Posted on 09/22/2008 2:34:38 PM PDT by SecAmndmt
That’s right. Keyes didn’t want to join their stupid party anyhow. That’s why he was seeking to be their nominee for President.
My comment was not about the current situation, but rather a comment on Ron Paul's skills as a leader. Intellectually sound, but not always able to convince anyone of the wisdom of his ways.
I skimmed the preamble kind of fast, and then scrolled down quickly, but yea, I don't see anything that appears to be against the Constitution either.
mnehrling’s issue with their platform from what I can tell is that they seem to be in favor of many of these things not because of the Constitution but because of their religiosity. There is a lot of overlap, so I guess his issue is WHY do they support these policies.
Personally I think they do a pretty good job with Constitutional adherence, but a lot of people are weary of all the religious talk.
It will likely cost trillions.
But I agree in that the market needs to handle this. These institutions should fail and we must understand that it will be painful in the short term. But like you said, the longer we put it off, the worse it’ll be.
Unfortunately, I think any politician who is intellectually sound and has the habit of telling the public the truth...will accurately be accused of being unpersuasive.
That is the nature of democratic politics...the charlatans and demogogues will always tell the public exactly what it wants to hear.
As Mencken wrote, "politicians will all promise every man, woman and child in the country whatever he, she or it wants. They’ll all be roving the land looking for chances to make the rich poor, to remedy the irremediable, to succor the unsuccorable, to unscramble the unscrambleable, to dephlogisticate the undephlogisticable, because they understand that votes are collared under democracy, not by talking sense but by talking nonsense"
I understand the point you are making and I agree that there is some truth to it. Nonetheless, we have had some great conservative leaders, such as Reagan, who did not conform to the status quo and did great things. Oration skills were a must for him.
Which is why we’re supposed to be a Republic.
He didn’t want to be their nominee enough to throw Israel, or any of the other freedom-loving people of the world, over the side. If he’d been willing, they would have nominated him no problem.
I’m glad we know the truth about them. And we do, because Alan is willing to walk down the hard paths when it’s necessary to do so.
Paul has walked away with millions of dollars.
Running can pay very well when one doesn’t use the money sent to campaign.
From his own website:
Only One Presidential Candidate Asks...
Constitution Party presidential candidate Chuck Baldwin is the only candidate from a FEC- recognized party to challenge the official story of the tragedy of 9-11. Representing the largest and fastest-growing third party based on voter registration (Ballot Access news), Baldwin joins the growing list of military, scientific and other well-credentialed experts who agree,'the government's account of what happened that day simply does not pass the smell test'.
Baldwin, poised to attract voters who will not cast their votes for either 'Big Box' party candidate in November said, 'All across America voters are telling me, ''I am afraid of Obama and I don't trust McCain'.
Baldwin added, 'More and more people want answers . They want to know about government corruption, our loss of liberties and yes, what really happened on September 11th. The heartache this country endured won't be cured, but it will give us answers to some basic questions about why our security, intelligence and civil defense measures failed and why so many aspects of the government's version have been shown to be lies'.
For the record, their claim about being the third-largest party is bogus. Since the American Independent Party in CA affiliated with America's Independent Party nationally, the CP is at best the sixth or seventh largest party in the country based on voter registration. They are not, as they claim, the "fastest-growing party," they are the fast-shrinking party in America.
On balance of issues, I’ll take trooferism and paleoconservative anti-war over: pro-abortionism, pro-sodomite “marriage”, the destruction of our sovereignty, the destruction of the dollar, illegal immigration, radical feminism, destruction of our military through globalist adventures overseas, the marginalization of Christianity in public life, the private federal reserve and its FRN “dollar”, gun grabbing, law breaking by public officials, foreign aid borrowed from China and given to ANYONE, treasonous entanglements and financing of our enemies for decades, phony professions of Christianity by elected officials, federal Planned Parenthood funding, Plan B funding, population control, assaults on property rights and the Bill of Rights, the income tax, the discharge of Michael New from the military, the Waco massacre, federal funding for the pagan academies AKA socialist government schools etc. etc.
Silly conspiracy theories just don’t trouble me. And quite frankly, our Founding fathers (who were influenced by Calvinist Protestantism) created a limited government precisely because our elected leaders are not exempt for criminal behavior before, during or after their time of “public service”.
Why settle for any of it? I don’t get it.
Those who actually believe that our own government had anything to do with 9-11 should not be posting on message boards or worrying about electoral politics. They should be at war.
Makes no difference. Those guys know they're building and buying houses in areas very prone to wildfires from way before the time that they buy, so I don't buy the idea that they're due anything in the way of help from anyone other than their insurance company and their family and friends. Those are the people who usually help the most and do it best. The feds stink at it.
I’m not a big fan of federal flood insurance and things of that nature. It was a big issue during the florida primary and mccain opposed it. He still managed to win.
What I’m talking about are the logistics of fighting a fire that transcends localities and the evacuation. For example, during a hurricane, people from Louisiana need to be bussed and sheltered in texas. That’s not an easy thing to pull off by the private sector.
Another example of federal intervention would be during some kind of highly contagious outbreak.
true.. but our constitution built a two party system. we have a two party system. pick one or the other. This isn't rocket science.
if you are in a state that can not win or can not lose. only then can i possibility see a protest vote. But that is all it is.
But personally I don’t know how you can protest with Palin on the ticket. We should be say YES! it is about time!
“Those who actually believe that our own government had anything to do with 9-11 should not be posting on message boards or worrying about electoral politics. They should be at war.”
Try not to take my statements out of context, thanks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.