Baldwin:Ron Paul would be Secretary of the Treasury

[Bison]

When asked about the Federal Reserve, Baldwin said: “I think it’s important that we return to sound money. I think that all the problems we’re facing economically are directly related to the Federal Reserve System and the fiat-money supply.” He also said that as president, he would make Ron Paul Secretary of the Treasury.

http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2008/07/ipr-exclusive-chuck-baldwin-makes-his-case-to-disgruntled-libertarians/

[familydog]

http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2008/07/ipr-exclusive-chuck-baldwin-makes-his-case-to-disgruntled-libertarians/

I like it :D

[Kludge]

I would make Ron Paul my co-president.

Write me in!

[Nirvikalpa]

Good.


On the proper role for religion in government, Baldwin said we are a “nation under God,” and as such, we have a “duty to our Creator” to acknowledge this fact. At the same time, unprompted, Baldwin said he supports the religious freedom of non-Christians and atheists. He said how someone worships God — or if they don’t at all — is “none of the federal government’s business, quite frankly.”

Oh, but he's a theocrat, for sure. </sarcasm>

Everything he said was dead-on right.

[Theocrat]

Good.



Oh, but he's a theocrat, for sure. </sarcasm>

Everything he said was dead-on right.

Let's make sure that Kade, Alex Libman, kombayn, bojo68, and the rest of our anti-God, fellow Ron Paul supporters read this and be forever silent about Dr. Baldwin's stance on freedom of religion.

[kombayn]

^I am by no means anti-God or anti-Religion. That's a person's personal choice, I'm glad to hear Chuck Baldwin does agree that the Federal Government has no business in freedom of Religion. He wouldn't go out and say though he's completely for separation of Church and State. I'm a heavy advocate for that and I disagree with him on other issues then just this one. I'm no way against Chuck Baldwin's candidacy but I will not vote for him this election, no way, no how.

[familydog]

^I am by no means anti-God or anti-Religion. That's a person's personal choice, I'm glad to hear Chuck Baldwin does agree that the Federal Government has no business in freedom of Religion. He wouldn't go out and say though he's completely for separation of Church and State. I'm a heavy advocate for that and I disagree with him on other issues then just this one. I'm no way against Chuck Baldwin's candidacy but I will not vote for him this election, no way, no how.

And Barr has gone out of his way to say that? :rolleyes:

[Kludge]

And Barr has gone out of his way to say that? :rolleyes:

Call me a collectivist, but I actually have different standards for different people. Baldwin should be addressing separation of Church and State because his pastor status probably makes many libertarians (myself included) uneasy about his neutrality.

Were Wiccans significant in number... There'd probably be pressure on Barr to address the same issue.

[votefreedomfirst]

Were Wiccans significant in number... There'd probably be pressure on Barr to address the same issue.

Anyone who values religious tolerance should pressure Barr on that issue. I don't think he should get be able to get away with attacking any minority. It's absolute disgraceful to have such a hate filled man as the Libertarian Party nominee.

[familydog]

Call me a collectivist, but I actually have different standards for different people. Baldwin should be addressing separation of Church and State because his pastor status probably makes many libertarians (myself included) uneasy about his neutrality.

Were Wiccans significant in number... There'd probably be pressure on Barr to address the same issue.

There are certainly issues in Barr's past that would make him an opponent of "seperation of church and state" besides the Wiccan deal. Issues that he hasn't said anything about after joining the LP. Has he even come out and said what Baldwin said in the interview?

[tonesforjonesbones]

I haven't heard Bob Barr talk about religion. I think he keeps out of it. Ron Paul didn't talk about it much. That pretty much proves that Barr is keeping religion out of the government. Tones

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Joseph: Baldwin would be...ummm unemployed

Ron Paul would be, too. I'd hire only my friends and relatives to operate as my cabinet.

[Kade]

Let's make sure that Kade, Alex Libman, kombayn, bojo68, and the rest of our anti-God, fellow Ron Paul supporters read this and be forever silent about Dr. Baldwin's stance on freedom of religion.

You keep calling me anti-god, and I will resort to calling you pro-delusion (anti-reason).

Abortion, Stem Cells, Gays, and Women's rights are religious platforms. He is a professional moralists, regardless of who he says deserves the same freedom as him. Putting atheist in a sentence does not make you pro-religious freedom.

[Kludge]

Pro-delusion, anti-life, un-American... These are the entertaining labels we should be bringing to the forefront of political banter.

[acptulsa]

If he kicks his veep candidate off the ticket and names Ron Paul to the spot I'll be far more impressed.

[Alex Libman]

Aww, did Pat Robertson turn him down?

[Alex Libman]

Let's make sure that Kade, Alex Libman, kombayn, bojo68, and the rest of our anti-God, fellow Ron Paul supporters read this and be forever silent about Dr. Baldwin's stance on freedom of religion.

Is that list ranked in any way? Because I'm sure I can be more obnoxiously anti-religious than those other three! :D

[Kade]

Is that list ranked in any way? Because I'm sure I can be more obnoxiously anti-religious than those other three! :D

I am the bane of the religious existence here... it's not a contest I would really want to compete in, I've already been banned once.

Sophocles and Hiki also get some mad props.. .

[Theocrat]

You keep calling me anti-god, and I will resort to calling you pro-delusion (anti-reason).

Abortion, Stem Cells, Gays, and Women's rights are religious platforms. He is a professional moralists, regardless of who he says deserves the same freedom as him. Putting atheist in a sentence does not make you pro-religious freedom.

Call me what you will, my friend, but I know what I believe, and I have a rational, objective basis for it. The true delusion comes from the one who denies the very thing in which he purports to not believe in, all the while living as if it does exist.

I find it shocking that you would call Dr. Baldwin a "professional moralist," as if that's a bad thing. What else are we dealing with in politics if none of the issues we agree and disagree on are based on morals of some kind? I think you're also missing the point of what Dr. Baldwin has stated, namely, that all belief systems (including "Atheism") have the freedom to be expressed without coercion from the federal government. If he was so "theocratic" as you would have us believe, then why would he make such a statement? Obviously, Dr. Baldwin is an advocate for tolerating differing religious beliefs than his own (even "Atheism"), and just because he may object to varying religious views, it doesn't mean that he necessarily desires to legislate or regulate them.