• Welcome to our new home!

    Please share any thoughts or issues here.


Forget Bob Barr. . .The REVOLUTION needs Chuck Baldwin

Stallion

Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2007
Messages
145
Every four years, conservative “pragmatists” trot out the “We Can’t Let So-And-So Win” mantra. Of course, the so-and-so in question is always the Democratic Presidential candidate. For all of my adult life, I have been listening to so-called “conservative” Republicans warn us of the impending doom that would befall our country if the Democratic candidate were elected. And this year is no different.

This year’s Republican primary did provide a wonderful aberration, however, to the usual choices between Tweedledee and Tweedledum. Republicans had an opportunity to nominate a real American constitutionalist, a statesman in the similitude of Thomas Jefferson or James Madison. That man was Texas Congressman, Ron Paul. Unfortunately, the Republican faithful seem to be incapable of discerning the marks of true greatness, not to mention fidelity to constitutional government. It is doubtful that most of them even understand what constitutional government is. And as for Christian conservatives, they can barely see any issues beyond abortion and “gay rights.” To try and convince them to support a constitutionalist candidate is like talking to a brick wall.

So, what choice does the Republican Party offer the American people this year? The worst of all possible choices: good old John “McSame” McCain.

Let’s be clear: a John McCain Presidency will be no better than a Hillary Clinton or a Barack Obama Presidency. In fact, in many ways, a McCain White House will be WORSE than a Democratic one.

On many issues, there is virtually no distinction between John McCain and any potential Democratic candidate. John McCain is no friend to gun owners. He is no friend to pro-lifers. He is no friend to fiscal conservatives. He is no friend to property owners. He is no friend to “family values” voters. He is no friend to America’s blue-collar workers. He is no friend to small business owners. He is no friend to opponents of illegal immigration.

On the other hand, John McCain is a great friend to Big Business. Similarly, he is a friend to Big Government and Big Brother. He is also a friend to open borders, supranational government, regionalism, and American imperialism.

But this is where the Boogeyman comes in.

At this point, Republican Party lackeys will break in and say, “We can’t let Hillary Clinton win. We can’t let Barack Obama win.” Even the favored son of the Religious Right, Mike Huckabee, has endorsed John McCain, not to mention Mitt Romney and virtually every other Republican “bigwig.” (Thank God, Ron Paul has maintained his integrity by NOT endorsing McCain.)

I, for one, am fed up with this baloney, because what we are actually faced with is not the “lesser of two evils” but “the evil of two lessers.” (To quote a good friend of mine.) And the reason John McCain would actually be a worse President than either Obama or Clinton is because of the manner in which conservatives go to sleep whenever a Republican occupies the Oval Office. Furthermore, the next couple of years are “crunch time” for this burgeoning North American Union and related issues.

America is currently facing the most serious threat to its national independence and sovereignty since the War of 1812. The forces of globalism have declared an all-out war against our country’s independence. Illegal immigration, the NAFTA superhighway, the North American Community, a regional currency called the Amero, and “free trade” deals are just a few of the weapons in their arsenal. And John McCain will use every bit of his power as President to facilitate all of this chicanery. And, because McCain is a Republican, conservatives and Christians will sit back and let it happen without even the slightest whimper of resistance. If Obama or Clinton were sitting in the Oval Office, however, massive numbers of conservatives and Christians would rise in protest over every inch of ground ceded to these nefarious nabobs. So, tell me, who is the greater evil? I say it is John McCain.

I realize that there are many readers shouting to themselves right now and saying, “So what do we do, Chuck? We have to vote for one or the other.” To which I say, No you don’t. You can think outside the box. You don’t have to throw your vote away on either of these wretched candidates. You can cast a vote for principle and vote for a third party candidate.

I can hear readers screaming at me now, saying that voting for a third party candidate is a wasted vote. I strongly disagree! Casting a vote for a person who you know is unfaithful to your principles is a wasted vote! Voting for someone who you know will keep our borders and ports open to illegals, continue George Bush’s preemptive war doctrine, and facilitate a burgeoning hemispheric government—not to mention someone who will increase and augment a burgeoning Orwellian police state—is a wasted vote!

At some point, we Americans must decide whether we will tolerate the continued sellout of our freedoms and principles or not. Will we swallow the shallow squeals of the establishment elite who think we are a bunch of sheep to be herded into their New World Order? Or will we stand our ground? Will we vote our principles and our conscience?

It does not matter that the pundits and experts say we can’t win. That is not our business. As John Quincy Adams said, “Duty is ours; results are God’s.” When will Christians, especially, quit trying to play politics and start standing for principle? They talk a lot about principle, but when it comes down to where the rubber meets the road, most don’t act like people of principle.

If God intends to give America another chance, if He intends to return these United States to constitutional government, and if He intends to preserve America’s independence, it will only come in the form of a miracle. And miracles do not happen by the machinations of pragmatic planners. Miracles are just that.

America was born a miracle, and it could now be given a new birth by miracle. If so, it would demand that people of principle start acting like it. That we cast aside the pragmatic, the reasonable, the sophisticated, and the expected. That we—as did the priests of old—would be willing to step out into the raging current of the Jordan River, knowing that either God would part the water or we would drown. That we would be willing to sign our names to a document—as did our Founding Fathers—that would make us either the enemies of the state or the inventors of a new nation. It means taking risks; it means doing the impractical; it means rejecting accepted wisdom and standing for principle.

I am convinced that only a miracle can save America now. And I am expecting God to grant such a miracle. Beyond that, I am willing to do my part to place myself in a position to let God use my voice and my vote to accomplish this miracle. And if that means voting for someone who “has no chance of winning” in order to let God take the glory for whatever victory results, it is the least I can do. So, who will join me?
I really hope the CP does the right thing and nominates Chuck Baldwin. Than we can stick it to that narcissistic opportunist Barr by donating to Pastor Chuck and spreading the message that the American people have a real choice on the ballot in November. :)
 
I really hope the CP does the right thing and nominates Chuck Baldwin. Than we can stick it to that narcissistic opportunist Barr by donating to Pastor Chuck and spreading the message that the American people have a real choice on the ballot in November. :)

How many states' ballots is the CP on, anyway?
 
i do really like Chuck Baldwin. i would support him over barr any day..


hes a really interesting guy.
 
From what I've read of Baldwin, he himself seems to be a well spoken guy with the right positions. I'm leery of the Constitution Party though, since it attracts at least as many theocratic Huckabee types as it does Constitutionalists. Perhaps with Baldwin and a contingent of Ron Paul supporters coming over, the CP could be tweaked for the better.

If more garbage comes out about Barr, Ron Paul loses the GOP contest, and there's no one better, I will definitely consider Baldwin in November. I just hope the Constitution Party doesn't shoot itself in the foot by putting that neo-con fraud Alan Keyes anywhere on the ticket. He should not be President or VP under any circumstances, unless he comes around and renounces his support for interventionism and the Iraq War.
 
From what I've read of Baldwin, he himself seems to be a well spoken guy with the right positions. I'm leery of the Constitution Party though, since it attracts at least as many theocratic Huckabee types as it does Constitutionalists. Perhaps with Baldwin and a contingent of Ron Paul supporters coming over, the CP could be tweaked for the better.

If more garbage comes out about Barr, Ron Paul loses the GOP contest, and there's no one better, I will definitely consider Baldwin in November. I just hope the Constitution Party doesn't shoot itself in the foot by putting that neo-con fraud Alan Keyes anywhere on the ticket. He should not be President or VP under any circumstances, unless he comes around and renounces his support for interventionism and the Iraq War.

I've read over the CP's platform and it sounds almost like it could have been written by Ron Paul himself. I know there are the Huckabee and Keyes supporter types that call the CP home, but it seems to me that the majority of Constitutionalists are Libertarians at heart.
 
I don't know...the Constitution Party scares the Hell outta me (no pun intended). A lot of what they endorse isn't constitutional at all (banning pornography, gambling, gay marriage, etc.). I don't know about you guys, but any political party that promises to "protect" fully-grown adults from other cultures and minor societal annoyances warrants at least a raised eyebrow of incredulity from yours truly, if not my most mocking surreptitious laughter.
 
I don't know...the Constitution Party scares the Hell outta me (no pun intended). A lot of what they endorse isn't constitutional at all (banning pornography, gambling, gay marriage, etc.). I don't know about you guys, but any political party that promises to "protect" fully-grown adults from other cultures and minor societal annoyances warrants at least a raised eyebrow of incredulity from yours truly, if not my most mocking surreptitious laughter.

From the CP website:

On pornography:
While we believe in the responsibility of the individual and corporate entities to regulate themselves, we also believe that our collective representative body we call government plays a vital role in establishing and maintaining the highest level of decency in our community standards.
To understand the position, you must understand that Christians view the production and distribution of pornography as sinful and harmful to society, much like murder, theft, vandalism, etc. and inherently wrong. We have laws against those other things, thus obscenity laws are justified. This is how they reconcile the position with the Constitution.

On gambling:
We are opposed to government sponsorship, involvement in, or promotion of gambling, such as lotteries, or subsidization of Native American casinos in the name of economic development. We call for the repeal of federal legislation that usurps state and local authority regarding authorization and regulation of tribal casinos in the states.
There is nothing unconstitutional about this. In short, they believe that the federal government should have no involvement in the gambling industry and that states and local governments should have the final say on tribal casinos.

On gay marriage:
Finally, we oppose any legal recognition of homosexual unions.
Being opposed to legislation that recognizes gay marriages is not the same as wanting to "ban gay marriage" as you suggest. Ron Paul believes that marriage should be sanctioned by the church, not the federal government. Does that mean that he wants to "ban" gay marriage as well?

The CP is as close to RP's views as any party out there, the LP included.
 
From the CP website:

On pornography:

To understand the position, you must understand that Christians view the production and distribution of pornography as sinful and harmful to society, much like murder, theft, vandalism, etc. and inherently wrong. We have laws against those other things, thus obscenity laws are justified. This is how they reconcile the position with the Constitution.

That's in conflict with the position of libertarians - murder, theft, and vandalism aren't harmful to society, they're harmful to other individuals, directly. There is no such thing as something being harmful to the collective "us." Pornography isn't directly harmful to anyone else; therefore, under the libertarian mindset, it shouldn't be regulated.

I don't think you can equate the two categories, because one is harmful to "society" and the other is harmful to individuals.
 
there is a hollywood aspected faction of the electorate who might
misguidedly think they are voting for the baldwin brother who recently
found God and a highly moral lifestyle! of course we know chuck baldwin
is not the witty guy who was on the celebrity apprentice very recently!
 
From the CP website:


On gambling:

There is nothing unconstitutional about this. In short, they believe that the federal government should have no involvement in the gambling industry and that states and local governments should have the final say on tribal casinos.

Ironic, considering a reservation is a local government.
 
Ironic, considering a reservation is a local government.

You know, you're right. I stand corrected. I guess the truly constitutional approach to this topic would be to allow the reservations to do whatever they want when it comes to tribal casinos. hmph. good point.
 
Stallion,

We do believe that the reservations can decide for themselves. But often, tribes within other states (i.e. they arent their own government) are granted gambling rights. Here in LA,we have several different tribes who are under their county government--but they have been granted certain rights about casinos. So its not inconsistent.

Baldwin is a great choice.
 
As for the CP, it's "theocratic" elements have declined drastically since 2006. Ron Paul-types have dramatically increased. Also, many former theocratic types were CONVERTED by Paul,and are now more liberty-loving. Chuck Baldwin basically casted himself as a Ron Paul surrogate,and won 3-to-1.
 
Chuckie hasn't held political office before which would disqualify him from getting my vote. If you haven't demonstrated that you can be a political administrator or legislator I would never even consider voting for ya.

The problem with most 3rd party people is that they run for purely selfish reason without building a public service resume.
 
If you haven't demonstrated that you can be a political administrator or legislator I would never even consider voting for ya.

Really? If someone hasnt been on the government teet, I see that as a plus.
 
exactly

Really? If someone hasnt been on the government teet, I see that as a plus.

This is a huge plus...lead a large church, online business for talking to america about liberty..ie the good rush limbaugh...

vp candidate for cp in the past.

We need a president like in that movie dave or a jimmy stewart type that cares about the people and is without question honest.

We know the other clowns are as dark as can be in these areas....

That is the desperate need for a paul or baldwin in office.

I am still holding out that ron will change his mind, he is the only person keeping us from having baldwin and paul on the ticket together.
 
Ron Paul has categorically ruled out running third party, becuase the RNC is in September, and he wants to give his National Delegates an opportunity to vote for him,and hopefully give his speech on stage. We were hoping to draft him as our nominee, but he made it clear he would not agree to it, and suggested that Baldwin was a VERY good surrogate.
 
must step it up.

called paul family to confirm no chance until post september for ron to change his mind.

By then it will be too late to be ready all at once.

We must lay the groundwork and then step it up.
 
Laying the ground work should include helping Chuck and the CP gain Ballot access in your state.
 
Back
Top