 | |  |  | | | | | | | | | | | | |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
| |
| Author |
Message |
IAM1
B.V. Info-a-holic
Joined: Sep 01, 2006
Posts: 5474
|
 Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 2:49 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| |
Constitution Party Chooses Chuck Baldwin
May 21, 2008
The New American-The Last Word
By: John F. McManus | May 26, 2008
At its April 24-27 national convention in Kansas City, the Constitution Party nominated Florida pastor/political activist Charles O. “Chuck” Baldwin as its candidate for president of the United States. Baldwin received 383.8 votes to 125.7 garnered by Maryland’s Alan Keyes and a few given to minor candidates. During the proceedings, hundreds of delegates from across the nation heard speeches from a slate of seven candidates and also from party founder Howard Phillips, conservative activist Richard Viguerie, Gun Owners of America Executive Director Larry Pratt, popular author Jerome Corsi, and myself.
Younger looking than his 56 years, Chuck Baldwin was born in northwest Indiana and received his education at Midwestern Baptist College in Pontiac, Michigan; Liberty University of Lynchburg, Virginia; and the Christian Bible College of Rocky Mount, North Carolina. In 1973, he married the former Connie Kay Cole, and they are proud parents of three children and now enjoy six grandchildren.
As pastor of the Crossroad Baptist Church in Pensacola, Florida, Baldwin once served in the 1980s as Florida chairman of the Moral Majority founded by the late Jerry Falwell. Before Falwell passed away in 2007, Baldwin distanced himself from his former mentor because of Falwell’s continuing support for President George W. Bush and other GOP headliners who had “strayed from positions vitally important to conservatives.” In the widely read Internet news column he has authored for many years, Baldwin endorsed the 2008 candidacy of Texas Congressman Ron Paul for the Republican nomination, and he specifically spoke out against the candidacies of Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, and John McCain.
A consistent critic of the current occupant of the White House, Baldwin has regularly chided fellow Christian Right pastors and their flocks for “blind support for President Bush in particular and the Republican Party in general.” He has faulted them for refusing to “honestly face the real danger confronting these United States,” the loss of sovereignty.
Among the many stands appearing in the party’s 39-page platform and totally supported by the candidate, one can find unequivocal support for both the right to life and the right to keep and bear arms. The party opposes conscription and any type of constitutional convention. It calls for repeal of the Federal Reserve Act and the “anchor baby” loophole used to provide legal status within our nation for border crossers. It seeks abolition of the Departments of Education and Energy; withdrawal from the United Nations, NATO, NAFTA, and the WTO; termination of all foreign aid and all tax-supported benefits for illegal immigrants; phasing out of the Social Security system; and ending the practice of sending military forces into battle without a congressional declaration of war. Believing that reducing the size of government to constitutional limits would enormously cut government’s monetary needs, the platform calls for the abolition of the Internal Revenue Service and the repeal of the income-tax amendment.
A strongly religious man, Baldwin emphasized his belief in the right of all to choose the religion of their choice. He made note of his friendship and admiration for Roman Catholic Alan Keyes during his acceptance speech, mentioning that he had welcomed his opponent for the nomination to speak to his Baptist congregation. Perhaps the strongest of Baldwin’s issues is the matter of abortion. He emphasized support for Ron Paul’s “Sanctity of Life Act” (H.R. 2597) that declares human life “shall be deemed to exist from conception” and bars the Supreme Court from ruling on the matter. Once legally defined as a person, insisted Baldwin, every infant in the womb would thereby be guaranteed the right to life — under the U.S. Constitution. He thundered, “If the Republican Party had been serious about life, it could have already ended legal abortion in America.”
As the party’s vice presidential candidate in 2004, Baldwin campaigned with presidential candidate Michael Peroutka, a Maryland lawyer. Considered even then as a possible candidate for the party’s nomination, Baldwin admits that the question of his future plans had arisen frequently, but while denying that he had ever sought the top post, he added, “I am always open to God’s will.” After having been named the party’s nominee, he asked the convention to nominate Tennessee attorney Darrell Castle as his running mate, and his request was honored.
Baldwin announced plans to gain the kind of attention Ron Paul achieved through the Internet where he succeeded in “showing how to circumvent the media.” He found while campaigning during 2004 that “the American people haven’t rejected our message; they haven’t heard our message!” And he blamed that deficiency on the dominant news media leading Americans to believe “there are only two political parties.” The conventioneers roared their agreement when he pledged, “This we intend to change.”
Watch video of Chuck Baldwin here:
http://baldwin2008.com/the-last-word-constitution-party-chooses-baldwin/
Chuck Baldwin 2008 For President » Constitution Party Chooses Baldwin |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Author |
Message |
IAM1
B.V. Info-a-holic
Joined: Sep 01, 2006
Posts: 5474
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 3:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| |
Libertarian Party: The Libertarian nominee could spell trouble for McCain if Ron Paul backers defect from the GOP
Recent entrant: Former Rep. Bob Barr of Georgia announced his candidacy for president as a Libertarian May 12 in Washington while his wife and son looked on.
Bob Barr is new piece in electoral puzzle
June 3rd, 2008
Christian Science Monitor
Washington - Newly minted presidential nominee Bob Barr of the Libertarian Party may not be a household name, but the former Republican congressman from Georgia has caught the attention of the GOP’s most passionate wing: supporters of libertarian-leaning Rep. Ron Paul (R) of Texas.
Though Mr. Paul is still running for president as a Republican, and scoring a fair share of votes in the late primaries – he won 16 percent in Pennsylvania – Sen. John McCain of Arizona has locked up the Republican nomination. But in the fall, Senator McCain will need all the votes he can get. And if a significant number of Paul supporters coalesce around Mr. Barr, that could spell trouble for McCain.
But that's a big "if." At the party convention in Denver last weekend, Barr won the Libertarian nomination on the sixth ballot, amid deep divisions over the direction of the party. Libertarianism centers on a belief in small, unintrusive government and puts a premium on individual liberty. As a member of Congress, Barr was known for three things: helping manage the impeachment of President Clinton, the war on drugs, and opposition to gay rights.
"At least on those latter two, he's got to adjust his image," says David Boaz, executive vice president of the libertarian Cato Institute in Washington. "He's started to do that, but if he's going to sound like a libertarian, then he's going to need to emphasize his opposition to the Iraq war."
Enter Ron Paul, and his vocal, generous supporters. Though national polls show only a small percentage of Republicans backing his candidacy, his fundraising has been prodigious, at more than $30 million. He maintains that he will take his nomination effort all the way to the Republican convention in Minneapolis-Saint Paul in September, but analysts believe the best he can get is a spot on the speakers' list – and, if he declines to help Barr in any way, perhaps even a prime-time speech.
So far, Paul has not spoken publicly about Barr's Libertarian nomination. And Paul's supporters are considering their options. "My heart will always be with Ron Paul, and I'll be fighting for him all the way to the National Convention," writes Frank Koch, a computer programmer from Columbus, Ohio, in an e-mail.
As for his vote in November, he adds: "I'm personally leaning toward the Constitution Party candidate Chuck Baldwin, but a large percentage of Ron Paul supporters are currently looking at Bob Barr. Voting for McCain, Hillary [Clinton], or [Barack] Obama is completely out of the question for all Constitution-loving activists."
Jane Aitken, a pro-Paul activist in Bedford, N.H., says she's not sure she likes Barr, but doesn't know what she'll do in November. "I could always have a good conscience and write in Ron Paul, and know that I didn't help someone like John McCain," says the retired schoolteacher.
Mr. Boaz, who hasn't endorsed anyone, doesn't rule out that some Paul supporters could even end up voting for likely Democratic nominee Barack Obama, because of his consistent opposition to the Iraq war. Some will end up with McCain, he adds, and others may not vote at all.
If the Paul vote splinters in numerous directions, then McCain can relax. And the typical Libertarian take in a presidential race, about 400,000 votes, also won't doom McCain, as long as it is spread thin around the country.
But there is a scenario in which Barr could become the Ralph Nader of the 2008 race – an echo of the third-party effort in 2000 that analysts believe took enough votes away from Democratic nominee Al Gore to cost him the crucial state of Florida.
Take Barr's home state of Georgia. A recent poll by Insider Advantage showed Barr winning 8 percent of the November vote there versus 45 percent for McCain and 35 percent for Senator Obama. Georgia has a large African-American population, and if Obama can generate high turnout in that community, a key part of his base, then that plus Barr could cost McCain the state – and conceivably the election.
This is a long-shot scenario, and the general-election campaign has not fully begun. But McCain cannot ignore Barr, especially if Paulites start to use him as a vehicle for a protest vote. A big challenge for Barr will be fundraising. So far, he has raised $155,000, according to his campaign website. He is likely not to be included in presidential debates. So getting the word out will be difficult.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0529/p02s01-uspo.html
Bob Barr is new piece in electoral puzzle | csmonitor.com |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
IAM1
B.V. Info-a-holic
Joined: Sep 01, 2006
Posts: 5474
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 4:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
IAM1
B.V. Info-a-holic
Joined: Sep 01, 2006
Posts: 5474
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 5:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| |
The "Ron Paul Revolution" isn't over until Ron Paul says it's over. And he's not done yet!
It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds. -Samuel Adams
6/16/2008
Ron Paul updates
Ron Paul tells followers he wants to lead a movement to build the Libertarian voice in the GOP.
In an interview with the Associated Press, Paul characterized his latest move as a "technical change" and said his campaign was "going to shift gears." Paul says he hopes the Campaign for Liberty will harness some of the enthusiasm his campaign generated to force grass-roots reforms on the Republican Party.
"We'll identify and support political candidates who champion our great ideas against the empty suits the party establishments offer the public," Paul said in a statement on the Campaign for Liberty website. "We will be a permanent presence on the American political landscape. That I promise you."
http://campaignforliberty.com/
Ron Paul's Campaign For Liberty | The Revolution Continues
One of Ron Paul's most notable achievements in the presidential campaign was the $34 million raised on his behalf, most of it by grass-roots supporters operating outside the campaign itself. That sum was more than twice the amount raised by Mike Huckabee, the former Arkansas governor. At the end of April, Paul still had $4.7 million in the bank.
Yet the fundraising success didn't translate into many votes. By the Associated Press' count, Paul garnered only 24 delegates and won no primaries or caucuses. And his presidential run was over, he acknowledged -- as he has before -- that he lacked enough delegates to win. While Sen. John McCain of Arizona sewed up enough delegates in early March.
Paul's opposition to the war in Iraq made his campaign a political refuge for antiwar Republicans, and his insistence on a reduced international role for the United States attracted those uncomfortable with the size of the U.S. government.
His other political views have veered far from the mainstream, including a belief that programs such as Social Security and Medicare, and drug law enforcement, should eventually end because they fall outside what he regards as the proper role of government. He also calls for the U.S. to leave the United Nations.
Congressman Ron Paul, an obstetrician/gynecologist, garnered few delegates during the GOP nomination fight, but his army of followers spread his name far and wide. Their "Revolution" signs -- with the "evol" highlighted, to focus on "love" -- cropped up on lawns and street corners around the nation, and his supporters have been a steady and occasionally inflammatory presence in cyberspace.
Watch video on the Ron Paul Movement and his book - "The Revolution: A Manifesto" here:
http://www.ronpaulforpresident2008.com/news/index.html
Ron Paul's website:
http://www.ronpaulforpresident2008.com/news/index.html
News on Ron Paul 2008 Revolution |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
greeney2
B.V. Info-a-holic
Joined: Sep 28, 2001
Posts: 9857
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 12:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| |
| Quote: |
| I'm not going to write him in because now that he has pulled out of the race, it won't count, but I can vote for Ralph Nader and it will be a legitimate vote for someone with equally as good of politics. |
Ron Paul was eliminated from his party during the primary allready, so writing in your vote is still an option. Ralph Nader in my opinion was far more legitmate than Ron Paul, and so was Ross Perot because both ran on 3rd party tickets. Ron Paul clearly should have done that too with his views and platform, but didn;t. I do agree that he should be respected for his effort to run, but the people have spoken.
He is still the US Congressman in the House of Representatives, not a Senator. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
weepingwillow
B.V. Info Seeker
Joined: Apr 04, 2008
Posts: 635
Location: U.S.A., Tennessee
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 1:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| |
If everyone would pick their VP, this decision would be a lot easier to make. If Ron Paul says he's dropping out of the presidential bid, then he's not campaigning and doesn't want it any more, but if they publicize it, I will do it, only if he's actually asking for the bid.
I like Perot too. He should have been president. That is how you see people mess up and they don't care.
The republican party is not what it's supposed to be. Ron Paul brought in a bill to make Republicans go back to their stand that government shouldn't have too much control. They aren't even following what the party rules are for Republican, and if you were to map it on a piece of paper, they really are communists Nazis. They don't want to run under that name because no one will vote, but running under the Republican name, they can get anything.
They are just using the old reputations of Republicans until people will get wise and vote elsewhere before it's too late, I hope. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
IAM1
B.V. Info-a-holic
Joined: Sep 01, 2006
Posts: 5474
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| |
Hi weepingwillow! Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, etc. they are all just titles but some represent where they stand on the issues much better than the others. The main thing which concerns me is the media attention the Reps. and the Dems. get versus the other parties. It just has to stop, all parties should be given equal attention IMO. The entire political system here is so biased that the people seem to be deliberately thrown into a state of confusion and misguidance. I think that there are very powerful and manipulative powers working within our governmental system to influence our politics in a way that will benefit them and not the American people! When a government gets to be as big/huge as ours and keeps growing, that's a telltale sign for us all that we have a corrupt government!
A government that is big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take it all away. -Barry Goldwater
This is so accurate/true, and that is exactly what our present administration is doing to the people!
A free society is one where it is safe to be unpopular. -Adlai E. Stevenson
This is can no longer apply to/for the American citizens of this country!
A hypocrite is the kind of politician who would cut down a redwood tree, then mount the stump and make a speech for conservation.
-Adlai E. Stevenson
And this is exactly the type of political administration and its political cronies that we presently have! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
weepingwillow
B.V. Info Seeker
Joined: Apr 04, 2008
Posts: 635
Location: U.S.A., Tennessee
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 3:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| |
| Quote: |
| A free society is one where it is safe to be unpopular. -Adlai E. Stevenson |
This is true. Conformists are dangerous thinkers. They require people to follow and the consquences for not can be death. That is why public school is such a dangerous thing and people should teach their children at home. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
IAM1
B.V. Info-a-holic
Joined: Sep 01, 2006
Posts: 5474
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 11:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| |
| weepingwillow wrote: |
| Quote: |
| A free society is one where it is safe to be unpopular. -Adlai E. Stevenson |
This is true. Conformists are dangerous thinkers. They require people to follow and the consquences for not can be death. That is why public school is such a dangerous thing and people should teach their children at home. |
Hi weepingwillow! I totally agree with you! teaching homeschooling is the best education for our children. All US citizens need to realize how terribly dangerous public schooling is! Children are totally being brainwashed and taught to conform to the governments demands in the public school system! Public schools indoctrinate your/our children everyday in the most negative of ways! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
| | | | | | | |
| |
blocks-left.jpg
blocks-left.jpg
blocks-left.jpg
|  |
Online Stats: 
