Paul has endorsed Baldwin

come to think of it Paul took Barrs advice and not throw his support to the four winds LOL I guess he expected he would be the one Paul endorsed oops
 
MGreen said:
Same here. If that was directly from Ron Paul, Barr's decision must have really pissed him off. Though honestly, it feels more like Tom Woods.
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter. It had to have Ron's approval before it was posted under his name.
 
Note how Dr. Paul never mentions Barr by name...using instead "Libertarian Party Candidate". Dr. Paul is dropping the hammer on Barr, yeah !!
 
EastWindRain said:
Finally.
Click to expand...

He was indecisivie enough about it huh?

Its almost as if he was relunctant to endorse either one of the two, wonder if snubgate really had an effect on this decision.

I'll take a closer look at Baldwin, but his endorsement does not mean the world to me at this point.
 
I find it interesting you are trying to dissuade support for Baldwin. Why?
Click to expand...

Well, buddy, I've been involved in the Libertarian Party for over 10 years. The LP has been promoting a liberty agenda for 30+ years and will (hopefully) continue doing so indefinitely, Barr or no Barr. Countless dollars and hours have been expended building up the "libertarian brand", running candidates at all levels of government promoting these ideas, and securing ballot access in spite of restrictive laws and regulations -- all in the name of maximal personal and economic freedom with a "big tent" welcoming approach. The LP is FAR from perfect, but they have been and continue to be the best thing going in terms of putting libertarianism in the political arena.

The Constitution Party, on the other hand, it nothing but a thinly-veiled refuge for religious zealots, Theocrats, homophobes, "moral majority" extremists, and so forth... always has been and likely always will be, Baldwin or no Baldwin.

It's disheartening that Ron Paul is misleading his flock to follow this truly "fringe" and intolerant party just because Baldwin helped out his campaign and Barr "snubbed" his little press conference.

All of the above is of course opinion only but I don't think I'm alone in my disappointment over this. If only I could get my money back from Ron Paul.
 
Wow, that's very disappointing. Chuck Baldwin violates Jefferson's "Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom" in every way possible (not to mention the Constitution). I'd rather vote for McCain than this intolerant anti-immigration, anti-abortion, anti-homosexual mysticist fundamentalist (though my vote will go to Bob Barr). A very bad move on Paul's part, which really turns me off from this campaign altogether.
 
Last edited:
as a life long Libertarian, and current Libertarian activist, i support this move by Ron Paul. although i disagree with the political move he originally made by having the press conference, now that the damage was done by it, it makes the best sense that he focus his vote on something tangible on the ballot.

I will still be voting for Libertarians whenever I get the chance, but, sometimes, you have to put viability over your party(only when it is not offensive to your principles), and in this case the LP candidate went over the line on the type of guys he would be including in his staff.

that being said, i will still be campaigning for both barr and baldwin, as i think both are great choices.
 
svf said:
Well, buddy, I've been involved in the Libertarian Party for over 10 years. The LP has been promoting a liberty agenda for 30+ years and will (hopefully) continue doing so indefinitely, Barr or no Barr. Countless dollars and hours have been expended building up the "libertarian brand", running candidates at all levels of government promoting these ideas, and securing ballot access in spite of restrictive laws and regulations -- all in the name of maximal personal and economic freedom with a "big tent" welcoming approach. The LP is FAR from perfect, but they have been and continue to be the best thing going in terms of putting libertarianism in the political arena.

The Constitution Party, on the other hand, it nothing but a thinly-veiled refuge for religious zealots, Theocrats, homophobes, "moral majority" extremists, and so forth... always has been and likely always will be, Baldwin or no Baldwin.

It's disheartening that Ron Paul is misleading his flock to follow this truly "fringe" and intolerant party just because Baldwin helped out his campaign and Barr "snubbed" his little press conference.

All of the above is of course opinion only but I don't think I'm alone in my disappointment over this. If only I could get my money back from Ron Paul.
Click to expand...

I think you're reading into the article. All Dr. Paul says is he's backing Chuck.

"I continue to wish the Libertarian and Constitution Parties well. The more votes they get, the better. I have attended Libertarian Party conventions frequently over the years."

That's a direct quote.
 
"His real reason for not coming, nor letting me know until forty minutes before the press conference started, is unknown to me. To say the least, I was shocked and disappointed."

I don't understand this - during the press conference he gave the impression he thought Barr was coming, not that he already knew 40 minutes ahead of time he wouldn't show up.
 
Danke said:
Link?
Click to expand...


http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin396.htm

THOUGHTS ON THE LARRY CRAIG SCANDAL
By Pastor Chuck Baldwin
September 7, 2007
NewsWithViews.com

..The real problem that this scandal unearths is the widespread influence that homosexuality has within the GOP. Ladies and Gentlemen, the GOP elephant is not red; it is pink. That is a fact that rank and file conservatives within the GOP either don't know or don't want to know. But it is getting harder and harder to keep that fact a secret.

If anyone really wants to learn the facts about how homosexualists have taken over the Republican Party, I encourage them to read Alan Stang's blockbuster new book entitled "Not Holier Than Thou," which is published by Patton House. Here is Alan's web site. ...
Click to expand...

and so on.
 
Theres alot of problems with baldwin as there are with barr.... Should of just ran mary ruwart :/.

Ill probably still be voting LP, its about the brand not the guy running, theres really no risk that he could win.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

jct74
Libertarian Party of New Hampshire Endorses Trump: ‘Best Candidate for Libertarians’
Replies
8
Views
816
Occam's Banana
Occam's Banana
PAF
No Matter Who Wins the November Election, Zionists Will Control the White House
Replies
2
Views
308
unknown
unknown
PAF
America Has Only Two Religions: Democrat and Republican
Replies
0
Views
499
PAF
PAF
Occam's Banana
The "Giuliani Moment"
Replies
6
Views
1K
Intrepid
Intrepid
Matt Collins
Why they wanted him dead before the convention:
Replies
12
Views
1K
acptulsa
acptulsa
Back
Top