Paul has endorsed Baldwin

[ihsv]

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.

Gosh. Who's intolerant here? You sound like a very unhappy person.

 

[dawnbt]

do some of you actually step back and think about what you're saying? Those of you who are railing about some stupid political party, are doing the very same thing that we criticized the republicans and democrats for doing. Party loyalists!! Did you forget somewhere along the way, that we don't elect a damn political party to office; we elect an individual? For those who have, i'm not seeing how you are any different at all than the party faithful in the gop.

+10000000

 

[RSLudlum]

How very libertarian of him to endorse Baldwin!

 

[MsDoodahs]

Gosh. Who's intolerant here?

Excellent observation.

 

[TurtleBurger]

Let's see if Barr and Root "display leadership" now and endorse Baldwin. I'm guessing not.

 

[Magsec]

I for one am very happy about this. It kind of makes sense too seeing as it was either Barr or Baldwin for Paul, and one had to sink real low for the other one to shine, which was an opportunity RP was willing to take. I was thinking of voting for Baldwin out of everyone else on the ballot, but the endorsement seals it. Let's keep liberty going!

 

[Mahkato]

Chuck Baldwin on Facebook: http://www.new.facebook.com/group.php?gid=16165934622

DIGG the announcement: http://digg.com/business_finance/A_New_Alliance_By_Dr_Ron_Paul_2

VOTEmotion: http://www.votemotion.com/links/3573/

 

[RevolutionSD]

I am very unhappy about this.
The constitution party is for a theocracy.
As an atheist, this is highly offensive to me.
People are also saying Baldwin is homophobic?
That means he's a collectivist, bad news if we're looking for a candidate who is truly for freedom.

 

[TurtleBurger]

Another bright note in this is, the media can now stop saying Dr. Paul is a "libertarian, not a Republican". As we knew all along, he's a Constitutionalist!

 

[ihsv]

I am very unhappy about this.
The constitution party is for a theocracy.
As an atheist, this is highly offensive to me.
People are also saying Baldwin is homophobic?
That means he's a collectivist, bad news if we're looking for a candidate who is truly for freedom.

This is highly offensive to you? So, do you claim some kind of special status because you're an atheist?

 

[klamath]

I feel sorry for you that you have been working in the libertarian party for 10 years, just to have it taken over in the last few. Don't get mad at Ron Paul, but perhaps look towards your own leadership within that party. Its been co-opted & manipulated. Also, you forget -- many high esteemed libertarian think tanks and organizations have had it in for Ron Paul since the very beginning. Work out your parties issues before you want others to jump on board to warring factions within your own party.

Also, I find it VERY INTERESTING you refer to 'us' as his flock. If you were a true supporter you would NEVER reference others nor yourself in such a manner. You are just here to troll and shill for your own agenda. You are doing damage control. Get lost. You never gave a dime to the cause of Ron Paul. It is very apparent.

I think you hit the nail on the head. 46 posts

 

[TurtleBurger]

I am very unhappy about this.
The constitution party is for a theocracy.
As an atheist, this is highly offensive to me.
People are also saying Baldwin is homophobic?
That means he's a collectivist, bad news if we're looking for a candidate who is truly for freedom.

The Constitution Party is not for "theocracy". I've never heard anything about them wanting to institute a ruling priestly class, or declaring an official state religion. Most of them have a Christian worldview, but that doesn't make them theocrats.

 

[Gin]

Personally I don't see the problem with Baldwin being a minister or the fact that he brings it up in his speeches... this is why...

The US was Founded on Christian Principles... It was the Christian Reform that Brought the settlers here in the first place....

Google the Founding Fathers Religious Background and get a wealth of information as to the reasons that the US came to be...

As recently stated in Joyce Meyers Magazine ... Enjoying everyday Life... America's Tolerance Showdown... By Gary Cass

We need a strong defense against the current model of tolerance. Our argument must have a firm foundation... Fortunately we do not have to look very far. We simply need to reclaim the ideas of our nation's Founders and tap into the rich vein of Christian principles that were the basis of their original vision of religious liberty....

It is tragic that Christians, who actually gave the world a sound foundation for liberty, might be shut down in the name of liberty by the very ones who benefited from Christian tolerance.

One author makes this point by comparing the original thirteen colonies to a boat. First the Pilgrims and then the Puritans came looking for freedom from the oppression of the Church of England. Eventually, they learned to tolerate each other. Then came the Baptists, the Presbyterians and all Protestants.
Eventually Catholics, liberal Christians then all Christians were extended acceptance in the colonial boat. Next Jews, Muslims, and Hindus
found refuge in the vessel. Finally, toleration was extended to atheists and the anti religious. Now, the last ones in the Christian boat of tolerance want to push the Christians out.
Supporters of tolerance really want freedom from religion.
By What Standard?

America’s future comes down to answering the question, What standard will the people demand their elected officials to follow? For Christians, the principles written in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution make perfect
sense because they are based on “the laws of nature and of nature’s God.” They can be embraced as a sound and rational basis for ordered liberty under God, especially the statement that “all men are created equal,” and “all men are endowed by their Creator with unalienable rights.” These were established on biblical truths. But where do humanists, who deny the existence of God, obtain
their source of right and wrong?

One of America’s most courageous and eloquent Founding Fathers, Patrick Henry,
reminds us, “It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians, not on religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ!” Our civil society is based on a Christian moral imagination and produced the greatness of America. This tried and true path needs to be reimagined in our day because the consequences of not doing so are disastrous.

If America is swept away in the wave of tolerance, we will have nothing to cling to,
including no standard of right and wrong. Then all becomes vanity. Life turns into the pursuit of materialism. Self-centeredness reigns. Where there is no constructive vision, but only selfish indulgence and pleasure seeking, nations die.
Only by returning to our Founders’ vision can we be secure in liberty’s safe harbor. For the sake of our children’s future, we must see to it that America becomes firmly attached to our great Judeo-Christian moral, spiritual and intellectual
foundation.

The first step is to stop the Christian bashing that seeks to tear down our great Christian faith and heritage.

http://www.joycemeyer.org/NR/rdonlyres/04A7A722-5158-4011-BC00-B259372BB544/0/JMM_0408.pdf



Maybe this is a bit too much, but my point is that this Nation was Founded on Christian Principles and so to not accept someone because they are a minister is absolutely wrong... IMHO....

Everyone must vote his/her conscience period....

 

[Fields]

This sounded very un-Ron Paul like. It had to have been ghost written.

Never the less, this is AWESOME news for Dr. Baldwin's campaign and he will be receiving my vote.

Thomas Woods knew this was coming out very early this morning and seeing that he wrote Ron Paul's book, my money would be on him.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Party over principle is obviously your way of thinking. You'd make a good dem or repub!

I do NOT agree with the CP on a few things, but I can say I support Baldwin 100%.

He isn't a closet neocon like Barr!

haha!

+1

I'll probably still be undecided till the election, tho. I have a lot of thinking to do before I commit myself to Baldwin. Thanks for the post, OP!

 

[Orgoonian]

Congrats to Pastor Baldwin!!

Still gonna vote Nader though..../em ducks misc.rotted veggies thrown my way

PS.I know Nader is not perfect,but he has done,and continues to do decent things.

 

[luaPnoR]

You guys... he's just saying who HE'S voting for. You think he's going to vote for Barr after what he did? It doesn't mean he thinks and wants everyone of his supporters to vote the way he votes. I say vote for who ever you want as long as it's not Obama or McCain. Paul would probably say the same thing to you but HE'S voting for Baldwin... he's gotta vote for somebody.

I was going to vote for Baldwin before and still will.. even if Paul had endorsed Barr I'd be voting Baldwin. Paul wants you to have a mind of your own.

 

[rockandrollsouls]

Honestly, that doesn't sound like Ron's wording and writing to me. If I see him say it in a video or something I'll probably swing towards Baldwin if that who he chooses based on his judgment. However, we have received many posts and updates that were not written by Ron so I choose not to acknowledge it until I hear it by audio or see it in video.

Congrats to Pastor Baldwin!!

Still gonna vote Nader though..../em ducks misc.rotted veggies thrown my way

PS.I know Nader is not perfect,but he has done,and continues to do decent things.

He's closer to Obama than Ron lol...

 

[devil21]

devil...you are what you hate..got it? Furthermore, you will effectively push the people who choose to vote for someone other than baldwin out of the movement completely. You are no different than the democrats and republicans. People have been trying to tell ya'll that. I say all the new niks with no postings are probably people you know who have signed on ...with a name you don't recognize because they don't want to be LAMBASTED for not being in lock step. <eyeroll> tones

Then that makes them pussies in my book. Hiding behind some unknown name? Yeah thats bold action for ya . Come out and take your lumps. I signed onto this movement to support the ideals that Ron Paul introduced me to. Those ideals had no "party affiliation" to me. If he supports Baldwin, then I support Baldwin. Voting for McCain is not supporting the ideals that we have all been trying to introduce others to for the last year and a half.

Im more amazed that people here like yourself (assuming you are geniune and not a troll...Im not convinced either way) can actually entertain the thought of voting for someone that Ron Paul specifically will NOT support because the candidate has nothing in common with RP's ideals. Working to elect McBush out of some glimmer of hope that maybe Palin will be able to keep him holding to a shred of classic conservatism is not only naive, since Palin is already spouting the neo-con line every chance she gets, but it's traitorous to the ideals of freedom, liberty, sound economic policy, and non-intervention. Maybe your ideals are flexible depending on the outlook. Mine are not.


And to address some of the religious discussion, I am not religious but I have no problem with Baldwin's faith. His issues are 95% in line with RP's and if Im going to vote for a religious candidate (they all espouse their religion in some form), then I'd rather it be a religious person putting AMERICA FIRST, instead of a neo-con putting ISRAEL FIRST.

 

[Orgoonian]

Honestly, that doesn't sound like Ron's wording and writing to me. If I see him say it in a video or something I'll probably swing towards Baldwin if that who he chooses based on his judgment. However, we have received many posts and updates that were not written by Ron so I choose not to acknowledge it until I hear it by audio or see it in video.



He's closer to Obama than Ron lol...

Haha,i cant argue with you there!
I dont like a lot of his policy,but i do respect him,and his integrity.
I also appreciate men like D.K,and Paul Wellstone(R.I.P)

Sadly,there is only ONE Ron Paul.