  |
If a new party did Celebrity Death Match with Lyndon LaRouche fighting Buchanan, winner gets nominated, they'd get the fun vote! |
Posted on 05/27/2006 4:31:32 AM PDT by FerdieMurphy
As the "Big Tent" collapses, make way for the true "third" party
According to research that I conducted in 1998, there were more than 400 political parties in America. (That number has grown smaller in recent years, but is still over 200 — far larger than the "mainstream" media admits.) According to research by Richard Winger, the publisher of Ballot Access News, the third-largest political party in the United States is the Constitution Party. Thus, the CP is the true third party.
Statistically, the CP has more members than any political party other than the Big Two. And, statistically, there are more caves in Tennessee than any other state. But, there are not enough caves nationwide to prevent people from knowing that border security is the hot-button political issue across America this year. The issue has been simmering for a long time, and has now reached a boiling point.
But, border security is not the only hot-button issue — especially for conservatives. Abortion is a perennial issue, but the death of Terri Schiavo has demonstrated that C. Everett Koop and Francis Schaeffer were absolutely right about the "slippery slope." That, in turn, has removed many abortion "moderates" from the fence. The party with the clearest stance against abortion is the Constitution Party.
Define "patriotism"
As our nation struggles with the very definition (and name) of the War Against Terrorism, we are forced to also struggle with the definition of patriotism. (Is it patriotic to defend Iraq against insurgents, and South Korea against invasion, and Haiti against true reform — and Bosnia against Christians — while ignoring the "stealth invasion" of our own country?)
Is it patriotic to continue a war that was started without a Constitutionally-required declaration of war? Is it patriotic to continue a war that recently reached its stated objective? (The recent free election of a "unity government" in Iraq provided the final stage of the "regime change" that we sought. And, the revelations by a former top Iraqi general proved that the WMD case was valid.
I've been a strong supporter of the war itself — despite the bypass of Congress — until the recent Iraqi elections. Now, it's time to tell our troops, "Good job, and welcome home.")
Questions about the ongoing war in Iraq and Afghanistan (with possible expansions toward Syria and Iran in the near future) have, in turn, forced many people to look away from the television long enough to at least consider studying and discussing the Constitution. That, in turn, has caused a rapidly growing number of people to discover, and embrace, the political party that is based upon that special document.
So, perhaps 2006 really is "the year of the Constitution Party."
Let's consider some facts. In the 2004 presidential elections, CP candidate Michael Peroutka got enough votes to force the national news media to pay attention to the Constitution Party for the first time since its creation in 1992. (Obviously, there had been other "mentions" of the CP, but not recurring coverage — including a CP line on some televised charts of candidate progress.)
Those 2004 elections were so close that some analysts thought that Peroutka could swing the outcome. But, nobody was sure which way it would swing. So, the CP tally was watched closely for the first time.
Fast-forward to January of 2006, and a special US House election in California.
Although CP candidate Jim Gilchrist did not win, he made a very strong showing. Gilchrist, the co-founder of the Minutemen, forced the border security issue to the forefront of a key election in a state with a strong pro-illegal-alien history. And, he came close to winning. That fact was not lost on Republican analysts — who are now trying to "shoot full-auto in all directions" to regain votes that they have lost by compromise.
Border security has caused some people to look at the Libertarian Party, only to discover that they favor open borders. (And, their national bylaws prohibit cross-party endorsements — which hamstrings any conservative coalitions. That fact cost me the Libertarian Party's endorsement, which I had sought at their recent state convention in Nashville.) That single fact could cause many Libertarians to jump to the Constitution Party. That migration actually started years ago.
A "Guilt-Free" Option
Border security also creates angst for Democrats — because many labor unions are in favor of open borders, but most union members view illegal aliens as unfair threats to their own jobs. For this reason, many conservative Democrats will not be voting their party line this year. Will they vote for CP candidates? I think so. (In my own case, due to ballot-access problems, I'm a Constitution Party member running on the Republican Party line. That makes me the "guilt-free option" for those that would otherwise never vote Republican.) On my "day job," I'm an interpreter of Sign Language for a school district (and a union steward). Recently, I discovered that my union strongly favors illegal aliens. Most members don't know that; and, the same is true for other unions. I recently provided internal union documents, to be used in an upcoming book by Jim Gilchrist and Jerome Corsi. When the book's impact ripples into the union shops, angry members will look for another political party. Many will join the Constitution Party.
Now, let's look at some statistics. This year, the number of CP candidates nationwide has exploded. There are four Constitutionalists running for the US Senate, and 13 for the US House. There are five CP candidates for governor of various states, and three of them also have CP lieutenant-governor running mates. One of those states is California, where history has proven that Arnold "The Governator" Schwarzenegger is no true conservative. There is also a CP candidate for secretary of state in California, along with several state legislative seats. The lower house of the Utah state legislature has a whopping 34 candidates from the Constitution Party, and there are 12 Constitutionalists running for the Utah State Senate. A similar, but smaller, trend is seen across Pennsylvania, where the CP has its headquarters. This year, although we might lose a race or two, the Constitution Party cannot be ignored.
My sense is that some CP races will be absolute landslides, as the blowback from lax border security hits both halves of the Big Two square in the face. And, because many Democratic incumbents (including my opponent, Jim Cooper) are also vulnerable on abortion and other social issues, voters will be looking for a strong conservative.
If the GOP candidates try to hide under the Big Tent, and seek votes as merely "Democrat Lite," such candidates just might get smothered by the tent's collapse. Americans are tired of compromise; we want leaders that actually stand for something.
And, as the 2006 elections set the stage for the 2008 presidential elections, the candidates that stand the tallest will be the ones that control the 2008 debates. In turn, the presidential candidate that stands firm in the debates, and shows no compromise, will be the candidate that occupies the White House. It will not be enough to be simply "anyone but Hillary." (Although, having organized the first anti-Hillary rally in New York in 1999, and the first anti-Hillary rally in Nashville this past week, that theme is still one that I consider important.)
Americans are looking for candidates that will help to make our country "feel like America again." We are looking for leaders that have the vision of Ronald Reagan, even if they are not from the "party of Reagan." Americans will find those leaders in the Constitution Party.
Tom Kovach lives near Nashville, is a former USAF Blue Beret, and has written for several online publications. Tom has been involved in politics since 1992, is the state PR coordinator for the Constitution Party, and is on the November ballot (GOP line) for the 5th Congressional District of Tennessee.
Just keep Pat Buchanan out of it and it might succeed over time.
Searched his name, which gave several Web-sites. Choose the political site {I forget it's name, but you'll find it.}, and went to the place in the site that says "Contact us".
I'm sure there's a phone number and snail mail address to, but I sent the e-mail.
Tom says he is running for Congress in the 5th District against Jim Cooper. Okay, I live in the 5th District and have not seen any campaigning, rallies or fundraisers for this mystery man and his obscure party.
How can you win if you don't run? Writing net articles won't get er done.
In fact his anti-Hillary rally wasn't even held in the 5th District..year of the Constitution Party my arse.
That doesn't sound like a pacifist to me.
I thought things improved greatly in 94 and 2000 and 2004 with GW, but I think he's made some bad mis-steps with illegal immigration and his refusal to veto spending increases. I'm at the point I will vote against BOTH Georgia Senators AND my Congressman simply because I haven't heard them speak out enough against what's going on with illegals. Chamblis is a calculating sleazeball politician and Johnny Isaksson hasn't ever met a public post he wouldn't run for.
If someone like Herman Cain or Zell Miller comes along, I'll vote for him in a heartbeat. At least they (or those like them) won't stand talking to you saying one thing while pissing down your leg when you aren't looking.
Specifically what races do you see this happening? In the Senate, there are no RINOs that are going to be replaced by conservatives. If Laffey beats Chafee in the RI primary, we will have a liberal representing RI in the Senate instead of a RINO. In Chafee's case (ACU rating =12) that is fine with me. But there are no other Senate races where there is a conservative still running against a RINO.
Your efforts are too late to effect the 2006 races, except to elect liberals.
No, the constitution party continues to be the party of the wasted vote.
If they were serious, instead of being loyal Moby useful idiots, they would form a "constitution caucus" and work to change the republican party from within.
If the constitution parter were anything but a bunch of fringe left overs they would have the organization and manpower to go into the primaries and caucuses to make their votes and voices matter.
As it stands now, a vote for the constitution party is a vote for Hitlary, Kerry, Algore, Edwards, BJClinton, Reid, and Pelosi.
Bush hasn't really appointed any strict constructionists either. Roberts and Alito had record and rhetoric of defending Roe v. Wade or abortion legislation, and Alito's first supreme court ruling cancelled the sentence of a convicted rapist.
It could happen in any race with a Constitution Party candidate. It's too late to do something about 2004 (or 2005), but it's not too late to do something about 2006 until November.
Adults understand getting SOME of what they want is better then getting NOTHING. Complaining endlessly does not excuse an Adult of the burden of actually DOING things. Complaining is NOT a substitute for taking action as a certain segment of Frepeer seem to think. They are NOT "helping the Conservative Movement" standing around complaining constantly about everything.
Frankly most Freepers have stopped even listening. We hear the SAME thing over and over and over from the Perpetually Whining. Since no matter WHAT happens all they do is complain why waste anytime on them? Since this group of constant complainers never stand FOR something, there is no reason for anyone to want to stand WITH them . It just the same old "do it my way or I will take my ball and go home" ranting we hear from this group on every issue. Politically irrelevance is what they seek, We should just tell them don't let the door hit your butts on the way out the door.
See this is what their temper-tantrum is about. They NEED us to validate them. What they want if for Freepers to beg and grovel for them to stay.
Why should we bother? They never stand with us on ANYTHING so which fringe group they run off to is a matter of supreme indifference. They will only repeat the same behavior in that group.
The people who spend 100% of their times complaining emotional stick to nothings without the Adult facilities of maturity and judgment. These are people who are never going to be anything but political irrelevances. They think that complaining endlessly excuses them for DOING things and working for they supposedly believe in.
Actually getting stuff done requires commitment and effort. Standing around sneering at anyone doing things is the behavior of the High School lunch room not the real world. Sneering and complaining is easy. Any Teenager does it endlessly every day.
Not all local elections are run offs.
No all local elections are even partisan.
|
If a new party did Celebrity Death Match with Lyndon LaRouche fighting Buchanan, winner gets nominated, they'd get the fun vote! |
I like the CP party and pay attention to politics but I can't name a single CP candidate. Are these guys in hiding?
The current political environment is ripe for a viable third party but none are emerging.
And, if one were to delve deeper, one would find there are other Libertarian principals that conservatives find unacceptable.
Which is why I've gone from being a capital "L" Libertarian to a small "l" libertarian.
Post #5 on this thread says it all:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1638966/posts?page=16#5
As long as we are putting forth hypotheticals, 'What if Bush and the Senate Republicans accurately represented the will of the people. If their consciences are so seered that they cannot, then go to the lectern and convince conservatives that giving the country away to scores of millions of aliens is best for the country. Show us where the collective will of 85% of the public is off base on this issue and we will follow. They will not do it because there is not rhyme or reason other than perceived political gain to the goddamn politicians." To those who believe that loosing the next election is worse than loosing your country, you might want to ruminate on that a while. This isssue is more than a vote to increase your taxes, or earmark a billion for a bridge to knowhere. Or you might consider this: "Is there no issue which rises above the need for your party affiliation dominence of the political landscape? Are not your chosen leaders lying to you more unsavory than democrats lying to you? You know the dems are liars from the beginning. Now we find we are being fragged by our own. Which is the harshest cut? The choice of taking this senate and administration to the woodshed seems inevitable. They asked for it and now they will reap their own whirlwind. This is a 1 % majority country now. I believe the Republican in the senate have driven off more than 1%, if only to stay home from the poles. This is not the doing of the electorate. It is the doing of nefarious, self-serving Republicans, who are requiring voters to check their opinions at the door and fall in line or else. In the words of Harry Callahan, "I am afraid you have misjudged me."
Perhaps. Voting for the lesser of the two evils hasn't worked very well has it?
What's that definition of insanity? Robotically doing the same thing over and over while hoping for different 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.