My THREE QUESTION test for Chuck Baldwin.

[Menthol Patch]

bump

 

[A. Havnes]

Compared to some of the other crisis we're exeriencing right now, I believe these three questions are quite irrelevant, unfortunately.

 

[Menthol Patch]

Menthol, I will be asking him these questions this friday when I see him at a conference, just for you.

I'm glad that these questions will be answered on Friday!

 

[mitty]

as president does it even matter?

he has already stated the federal government has no business regulating such things. just like ron paul. since he is running for president and not for governor you'd think that this wouldnt be an issue.

 

[Menthol Patch]

as president does it even matter?

he has already stated the federal government has no business regulating such things. just like ron paul. since he is running for president and not for governor you'd think that this wouldnt be an issue.

It does matter. It's a huge matter.

 

[mitty]

It does matter. It's a huge matter.

then why did you support ron paul? hes all for states rights on these issues just like baldwin. that is not the case with you. you are being inconsistent.

 

[Menthol Patch]

then why did you support ron paul? hes all for states rights on these issues just like baldwin. that is not the case with you. you are being inconsistent.

Ron Paul said he would pardon non violent drug users!

Ron Paul also openly spoke out and admitted that everyone has the right to use whatever drug they choose and do whatever they want with their own body.

 

[Menthol Patch]

then why did you support ron paul? hes all for states rights on these issues just like baldwin. that is not the case with you. you are being inconsistent.

Let me guess... You don't care if people are thrown in prison for drug user or deciding what they should do with their own bodies.

 

[mitty]

Let me guess... You don't care if people are thrown in prison for drug user or deciding what they should do with their own bodies.

lol. yep thats me. i'd kill everyone that looked at me funny including druggies.

im simply saying that you are being ridiculous if you will not vote for baldwin just because he harbors personal views you do not agree with even if he admits as president he wont regulate those views in the first place. yet you support ron paul for the same reason you would not support baldwin. let me guess, you wont vote for him because he drinks a soda you dont like too?

 

[Menthol Patch]

lol. yep thats me. i'd kill everyone that looked at me funny including druggies.

im simply saying that you are being ridiculous if you will not vote for baldwin just because he harbors personal views you do not agree with even if he admits as president he wont regulate those views in the first place. yet you support ron paul for the same reason you would not support baldwin. let me guess, you wont vote for him because he drinks a soda you dont like too?

No, I don't care what soda he drinks. I only support candidates that support people's rights.

Ron Paul may not get involved in every state issue, but he would scream loudly that drugs should be legalized, prostitution should be legalized, and that everyone has the right to live their life however they see fit.

Regardless if Ron Paul could directly change state laws he would have an impact because he would be standing up for freedom.

I need to know if Chuck Baldwin would stand up for freedom if he became President.

 

[mitty]

I need to know if Chuck Baldwin would stand up for freedom if he became President.

obviosuly ron paul thinks he does.

 

[Menthol Patch]

obviosuly ron paul thinks he does.

That is not good enough for me.

 

[mitty]

That is not good enough for me.

odd. considering you hold ron paul to such a high standard and you seem to have complete trust in him. so i guess if you decide chuck baldwin is not for freedom then you ought to just stop supporting ron paul since he doesn't endorse freedom either...in officially endorsing a candidate that is not for freedom.

 

[Fyretrohl]

You know, I seem to recall a certain congressman from Texas visiting Nevada while campaigning for President. During that time, he made it clear that he disagreed with Prostitution and wouldn't agree with it in his state. However, he was clear that it was not his role as a national politician to decide the matter. That was for each state. My take was, if Ron Paul was running for Governor of Nevada, he would probably be trying to get rid of those laws.

 

[ceakins]

1. Chuck Baldwin believes that the war on drugs should be ended, and that drug prohibition or legalization should be a state issue. A simple Google search turned up this article. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?pageId=94

Yet he supports going into foriegn countries and going after narco-terrorist.
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/election/351-countering-for-the-constitution

TNA: Where do you stand on the war on drugs?
Baldwin: I believe that as president, I would have the responsibility to keep drugs from crossing the borders, and I would do everthing in my power to keep drugs out of America. Once they come into the country, drug enforcement falls under the rubric of law enforcement, and the Constitution gives no authority to the federal government for domestic law enforcement. That is the responsibility of the state and local communities. So I believe that the drug war has been used by the federal government many times excessively, to the point where individual rights have been abridged and abrogated. I think the propensity for overreach is too great.

TNA: As I understand it, U.S. planes are going over and bombing poppy fields and whatever in Colombia and other places. Should we be doing that?
Baldwin: If the government of that country were to ask for the assistance of the United States, in particular where the vested interest of the United States is at stake, then I think that there is consideration there. But if it's a matter of the United States arbitrarily taking upon itself to invade the air space and the sovereign territory of another country to do whatever it wants to do unilaterally, then no. Absolutely not.

2. As far as I know, he has not addressed this. However, he is pretty consistent, so he probably believes it is a state issue.

3. I don't even know how to look for the answer to that.

See inline response.

 

[ceakins]

Again Menthol Patch, I didn't say I didn't agree that the War on Drugs is bad; I'm simply disagreeing with the post and many people's belief here. Baldwin opposes the War in Iraq and the Patriot Act. For whatever reason, the War on Drugs, Prostitution, and the ability to burn Bibles are more important than the Government wiretapping, searching and seizing your property unwarrantly, and throwing you in jail without a trial??? Wowzah...

Quick question...what would you rather have, the Patriot Act or the War on Drugs. Me??? I'd take the War on Drugs; no questions asked. At least they get a warrant to seize your stash and to tap your phoneline. With the Patriot Act, hell, they don't bother, they'll just throw you in jail if they have any suspicion.

So peoples freedom from imprisonment is less important to you? What you mention hasn't put a great amount of people in prison if you want to do comparisons, the war on drugs has.

 

[ceakins]

**sigh** ice cream and heroin are not comparable. Look, I'm coming from a different perspective. My education is in behavioral science with an emphasis on addictive disorders. We are an addicted nation. Granted the war on drugs has been useless, but legalizing addiction (dope) isn't going to make things any better. If you think so, then go have a talk with the many mothers whose husbands are shooting up and smoking weed in front of the kids instead of working to pay the bills. Go to hospitals on the poor side of town and ask about the crack addicted babies. Ask anyone who's addicted if they wish they had never started.

Addiction is hurting this country in more ways than you may know.

You think legalizing dope is going to change all this? I don't want it legalized, but I don't want addicts thrown in prison, only dealers. I think addicts belong in rehab for lengthy periods of time.

As to the casual user, I believe in simply de-criminalizing dope.

So who's going to pay for this rehab?

 

[mconder]

When I saw the title to your post, I guessed exactly the questions you would be asking. I believe Chuck Baldwin has already answered. It's just to bad these seem to be your most important issue. Let me just remind you that at least two of those were illegal during the most successful times of this country. Illegal war, spying on U.S. citizens, no warrant arrests, the FED, were all illegal during the most successful times of this country.

 

[Menthol Patch]

When I saw the title to your post, I guessed exactly the questions you would be asking. I believe Chuck Baldwin has already answered. It's just to bad these seem to be your most important issue. Let me just remind you that at least two of those were illegal during the most successful times of this country. Illegal war, spying on U.S. citizens, no warrant arrests, the FED, were all illegal during the most successful times of this country.

All of these issues are important. Apparently, you don't think it's a bad thing that right now there are innocent people who have had their lives ruined or been imprisoned for committing crimes (such as prostitution, drug use, peaceful protesting, etc) in which no one else's rights were violated.

 

[ceakins]

odd. considering you hold ron paul to such a high standard and you seem to have complete trust in him. so i guess if you decide chuck baldwin is not for freedom then you ought to just stop supporting ron paul since he doesn't endorse freedom either...in officially endorsing a candidate that is not for freedom.

Ah so you follow Ron Paul like a cult leader? I'm sure Ron Paul would also tell you to make your own decision. Scary you're incaple of thinking for yourself.