0 votes

Mary Starrett says it all!

By Mary Starrett
July 1, 2008
NewsWithViews.com

Being For the Constitution SOME of the Time And Not All Of The Time Is Like Being ‘A Little Bit Pregnant’

Bob Barr, former Republican Congressman and US Attorney and now the Libertarian Party candidate for president has held many positions that constitutionalists can agree with. Many see Barr as the natural movement forward of the Ron Paul campaign, but even the most cursory examination of Bob Barr’s past political positions show he doesn’t pass the smell test.

In other words, you can’t be for adherence to the Constitution some of the time and against it some of the time, as we shall see Bob Barr clearly is.

Close enough is not close enough at all when it comes to our civil liberties and the rights guaranteed in the founding documents.

Constitution Party presidential candidate Chuck Baldwin (www.Baldwin2008.com) believes the US Constitution was then and is now designed to tie down the tentacles of the Federal government and that any and all powers given to the Federal government are clearly outlined in and limited by that document.

Bob Barr has not held fast to that single absolute and that is why you should know there is a very large distinction between Barr and Baldwin.

• Barr is in favor of an interventionist foreign policy, arguing for intervention in Iran and South America, among other countries. Barr voted for the Iraq war. He praised Bush because "the surge is working." Chuck Baldwin believes, as our Founders did, that we should be a friend to all and avoid ‘foreign entanglements’. Baldwin has stated that if elected he would see to it that those who have been sent to fight the illegal, unconstitutional and immoral wars in Iraq and Afghanistan would receive orders to return home immediately.

• Barr voted for the Patriot Act, and favored reauthorization of that liberty-robbing set of laws. Chuck Baldwin has always stood against the Patriot Act as an unconstitutional power grab by the executive branch.

• Barr favors a national sales tax. Chuck Baldwin contends that does not reform our tax system, it merely re-orders the heavy-handed manner the IRS controls the illegal and unfair robbing of Peter to subsidize Paul.

• He’s held an advisory position with the ACLU- a group which has worked tirelessly to push anti- Christian and anti- free speech agendas

• While Bob Barr has publicly, at times, supported pro-life groups, sadly, in his private life, according to his ex wife, Barr encouraged the abortion of their child.

• Chuck Baldwin has been a vocal and steadfast defender of the sanctity of life- publicly and privately.

Bob Barr is no Chuck Baldwin and that is why in November it behooves liberty-minded Americans to vote for the Constitution and vote for the Constitution Party candidate Chuck Baldwin.

Source: http://www.newswithviews.com/Mary/starrett86.htm

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

One should

also add that Dr. Paul and Barr worked with the ACLU on certain civil liberty issues like medical marjuana. Barr was a legal consultant with them on the MPP, not anymore. Barr expressly also said that he does not agree with the ACLU on many other issues.
Baldwin also called on atheists, Jews etc. to support him, not exclusively Christians.....

Well quite an attack piece

towards a fellow conservative-libertarian. One would rather see the CP trying to build on the Ron Paul support (like reach out to Huckabee supporters for instance) than wasting time and money to see who can get the most of the RP support. Fact is, the CP founder Howard Phillips is a friend of both Baldwin and Barr.

In 2005 Barr had a personal interview with Baldwin in his studio about the Patriot Act, that Barr has been fighting since the past 5 years> If you say he voted for the Patriot Act, you have to follow the reasons AND also mention that he put in the sunset-clauses, otherwise it would have been permanent. He had his initial rejection of the Patriot Act.
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/Interview_Barr.html

On the war, he opposed the war 4 months after the invasion. Most of the media and population were for the war and he probably believed the WMD issue, and changed his mind immediately after not being found. Sure he is not perfect, but have you ever met a CHristian that has never sinned or someone that has never made any mistake? He has acknowledged his mistakes, unlike Bush, McCain etc. etc.

I must say it is a TOTAL lie to say Barr is in favor of interventionism in Iran. He appeared with Ron Paul and Democratic congress representatives in a call against military intervention in Iran. (I did not see Baldwin at the event). The event was organized by Doug Bandow and others. Bandow is a foreign policy advise to both Dr. Paul and Barr. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgOO-88Uv4U

Baldwin has said in his interview with the Ron Paul twins “We’ve accomplished what we set out to do in Iraq”. Perhaps Baldwin did approve of the war for this reason and now say one can come back as mission accomplished? This is the idea one is getting.

Baldwin also mentioned “close the borders” — not “secure the borders, like Paul. Baldwin came out in favor of building a wall on the southern border, which Paul and Barr do not.

Barr, like Paul says the most important thing is to reduce the size and scope of the government drastically. With a record 9 trillion deficit no sane person would believe you will be able to reduce personal tax to zero
any time soon. You first have to save a lot and then lower tax step by step. Barr has left the issue of a specific tax system open, the issue of a fair tax presupposes the breakdown of the IRS and once would have a limited government, then you can see and debate about what taxes.

The CP and Baldwin is also more for fair trade, than for free trade, as Dr. Paul and Barr is. In this case the CP's policy of tariffs on CHinese goods for instance are closer to the Democrats, than the GOP or the LP.

Barr has publicly also recently in several interviews stated he is pro-life.
The issue with his ex-wife is that it was no her request and she was sick, had cancer and wanted the abortion. In this case I do believe Barr has taken the correct decision to allow it in order to save the life of his wife, rather than facing the possibility of both his ex-wife and baby losing their lives. SO Barr has decided in favor of life, the life of his wife.

IMHO both Baldwin and Barr should look for NEW voters to add to the campaign for liberty, instead of fighting to see who gets the biggest slice of the current Ron Paul cake. They should all work together. Some in the LP dislike Barr a lot as he is a social conservative, just like Dr. Paul and Baldwin, so the CP should not attack him, but rather leave the possibility for a new party open with the CP, Barr, Baldwin and say the pro-life part among the Libertarians.

If you compare Barr and Baldwin's campaigns so far, it is clear which one is more professional and impressive......

Who's speaking?

Last time I checked.... Chuck Baldwin is speaking right before Ron Paul at the March on July 12th.
That speaks volumes for me... still not quite sold on voting for anyone else but RP, but I don't think writing in RP will do any good.

Convince me otherwise & I'm sure to listen!

"Whether you think you can or think you cannot, you're absolutely right!"

"Whether you think you can or think you cannot, you're absolutely right!"

Not sure whether Barr was invited to the Revolutionsmarch

However, both Dr. Paul and Barr will this year again be speaking at the Freedomfest - like last year (Dr. Paul via satellite in DC) and Barr will be the keynote speaker at Freedom 21 http://www.freedom21.org , where Dr. Paul will also be. I do not think Dr. Baldwin will be a speaker with any of these two events.

correction

I have just noticed Chuck Baldwin will indeed be at Freedom 21, where Barr will be the keynote speaker though. Baldwin will not be at the FFF.

How can anyone be sure?

With Stalinist-style, black-box elections, how can anyone be sure that a given vote for a ballot-qualified candidate will be "counted" in secret using proprietary software?

That's part of the reason why I'll be voting for the best man for the job, Ron Paul.

----

Ron Paul's Campaign for Liberty Money Bomb!

"We really do have...a once in a lifetime opportunity to take the Republican Party back to where it was." -Kent Snyder, 1959-2008

----

"...a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people." -John F. Kennedy

Digg this thing

Digg please!

http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Bob_Barr_For_the_Constitut...

----

Ron Paul's Campaign for Liberty Money Bomb!

"We really do have...a once in a lifetime opportunity to take the Republican Party back to where it was." -Kent Snyder, 1959-2008

----

"...a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people." -John F. Kennedy

Yeah

Let's further associate Ron Paul with scurrilous BS about someone he said he likes. Great idea.

"What does conservatism today stand for? It stands for war. It stands for power. It stands for spying, jailing without trial, torture, counterfeiting without limit, and lying from morning to night."

Lew Rockwell

An attack piece

Which is fine. And good that he will see why many people don't like him and are highly suspicious of him.

2 things

"• Barr favors a national sales tax. Chuck Baldwin contends that does not reform our tax system, it merely re-orders the heavy-handed manner the IRS controls the illegal and unfair robbing of Peter to subsidize Paul."

He does as far as I am aware, but only if the income tax is abolished. I might be wrong on this (?). I personally would prefer they did NOT advocate any new taxes until *after* it's gone - otherwise you wind up with both! So I think he should change his rhetoric. (Another conservative Bruce Bartlett has said at some point there will have to be a sales tax otherwise unfunded liabilities will wipe out the economy - again, I wish they would not talk about new taxes at all)

"• While Bob Barr has publicly, at times, supported pro-life groups, sadly, in his private life, according to his ex wife, Barr encouraged the abortion of their child."

This is scurrilous. There are plenty of reasons to object to Barr otherwise. This is NOT like Gingrich dumping his wife when she was sick, this is just gossip.

"What does conservatism today stand for? It stands for war. It stands for power. It stands for spying, jailing without trial, torture, counterfeiting without limit, and lying from morning to night."

Lew Rockwell

just the FACTS ma'am

I wouldn't call it an "attack piece." The article just addresses the FACTS about Bob Barr which I would think would be important to liberty-minded people in making an informed decision.

----

Ron Paul's Campaign for Liberty Money Bomb!

"We really do have...a once in a lifetime opportunity to take the Republican Party back to where it was." -Kent Snyder, 1959-2008

----

"...a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people." -John F. Kennedy

Where

are the good points? Half the truth is Keith Olbermann territory ya know.

"What does conservatism today stand for? It stands for war. It stands for power. It stands for spying, jailing without trial, torture, counterfeiting without limit, and lying from morning to night."

Lew Rockwell

About time somebody said it...

....but I'm a "Ron Paul or nothing wacko" as one Ron Paul "supporter" put it on the Daily Paul recently. I'll be voting for the best man for the job, Ron Paul.

----

Ron Paul's Campaign for Liberty Money Bomb!

"We really do have...a once in a lifetime opportunity to take the Republican Party back to where it was." -Kent Snyder, 1959-2008

----

"...a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people." -John F. Kennedy

Maybe I should just call her

Maybe I should just call her names, how much liberty does that get me?

Why is is that the Baldwin supporters do nothing but endlessly bash Barr? Why not go after McSame, perhaps you're worried that if Bar get some real traction, your guy McSame will loose? It does seem that way.

Barr goes out there and trashes McSame why won't you and your guy do that? Wouldn't that be just a tad more productive and perhaps gain us some liberty.

Everyone on here knows about Barr and knows he's not perfect. but neither is Baldwin (sorry Jesus freaks, some of us don't want your religion forced onto us) I happen to like some of what the ACLU has done in that area, I know you don't, and you want me forced to worship your God and say your prayers - sorry but that's as anti-liberty as you can get and its what you and your guy is all about and if this nonsense keeps up, maybe you'll start to here that back from the people getting tired of this bashing.

False presupposition

"(sorry Jesus freaks, some of us don't want your religion forced onto us) "
What this well meaning individual is saying is," I don't want YOUR religion shoved down my throat, I want to shove my anti-supernaturalism, materialistic, naturalistic RELIGION down Your throut."
All life is RELIGIOUS, the only question is, which religion. America was founded on orthodox Augustinian Calvinistic religion and has since drifted toward Roman semi-pelagian (arminianism) humanistic religion which deserves to be exposed as heretical. Your dislike of the latter should not negate the truthfulness and benifit of the orthodox former. No God- no man, only statism and tyranny.

Culture is Religion externalized.

I said no such thing. You

I said no such thing. You can worship a rock the moon or whatever you want. I worship no one (except my wife, and the cat would like it too but so far I only except her right to exist!) It is a fact, religious people by their belief system believe I am wrong and their duty is to get me to see the light.

I, OTOH, do not care if you are like me, just leave me the F alone to worship and believe in nothing except what I see and/or choose to believe.

But I'll tell you what, get your Baldwin Jesus freak guy to say it's 100% ok with him that satanists,and agnostics and maybe even a few jews serve in his administration and maybe I could support him. I don't want to live in a theocracy moreso than the one we have already. I can stand to loose a bit more economic freedom, it will always be easier to regain those. But these personal freedoms that we are loosing we'll never get back!

Gods Law or mans law?

richiep says,"I, OTOH, do not care if you are like me, just leave me the F alone to worship and believe in nothing except what I see and/or choose to believe."
These are the same sediments of Robespiere and the French Revolution, not the American one nation under God. What is your source of authority? God or fallable man? You have apparently chosen man and we will all be oppressed with the results of that humanistic choise.
Man must be ruled by a power within him or by a strong hand from without, by the Bible or by the sword.

Culture is Religion externalized.

So you would be 100% ok to

So you would be 100% ok to have Chuck Baldwin and others like him in your administration?

I don't know how he would select his cabinet, but I am sure he would look for very qualified individuals whose political views matched his. As a result, most of them would also probably share his worldview, but is that a bad thing? As long as they uphold the Constitution and the ideals of liberty, why do you care what their personal beliefs are? Why should it matter? Is that not your own argument?

Or are you saying that one's worldview actually does matter?

Why would I want a Jesus

Why would I want a Jesus Freak in power that wants to force his belief onto others. That is the heart of the question. So to answer yours, Baldwin is unacceptable to me based on his believe that it's ok to force other to believe as you do,if you believe you are right. Or to put it another way,, can you show me proof that Baldwin has "reformed" his ways of the past. I can show you proof that Barr has.

Keep one thing in mind here too, a lot of RP supporter as pro-choice, and that was the true beauty of the kind of candidate he was and is, he can appeal to people across the spectrum. Baldwin has zero shot of ever getting a pro choice person.

You Are Not Listening

You have yet to show me how Chuck Baldwin wants to "force" you to believe anything. Is it wrong for him to try to persuade someone to share his views just as you, on this forum, are trying to persuade people to share your views? There is a big difference between standing up for and espousing your worldview and forcing other people to share that view. If you do not understand the difference, then you really do not understand what liberty and freedom of religion are.

Look at this line from one

Look at this line from one of his speeches, which is probably typical of the way he thinks....

"Consider how it has been federal courts that have banned prayer in school, and legalized abortion and homosexual marriage. Even in the liberal State of Massachusetts it was the courts (along with a compliant liberal governor, Mitt Romney), that forced acceptance of homosexual marriage upon the people."

So he views states recognizing gay marriage as forcing people to believe something they don't want to? Where does that take you... anywhere!! What if Congress passed a law saying you had to say a prayer before entering a federal building, and the court overturned it. I'm sure he would be outraged - "HOW DARE THEY STOP PEOPLE FROM RECOGNIZING GOD!" I,on the other hand, would say good for the court, just as I have said about the courts on the gay marriage issue. The answer of course is no one should be forced to believe anything, and that's why the state should not be in the marriage recognizing business, but we should all know that. Same with his outrage of school prayer. The state shouldn't be in that business - get the state out and these issues go away.

I've seen nothing to convince me he's really for that, as he think (from what I have seen) that he believes God should be part of our lives, fine for him but I say no no NO. I don't want it, keep your invisible man in the sky BS to yourself. thank you very much.

Bottom line to me is, Baldwin is not the enemy, and that's why I don't post threads on here bashing him, unlike what his supporters do about Barr, but he's not the pure libertarian type of candidate either, that some like to pretend he is. That being said, I'm loosing any respect for him I might have had by the endless childish ways his supporters are acting, and its almost enough to make me want to give up on this site.

Homosexual Marriage

I think you misunderstand what he is saying. The courts have been forcing homosexual marriage on the people because instead of interpreting the law, which is what they are supposed to do, they are in fact legislating from the bench. In the case of Massachusetts, the judges basically ordered the state legislature to create a law allowing homosexual marriage. Until that point, there had actually been no laws regarding this issue, so this was, in fact, a new law.

If we were to allow homosexual marriages, this bill should have been introduced by the legislature or by a petition from the general populace for this law. At this point, the will of the people would have clearly expressed the desire to create homosexual marriages (as such an entity had not yet existed). Without any approval by the people, a new law was created by the judges and put into place. It was short-circuiting the legislative process.

Now, if the people passed a law forbidding homosexuals to form civil unions, the supreme court would be well within its rights to deliberate on whether or not this was a violation of the rights of homosexuals, but they have no place dictating a new right or law that does not currently exist in the law of the state or the country.

As far as your comments about Baldwin's supporters, I think there has been plenty of bad behavior on both sides. I definitely lean toward Baldwin, but I think Barr has a lot of strong qualities as well. He is also semi-endorsed by Ron Paul (as is Baldwin). Really, I think we all need to recognize that both candidates have strengths and weaknesses and address them in a logical and informative discussion -- not an emotional argument.

Untrue

"I happen to like some of what the ACLU has done in that area, I know you don't, and you want me forced to worship your God and say your prayers - sorry but that's as anti-liberty as you can get and its what you and your guy is all about..."

This is patently untrue. If you are going to make such a claim, you need to back up your accusation. When has Chuck Baldwin ever said that he wanted to force you to worship God? He has consistently stated that he believes in the freedom of religion as set forth in the Constitution. On the other hand, should we not be allowed to say our prayers in public if we feel led? Is it not a breach of our Constitutional freedom of religion to deny high school students from saying a prayer or mentioning Jesus in their high school graduation speech?

Just because someone believes strongly in their religion does not mean that they will "force" you to follow suit. Chuck Baldwin upholds the Constitution and all that it protects -- including your right to not believe in his God.

DITTO

There is so much false Religiousity in America today, it is no wonder so many people are turned off.

Culture is Religion externalized.

Very well said-thank you!!!

Very well said-thank you!!!

I will

Vote for Chuck Baldwin if Ron Paul isnt on the ballot

Agreed

Bob Barr may be okay, but I know that Baldwin is a good and trustworthy man.

I will vote CP if on my

I will vote CP if on my ballot and RP is not. But Chuck is VERY Christian and I am not. I will vote for him because I respect his integrity, and believe that his personal views of morality will not include forcing it upon the states in an unconstitutional display of federal powers.

I suspect your faith in his integrity..

will not be betrayed. He has been speaking as a staunch defender of the Constitution for a long time.

Libera me, let the truth break, what my fears make--Leslie Phillips

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15