I like your patriotic Snoopy. :)Thanks!
Posted on 01/01/2004 9:48:48 PM PST by The_Eaglet
On December 15, 2003, Michael Peroutka announced his candidacy for the Constitution Party presidential nomination. In an interview on Radio Liberty hosted by Dr. Stan Monteith, Mr. Peroutka identified the need to restore loyalty to the Constitution as a key reason for his campaign for the presidency, In response to recent expansions in federal funding of education and the Medicare program, Peroutka explained how federal involvement went beyond Constitutional limits, Peroutka later explained, "The Constitution is a big stop sign that says, `Federal government, here is where you stop.' That's the way that began, and that's what we, frankly, need to return to." Dr. Monteith and Mr. Peroutka also discussed the work of the Institute on the Constitution, a non-partisan organization that educates the electorate on the founding documents of the United States government, along with their historical and philosophical premises. With the endorsement of Howard Phillips, the Constitution Party nominee in 2000, Peroutka expressed confidence in becoming the next standard-bearer for the Constitution Party, "I intend to be the candidate for the Constitution Party come next June when they have their convention." When the host asked for closing thoughts, Mr. Peroutka offered these words, "America needs to return to an American understanding of law and government. That is to say, the purpose of government is to protect and secure God-given rights, and until we return to that understanding, we're going to be in trouble, and I believe that the Constitution Party and my hopeful candidacy will stand exactly for those principles." In addition to his professional experience as an attorney and organizer of educational resource organizations, Peroutka served the Reagan administration in the Department of Health and Human Services. He now serves as chairman of the Constitution Party of Maryland and president of the Institute on the Constitution. An audio file of this interview is available from Radio Liberty at http://66.36.228.157:8080/sw_archives/rliberty/rl12-15-03a.rm. This interview was broadcast live on the Internet and affiliate radio programs.
"We really do need, Dr. Stan, an American, somebody who understands law and American form of government, to run for president; and I really believe that at this point, there is not such a person in any of the major parties ... because none of them give the slightest fig, I believe, about being loyal, and being faithful, to the Constitution of the United States, and I believe that someone needs to do that."
"Article I Section 8 lays out those programs for which Congress may tax and spend money, and education just is not listed there. Education may in fact be a good thing, but the federal government has no business being there. If you have no authority to be there, if you can't do it constitutionally, you are not going to do it right. So, that's really a theme of our campaign here, Dr. Stan: they can't do it right, because they can't do it constitutionally."
I like your patriotic Snoopy. :)Thanks!
Which GOP are you talking about? I know that there are some "True conservatives" in Congress like Ron Paul and the Liberty Committee, but the most of rest of the GOP are helping the U.N. Take a look at this article from 2 years ago:
http://216.239.41.104/search?q=cache:gtvpE-YgcEwJ:www.usasurvival.org/bushprtctun.html+GOP+%2BUN&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
If I do some more searches on Google I'm sure we can find more GOP supported pro-UN bills.
This is from the Constitution Party's Platform: "We call upon the president and Congress to terminate the membership of the United States in the United Nations and its subsidiary and affiliated organizations."
Er, who's preventing it from happening?
Today we report on the news that the U.S. government intends to rejoin UNESCO, which it pulled out of during the Reagan era. Social conservatives will be deeply concerned over this since UNESCO, while not as bad as the U.N. itself, still supports the U.N. in promoting abortion and anti-family values around the world. Social conservatives will insist on one of their own for the U.S. UNESCO job.
One of the little-noticed and little-reported items in President George W. Bush's speech to the U.N. General Assembly last week was the U.S. pledge to rejoin UNESCO, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. In his speech, President Bush declared that "As a symbol of our commitment to human dignity, the United States will return to UNESCO. This organization has been reformed and America will participate fully in its mission to advance human rights and tolerance and learning."
So joining U.N. organizations prevents these United States from being 'subjugated to the U.N. and international socialism'? And this is 'conservative' politics is it?
Just as long as he and his supporters continue to make his campaign known, I will be grateful.
If you can't see or admit this you are so blinded by ideology as to be entirely useless to the country anyways. The Socialists/Greens/Communists worldwide are attempting to influence our 2004 election to defeat Bush... they consider him an enemy to their goals and an enemy to the U.N. Right now it is not just the GOP against the DemocRats, it is the GOP against the left half of our country AND America's enemies abroad... 2004 is the WRONG year for you to refuse to be part of the conservatives and rightish-moderates that form the GOP coalition.
The current GOP has increased the size of the federal government at a faster rate than any other in US history, including all previous Democrats. The majority of the GOP of today would have been considered liberals compared to the GOP of Reagan's days. If we continue in the direction we are heading we will have two liberal parties in control both full of "proud Socialists".
I think Bush will win in 2004 and will continue to grow the federal government and increase it's power and spending over the next 4 years just in time for Hillary to take the reigns in 2008 only to expand what Bush has set in motion. I REALLY fear the "US Patriot Act" and Homeland Security under Hillary's control.
Although the chutzpah of the Constitution Party adherents is admirable, they haven't got a snowball's chance in hell of winning the preseidential election - or any other election, except for some localized races here and there. What they do have a chance of doing is causing a lot of conservative voters to waste their vote instead of voting for President Bush in the 2004 election, just like Nader caused Gore to lose the last time around. Will the Constitutional Party loyalists pat themselves on the back after they have succeeded in putting Howard "Draft-Dodger" Dean in office, or God forbid - der Hildebeast?If the Constitutional Party really wants to make a positive difference, they would organize themselves as a faction within the Republican Party and start influencing activity at the PCO and state levels, then they'd be a force to be reckoned with. Otherwise, they'll just be suqeaky wheels regarded as "extremists" and "nut-jobs" with no influence whatsoever, other than as "spoilers" which will cause Republican candidates to lose to democRATS.
Republican's abandoning conservative values will cause Republican candidates to lose to democRATS. I supported the GOP during the Regan years, but the last Presidential candidate I voted for as a registered Republican was Alan Keyes. There are a few members of the GOP that I still support, but the GOP as a whole is moving towards the left at a very scary rate.
One reason for that is because the conservative grassroots activists are wasting their time getting involved in fringe outfits, like the Constitution Party, instead of organizing themselves as a real opposition block within the Republican Party. The Party will reflect the values of the most organized activists - which right now happen to be the "moderates" (i.e.: spineless compromisers) because the real conservatives are demoralized and jumping ship - which will only cause the "moderates" to be in control. Is that what consrvatives really want? Then they'd better wise up, stop whining, organize, get activated and get the Republican Party back on track.
I think the party reflects the leadership, not any single goup of activists. The RNC leadership calls themselves "moderate" or "compasionate conservatives", when they realy are only another form of socialists. There are some great organized activists groups within the GOP like The Liberty Committee (http://www.thelibertycommittee.com/), but I think they are shunned by the leadership and usually end up voting against the majority of the GOP. I would love to see the Republican party back on track, but I think it has drifted to far left for that to be possible. Entitlements are forever and the current GOP under the leadership of Bush has give many handouts to the American people it would be very difficult if not impossible for them to take them back. Medicare, GOP Pork and soon amnesty for 8 million illegals, I would say that the Republican party doesn't care what the activist or the voters feel or think, only what will keep them in power.
Nah they would find something like Ben Franklin starting the Post Office or the part in Alexander Hamiltion's hair is wrong to scream that the sky is falling.
No, I just want the current GOP to stop compromising on so many issues and start sharing the same values and principals the Founders had. I guess that is hard though when most of the GOP think that the American form of government is a Democracy, and would rather compromise and increase the strength of the Federal government so they can stay in power.
He's the father of the modern day Coast Guard. Hamiliton was a donut-eating jack booted thug!
No, but close
Hamilton's basic plan of government looked like this:The Hamilton PlanTwo legislatures consisting of (1) an assembly, directly elected by the people to three year term ; and (2) a senate, chosen by electors from senatorial districts to serve during good behavior
A Judiciary consisting of twelve justices to serve during good behavior. The judiciary would have both original and appelate jurisdictions.
An executive "Governor," whose election is made by electors chosen by electors chosen by the people from the senatorial districts, to serve during good behavior. Hamilton was opposed to terms for the executive because he felt that the incumbent would spend his time in office creating a political machine to ensure his reelection. He saw, in retrospect quite clearly, that limited terms would effectively limit the chief executive to engaging in full-time electoral politics. "An executive for life has not this motive for forgetting his fidelity and will therefore be a safer depository of power."
Senators and President for life? What amounted to an elected monarch. Never mind his banking schemes. I often wonder how this nation of states would have been different if Burr had not given Hamilton what he deserved. Perhaps Clay would not have been as influenced by Hamilton's views and Clay's American System would not have begun to come to fruition under Clay's lackey.
Reminds me of the latest news from Seattle: A local restaurant has been offering "Naked Sushi" where patrons eat sushi off of a nude woman. Not to be outdone, local homosexuals have scheduled a "naked donut-eating contest" at the restaurant. http://www.thestranger.com/2003-11-20/savage.html
As Secretary of the Treasury, for a new nation with a war debt, Hamilton was faced with the realization that people who had regularly smuggled their good past English Revenue Cutters to avoid paying English customs duties were now continuing to avoid paying the same duties to their own country. Many of our founding fathers kept up that little tradition.
The Revenue Cutters were given the authority to stop ships, without warrant, and search them for contraband and to seize vessels carrying such contraband. In this way he was able to force American's to pay the government it's due.
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.
