Posted on 04/02/2012 10:39:52 AM PDT by xzins
The Constitution Party of Wyoming announced Wednesday that it has submitted enough petition signatures to become the state’s fifth recognized political party.
It’s the most political parties Wyoming has had in more than a decade. Analysts say the number reflects voter discontent, but it is unlikely to make a significant impact on Wyoming elections, at least in the near future.
Founded in 1992 as the U.S. Taxpayers Party, the Constitution Party is one of the top three minor parties in the United States. The party’s stated goals include restoring the Founding Fathers’ vision of a limited federal government based on Biblical foundations.
(Excerpt) Read more at trib.com ...
http://www.constitutionparty.com/
Life: For all human beings, from conception to natural death;
Liberty: Freedom of conscience and actions for the self-governed individual;
Family: One husband and one wife with their children as divinely instituted;
Property: Each individual's right to own and steward personal property without government burden;
Constitution: and Bill of Rights interpreted according to the actual intent of the Founding Fathers;
States' Rights: Everything not specifically delegated by the Constitution to the federal government, nor prohibited by the Constitution to the states, is reserved to the states or to the people;
American Sovereignty: American government committed to the protection of the borders, trade, and common defense of Americans, and not entangled in foreign alliances.
This is a real dilemma for me this year. My heart is 100% on board with the Constitution Party. My head is telling me that at whatever cost Comrade Zero must go, or there won’t be an America by 2016.
I looked at the Constitution Party website several elections ago.
Their domestic platforms sounded pretty good.
They fell flat on foreign policy, however. They seemed more like Ron Paul. They were advocating isolationsim, which is impractical in the current world.
There is no shame in standing up for your principles.
I’ve been asked one too many times to vote for a loser who doesn’t represent my beliefs.
So, after much soul-searching, I’ve decided it’s better, win or lose, to work for the future to build something that does represent me rather than to keep supporting a system that fights against my beliefs and fights to undermine my country.
Hardly seems like news: My 2008 presidential ballot had seven other choices besides Obama/McCain. Been that way since I remember.
What do you mean by isolationism?
I really do respect you for standing up for your principles. I may well do the same. If the GD Rats would run a genuine American and not a Kenyan Marxist POS it would be a no brainer.I’m just scared to death of what this monster will do if (GOD forbid) he gets another term.
The very purpose of Government, as defined in the 2nd paragraph of the Declaration of Independence, is "to secure these [unalienable] rights, Governments are instituted among Men", "that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
To fulfill this obligation, the Preamble of the Constitution states one of the duties specifically delegated to the Federal Government is to "Provide for the common defense".
US Constitution, Article 1, Section 8, Clauses 11 - 16 give Congress further direction and authority in this area, including the power "To raise and support Armies" and "To provide and maintain a Navy".
It is a primary obligation of the federal government to provide for the common defense, and to be vigilant regarding potential threats, prospective capabilities, and perceived intentions of potential enemies.
We oppose unilateral disarmament and dismemberment of America's defense infrastructure. That which is hastily torn down will not be easily rebuilt.
We condemn the presidential assumption of authority to deploy American troops into combat without a declaration of war by Congress, pursuant to Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution.
Under no circumstances would we commit U.S. forces to serve under any foreign flag or command. We are opposed to any New World Order, and we reject U.S. participation in or a relinquishing of command to any foreign authority.
The goal of U.S. security policy is to defend the national security interests of these United States. Therefore, except in time of declared war, for the purposes of state security, no state national guard or reserve troops shall be called upon to support or conduct operations in foreign theatres.
We should be the friend of liberty everywhere, but the guarantor and provisioner of ours alone.
We call for the maintenance of a strong, state-of-the-art military on land, sea, in the air, and in space. We urge the executive and legislative branches to continue to provide for the modernization of our armed forces, in keeping with advancing technologies and a constantly changing world situation. We call for the deployment of a fully-operational strategic defense system as soon as possible.
We believe that all defense expenditures should be directly related to the protection of our nation, and that every item of expenditure must be carefully reviewed to eliminate foreign aid, waste, fraud, theft, inefficiency, and excess profits from all defense contracts and military expenditures.
We reject the policies and practices that permit women to train for or participate in combat. Because of the radical feminization of the military over the past two decades, it must be recognized that these "advances" undermine the integrity, morale, and performance of our military organizations by dual qualification standards and forced integration.
We fully support well regulated militias organized at the state level. Further, we fully support and encourage the restoration of unorganized militia at the county and community level in compliance with our patriotic and legal responsibilities as free citizens of these United States.
Under no circumstances should we have unilaterally surrendered our military base rights in Panama. The sovereign right of these United States to the United States territory of the Canal Zone has been jeopardized by treaties between these United States and Panama. Inasmuch as these United States bought both the sovereignty and the grant ownership of the ten-mile-wide Canal Zone, we propose that the government of these United States restore and protect its sovereign right and exclusive jurisdiction of the Canal Zone in perpetuity, and renegotiate the treaties with Panama by which the ownership of the canal was surrendered to Panama.
It should be a priority goal of the President and Congress to insist on enforcement of that portion of the 1978 Panama Canal Neutrality Treaty which prohibits control of the entrances to the Panama Canal by any entity not part of the Republic of Panama or these United States of America. By this standard, the award of port facilities at the entrances to the Panama Canal to Hutchison Whampoa, a Hong Kong company closely linked to the Chinese Communist People's Liberation Army, must be overturned. Similarly, Congress and the President should take advantage of Panama Canal treaty provisions to negotiate the return of a U.S. military presence at the Isthmus of Panama. At a time when the U.S. Navy is one-third its former size, it is essential that rapid transit of U.S. military vessels between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans be assured.
BTTT!
I do not understand how people think we can continue to wage wars everywhere, when the nation is completely bankrupt. We are no longer an actual superpower, but a financially bankrupted and morally corrupt, nearly-lawless nation.
We will not even be able to pay back the SS that some of us have paid into for 30-40 years+++. The politicians will not secure the border, which is one of the most basic tenets of the lousy government. Are we just supposed to keep printing money to fight lost causes thousands of miles away??
“Under no circumstances should we have unilaterally surrendered our military base rights in Panama. The sovereign right of these United States to the United States territory of the Canal Zone has been jeopardized by treaties between these United States and Panama. Inasmuch as these United States bought both the sovereignty and the grant ownership of the ten-mile-wide Canal Zone,...”
The above statement is patently false, as Panama never surrendered its sovereignty over its own land to the U.S. government. The U.S. government has recognized the Panama Canal Zone as an unincorporated territory not covered by the U.S.Constitution but controlled by Congress. Children born in the Canal Zone are considered simply ‘citizens’ but are not ‘natural born citizens’, period.
[ Actually Isolationism is exactly what we need to do.
We can’t be the World Policeman, we need to close most of the overseas bases, bring all of our troops home and let these people kill each other as they have for thousands of years.
We need to concentrate on our country, put the troops on the southern border and close it once and for all. ]
What we really need is “enemy isolationism” and that is basically we need to stop giving our enemies foreign aid. Cut off all foreign aid to countries that don’t like us and cut in half foreign aid to countries that are neutral to us. Why the damned hell are we even sending ANY money to Egypt or Pakistan, we would at least be doing better giving the money we give to egypt to israel and Pakistan to India.
It sounds weird but we need to “Saul Alinsky” our enemy foreign countries, that is Isolate and Ridicule them.
I’ll be taking a closer look at this party. I’m still embarrassed by voting for McCain and I will simply not be a Republican if Romney gets nominated.
The biggest attacks on Americans over the last years have been from Islamoterror nations.
Why on earth would you say fighting them is a lost cause?
Did you happen to notice that the ring-leader of the largest attack on our soil is now dead because of battles we took over there instead of fighting them on our soil?
IOW another sucker party.
I rank this group as likely winning anything as the “Birthday Party” (yes that is a real political party)
According to one explanation of the US treaty with Panama in 1903, the US received rights to a 5 mile wide canal zone on each side of the canal in perpetuity.
I remember the Carter years debate, and we had no doubt that the Canal was under our control. As part of the US force that put Noriega in his proper place in Dec ‘89, we still knew the place was rightfully US purchased territory.
To come up with tested leadership is not so easy.
The right seems to go through "flavors of the week" like playing cards...Cain, Bachmann, Fred Thompson, Alan Keyes, Rick Perry, etc. etc. They talk great but the right gets disillusioned with them when they don't seem able to stand up under fire.
You gotta have more than good words. Executive leadership skills MATTER.
Not only was McCain a faux-conservative, he gave up. He would not fight Obama, he wouldn’t join with Palin, and he wouldn’t untie her hands.
McCain is Dole.
In far too many ways, Romney is Obama.
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.