Thread: Pastor Chuck Baldwin Announces his candidacy for President

Originally Posted by tancredofan

Originally Posted by DinTN

Dr. Chuck Baldwin speaks on Illegal Immigration
"We will close our borders and ports. Illegal immigration STOPS the day we take the White House!
We will not provide amnesty to anyone. There will be no welfare for illegal immigrants! We will end birthright citizenship! There will be no more anchor babies!"

How is this guy going to avoid the same fate by the MSM as Ron Paul and Tom Tancredo?

He will be completely ignored by the mainstream media.

Ron Paul appeared as a guest on The Tonight Show. Chuck Baldwin will not be invited to appear as a guest on The Tonight Show.

Ron Paul appeared as a guest on The Daily Show. Chuck Baldwin will not be invited to appear as a guest on The Daily Show.

How would you possibly know that? Are you the producer of these shows?

Originally Posted by jp_48504

Originally Posted by tancredofan

Originally Posted by DinTN

Dr. Chuck Baldwin speaks on Illegal Immigration
"We will close our borders and ports. Illegal immigration STOPS the day we take the White House!
We will not provide amnesty to anyone. There will be no welfare for illegal immigrants! We will end birthright citizenship! There will be no more anchor babies!"

How is this guy going to avoid the same fate by the MSM as Ron Paul and Tom Tancredo?

He will be completely ignored by the mainstream media.

Ron Paul appeared as a guest on The Tonight Show. Chuck Baldwin will not be invited to appear as a guest on The Tonight Show.

Ron Paul appeared as a guest on The Daily Show. Chuck Baldwin will not be invited to appear as a guest on The Daily Show.

How would you possibly know that? Are you the producer of these shows?

I voted for the presidential nominee of the Constitution Party in the last election. He essentially received no mainstream media coverage.

No presidential nominee of the Constitution Party has ever been invited to appear on The Tonight Show.

Chuck Baldwin will not be invited to appear in the presidential debates.

I don't have to be a producer of The Tonight Show to understand the reality of how the mainstream media works.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Chuck Baldwin" <chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com>
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2008 10:18 AM
Subject: Open Borders Prove "War On Terror" Is Superficial by Chuck Baldwin, May 23, 2008

Open Borders Prove "War On Terror" Is Superficial
By Chuck Baldwin
May 23, 2008

This column is archived at
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2008/c ... 80523.html

The American people were led to believe that America's fine men and
women in uniform were sent halfway around the world to Iraq and
Afghanistan to fight a "war on terror." Of course, everyone now knows
that Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with the attacks on September
11, 2001. I am sure that most everyone also remembers that the vast
majority of the terrorists who participated in those attacks were from
Saudi Arabia, not Iraq. Yet, Saudi leaders continue to enjoy the
coziest of relationships--and, dare I say, friendships--with President
George W. Bush.

Does anyone besides me remember when Bush said that countries had to
decide whether they would be friends with either terrorists or the
United States, but that they could not be friends with both? Well,
Saudi Arabia has probably financed, supported, and befriended more
terrorists in the Middle East than any other nation in the world
(except perhaps Red China), yet they continue to be "friends" with the
United States.

Another glaring inconsistency regarding the "war on terror" is the
fact that for some seven years since the 9/11 attacks, our nation's
borders and ports are as open and porous as ever. These open borders
make the argument that "we are fighting them over there, so we won't
have to fight them over here" look absolutely disingenuous--even
laughable.

If foreign terrorists want to bring the fight to America's streets
again, they still have plenty of opportunity to do so. In fact, we
have no idea how many potential terrorists have already slipped across
our borders and are right now living among us. Furthermore, we have no
idea how many potential terrorists continue to pour through these wide
open sieves that we call borders.

How can this administration look the American people in the eye with a
straight face and claim that it is fighting a "war on terror," while
it does almost nothing to secure our borders and ports? As Marcellus
said in Shakespeare's Act 1 of Hamlet, "Something is rotten in the
state of Denmark." Amen. Something is also rotten in Washington, D.C.

Besides, why should al Qaeda attack us now? The U.S. occupation of
Iraq is the best recruiting tool they ever had. Do the American people
not realize (I think most of them actually do) that, thanks to our
protracted occupation of Iraq, al Qaeda might actually be stronger now
than it was when we invaded that country in 2003.

If the Bush administration was serious about fighting a war on terror,
it would absolutely, resolutely, and immediately seal our borders and
ports. It is nothing short of lunacy to send our National Guard forces
to Iraq for the purpose of protecting that country's borders, while
leaving America's borders wide open!

Not only does the Bush administration not secure our borders and
ports, it wants to provide a "path to citizenship" for illegal aliens.
It allows tax dollars to be used to pay for illegal aliens' education,
social services, and medical care. It offers birthright citizenship
for illegal aliens. And it prosecutes and imprisons Border Patrol
agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean for shooting (but not seriously
enough to prevent his escape back into Mexico) a known illegal alien
and drug trafficker.

No wonder the flood of illegal aliens has skyrocketed since George W.
Bush became President of the United States.

And is there anyone who does not understand that a John McCain
Presidency will be more of the McSame? A McCain White House promises
a 100-year occupation of Iraq along with continued open borders and
ports. Plus, McCain will also push forward with his plans to grant
amnesty to illegal aliens.

In addition, when it comes to illegal immigration, amnesty, etc.,
there will be no relief from an Obama White House. Both Barack Obama
and John McCain are pro-open borders, pro-amnesty twins.

Instead of fighting a "war on terror," the Bush administration (and
numerous administrations before it) is allowing our troops to be used
as the personal militia of the United Nations and for the commercial
benefit of international corporations.

Remember, soon after our troops invaded Iraq, President Bush
explicitly reported that the reason for the invasion was to defend
"the credibility of the United Nations." But this has been the pattern
of White House behavior ever since the U.N. was created back in 1945.
Presidents from both parties have repeatedly injected U.S. troops into
copious conflicts and wars, all for the purpose of enforcing and
augmenting the policies of the United Nations.

In fact, the last constitutional conflict that the U.S. military
fought was World War II. Virtually every war since has been a U.N.
manufactured and manipulated conflict. The war in Iraq is no
different.

I ask the reader, If you were President, and you sincerely believed
that you were fighting a war on terror, and that you had to take the
drastic action of sending other men's sons and daughters to fight and
die in order to wage this war (not to mention the prospect of
potentially bankrupting the country to fight it), would you be so
careless or indifferent as to not close the borders to the threat of
terrorists who might actually decide to attack us? I doubt that there
is a reader who would not agree that anyone who took such a task
seriously would--at the very minimum--do this.

So, I repeat: the fact that George W. Bush refuses to seal our borders
and ports proves that whatever else he thinks he is accomplishing in
Iraq, he is disingenuous when he proclaims that he is fighting a "war
on terror." (Again, the country that had the closest connections to
the 9/11 terrorists was Saudi Arabia, not Iraq. If fighting the
terrorists was the focus, why did Bush not attack Saudi Arabia?)

And that means John McCain is disingenuous when he says he wants U.S.
troops to stay in Iraq for 100 years so "we won't have to fight the
terrorists over here" while, at the same time, promoting amnesty for
illegal aliens (which does nothing but promote even more illegal
immigration).

No, my friends. The real war is not a "war on terror." The real war is
a war against constitutional government, personal liberty, and
national sovereignty. It is a war against the fundamental principles
of America's Founding Fathers, that America should be a friend and
trader with all, but engaged in entangling alliances with none. It is
a war against the Bill of Rights. It is a war against the Spirit of
'76, the spirit that says America is a free and independent country,
subservient to no international entity or interest. It is a war
against the principle that would put America first. It is a war
against the very heart and soul of everything this country has stood
for ever since our patriot forebears stood on Lexington Green and
Concord Bridge. And this war is not being waged from Baghdad or
Tehran. It is being waged from Washington, D.C.

(c) Chuck Baldwin

Originally Posted by tancredofan

He will be completely ignored by the mainstream media.

Ron Paul appeared as a guest on The Tonight Show. Chuck Baldwin will not be invited to appear as a guest on The Tonight Show.

Ron Paul appeared as a guest on The Daily Show. Chuck Baldwin will not be invited to appear as a guest on The Daily Show.

Maybe, maybe not.
I emailed The Tonight Show and requested he be a guest....we'll see.
I'm a Letterman fan myself but I'd watch Leno if Chuck Baldwin is on. I may even write The Letterman Show also

Bumping this.

Was going to post Pastor Baldwins essay here, but will eMail it to all I know instead.

Did my home work and found this from a few months back so will not repost it. I would really like to see us back this man up. Is it possible to come to an agreement about him? I think most of us are of like minds.

Tho there is a LOT to blame on IA's for the wrongs in our country, but there are also other issues to consider. I am not a fan of pulling out of the war right now. Iraq DOES however need us to stop "holding thier hand" and gain some independence in defending themselves. What I like about Baldwin is he is for America first. Homeland security is first. If we dont secure our borders first, what business do we have securing another country's? Where is the credibility in that, when our own borders are so porous???

In order to make ANY kind of dent, we here at ALIPAC must do what we can to send a strong message to our "higher ups" and get behind one candidate. I, for one. will continue to look further into this one.

As I have said before, my personal opinion is, this is God's country, and he is ultimately in control. I will no longer vote for the "candidate that will do less damge" and vote for one who will do the most good.

I wonder if W has considered getting Mr Baldwin on his radio show?

Baldwin has my vote.