WHich inferior candidate will you be tricked into 'voting' for?

[ES]

You can read the constitution party platform here and decide for yourself.
http://www.constitutionparty.com/party_platform.php

[ES]

They want to base America's laws on the Bible, which is utterly retarded.

Well that's kinda where we got our laws from in the first place isn't it. Maybe we should legalize killing and stealing because those laws against it are sooooooooo retarded.

[dogmadestroyer]

Then why didn't Alex have Bob Barr on his show then ??

or just maybe...

You're a COINTELPRO dis-info troll ??   

HAHAH I love when a n00b calls a well established member a troll.

Looking at Barr's record after he left congress, I think it is possible that he feels free to act on his own disillusionment with the country. He had a fairly mundane, compartmentalized existence at CIA. Unless I see evidence otherwise I don't see the point to all of this.

Do you actually think that people voting for Barr will actually have any impact whatsoever on the (s)election? Please, most people don't think Ron Paul is even running.

I can respect Chuck Baldwin because he actually has integrity but the Constitution party needs to spend more time on the Constitution and less time thumping their bibles.

[Dig]

Spoken like a true COINTELPRO troll.   

Volitzar, AK has some seriously differences of opinion than me and he does try to force his opinion on others, but calling him a COINTELPRO troll with 32 posts to your credit makes you lose a bit of credibility here.  Feel free to argue logically with him.  Just yelling COINTELPRO without much supporting evidence wastes people's time here and distracts from your point.  Personally I find him a bit stubborn and he has a descent grasp of Bernays principals of propaganda, but I think these are just character flaws (no offense AK, I possess these character flaws too - we can smell our own) do not necessarily mean he is an agent.

[TimeLady]

I'm pretty sure that if America's  laws were changed to be completely based on the Bible that would be a mistake.

If they were, any woman who would be raped, and is a virgin, could be taken to be someone's wife.

On the less extreme end, we couldn't eat shellfish or wear mixed-fiber fabrics . . . maybe that'd be a good thing, if only to get rid of polyester leisure suits once and for all...

[STEELYMAN]

I don't really like Barr, he's probably the best candidate now other than Ron though.

And yeah I'm gonna pass on Chuck Baldwin.

[dogmadestroyer]

I'm pretty sure that if America's  laws were changed to be completely based on the Bible that would be a mistake.

Yeah, in addition to being protected from someone else's temptation it could never happen. The people who seek to move the laws in that direction typically live in a very insular, religious community and can't fathom that most people wouldn't take to that. That is a good way to get churches burned and open civil war in places like the Northeast and California. Rightfully so.

On the less extreme end, we couldn't eat shellfish or wear mixed-fiber fabrics . . . maybe that'd be a good thing, if only to get rid of polyester leisure suits once and for all...

Yes!! I don't want to see anymore of this.

Judging from the Systembolaget bags, this is in Sweden and is to be expected.

We all know God hates Sweden. http://www.godhatessweden.com/

[dogmadestroyer]

Volitzar, AK has some seriously differences of opinion than me and he does try to force his opinion on others, but calling him a COINTELPRO troll with 32 posts to your credit makes you lose a bit of credibility here.  Feel free to argue logically with him.  Just yelling COINTELPRO without much supporting evidence wastes people's time here and distracts from your point.  Personally I find him a bit stubborn and he has a descent grasp of Bernays principals of propaganda, but I think these are just character flaws (no offense AK, I possess these character flaws too - we can smell our own) do not necessarily mean he is an agent.

Ahem, take a look at Volitzar's posts. They're all about Bob Barr=NWO and he's attacked A K in two threads. 

[A K]

One thing that is interesting about this forum, is that while most of us here agree on the problems - NWO, Neocons, Iraq War, 9/11 inside job, police state, military/industrial/oil/drugs complex calling the shots - we have different political philosophies.  We talk about a "movement", and some call it libertarian, true conservatives, patriot, anti-NWO, anti-Neocon, anti-war, 9-11 Truth.  I consider myself more or less a libertarian, and due to the support Ron Paul and Jesse Ventura get here, I made the assumption that most everyone here was libertarian. 

But I see that is not true.  Some here come from a more left wing anti-war anti-elites perspective.  Some focus more on 9-11 truth, or anti-NWO and anti-globalism.  There are many here, who while they are anti-NWO, are conservatives, and many are Christain conservatives.  For those people the Constitution Party is a viable option, and I am certainly glad to see conservatives vote CP rather than McCain. 

But due to their restrictive statist position on issues like pornography, drugs and gambling they would not get my vote.  The Libertarian Party is the only party with a clear anti-state pro-individual freedom philosophy.  The CP and LP agree on many issues, it is mainly social issues where they differ strongly.  Everybody has to vote for what they believe, the only thing I can tell people is look at alcohol prohibition, look at this insane war on drugs - the state has no business trying to regulate our personal lives.  As even Pat Buchanan said, "Let Alabama be Alabama, let San Francisco be San Francisco."

The matter is more complicated by the fact that while I agree with 95% of the LP platform, they picked someone with a VERY un-libertarian past to the nominee.  People have every right to be a little suspect of him - but it SEEMS his conversion is real, and since he is not going to win, if I vote LP, it is more for the platform and the message rather than the man.  If the LP can get 5% or more, I think it helps them with funding, exposure and getting more members, which I think is the best way to help Ron Paul and/or Jesse Ventura for 2012.  Others will write in Paul or vote CP, both of which are better than voting for McCain, but I personally don't see either of those options helping the movement as much as an LP vote.

But, maybe it is a good thing that while most of us have general agreement on the problems, we have different views on the best remedy, because that keeps it interesting.  I have learned many things from posts here - I learned a lot about 9-11, water issues and NAU stuff, to take just three examples.  And some people have told me publicly and privately that they have learned things from my posts.

[Dig]

Ahem, take a look at Volitzar's posts. They're all about Bob Barr=NWO and he's attacked A K in two threads. 

i know, what is up with AK getting attacked by someone other than me?

[A K]

ES - You make a fair point in that yes, some of the English common law and early American law is based in part on the ten commandments and the Bible, but a lot also comes from Rome, Athens, Greece.  And from John Locke, Adam Smith, Thomas Paine.  But many of the founders were Deists - they believed that a Creator made the universe, but then left it for man to shape.  They did not believe God interceded after the act of creation.  Jefferson did not think that Jesus was the son of God or had supernatural powers.

But where I mainly differ with the CP is there desire to regulate private moral behavior based on their interpretation of the Bible.  That is why I would vote LP rather than CP, even though both parties are very good on national sovereignty and anti-NWO issues.

Barr's past does concern me.  But Jim Garrison used to be in the FBI, Victor Marchetti was CIA before he wrote books exposing them, even Ron Paul was more of a mainstream Goldwater/Reagan conservative before the statist, big government, anti-freedom  and interventionist policies of the Reagan/Bush years caused him to leave the GOP and run for President as a Libertarian.  The jury is still out on Barr, that is why I would like to see Alex interview him and his VP nominee Wayne Root.

[A K]

One thing that is interesting about this forum, is that while most of us here agree on the problems - NWO, Neocons, Iraq War, 9/11 inside job, police state, military/industrial/oil/drugs complex calling the shots - we have different political philosophies.  We talk about a "movement", and some call it libertarian, true conservatives, patriot, anti-NWO, anti-Neocon, anti-war, 9-11 Truth.  I consider myself more or less a libertarian, and due to the support Ron Paul and Jesse Ventura get here, I made the assumption that most everyone here was libertarian. 

But I see that is not true.  Some here come from a more left wing anti-war anti-elites perspective.  Some focus more on 9-11 truth, or anti-NWO and anti-globalism.  There are many here, who while they are anti-NWO, are conservatives, and many are Christain conservatives.  For those people the Constitution Party is a viable option, and I am certainly glad to see conservatives vote CP rather than McCain. 

But due to their restrictive statist position on issues like pornography, drugs and gambling they would not get my vote.  The Libertarian Party is the only party with a clear anti-state pro-individual freedom philosophy.  The CP and LP agree on many issues, it is mainly social issues where they differ strongly.  Everybody has to vote for what they believe, the only thing I can tell people is look at alcohol prohibition, look at this insane war on drugs - the state has no business trying to regulate our personal lives.  As even Pat Buchanan said, "Let Alabama be Alabama, let San Francisco be San Francisco."

The matter is more complicated by the fact that while I agree with 95% of the LP platform, they picked someone with a VERY un-libertarian past to the nominee.  People have every right to be a little suspect of him - but it SEEMS his conversion is real, and since he is not going to win, if I vote LP, it is more for the platform and the message rather than the man.  If the LP can get 5% or more, I think it helps them with funding, exposure and getting more members, which I think is the best way to help Ron Paul and/or Jesse Ventura for 2012.  Others will write in Paul or vote CP, both of which are better than voting for McCain, but I personally don't see either of those options helping the movement as much as an LP vote.

But, maybe it is a good thing that while most of us have general agreement on the problems, we have different views on the best remedy, because that keeps it interesting.  I have learned many things from posts here - I learned a lot about 9-11, water issues and NAU stuff, to take just three examples.  And some people have told me publicly and privately that they have learned things from my posts.

[A K]

Sane -

Ha ha.

I am sure you remember that I have stated I was considering voting Obama if my state was close, mainly because I argued he was better on Iraq, Iran and the Constitutional issues than Hillary or McCain.  And I haven't ruled it out.  The amount of Neocon hostility, attacks and now calls for assassination does mean they fear this guy may pursue a somewhat different agenda than the party line.  But you look at Obama's advisors and there is little reason to hope.  And his recent embarassing and servile performance in front of a pro-Israel anti-Muslim crowd in Florida is causing me to lose what little interest I had in him.  Still want to see who he picks for VP.

And while the LP platform is great, Barr is a very mixed bag with a checkered past.  I think his conversion is real, but i want to see and hear more.

Ultimately, the ballot box may not be as effective as the info war and spreading the message, at least right now.

[A K]

Maybe Alex can have a mini-debate:  Bob Barr from the Libertarian Party, Chuck Baldwin from the Constitution Party and Cynthia McKinney from the Green Party.  Let us hear them on all the issues and have Alex ask the tough questions, and we can better decide which one, if any, deserves our vote.

[Dig]

Sane -

Ha ha.

I am sure you remember that I have stated I was considering voting Obama if my state was close, mainly because I argued he was better on Iraq, Iran and the Constitutional issues than Hillary or McCain.  And I haven't ruled it out.  The amount of Neocon hostility, attacks and now calls for assassination does mean they fear this guy may pursue a somewhat different agenda than the party line.  But you look at Obama's advisors and there is little reason to hope.  And his recent embarassing and servile performance in front of a pro-Israel anti-Muslim crowd in Florida is causing me to lose what little interest I had in him.  Still want to see who he picks for VP.

And while the LP platform is great, Barr is a very mixed bag with a checkered past.  I think his conversion is real, but i want to see and hear more.

Ultimately, the ballot box may not be as effective as the info war and spreading the message, at least right now.

dude let me save you a bunch of time concerning obama, barr, etc.


RON PAUL

RON PAUL

RON PAUL

you can do the research on your own (as it seems you will anyway), but judging by your awakening to the Obama BS, you might take on a similar position as you wake up to how bad it is.

[A K]

Maybe Alex can have a mini-debate:  Bob Barr from the Libertarian Party, Chuck Baldwin from the Constitution Party and Cynthia McKinney from the Green Party.  Let us hear them on all the issues and have Alex ask the tough questions, and we can better decide which one, if any, deserves our vote.

[Freeski]

For what it's worth, I evaluate a politician on how well they understand the role of government in a supposed free society - and all it takes for me to write someone off is that they demonstrate a belief that it's their job to manage society. Freedom is risky, yes, and so is life, but what other political philosophy even comes close to the merits and God-given right to liberty?

My politician scorecard:

• Those who get it: 1 (Ron Paul)
  
• Those who don't: all others (and that's not hyperbole - all politicians are either evil or ignorant, except Ron Paul)

[aLLyOuRbAsE]

For what it's worth, I evaluate a politician on how well they understand the role of government in a supposed free society - and all it takes for me to write someone off is that they demonstrate a belief that it's their job to manage society. Freedom is risky, yes, and so is life, but what other political philosophy even comes close to the merits and God-given right to liberty?

My politician scorecard:

• Those who get it: 1 (Ron Paul)
  
• Those who don't: all others (and that's not hyperbole - all politicians are either evil or ignorant, except Ron Paul)

freeski is right, you ask anyone, "do you own your life?", and they will promptly return with a confident yes. but then why would one allow all these exceptions to this rule? could it be the old cliche, fear? could it be that we have been scared into sacrificing this rule, because we fear if we dont, we will not be safe?

to deny you own your own life, is to imply that someone else has domain over it. by sacrificing any of your life, liberty, or property, you are merely authorising others to steal, enslave, and murder you.

and would we think our elected representatives above these ideas? or that these matters do not apply to politicians? of course not. they are of highest importance. they are the highest rule by which we would choose.

hear this, because this is in all that we struggle against, for our own good, for your own good, it is fear, to make you forsake what you know is true. know thyself.

[Freeski]

Someone once wrote or said that those who are afraid of liberty miss the point. If true liberty is unworkable because "X" percent of the population is in fact evil, and we therefore need protection from that evil percentage - then that evil percentage is equally applicable to those who we "elect" to rule us. "X" percent of our overlords will be evil.

In other words... the system we think we need is as bad as what we think we're guarding against.

Give me liberty, give me a gun and mind your own f**king business.

[aLLyOuRbAsE]

or in other words...

Give me liberty, give me a gun and mind your own f**king business.