where I guess people thought I was sucking my thumb or taking notes about Peter's comments. Not the case. My numerous attempts at stopping Peter and correcting a point, you just don't hear in the broadcast.
One point of correction. I write in an earlier post that "Peter caught me off gaurd when he said that a capitation tax is not allowed by the Constitution." Although you didn't hear it, I was objecting to Peter's comment on my call for a head tax and becasue of the crosstalk, I only heard him say that an ammendment would be needed, but what he was doing was bringing up another point which I was not making. He said during the crosstalk, "would you want the government to have to apportion it according to the Constitution, or would we amend the Constitution to allow the government to levy a capitation tax without apportionment?" Earlier, I clearly said that I would be in favor of a per capita tax. I said something like, "Add up the population and divide by the revenue needed," which the Constutution allows. That's why when Peter raised the necessity of an ammendment I was confused, it had nothing to do with the point I was making. So Peter did not suggest that a capitation tax was not Constitutional, he was bringing up a "tax without apportionment," which had nothing to do with what I said.
Next time though, I'll have to record things from my end, also. You all missed a helluva a battle.