Ron Paul publicly endorsed the loony far Right John Birch Society. Ron Paul even went so far as changing his church from mainstream Episcopalian to a fundamentalist Baptist variety. Now Ron Paul has come out of the closet and endorsed the extreme Right Constitution Party.

Paul said: “I’m supporting Chuck Baldwin, the Constitution Party candidate.”

The Constitution Party is specifically Christianist and wants to impose fundamentalist Christianity on the United States. They don’t even pretend to respect the religious values of others. They instead claim that “our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” is the “Creator, Preserver and Ruler of the Universe and of these United States.” Please note they specifically claim that Jesus Christ is the “Ruler of the Universe and these United States.” How much more clear can their theocratic tendencies be?


As much as we still like Ron Paul, let us face an obvious fact: Ron Paul's campaign wasn't destroyed by Fox News or Neoconservatives. Ron Paul radicalized over time, began to attract nutcases, took questionable interviews, promoted fundamentalist religious views openly, and gradually lost fire power for his mainstream supporters. It's a conservative dilemma; over time conservatives tend to either radicalize to the extreme or go too liberal to enact their original policies once they are in power. Ron Paul, while intelligent and capable as congressman, spells FAIL as political leader. Time to move on.

Originally posted by concernedcitizan
Ron Paul publicly endorsed the loony far Right John Birch Society. Ron Paul even went so far as changing his church from mainstream Episcopalian to a fundamentalist Baptist variety. Now Ron Paul has come out of the closet and endorsed the extreme Right Constitution Party.

Paul said: “I’m supporting Chuck Baldwin, the Constitution Party candidate.”

The Constitution Party is specifically Christianist and wants to impose fundamentalist Christianity on the United States. They don’t even pretend to respect the religious values of others. They instead claim that “our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” is the “Creator, Preserver and Ruler of the Universe and of these United States.” Please note they specifically claim that Jesus Christ is the “Ruler of the Universe and these United States.” How much more clear can their theocratic tendencies be?


As much as we still like Ron Paul, let us face an obvious fact: Ron Paul's campaign wasn't destroyed by Fox News or Neoconservatives. Ron Paul radicalized over time, began to attract nutcases, took questionable interviews, promoted fundamentalist religious views openly, and gradually lost fire power for his mainstream supporters. It's a conservative dilemma; over time conservatives tend to either radicalize to the extreme or go too liberal to enact their original policies once they are in power. Ron Paul, while intelligent and capable as congressman, spells FAIL as political leader. Time to move on.

Ron Paul is about the only real Republican left out there.

where are your sources to support these claims?

Ron Paul answers with righteousness and common sense, and i dont think a concerned 'citizan' has any actual reason to bring grief to the feet of Dr. Paul.

radical? how about reasonable.

^ What's crazier... Doing interviews with Alex Jones and supported radical Christians...

Or voting to send kids to get blown up by hidden ied's in dead dogs in a sand box??...

Originally posted by concernedcitizan
Ron Paul publicly endorsed the loony far Right John Birch Society. Ron Paul even went so far as changing his church from mainstream Episcopalian to a fundamentalist Baptist variety. Now Ron Paul has come out of the closet and endorsed the extreme Right Constitution Party.

Paul said: “I’m supporting Chuck Baldwin, the Constitution Party candidate.”

The Constitution Party is specifically Christianist and wants to impose fundamentalist Christianity on the United States. They don’t even pretend to respect the religious values of others. They instead claim that “our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” is the “Creator, Preserver and Ruler of the Universe and of these United States.” Please note they specifically claim that Jesus Christ is the “Ruler of the Universe and these United States.” How much more clear can their theocratic tendencies be?


As much as we still like Ron Paul, let us face an obvious fact: Ron Paul's campaign wasn't destroyed by Fox News or Neoconservatives. Ron Paul radicalized over time, began to attract nutcases, took questionable interviews, promoted fundamentalist religious views openly, and gradually lost fire power for his mainstream supporters. It's a conservative dilemma; over time conservatives tend to either radicalize to the extreme or go too liberal to enact their original policies once they are in power. Ron Paul, while intelligent and capable as congressman, spells FAIL as political leader. Time to move on.

did you even watch this video??

where was he radical?

Originally posted by CanadianDream420
^ What's crazier... Doing interviews with Alex Jones and supported radical Christians...

Or voting to send kids to get blown up by hidden ied's in dead dogs in a sand box??...

Why chose one?

Both sound pretty bad to me.

Ron Paul would be a good president because in the framework of federal government, he would lift most of the red tape and authoritative abuse, and let states do most of the work. But Libertarians hear "less federal government" and they don't really think about what that means.

Paul would provide a good baseline for federal gov't, but what happens afterward? States become mini-cultures again instead of just more land...what the Paul fans need to realize is that we won't live in a heaven free of zoning laws, permits, and speed limits, but that we'll have 50 different subcultures instead of one for our 350million or so residents.

Part of the problem is that Paul is a decent public speaker but tends to be very repetitive. You can watch him on YouTube say the same things about the economy over and over but rarely does he elaborate, he more tries to vilify Bernanke and company. It works to a point but I'd wish he'd be more concise and tell us about his vision for 50 years after he leaves office than about how he'd end to the Federal Reserve.

The man will be 76 when the next election comes around and he hasn't come out and said he'll run for president for 2012. Who would elect a 76 year old man when they wouldn't elect the better, 72 year old version in 2008?

Originally posted by concernedcitizan
Ron Paul would be a good president because in the framework of federal government, he would lift most of the red tape and authoritative abuse, and let states do most of the work. But Libertarians hear "less federal government" and they don't really think about what that means.

Paul would provide a good baseline for federal gov't, but what happens afterward? States become mini-cultures again instead of just more land...what the Paul fans need to realize is that we won't live in a heaven free of zoning laws, permits, and speed limits, but that we'll have 50 different subcultures instead of one for our 350million or so residents.

Part of the problem is that Paul is a decent public speaker but tends to be very repetitive. You can watch him on YouTube say the same things about the economy over and over but rarely does he elaborate, he more tries to vilify Bernanke and company. It works to a point but I'd wish he'd be more concise and tell us about his vision for 50 years after he leaves office than about how he'd end to the Federal Reserve.

The man will be 76 when the next election comes around and he hasn't come out and said he'll run for president for 2012. Who would elect a 76 year old man when they wouldn't elect the better, 72 year old version in 2008?

MCCAIN IS THE BETTER VERSION OF PAUL???

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAAHGH AHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

the federal reserve IS the woes of americas economy. and when has a president EVER stated his view or goal for america 50 yeas after they are out of office.

you dont know what you are talking about.

and in case u didnt notice, each state is STILL distictly different from its neighbor, asaside from states covered mostly in sand.

your BASESLESS ASSUMPTION for what would happen if Paul were president is just that... BASELESS ASSUMPTION.