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.
And, if one were to delve deeper, one would find there are other Libertarian principals that conservatives find unacceptable.
_________________________
Such as support for abortion, legalization of psychedelic drugs, homosexual marriage, radical isolationism, unrestricted trade, and unrestricted control of the environment by government.
The Libertarian party is not founded on (US) Constitutional authority. It is a radical left wing variation of Marxism.
If the Dems take over in 2006, they'll waste the next two years impeaching Bush, and get nothing else done.
Frankly that doesn't scare me as much as you might believe. Nor does it seem very realistic.
Vote as you please, but I will give you a piece of advice from Common Tator: If conservatives stay home and don't vote, those who are elected will be beholden not to conservatives, but to moderates. You will then find candidates moving leftward to satisfy those dependable voters. The end result will be that the Republicans move leftward, and you will get less of what you want.
And, of course, if the democrats regain power you will get NOTHING of what you want and a whole lot of stuff that you don't want at all.
No, but this talk plus stupid talk from the liberal-tarians about a third party might make things just right for a rat take over.
And if it walks like a rat and talks like a rat, it's STILL a rat....
even if there's an 'R' after its name.
Hear, hear!!
Satan 2008! Why settle for the lesser evil?
"If conservatives stay home and don't vote, those who are elected will be beholden not to conservatives, but to moderates. You will then find candidates moving leftward to satisfy those dependable voters. The end result will be that the Republicans move leftward, and you will get less of what you want."
If a Republican runs on a liberal platform, with a liberal track record, and I vote for him, he will take my vote as acceptance of his posture and conduct. He will not get sworn in and say to himnself, "BOY, I'D BETTER CHANGE MY WAYS", now, will he?
Actually, no. This is a matter of national survival. If the WH is able to pressure the House into accepting amnesty, then GOP House members are toast. There are people who were not just precint workers in '04, but actual electors, that would be supporters of articles brought by Dem House managers in '07.
This move is GUARANTEED to elect Democrats to a majority. If any fringe party needs to be strengthened, it is the Greens. The Greens drive the dim candidates to the left and make the voters aware of dim "core values". The best way to insure more conservative policies by Republicans is to make our majorities LARGER so that there will be no need to enlarge the tent.
OK Miss Marple -- That's Good.
And the strict judicial appointments Are Good -- Those are presidential appoinments of course, and 2006 is NOT a Presidential Year. VERY IMPORTANT DISTINCTION!
I have NOT been very impressed with GOP support generally, and the post earlier "hissy fit", is exactly what I'm talking about. Heard that attitude before. I think THAT attitude expects me to keep voting for republicans, and to keep being satisfied at the end of the benefit line.
I even think that attitude should be evicted.
Take Prop 187. A piece of Legislation that would of done a great deal to stop this Illegal mess. A Leftist judge simply imposed his personal Leftist dogma and overturned the will of Californians.
Our suppose some miracle happens and the US House Republicans win the fight on Illegals and get their strict enforcement bill. Guess what. The day after the Law is signed, the ACLU and La Raza and a bunch of racists "Immigrant support groups" are going to go to one of their tame judges in San Fransisco or Boston or wherever and get an injunction to stop the laws from being enforced until years of legal battles are fought out all the way up to the Supreme Court. Judges, Judges, Judges. The Judges appointed in the next 4 years, especial to the Supreme Court are vital to our survival as a nation. 7 of 9 Justices were born in the 1920s. They are NOT going to be around much longer.
Trowing a temper tantrum because you do not get ONLY 100 % of what YOU personally want TODAY so the Leftist get to appoint those judges would be an incredibly foolish thing for anyone truly "Conservative" to do.
I disagree. They will do everything they can to subvert, facilitate corruption, and hijack the election process. Through these acts, felons, illegals, will be able to vote, as well as multiple fraudulent voting will be allowed. Don't put ANYTHING past a Democrat. He will do ANYTHING to control your life....
I hope you're right, but there are a lot of things Congress can do against the President's wishes besides overriding a veto (which GW seems wont to do). Remember Slick Willie firing EVERY US Attorney in the US the day he took office? Congress can hold EVERYTHING having to do with funding hostage to get what it wants and the Repubs ALWAYS cave... Mark my words...if they win 2006, they've got 2008, 2012, 2016 and so on.....
OK I'll mark your words, and you mark mine.
2006 is the wake-up call to GOP Presidential Candidates. If the call doesn't come, they distance themselves from conservatives and run in the center.
But if the Wake up call does come, they look hard to the Right, and run to the conservative Base. Mark My words.
It doesn't matter if a RAT takes over. There's not enough difference between the political parties over issues that matter.
So, we get Hitlery for four years, if the nation can survive Carter, we can survive her.
I'm ready for a change. Maybe the Consitution Party is one to something.
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.