The common knock against Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul is that he is out of touch with too much of the electorate to possibly win the presidency.

If that's true, perhaps it's the electorate's problem, not Paul's.

In a chilling speech on April 24, 2002, the Texas Congressman outlined numerous issues he predicted would transpire over the next decade and why. Watch Paul's address to Congress, juxtaposed with the reports of the news he saw coming, here:

Basically, Ron Paul accurately predicted:

The invasion of Iraq

The failure of the government of Afghanistan

Both political parties endorsement of military interventionalism

The erosion of U.S. civil liberties and the Constitution

Americans becoming poorer over the ensuing decade

An international financial crisis that would decimate U.S. government finances, trigger a recession and resulting in exploding deficits for years

Paul concluded his speech saying he hoped he would be wrong on all accounts. Can anyone really argue that he was - or that he's out of touch now?