Baldwin Or Barr - Poll

[Theocrat]

Likewise

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!

I understand your sentiments here. Admittedly, I couldn't vote for a candidate in good conscience if he represented views which contradicted my Christian beliefs.

 

[Alex Libman]

Do your "Christian beliefs" include punishing people for victimless crimes? Putting the presumed will of a parasitic fetus above the will of its host body? Using the force of government to validate your faith?

 

[crazyfingers]

The aforementioned humor represents the distrust that everyone who isn't a diehard Christian will feel for the Constitution Party.

Speak for yourself. I'm an atheist voting for Baldwin.

At least he doesn't have the blood of hundreds of thousands on his hands (Iraq).

 

[familydog]

The aforementioned humor represents the distrust that everyone who isn't a diehard Christian will feel for the Constitution Party.

Erm. You do realize that your brand of humor makes you come off as a Christophobe right? You remind me of neocons and their irrational fear of Muslims.

 

[WRellim]

Do your "Christian beliefs" include punishing people for victimless crimes? Putting the presumed will of a parasitic fetus above the will of its host body? Using the force of government to validate your faith?

Quite frankly, why the heck did you EVER support Ron Paul. His stance on abortion is identical to Chuck Baldwin's.

Ergo if you have a MAJOR problem with Baldwin, you should have had a MAJOR problem with Ron Paul.

 

[MMolloy]

Do your "Christian beliefs" include punishing people for victimless crimes? Putting the presumed will of a parasitic fetus above the will of its host body? Using the force of government to validate your faith?

Wow... you are a master of NeoSpeak!

Parasite: an organism that lives on or in an organism of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.

And according to any other definition of parasite... a young child would be just like an unborn child in that it is dependent on others for survival, so they must both fit the definition of a parasite... in your self deluded narcissistic world.

 

[Theocrat]

A Strong Statement Just to Preserve "Parasites"

Wow... you are a master of NeoSpeak!

Parasite: an organism that lives on or in an organism of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.

And according to any other definition of parasite... a young child would be just like an unborn child in that it is dependent on others for survival, so they must both fit the definition of a parasite... in your self deluded narcissistic world.

Good point. I wonder if Alex Libman recalls what Congressman Paul's position is on the issue of life and liberty when Dr. Paul states, "The right of an innocent, unborn child to life is at the heart of the American ideals of liberty." I guess not...

 

[tonesforjonesbones]

I'll tell you one thing..I"m seeing a lot of atheist christian haters claiming to be libertarians...if that continues...I will switch to the CP and Baldwin. I'm not liking the tone of it. If that is what the libertarian party is about..that's definately not my place. TONES

 

[tonesforjonesbones]

I do NOT think the LP is a home for druggies, porn addicts and haters of God and those addicted to gambling. That is not the point. the point is getting back to the CONSTITUTION and the 10th amendment...and allowing the states and the people to decide. Guess what...the people may vote against ALL of them..and if they do...so be it. TONES

 

[jmdrake]

Do your "Christian beliefs" include punishing people for victimless crimes? Putting the presumed will of a parasitic fetus above the will of its host body? Using the force of government to validate your faith?

Here's what Ron Paul would say to you:


Protecting the life of the unborn is protecting liberty
Liberty is the most important thing, because if we have our liberties, we have our freedoms, we can have our lives. But it's academic to talk about civil liberties if you don't talk about the true protection of all life. So if you're going to protect liberty, you have to protect the life of the unborn just as well. I have a bill in Congress which I would certainly promote and push as President. But it's been ignored by the right-to-life community. My bill is called the Sanctity of Life bill. What it would do is it would establish the principle that life begins at conception. That's not a political statement, but a scientific statement that I'm making. We're all interested in a better court system, and amending the Constitution to protect life--but sometimes that is dismissing the way we can handle this much quicker. My bill removes the jurisdiction of the federal courts from the issue of abortion. If a state law says "no abortion," it doesn't go to the Supreme Court to be ruled out of order.


Find this and more at:

http://www.ontheissues.org/TX/Ron_Paul_Abortion.htm

I agree with other posters who wonder why people like you supported Ron Paul in the first place. Hey, I appreciate your vote and your donation if you gave it but your position on this issue is 180 degrees different from Dr. Paul's. You don't have to agree with him on everything (I don't) but why ridicule those beliefs?

Regards,

John M. Drake

 

[haigh]

The crime of one generation, the baby-boom, inflicting the cost of its own retirement, to the tune of $54 trillion dollars, on subsequent generations is so heinous as to make irrelevant the differences between Barr and Baldwin, who both oppose this type of slavery.

Although I'm not a fan of having explicit religious references in a political party platform, if Baldwin is out polling Barr come November, I'll vote for Baldwin, which will be the first time in decades I have not voted Libertarian for POTUS.

 

[jmdrake]

I'll tell you one thing..I"m seeing a lot of atheist christian haters claiming to be libertarians...if that continues...I will switch to the CP and Baldwin. I'm not liking the tone of it. If that is what the libertarian party is about..that's definately not my place. TONES

I wouldn't judge the LP by these jokers any more than I would judge Ron Paul by them. Also personally I don't read too much into the CP preamble. Ron Paul himself has made similar statements (the constitution and declaration of independence "replete" with references to God). It's hard to tell what someone means by such statements without looking at specifics.

Regardless the good thing is we have a choice. Those who lean Christian conservative can vote Baldwin. Those who lean libertarian can vote Barr. Either way the anti McCain pro liberty vote total goes up. On election night that's all that matters. Neither candidate will win, but the numbers from both can be combined to show a real impact.

Regards,

John M. Drake

 

[WRellim]

I wouldn't judge the LP by these jokers any more than I would judge Ron Paul by them. Also personally I don't read too much into the CP preamble. Ron Paul himself has made similar statements (the constitution and declaration of independence "replete" with references to God). It's hard to tell what someone means by such statements without looking at specifics.

Oh I dunno about that... about 2/3 of the "Libertarians" we had around my area who "supported" Ron Paul were/are not simply atheist, but very blatantly ANTI-Christian (and only by NOT discussing religion AT ALL -- were we able to co-exist to work together temporarily for RP -- seriously, placing anything even remotely "Christian" in nature in front of them was like waving a red cape in front of a bull.)

Even still, they were continually trying to shove home-made "Zeitgeist" DVD copies on everyone as if it were a piece of "Ron Paul" campaign literature -- I think that hurt us tremedously around here. (And if they do the same thing while campaigning for Bob Barr... well, you do the math.. Same thing with all of the "pro-hemp" literature... it just reinforces locals stereotype of "LP" as the atheist/pot party).

So, in a certain sense, I'm not really sorry that they WON'T be working for Baldwin (or joining the GOP -- which they wouldn't do -- not even to help RP) -- because kind of like the militant "Bullhorn Guy" type 9/11 Truthers, they drive people off (sort of like NEGATIVE campaigning).

 

[mrchubbs]

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

Sorry but when Baldwin writes that recognizing homosexuality will lead to legalization of pedophilia he deserves to get hit with all the jokes there is.

 

[torchbearer]

Instead of divide and conquer techniques like the OP has set, let consider Barr and Baldwin.
We may only be able to vote for one, but we can help both.
This should be about honest friendship not division and hate.

I wish I could send to the firing line all those who are causing hate and division. This is not how revolutions are won.

 

[mrchubbs]

Baldwin was vocally supportive of Dr Paul...

Barr was the one back in December who proposed the resolution on the LP national committee that asked Ron Paul to run as a Libertarian if he should fail in getting the GOP nomination. It passed unanimously. He also donated to Paul's campaign ($1000.00 I think it was).

I'm not sure how much more supportive he needs to be.

 

[familydog]

Barr was the one back in December who proposed the resolution on the LP national committee that asked Ron Paul to run as a Libertarian if he should fail in getting the GOP nomination. It passed unanimously. He also donated to Paul's campaign ($1000.00 I think it was).

I'm not sure how much more supportive he needs to be.

You misunderstand. That was a conditional endorsment. One of those "I'll only endorse you if you do something for me in return." Paul didn't take his offer, therefore Paul didn't get an endorsement. Why didn't Barr just give a regular endorsement? Would it ruin his shot at being the LP party nominee? That is the only thing I could guess. What a true freedom fighter

Was that money from Barr's own pocket? Or was it with other people's money from his PAC?

 

[WRellim]

Instead of divide and conquer techniques like the OP has set, let consider Barr and Baldwin.
We may only be able to vote for one, but we can help both.
This should be about honest friendship not division and hate.

I wish I could send to the firing line all those who are causing hate and division. This is not how revolutions are won.

My, my how non-violent libertarian of you... Wait a minute?

Guess that just proves that LP no longer holds that principle, right.

Because while I wholeheartedly disagree with Barr, and think he is an opportunistic, sociopathic political HACK... I would and WILL defend the RIGHT of the Barr supporters (and even Baldwin haters -- or whoever) to continue to speak freely.

I *wish* they would STOP with the smears... but I would NEVER wish any violence to be perpetrated against them.

 

[torchbearer]

My, my how non-violent libertarian of you... Wait a minute?

Guess that just proves that LP no longer holds that principle, right.

Because while I wholeheartedly disagree with Barr, and think he is an opportunistic, sociopathic political HACK... I would and WILL defend the RIGHT of the Barr supporters (and even Baldwin haters -- or whoever) to continue to speak freely.

I *wish* they would STOP with the smears... but I would NEVER wish any violence to be perpetrated against them.

The founders weren't non-violent libertarian either. Grow the fuck up.
We are working together because it is beneficial to our ends(liberty from government) to do so.
People who are hindering these efforts are directly effecting my ability to get to that end. And thus are offending... If we intend to retake our country, this bullshit needs to seriously stop, as in firing line serious.

 

[Razmear]

Instead of divide and conquer techniques like the OP has set, let consider Barr and Baldwin.
We may only be able to vote for one, but we can help both.
This should be about honest friendship not division and hate.

I wish I could send to the firing line all those who are causing hate and division. This is not how revolutions are won.

The OP was simply seeking to get some real numbers on where folks stand instead of judging who had the most support by which candidate has the most vocal posters here. There was no intent on my part to divide and conquer anything.

eb