To the, why should this matter, I say
Any one who does not follow his "religious 'spiritual' authority" Is not much good to himself or anyone else.

You all said

According to Wikipedia, Alan Keyes is Catholic. While that is disturbing to me from a doctrinal point-of-view, when I read his speeches, I don't get the sense that "the church" controls him.

Remember that to a Catholic, The poop is god. GOD is subject to him, The Bible is subject to him. Even Marry is subject to him. he decides "heaven or HELL" all Catholics are subject to him.

If Mr. Keyes is not subject to him then he has no base and is a liar. or
COULD MR. KEYES BE A JESUIT. Sent to destroy the USA?

I also did not realize that Keyes was Catholic. But then again, on the outside of doctrine, Catholics have very high secular moral standards.

Mel Gibson is a Catholic.......

Good point
Mr. Gibson is an old Latin mass type and worships marry (queen of heaven-mother of god)

If you are referring to the Passion movie Mr. Gibson said it was an act of worship to marry not JESUS and could not understand why we liked it!!
BTW they said a mass every day they worked on the movie!!

Lutheran or Episcopal al thro they dont teach properly they dont worship the poop.

Thank you

Bro. Harold

Also the mormans have a poop in salt lake city!!!

Got this from Pastor Dixon, and thought it was very "on point":

One thing we have learned from the current primary campaign is just how manipulable the American voter is by a media onslaught for or against various candidates. The slick campaign to eliminate Romney from the campaign, using Huckabee as the spoiler, was very revealing. So was the extreme media bias against Ron Paul. There just aren’t enough thinking people among voters to amass any more support for a principled, Constitution-based platform than 5-10%. That doesn’t bode well for a third party or independent run. The mainstream media will deny any meaningful news coverage to third parties–unless it’s one of “their” third party spoilers like Ross Perot, who collaborated with the PTB in order to get the Clintons installed in the White House. Only in those cases do they get lots of coverage and are allowed into the debates.

Without substantive media attention, within our “winner-take-all” system, a third party/independent run for the presidency is not capable of winning the election outright–though it can act as a spoiler for one party or the other. However, as I just pointed out, the PTB(powers-that-be, i.e.-CFR/Trilaterals, etc) get their way with either the Democrat or Republican–they just get it done in a different order and slightly different time frame.

In any case, no third party or independent candidacy is going anywhere unless all the disparate parties and forces agree on supporting a single candidate–and that person is Ron Paul. He is the only candidate capable of attracting partisans across the principled political spectrum of constitutional conservatives, independents and many anti-war Democrats as well. Almost all of the small third parties would be willing to join forces if Ron Paul were the standard bearer. Such a unified coalition has not been possible in the past hundred years. Only Ron Paul is capable of engendering the necessary trust to put together this large a coalition. He says this movement is not about him, but it is, in one significant way: A proper ideology is absolutely essential, but it has to have a human being to be its champion and get elected to office. Ideas don’t get elected on their own without a person the people can rally around. No one else has the elected track record of Ron Paul. No one else has his absolute reputation for trust.

The only problem is that Paul has announced that he will not run as a third party or independent candidate–that he is staying loyal to the Republican party. He has done this not because he really thinks highly of the Republican party (that has betrayed him constantly), but simply because running as a Republican has been the only way in which he has ever won anything. He would never have won his seat in Congress as a libertarian. Only by running as a mainstream candidate do you accrue the number of unthinking voters that is necessary to win. Not only is Ron running for President but he is running concurrently for his seat in Congress as a Republican. So he is not free to switch parties without ceding the Congressional race to the other liberal Republicans who are challenging Paul in the Republican primary in his Texas district.

The ultimate question for Ron Paul is this: Is staying within the Republican’s going to continue to yield any significant benefits in terms of building the movement? It’s a tough question. He believes it will. Most of Paul’s supporters couldn’t care less about Paul staying in the Republican party–which they correctly view as part of the problem. However Ron sincerely believes he can continue to grow the movement staying in the GOP and by retaining his seat in Congress.

Certainly this year’s record run for the Presidency bears that out. Paul never would have got even a fraction of the media and debate time had he not run in the Republican primary. Even though the media purposely denied him equal coverage and equal time in the debates, still his message did get out there–with a lot of help from his supporters. Ron’s message failed to catch on in large numbers because too many voters are unthinking, taking their cues from talking heads who dismiss Paul as irrelevant, and too complacent with the status quo to feel the severity of the crisis we face. The PTB are intent on keeping people complacent, and marginalizing those that aren’t.

Has Ron’s advantage running with the Republican’s run its course? Yes and no. I don’t think he will have any more effect back in Congress than before–which was minimal. Admittedly, it has been great to have him there. He has been our watchdog on everything the Congress did wrong. He has been the conscience of the Congress for decades but, like Jiminy Cricket of Pinnochio fame, Congress isn’t listening. Ron isn’t getting any younger either but he is in good health and could still fight on for many years–at least in Congress–but probably not as president where he is quickly reaching that age limit where few would consider him a viable candidate because of age. That is why many of us felt this election was our last and best chance.

There is still, however, the possibility that some crisis may get out of hand and the PTB could come out looking very bad. From his position as a Republican member of Congress and a former Presidential candidate, his voice would have the best chance of being heard. Future crises that surely must come are what Ron Paul is hoping will give him yet another chance either before the convention, or in the next four years.

The PTB are experts at making sure dissidents don’t get the chance to build on some crisis. That is why defacto control of the media is so important. Some have hypothesized that the current economic crisis could bring this nation to its knees and finally cause people to wake up, and reject establishment fiat money policies. It could, but even then history gives us little hope that people can resist the false saviors that present themselves in a crisis to divert us from a proper solution.

For example, in 1992 the entire Italian establishment political structure was voted out of office in the famous scandal over bribery and corruption. It was discovered that all political parties were engaged in systematic kickbacks on government contracts from big corporations and the Mafia. All of those political parties reformed within six months and were back in business with new names and new faces–and the very same powerful forces were still controlling Italian politics. A similar charade deceived the whole world with the deceptive “fall of the Soviet Union.” The Communists simply went underground and created their own “reformed” communist parties with false anti-communist leaders both in Russia and in former satellite countries. Even Lech Walesa’s Solidarity Movement in Poland was a front controlled by the Communists. The whole world bought into this grand deception but Communism never died. They simply learned to do what Western globalists did–use puppets to front as conservatives and agents of change.

As bad as things are looking economically, I don’t believe the PTB will allow it to get so bad that they lose control. But if it does and the public threatens to throw the rascals out, I believe you will see the PTB engineer a false reform with fresh faces just like the Italians and the Soviets did. They’ll never let a real change agent like Paul take the lead, any more than they will ever let the real critics of the 9/11 conspiracy have a role in any new investigations.

The system is rigged in a very multi-layered and sophisticated way and it takes a great deal of expertise to see through it. But, with it all, we must keep trying to position the movement to take advantage of any faults and mistakes the powers that be might make as they conspire to take down liberty. Each succeeding conspiracy, whether it be the JFK assassination, the Oklahoma City bombing, or 9/11, brings more people to greater understanding–never enough, sadly, to reverse our course, but certainly enough to constitute a worrisome resistance to those intent upon delivering us to a NWO. Building a remnant is always worth fighting for, even if we can’t save our nation temporally.

This post was last modified: Sun Feb 17, 2008 03:18 AM by Mongol Servant.

Very, VERY Well said!

Here in England, There has been a great deal of coverage of the primaries, but not once have I heard Ron Paul mentione, NOT ONCE.

Of course they're not going to mention Ron Paul. I saw an article that stated that only 5 - 10% of Americans want a constitutionally mandated federal government. The majority (90%) want their "pet interest" taken care of by BIG government. They will sell their freedom, for the ill-perceived "safety & security" of cradle-to-grave government sponsored subsidies. Sad state of affairs. Here's another note from Neil Smith:

Something is deeply wrong with the American political process.

That's the only way to explain why, despite polls showing that 70% of us want the wars in the middle east ended and our troops brought home now, the probable nominees of the "major" political parties are a warmongering lunatic and a "peace candidate" who says he wants to bomb Pakistan.

At the same time, the only potential potentate who wants what we want—and also promises to force the government into compliance with the Constitution, which was supposed to be its basic operating system—has been as crudely and blatantly shut out of the corrupt electoral process, by both government and mass media, as if he were a black political activist in Selma, Alabama or Oxford, Missiissippi in the 1950s.

Tammany Hall's notorious 19th century Boss Tweed may have said it out loud in public first: "I don't give a d**n who votes, as long as I do the nominating," but the sentiment is straight out of Alexander Hamilton's personal philosophy of power above anyone and anything else.

Little wonder, then, that our civilization presently finds itself in worse shape, politically and economically, and in greater danger of some kind of violent and bloody Wagnerian collapse, than at any other time during its long, ugly, war-torn history, including World War I, World War II, the Great Depression, and the egregiously misnamed Civil War.

There was nothing civil about it.

In the wake of whatever happened on September 11, 2001 (whether anybody likes it or not, the facts of that event, including who was responsible, are far from settled), a fat, lazy, corrupt, rubberstamp Congress passed the so-called "U.S.A. Patriot Act" apparently without even reading it (some politicians claim there were no copies available to read—which should have caused them to reject it on the spot) destroying financial, communications, and medical privacy in this country, and with them, the tattered remains of the fundamental human right to trade with anybody for anything. Among many other new lows, for the first time, the law restricted constitutional and other rights during the period of an undeclared (and therefore totally illegal) war.

In addition to creating a new category of crime called "domestic terrorism", the act allowed the indefinite detention of a steadily widening variety of individuals, secret, warrantless searches of people's homes and businesses, and other violations of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments. (Freedom to travel without harrassment or intrusion had already been obliterated more than a generation earlier.) In short, with one stroke of a President's pen, America completed what had been, until then, a slow, steady, gradual descent into police statism.

The act (and supporting legislation that came later, such as the deceptively-named "Military Commissions Act" and H.R.1955/S.B.1959) mandated "studies" of biometric identification systems—I recently wrote an article about the way "studies" rapidly become law—the early origins of the notorious "No-Fly list" at airports, and fat "security" contracts for fascistic corporations like Halliburton and Blackwater, the latter of which has since become a worldwide military power with a greater armed presence in Iraq than the United States government.

Meanwhile, a brand new and overwhelmingly powerful secret police establishment with the Joseph Geobbelsian monicker "Department of Homeland Security", arose to prominence and has come to dominate all other American law enforcement organizations, Constitutional or otherwise.

But that was only the beginning. The Patriot Act, scheduled to sunset in 2005, was renewed with disgusting haste and followed by Patriot II, giving the government even more power at the expense of what had been unalienable individual, civil, Constitutional, and human rights.

All in all, it has been a time of bitter disillusionment. The nation's courts, for example, particularly the United States Supreme Court, have revealed themselves to be fully as corrupt and unreliable in their stewardship of the Constitution, especially of the Bill of Rights, as Congress, or even the mass media Thomas Jefferson believed—falsely, as it turned out—would preserve them. If somebody set out from the beginning, with the deliberate intention of destroying American civilization, he would be following exactly the same policies—running the Abraham Lincoln playbook—that George W. Bush is following.

Allow me to repeat that, because it's important. If somebody set out from the beginning, with the deliberate intention of destroying American civilization, he would be following exactly the same policies—running the Abraham Lincoln playbook—that George W. Bush is following.

Notably it was Dishonest Abe who first suspended habeas corpus, but Republicans are nothing if not pathetic creatures of nostalgia and will do absolutely anything to bring back the "good old days" of Lincolnofascism.

Cures? The list of cures is endless: abolish sovereign immunity, disarm the feds; demilitarize the cops; outlaw the secret ballot; send the politicians (including the President and his Cabinet) into combat first; abolish limited liabilty, outlaw fractional reserve banking, repeal every law passed since September 11, 2001, repeal every law passed since 1912. And no, I'm not kidding about any of those or a half a hundred more I could have written down here. But the problem remains the same as it was before: no real reform effort can get any traction when the system is run by crooked politicians and the whorish media.

Face it: in the kingdom of bananas, he who has the most bananas is king.

The 2008 presidential election is the last test of the Democratic Experiment in America. So far, it's failing badly. If Ron Paul and his message of peace and the rule of law continue to be excluded, that will be the end of a political system that was probably phony to begin with.

It will be our task—that of America's libertarians, and those individuals who waged the Ron Paul campaign, to decide upon the next step. I have three ideas for getting the traction we need and using it to change things for the better, forever, whether those who falsely believe they own the country—and our lives—want them changed or not.

Anybody interested?

Over here, we regularly see pictures of police smashing down doors with battering rams, often at 5.00 or 6.00 a.m. Their excuse is that drug dealers can flush away the evidence, if they delayed, or armed criminals/terrorists could get their arms. This has resuilted in at least one innocent person being shot, in the last year or so.

Even the Gestapo knocked.

This post was last modified: Sat Feb 23, 2008 08:52 PM by Davo.

With all of the hoopla going on around the primaries, it's amazing that NONE of the career politicians have any kind of solution or plan, for getting America out of the deep quagmire we're in. For the past 100 years, Americans have swallowed the same old garbage and lies from whoever is running for office. We are in the last days, no doubt. Here's an article, with at least some sort of workable plan:

http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Editorial...oNo=031003

The "fat lady" hasn't even mounted the podium yet. Stop listening to all the McCain garbage and read this:

http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Find-Free...?At=031091

There's still hope!

Bro Tim,
I saw that today, Alan Keyes officially left the GOP. I also noticed this article from Pastor Chuck Baldwin, there in Pensacola:

April 15, 2008
NewsWithViews.com

Every four years, conservative "pragmatists" trot out the "We Can't Let So-And-So Win" mantra. Of course, the so-and-so in question is always the Democratic Presidential candidate. For all of my adult life, I have been listening to so-called "conservative" Republicans warn us of the impending doom that would befall our country if the Democratic candidate were elected. And this year is no different.

This year's Republican primary did provide a wonderful aberration, however, to the usual choices between Tweedledee and Tweedledum. Republicans had an opportunity to nominate a real American constitutionalist, a statesman in the similitude of Thomas Jefferson or James Madison. That man was Texas Congressman, Ron Paul. Unfortunately, the Republican faithful seem to be incapable of discerning the marks of true greatness, not to mention fidelity to constitutional government. It is doubtful that most of them even understand what constitutional government is. And as for Christian conservatives, they can barely see any issues beyond abortion and "gay rights." To try and convince them to support a constitutionalist candidate is like talking to a brick wall.

So, what choice does the Republican Party offer the American people this year? The worst of all possible choices: good old John "McSame" McCain.

Let's be clear: a John McCain Presidency will be no better than a Hillary Clinton or a Barack Obama Presidency. In fact, in many ways, a McCain White House will be WORSE than a Democratic one.

On many issues, there is virtually no distinction between John McCain and any potential Democratic candidate. John McCain is no friend to gun owners. He is no friend to pro-lifers. He is no friend to fiscal conservatives. He is no friend to property owners. He is no friend to "family values" voters. He is no friend to America's blue-collar workers. He is no friend to small business owners. He is no friend to opponents of illegal immigration.

On the other hand, John McCain is a great friend to Big Business. Similarly, he is a friend to Big Government and Big Brother. He is also a friend to open borders, supranational government, regionalism, and American imperialism.

But this is where the Boogeyman comes in.

At this point, Republican Party lackeys will break in and say, "We can't let Hillary Clinton win. We can't let Barack Obama win." Even the favored son of the Religious Right, Mike Huckabee, has endorsed John McCain, not to mention Mitt Romney and virtually every other Republican "bigwig." (Thank God, Ron Paul has maintained his integrity by NOT endorsing McCain.)

I, for one, am fed up with this baloney, because what we are actually faced with is not the "lesser of two evils" but "the evil of two lessers." (To quote a good friend of mine.) And the reason John McCain would actually be a worse President than either Obama or Clinton is because of the manner in which conservatives go to sleep whenever a Republican occupies the Oval Office. Furthermore, the next couple of years are "crunch time" for this burgeoning North American Union and related issues.

America is currently facing the most serious threat to its national independence and sovereignty since the War of 1812. The forces of globalism have declared an all-out war against our country's independence. Illegal immigration, the NAFTA superhighway, the North American Community, a regional currency called the Amero, and "free trade" deals are just a few of the weapons in their arsenal. And John McCain will use every bit of his power as President to facilitate all of this chicanery. And, because McCain is a Republican, conservatives and Christians will sit back and let it happen without even the slightest whimper of resistance. If Obama or Clinton were sitting in the Oval Office, however, massive numbers of conservatives and Christians would rise in protest over every inch of ground ceded to these nefarious nabobs. So, tell me, who is the greater evil? I say it is John McCain.

I realize that there are many readers shouting to themselves right now and saying, "So what do we do, Chuck? We have to vote for one or the other." To which I say, No you don't. You can think outside the box. You don't have to throw your vote away on either of these wretched candidates. You can cast a vote for principle and vote for a third party candidate.

I can hear readers screaming at me now, saying that voting for a third party candidate is a wasted vote. I strongly disagree! Casting a vote for a person who you know is unfaithful to your principles is a wasted vote! Voting for someone who you know will keep our borders and ports open to illegals, continue George Bush's preemptive war doctrine, and facilitate a burgeoning hemispheric government--not to mention someone who will increase and augment a burgeoning Orwellian police state--is a wasted vote!

At some point, we Americans must decide whether we will tolerate the continued sellout of our freedoms and principles or not. Will we swallow the shallow squeals of the establishment elite who think we are a bunch of sheep to be herded into their New World Order? Or will we stand our ground? Will we vote our principles and our conscience?

It does not matter that the pundits and experts say we can't win. That is not our business. As John Quincy Adams said, "Duty is ours; results are God's." When will Christians, especially, quit trying to play politics and start standing for principle? They talk a lot about principle, but when it comes down to where the rubber meets the road, most don't act like people of principle.

If God intends to give America another chance, if He intends to return these United States to constitutional government, and if He intends to preserve America's independence, it will only come in the form of a miracle. And miracles do not happen by the machinations of pragmatic planners. Miracles are just that.

America was born a miracle, and it could now be given a new birth by miracle. If so, it would demand that people of principle start acting like it. That we cast aside the pragmatic, the reasonable, the sophisticated, and the expected. That we--as did the priests of old--would be willing to step out into the raging current of the Jordan River, knowing that either God would part the water or we would drown. That we would be willing to sign our names to a document--as did our Founding Fathers--that would make us either the enemies of the state or the inventors of a new nation. It means taking risks; it means doing the impractical; it means rejecting accepted wisdom and standing for principle.

I am convinced that only a miracle can save America now. And I am expecting God to grant such a miracle. Beyond that, I am willing to do my part to place myself in a position to let God use my voice and my vote to accomplish this miracle. And if that means voting for someone who "has no chance of winning" in order to let God take the glory for whatever victory results, it is the least I can do. So, who will join me?

Chuck Baldwin is Founder-Pastor of Crossroads Baptist Church in Pensacola, Florida. In 1985 the church was recognized by President Ronald Reagan for its unusual growth and influence.

Dr. Baldwin is the host of a lively, hard-hitting syndicated radio talk show on the Genesis Communications Network called, "Chuck Baldwin Live" This is a daily, one hour long call-in show in which Dr. Baldwin addresses current event topics from a conservative Christian point of view. Pastor Baldwin writes weekly articles on the internet http://www.ChuckBaldwinLive.com and newspapers.

To learn more about his radio talk show please visit his web site at: http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com. When responding, please include your name, city and state.

I respectfully disagree with Pastor Baldwin.

I'm not well-versed on McCain's record regarding fiscal conservatism, property ownership, and blue-collar workers. But if we're going to be honest President Bush is no fiscal conservative either.

From my review of his voting record, John McCain is a friend of gun owners. He voted against Brady Bill & assault weapon ban. Voted YES on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005) Voted YES on banning lawsuits against gun manufacturers for gun violence. (Mar 2004) Voted NO on background checks at gun shows. (May 1999) Voted YES on more penalties for gun & drug violations. (May 1999) Voted YES on loosening license & background checks at gun shows. (May 1999) Voted YES on maintaining current law: guns sold without trigger locks. (Jul 1998 ) Ban gun registration & trigger lock law in Washington DC. (Mar 2007) Given that record he seems plenty friendly to gun owners like myself.

He is also without a doubt pro-life. NARAL gave him a rating of 0% on "abortion rights" after all and the NRLC gave him a 75% rating on pro-life voting. Perhaps their less than 100% rating was because he did vote in favor of expanding federal funding of embryonic stem-cell research. I completely disagree with John McCain on McCain/Feingold campaign finance and the other initiatives in which he has co-sponsored with Democrats. However, though I disagree with him severely on some issues, he is still worlds better than Hillary or Obama who are downright socialist, pro-abortion, anti-gun to the extreme, and are no friend to people who hold moral principles. Voting for anyone other than John McCain will ensure Democratic Party control of our nation for the next 4 years and I refuse to sign up for that. Our resistance against Democratic policies needs to be at the ballot box, not later when we've already given them power for 4 years in the legislature AND the presidency.

NAU and the Amero? Let's try to keep the conspiracy theories to a minimum.

This post was last modified: Wed Apr 16, 2008 11:59 AM by Nate.

Nate,
Did you read the entire article? Your reply is indicative of what Pastor Baldwin was pointing out in the first place. Did you also check to see that McLame was going to change parties when Bush got the nod last time instead of him?

There's no "conspiracy theory" in the mix (unless you believe everything put out by the main-stream news mafia). Here's McLame's own words:

McCain's March 2008 World Affairs Council speech stated in part,

"With globalization, our hemisphere has grown closer, more integrated, and more interdependent. Latin America today is increasingly vital to the fortunes of the United States. Americans north and south share a common geography and a common destiny. The countries of Latin America are the natural partners of the United States, and our northern neighbor Canada.

Relations with our southern neighbors must be governed by mutual respect, not by an imperial impulse or by anti-American demagoguery. The promise of North, Central, and South American life is too great for that. I believe the Americas can and must be the model for a new twenty-first century relationship between North and South. Ours can be the first completely democratic hemisphere, where trade is free across all borders, where the rule of law and the power of free markets advance the security and prosperity of all."

Most people listen to something, with one of two purposes, in mind:
(1) They listen to respond
(2) They listen to comprehend

Please, take time to read each thought Pastor Baldwin is emphasizing, with a view towards understanding his purpose and point. For the past 100 years, we (Americans) have listened to promise, after promise, after promise, from these "career politicians", and absolutely NOTHING has changed. One of the main issues brought up by Pastor Baldwin, and I whole-heartedly agree, is that we had the opportunity to elect a Christian statesman, for the 1st time in a long time, and we let it get away. Another point he made, and again I whole-heartedly agree with, is that we MUST end this "business as usual" government, that is destroying the America clearly laid out and mandated by the U.S. Constitution. Dr No would get us back on the track of allowing the States to determine issues for their people, instead of this federal monster in Washington.

Regardless of all this, McLame has already been decreed as the heir to the throne by the media, so, all of the "Christian lemmings" will follow suit. Oh well.....

As I said before, I'm not a fan of McCain. He has many flaws that other candidates in the Republican party did not possess. However, the fact remains his voting record is pro-life and pro-gun/2nd amendment making the pastor's statements to the contrary false.

Would I love to vote for a Christian statesman? Absolutely! Would I love to vote for a candidate who would get us back to a "states rights" configuration again? Absolutely! Would I love to vote for a candidate who will seal our borders and send all illegals packing? Absolutely! The problem is we do not have that perfect candidate, so we must choose the one which is better than Obama or Clinton could ever dream of being. They are neither pro-life nor pro-gun/2nd amendment by any stretch of the imagination and are incredibly hostile to people of faith. Voting for anyone but McCain will ensure that dyed in the wool Democratic Party socialist will run this country. That will in turn guarantee extremely liberal judges being appointed to the Supreme Court. I refuse to cast a vote that will do so.

This post was last modified: Mon Apr 21, 2008 10:08 PM by Nate.

The Republican and Democrats are essentially one party. Pastor Chuck Baldwin is up for the nomination in the Constitution Party this coming weekend at the CP presidential nominating convention in Kansas City. I'll be voting for him. Christians will be able to vote their conscience in 2008.

http://www.constitutionparty.com
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com

How Bad Is McCain

If all your voting for is Supreme court Justices, then McCain is not your man.

This post was last modified: Mon Apr 21, 2008 11:06 PM by Raymond.

I would like to add that if you vote for McCain you have also told the Republican party that they don't have to run a real conservative to get your vote. The next guy they run for President after McCain will be even more liberal(if thats possible). The Republican party is no longer conservative.

You might say they are neither hot nor cold, but only luke warm.