Chuck Baldwin finds Sarah Palin’s answers ‘very troubling’

After the Sarah Palin interviews by ABC’s Charles Gibson were broadcast, Constitution Party presidential candidate Chuck Baldwin wrote that he found her answers “very troubling.”

While he is not happy with her record on immigration and her subservience to John McCain on stem cell research, what bothers him most is that “on foreign policy, especially, Palin reveals herself to be just another neocon”:

When asked if she would be willing to take America to war with Russia in order to defend Georgia, she responded by saying, “Perhaps so.”

Egad! Do John McCain and Sarah Palin envision-even desire-war with Russia? John McCain is already on record as supporting sending troops to Georgia; now Sarah Palin suggests that even war with Russia is a possibility. Over what? Has Russia deployed troops along our borders? Has Russia threatened to invade the United States? Are McCain and Palin truly willing to launch a war with a nation that has thousands of ICBMs in its nuclear arsenal, when our own security has not been threatened?

24 Responses to “Chuck Baldwin finds Sarah Palin’s answers ‘very troubling’”

  1. Tennessee Mike Says:

    Boy, Baldwin’s awfully judgemental for a preacher. “Judge not, ye be not judged”.

  2. Odin Says:

    She does not have answers for foreign policy because she know nothing about it. Her “whatever Israel wants” was way more troubling than anything in that interview.

  3. Tim M Says:

    Georgia is a patner of NATO and attempting to become a full member. Under article 6 of the NATO charter, NATO members are required to defend other members of NATO so Palin was correct that if Georgia was to become a member, we would be obligated to defend but she also stated she prefered sanctions.

  4. Joe Lawson Says:

    Well Mr. Chuck Baldwin, Patrick J Buchanan who you supported in 2000 says Palin is NO NeoCon and is more or less holding her place to make it to the next level. Obviously Buchanan says, she will have to take the McCain path, but that doesn’t mean once she gets there she will be taking the advice of the NeoCons who are trying to mold her right now.

  5. chinese_conservative Says:

    Actually all that judge not, ye be not judged is not a prohibition on judgement it is just means if you judge you shall be judged by the same standards. This proper since both are running for the White House so we should judge whether they would be presidents or vps.

  6. Larry Breazeale,Msgt.(ret.)USAF Says:

    JUAN “McAMNESTY” McCain knows he is completely lousy on the issues and his record is nothing to be proud of. He needed something or some one to spive it up…..enter PALIN. She is really the “lipstick” on the pig.

    She is merely a DISTRACTION, pure and simple. The CFR (Council on Foreign Relations) party hacks are controlling her already, what to say, what to do. She has already compromised her principles! Just being Juan McCain’s running mate, she is saying LOUD & CLEAR, that she supports McCain’s CFR agenda…open borders, MORE un-constitutional FOREIGN AID, MORE trade deals, MORE FREE TRADE SCHEMES, MORE outsourcing of American jobs, MORE no-win undeclared wars.
    If she is not already a CFR member, sticking close to traitor McCain…she will be.CHUCK BALDWIN 2008 !

    Larry Breazeale, Msgt. (ret.) USAF
    Nat.Chrm. NVC/CP…www.nvets.org

  7. Larry Says:

    As I understand war with Russia means end of USA and end of world.

    Am I wrong in thinking this way or there is another possibility where we destroy Russia and nothing happen to us…

    In other words it would be like the Iraqui war.

  8. Northern Exposure Says:

    Actually Russian Bear Bombers have been repeatedly violating Nordic, Canadian and Alaskan airspace over the past two years in threatening maneuvers. Wake up and smell the Kremlin! The Russian government is not a fuzzy friendly Teddy Bear, but rather a ferocious and hungry predator.

  9. Mark Seidenberg Says:

    What was the first country invaded by the Soviet Union? Answer it was the
    United States, viz., the Territory of Alaska. Today, one of the Soviet Union
    sucessors in Russia is claiming (and holding Wrangell and Copper
    Islands) 8 Alaskan Islands in violation of international law. Five of the eight are located in the Arctic Ocean. These five islands, viz., the three DeLong Islands, Wrangell Island, and Herald Island, where aquired by the
    United States Government in the year 1881. The United States Congress
    by the First Organic Act of Alaska on May 17, 1884 made them party of
    the District of Alaska. In 1912 Alaska became an Organized Territory of
    these United States. In 1959 Alaska became a sovereign state of the
    union.

    Now to the answer to the question “Has Russia theatened to invade the
    United States?” The answer is yes. They have invaded the United States
    under there former governmental form, viz., the Soviet Union. I have
    observed in person that Russian troops stationed at Rodger Harbor,
    Wrangell Island, Alaska in 1995.

    The Soviet Union invaded the United States in 1924, which is an act of war.
    They have not left nor signed a peace treaty with the United States Government.

    As a former National Committeeman and Chairman of the California Delegation to the Constitution Party Convention of 2008, I can state
    this type lack of concern over the protection of the boarders by Chuck
    Baldwin, has caused the American Independent Party to split with the
    Constitution Party and back a ticket of Alan Keyes (for President).

    The only good news is Chuck Baldwin name will not be on the California
    ballot under the American Independent Party.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman, American Independent Party

  10. Richgriffin Says:

    Actually, Sarah Palin’s “whatever Israel wants” is the exact same thing that both corporate parties support…. but I do get your point…

  11. DonaldRLake Says:

    One more time, why is the USA [Canada, Iceland] still in full membership with NATO? What next, offensive missiles in Poland?

    Let’s get some Navy Ensign, appoint them to NATO and rachet back to ‘associative membership’!

    We are not the World’s policeman.

    We are not the world’s policeman.

  12. John Lowell Says:

    SARAH PALIN FINDS CHUCK BALDWIN’S PICTURE “VERY TROUBLING

    In a surprize gotcha while on the campaign trail in Cleveland today, Sarah Palin, referring to recent pictures of Chuck Baldwin that have sprung up on various internet sites, intoned, “For God’s sake, someone get that poor man a sweater, he’s freezing.”

    http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/16/a-salute-to-our-us-constitution/

    Palin’s comments are expected to find resonance among that small sector of the electorate that earns it’s living in small sweat shops housed in trailers traveling throughout the country. Emelda Twan, a 76 year old sweat shop slave working in a trailer that stops in Tupelo, Mississippi, once a quarter vowed now to vote for Palin because of her compassion. “She just knew what this poor feller needed”, she said.

  13. Northern Exposure Says:

    Russian submarines to test-fire nuke missiles in Pacific
    Tuesday, 16 September 2008
    From correspondents in Moscow

    September 13, 2008 06:59am
    Article from: Agence France-Presse

    RUSSIAN submarines armed with intercontinental ballistic missiles will
    test-fire their rockets in the Pacific Ocean between September 15 and
    20, a military official was quoted as saying today.

    “Some missile launches will be carried out in the Sea of Okhotsk and the
    Bering Sea” and will hit targets on the Kamchatka peninsula in eastern
    Russia, said the unidentified official, RIA Novosti news agency reported.

    A press officer for the governor of Kamchatka, a mountainous region
    often used for missile tests, told RIA Novosti that local authorities
    had been forewarned and would inform the local population in due course.

    Russia’s Pacific Fleet, which will carry out the tests, has Delfin
    nuclear submarines equipped with RSM-54 intercontinental ballistic
    missiles that can reach targets as far as 8300 km away.

  14. Stefan Says:

    I would not consider Palin a neocon per se. One wishes Baldwin, with his theological background, could have gone into the influence of his dispensationalist religious beliefs, with the political consequences of it and uncritically supporting the neocons agenda. Palin’s “dispensationalist” worldview puts her in philosophical lockstep with a huge part of the neocon programme. She
    will as VP have a very limited influence in government and foreign policy anyway, and will be more a postergirl for McCain-Lieberman to implement their “Bush doctrine on steroids”.

  15. David D.... Says:

    Doc. Baldwin just called them like he saw them as he has said countless times this election is about ‘Constitutionalists verses Globalists’ and that is what McCain/Palin and Obama/Biden are globalists, they are two sides of the same political coin and there is but a handful of personal and political differences seperating them!

    He (Baldwin) is reading between the lines and making an political observation in an election year, and in this instance and in this case Doc. Baldwin is spot on right. BALDWIN/CASTLE 2008 OR BUST

  16. Luke Says:

    I’m not Christian. This sometimes makes me a little wary about the Constitution party. I am however a supporter of principled third party candidates, so I bring up Baldwin’s name (among others) to anybody that I can get to listen.

    I’m very pleased to see that Baldwin has such a reasonable view on foreign policy. The idea of Palin being in charge of our military is truly frightening.

  17. Red Phillips Says:

    Baldwin is a dispensationalist, but he is not an interventionists. I’m sure that there are dispensationalists in smaller countries around the world who are not interventionists also. Dispensationalism does not inherently lead to interventionism re. Israel. It seems to be a peculiarly American manifestation of it. It is the combination of dispensationalism and American exceptionalism that makes for a volatile mix.

  18. Red Phillips Says:

    Mark S. has done us a favor and revealed that the reason the rump CA AIP broke away is not only because they have a pathological hatred of Chuck Baldwin, but also because they are straight up interventionists. Keyes is the interventionist’s interventionist. He made this clear post the Georgian invasion of South Ossetia. Good riddance to these treacherous war-mongering keyboard warriors.

  19. John Lowell Says:

    Red,

    So the CP is finally rid of its association with the AIP? Now if someone would only hand Baldwin a sweater.

  20. Stefan Says:

    John L: The CP is still working with the AIP (AK), NIP (Nebraska) and IAP (NV). It is surprising in how many states Baldwin/Castle are as “Independent candidate” and not under any party political organisation.
    http://www.constitutionparty.com/ba_stats.php

    Apropo sweater: the news is about Palin’s dramatic change in dress/style, which is perhaps the equivalent of Baldwin moving from sweater to a suit… :-) Todd Palin has been a member of the AIP and I can also understand it, he is of part Eskimo descent - I think - and no wonder he would not have something to do with dominance from DC.

  21. Stefan Says:

    It seems like poor Palin may be needing a metaphorically sweater soon, as the bounce seems to have peacked. McCain’s shrewd choice is also highly risky:

    http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_page=2835&u_sid=10435997
    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/16/opinion/16brooks.html?_r=2&ei=5070&emc=eta1&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

    John L: McCain will not overturn Roe & Wade nor likely appoint judges that would be likely to do that, as in that case those judges would also overturn McCain-Feingold. Also, the Bush admin, that was supposed to be pro-life has done zero to change the issue, even with a GOP majority for 6 years! There are a few choice R’s but then also a few pro-life D’s and could have had a majority.
    McCain would not change anything on this issue, he is on record…one wonders how many pro-lifers would be fooled into voting for him based on allegedly pro-life positions. Some “pro-choicers” have even said the US has some of the most liberal laws re. abortion and it should be changed.

  22. Red Phillips Says:

    Stefan, I am not now nor have I ever been on the Palin bandwagon, but the fact that Brooks, Frum, Will, Krauthammer etc. have concerns is one reason to like her. They are elitist snobs, less concerned with experience than pedigree. Oh no, she went to the University of Idaho like a normal person. I didn’t support Meirs for SCOTUS either, but much af the same dynamic was at work. As it was with Huckabee.

  23. John Lowell Says:

    Stefan,

    “John L: McCain will not overturn Roe & Wade nor likely appoint judges that would be likely to do that, as in that case those judges would also overturn McCain-Feingold. Also, the Bush admin, that was supposed to be pro-life has done zero to change the issue, even with a GOP majority for 6 years! There are a few choice R’s but then also a few pro-life D’s and could have had a majority.”

    Interesting analysis, Stefan, concerning the McCain-Feingold aspect and you are certainly right to say that Bush has done nothing that has concretely improved the death culture. If anything his stem-cell compromise actually damaged it, much to the consternation of the USCCB and the Vatican. I never forgave nor will I ever forgive him for that perfidy. But I think you may be overly concerned with the point of McCain-Feingold, as well thought out as it is. It certainly used to be that those most interested in the overturning of Roe would be trusting enough of a Republican president and his appointees, but after David Souter that’s over. McCain, if he were to get the opportunity to appoint someone, just might have to take his chances on McCain-Feingold to keep a lid on his own administration. The reaction to Meirs comes to mind as instructive here. What concerns me most about a McCain appointment, though, is that while it would most likely be reliable concerning Roe, it would most likely be reliable on the unitary executive as well and that part scares me. Non-ideological pro-lifers, largely Catholics and some Reformed Protestants, would be loath to buy into a Faustian deal that gave them an abortion-free America at the cost of having a Caudillo in the place of a President and that’s precisely what it promises to mean. The Reichschurch, on the other hand, the Dobson, Lands, Colsons, Falwells, Neuhauses and Weirichs wouldn’t much care about being ruled by a Fuehrer. They’re all terribly parenta - if not authoritarian - as it is. Catholics need to give a lot of serious thought to the proported cultural benefits of a McCain Administration. Actually, Baldwin is a much better choice on these questions.

  24. Speas Says:

    FYI - Chuck Baldwin will be in Northern NJ (close to NYC) for a reception on Sept 26. From the http://www.constitutionparty-nj.org/ website:

    The entire public is cordially invited on September 26 from 7:00pm - 10:00pm to meet Chuck Baldwin, Constitution Party candidate for president, as he travels to New Jersey to meet with voters face-to-face. This event is free to the public and will be held at the Firehouse Restaurant, 455 St. Georges Ave. in Rahway, NJ. This will be a great opportunity for the public to meet-and-greet a presidential candidate.

Leave a Reply