Chuck Baldwin Endorses Ron Paul
By Jill Pyeatt on December 21, 2011 10:56 PM
Jill Pyeatt
Jill Pyeatt is a small-business owner and jewelry designer from Southern California. She currently serves on the Judicial Committee of the Libertarian Party of CA. She can be found on Facebook and Twitter.
#34 Baldwin is no longer with the CP. He is running as as Republican fot Lt. Governor of Montana this year.
As a Bible believing American law enforcement officer, I am deeply offended to see Baldwin side with the pro-criminal, pro-drug dealer, race baiter.
Apparently Chuck Baldwin also thinks that our police and justice system is corrupt and racist, that we should allow drug dealers to peddle their poison unhindered and that Islam is no threat to America.
“Paul’s track record is impeccable??????”
That’s settles it, the Constitution Party is not going anywhere as long as Baldwin is calling the shots.
Have to agree with your second post, Andy
@!29 rofl
NAACP speaks on Ron Paul- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGhv3paNz6U
I’m pretty outraged at the CIA over this. If they hadn’t been involved with hijacking the 2008 nomination, I wonder if we could have broken 0.5%.
If it’s from the 2008 campaign, I didn’t catch it. Sorry.
Question!
Isn’t this video from 2008?
Dick Jacobs was an active Libertarian in Michigan. He ran for Governor in 1982, US Senate in 1988 and Congress in 1992.
He received about 2% for Congress, under 1% in each of his statewide runs.
I am pretty sure he also served as State Chair of the Michigan LP.
Let’s not forget that in reference to gay marriage, Ron Paul called for “separation of marriage and state” on national t.v. The key to a diverse population living together peacefully is that regardless what choices we make in life, we do not force those choices on others.
Regarding Barr, don’t forget that once you’re in The Company, you’re ALWAYS in The Company.
@22 I believe that is meant a bit symbolically.
Perhaps you should look up the financial support being received by the current PResidential candidates, which by 2008 standards is a bit limited, and ask if the membership is casting a vote on the situation. Alternatively, if the membership is not voting with their checkbooks, perhaps there is a message out there someplace.
Christine Smith hit the nail on the head with her comments about Bob Barr at the LP National Convention in 2008:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fCkC5b095c
@ 19 we are asked Where are the Ed Clark’s, Dick Jacobs’, Harry Browne’s, Carla Howell’s, Jo Jorgensen’s, Christine Smith’s, et. al., instead of all these charlatans?
I imagine Ed Clark is getting up there in age. I think he is in his 80’s. Dick Jacobs? Do you mean Dick Randolph? Harry Browne has died. Carla Howell is the new executive director of the LP. Jo Jorgensen? That’s a good question. I hope she is still active in the LP. I have no idea where Smith is.
“James Clifton // Dec 22, 2011 at 7:05 pm
Where are the Ed Clark’s, Dick Jacobs’, Harry Browne’s, Carla Howell’s, Jo Jorgensen’s, Christine Smith’s, et. al., instead of all these charlatans?”
Who in the heck is Dick Jacobs?
“ATBAFT // Dec 22, 2011 at 2:54 pm
Sure, #2 Andy, if Mary Ruwart had won the nomination, that would have kept Obama or McCain from being president, so the CIA sent Barr in to sabotage the LP. LOL”
I never implied that Mary Ruwart or any other Libertarian Party candidate that ran for the LP’s Presidential nomination would have won the White House. That’s an absurd notion.
I suspect that Bob Barr was sent in to the Libertarian Party by the CIA or the Republican Party (or perhaps some other group) as a sabatuer in order to prevent the Libertarian Party from gaining any ground. The Libertarian Party had the potential to have a big year in 2008 with all of the interest that was created in libertarian issues by the Ron Paul campaign. 2008 could have been the best year ever for the Libertarian Party and Bob Barr played a major role in ensuring that the LP did not get ahead in 2008.
Where are the Ed Clark’s, Dick Jacobs’, Harry Browne’s, Carla Howell’s, Jo Jorgensen’s, Christine Smith’s, et. al., instead of all these charlatans?
Paul endorsed Baldwin in ’08 because their political ideas are very similar. Baldwin is now returning the favor.
Baldwin supported Paul in ’08 and only sought the Constitution Party nomination when it was clear Paul would not be the Republican nominee. Paul is closer to the Constitution Party platform than the Libertarian Party platform in my opinion, although that may have some room for debate.
Good for Paul. I’m not really a Baldwin fan, but hopefully this helps him with the evangelical vote, a faction he has struggled to catch fire with.
Thanks for this! I always get sick of arguing with my “progressive” friends that think they support Ron Paul. I’ll just show them this! End of story.
@ 13 – No Baldwin is not a libertarian, but he shares with libertarians opposition to the Iraq War, opposition to the Patriot Act, and he favors ending the income tax. He is an occasional ally of libertarians, as he has been in teh 2008 and 2012 Ron Paul campaigns.
Baldwin is not “more libertarian” than anyone because he endorsed Paul. He probably mostly endorses the social conservative aspects.
Are Stormfront people who support Paul “more libertarian” than libertarians who don’t?
Sure, #2 Andy, if Mary Ruwart had won the nomination, that would have kept Obama or McCain from being president, so the CIA sent Barr in to sabotage the LP. LOL
@5 Yes, of course you are right. I was just thinking of friends who are Leftists like me and we have talked abt voting for Ron Paul if he ran as some sort of indie in the general. And his anti-women’s control of their reproductive system was a strong negative to us, and if he is anti-gay civil rights that would make the Left vote for Paul more difficult :=)
Greg @ #4 is correct on all points.
Chuck Baldwin is a good representative of limited government conservatism. He opposed the Iraq War and he has spoken out against the Patriot Act. And he sees the damage that the War on Drugs does to constitutional liberty.
Baldwin is more of a social conservative than Paul, but Paul’s stated pro-life position covers him on other issues, such as DADT repeal.
Ron Paul is a bridge between Libertarians and constitutional conservatives.
@2 Right On – Andy, I too couldn’t support the CIA man……..
@5 Ditto Red.
@7 Let’s not get carried away here…..
Dr. Paul is and will catch the most HELL he has ever caught over the next days and weeks. He has risen TOO high in the polls. The Establishment MUST destroy him……
I wonder how possible it is that Ralph Nader endorses Ron Paul?
Deran, this message is clearly aimed at GOP primary voters. You have to win the primary before you can compete in the general.
Yes, Baldwin is definitely playing to his audience a bit when pitching Paul. That’s to be expected. Paul is certainly socially conservative in his personal life but he clearly doesn’t believe the government can legislate values. And while he may at one time have supported DOMA, earlier this year he was willing to take a lot of flak by voting to end DADT (after he found out people were actually being kicked out of the military over it).
@1 Paul is way social conservative. Catch his interview on TheAmericanView. I do not agree with the host’s politics at all, but he did a superb job of drawing out what Paul thinks.
Let’s see here, Bob Barr, the Libertarian Party’s candidate for President in 2008 endorsed Newt Gingrich for President. Chuck Baldwin, the Constitution Party’s candidate for president in 2008 just endorsed Ron Paul for President.
This settles it, Chuck Baldwin is more libertarian than Bob Barr. Actually, Bob Barr is no libertarian at all. He’s a phony and his campaign was phony and anyone that supported him was a fool. I suspect that Bob Barr intentionally sabotaged the Libertarian Party. I don’t know if he did this on his own or if he was working for somebody, but it wouldn’t suprise me if he was working for the CIA or the Republican Party.
I’ve been a Libertarian Party member since 1996 and I’ve got way more respect for Chuck Baldwin than I do for Bob Barr. Perhaps I should rephrase this. I respect Chuck Baldwin and I don’t have any respect for Bob Barr. Barr’s endorsement of Gingrich shows that he’s got zero libertarian principles.
Mr. Baldwin’s rousing pronouncements that Congressman Paul was a sponosr of that pro life bill and his alledged support for DOMA don’t seem very libertarian to me, as an otisder. Baldwin is selling Paul as a social conservative which I don’t think is a positive in a general election.
I’ve nown abt Paul on abortion, but I was not aware that it is a certainty that Paul is a social conservative on lesbian and gay civil rights.