Posted on 05/18/2006 4:04:27 AM PDT by FerdieMurphy
For quite some time, 20 years at least, conservatives, constitutionalists and traditionalists have been frustrated with political reality in America. The ‘Republican revolution’ of 1994 bore small fruit, that establishment Republicans let wither and die on the vine. In the place of promises of smaller government, fiscal responsibility and stronger defense of our liberties and sovereignty, the Republicans have given us what the Democrats wanted to give us: bigger government, larger debts, and big-brother government with fading liberty and sovereignty.
The Democrats are nothing but pandering socialists who have sold out to corporate globalists, whereas Republicans are pandering corporatists who have sold out to socialistic globalists. There’s not a whole lot of difference is there? What we have running our country are a bunch of power hungry one-worlders who basically chose up sides to play their game and are only concerned with their team (political party) being in control. Either way we get the same raw deal.
Not since the 1850s has the political environment been so ripe for the emergence of another political party onto the national scene in a manner that will allow it to ‘play with the big boys.’ Back then, it was the newly formed Republican Party that came on the scene and eventually eclipsed and killed the Whig Party. If a political party, whether it were to be a newly formed party or one of the current third parties, was to make the right move, it could dominate the right, become a defender of the Constitution, and truly get into the game with the ‘big boys.’
The Democratic Party has sold its soul to socialism and every leftist special interest or perversion known. The Republican Party is tearing itself apart due to the left-leaning elites that control the party, ignoring its conservative base. A new conservative party could pull in the disaffected voters who’ve given up on our political system, and also draw in conservatives hopelessly clinging to the Republican Party. The remaining liberal Republicans would simply fold themselves into the Democratic Party, where there hearts really reside already.
According to a recent Scott Rasmussen’s survey, a third party candidate could easily take a third of the votes in a national election if they made preventing illegal immigration and enforcing our immigration laws their key issues. In fact, if Hillary Clinton was to run for president in 2008, without a third party candidate focused on illegal immigration, the survey shows nothing can stop Hillary from winning. Basically, we will have another Clinton in the White House in 2009 if a conservative third party candidate doesn’t come forth and champion U.S. sovereignty and fight illegal immigration. The survey shows that a third party candidate can win in a three-way race. Hillary wins in a two-way race between Democrats and Republicans. But a third party President facing a Congress split between two opposition parties could mean a seriously failed presidency. That is why a third party would have to ensure candidates run for the House and Senate at the same time, and do so with a ‘joint game plan’ with the presidential candidate. If the ‘Contract with America,’ where candidates ran on a group platform, worked in 1994, it can work in 2008, linking a third party’s presidential candidate with that party’s congressional candidates, all sporting the same key issues and ‘running together’ after a fashion.
With this in mind, neo-con Republicans would no longer be able to scare conservatives into voting for them simply based on the idea that ‘if you don’t vote for us, the Democrats will control everything.” This worn out line has really lost its impact; especially with how the Republican controlled Congress and White House have spent the last five years acting like Democrats.
But what party to form, or which party to look to? To try and form a new, independent party now, looking two years ahead, is a daunting task. I question if this can be done in a manner that will be effective. Looking at existing third parties, which ones have fairly viable organizations that stretch across the country? There are only two I’m aware of that meet the organizational criteria: the Libertarian Party and the Constitution Party. Both, overall, tend to hold fairly sound, traditional views on limited government, fiscal responsibility by government, and limited international involvement (leaving that involvement to be purely economic). It’s in the area of immigration that these two parties differ. It is the Constitution Party that holds the view the Rasmussen survey shows can take the White House.
If the American people wish to break the stranglehold that the current two-party system holds over them (and will surely lead to our financial, cultural and political demise), then anyone who considers themselves a patriot should look to backing the one viable party that stands for American sovereignty and the control of our borders: The Constitution Party. Cast off fears that not voting Republican will mean Hillary gets the White House. The survey shows that that very fear will ensure she gets the White house. It takes courage to take a new path, and it’s time all conservatives, constitutionalists and traditionalists got in the one vehicle that’s currently available to take us back to the constitutional republic our forefathers left us.
I’m not saying that every official position of the Constitution Party is going to appeal to all conservatives/constitutionalists/traditionalist, but neither do all the planks in the Republican or Democrat platforms. I’m just saying that if the citizens want to take back their country from the elites and globalists, it’s time to break with the establishment one-worlders who are selling us down the river and take action via a political party that is working to preserve our Constitution as intended, not as interpreted (or ignored) by elitists.
The Constitution Party stands for more than just defending against immigration, and people should read up on them. At the same time, the Constitution Party needs to promote more of their fiscal views. Currently, they are known mostly as a pro-life party. They can’t ride an anti-abortion, one-trick pony to the White House or to Congress. To be viewed as a truly viable party, the Constitution Party needs to promote their other views concerning limited government, fiscal responsibility and halting illegal immigration. Getting a truly conservative, Constitution-honoring political party into Congress and the White House would help to steer the U.S. back towards sanity. A three-way split in political parties working in Congress could be really beneficial to the health of our Republic.
I know there will be Republican supporters out there that will tell me I’m dividing their ranks and now is the time to fight to keep the Republican Party on track. I can only say that not only is the Republican Party not on track, it has derailed and had a horrible wreck. At this point in time, it is a fool’s errand to attempt to change the neo-con party. I’m also confidant that some Libertarians out there will tell me I should be backing the Libertarian Party rather than the Constitution Party, as they are the real party of true liberty. The Libertarian Party has a lot of good positions on issues. However, as I stated earlier, the big issue that is the turning point for making a third party a true player on the national level is illegal immigration, and the Libertarian Party doesn’t have the correct position on it to take advantage of the current situation in America. In looking for the best vehicle to break the stranglehold that the Republican-Democrat system has on public office, the Libertarian Party simply isn’t positioned properly to be that vehicle.
I freely admit that I’m not a Republican any more (I haven’t been for about 10 years now), and that I’m not a Constitution Party member…yet. However, the time is ripe for change, and I’m tired of being a disaffected conservative. Thanks to the spinelessness of establishment politicians, the climate is right for a new major political party, and the Constitution Party is right on the issue of immigration to take advantage of the times. This is not just a chance to shake up the two-party system, but a chance to take our country back and make it a home again for citizens rather than territory to be conquered by the illegal invaders.
Exactly right. It starts with whatever is at hand. I personally know two people--one in local town Republican politics, one in a very high-up position with our Republican governor--and I batter them constantly. I can't get through to talk to my Senator personally, so I give $$ where I can and browbeat these two people incessantly.
Small potatoes? Yup--but imagine if we ALL did that.
Should have been Kemp/Dole not Dole/Kemp.
Oh, yeah. The third party routine worked out really well when H. Ross Perot was running, didn't it? (/sarcasm)
At the risk of sounding like I favor such a turn of events (I don't), I'm not so sure that a Republican president who serves the liberal/globalist agenda and who spends in a manner that that would leave even the most liberal democrat in awe, with a Republican congress that consistently snatches defeat from the jaws of victory is any better than a full-blown socialist democrat president. At least the latter seems to actually stir the conservative sentiments and provoke some fight from our Republican, so-called representatives in Washington. As it stands right now, the only difference between them is the speed at which they are paddling the canoe to Hell.
Ya!
How ELSE is another CLINTON going to get in the White House?
The Reformed party did not consist of "Democrats and Neo-conservatives" (a term that wasn't even around back then). Also, check out the Bull Moose party. Another failed attempt but it came out of the Republican party. As for "recycled ideas and no ideals", there's nothing new about the current problems over cheap Mexican labor."
It's time now for either a complete reinstallation of congress, or a revolution.
I think you'd be better off focussing on a few House and Sentate seats that now containing the more liberal Republicans who aid and abet the Democratic blockade. Revolution? Please. "You'd better free your mind instead".
Perhaps we need a benevolent despot.
That's been tried by other countries and has also been a stunning failure. Be careful now, I will question the patriotism of anyone who wants a despot.
I was afraid of a nightmare scenario like this two years ago. I knew the immigration issue would split the Republican Party and that a Third Party was a real possibility.
If a real conservative enters the race and defects to a third party and holds out until election, get ready for a President Hillary.
I have to disagree. The author goes on about "globalism" but he appears to blame corporations for it--- the sure sign of a leftist. Yes, Marx thought free trade needed to occur before communism could. Bust so what? He also thought "capitalism"-- characterized by the rule of law, property rights, the absence of centralized control of the economy and free trade--- in other words the AMERICAN system-- needed to be adopted around the world before communism could occur. Marx was wrong on these point as in so much else.
The reason we've made it's profitable for businesses-- not just corporations-- to hire illegal immigrants is that socialist practices such as the minimum wage, mandated health care benefits, family leave and the Social Security ponzi scheme have increased the price of hiring American workers.
Getting rid of those practices cannot occur within the structure of a third party--- there has never been a successful theird party in America and never will be.
No. You run against the person whos votes your trying to get. You think a Conservative is going to get a liberals votes? Thats why in things called "Primarys" Republicans run against Republicans and Democraps run against Democraps. In the case of the 3rd party its trying to wedge its way into the voting block your trying to get. Perot was a weak spined leader with a great idea. We now need a strong spined leader with a great idea to get a 3rd party working
"According to a recent Scott Rasmussen’s survey, a third party candidate could easily take a third of the votes in a national election if they made preventing illegal immigration and enforcing our immigration laws their key issues."
SEE MY TAGLINE.
And there is also a 900 lb gorilla in the room that any Republican Presidential candidate will have to deal with. That gorilla is all of GWB's public perceived problematic baggage (Low Approval, Border, Iraq, WMD, Iran, Oil, FEMA, etc. ). It may take more then 'a banana' to satisfy that gorilla.
You got that right!
And while I sympathize with the author, my real fear lies in the idea of an emerging Third Party. One that is even now mobilizing into the political arena, being strongly encouraged by their base, and if successful will cause the downfall of our nation. The party has a strong steady following, an unwavering platform, and their dedication is second to none. Nothing will stop them and they are already moving into the local and state levels.
One needs to be very careful what one wishes for...
"If the Republicans could not beat Bill twice, they certainly have no chance to beat Hill."
WRONG!! It would be difficult; never underestimate the power of the Clintonistas; but, I've said it before (even before Dick Morris wrote his book) and I'll say it again: IMO, the only person who can beat her is Condi Rice. She will cut into the women's vote and the black vote.
Don't tell me that black Democrats will go into that voting booth by the thousands and miss an opportunity to have a black president.
Nope. Condi can do it. Hillary would mop the floor with Rinos like McCain and spineless little twits like Frist.
One of the first things when investigating certain crimes is to look who benefits. If you do, it often leads you to the perpetrator.
Does the conservative movement benefit if we break into factions? No. Only the left.
Has this tactic been used over and over to shatter conservative strength in country after country? Yes. Who benefited? The left.
Is it in the left's interest that we shatter into feuding factions who split the vote, stop working together, and become weak?
You bet ya.
Who very well may be encouraging all this anger?
From your keyboard to God's ears!
When he was nominated and he made another "I will go for the touchdown" reference, I thought the fight was on. But he rolled over and wasnt a factor.
and if people do, the conservatives will lose, because the vote will be split. Our enemies take over because America has always been a moiety. Always.
But those who do might be able to keep their doctrinal purity if they do.
I just hope they like being under the Hillerista regime.
They might as well have signed up as campaign workers for her. They just might get the same results.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.