Chuck Baldwin: My Thoughts On The Movie "American Sniper."

[AuH20]

This should help them think...

 

[Pericles]

Just about everything Baldwin writes increases my respect for him.

 

[Sola_Fide]

He was way too easy on Chris Kyle himself. In my job I do a lot of business with the military, and of there is anything that always irks me about the attitudes of soldiers when they talk about these issues with me, it is their unflinching nationalism and cold heart for killing the infidels.

 

[ThePaleoLibertarian]

Or from Faux news and "conservative talk radio" namely that horrible host Hannity (Mr. you don't agree with me and your ideas suck because you are a "liberal"). My dad constantly yells and screams about "liberals". It drives him nuts when I say that I am a "liberal". I follow up with classical liberal and talk about what the term is supposed to mean. He hasn't stopped yet but I have faith. He went from "no way in hell am I voting for that crazy Ron Paul guy" in '08 to not only voting for Ron in '12 but spreading the word which is hard for him to do comfortably through his job because he works for a major "conservative type of political group" and they mainly push neocons

I don't understand why anyone would identify as a "classical liberal" in the 21st century. As a self-identified reactionary, I certainly understand appreciating old ideas, and wanting to hearken back to an older political order. That being said, I don't get the "classical liberal" label. Why not just call yourself a libertarian? Classical economics are dated and wrong compared to modern free market schools of thought, like the Austrians, Chicago and of course the Neoclassicalists. I don't see any reason to identify that way, other than to confuse people. The liberal label belongs to the left now, it has for ages now.

Anyway, Chuck Baldwin is great. I was a registered Constitution party member for a while, in my first voting-age election in 2008 but it's a pretty facile thing to be in California. I was probably the only one for miles and miles.

 

[puppetmaster]

And that's the point of bringing her there (if they do, and I'm almost certain they will). They know the GOP base will eat it up, wave their flags, and cry buckets. And don't you DARE say one word of criticism, or else you're a cold-hearted snake beating up on a poor, defenseless widow who only wants to share the story of her brave husband who fought for your freedom, you ungrateful pinko.

America will be in a different place by the time elections hit.

 

[AngryCanadian]

Lots of idiots have commented there, calling him a liberal. Its pathetic.

Idiots that dont have any arguments so they use insults to prove a point.

 

[Mani]

He was way too easy on Chris Kyle himself. In my job I do a lot of business with the military, and of there is anything that always irks me about the attitudes of soldiers when they talk about these issues with me, it is their unflinching nationalism and cold heart for killing the infidels.

I absolutely loved what he wrote but I agree he was too soft on Chris.

Dude was on their soil, in their land, raiding their homes, murdering their women and children....And he called them "savages"???

 

[anaconda]

Have no clue what a liberal is then. baseless ad hominem.

LOL. This type of thing always reminds me of Dick Morris calling Ron Paul a "left-wing radical."

 

[cajuncocoa]

America will be in a different place by the time elections hit.

How so?

 

[Christian Liberty]

He was way too easy on Chris Kyle himself. In my job I do a lot of business with the military, and of there is anything that always irks me about the attitudes of soldiers when they talk about these issues with me, it is their unflinching nationalism and cold heart for killing the infidels.

I agree that he was too easy on him. Its probably a strategic error to all go the Laurence Vance route though, right though he is.

 

[Tywysog Cymru]

Chuck Baldwin 2016!

(If Rand Paul doesn't win).

 

[Christian Liberty]

I agree that he was too easy on him. Its probably a strategic error to all go the Laurence Vance route though, right though he is.

I mean, I'm guessing you don't call them murderers when you are doing business with them. Hence, Chuck isn't going to do so when he's trying to win their votes. When I'm in a position that doesn't require me to win someone's respect, I'll share all the truth

 

[Ronin Truth]

Getting votes creates a whole lot of whores.

 

[cajuncocoa]

Getting votes creates a whole lot of whores.

That's why getting votes isn't the path to liberty. You have to change their minds FIRST.

 

[Christian Liberty]

That's why getting votes isn't the path to liberty. You have to change their minds FIRST.

You know I'm definitely more on the "principled" side of the debate. But I'm telling you, even as someone who doesn't really care about strategic considerations as such, its hard to tell people the truth about the military, and doubly so when they have relatives who are in, or are looking to go in themselves. Strategically speaking, I think its possible to completely condemn the wars without compromise without calling soldiers who fight in foreign wars murderers. And if you don't try to do so, I'm not sure they will listen to you at all.

That said, I'm not really much about winning. Winning won't work unless you change minds. The question is where you start when trying to change minds.

 

[William Tell]

That's why getting votes isn't the path to liberty. You have to change their minds FIRST.

I don't think it has to be either or. When running for office you want votes, but I think educating is good too. I kind of doubt Ron Paul educated everyone in his Congressional district before he won the first time. Ultimately the goal should be an educated populace.

 

[Sola_Fide]

That's why getting votes isn't the path to liberty. You have to change their minds FIRST.

Agree. Voting might only be beneficial if it helps to open people's minds. But even then, it is potentially wrong because it contributes to the machine of murder and theft.

 

[Christian Liberty]

Agree. Voting might only be beneficial if it helps to open people's minds. But even then, it is potentially wrong because it contributes to the machine of murder and theft.

Only if with your vote you are actually contributing to the murder and theft.

 

[cajuncocoa]

I don't think it has to be either or. When running for office you want votes, but I think educating is good too. I kind of doubt Ron Paul educated everyone in his Congressional district before he won the first time. Ultimately the goal should be an educated populace.

Consider: why didn't RON Paul win the GOP nomination? Indoctrination of the GOP base by FOXNews, Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, et al, had those people convinced that RON Paul's stance on many issues (primarily foreign policy) was completely out of step with what was needed in today's world.

Those folks have come no further than they were 4 years ago (look at the box office numbers for "American Sniper"). Listen to how RAND has to choose his words so as to sometimes alienate his Father's base, and STILL they call him an isolationist. Do you really believe he will be free to ACT as Ron would after he's elected (IF he's elected?) The same forces will be critical of him if he does...Limbaugh, Hannity, et al will throw him under the bus. He won't want that. He will want to be re-elected. That's part of the game of politics.

 

[William Tell]

Consider: why didn't RON Paul win the GOP nomination? Indoctrination of the GOP base by FOXNews, Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, et al, had those people convinced that RON Paul's stance on many issues (primarily foreign policy) was completely out of step with what was needed in today's world.

Those folks have come no further than they were 4 years ago (look at the box office numbers for "American Sniper"). Listen to how RAND has to choose his words so as to sometimes alienate his Father's base, and STILL they call him an isolationist. Do you really believe he will be free to ACT as Ron would after he's elected (IF he's elected?) The same forces will be critical of him if he does...Limbaugh, Hannity, et al will throw him under the bus. He won't want that. He will want to be re-elected. That's part of the game of politics.

Not to nitpick, but Ron won many GOP nominations. Rand being president is at the bottom of my list of fears. He's managed to have an almost perfect record in the Senate, why do you think he would be different as President?

Yes, people need to be educated. But I reject the notion that it has to be your way, Collins way, or the highway. People like Thomas Massie and others win elections without a fully informed populace. However, most of the them do not subscribe to Collins notions either. They understand that they can help educate in their tenure in office.

Yes, the populace is indoctrinated. Yes, they need to be woken up. But the job of waking up America does not rest entirely on Rand's shoulders, nor Ron's.