Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Mr. Michael Peroutka: His Face Is Set
daveblackonline.com ^ | February 19, 2004 | David Alan Black

Posted on 02/19/2004 8:28:43 PM PST by jgrubbs

Isaiah wrote, “Therefore I have set my face like a flint” (Isa 50:7). The prophet is speaking of God’s Suffering Servant who has resolutely embarked upon an irreversible course. The New Testament says that our Lord “stedfastly set his face to go to Jerusalem” to endure the cross (Luke 9:51). Scholars tell us that the phrase “set one’s face” is a Hebraism implying fixedness of purpose, especially in the face of difficulty or danger. I imagine this is the mindset of our brave sons and daughters in Iraq as they set out on a dangerous convoy through the Sunni Triangle.

As for Jesus, He had chosen to enter upon the path before Him—a path of humiliation, suffering, and death in order to accomplish the divine plan of salvation. He knew the time had come when, after His suffering and resurrection, He would again be taken up and reinstated in His former glory with the Father and vested with the new glory He had won as Son of Man.

This Saturday, fully aware of the path awaiting him, Mr. Michael Peroutka will announce his candidacy for President of the United States. The decision to run for public office was not an easy one for this soft-spoken man. In his statement of candidacy he notes:

To say that I did not feel qualified to take on such a massive task is to engage in gross understatement. After prayer and serious consideration, I am convinced that the question of my qualification and competence is not solely within my power to judge. The uniqueness of this undertaking and the special demands that it requires, make it necessary to rely upon the judgment, experience and counsel of men who have trod this path before me. In short, if men like Howard Phillips and Jim Clymer are convinced that I can adequately represent the Constitution Party in such a fashion, then I must weigh their opinion and their vision as well as my own knowledge of the task and of my own strengths and shortcomings. In light of these considerations, and despite previous misgivings, I believe God has given me this duty to perform.

Mr. Peroutka entertains no illusions that his path will be easy or “successful” in the world’s eyes. He is simply carrying out to the best of his ability the will of God as he understands it:

[T]here are at least two distinct tasks against which competency must be judged. One is the running of a legitimate and appropriate candidacy. The second is the serving in office in the event that God would grant the victory. About the first I know almost nothing except that it will be a challenge that will test my knowledge, patience, energy, and stamina. I expect to take punches and I need to do so with equanimity and maintain the course despite attacks and setbacks. I am committed to this. Regarding the second, I feel a little more qualified. Although I am not well-schooled on every important issue, I do feel that I have an overall grasp of what a Constitutional Republic of Sovereign States based on Biblical principles would look like and I think, with practice, I can express this clearly and concisely. Applying these principles to every question of current events in a rapid-fire interview with good sound bites may not be my forte but I think I could actually do the work of the office if God gave it to me to do. Moreover, I am confident that if He gave it to me He would give me the resources and the help to carry out His will for me.

What does this mean for you and me? As voters, we are now faced with a viable alternative to the two-party monopoly that dominates American politics. And, like Mr. Peroutka, it is time to make a choice. Pastor Mark Dankof put it this way in a recent email:

What are your other voting options in the first Tuesday of November this fall? One will be a liberal Democrat, quite clearly the reincarnation of another Dukakis candidacy. The other will be Rockefeller Republican George W. Bush, who has given us 1) a Congressionally undeclared and preemptive foreign war in Iraq on the basis of fraudulent claims and evidence; 2) a never-ending and disastrous occupation of that country which continues to siphon billions of tax dollars and American lives with no end in sight; 3) a Leviathan federal budget of 2.3 trillion dollars with 500 billion dollar + deficits; 4) a catastrophic immigration policy which has given blanket amnesty to an additional 12 million illegal aliens in the United States; 5) a continuation of America-Last trade policies as outlined in NAFTA and GATT, designed to destroy the manufacturing base and sector of the American economy; and 6) ongoing capitulations in the Culture War to the anti-Christian, pro-abortion, and homosexual lobbies active within his own Party.

If you like these policies, Mr. Bush and/or his Democratic opponent are just for you. I accept this. But if you share my own anxiety about the future of America and the direction either King George or John Kerry of the People’s Republic of Massachusetts will set in the four years that follow this November’s election, please prayerfully consider Michael Peroutka as worthy of your vote as the next President of the United States. And tell as many of your friends and family members as you can of this important option I commend to you. There is indeed a viable alternative available. And let’s Reclaim our Republic.

A friend of mine recently asked me, “But I’ve never heard of Michael Peroutka. How in the world can a man without name recognition, personal connections, and access to resources be considered a viable candidate for president?” This is a legitimate question. But it has been answered by Mr. Howard Phillips, one of the founders of the Constitution Party. In an interview with Mark Dankof on World Net Daily, Mr. Phillips said this:

Christians, conservatives, Constitutionalists, will only be effective in politics when they begin with the standard, rather than beginning with the man. If you begin with the standard of God’s word, the Bible, if you begin with the political standard of the Constitution, and then assess the degree to which those who seek your support identify themselves with that which is required by the Bible and the Constitution, you are less likely to err. But there is no such thing as perfect discernment—we just do the best that we can.

In other words, not only does the Constitution Party put principle above politics; it puts principle above personality. This is as it should be.

Personally, I like the determination and humility I see in Mr. Peroutka. It reminds me of what the apostle Paul said in Acts 20:24. Although aware that bonds and afflictions awaited him, he declared, “But none of these things move me.” Paul had set his face. In Philippians 3:13 he tells us, “This one thing I do,” not “These many things I dabble in.” Yes, there are “those things which are behind,” and Paul is forgetting them. But there are also “those things which remain before,” and Paul is reaching forth unto them with every ounce of his God-given strength. All the land that remains to be possessed, all the service that remains for us to accomplish, all that is ours in Christ both as individuals and as a nation—let us reach for these while there is still time.

Today is the day to make up our minds on “this one thing.” It will help bring all other things in their proper relation to that. This is what Mr. Peroutka has had the courage to do, and that is what we must do.

Set your face like a flint and you, too, shall never be ashamed.

David Alan Black is the editor of www.daveblackonline.com. His latest book, Why I Stopped Listening to Rush: Confessions of a Recovering Neocon, will be released this year.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2004; constitutionparty; michaelperoutka; peroutka
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-109 next last

1 posted on 02/19/2004 8:28:44 PM PST by jgrubbs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: B4Ranch; The_Eaglet; Ricardo4CP; sfRummygirl; TBP; Federalist 78; kidd; Theodore R.; Godebert; ...
Constitution Party Ping!
2 posted on 02/19/2004 8:32:41 PM PST by jgrubbs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs
Why don't you guys go start your own damned website?
3 posted on 02/19/2004 8:34:52 PM PST by Jim Robinson (I don't belong to no organized political party. I'm a Republycan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs
I'd like to have a candidate I can really support from the heart. I wish Peroutka's campaign would hurry and make yard signs, bumper stickers, and t-shirts available to the public. I'd also like to see them run commercials during this summer's Olympics so that Peroutka's name gets out there to people who otherwise might not know him.
4 posted on 02/19/2004 8:35:14 PM PST by MarcoPolo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs; Constitution Party
Go Peroutka go!!

used to be a FReeper named Constitution Party... wonder what happened to him??

5 posted on 02/19/2004 8:36:31 PM PST by GeronL (http://www.ArmorforCongress.com......................Send a Freeper to Congress!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
LOL.

I think they should too. But at least their conservative.

6 posted on 02/19/2004 8:37:11 PM PST by GeronL (http://www.ArmorforCongress.com......................Send a Freeper to Congress!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
Whatever. You can go with them.
7 posted on 02/19/2004 8:38:25 PM PST by Jim Robinson (I don't belong to no organized political party. I'm a Republycan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Free Republic is an online gathering place for independent, grass-roots conservatism on the web. We're working to roll back decades of governmental largesse, to root out political fraud and corruption, and to champion causes which further conservatism in America.
8 posted on 02/19/2004 8:40:12 PM PST by jgrubbs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs
Free Republic supports President Bush for Re-election. There's no way in hell that Free Republic is going to be used to help usher in a damned Democrat. If you want to promote a third party spoiler, please do it elsewhere.
9 posted on 02/19/2004 8:44:49 PM PST by Jim Robinson (I don't belong to no organized political party. I'm a Republycan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs

Oh yeah, the Constitution Party....

There's strong leadership for the 21st Century!

Be Seeing You,

Chris

10 posted on 02/19/2004 9:08:18 PM PST by section9 (Major Motoko Kusanagi says, "I have John Kerry's medals at my blog. Click on the pic!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs
Michael Peroutka --> anagram --> A chum like a Perot
11 posted on 02/19/2004 9:11:08 PM PST by Consort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs
I guess conservatives can be assclowns too.
12 posted on 02/19/2004 9:28:55 PM PST by dc-zoo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Consort
Some more:

CHOKE MATERIAL UP

CHOKE AMATEUR LIP

13 posted on 02/19/2004 9:33:17 PM PST by Johnny_Cipher (Making hasenfeffer out of bunnyrabbits since 1980)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Consort
Constitution Party --> anagram --> UNPATRIOTIC SNOTTY
14 posted on 02/19/2004 9:38:07 PM PST by Johnny_Cipher (Making hasenfeffer out of bunnyrabbits since 1980)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

Comment #15 Removed by Moderator

Comment #16 Removed by Moderator

To: ambrose
*ping* (#9)
17 posted on 02/20/2004 12:16:05 AM PST by onyx (Your secrets are safe with me and all my friends.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: onyx
bwahaha
18 posted on 02/20/2004 12:22:40 AM PST by ambrose ("John Kerry has blood of American soldiers on his hands" - Lt. Col. Oliver North)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: ambrose
YES! I love it.
19 posted on 02/20/2004 12:23:39 AM PST by onyx (Your secrets are safe with me and all my friends.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs
Thanks for posting this.
20 posted on 02/20/2004 3:01:59 AM PST by The_Eaglet (Opportunity: http://www.peroutka2004.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
...please prayerfully consider Michael Peroutka as worthy of your vote as the next President of the United States.

BWA HA HA HA! Are these people looney tunes for real or is it all a big joke to them?????????

21 posted on 02/20/2004 5:49:36 AM PST by Recovering_Democrat (I'm so glad to no longer be associated with the Party of Dependence on Government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
On another thread page, you said that the mission statement on the home page is still current. Others have since expressed their doubts, and I would like to know if this applies to my questions below.

Since President Bush has exceeded Bill Clinton in terms of federal largesse, it seems to me that supporting Bush's campaign contradicts this statement.

As a U.S. citizen, I support Bush in his efforts to carry out his Constitutionally-authorized duties as President for his elected tenure, and I am thankful when he fulfills them.

Considering that he has signed bills that implement unconstitutional spending and infringe on Constitutional liberties (such as campaign finance reform) and that he has called for further government expansions, we know that he intends to further roll out (not "roll back") federal largesse.

May we continue to post about efforts to stop acheivement of his intentions of liberally spending our tax dollars?

As a "gathering place for independent, grass-roots conservatism" are posts about non-Republican conservative efforts also allowed?

I am grateful that this was the case in the past, and I hope that FreeRepublic will continue to "champion causes which further conservatism in America" and "have fun doing it!"

22 posted on 02/20/2004 10:42:12 AM PST by The_Eaglet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: MarcoPolo; jgrubbs
I'd like to have a candidate I can really support from the heart. I wish Peroutka's campaign would hurry and make yard signs, bumper stickers, and t-shirts available to the public. I'd also like to see them run commercials during this summer's Olympics so that Peroutka's name gets out there to people who otherwise might not know him.

Peroutka's web page has the image for the bumper sticker available for free. I printed it out and put it inside the rear window of my car.

23 posted on 02/20/2004 11:59:47 AM PST by The_Eaglet (Conservative chat on IRC: http://searchirc.com/search.php?F=exact&T=chan&N=33&I=conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: GeronL; Mid-State Constitution Party; TBP; sheltonmac
used to be a FReeper named Constitution Party... wonder what happened to him??

There's Mid-state Constitution Party, but he has not posted in a long time.

24 posted on 02/20/2004 12:10:49 PM PST by The_Eaglet (Conservative chat on IRC: http://searchirc.com/search.php?F=exact&T=chan&N=33&I=conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs
David Black would be MUCH more comfortable if he removed that stick.
25 posted on 02/20/2004 12:30:07 PM PST by Tamzee (PhilDragoo says... Senator Kerry for Information Minister!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The_Eaglet
Yes, advancing conservatism, etc, is the mission statement. We do that by electing the most conservative people we can possibly elect and by doing all we can to ensure that conservative judges get appointed and confirmed, and by doing all we can to see that America and our freedom and liberty is defended and preserved. And, obviously (to most of us), helping to elect the United Nations loving, abortionist, gay agenda advancing, Marxist/liberal John Kerry would be a giant step backwards from where we are today.

Bush will defend America. Kerry will surrender to the United Nations.

Bush has said no to Kyoto and other sovereignty robbing treaties. Kerry will sign on to all he possibly can.

Bush will appoint conservative judges. Kerry will appoint liberal activists.

Bush is a proven tax cutter. Kerry has sworn to raise our taxes.

Bush is pro-life, pro-family, pro-God, pro-gun, pro-America. Kerry is an America hating, abortionist, homosexualist, feminist, godless pinko hippy peacenik.

Either we reelect Bush or obviously we get stuck with the corrupt Kerry. That would be a huge setback to our conservative causes.


Free Republic is a grass roots organization and it IS independent of any party, including any third parties, but that doesn't mean we can't support the best available conservative for the job. I defend America. I defend freedom. I support the conservative cause and I wholeheartedly support Bush for reelection and want nothing whatsoever to do with splitting the conservative vote thereby helping to usher in another corrupt liberal Democrat.

Like I said above, if you want to promote a spoiler do it elsewhere. Free Republic is a place to advance conservatism, not liberalism.
26 posted on 02/20/2004 12:44:59 PM PST by Jim Robinson (I don't belong to no organized political party. I'm a Republycan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson; jgrubbs
Bush for reelection and want nothing whatsoever to do with splitting the conservative vote thereby helping to usher in another corrupt liberal Democrat.

Don't you think that by running for re-election after advocating and implementing abhorrent liberal policies that Bush is splitting the conservative vote? He would serve conservatives better by dropping out of the race and supporting someone who is consistent in his positions.

He barely beat a half-witted socialist Democrat who served in the previous administration. A repeat race, especially after outspending said administration, will only further divide conservatives.

27 posted on 02/20/2004 1:01:17 PM PST by The_Eaglet (Conservative chat on IRC: http://searchirc.com/search.php?F=exact&T=chan&N=33&I=conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: The_Eaglet
Look, I support GW Bush 100% over John Kerry even if I don't like some of his policies. Is that so hard to understand?

28 posted on 02/20/2004 1:11:08 PM PST by Jim Robinson (I don't belong to no organized political party. I'm a Republycan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: The_Eaglet
Don't you think that by running for re-election after advocating and implementing abhorrent liberal policies that Bush is splitting the conservative vote?

No, holding Bush to a "Reagan" standard that Reagan himself would have fallen well short of is splitting off a fairly small part of the conservative vote.

29 posted on 02/20/2004 1:15:46 PM PST by kevkrom (Ask your Congresscritter about his or her stance on HR 25 -- the NRST)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
I understand that.
30 posted on 02/20/2004 1:15:56 PM PST by The_Eaglet (Conservative chat on IRC: http://searchirc.com/search.php?F=exact&T=chan&N=33&I=conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: kevkrom
Why not hold Bush to the standard of his oath to preserve and defend the Constitution

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Amendment X

31 posted on 02/20/2004 1:22:06 PM PST by The_Eaglet (Conservative chat on IRC: http://searchirc.com/search.php?F=exact&T=chan&N=33&I=conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson; The_Eaglet
Why don't you guys go start your own damned website

I will honor Jim's request and start a forum site for the Constitution Party and other conservatives upset with the current moderate state of the GOP, as not to upset anyone else here at FreeRepublican.

This new site will be a "online gathering place for independent, grass-roots conservatism on the web." Whis will allow us to work "to roll back decades of governmental largesse, to root out political fraud and corruption, and to champion causes which further conservatism in America."

32 posted on 02/20/2004 1:30:17 PM PST by jgrubbs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs
Good lu8ck. But don't come here recruiting.
33 posted on 02/20/2004 1:33:23 PM PST by Jim Robinson (I don't belong to no organized political party. I'm a Republycan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: The_Eaglet
Yeah, right. By electing John Kerry? Get real.
34 posted on 02/20/2004 1:36:14 PM PST by Jim Robinson (I don't belong to no organized political party. I'm a Republycan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs
Great idea. You might want to change the wording to avoid copyright infringement.

We need all the conservative sites we could get to balance out widespread coverage with stories filtered by selective liberal media, many of which purport to be fair or unbiaseed.

35 posted on 02/20/2004 1:37:28 PM PST by The_Eaglet (Conservative chat on IRC: http://searchirc.com/search.php?F=exact&T=chan&N=33&I=conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
If he were to endorse Peroutka it would help defeat Kerry or whoever the Democrats nominate.

If Bush were to apologize for his liberal actions, stop all of his socialistic and unconstitutional spending, call for repeals of the unconstitutional legislation he has signed, and direct some more of our existing resources to border defense and expired visa violations, I would consider voting for him.

Right now, we don't have reason to think that he would do any of the above, and it might be less trouble for him to endorse another conservative candidate.

36 posted on 02/20/2004 1:46:36 PM PST by The_Eaglet (Conservative chat on IRC: http://searchirc.com/search.php?F=exact&T=chan&N=33&I=conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
That was a pretty childish outburst.

I like hearing various conservative points of view. Non-Republicans can have valid ideas.
37 posted on 02/20/2004 1:53:11 PM PST by k2blader (Some folks should worry less about how conservatives vote and more about how to advance conservatism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: The_Eaglet
And we'd never have a governable majority. I don't like this liberal stuff either, but conservatism is not yet the majority. Sometimes he has to throw bones in order to win elections.
38 posted on 02/20/2004 1:53:50 PM PST by WinOne4TheGipper (The Republican Party's job is to win elections. It's our job to change minds.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: k2blader
Fine, but they're not going to use FR for their official recruiting campaigns.
39 posted on 02/20/2004 1:54:49 PM PST by Jim Robinson (I don't belong to no organized political party. I'm a Republycan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: The_Eaglet; jgrubbs
"coverage with stories" above was meant to be "coverage of stories".
40 posted on 02/20/2004 1:54:51 PM PST by The_Eaglet (Conservative chat on IRC: http://searchirc.com/search.php?F=exact&T=chan&N=33&I=conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: The_Eaglet
Don't you think that by running for re-election after advocating and implementing abhorrent liberal policies that Bush is splitting the conservative vote? He would serve conservatives better by dropping out of the race and supporting someone who is consistent in his positions.

I think the majority of Americans are not liberal or conservative, and don't pay much attention to the details. These people have never heard of the Constitution Party, and they won't vote for it. They'll vote for the candidate of one of the major parties. An exception would be someone like Perot with LOTS of money and LOTS of media attention. Do you suppose the Constitution Party will get that?

He barely beat a half-witted socialist Democrat who served in the previous administration.

Precisely. Over half the American voters voted for either Gore or Nader. A little less than half the American voters voted for Bush or more conservative candidates.

Most Americans are moderates, and believe the media hype that Conservatives are too mean and hateful. They don't want to be like that; they see themselves as kind and generous people.

Most Americans see third party candidates, on the whole, as Quixotic nutcases, and they don't vote for them. By the time of the election, Peroutka will be lucky if 10% of Americans have even heard of him. During the last election, both Pat Buchanan and the Reform Party were fairly well known, but got very few votes.

A repeat race, especially after outspending said administration, will only further divide conservatives.

The biggest thing dividing conservatives is these "conservative" candidates. One wonders what they are actually expecting to accomplish, since they can't possibly expect to win.

Bush isn't perfect by a long shot, but he sure beats Kerry.

41 posted on 02/20/2004 3:03:16 PM PST by Amelia (I have trouble taking some people seriously.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs
Personally, I find the comparison of Mr. Peroutka's decision to run for president with Jesus deciding to accept His ministry very offensive.
42 posted on 02/20/2004 3:05:14 PM PST by Amelia (I have trouble taking some people seriously.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Amelia
As for Jesus, He had chosen to enter upon the path before Him—a path of humiliation, suffering, and death in order to accomplish the divine plan of salvation. He knew the time had come when, after His suffering and resurrection, He would again be taken up and reinstated in His former glory with the Father and vested with the new glory He had won as Son of Man.

This Saturday, fully aware of the path awaiting him, Mr. Michael Peroutka will announce his candidacy for President of the United States. The decision to run for public office was not an easy one for this soft-spoken man. In his statement of candidacy he notes:

I can see your point there. It was a bit over the top. However from the perspective of doing something so unpopular and still pressing forward with it because he believes in the long forgotten concept of what used to be a Republic nonetheless, I have to give him some credit. It's refreshing to see a candidate that is willing to stand up and say "this is what the Constitution says my job is and that's what I'm doing" instead of the candidate who says 'Vote for me and see what I can give you".

43 posted on 02/20/2004 3:15:23 PM PST by billbears (Deo Vindice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs

Oh yes, vote third party!


So that we are to leave all that we hold dear to Kerry and the democrats.
Then with heads held high in resolute and irrefutable principle march off to the re-education camps, thereby
taking the high road of moral indignation into oblivion.
At least we won't have to be around to watch the Islamic
horde slaughter the remaining liberals. (And you too.)
44 posted on 02/20/2004 3:36:33 PM PST by tet68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: billbears
However from the perspective of doing something so unpopular and still pressing forward with it because he believes in the long forgotten concept of what used to be a Republic nonetheless, I have to give him some credit.

For reasons I've stated above, he's not likely to get a significant number of votes. HOWEVER, if he did get some measurable percentage of votes, the practical result of his candidacy is more likely to be the election of the Democratic candidate, which is exactly the opposite of what he says he wants. Therefore, it's non-productive and most likely to be counter-productive.

It's refreshing to see a candidate that is willing to stand up and say "this is what the Constitution says my job is and that's what I'm doing" instead of the candidate who says 'Vote for me and see what I can give you".

Well, yeah, except that MOST people are more likely to vote for the person who promises them the most - that's precisely WHY politicians make those promises. At least President Bush has kept most of his.

45 posted on 02/20/2004 3:38:35 PM PST by Amelia (I have trouble taking some people seriously.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Amelia
Raw sanctioned POWER knows no limits and is not obligated to change its mind. Either way we go some one will be looked aside!
46 posted on 02/20/2004 5:02:25 PM PST by winker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Amelia
Bush isn't perfect by a long shot, but he sure beats Kerry.

Amen to that and if these guys want to run and actually expect someone to vote for them, they can run in the primary. I'll support them there.

This way they're nothing but spoilers who will get their jollies out of seeing a Democrat getting elected. Makes them feel big, I guess.

47 posted on 02/20/2004 5:14:40 PM PST by Conservativegreatgrandma
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Amelia
For reasons I've stated above, he's not likely to get a significant number of votes. HOWEVER, if he did get some measurable percentage of votes, the practical result of his candidacy is more likely to be the election of the Democratic candidate, which is exactly the opposite of what he says he wants. Therefore, it's non-productive and most likely to be counter-productive.

Interesting. Never considered a citizen of a respective state allowing their voice to be heard called 'counter-productive'. Much better we continue the popularity contest. Can't let following the precepts and letter of the law in the Constitution get in the way now can we?

Well, yeah, except that MOST people are more likely to vote for the person who promises them the most - that's precisely WHY politicians make those promises. At least President Bush has kept most of his.

Oh yes, remind me in thirty years to write a letter to each and everyone of the politicians that voted, called for, passed, signed, and in any way was responsible for this $530 billion (and growing exponentially) 'healthcare' package that was just signed. I'm so absolutely grateful....

Of course by then it'll probably cost $4 to mail a dern letter but we can't let cost and limitations of the national government as explained by the Constitution get in the way of 'promises' now can we?

48 posted on 02/20/2004 8:04:50 PM PST by billbears (Deo Vindice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: billbears
I think it's really interesting we have people on other threads jubilant because Nader is going to jump in and split the liberal vote, but don't see that Peroutka and whoever the Libertarian candidate may be are potentially splitting the conservative vote.

I think principle is very important, but if you don't get anyone elected, how are you going to get your policies implemented? I've decided half a loaf is better than none.

If you happened to lose your job, would you work at whatever you could until you could find a new job you liked, or would you sit on your rear and whine about not being able to find the perfect job as you starved and lost all your possessions?

49 posted on 02/20/2004 8:17:27 PM PST by Amelia (I have trouble taking some people seriously.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Amelia
A job is a personal responsibility and something I am expected to uphold. Much as the leaders of the nation. To pay lip service to a document and then go about business as usual is not something one should expect from their leaders. Politicians maybe, but not leaders

As for Nader's vote tally, heck the man has been running for years. Sooner or later people start to vote for them. We constantly hear about this 'incrementalism' the Republicans are trying to sell as the excuse for expanding and not limiting government. It's the same with the votes. Nader has been doing it over and over. And in some states he's giving a showing that I imagine Democrats and Republicans alike don't appreciate. Somebody is trying to kick them off the top of their hallowed hill with a message out of the ordinary

I'm not saying we'll see some 20-30% runup with a conservative third party this year or even next election cycle. But you have to admit, some citizens of the respective states are getting restless. The Republican party is going conservative when it matters less and less. As this continues, will 'flyover' country be voting solid Republican 25 years from now?

50 posted on 02/20/2004 8:27:37 PM PST by billbears (Deo Vindice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-109 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson