Joseph Sobran Endorses Chuck Baldwin

The American Conservative ^ | 11/3/2008 | Joseph Sobran

[incredulous joe]

“it might be fun if they send us all to the same re-ed camp”

until the electrodes are put in place

[kempster]

This endorsement is Hugh! This could move Chuck Baldwin from that devastating 1% plateau to the more respectable 1.2% plateau.

[Undertow]

I think it’s Andorra.

[Huck]

Neither of the major-party presidential candidates, let alone President Bush, could have held an intelligent conversation with Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, or John Jay, the authors of The Federalist, our best known commentary on that Constitution. I happen to think that time has proved abundantly that their opponents, the “anti-Federalists,” were profoundly right in their fears of where adoption of the Constitution—a grievous act of centralization—would lead: to say no more about it, to a gigantic war between the states, to two world wars, and to the endless usurpation of power implicit in all yakking about “the economy.”

Funny, I was about to do the old post-before-reading-the whole thing and comment that Sobran should include anti-Federalists as also being authoritative. Then I accidentally read on and he mentions them in the next sentence. Patrick Henry, who was a rival of Madison's, was the most ardent and noteworthy anti-federalist. Folks should read the Virginia debates on the ratification, which contain classic arguments between Henry and Madison. Sadly, Henry turned out to be correct.

But the author is probably right. None of our current "leaders" could discuss the Constitution beyond grade school simplicities like "checks and balances." I probably have done more reading on the subject than they have,and I didn't even go to college.

[Huck]

I'm in NJ, which is likely safe for the DEMs, but this year, who can tell for sure? Besides, the popular vote is important psychologically, especially with the subversive MSM on the beat.

When McCain went for the stupid bailout, I had another moment of doubt, and considered voting for Baldwin. But it's silly. Expecting serious Constitutional debates in our current culture is like expecting Mozart at an AC-DC concert. Modern America simply is too immature or ignorant in the main to have a clue about it, and they couldn't care less.

So, I resolved to do the practical thing, odious as it is. Then again, I was not much more enthused when I voted for GWB in 04, after having been less than satisfied after voting Libertarian in 00.

[robert david]

Heh heh. Seriously though, old Chuck will be lucky to get 0.2% of the vote.

[SecAmndmt]

“If Obama wins, I doubt any of us will be allowed to complain period. “

I doubt if you’ll be too upset if Obama wins.

After all, you’ve spent just about your entire time at FR attacking the principled conservative & constitutionalist base of the party, not to mention Baldwin and RP supporters.