Baldwin Or Barr - Poll

[tonesforjonesbones]

The Obama forum is that way <-------------------------------------------
TONESSSSSS

 

[EastWindRain]

Seeing that Ron Paul is no longer a Presidential Candidate...



Dr. Chuck Baldwin can pick up where Dr. Ron Paul left off. Chuck Baldwins policies are virtually identical to Ron Paul's.

 

[haigh]

Seeing that Ron Paul is no longer a Presidential Candidate...



Dr. Chuck Baldwin can pick up where Dr. Ron Paul left off. Chuck Baldwins policies are virtually identical to Ron Paul's.

Third Party Watch presented this as an official statement of the Constitution Party:
"The Constitution Party gratefully acknowledges the blessing of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ as Creator, Preserver and Ruler of the Universe and of these United States. We hereby appeal to Him for mercy, aid, comfort, guidance and the protection of His Providence as we work to restore and preserve these United States."

It is hard to imagine any more than a small fraction of America going for a political candidate representing a party with a statement like this. It evokes fears that church and state will not be sufficiently separate. The Constitution Party needs to drain this type of rhetoric from all of its statements.

 

[mdmarino]

Third Party Watch presented this as an official statement of the Constitution Party:
"The Constitution Party gratefully acknowledges the blessing of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ as Creator...

Yep, that is from the preamble to their party platform (which you can read in its entirety here: http://www.constitutionparty.com/party_platform.php).

And this part (in bold) I find particularly disturbing:
The goal of the Constitution Party is to restore American jurisprudence to its Biblical foundations and to limit the federal government to its Constitutional boundaries.

I could never support a party with this platform, even if I do agree with some of their positions on some issues. Too bad they can't just focus on the second half of their "goal" (i.e., to limit the federal government to its Constitutional boundaries).

 

[WRellim]

BEWARE: Third Party Watch now Viguerie/Barr Tool

Third Party Watch presented this as an official statement of the Constitution Party:
"The Constitution Party gratefully acknowledges the blessing of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ as Creator, Preserver and Ruler of the Universe and of these United States. We hereby appeal to Him for mercy, aid, comfort, guidance and the protection of His Providence as we work to restore and preserve these United States."

Third Party Watch was recently purchased by one Richard Viguerie, the gentleman whom David Nolan (founder of the Libertarian Party) recently write an article entitled, "Is Richard Viguerie Trying to Buy the Libertarian Party?" and which linked Mr. Viguerie (also known for his email address "harvesting" via the UltimateRonPaul.com website fiasco) to one Russ Verney and candidate Bob Barr with the following:

Clearly, Barr and Viguerie are attempting to gain control of the LP so that Barr can campaign on a conservative/libertarian hybrid platform and Viguerie can extend his fundraising empire into the libertarian quadrant of the political universe. If they succeed, the Libertarian Party will become just one more mouthpiece for malcontent Republicans.
​

So, any and all articles on "Third Party Watch" should now be read with the understanding that the owner of the site is not merely a Bob Barr backer, but a man who has been seen by notable figures as having a very clear agenda in "pulling the strings" behind the Libertarian Party... exactly to what end, no one knows, but as his history shows, Mr. Viguerie manages to "milk" profits from his political activities; so doubtless he will make every effort to channel funds to and through organizations under his control -- and likewise every effort to undermine any efforts that are outside of his control.

It is hard to imagine any more than a small fraction of America going for a political candidate representing a party with a statement like this. It evokes fears that church and state will not be sufficiently separate. The Constitution Party needs to drain this type of rhetoric from all of its statements.

Actually, it is easy to imagine that a rather HUGE number of Americans will find absolutely nothing wrong with that statement -- and independent of your smear attempt -- would NOT find it indicative of any "threat" at all.

Mr. Baldwin has been a long-time on record with an article (written in December of 2004) opposing the exact type of thing you are attempting to insinuate: "I Am A Conservative Christian, And The Religious Right Scares Me, Too"


So your smear shows that you have either not done much research on the man ...or you are disingenuous and have an inherent bias against Mr. Baldwin.

 

[Sandra]

These jokers better find a way to get on the same ticket!

 

[Sandra]

As far as Viguerie goes, he is a slick and slimey chameleon that can present himself as what he thinks that person needs to see. Barr needs to publicly break ties.

 

[haigh]

WR,
If you'll read my message you'll see I said nothing against Baldwin the man. I was quoting what is apparently posted on the Constitution Party's web site, and making a comment about one of the founding principles, the separation of church and state. And simply asserted that this statement from a political party shows no respect for this principle and is unlikely to gain much popular support.

 

[mrchubbs]

WR,
If you'll read my message you'll see I said nothing against Baldwin the man. I was quoting what is apparently posted on the Constitution Party's web site, and making a comment about one of the founding principles, the separation of church and state. And simply asserted that this statement from a political party shows no respect for this principle and is unlikely to gain much popular support.

Read this (from the other thread) by Baldwin on Gay Marriage, if you haven't already.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/analysis_baldwin.html


Enjoy.

 

[MMolloy]

Separation of Church & State!

I am glad this issue (of "Separation of Church & State") was brought up! If you want a balanced view of what Chuck Baldwin thinks about this issue... Here it is:
http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin418.htm

He starts off with:

One thing that Christians should come to terms with is the truism that government cannot do the church's job. Not in any shape, manner, or form. Yet, by the way many Christians and pastors behave these days, one gets the impression that they don't really understand this truth. Instead, it seems that many Christians and ministers see the government--especially the federal government--as an extension of the church

and goes on to tell how the left and right are wrong on this issue!

Like Dr. Paul... Chuck Baldwin has been educating people for decades about constitutional principles.

 

[crazyfingers]

Read this (from the other thread) by Baldwin on Gay Marriage, if you haven't already.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/analysis_baldwin.html


Enjoy.

http://freestudents.blogspot.com/2008/04/bob-barr-feels-heat-so-he-lies.html

Barr laid it out clear. He does not want gay couples to have equal rights before the law. I quote his testimony: “To be clear, I am absolutely not a supporter of granting marriage rights for same-sex couples any sort of legal recognition...” That is not libertarian. He argued that marriage should be regulated by the will of the people and he argued that gay couples should not have “any sort of legal recognition” at all.

Enjoy.

 

[Theocrat]

Humanism Rising

Third Party Watch presented this as an official statement of the Constitution Party:
"The Constitution Party gratefully acknowledges the blessing of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ as Creator, Preserver and Ruler of the Universe and of these United States. We hereby appeal to Him for mercy, aid, comfort, guidance and the protection of His Providence as we work to restore and preserve these United States."

It is hard to imagine any more than a small fraction of America going for a political candidate representing a party with a statement like this. It evokes fears that church and state will not be sufficiently separate. The Constitution Party needs to drain this type of rhetoric from all of its statements.

That great statement of theirs has nothing to do with the separation of Church and State. I think you're confusing "separation of Church and State" with "separation of religion and State." I would refer you to the First Amendment of our Bill of Rights where it ensures that the government (particularly Congress) will allow freedom of religion, not freedom from religion (which is impossible to do anyway).

Your post reeks of secular humanistic propaganda which tries to attain a neutral position on the issue of religion in government. They are definitely not neutral because, you see, the removal of one religious view in government is just the imposition of another. That is exactly what secular humanism seeks to accomplish, and organizations such, as the ACLU, religiously fight for that end in our constitutional republic today. Their agenda is just as religious as the Constitution Party's.

 

[Alex Libman]

Christian nation, eh? Well, Baldwin would help bring down the fuel costs... by turning heretics into fuel! "It's getting kinda chilly, honey, would you throw another atheist in the fireplace? No, better make it a homosexual or a pornographer, they burn the hottest, and without the repugnant odor of abortionists and gamblers."

 

[Theocrat]

Lol

Christian nation, eh? Well, Baldwin would help bring down the fuel costs... by turning heretics into fuel! "It's getting kinda chilly, honey, would you throw another atheist in the fireplace? No, better make it a homosexual or a pornographer, they burn the hottest, and without the repugnant odor of abortionists and gamblers."

I'm not sure if you were being hilarious or serious, but this post made me spew coffee on my computer! I vote this as the "Funniest Post of the Day." Thanks for the laugh, Alex Libman.

 

[Alex Libman]

I got more!


(Q) How many Constitution Party members does it take to change a light bulb in the U.S. Congress building?

(A) One to hold the ladder, one to bless the bulb, twelve to sing a hymn to our nation's official Lord and Saviour, and twelve more to make sure Barbara Boxer and others don't take off their Judenhuts.


* Knock, knock!
* Who's there?
* The Constitution Party!
* One minute... Pssst, honey, quick, hide the science books!


(Q) Why did Chuck Baldwin cross the road?

(A) For the Greater Glory of God!

 

[american.swan]

Dang it, splitting our numbers....Sounds like the Neo-con plan is working.

I am not going to vote for BARR. I don't trust him. Let him run for major of his town and prove he's changed, then I'll consider his NEW voting record as major / town council.

Baldwin was vocally supportive of Dr Paul...

 

[MMolloy]

I got more!


(Q) How many Constitution Party members does it take to change a light bulb in the U.S. Congress building?

(A) One to hold the ladder, one to bless the bulb, twelve to sing a hymn to our nation's official Lord and Saviour, and twelve more to make sure Barbara Boxer and others don't take off their Judenhuts.


* Knock, knock!
* Who's there?
* The Constitution Party!
* One minute... Pssst, honey, quick, hide the science books!


(Q) Why did Chuck Baldwin cross the road?

(A) For the Greater Glory of God!

LOL... It seems increasingly obvious we will have a divide in this movement:

Those who tell bad jokes (and probably laugh at them as well... being so impressed with their own intellect... narcissistic @#(%s) and those that realize these jokes are nothing but reguritated leftist propaganda.

 

[familydog]

I got more!


(Q) How many Constitution Party members does it take to change a light bulb in the U.S. Congress building?

(A) One to hold the ladder, one to bless the bulb, twelve to sing a hymn to our nation's official Lord and Saviour, and twelve more to make sure Barbara Boxer and others don't take off their Judenhuts.


* Knock, knock!
* Who's there?
* The Constitution Party!
* One minute... Pssst, honey, quick, hide the science books!


(Q) Why did Chuck Baldwin cross the road?

(A) For the Greater Glory of God!

When there is no legitimate criticism of a Baldwin found, always resort to attacking his religion and attacking the party he is running under.

 

[freedom-maniac]

Barr Voted for the War. No way will I vote for him.

 

[Alex Libman]

The aforementioned humor represents the distrust that everyone who isn't a diehard Christian will feel for the Constitution Party. It is very unwise to vote for a candidate whose party would do bad things to you if elected on state and local level. I'm a libertarian atheist. I cross "In God We Trust" off my currency (if I have nothing better to do with my time), and I believe all pornography and other victimless crimes should be legal. There's no way in hell I'm voting for Baldwin!

Barr is far from perfect, but he's the most (small-l) libertarian candidate running thus-far. The Bush administration pushed the war through based on lies. Barr has done enough to redeem himself since then, and nothing he's done during the campaign thus-far has shown him insincere. He's running to get as many votes as possible, and that's exactly what I'd want him to do.