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.
I Could Not Agree With You More.
You Must be a very intelligent person.
I know of one guy who wrote a nice check to The Minuteman. Before he sent it he made several photocopies.
Now whenever he gets one of those letters from the RNC or his local RINO he sends it back, in their postage paid envelope with a copy of the check and a nice note 'splaining that when they control the border, maybe he'll start writing them checks instead...
Has 60 votes in the Senate (RINOs and Rats), Conservatives have 40. Liberal Republicans need to go, but Bush supports liberal Republicans time and time again. Electing Bush was the biggest mistake Conservatives ever made.
It needs to emerge from within the GOP-- that is the only sane course of action. Work with us to make that happen.
They can grow from there. They will then have a record. This is a long process , over many election cycles, not just one lucky year. It just seems they're in it for the glory of name recognition.
Europe won't carry the load. As they did with Hitler, they'll silence their own people in an attempt to please the Islamists. Islam has already demanded Sharia law in some parts of France, England and Holland. Personally, I wouldn't be surprised to see the same thing happen in Detroit within ten or fifteen years. During the cartoon wars, the politicians ignored the fact that some of the supposed cartoons were not actually cartoons done by Danish cartoonists, but were taken from other sources by Islamist clerics because they knew the original cartoons were not offensive enough to cause riots. The US media has followed suit, ala Comedy Central. In France, the media deliberately downplayed the riots because they didn't want "right-wingers" to get political mileage out of it.
I think Europe will go Islamist without even token resistance.
As to the Constitution party, any third party has a tough time. You can't get large campaign contributions unless the primary contributors believe you have a chance to win. The way to go would be to start at a grass roots level, targeting districts where a third party has a chance, or even in local elections where the political affiliation of the candidate often isn't stated.
A third party would have to be a long-term project. It's also difficult, because once in office, you have to deal with all issues, not just those personally important to you. For example, border security was hardly discussed at all in the 2004 elections, but it threatens to eclipse everything in 2006. Personally, I think the Dubai ports deal was the first shot in that war. It was the tipping point, and is IMHO, the ONLY reason Bush is in trouble. On the WOT, the people who hate Bush for this always hated him. The Rats will push for total open borders, and are only grandstanding because they've found out they can't outflank Bush to the left (as they've already got all the votes they're going to mine out of that), so they're sowing discontent on the right. This does not mean I agree with Bush on borders, it means I do not think the alternative of Rats is a real alternative.
Ross Perot made inroads in 1992 for several reasons, but don't forget that his primary reason for running was to hurt Bush. I've always believed he had a deal with the Clintons, but such things are never proven. However, the media covered him heavily and positively because he was hurting Bush. It's the same reason they gave McCain good coverage. A party that has a legitimate shot at winning, and would move the country more towards the Constitution would get scathing media coverage, and the MSM still wields a lot of power.
Absolutely correct. It's a long-term process, and you have to win some elections in areas where it doesn't take millions and millions of dollars to win.
I happen to be a more of a libertarian, but I will not support the Libertarian Party.
I'm not yet convinced of that. At the moment the USA is fighting Europes fight, and Europe with a few notable exceptions (UK,Poland, Italy) is stabbing us in the back at every opportunity. Should the usa temporarily withdraw from the war, it would be Europes turn to fight Islam. There can be no compromise, Islam will not allow one. I think it might be a good idea to let the Europeans see what it really means to fight for survival with thier sons and daughter instead of ours.
So we should stop fighting the WOT and stick our heads in the sand.. Yeah that will work.. NOT!!!!
He may be no conservative, but he is, IMHO, a good and decent man. For all his faults, I love his resolve on the WOT.
If you read what I posted you would see a very clear strategy for fighting and winning on our terms. What I posted reflects real thinking and a real knownledge of history. There are risks in what I propose, but then there always risks.
Don't stay home. Go out and vote, and vote for whatever Conservatives are on the ballot. Don't punish Conservatives for the actions of RINO and Liberals. But if the race is RINO vs. Dim vs. Pacifist, just Skip it.
Of course when you merely feel rather then think it easy to confuse hyper emotionalism for "Being very smart".
Would a good and decent man sell out his country to the NWO? Would a good and decent man refuse to do his sword Constitutional oath to enforce our laws and defend our borders?
As a man I made find Bush likeable and respect his devotion to faith and family. But unfortunately for Bush he is the president of the United States and will be judged by a much higher standard then the nice guy standard.
Culture of death Murder of Terri-imposed by a judge. Texas Sodomy law, struck down by a group of Judges. Abortion. Imposed by a set of Judges. Mass Gay Marriage imposed by a Judge. Rulings against public display of 10 Commandments-Imposed by a Judge and on and on and on and on and on. As a "Social Conservative" you REALLY have no grounds to be screaming at the GOP. For you the issue should be "Judges, Judges, JUDGES
70 years of Leftist Social Engineering imposed by the Imperial Judiciary not instantly overturned by the Bush Judges, some of the best ones who did not even get confirmed until 2005 and you are ranting mad? Maybe your expectations are WAY out of line with what is REALISTIC?
So yet again, the same thing redux. "I am mad because not only 100% of only what I want is being imposed right now! I don't want to think, I want to be mad. How dare you make me think!".
Once again, temper tantrum behavior of spoiled children not the reasonable behavior of rational adults.
If he thought it was in the best ultimate interests of the people, yes.
Would a good and decent man refuse to do his word Constitutional oath to enforce our laws and defend our borders?
Yes. If he believed that the Constitution and the good of the Country required spreading US influence (and territory) to include Canada and Mexico.
He'd be wrong, but if he believed it, that would be his actions.
I think he's a good and decent man, but he's not always right.
It seems they think their knee jerk hyper cynical rabid dislike of certain political groups is some how "wise" or "clever". It neither. It the same level of intellectual ability most teenagers display. aly.
Judges, Serious War on Terror, Taxcuts, 1st Serious reform attempt on Soc Security, 1st elements of privatization put into the Medicare, etc etc etc.
Perhaps a better definition of insanity is an inability to recognize the logical consequences of a chosen, or advocated, course of action. This type of screaming endlessly that a political glass only 60% full of Conservative Water would be better if replaced by a glass 100% of Leftist Political Poison is the behavior of either truly insane or incredibly ignorant people
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.