Posted by: James McDonald | September 11, 2008

Ron Paul’s Suggestions

[Note: editted 9/12] Ron Paul suggested people consider voting for Cynthia McKinney of the Green Party today for the office of president. Not only is she a woman, but she’s pro-abortion to boot. Congressman Paul has also suggested people consider uber-liberal Ralph Nadar. Could you imagine the nominees they would come up with for the Supreme Court

Now, don’t get me wrong. I have great respect and admiration for Congressman Ron Paul. If he were still in the contest, he would certainly have been a contender for my vote.

I do find it ironic, however, that most of the Christians who stand against Senator John McCain and Governor Sarah Palin were just a short time ago strong Ron Paul supporters. This includes many of my colleagues.

Friends, again, I encourage you to be Berean as you consider where to invest your vote. I spent a good part of the afternoon talking with Senator McCain’s liaison to the evangelical community today. I will have more on this conversation in the next few days.

For those tracking our travels, Stacy and I should be home tomorrow. It has been a relaxing and refreshing time. Thank you for your prayers.

Go here to read the official announcement from Ron Paul.

[Addendum - this is the preamble to a post on Ron Paul's official website...

We Agree
The Republican/Democrat duopoly has, for far too long, ignored the most important issues facing our nation.  However, alternate candidates Chuck Baldwin, Cynthia McKinney, and Ralph Nader agree with Ron Paul on four key principles central to the health of our nation. These principles should be key in the considerations of every voter this November and in every election.

You can find the full article here.]

[Addendum 2 - When I first wrote this post, I mischaracterized Congressman Paul's suggestion of third party candidates as an endorsement. I actually thought that was what he was doing, especially when he pointed out areas where he agreed with McKinney and Nadar. However, this was unfair. I publically apologize to Congressman Paul for this error.]


Responses

  1. Dear James:

    That’s not the case. He didn’t “endorse” her for office (Rep. Paul recently said he is undecided between voting for Barr or Baldwin). What he is saying is that 3rd parties – who are essentially locked out of the process – even in their vast diversity and disagreements, have a certain amount of overlap on certain specific issues that the Big Parties are either not addressing, or are in essential agreement with each other.

    That’s not an “endorsement.” But I do think Dr. Paul endorses more access to more voices in the political process. There is much in McKinney’s platform that Ron Paul would never endorse. But I think it is helpful for third parties to work together on issues where they have commonality – kind of like the way Baptists and Roman Catholics (and even Muslims and Atheists!) who oppose abortion can and do work together on that one issue.

    Just my two cents!

  2. Hi Larry,

    Great to hear from you! We had you and yours in prayer while the storm approached. God is good.

    On Congressman Paul, did you see this post? If this is not an endorsement, I am not sure what is.

    http://www.ronpaul.com/2008-09-10/paul-baldwin-mccinney-nader-we-agree/

    I went to the source today regarding Senator McCain. I am a bit amazed the Lord opened the door. Lord willing, I will post my findings once we return home.

    Blessings to you and yours,

  3. Pastor McDonald,

    The article that you referenced here: http://www.ronpaul.com/2008-09-10/paul-baldwin-mccinney-nader-we-agree/ was NOT written by Ron Paul but by a Ron Paul supporter.

    Note the author is tmartin and the disclaimer on the sidebar says “The RonPaul.com website is maintained by independent grassroots supporters of Ron Paul. Neither this website nor the articles, posts, videos or photos appearing on it are paid for, approved, endorsed or reviewed by Ron Paul or his Campaign. For Ron Paul’s official website, go to CampaignForLiberty.com”

    An honest reading of Ron Paul’s statement( found here; http://www.ronpaul.com/2008-09-10/ron-pauls-statement-to-the-national-press-club/) does not indicate an “endorsement” of anyone, only an endorsement to vote on principles, as you have also encouraged us to do.

  4. Hi Floyd,

    Thanks for the note. However, I did find this on the official website…

    http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog/?p=484

    Granted, Congressman Paul may not have writen this, but it is his official website.

    Blessings,

  5. And yet, it seems FAR from an endorsement, Pastor.

    At most, he simply lays out four important issues, names the other 3rd party candidates that agree on them, and endorses that these principles should form our vote. Do you really have a problem with that?

    You and I have agreements on various issues with men that we would nevertheless, not endorse for political office. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with stating that.

    Blessings, and safe travels!

  6. Thanks Floyd. What I read I indeed interpreted as an endorsement. Especially when I read the list of areas of agreement from his official website (http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog/?p=484).

    However, to be charitable, I have modified the post. I still find it highly troubling that a godly man like Ron Paul could even suggest McKinney or Nadar.

  7. Dear James:

    If I might be given a little “indulgence” here (isn’t that always funny coming from a Lutheran pastor?), Paul is suggesting that the two major parties have become so similar, and that so many issues (such as the bailout of the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – which he predicted five years ago would happen, as well as the continued devaluation of the dollar at the hands of the Fed), that only the third parties are even talking about these issues.

    The problem is that none of the “independents” are admitted into the debates, nor are the issues they raise being addressed (instead we’re talking about pigs and lipstick with less than two months before the election).

    However, most people feel bullied to vote for a Republican or a Democrat, so as not to “waste their vote.” Also, there are a lot of Rs and Ds who are voting “against” someone rather than “for” someone – not to mention the “lesser of two evils” approach.

    Dr. Paul is suggesting that only a large turnout for third parties will open the process to anyone other than the Big Two. The bipartisan system is strangling us politically. Of course, one of them is going to win. But can you imagine the shockwaves if 25% of the people rejected the Big Two and went for someone else? Neither Nader nor McKinney is going to win (and neither is Barr nor Baldwin). But if the third parties combine for only 1% of the vote (or less), they will never get a hearing on anything. But again, if all the independently-minded Americans (of which there are actually quite a few) were to vote for a 3rd party, it could result in more debate and real issues being heard. It is the only way to break up the monopoly.

    No conservative independents are going to vote for the Green Party. And no liberal independent is going to vote for the Constitution Party. But Ron Paul is saying if you care about the issues that aren’t being discussed – vote for a third party. If you’re a left-winger, why not vote for Nader instead of Obama? If you’re conservative, why not Barr instead of McCain?

    I’m tired of being told by establishment career politicians how to vote, and what constitutes “wasting” my vote. I agree that the two-party system is utterly choking out any real debate.

    All we have now is a two-ring circus with a campaign that looks like a professional wrestling match.

    Thanks for the indulgence! ;-)

  8. Pastor McDonald,

    The website you referenced says that the candidates agree on four points.

    I watched some of the news conference yesterday but not all. I think the main message was that the ‘elite media’ had ignored these candidates and Ron Paul felt they deserved to be recognized.

    Interestingly, there was nothing mentioned (that I could find) about the press conference on the Fox News website. I watched the live stream on CNN.

    Here is a link to part of that:

    Thanks for addressing these issues–my husband and I read your blog and appreciate your wisdom, compassion and grace.

    Kristy Orfield

  9. I agree with the previous commenters on this one.
    Could you expound on your comment–that you can’t believe a godly man like Ron Paul would suggest Nader or McKinney? You are a godly man who endorses McCain–who is not a fully pro-life candidate. Not trying to be contentious at all, but I’d be interested to hear how your endorsement of McCain is different than his suggesting McKinney and Nader? I will admit I don’t know much about either of them.

  10. Hi Bea,

    First things first – I have not endorsed Senator McCain – at least not yet.

    Second – Can you elaborate on how John McCain is not fully pro-life? Can you name the votes, the issues, the dates of the votes?

    Instead of just jumping to conclusions, I have been investigating these issues. At Saddleback, John McCain said, “Life begins at conception.” I have discussed his views with one of his key staffers. I will be reporting on that conversation soon.

    Bea, it is our responsibility to check things out ourselves – to be Berean – not just to read a list of charges and accept them at face value.

    I pray you are not offended by this statement. My intent here is the spur folks on to think.

    Grace and peace,

  11. Pastor McDonald-
    If you do decide to support John McCain, can you do so knowing that he has chosen a woman to be his running mate? If you believe that God has placed a woman in the sphere of the home, and that she is to be submissive to her own husband, etc., then how can you support a candidate who has chosen as a running mate a woman who, by virtue of fulfilling her obligations as vice president, would be explicitly violating the commands found in scripture? (And this is no slam against Sarah Palin personally, because she seems like a neat, poised, funny, and articulate woman.) By endorsing McCain would you not also be lending support to something that God says is wrong??
    Susan

  12. Hi James,
    No offense taken at all.

    As for votes of McCain’s, here is one.

    HR 3010 HHS Appropriations Bill; date Oct. 27, 2005. Among other things, this bill appropriated federal monies to Planned Parenthood. There is lots more–I’d encourage you to take a look.

    Here is a link to a blog post that lays out the appropiations. It includes links to the Congressional sites with info on the text of the bill and the record of votes.

    http://lefemineforlife.blogspot.com/2008/02/pro-abort-john-mccain-voted-hhs-funds.html

    Sincerely in Christ,

  13. Hi Susan,

    First off, again, I have not endorsed John McCain. However, I have not found one verse in the Bible that says women cannot serve in public office. As we read in Isaiah 3, women in positions of civil rule area curse on a nation. If there ever were a nation that deserved God’s curse, it is this one. We have legalized sodomy. We are killing 1.3 million children each year. We have approved filth in film and print.

    But is God’s curse on a nation a bad thing? Could God’s curse bring with it His blessing?

    There is a difference between what God gives us as decrees and principles and what He decrees through His providence. God decreed Deborah would be a judge of Israel. I believe she sat as both a judge and a blessing.

    The Bible is indeed clear – married women with children are to be keepers at home. Young women are to be trained up to understand service in the home is to be their goal and priority. And women are not to hold positions of office in the church. These are the Lord’s principle. It indeed reflects His creative order. But there are certainly situations that do not fit this mold, the single mother, the unmarried 43 year old nurse, the list goes on and on.

    Again, I am working through this. But, I want to make sure my decision is based on the Word and not just my emotion.

    Blessings,

  14. Hi Bea,

    Thanks for the link I actually saw it yesterday.

    There are many issues I am investigating regarding John McCain. This is one of them. It is for this reason I have been discussing his record and his positions with his chief staff members. I do not want to make an uneducated assumption.

    On this bill, this was an overall funding bill for many agencies. Without speaking for Senator McCain on this one, I am sure it would be easy for someone to overlook all of the line items.

    There are 100 people in the Senate. 94 voted in favor of this bill. 3 voted against. 3 were absent.

    I think it is far reaching to call John McCain, a man who has voted many times for life, a man who has said “life begins at conception,” pro-abortion because of this bill.

    Blessings,

  15. Pastor McDonald-
    Thanks for your answer and for not being afraid to address this issue! It has been an interesting political season here at our house. We homeschool our kids and in doing so, have taught them about the godly men and women who founded our nation, the wonderful Constitution we have, etc. But it’s also sad when we talk about what SHOULD be going on in our nation, the way things SHOULD be, and what actually is. Like so many families, we long for candidates who more closely hold to common sense and moral positions on so many of the issues. We listened intently to the speech Sarah Palin gave last week and found ourselves thrilled to hear her say things that sounded more like what a candidate who loves her country should be saying. But we just don’t know about putting a woman with children into office (even if it is “just” as VP!)…..Oh, how we long for God to correct and bless this nation that we love so much!!
    I hope you will continue to comment on this. I have so enjoyed reading the thoughts and comments of my fellow brothers and sisters in Christ, because it gives us a lot to think about and pray about as a family. May God be merciful to our nation.
    Susan

  16. This is the main message of his speech and online materials: vote your consciences; don’t waste your votes on “the lesser of two evils”.

    The strangely unique thing about Ron Paul is that his vocal anti-war and pro-privacy rights position attracted a crowd of very diverse followers, not just “ultra-conservative”, freedom-loving, God-fearing Christians.

    When I read his statement, I understand that he is speaking to all of his supporters when he encouraged them (“us”, I suppose, since I voted for him in the primary) to consider other candidates with whom he held certain points in common.

    I don’t see it being an endorsement of the other candidates any more than I see a retailer’s meeting a customer’s needs by referring him to another business as being an endorsement.

    In fact, given that it’s not possible to endorse all of those diverse candidates simultaneously and actually have it mean anything, then I would argue that this statement can’t truly be read as being an endorsement for any of them.

    I appreciate your effort in examining all sides of the issue. It sure is generating a lot of discussion!

  17. In the midst of the debate, however, I am curious: do those of us in this conversation share the conviction that we should vote according to principle, and not according to what seems politically expedient?

    And to what extent are other principles of government (besides the abortion issue, that is) taken into consideration when contemplating a vote for McCain over Baldwin, for example?

    If it doesn’t prove to be too much of a distraction, I’d love to hear how you’re thinking through those angles, as well.

    Blessings on you and yours ~

    P.S. Paul’s broadcasting piece today is on the blessings of a large family. You can catch it later on his production blog (click through my name at the left) Here’s praying you recover well from your travels!

  18. Hi Pamela,

    As for me and my house, I am looking at many issues. Obviously, the issue of life is very important. So is the issue of judicial appointments. Remember – Supreme Court justices serve for life.

    There is also the economy, healthcare, defense, the war on terror, crime, energy.

    Let’s not forget education as well.

    To me, these and many other issues should be weighed in a vote.

    And there will be no time to rest! Much to do!

    Blessings,

  19. Did you hear that Ron Paul has endorsed Chuck Baldwin? Here is a link to his Campaign for Liberty website, explaining his reasons for the news conference you refer to in your original post.

    http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog/?p=582#more-582

    Grace and peace,

  20. As always a thoughtful post , James.

    My heart is in continual prayer right now for our nation… we deserve God’s judgement…. but I am praying for His grace & mercy in this election……

    I can not fathom what it would be like with Obama in the white house ~ so I will be voting for McCain……..

    Blessings to you & your lovely wife,
    gloria


Categories

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: