Chuck who?

Bad news for Georgia native Bob Barr (see that Georgia tie in?!), Ron Paul is endorsing some guy named Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party.

The Constitution Party only has ballot access in 24 states, max. Baldwin writes for the site, which I’ll charitably call fringe. He’s also the pastor of Crossroad Baptist Church in Pensacola, FL, which appears to be his personal promotional vehicle — he founded it and has stuck around.


  1. Game Fan says:

    Some people will always vote for the best fiscal conservative/constitutionalist, ect… Even if he’s portrayed as a loonie tunes fringe wacko.
    And Baldwin is the only candidate I’m aware of who made a strong statement AGAINST the NWO.

  2. StevePerkins says:

    I’m shocked to see this story break on PeachPundit, rather than any of the Libertarian blogs I check out. Most of them have been rabidly anti-Barr since the convention… and seize on every morsel of news (both real and made-up) to tear Barr down and talk about what a bad pick he was. I have tons of friends in the Georgia affiliate, but I’m losing patience in the national level… those guys are just terrified of anything that might run the risk of getting them taken seriously.

    Speaking of losing patience, I think Dr. Paul’s minutes of fame are at 15:01. He was going to endorse McCain (or at least remain neutral) until he didn’t get a speaking spot at the GOP convention. So a week or two later, he decides to do an “open endorsement” of the top 4 third-party candidates instead. Barr didn’t go to the press conference, because that’s just dumb… so a week or two later, Paul apparently changed his endorsement plans yet again. That Chuck guy is from a group that believes the main problem with the GOP is that it’s too focused on economic conservatism and not focused enough on social issues (you read that right). This comes after Paul was making appearances with Ralph Nader two weeks ago.

    I just don’t know anymore. I just want to work with people who care about fiscal conservatism, yet: (1) aren’t homophobic or racist, (2) don’t obsess over Harry Potter books in the library, and (3) aren’t otherwise kooks in general. Why is that so hard?

  3. I find this amusing, Dr. Paul was on Glenn Beck a month or so ago and claimed he was “good friends” with both Barr and Baldwin and ergo would not endorse either one.

    The real question here is how many Paul-publicans are going to follow him him this time.

  4. Doug Deal says:


    I just want to work with people who care about fiscal conservatism, yet:

    (1) aren’t homophobic or racist,


    (2) don’t obsess over Harry Potter books in the library, and


    (3) aren’t otherwise kooks in general.

    Oooooh, so close Bill, John, Icarus, Indy … and the rest

    Sorry, couldn’t resist, you guys are actually fine fellows.

  5. Jason Pye says:

    Some people will always vote for the best fiscal conservative/constitutionalist, ect… Even if he’s portrayed as a loonie tunes fringe wacko.
    And Baldwin is the only candidate I’m aware of who made a strong statement AGAINST the NWO.

    Baldwin will not be on the ballot in Georgia and the Constitution Party is barely organized here.

    Have you ever read their platform? It’s crazy. Like, religious crazy and much of it contrary to the Constitution.

  6. Icarus says:

    “Have you ever read their platform? It’s crazy. ”

    And this is coming from a guy who was stalked at his convention by something called “Starchild”. He knows crazy.

  7. Icarus says:

    As for Doug’s comment, I have never claimed to not be a kook.

    I do seem to remember we outed quite a few of the regulars as Harry Potter nuts a while back, however.

  8. Jason Pye says:

    Steve Perkins can back me up on this, but Starchild isn’t a fool. As hard as it is to believe with his name and how he dresses. The guy is incredibly intelligent.

  9. StevePerkins,

    Every poll that has been done on the issues you mentioned shows that the majority of Americans agree with you. But for some reason… most allow themselves to get away form the important issues and get divided on some idiotic issue(s) so the result is all get lead down the path to more government… the modern politician seems to thrive on this..
    “…distracting people at the mid-point of their all-too-quick mental journeys from ‘It would be nice if…’ to ‘There oughta be a law!’ ” – stolen from Starchild

  10. StevePerkins says:

    I do second Pye on the Starchild thing. Starchild dresses outrageously because he comes from the “shock value” school of thought, that you can’t get a message out unless you first attract attention. I disagree with that philosophy myself… but putting wardrobe aside, he’s probably one of the most intelligent and articulate political types you’ll ever talk to. I’ve occasionally had to distance myself from a lot of associations in libertarian circles, but Starchild is not one of them.

  11. StevePerkins says:

    An activist from California who comes to Libertarian conventions dressed in outrageous outfits (e.g. this year it was as a pirate). He’s often made into a poster child of sorts for libertarians being nutty.

  12. GreenAllTheWay says:

    Steve, since your wife’s HOA figured out the banking crisis, can you ask them the sollution to this?

  13. Game Fan says:

    Apparently any talk of a “New World Order” is too embarrassing for the “tow the line” neocons to discuss it rationally. However, since the poster boy for neoconservatism (George I) mentioned it dozens of times I’m not sure what mental process is involved in ignoring it. Perhaps someone could enlighten me. Perhaps one of those “Christian Conservatives”.

  14. Game Fan says:

    For those who don’t believe in global conspiracies there should be no problem in taking a neutral stance toward someone who opposes global conspiracies. Personally I think “centralization” is economic in nature. And the politicians are just along for the ride.

  15. Game Fan says:

    I really don’t think there’s a “plan” other than a bunch of spineless ass wipe politicians lining up to sell out our country for some type of offshore interests. But hey, convincing people there’s a “master plan” is a great way to scare the heck out of some people. Most of this “conspiracy” is like a trip to the spook house.

  16. btpull says:

    The LP has the perfect opportunity tie government intervention in private sector and poor national policies to the current financial crisis.

    Unfortunately the LP is too dysfunctional to capitalize on it.

  17. Jane says:

    Is the Constitution Party any more than just a Southern Right party in Georgia? If seems to me that except for Flaggers, and Ray McBerry supporters there are not that many in Georgia. Plus, they are about as articulate as Boomhauerand and as level headed as Dale Gribble. If anyone thinks they area viable alternative to liberals or Neo-Con’s/Jews they are crazy.

  18. Bill Simon says:


    You said this: “If anyone thinks they area viable alternative to liberals or Neo-Con’s/Jews they are crazy.”

    Before I jump to any conclusions, please explain your sudden painting of all “Neocons” as “Jews.”

  19. Bill Simon says:

    Jane, Part 2

    Also, did you mean to write that as “Jews” or were you thinking about it the way former state representative Billy McKinney thought about them as “J-E-W-S”?

  20. Game Fan says:

    I may support McCain if he becomes a hell raising ass kicker. Whoever shakes it up the most in DC. Frankly I liked the “beheading” comment regarding the current bailout fiasco.

  21. You people crack me up. PP perishes for a lack of knowledge and wisdom. From what I’ve read about Baldwin, Ron Paul endorsed him over Barr for good reason: he actually wants to return America to constitutional government.

    He would dismantle the Patriot Act and restore law enforcement to the states and local governments, where it rightly belongs. Yes, this includes the so-called “war on drugs” and the so-called “war on terror.” No more warrantless searches and seizures. No more eavesdropping on Americans’ phone calls, or collecting Americans’ emails, or spying on American citizens without court order and oversight. No more stripping Americans of their constitutional rights in the name of “national security.”

    In addition, he would use every power and authority vested to the office of President to preserve and protect the right of the people to keep and bear arms. And he would immediately restore Posse Comitatus.

    He apparently also takes the words of the Declaration of Independence seriously, where it states, “That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States.” This means the NAFTA superhighway is dead. The North American Union is dead. NAFTA, CAFTA, GATT, and the WTO are eliminated. The FTAA is DOA. No more expending tax dollars for the support of the United Nations.


    He would apparently take his oath to uphold the Constitution seriously, where it states that one of the express purposes of the federal government is to “repel Invasions.” This means securing America’s borders, because the illegal immigration crisis is more than mere immigration: it is an invasion.

    I like that fact that Baldwin seems to share Ron Paul’s concerns for the way both Democrats AND Republicans have allowed the United States to become a meddlesome, interventionist, nation-building empire for the sake of satisfying the greedy machinations of international bankers and power-hungry politicians. Baldwin says that he’ll not only bring our troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan, but also from most of the other 130 nations that currently house U.S. forces. He would end foreign aid and get the U.S. out of NATO.

    GOOD. It’s past time for the European states to defend themselves. It’s time for us to stop sticking our nose in every other nation’s business and start taking care of the United States. The Warfare State will kill us, just as surely as the Welfare State will. Global empires are NOT SUSTAINABLE. If history teaches anything, it teaches that.

    Lo and behold, Baldwin would apparently even take his oath to the Constitution so seriously, he would never send troops to invade and occupy a foreign country without a Declaration of War by Congress! (Yes, that IS what the Constitution says has to be done!) In dealing with rogue terrorist organizations such as al Qaeda, he would actually seek letters of Marque and Reprisal from Congress (yes, that IS what the Constitution says ought to be done!), which would give him the authority to use whatever special and/or private forces are necessary to seek out and destroy those who desire our hurt. WOW, someone who’s actually READ that part of our foundational document!

    And even though he’s a born-again Christian (as is Ron Paul), he states very clearly that he “would take [his] responsibility to protect the religious liberty of every American seriously. People have the right to worship God (or not worship God) according to the dictates of their own conscience. Whether one is Baptist, Catholic, Mormon, or agnostic, people have the right to practice their faith as they see fit. I am absolutely dedicated to preserving religious liberty. Religious tyranny is as evil as political or social tyranny. And, as I will be no man’s slave, neither will I be any man’s master.”

    Gee, there goes those fears of “theocracy” raising its ugly head, huh?

    I think that probably what some of our libertarian friends on here (plus fake libertarians like Chris) are scared of is the fact that Baldwin not only claims to be pro-life (like most of the “Republicans” do), he actually means it, and says he would “use the bully pulpit of the White House to press Congress to pass Dr. Paul’s Sanctity of Life Act, which would overturn Roe v. Wade and end abortion-on-demand.” Good for him. On this topic, the GOP is especially hypocritical. The Republican Party controlled the entire federal government for six years and did NOTHING to save the life of a single unborn child. Saving unborn babies from the abortionists’ scalpel is more than rhetoric with Baldwin, apparently. Even if you’re “pro-choice” on the issue of killing babies in the womb, at least give the guy credit for being real on this issue, unlike posers like National Right to Life.

    It’s also obvious why Ron Paul endorsed Baldwin if you look at his philosophy of economics. Dr. Paul has been predicting the current financial meltdown in this country for years. And when all is done, the current bailout being proposed will do more harm than good. The problem is, America’s leaders have rejected sound money policies for years, and the chickens are coming home to roost.

    As President, Baldwin says he would seek to overturn the 16th Amendment, eliminate the Internal Revenue Service, and disband the Federal Reserve. He “would lead the charge to return America to sound money principles.” He would seek to reduce federal spending to constitutional levels by eliminating those same federal departments that Newt Gingrich promised to eliminate in his Contract with America back in 1994 (and then failed to do). He would seek to eliminate the Departments of Education, Commerce, Energy, etc. He would even demand that Congress pass a balanced budget and that we stop deficit spending.

    Neither John McCain nor Barack Obama will do any of the above. Well, we shouldn’t expect the Democrats to; but ALL of that is what the GOP OUGHT to be doing, but our party has become a bunch of mealy-mouthed spineless Dem-light big-government obsequious sycophants who wouldn’t know the Constitution if it bit them on their fat butts.

    Erick, if you learned how to use Google, you’d find that Baldwin is already going to be on the ballot in 37 states (not “24, max”), and has achieved write-in status in 11 more. No, Baldwin won’t appear on the ballot here in Georgia, thanks to our ridiculous ballot access laws, the worst in the nation. But he HAS qualified as a write-in candidate here. And I’m kinda glad to hear that. Yup, kinda glad indeed. 🙂

  22. And yes, I realize that Baldwin can’t win. But is that really what determines your vote? So, if polls were to make it obvious that Obama has a 20-point lead and McCain had no chance to overcome that, would my fellow “Republicans” here decide to vote for Obama, since McCain “can’t win”?

    This is why our party is in the piss-poor state it’s in today.

  23. The problem with our form of government, and you should know this Taft Republican, is that someone like Baldwin is simply unelectable at the Presidential level.

    History dictates that Moderates often best extremists, and to call Baldwin anything but an extremist would be a disservice to his hard line views on our Constitution; not that such a view is bad per say.

    But if we look at successful campaigns, people like Baldwin fail to garner support from the masses, perhaps the ignorant masses, and ultimately fail to secure the win. The Electoral College forces moderation and compromise to win the 270 votes required to be President.

    I realize you’ve already conceded that Baldwin won’t and can’t win, but bear with me for a minute. If we consider this then it should be obvious why our party has drifted so far away from what it use to stand for. It’s done so to win elections. And it is absolutely abhorrent. I don’t know that the problem is that we’ve found a bunch of DemLites as it is that the people of this country have gone so far down that they can no longer stand someone who thinks outside of their little box. I’ve seen some people, at college no less, simply shut down when explained to them that they don’t directly elect the President.

    What I’m getting at here, is that the party has gone to what it has because of the people it relies on to win elections.

  24. griftdrift says:

    We’re going to skip past the part where the Constitution Party actually bases its premise mostly on the Declaration of Independence instead of the Constitution (you know, the thing that actually contains the laws which created the country and for Gods sake what they named their party after) and go straight to the platform and then their defense of the ridiculous judge Roy Moore.

    “The sole purpose of government, as stated in the Declaration of Independence, is to secure our unalienable rights given us by our Creator. When Government grows beyond this scope, it is usurpation, and liberty is compromised.”

    We commend Former Chief Justice Roy Moore of the Alabama Supreme Court for his defense of the display of the Ten Commandments, and condemn those who persecuted him and removed him from office for his morally and legally just stand.

    If that isn’t clear enough, his party’s preamble states pretty clearly which rail is on top.

    The Constitution Party gratefully acknowledges the blessing of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ as Creator, Preserver and Ruler of the Universe and of these United States. We hereby appeal to Him for mercy, aid, comfort, guidance and the protection of His Providence as we work to restore and preserve these United States…This great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been and are afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here…The goal of the Constitution Party is to restore American jurisprudence to its Biblical foundations and to limit the federal government to its Constitutional boundaries

    Talks good. What you put down in print is better.

    Really just one question. Does this swing me back to the liberals or the libertarians? I’m pretty sure my designation as a neo-con last night has been short lived.

  25. griftdrift says:

    Our country is based on the laws of the Constitution. Not the rhetoric of the Declaration of Independence. There’s a pretty good reason God, The Creator or a deity is mentioned nowhere in the Constitution.

    Maybe your party should change its name.

  26. Jane says:

    My friend Bill Simon,

    I was highlighting the craziness of the right wing wac jobs who are supporting Baldwin.

    Baldwin/Ron Paul and thier ilk do more harm to what they beleive than to those they claim to oppose. Baldwin and the Southern party are the Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s of the Conservative movement.

  27. grift, seriously, a simple perusing of historical documents will show you where the CP gets those quotes you pulled from their platform. Things like the Rev. Jasper Adams’ 1833 sermon, “The Relation of Christianity to Civil Government in the United States,” and quotes from insignificant people like Patrick Henry talking about who founded this nation…

    The CP is an avowedly Christian party. So? Look at their policy proposals, and again, you’ll see why Dr. Paul endorsed Baldwin. Which is what this thread is about, after all.

  28. And since when did you start believing that “Our country is based on the laws of the Constitution”? You know you really believe it’s based on the decisions of federal judges. 😉

  29. Bill Simon says:


    These are your words: “Neo-cons/Jews”

    What element of your gut compels you to essentially state that the word “Neocon” is synonymous with the cultural and religious classification for a group of people known as “Jews”?

  30. Rick Day says:

    I’ve sent money to the RP campaign.

    Apparently, too much.

    What I read from the press release, RP did this out of spite because Barr refused to be in the area with C-Mc. and cancelled 40 minutes before the thing started.

    I figured at least RP would endorse, if not run on, the LP ticket.

    Not happy, No not happy with the man at all. We got tooled.

    Now I have to seriously look at The Big Black O ™ again.

    ugh. I know how Caesar felt.

  31. Icarus says:

    “Not happy, No not happy with the man at all. We got tooled.”

    I’m not one to say “I told you so”.

    (You probably get enough of that from that short yankee woman anyway)

  32. Bill Simon says:


    I’m the furthest thing from a Flagger you will ever meet.

    “Drinking” has a tendency to bring-out the monsters from your id…

    FYI: Just because Paul Wolfowitz and Bill Kristol HAPPEN to BE “Jewish” AND Neocon pieces of crap, that doesn’t mean ALL Jews think their way or agree with them, okay? Ya dig?

  33. Game Fan says:

    You’re playing into the hands of the elitists when you tie political ideologies with a certain religion. I’m glad to say I think thought process has reached it’s heyday. It’s been my experience that the people who bring religion into the discussion whenever possible may not have a lot to contribute in other areas.

  34. Game Fan says:

    That’s awesome. All issues I’ve been concerned about (and informed about) for years. Some of the “big picture” conservatism so many people seem to ignore so often. Why? the MSM isn’t talking about it.

  35. Jason Pye says:

    From what I’ve read about Baldwin, Ron Paul endorsed him over Barr for good reason: he actually wants to return America to constitutional government.

    That is absolutely not true. Rick Day has it right. Paul is pissed off at Barr because he didn’t do as told.

  36. Game Fan says:

    Note I said I MIGHT support McShame. (as I blog away here in my underwear) Then again I MIGHT get carted off and disemboweled by one of those giant thunderbirds from ancient lore. 🙂

Comments are closed.