Oh yeah, the Constitution Party....
There's strong leadership for the 21st Century!
Be Seeing You,
Chris
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.
used to be a FReeper named Constitution Party... wonder what happened to him??
I think they should too. But at least their conservative.
Oh yeah, the Constitution Party....
There's strong leadership for the 21st Century!
Be Seeing You,
Chris
CHOKE MATERIAL UP
CHOKE AMATEUR LIP
BWA HA HA HA! Are these people looney tunes for real or is it all a big joke to them?????????
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!"
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.
There's Mid-state Constitution Party, but he has not posted in a long time.
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.
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.
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.
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."
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.
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.
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.
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".
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.
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.
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?
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?
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?
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.