Comments for Here I Stand

Comment on Big Government Responsible for High Gas Prices by William Bunker

William Bunker — Tue, 06 May 2008 19:18:32 +0000

You’re very correct, Ron Paul. But you may be unaware of the extent to which these programs are occurring in the US and world.

We have the technology to move beyond oil, but we’re still using oil because of the level of infrastructure investment we have in oil, and the level of control over society and the world it affords those in empire and parts of the 1st world and corporate ownership and control. On a weaker note, many economies have planned their spending and built their expenses and upkeep around oil.

If oil suddenly dropped to $30 a barrel from being massively outpaced by competition and a futures collapse occurred, many countries and economies and much of the $5 trillion world energy industry would crumble. We’d also see power failure from nuclear and coal plants and refineries becoming no longer profitable and their downsides no longer tolerated. There is no easy or good way to shift to this new energy source without massive economic losses. But a new energy source would mean far more massive economic gains, and the potential for greater liberty through economic freedom and the end of modern global slavery to big infrastructure, like banks, corporate farms, and other accumulated industrial and commercial enterprises relying on the shortages of others to do business.

These companies and governments are buying up these post-oil patents and technologies and companies and suppressing them to maintain this reality.

This technology cannot be suppressed for much longer and should have been released during the Cold War when we first discovered most of it.

As part of my campaign for Massachusetts House of Representatives, I will be hosting a serious public forum on the switch to energy technologies and the consequences that it will mean for the community and for the economy at large. I encourage you to do the same in your jurisdiction.

<
Best wishes,
William Bunker

Comment on If I Were President by cindy

cindy — Tue, 06 May 2008 17:31:11 +0000

When people get so set on being right , I do Not understand !
We have a Constitution.
Bushes actions had NOTHING TO do with “The Party” or his supposed belief. BS

Why do we need a “constitution party”?so the President can disobey the party and then the party becomes corrupt, again

Spread the word. Post the petition on forums, forward it, print it out…How do we correct all the violations of law and deal with all the issues facing us? It takes only one document. The U.S. Constitution.

http://www.PetitionOnline.com/USRC01/petition.html

* This petition will remain open until there is a sufficient number of signatures (30,000 or more) to formally present it to congress*

Cindy Mulvey

Comment on “Smoking Gun” Recording Reveals Trinity Baptist Cover-up! by Levi

Levi — Sat, 03 May 2008 02:22:50 +0000

It is because many of these “Christian leaders” are frauds and not REAL Christians. They are power hungry money-lovers.

Q. Where did Dr. Boys get his Ph.D from?

Comment on If I Were President by kross

kross — Fri, 02 May 2008 18:56:42 +0000

Hey anybody see that film “Death of a President”? Well the title says it all. I hope what happened in that fictional movie becomes a reality. Not because I’m some crazy nut that really hates the president, but because it would actually bring great relief to know somebody else can finally take over the White House halting this NAU I’ve been reading about for the past two years. Up until this April, I’ve noticed a lot more serious articles are rising, but still no mainstream media reporter except Lou Dobbs has the balls to tell the american people on CNN. When Bush finally gets what he deserves, I hope every single news reporter goes down with em.

Comment on A Stern Warning to the “Conservative Elites” about Mitt Romney by Winghunter

Winghunter — Thu, 01 May 2008 15:58:02 +0000

Willard now pretends to be a “converted” conservative but, given his long past of deception there is no possible way that he can ever be believed or more importantly trusted…especially, in observing the way he intentionally went about it.

Such is the rightful price of destroying your own credibility.

Willard Mitt Romney
http://willardromney.blogspot.com/

Comment on Thoughts on the Alan Keyes Situation by catholic guy

catholic guy — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 14:54:40 +0000

The Structure of the Bible

The Bible consists of the 66 canonical books of the Old and New Testaments. These are the 39 books of the Old Testament and the 27 books of the New Testament. The Apocryphal books accepted by the Roman Catholic Church are not part of the recognized canon of Scripture.

-Kevin, so much for unity you preach. Who says the Catholic canon is not Scripture? the Authority of Jamnia 90AD!!!! or yea, and the fat, letcherous monk of Germany. Funny, the oldest Churches )Catholic, Ortohdox. Coptic) do recognize them!!!

Who decided what is recognized????????????????

Comment on Thoughts on the Alan Keyes Situation by Chris Campbell

Chris Campbell — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 14:51:05 +0000

“delveintothedepths
Quite frankly, this cult-like devotion to Alan Keyes is a little frightening. Are all of you suggesting that Pastor Chuck Baldwin is not a man of God who prays and seeks the Lord’s guidance before making his decisions? I think this is a subject I will revisit in a future post.

I have tried to defend Dr. Keyes. I had him as a guest on my talk show and showered him with compliments. I have been known as a Keyes supporter. Yet, because I do not beleive him to be perfect or without sin, I have been lambasted by his supporters. This is odd, very strange indeed.

Perhaps it is time for me to rethink my defense of Alan Keyes”

-um, yeah, you might want to do a little more research and read the CP platform while you are at it.Keyes supprots pre-emptive war, in violation of the platform, constitution and his own Church teaching. He supprots Enlightment “free market” Straussian and is a worshipper of Lincoln, the father of the GOP/Neocon war machine.

Comment on Thoughts on the Alan Keyes Situation by Chris Campbell

Chris Campbell — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 14:48:51 +0000

You bemoan the attempted takeover and platform infringement by KEyes and his people, yet you talk about shame about Cp, ask for repentence ,etc?

Can’t have it both ways kevin. They tried to take over and make it GOP-lite, yet you are condeming the Party loyalists for their defense over this attemtped hostiel takeover?

I was not able to go either, yet I appointed our Secretary of State as the delegate to convention. I was caleld by Scott Bartlett about 2 other men that simply showed up-never contacted me, asked for leadership, donated moeny, etc- and wanted to be delegates. Told Scott a flat out no to this.

The next day these 2 men are appointed to be delegates by-well, we don’t know. J. Green, our designated delegate spent a lot of time trying to work out that mess. Both men were predisposed toward Keyes, until vote.
There was a movement under foot, do not feel like singing cumba-ya with Keyes.

Comment on Thoughts on the Alan Keyes Situation by Laurie

Laurie — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 22:40:11 +0000

It seems to me that the CP was thinking that Alan Keyes would join the CP (meaning join our platform) when they asked him to come. Then when the Keyes supporters tried to get the CP to join Keyes. Mr. Phillips had no choice to do what he did. (maybe it could have been explained a bit better, I don’t know) but It seemed to me like Alan Keyes had every intention of hyjacking the CP for his own cause instead of joining us to fight for our country!!! I was there for the speech and I must say I too had my mouth open but if they were trying to take over then it had to be done. He did not agree with our platform at all. I heard him say that it was “ridiculous” . Did he really think that after joining a week he was going to come in and change everything that took years of work to build. Had we allowed Dr. Keyes to change our platform to reflect his ideas it would cease to be the Constitution party which many are turning to in hopes to change our country not comprimise with the establishment. How could he be our nominee when he goes against the platform on major issues. Dr. Keyes is an incredible speaker and has a lot of great ideas but he is not a CPer and had no business in joining the CP to promote his agenda. I hope and pray we can all get together on the constitution of our country and fight the real enemy ” big government” If we don’t work together to save our freedoms we won’t even be able to discuss these issues on a forum like this!

Comment on Thoughts on the Alan Keyes Situation by jim cooke

jim cooke — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 18:59:11 +0000

Somebody is way too sensitive here. I am not a member of any cult and never have been and never will be. And that quite frankly is not the whole issue. I have said very little though I have written several words, but it is not about what somebody is and what somebody else is or isn’t. I have not bad mouthed Chuck Baldwin, but having been a believer in the person Alan Keyes and knowing what he believes in doesn’t mean I worship him. He would consider me nuts if I did. I am also not judging Mr. Baldwin b/c again that would not be my right, and I don’t know him well or hardly at all. But like Zita as well, why would the CP bring Dr. Keyes in??? All I want is what is best for America, period… and as I wrote earlier . . .
EVERY CONSTITUTION PARTY MEMBER, EVERY REPUBLICAN, EVERY DEMOCRAT, EVERY UNDECIDED, EVERY CHRISTIAN NEEDS TO HEAR ONE MESSAGE AND TOGETHER UNITE AND THIS COUNTRY COULD MAKE IT THRU WHAT COULD BECOME A GREAT GREAT DISASTER IF SOMETHING ISN’T DONE THE WAY GOD WOULD WANT US TO DO IT, B/C LIKE IT OR NOT, WE AS CHRISTIANS ARE ALMOST LIKE THE WORLD ITSELF - DIVIDED AND SPREAD THIN - INSTEAD OF UNDIVIDED AND STRONG. GOD BLESS, J.C.