Libertarian Candidate Craig Exposes Ron Paul

Jefferson

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Libertarian Candidate Craig Exposes Ron Paul

This is the show from Thursday January 3rd, 2007.

BEST QUOTE OF THE SHOW:
The state republican pro-life candidates say, "Oh, [abortion] is a federal issue" and the federal candidates say it's a state's issue. And they're a bunch of child-killing liars. And you need to get angry. You need some righteous indignation. Those of you who have been lied to for all these years, you need to wake up! Ron Paul is pro-choice! And he doesn't support the Constitution. He supports the Constitution but will violate it to give states the right to kill kids.

SUMMARY:

* MO Libertarian Party Candidate Kevin Craig Admits the Truth: A libertarian party candidate running for a U.S. House seat in Missouri, Kevin Craig, admits the obvious truth on Bob Enyart Live, that Ron Paul would allow the states to continue the killing of unborn children. Also, Craig admits that as a Libertarian Candidate for a federal seat, he is opposed to the fourteenth amendment, because it requires equal protection of all persons under the law. This Libertarian candidate therefore approves of Ron Paul in large part because even though Paul believes an unborn child is a person, and to intentionally kill that child is murder, even still, Ron Paul would not enforce the U.S. Constitution and its requirement of equal protection for all persons.

Thus, this Libertarian Party candidate helped established the truth that Ron Paul is pro-choice, state by state. Like Paul (and like John Kerry, etc.), many of his supporters appear to be personally against abortion, but willing to allow the states to systematically murder innocent children. Unlike Kerry, a major claim of Paul's (and his supporters') is that he will uphold the Constitution. Pro-lifers around the country are now exposing even this as false. To get the vote of conservative Christians, Ron Paul uses rhetoric referring to abortion as murder, and giving lip service to the right to life of the fetus, claiming that he believes that a fetus is not just tissue, but a living human being. However, it turns out this represents his "personal view." When it comes to law, Paul states that the federal government should tolerate any state that legalizes abortion. Of course, the Constitution forbids such genocidal apathy. The federal government has the obligation to uphold the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states:

"...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

And the Fifth Amendment:

"No person shall be... deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..."

A perverse official could deny that a black person, or a child, is a person. But supposedly, Ron Paul, as in his own Sanctity of Life bills, would have the federal government declare that "human life shall be deemed to exist from conception." And then in the most obvious hypocrisy against both God's law and even the Constitution, Ron Paul argues, and as head of the Executive branch he would put into law:

"any State has the right to deprive any unborn person of life, for any reason, and by my own hypocritical oath as a doctor, and now by my pledge as a presidential candidate, I will not enforce the 5th or 14th amendments of the very constitution I claim to support, because my lust for power supersedes any other commitment I claim, whether to our man-made constitution or to God's command, Do not murder." -Ron Paul (on Truth Serum)

Creep.

* Romney Health Care: Mitt Romney stated that as Governor he always came down on the side of life with every bit of legislation that crossed his desk, except that Romney Health Care pays for abortion, promotes chemical abortions with Plan B, gives Planned Parenthood a seat on the Massachusetts Health Care advisory board, and attempts to force Catholic hospitals to dispense abortifacients. Like John Kerry before him, Mitt Romney is a pro-choice liberal Massachusetts politician.

Today's Resource: If you subscribe to the BEL Televised Classics, you will be able to watch one of the shows just transferred from studio beta tape to DVD, titled, Bob Debates Evolution . It's a classic in and of itself. Click on the Subscription Department in the BEL Store , or call us at 800-8Enyart to subscribe to Bob's videos or his Monthly Bible Study Albums!
 

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
How about finding a States Rights man up against a Federal guy and seeing what happens .. :D
 

PKevman

New member
Great show. I just don't see why Christians who support Ron Paul cannot see the truth staring them in the face! :up:
 

PKevman

New member
Yup. "The Libertarians are not really pro-constitution. That's a lie."

BOOM! TRUTHSMACK!

"They're a bunch of child killing liars, and you need to get angry."

"Ron Paul is Pro-choice and he doesn't support the constitution!"


God bless you Bob!
 

CRASH

TOL Subscriber
Wow! I am listening to this interview right now.:banana: :banana: :banana:

Kevin Craig:kookoo: is getting Hammered!

What a wicked dog. He thinks it's okay for states to legalize lynchings of blacks?!?!?!:mad:

WHAT AN IDIOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

Nick M

Black Rifles Matter
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Good points by Bob. Funny how the "champions of the Constitution" despise the bill of right so much. Especially the part about how Congress has the authority to enforce the laws.

Thank God we had Washington and Adams at the begining.
 

Jabin

New member
Ron Paul has made the case for overturning RvW. And, he is effectively more pro-life than the hypocrites pro-life voters keeping electing. Consider, the majority of supreme court justices have been appointed by "pro-life" presidents for as long as I remember. But, you'd be forgiven for not realizing that by how the court votes.
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
Ron Paul has made the case for overturning RvW. And, he is effectively more pro-life than the hypocrites pro-life voters keeping electing. Consider, the majority of supreme court justices have been appointed by "pro-life" presidents for as long as I remember. But, you'd be forgiven for not realizing that by how the court votes.
We realize that too. We're the "no exceptions" crowd.
 

Christian Liberty

Well-known member
We realize that too. We're the "no exceptions" crowd.

I'll try to listen to this at some point, but the ridiculous strawmans of Ron Paul's position by people like Jefferson, Nick, etc are getting kind of annoying. Admittedly, you don't generally do that.

Jr. is undoubtedly putting together a slew of Lew Rockwell articles that will (in his mind) defend the drug pushing, sodomite loving, baby murdering Libertarian from Texas.

:rolleyes:
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
I'll try to listen to this at some point, but the ridiculous strawmans of Ron Paul's position by people like Jefferson, Nick, etc are getting kind of annoying. Admittedly, you don't generally do that.
FYI, just because Jeff posts these threads doesn't mean the content is his. This is a special sub-forum where it is Jeff's job to post threads linking to the BEL episodes on KGOV and he puts the content from the page for the episode in the post as well.
 

Christian Liberty

Well-known member
FYI, just because Jeff posts these threads doesn't mean the content is his. This is a special sub-forum where it is Jeff's job to post threads linking to the BEL episodes on KGOV and he puts the content from the page for the episode in the post as well.

I assumed by posting it he was agreeing with it. I'd certainly never post something I didn't agree with without leaving some indictation that I rejected it.

That said, Bob Enyart has strawmanned Ron Paul as well. Its ridiculous. Ultimately, they care more about a big, bloated Federal Government for their own purposes than they do about liberty. These ridiculous attacks shows that they are, maybe unknowingly, doing Satan's work.
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
I assumed by posting it he was agreeing with it. I'd certainly never post something I didn't agree with without leaving some indictation that I rejected it.

That said, Bob Enyart has strawmanned Ron Paul as well. Its ridiculous. Ultimately, they care more about a big, bloated Federal Government for their own purposes than they do about liberty. These ridiculous attacks shows that they are, maybe unknowingly, doing Satan's work.
If you haven't even listened to it how can you make that claim?
 

Christian Liberty

Well-known member
If you haven't even listened to it how can you make that claim?

Ron Paul's enemies all have the same agenda, the expansion of the Federal Government.

Only an absolute moron would think that supporting the 10th amendment of the US constitution over the illegitimte 14th amendment is somehow being "Pro-choice, state by state." If anything, Ron is "Pro-life, state by state."

Not to mention the absolutely vile attacks on Ron's supporters. There's enough in the OP to show me that Bob is a liar.
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
Ron Paul's enemies all have the same agenda, the expansion of the Federal Government.
And there you go, making generalizations.

Only an absolute moron would think that supporting the 10th amendment of the US constitution over the illegitimte 14th amendment is somehow being "Pro-choice, state by state." If anything, Ron is "Pro-life, state by state."
You have already recognized that Paul allows for states to "keep abortion legal" if they so choose. And that is the problem.

Not to mention the absolutely vile attacks on Ron's supporters. There's enough in the OP to show me that Bob is a liar.
Care to point to any of these vile attacks?
 

Christian Liberty

Well-known member
And there you go, making generalizations.

I don't know about Enyart specifically, but I know the vast majority of the people who attacked Ron Paul for "Not being pro-life enough" supported Rick Santorum instead, and many of them (Although in this case, I know it doesn't apply to Enyart) ultimately voted for Romney because they were scared of Obama.

I don't think its a generalization. People who care about liberty should be much, MUCH more concerned with dismantling the Federal Government, or at least radically reforming it, than they are with trying to reform a murderous regime into one that can actually stop murder.


You have already recognized that Paul allows for states to "keep abortion legal" if they so choose. And that is the problem.

Because Paul recognizes and understands the 10th amendment. He also recognizes and understands that the Federal Leviathan is, by its nature, evil and murderous, and so tries to limit its power rather than increase it.

Care to point to any of these vile attacks?

Libertarian Candidate Craig Exposes Ron Paul

This is the show from Thursday January 3rd, 2007.

BEST QUOTE OF THE SHOW:


SUMMARY:

* MO Libertarian Party Candidate Kevin Craig Admits the Truth: A libertarian party candidate running for a U.S. House seat in Missouri, Kevin Craig, admits the obvious truth on Bob Enyart Live, that Ron Paul would allow the states to continue the killing of unborn children. Also, Craig admits that as a Libertarian Candidate for a federal seat, he is opposed to the fourteenth amendment, because it requires equal protection of all persons under the law. This Libertarian candidate therefore approves of Ron Paul in large part because even though Paul believes an unborn child is a person, and to intentionally kill that child is murder, even still, Ron Paul would not enforce the U.S. Constitution and its requirement of equal protection for all persons.

Thus, this Libertarian Party candidate helped established the truth that Ron Paul is pro-choice, state by state(RPfor2016 commentary: And Bob along with everyone else is "Pro-choice, nation by nation" unless they advocate invading other countries to stop them from aborting Like Paul (and like John Kerry, etc.), (RPfor2016 commentary: This charge is absolute crap. Ron Paul has stated, in defending his sanctity of life act, that he would like to see homicide laws used against abortionists. That's much further than most "Personhood" advocates would go. Admittedly, Ron Paul disagrees with you on the level at which this should be done,but not so much regarding what should be done. By contrast, John Kerry says he is personally anti-abortion, but he doesn't want ANY laws against it. many of his supporters appear to be personally against abortion, but willing to allow the states to systematically murder innocent children. Unlike Kerry, a major claim of Paul's (and his supporters') is that he will uphold the Constitution. Pro-lifers around the country are now exposing even this as false. To get the vote of conservative Christians, Ron Paul uses rhetoric referring to abortion as murder, and giving lip service to the right to life of the fetus, claiming that he believes that a fetus is not just tissue, but a living human being. However, it turns out this represents his "personal view." When it comes to law, Paul states that the federal government should tolerate any state that legalizes abortion. Of course, the Constitution forbids such genocidal apathy. The federal government has the obligation to uphold the

RPfor2016 commentary: Are you kidding me, Enyart? "Genocidal apathy?" I guess ANY inaction on any murder anywhere is "Genocidal apathy". The only murderers in the case of abortion are the women involved and the doctors. Most pro-lifers, in their hypocricy, include the negligent government here, and exclude the woman. Of course, they ignore the ACTUAL murders committed by the US government, which, conveniently, Ron Paul stands alone among Presidential candidates in 2012 in opposing (Admittedly, Gary Johnson and Virgil Goode opposed most of these killings, but not all of them. Gary, however, was actually "pro-choice state by state" [rather than being pro-life state by state, as Ron Paul is] and Virgil Goode didn't pass ARTL's purity test either.)
Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states:

"...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

RPfor2016 commentary: and that amendment was not valid to begin with. Enyart should know this.


That said, the amendment refers to persons who are "Born or naturalized in the United States." While unborn children are clearly people, they are not "Born or naturalized in the United States" and so the 14th amendment does not protect them, whether it should or not aside.

And the Fifth Amendment:

"No person shall be... deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..."


(RPfor2016 commentary: The Constitution doesn't define "person" but I can agree with Enyart that including the unborn here is only rational. And unlike the 14th amendment, this one doesn't specify "Born or naturalized in the United States." That said, refusing to criminalize murder isn't really a denial of due process, since being aborted (Or murdered, they're really the same thing) doesn't actually have anything to do with "due process" like a court sentence.


"any State has the right to deprive any unborn person of life, for any reason, and by my own hypocritical oath as a doctor, and now by my pledge as a presidential candidate, I will not enforce the 5th or 14th amendments of the very constitution I claim to support, because my lust for power supersedes any other commitment I claim, whether to our man-made constitution or to God's command, Do not murder." -Ron Paul (on Truth Serum)


RPfor2016: This is a fake quote
Creep.


Not a surprise that the open theist heretic would say that about an actual Christian.

* Romney Health Care: Mitt Romney stated that as Governor he always came down on the side of life with every bit of legislation that crossed his desk, except that Romney Health Care pays for abortion, promotes chemical abortions with Plan B, gives Planned Parenthood a seat on the Massachusetts Health Care advisory board, and attempts to force Catholic hospitals to dispense abortifacients. Like John Kerry before him, Mitt Romney is a pro-choice liberal Massachusetts politician.


Of course he is. Finally Enyart says something worth listening to.



Not to mention that he told Christians to "Repent" for supporting Ron Paul a few years ago.

(My comments in the quote are italicized and underlined, but not bolded, even where they are not marked as my comments.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
I don't know about Enyart specifically, but I know the vast majority of the people who attacked Ron Paul for "Not being pro-life enough" supported Rick Santorum instead, and many of them (Although in this case, I know it doesn't apply to Enyart) ultimately voted for Romney because they were scared of Obama.
Enyart did not support Santorum.

I don't think its a generalization. People who care about liberty should be much, MUCH more concerned with dismantling the Federal Government, or at least radically reforming it, than they are with trying to reform a murderous regime into one that can actually stop murder.
Did I ever tell you who put together the reformed Constitution and Criminal Code I linked you to, previously? It was Bob. And he is the one who convinced me that a Constitutional Monarchy is better than what we have.

Bottom line: you have no argument when you accuse Bob of not advocating a dismantling of the current government and a radical reformation of the government overall.

Because Paul recognizes and understands the 10th amendment. He also recognizes and understands that the Federal Leviathan is, by its nature, evil and murderous, and so tries to limit its power rather than increase it.
But does he advocate, as you do, the forced secession of states that do not criminalize abortion if the federal government recognizes it as murder?

Not to mention that he told Christians to "Repent" for supporting Ron Paul a few years ago.
What do you think he meant?

(My comments in the quote are italicized and underlined, but not bolded, even where they are not marked as my comments.
It would have been easier if you had broken the OP up into quote boxes and posted your comments on the outside.

And Bob along with everyone else is "Pro-choice, nation by nation" unless they advocate invading other countries to stop them from aborting
Except that maybe they recognize that the US government has authority within the US, but not outside it.

Or do you no longer believe that?*

*That's what I thought.

This charge is absolute crap. Ron Paul has stated, in defending his sanctity of life act, that he would like to see homicide laws used against abortionists. That's much further than most "Personhood" advocates would go. Admittedly, Ron Paul disagrees with you on the level at which this should be done,but not so much regarding what should be done. By contrast, John Kerry says he is personally anti-abortion, but he doesn't want ANY laws against it.
I don't know a single personhood advocate that doesn't want homicide laws used against abortionists.

Also we don't disagree with Paul that the states should take care of the enforcement of said laws.

Are you kidding me, Enyart? "Genocidal apathy?" I guess ANY inaction on any murder anywhere is "Genocidal apathy". The only murderers in the case of abortion are the women involved and the doctors. Most pro-lifers, in their hypocricy, include the negligent government here, and exclude the woman. Of course, they ignore the ACTUAL murders committed by the US government, which, conveniently, Ron Paul stands alone among Presidential candidates in 2012 in opposing (Admittedly, Gary Johnson and Virgil Goode opposed most of these killings, but not all of them. Gary, however, was actually "pro-choice state by state" [rather than being pro-life state by state, as Ron Paul is] and Virgil Goode didn't pass ARTL's purity test either.)
It is genocidal apathy in regard to abortion, because abortion is not simply a murder every now and then, and certainly not a single murder, but millions of murders a year, with governmental authorization.

It is as much apathy to genocide as it was when the government stood by and let its citizens kill black people, during and after slavery. And sometimes its not even apathy, such as is the case currently with abortion, it is active support.

And the only time the woman is not guilty is if she is forced into it by someone else, and most of the time even when the woman is complicit there are still more murderers than she and the doctor.

and that amendment was not valid to begin with. Enyart should know this.
Can you give a detailed explanation as to why this amendment is not valid?

That said, the amendment refers to persons who are "Born or naturalized in the United States." While unborn children are clearly people, they are not "Born or naturalized in the United States" and so the 14th amendment does not protect them, whether it should or not aside.
I can agree with that.

RPfor2016: This is a fake quote
Do you really think you needed to point that out?

Not a surprise that the open theist heretic would say that about an actual Christian.
:plain:
 
Top