MSN Home  |  My MSN  |  Hotmail
Sign in to Windows Live ID Web Search:   
go to MSNGroups 
Groups Home  |  My Groups  |  Language  |  Help  
 
Libertarian the Answer[email protected] 
  
What's New
  
  The Green Moon  
  General  
  Ask Management  
  Forums  
  Pictures  
    
    
  Links  
  Rules  
  Recommend Books  
  Money Links  
  
  
  Tools  
 
General : Alan Keyes
Choose another message board
 
     
Reply
 Message 1 of 10 in Discussion 
From: MSN NicknameJuniusJnr  (Original Message)Sent: 5/4/2008 1:40 PM
 
The link above describes Mr. Keyes' stance on various issues.
If he wrote this, if he thought these things out this clearly, he's worth looking at as a serious candidate


First  Previous  2-10 of 10  Next  Last 
Reply
 Message 2 of 10 in Discussion 
From: codifySent: 5/4/2008 2:19 PM
I have some issues with his stands on a few things. His temperament is lacking as well.
 
Next...

Reply
 Message 3 of 10 in Discussion 
From: MSN NicknameJuniusJnrSent: 5/11/2008 3:42 PM
his temperment?  care to expound?
I don't know a lot about the guy. I do like where he stands on many of the issues.
and now I don't even know if he's running.
I'm looking for a candidate I can vote for and still look in the mirror the next day. So far, I've found exactly ZERO candidates running for president of the United States that I wouldn't have to be blindfolded and pick one to vote for so that I wouldn't know what I did. As far as I'm concerned they are all despicable.

Reply
 Message 4 of 10 in Discussion 
From: codifySent: 5/11/2008 7:35 PM
Ron Paul.
 
Write in Ron Paul if necessary.

Reply
 Message 5 of 10 in Discussion 
From: MSN NicknamemacroscopicSent: 5/12/2008 6:20 PM
If he wrote this, if he thought these things out this clearly, he's worth looking at as a serious candidate.
 
Alan Keyes could not win a snowball fight against a 2nd grader, let alone the presidency.  he has run many many times, and never gets anything more than chuckles for it.

Reply
 Message 6 of 10 in Discussion 
From: MSN NicknameJuniusJnrSent: 5/18/2008 2:49 PM
As far as I know, Ron Paul has refused to abandon the Republican Party and he can't run on their ticket and on an Independent ticket at the same time. therefore, we can't write in a vote for him because he's locked in. In addition to that, he's running for his seat in Congress in TX at the same time so how do you think that will play out?
 
He shot himself in the foot being stubborn if you ask me. Not to mention that he wouldn't live long enough to serve out one term under that pressure and that he sounds like a kook when interviewed. I can't see myself voting for him even if he could suddenly overcome all those obstacles, which isn't likely.
 

Reply
 Message 7 of 10 in Discussion 
From: MSN NicknameJuniusJnrSent: 5/18/2008 2:51 PM
OK so Alan Keyes couldn't win a snowball fight. But the fact remains that we need a friggin candidate before Obama or McCain (most likely McCain from my vantage point) gets to sit in the Oval Office and be the new :"decider."

Reply
 Message 8 of 10 in Discussion 
From: HoratioBunceSent: 5/18/2008 3:19 PM
JuniusJnr,
 
Ron Paul is still my first choice.   If he doesn't win the party's nomination at the Republican convention this summer, I'll be voting for a third party candidate......again.
 
As of right now, it appears as though I'll be casting a vote for Chuck Baldwin, of the Constitution Party.
 
And now a word from the man I sponsor.
 

IF I WERE PRESIDENT

by Chuck Baldwin

Constitution Party 2008 Presidential Candidate

 

Due to my frequent criticisms of President George W. Bush, I am often asked what I would do if I were President of these United States. This column will serve as an attempt to answer that question. If I were President, I would begin the process of safely extracting our troops from Iraq. In the first place, our troops are no longer fighting a war, they are an occupation force, which occupies a sovereign country. And this is being done without a Declaration of War. The Iraqi people resent our occupation as much as we would resent another nation stronger than ours invading and occupying America. If such a thing happened to our beloved country, I’m sure many of us would also become "insurgents."

In the second place, the invasion and occupation of Iraq was absolutely unnecessary. Instead of sacrificing more than 4,000 American lives and the lives of tens of thousands of Iraqi citizens (not to mention some 2-3 trillion dollars), President Bush should have supported Ron Paul’s bill, H.R. 3076, the September 11 Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001. This is the constitutional way to deal with rogue terrorist organizations. This is the way President Thomas Jefferson responded to the Barbary pirates.

According to Congressman Paul, "A letter of marque and reprisal is a constitutional tool specifically designed to give the President the authority to respond with appropriate force to those non-state actors who wage aggression against the United States while limiting his authority to only those responsible for the atrocities of that day. Such a limited authorization is consistent with the doctrine of just war and the practical aim of keeping Americans safe while minimizing the costs in blood and treasure of waging such an operation."

Had President Bush responded in this manner, tens of thousands of lives would have been saved, trillions of dollars would not have needed to be spent, Osama bin Laden and most of his fellow terrorists would likely be dead, and we would not be bogged down in a nightmarish military quagmire in Iraq. And, if I were President, this is exactly how I would handle terrorist organizations such as al Qaeda.

Furthermore, it is absolutely ludicrous to say we are fighting a war on terror half way around the world when we refuse to secure our borders and ports. If I were President, I would immediately seal our borders. I would also see to it that employers in America who knowingly hire illegal aliens are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. In plain language: any employer who consciously hires illegal aliens would go to jail. They would not pass Go; they would not collect $200; they would go straight to jail.

By sealing the borders and by cutting off the money supply to illegal aliens, the problem of illegal immigration would dry up. As it is, we have no idea how many potential terrorists--not to mention violent gang members such as MS-13--have snuck (and are sneaking) through our borders.

And speaking of illegal immigration, as President, I would enforce our visa rules. This means anyone who overstays their visa or otherwise violates U.S. law is immediately deported. There would be no "path to citizenship" given to any illegal alien. That means no amnesty. Not in any shape, manner, or form. I would not allow tax dollars to be used to pay for illegal aliens�?education, social services, or medical care. As President, I would end birthright citizenship for illegal aliens. There would be no "anchor babies" during my administration.

If I were President, I would use the bully pulpit of the White House to encourage Congress to pass Congressman Ron Paul’s Sanctity of Life Act. In short, this bill would do two things: First, it would declare that unborn babies are persons under the law. Second, under the authority of Article. III. Section. 2. of the U.S. Constitution, it would remove abortion from the jurisdiction of the Court. In essence, this bill would immediately overturn Roe v. Wade and end legalized abortion.

Republicans tout themselves as being "pro-life." Yet, the GOP controlled both houses of Congress and the White House for six years and did absolutely nothing to overturn Roe or end abortion-on-demand. Under my administration, we could end legal abortion in a matter of days, not decades. And if Congress refused to pass Dr. Paul’s bill, I would use the constitutional power of the Presidency to deny funds to protect abortion clinics. Either way, legalized abortion ends when I take office.

On the subject of foreign policy, as President, I would end foreign aid. I would also end the current infatuation with nation-building, empire-building, and interventionism. America is not the world’s policeman. Neither are our military personnel the personal militia of the United Nations.

Remember that President Bush told the U.N. in 2003 that the reason we invaded Iraq was for the purpose of securing the "peace and credibility of the United Nations." (I lie not; that is what he said.) President Bush also placed the U.S. back under UNESCO in spite of the fact that President Reagan had heroically taken the U.S. out from under that sinister organization.

I am sure that readers recall that the U.N. Charter was authored by a Soviet communist agent (Alger Hiss) and that the U.S. has been fighting wars for the U.N. ever since the organization was created back in 1945.

Speaking of the United Nations, as President, I would withhold funds from the support of the United Nations. In other words, I would get the U.S. out of the U.N. Beyond that, when I move into the White House, the U.N.’s rent is up! They move out of New York City post haste.

By the same token, there is absolutely no reason for us to be in NATO. We should not be antagonizing Russia by attempting to expand NATO. There is no reason why Russia could not become a friend and ally of the United States. Free and fair trade with Russia and a noninterventionist foreign policy in Europe would do much to endear American interests to Russia. To insist on expanding and empowering NATO only serves to further alienate Russia and drive her to make alliances with Communist China.

Speaking of China, it is time that we recognize the very serious threat that China poses to the peace and security of the United States. Our trade practices serve only to allow corporate America to continue to invest in what will surely become an albatross around the neck of our well-being. We must discontinue the practice of allowing China to export its cheap products to the U.S. with no protection for America’s jobs and manufacturing, not to mention the lack of protection for our safety. This must stop, and it will stop when I become President. "Free trade" will no longer mean a free ride for Red China.

Furthermore, as President, I would take the preservation of our nation’s sovereignty and independence extremely seriously. This means that the burgeoning North American Union is dead on arrival the day I am sworn in as President. Gone, too, is the NAFTA superhighway. And for that matter, I would lead the United States out of NAFTA and CAFTA altogether. And any prospect for the FTAA would be dead as well.

As President, I would be the best friend that gun owners (and lawful gun dealers), homeschoolers, and veterans ever had in the White House. These are three of the most persecuted, harassed, or overlooked groups of people in the country. But not if I were President.

There is no reason why our veterans should wait for weeks and months to receive the medical care they need. It is disgraceful that we would ask our brave men and women of the U.S. armed forces to fight our country’s battles and then leave them to pretty much fend for themselves when it comes to receiving adequate health care. I would make taking care of our veterans an extremely high priority, if I were President.

If I were President, I would also do everything in my power to locate and retrieve any and all MIAs. I personally believe that there are hundreds of our servicemen who are yet being held against their will in various parts of the world. I would make finding them and bringing them home of utmost priority, if I were President.

On the home front, if I were President, I would end corporate welfare. I would also work to disband the Department of Energy (along with the Department of Education and many other federal departments). There is absolutely no reason for us to be dependent upon OPEC. There is enough gas and oil under the soil of Alaska (not to mention the Dakotas and the Gulf of Mexico) to meet the energy needs of the United States for the next 150-200 years. There is also no reason that gas should cost more than $1.50 a gallon (which is about what it was before Bush became President).

We must begin drilling for the domestic oil that we know exists; we must build more refineries and nuclear power plants. There is no reason why the United States cannot be mostly energy independent. It is time we started putting the people and interests of the United States ahead of the CEOs and interests of international corporations.

Lastly, if I were President, I would work feverishly to overturn the Sixteenth Amendment, which would repeal the Income Tax. And, no, I would not promote a national sales tax. That would be disastrous! Can you imagine what a 30% sales tax would do to the cost of EVERYTHING? Plus, give politicians a national sales tax to increase and just imagine what kind of percent that would grow into!

I would also work to repeal the "death tax," inheritance taxes, and property taxes. The American people are already paying somewhere between 30% and 40% of their income to Uncle Sam. It must stop. We are bankrupting our country with this incessant and burdensome tax system. In addition, I would work to expunge the Federal Reserve and to restore the American economy to sound money.

Now, I hear people say, That’s easy for you to say; you are not a candidate for President. Ah, but now I am.

Last week, in its national nominating convention in Kansas City, Missouri, the Constitution Party nominated me as its 2008 Presidential candidate. Party delegates nominated me over Ambassador Alan Keyes by a margin of 74% to 24%. Therefore, I am now a candidate for President of these United States.

See the CP website at a href="http://www.constitutionparty.com">ConstitutionParty.com

My Vice Presidential running mate is Darrell Castle, an attorney and Vietnam War Marine Corps veteran from Memphis, Tennessee.

Our web site is not online yet, but will be soon. We will be able to receive credit card donations when the web page is uploaded. The address of my campaign web site is: Baldwin2008.com

In the meantime, if anyone wants to support our campaign, checks may be written to:

Baldwin 2008

 

P.O. Box 131

 

Palmyra, New Jersey 08065

I believe it is only fair, as I continue to write these columns, that one understands the full disclosure of my candidacy.

As readers know, I enthusiastically supported Ron Paul during the Republican Primary season. I plan to continue to trumpet his call for limited government, non-interventionism abroad, constitutional government, and freedom into the general election as a Third Party candidate.

I do not expect the national media to pay us much heed; they seldom do. I do not expect to receive large donations from corporate America. I do expect criticism and ridicule. That is nothing new. However, I also anticipate tens of thousands of freedom-loving people from all religious persuasions and walks of life to rally to our cause. Why? Because thousands of principled people will not be bullied into voting for the "evil of two lessers" being shoved down our throats by the two major parties. Because this campaign is not about Chuck Baldwin. It is not about a political party. It is about freedom. It is about constitutional government. It is about restoring America to the founding principles bequeathed to us by our Founding Fathers. If you believe in those principles, join us!

In the meantime, these columns will continue to serve as a voice for America’s founding principles, as they have for the past eight-plus years. In addition, unlike the candidates from the two major parties, the taxpayers are not underwriting my campaign, and I will continue my day job. (Imagine that: a Presidential candidate who actually works for a living!) And all of this is just in time for my 56th birthday, which is tomorrow, May 3.

There you have it: this is what I would do if I were President of these wonderful United States of America.

http://www.constitutionparty.com/news_print.php?aid=749


Joel


Reply
(2 recommendations so far) Message 9 of 10 in Discussion 
From: MSN NicknamemacroscopicSent: 5/18/2008 9:45 PM
But the fact remains that we need a friggin candidate before Obama or McCain (most likely McCain from my vantage point) gets to sit in the Oval Office and be the new :"decider."
 
JJ- i will likely be voting 3rd party this year again.  this is the third election in a row for me- so i am starting to get used to it.

Reply
 Message 10 of 10 in Discussion 
From: MSN NicknameJuniusJnrSent: 5/25/2008 3:30 PM
The only thing that turns me off about Baldwin is that "Pastor" bit. I looked up his page before they set up a new page for him and it really hit me in the face that he touts himself as a Pastor first.  It tells me that he's a little more right wing than I care to have as a President but I'm seriously considering him as my candidate.  I, too, will be voting 3rd party.  Probably Constitution Party.
 
I have to re-register to vote in a new state next week. I'm debating about registering as a Constitution Party member. Does anyone know what ramifications that will have in future elections in NC?  Will I be restricted to only Constitution Party candidates in future  Primaries?  Will I be excluded from joining groups like the League of Women Voters, etc?  I constantly receive information from all corners because that is the only way I feel that I can make an intelligent choice come election day. I feel that sticking with only one side of the story is a detriment and it it part of what keeps the rogues gallery we have had for the last 20 years intact.

First  Previous  2-10 of 10  Next  Last 
Return to General