Baldwin and Constitution Party: no libertarian principles
My problem with Chuck Baldwin and the Constitution Party is they lack libertarian principles.
Sure, they support the Constitution and anything that is unconstitutional, but as history shows, what is "unconstitutional" is open to interpretation and debate. Further, the Constitution allows for it to be modified. Thus anything that gets added to the Constitution, no matter how much it may curtail individual liberty, would be supported by Baldwin and the CP (because it's in the Constitution).
Following the Constitution is important, but what is more important is how the Constitution is interpreted, and how potential modifications are interpreted. In particular, what's critical is that the principles of liberty are in place and followed when the Constitution is interpreted and modified, and I have no confidence that that would be the case with Baldwin, or that voting for him is registering support for that critical idea.
The only vote that does that is a vote for a Libertarian Party candidate, even (cough) Bob Barr.
********************
***** UPDATE 1 *****
********************
Mt1034 makes an interesting point below - that if you listen to Baldwin he is distinctly libertarian. I know, and it doesn't matter. Below, I explain why. Well, this is what I wrote:
Yes I know Baldwin is distinctly libertarian, and it doesn't matter.
If Baldwin and Barr actually had a chance to win and become president, then their true libertarianism (and many other personal characteristics) would matter.
But since neither will win, and the main reason we're voting for them is to register a protest against the anti-liberty two-party system (per Dr. Paul's speech the other day), and the secondary reason is to register a vote in favor of individual liberty, what matters is which candidate symbolizes the message of liberty most effectively.
Honesty, integrity, whether they would appoint Ron Paul as head of the treasury, even true allegiance to libertarianism... is all irrelevant when actually winning is not even close to possible. So it all comes down to this:
A vote for whoever is the candidate of the LIBERTARIAN party, regardless of that individual's character, resume or credentials, sends the most forceful support for the LIBERTARIAN message.
In contrast, a vote for whoever is the candidate of the CONSTITUTION party, regardless of that individual's character, resume or credentials, sends the most forceful support for the FOLLOW-THE-CONSTITUTION message.
The follow-the-constitution message is important, but for reasons given in my opening post above, and reiterated by others below, it's not as important as the message of liberty.
If conveying the message of LIBERTY is our highest priority, we must vote for the candidate of the LIBERTARIAN party, no matter how much we would rather wring his neck.
********************
***** UPDATE 2 *****
********************
Rharaz notes below that the CP platform is not a blind support of everything in the Constitution. In my response, I explain why this is also irrelevant, and this is my point:
Remember, this is all symbolic. It's about which vote is more effective at conveying "I SUPPORT THE MESSAGE OF LIBERTY". Voting for which candidate is the clearest registration of "I SUPPORT LIBERTARIAN LEADERSHIP". That is what we want to convey with our votes, and voting for the candidate of the LIBERTARIAN Party will clearly accomplish this more effectively than voting for the candidate of the CONSTITUTION Party, irrespective of who they are.
Let me put it this way. If Baldwin and Barr were to switch parties today, I would be saying we should all be voting for Baldwin in November, simply because he would be the LP candidate (and thus voting for him would be the most effective means by which to promote the message of liberty).
********************
***** UPDATE 3 *****
********************
Chuck Baldwin is no Ron Paul!
I've made this point twice below, so I'll repeat it here:
In general, anyone who wants his or her vote to represent the message of liberty most powerfully must vote for the candidate of the Libertarian Party. I say "in general" because there can be exceptions. If by some miracle the GOP nominated Ron Paul as their candidate, then of course a vote for Ron Paul would be clearly a vote for liberty (because Ron Paul has established decades of bona fide libertarian credentials). But Chuck Baldwin just does not carry that kind of credential (and nor does Bob Barr). Not even close. So all they have to hang their hats on are their respective parties, and what they generally represent. So in this case, the strongest vote for the message of liberty is whoever happens to be the LP candidate, which this year means a vote for (cough) Bob Barr. Choke it down and welcome to the movement for liberty. We had to do it with Andrew Marrou in '92 too.
~
********************
***** UPDATE 4 *****
********************
9/27/08
I'm coming around to seeing the logic in the argument that the LP needs to learn to no nominate boneheads like Bob Barr by having even loyal libertarians not vote the LP candidate this year, but I still fail to see the point in voting for Chuck Baldwin. What message does that send, and to whom?
Minarchist- In case you missed this.....
"Many cuckoos are brood parasites who lay their eggs in the nests of other bird species which hatch them and rear them as their own offspring."
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/61877
good one
I had a good laugh
http://www.votenader.org/blog/2008/09/10/statement-to-ron-pa...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/57925480@N00/2660779139/sizes/l/
Website:
http://www.libertypoet.com/
Twitter:
http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
"How can we justify to the unemployed and underemployed in the United States the incredible cost of maintaining a global empire?" - Dr. Ron Paul
Update 4 Barr's campaign is
Update 4
Barr's campaign is dead and he's proven time and again he doesn't have libertarian principles either. It comes down to who is the more libertarian of the two and to me, Baldwin excels. He matches Ron Paul's platform a LOT more than Barrf does and he'd definitely be more willing to listen to Ron Paul for guidance etc.
Constitution is grounded in firm principles
I believe, the only way the Constitution is 'open to different interpretation', is if the Supreme Court declares its a 'living' document, which of course, is not true at all.
Just because certain members of the executive, the congress, the senate and political parties act 'AS IF' it is a living document, still, does not make it so.
I have been taught and understood the Constitution is a basic, fundamental document whose philosophy goes hand in glove with our Declaration of Independence which states we are each individuals imbued with inalienable rights from our creator and each of our destinies must be protected and sovereign including the nation as a whole, in order to pursue life, liberty and happiness.
Therefore, it is what it is.
If it was not firm and sound, then how stable would that be for future generations?
Bob Barr
Bob Barr is a neocon. Can you not all see it? It's quite clear to me.
I guess He is voting for
I guess He is voting for Barr because He wants to do drugs .... I for one would rather have 20k more in my account than the freedom to smoke a doobie. As a matter of fact drug laws are so pathetic if I wanted to smoke a doobie which I don't id just go ahead and do it.
Minarchist, Say what You Mean and Mean
What you say! I amnot changing context here as you have so proclaimed. What is the context that you are asserting that I am changing? That Mr. Barr Voted in favor of the Patriot Act before as you even state He "allegedly" changed his postion? Are you now proclaiming that you don't even know for sure? Oh, excuse me while I use your own feeble words. Is that the context that I am changing? I cannot change the fact that Barr voted in favor of the Patriot Act no more than you can state you have an agenda to spread, yet you don't or can't just come outright with conviction of supporting someone who appears to be a Barr supporter. I willnot continue with this back and forth trash with you so, just be honest with your intent. Just say, Minarchist For Barr in 08 with proud conviction and stop your feeble attempts of turning the tables when even your own words get in your way. Well I am off to work now so....Have a good evening and remember what I said...Mean what you say and say what you mean. Show some conviction in your beliefs instead of being so illusive in your postings to those of us who don't get here as often as we would like. I have recently been able to visit for the last 2 days due to hurricane IKE. I'm Glad I have been called back to work tonght! Take Care ALL Revolutionaries!!!
I'll try to keep it simple
I do not dispute that Barr voted for the patriot act.
I'm am not saying that's relevant to nothing. It is relevant to a lot.
I am saying it is irrelevant to whether voting for Barr as LP nominee is a vote for liberty, because he has since that vote apparently converted to libertarianism and become the LP nominee. That's what matters in terms of whether a vote for Barr will mean the most powerful vote for liberty: it clearly will, regardless of whether his conversion was genuine.
"Know what you know, know what you don't know, and understand and appreciate the distinction."
Minarchism
track
"Know what you know, know what you don't know, and understand and appreciate the distinction."
Minarchism
track
good show man.....
Good effort......(as i barf)
just because the constitution is open for AMMENDMENT, how can you come to the conclusion that CB or the CP would go along with it and thereby restrict liberty, just because the Constitution allows for change?
The CP nor CB believe the constitution is a "living document" even if it is ammendable. CB has a very good grasp on the constitution and the party would not be gullable enough to sign on to any ammendment that would constitute anyone losing any liberties. Actually, your liberties come from your creator.
CB2008
You are so full of sh*t!
You are so full of sh*t! You are essentially saying to vote for Barr, no matter what he stands for or what he's done, simply because he is the 'Libertarian' candidate. No, what matters isn't the party name, but the voting record, actions and principles of the candidate. I'd vote for Ron Paul even if he ran as a democrat, because I trust him and know what he stands for. Bob Barr voted for the most heinous attack on the Constitution in the history of the United States......the so-called "Patriot Act". He broke his word to Dr. Paul, and did not want to go on record as publicly endorsing the points in the 'we agree' thing, and is showing himself to be exactly what we said he was, a neocon plant.... which, incidentally, is also what you are. Give it up, Barr is done, and we don't "have to" do anything except remain true to our convictions, have some integrity, and quit choosing the 'lesser of three evils'. That's Ron Paul's point..... either don't vote at alll, or vote for someone with some integrity. Will Baldwin win, no. Will Barr win, no. What is important is for The Revolution to keep educating people, and to take a stand and say "ENOUGH!! We won't comprimise or fall for the bullshit any longer!" It's time to send a message, and supporting Bob Barr sure as hell doesn't send the right one. Doing that sends the message that we're gullible idiots.
Doc Holladay
Nashville, TN
http://www.myspace.com/docholladaymusic
www.reverbnation.com/docholladaymusic
Truth is treason in an empire of lies.
By George, you've got it!
You are essentially saying to vote for Barr, no matter what he stands for or what he's done, simply because he is the 'Libertarian' candidate.
Almost. What I'm saying is: in order to most powerfully support the message of liberty with your vote, vote for the LP nominee, no matter who it is, simply because he is the libertarian candidate, unless you have a very good reason to do otherwise.
Every presidential vote is some mix of generic support for that party's philosophy and support for the person himself. With the two major parties where each election the party philosophies seem to be merging more and more, it's almost all about the nominee and very little about the party or what it stands for (despite status quo claims that there are significant difference among Demopublicans).
With the minor parties it's the reverse. The nominees are often obscure, but the parties have distinct political philosophies, so the votes are much more about the party philosophies than the nominees themselves. There can be exceptions, Ross Perot was one, and Ron Paul another, of course. But how many minor party nominees can you name from 2004? 2000? 1996? See what I mean? Obscure. But, no matter who the LP candidate was, you know votes for him meant votes for liberty, and votes for the Green Party nominee (whoever it was) meant votes for making conserving the natural environment the highest government priority.
So, by and large, typical minor party candidates are relatively obscure, like Barr and Baldwin. They themselves, their character, their beliefs, even their voting records and what they say, are relatively irrelevant compared to the weight of their respective party philosophies that they represent, not only because they're obscure, but also because everyone knows they are not going to win. So the minor party philosophies are much more relevant (relative to the nominee), and this is particularly true with the LP, the party of principle, where it's all about the libertarian philosophy. The most important characteristic of the LP nominee, no matter who it is, is that he is the representative of the message of liberty. There is no debating this point. It's the way it is, and has been for over 35 years.
So, yeah, maybe in a pure Baldwin vs. Barr contest, with neither one associated with any party, Baldwin would be the choice most consistent with liberty. But given the relevant political contexts, with Barr the Libertarian nominee, and Baldwin the obscure CP nominee, it's no contest. Barr is the clear choice for liberty, not because of Barr, but simply because he is the LP nominee.
"Know what you know, know what you don't know, and understand and appreciate the distinction."
Minarchism
track
"Know what you know, know what you don't know, and understand and appreciate the distinction."
Minarchism
track
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!! I was a card carrying Libertarian for years until I switched to Republican for Ron Paul to change the Republican party.
I WILL NOT vote for this piece of trash that has hijacked my beloved LP party. The point that Ron Paul is making is that if a party is screwed up then vote against them. Hence, the vote for third parties to make a show against the Demoncrats and Repukes. The same goes for the LP...our party brother has F'd up!!!!! We either say no or be complicit in the EVIL!!!! I will not be complicit in the evil...I will punish my beloved party for their mistake and hold them ACCOUNTABLE and hopefully they will learn from the mistake and resist in the future.
If we do not STAND UP and show our LP that we disagree then they are open to hijacking. Your points are NULL AND VOID. Do not back parties when they screw up...hold them accountable and make them pay! WE OWE THIS TO OUR PARTY!!!!! We must think long term for the LP...this isn't about one or two elections cycles...we will recover.
I will vote Chuck Baldwin and hope my LP party burns like the Phoenix and arises from its ashes wiser and smarter to begin again!
=======
Federal Reserve to the American People:
"Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam."
================
Who is John Galt? Vote ███ ███ 2012!
No?
What I wrote was this:
in order to most powerfully support the message of liberty with your vote, vote for the LP nominee, no matter who it is, simply because he is the libertarian candidate, unless you have a very good reason to do otherwise.
What you're saying is that Bob Barr is so unLibertarian that the LP needs to be informed that when they nominate a nonLibertarian, even hardcore libertarians who normally support the LP candidate no matter who it is won't vote for him. Sounds like a very good reason to me.
"Know what you know, know what you don't know, and understand and appreciate the distinction."
Minarchism
track
"Know what you know, know what you don't know, and understand and appreciate the distinction."
Minarchism
track
Minarchist, Please address the argument that is made above this
post by clinton.
thanks
Done
"Know what you know, know what you don't know, and understand and appreciate the distinction."
Minarchism
track
"Know what you know, know what you don't know, and understand and appreciate the distinction."
Minarchism
track
The libertarian party has
The libertarian party has been hijacked by neocons. This isn't me just saying it, it's been brought up here at the DP many times by many people, so save the effort of denying it. Maybe that's why you are so intent on supporting the "libertarian" party.......because from what I see, it's in shambles and has been infiltrated by the neocons.
Doc Holladay
Nashville, TN
http://www.myspace.com/docholladaymusic
www.reverbnation.com/docholladaymusic
Truth is treason in an empire of lies.
Got to give Chuck credit...
for openly opposing the New World Order.
I haven't made up my mind about him yet, but I respect him for that.
p.s. Didn't Barr support government intervening in the whole Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac situation? If so, that's at least strike four for Bob!
Barr DOES NOT support the bailouts
http://www.bobbarr2008.com/press-releases/123/barr-blasts-la...
http://www.bobbarr2008.com/press-releases/97/barr-calls-to-s...
http://www.bobbarr2008.com/press-releases/110/no-auto-indust...
This could be an interesting survey.
Who do you think Ron Paul will vote for?
I'll go first. Chuck Baldwin, hands down!!!
I guess you can make yourself feel good...
and vote for a fake libertarian Bob Barr. I would vote for Nadar or McCinney before I would vote for Barr. He has no integrity what so ever
VOTE CHUCK BALDWIN
A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.
Vote Nader
for Liberty!
http://www.votenader.org/blog/2008/09/10/statement-to-ron-pa...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/57925480@N00/2660779139/sizes/l/
Website:
http://www.libertypoet.com/
Twitter:
http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
"How can we justify to the unemployed and underemployed in the United States the incredible cost of maintaining a global empire?" - Dr. Ron Paul
Are you serious?
How does Nader represent the message of liberty?
"Know what you know, know what you don't know, and understand and appreciate the distinction."
Minarchism
track
"Know what you know, know what you don't know, and understand and appreciate the distinction."
Minarchism
track
reply
Please stop embarrassing yourself, Ralph Nader has spent most of his life fighting tirelessly in the political trenches over many critical issues facing working class Americans. When he speaks he raises Constitutional talking points all the time as he did the other day while sitting with Ron Paul during an interview on CNN ... and that proves my point doesn't it, he was at Ron's news conference as well as the interview and your guy Bob Barr was nowhere to be found.
read his letter to Ron Paul supporters
right here~
http://www.votenader.org/blog/2008/09/10/statement-to-ron-pa...
the man since 1962 fought corruption corporate welfare warfare state
he is the only man left in the race that can truly effect change.
Website:
http://www.libertypoet.com/
Twitter:
http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
"How can we justify to the unemployed and underemployed in the United States the incredible cost of maintaining a global empire?" - Dr. Ron Paul
change change cahnge...
change change cahnge... thats what wee hear form those liberal idiots of the democratic party... FOLLOW THE CONSTITUTION!
“A prudent man foreseeth the evil, and hideth himself: but the simple pass on, and are punished.” (Prov. 22:3; 27:12 KJV)
Hey McCain-----┌П┐(◣_◢)┌П┐
Nader is an authoritarian
He may be more gentle than other rulers (he wants to grant us civil liberties), he still wants to steal our money (ie. taxation) and plan the economy.
not quite so
if you make 50000$ or less 0 tax to pay.
http://www.votenader.org/blog/2008/09/10/statement-to-ron-pa...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/57925480@N00/2660779139/sizes/l/
Website:
http://www.libertypoet.com/
Twitter:
http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
"How can we justify to the unemployed and underemployed in the United States the incredible cost of maintaining a global empire?" - Dr. Ron Paul
that is socialism...
that is socialism... everyone no matter how much you make should pay"0"!!! PERIOD! don't fall for the brainwashing!
“A prudent man foreseeth the evil, and hideth himself: but the simple pass on, and are punished.” (Prov. 22:3; 27:12 KJV)
Hey McCain-----┌П┐(◣_◢)┌П┐
So you'd rather have various
So you'd rather have various Blackwater-types defending us instead of a socialized military?
----------
Liberty for Dummies
----------
Democrats want to be your mommy.
Republicans want to be your daddy.
Libertarians want to treat you like an adult.
Vote Baldwin for the Constitution.
Conveying the message of liberty via a candidate who represents everything that opposes freedom is fraudulent. Just as the republicans try to pass off bogus Constitutional platitudes, your effort to push votes for Barr is a lie. You know, like "lipstick on a pig." ;-)
Voting for Bob Barr to convey liberty is impossible. Bob Barr may be a good guy, but he blew it with his vote in favor of the Patriot Act. We can't back down on holding our elected officials responsible for their betrayals of the Constitution. If it has to start with Bob Barr, well at least it starts. Consequences!!!
I will vote honesty over political slip-sliding any day. Sorry. But by not voting for Bob Barr, you are actually voting FOR liberty. Can't you see that?