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

To: SoCalPol
Conservative my a** Below is from lthe const. web site. It is no different than the left wing anti war idiots.

Below from a year old thread, The Constitution Party on the War on Terror. Their platform is in post 2. They differ from left wing anti-war idiots in that they plan on re-taking the Panama Canal. That will only happen militarily.

From a personal perspective, I wouldn't support a party that runs Mark Dankoff, nor one that religious freedom in terms of tolerance of and asylum for non-Christians.

--------------------

The Constitution Party on the War on Terror
The Constitution Party ^ | 4-11-06

Posted on 04/11/2006 9:31:43 AM CDT by SJackson

Since third parties, specifically the Constitution Party, have become an issue

Constitution Party on Immigration

Constitution Party gains strength, could hurt Republicans

I thought it might be helpful to look at issues other than immigration. The entire platform is in post 1, since there are issues other than the WOT and immigration.

Terrorism and Personal Liberty

America is engaged in an undeclared war with an ill-defined enemy (terrorism), a war which threatens to be never ending, and which is being used to vastly expand government power, particularly that of the executive branch, at the expense of the individual liberties of the American people.

The "war on terrorism" is serving as an excuse for the government to spend beyond its income, expand the Federal bureaucracy, and socialize the nation through taxpayer bailouts of the airlines, subsidies to the giant insurance corporations, and other Federal programs.

We deplore and vigorously oppose legislation and executive action, that deprive the people of their rights secured under the Fourth and Fifth Amendments under the guise of "combating terrorism" or "protecting national security." Examples of such legislation are the National Security Act, the USA PATRIOT Act, and the proposed Domestic Securities Enhancement Act (colloquially known as "Patriot II").

The National Security Act is used by the federal government as a shroud to prevent the American people and our elected officials from knowing how much and where our tax dollars are spent from covert operations around the world. The National Security Act prevents the release of Executive Orders and Presidential Decision Directives, e.g., PDD 25, to the American people and our elected representatives. Not only are many of these used to thwart justice in the name of national security, but some of the operations under this act may threaten our very national sovereignty.

The USA PATRIOT Act permits arrests without warrants and secret detention without counsel, wiretaps without court supervision, searches and seizures without notification to the individual whose property is invaded, and a host of other violations of the legal safeguards our nation has historically developed according to principles descending from the Fourth and Fifth Amendments.

Since we will no longer have a free nation while the federal government (or the governments of the several states, as the federal government may authorize) can violate our historic rights under such laws, we call for the rejection of all such laws and the ceasing of any such further proposals including the aforementioned Domestic Securities Enhancement Act.

The Constitution Party is unalterably opposed to the criminal acts of terrorists, and their organizations, as well as the governments which condone them. Individuals responsible for acts of terrorism must be punished for their crimes, including the infliction of capital punishment where appropriate. In responding to terrorism, however, the United States must avoid acts of retaliation abroad which destroy innocent human lives, creating enmity toward the United States and its people; and

In accord with the views of our Founding Fathers, we must disengage this nation from the international entanglements which generate foreign hatred of the United States, and are used as the excuse for terrorist attacks on America and its people. The 'war on terrorism" is not a proper excuse for perpetual U.S. occupation of foreign lands, military assaults on countries which have not injured us, or perpetual commitment of taxpayer dollars to finance foreign governments.

----------------------

Peroutka’s Plan for Iraq
April 16, 2004

"I like President Bush personally. He is a sincere man. I respect his office. But, it is becoming painfully obvious that he has no plan to get our country out of the un-Constitutional, bloody, deadly, mess going on in Iraq. In fact, Mr. Bush and John Kerry both favor putting more troops into Iraq. In his recent press conference, Mr. Bush said our troops would be in Iraq 'as long as necessary,' 'for a while,' until Iraq is 'a free country.' He said Iraqis would provide their own security 'eventually.' I strongly disagree. As President, I would move immediately to withdraw all our troops from Iraq in a way that would provide for the safety of those Iraqis who worked with us during this illegal, wrong-headed war.

"I, like President Bush, hope that the Iraqi people, and all people, will be free from tyranny. But, unlike President Bush, I realize that, Constitutionally, as President, it would not be my job to use our military to spread 'freedom' everywhere in the world. Unlike President Bush, I, as President, would realize that I had been elected President of the United States, not President of the World.

"In 1821, John Quincy Adams said, of America:

'She goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own.'

But, ignoring Adams' wise advice, President Bush, using our military, has gone abroad and destroyed the monster Saddam Hussein who posed no threat to the vital national security interests of our country. The result: We are bogged down in a bloody and expensive mess with no end in sight. If elected President, however, I would move immediately to end our involvement in Iraq. I am not one who believes that when you are in a hole you should not be in, you should keep digging. "

For God, Family and the Republic,

Michael A. Peroutka

----------------------


Withdraw from Iraq-no democracy through warfare
Should the United States withdraw its troops from Iraq? A: Yes.

Peroutka says, "Article I.8 of the US Constitution does not grant to Congress the power of "nation-building." If I am elected President, no longer will these United States seek regime change nor the concept of spreading democracy through warfare, and the children within these United States will not be committed to engage in a war to `free' any people."

Michael Peroutka on VoteMatch


250 posted on 01/10/2007 12:36:55 PM PST by SJackson (The Pilgrims—Doing the jobs Native Americans wouldn’t do!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]


To: SJackson

Your views are no different than the soscaliest, CPUSA, etc. who rally against the war and share many of your ideas.

No Thank You. I am against your socialist values.


251 posted on 01/10/2007 12:40:49 PM PST by SoCalPol (We Need A Border Fence Now)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 250 | View Replies ]

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