Posted on 12/04/2006 10:01:36 AM PST by NapkinUser
As Hillary Clinton begins her own preparations to run for the presidency, the deciding factor of who will be the next commander in chief may have less to do with whomever is chosen as the Democrat or Republican nominee, and more to do with the choice of the Constitution Party.
This weekend at a national committee meeting in Manchester, N.H., Howard Phillips and the Constitution Party he founded set in motion the plans to launch its own third party candidate for president.
"The time has never been better for a third party dark horse candidate to grab the White House," Phillips told WND.
He affirmed that by next July, his party intends to nominate a presidential candidate, with possibilities for the ticket including Minuteman Project co-founder Jim Gilchrist, former Republican presidential candidate Alan Keyes, Baptist pastor Chuck Baldwin, and author and WND columnist Jerome Corsi.
The Constitution Party is also strongly supportive of Republican Congressmen Tom Tancredo and Ron Paul, but there is no decision yet that either would leave their home in the Republican Party to pursue a Constitution Party nomination. Tancredo has said numerous times he is considering a run for the presidency.
"The American public are angry at both the Democratic and Republican Party," Phillips said. "If neither major party wants to listen to the American middle class, the Constitution Party is ready to enter center stage and get back to the basics that have made the republic established by our founding fathers work for over 230 years."
The meeting was highlighted by a lineup of well-known conservative speakers, including those who may end up running.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
Alternate title: Irrelevant party makes irrelevant plans for an irrelevant future for an upcoming irrelevant campaign.
Good point... something else to think about, too. Mormons don't go for abortions and encourage their members to have large families and are very conservative people.. they do continue to spread out around the SW, hopefully that will help negate some of the large hispanic families voting for the dems..
I the before mentioned case I choose both before and after.
Maybe, but that's just one issue. Everyone has the right to be wrong. He's wrong about 17% of the time.
This is my dilemma with voting for McCain in either primary or national election. He is as much as any one singular person is responsible for what is this day. He has seduced himself into thinking that the 'base' hatred for Hillry will elect him, or else he has already decided that he will never win and she is the ultimate finger in the eye of those who rejected him in 2000.
The ultimate tipping point in my mind about the unfitness of McCain as commander in chief was he literally went out of this real world in demanding to have that amendment of anti-torture. He slurrrrred from top to bottom the military structure and accused with implication that it took him to stop US from being one and the same as these depraved terrorists.
NOT even the dishonor deeply seated within the Clintons hatred of the military equals this slur.
Well, except if you're a Democrat. I believe Rush keeps citing some article from the '90s that basically glorified Clinton for being such a good liar.
"2008 is HIllary's to lose. if she picks obama as a rumming mate (if I was her, I would) she'd be dern near unbeatable."
Wadja mean?
How about if the Republicans pick Jim Gilchrist?
Using that brilliant counter-measure, the Constitutional Party can be in unity with the Republican Party.
Besides, the Republican Party wouldn't want to risk offending the ever powerful Constitution Party.
Well, Jack Aubrey did it. He took on the Spanish 32-gun Cacafuego in his 12-gun sloop Sophie and won...
Oh, wait. That's fiction. Never mind.
It's true that there are some very strong prospects within the GOP other than McCain or Giulani, or even Mitt Romney. The 64 million dollar question is if the current party leadership will choose to support those candidates or strangle them out in order to ramrod McCain into the White House. That, I think, would be a big mistake. McCain can't win because too many Republicans hate him after the McCain-Feingold Bill and his leadership of the Gang of 14. Giuliani is too liberal: pro-gay marriage, pro-abortion, pro-amnesty. Locally, he helped bust up the mobs when he was DA- how effective his efforts ultimately were, I am not certain; I don't live in NYC, so I can't really hazard a guess. Nationally, he just happened to be the mayor of NYC on 9/11/01. Since then, he's been touted by the media as "America's Mayor," which I think is a load of hooey. he just happened to be the guy in the office that day.
I propose that the first thing that all Republicans at all points of the spectrum need to do in order to win in 2008 is to revisit the founding principles of the party, and come together on that common ground. Otherwise, we're going to be just as fragmented then, or worse, as the Party is now.
I know that many here remember why the Republican party was formed. There were certain values that enough people agreed with to form a breakaway party. Those values were founded in certain truths. Remember, the GOP was once considered an "insignificant" party when it first came into existence.
Having looked into the Constitution Party, I don't see them as a viable option. A cornerstone of their party platform is isolationism; this is a lovely notion, but dangerously unrealistic in an age when our survival depends on our ability to hit our enemies with everything that is not nailed down and then with whatever can be pried loose.
Furthermore, to paraphrase what another Freeper said, the CP needs to work on getting more little fish into the pond before they attempt to throw one into the deep blue sea. They don't have the political "oomph" that can only come through years of having their people serving in lower offices and thus a track record. People still have the ashes of 1992 in their mouths thanks to Ross Perot, and the 2000 election showed us yet again how a liberal wierdo with a comparatively small following can seriously jeopardize an election if our primary's candidate is not leading by a wide enough margin to ensure victory.
I have thrown my share of bombs- you all know this. And I have admitted when I am wrong- this you also know. If I'm missing something on this, inform me. But I will respectfully maintain that the only way that the Republican Party is going to return to is former greatness is if everyone in the Party revives the founding principles that made our Party great in the first place. This means unity among and throughout the entire Party.
Does that mean compromising on the really important stuff, like truth, justice, strength, honor, integrity and duty? I don't think so. If we Republicans really have those things in mind when we come to the table, the best of what is good about the Party shines through. But if one side- either side- prefers the preservation of their control over what is good and necessary for the future of the Party, and of the nation, then it won't work and at that point the Party is doomed.
obama has far more glowing media attention - adn don't forget that hillary put him on the convention floor in 2004 - for a very good reason.
I don't place McCain any higheron the totem than Hillary. I just pray people don't vote for him in this round of primaries.
hillary will get universally positive press coverage, whoever the republicans nominate will be pilloried in the press. we have no one who can withstand that.
I would love to understand what it was about Clinton that so many people looked past his flaws, including our current President.
What have you been smoking?
you busted me! I've been reading aubrey/matirun for some weeks now. into book five, I think (cruising to the spice islands to see Bligh with prisoners/women aboard). and i was wondering if anybody would cite that instance. good for you, my friend!
Current party leadership looks to the press, and popular opinion polls. Reagan didn't. he knew that polls are phony and that different people feel differently at different times, but underneath it all, we are all americans - and proud of it. that's their fatal flaw.
if we had a governor with no negatives, a fresh face with new, conservative ideas...
It's quite a practical position if you consider how much money is wasted in redistributing our earnings overseas and borrowing from future generations with deficit spending.
Tell that to the Constitution Party candidates that just got elected.
Personally, I'm done pulling the big R lever out of fear that the Dems will get in power. If the GOP cannot run a Presidential candidate that is worth supporting, then I'll vote third party. If Hillary gets in because of that, then so be it. The blame is not on the voters - its on the GOP.
These are excellent points. You can not stop liberals (whether Democrat or Republican) from destroying this country if you vote for them.
WorldNetDaily had it right the first time.
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.