Reports from the Constitution Party National Committee Meeting in Concord

The most recent The American View radio broadcast hosted by the Constitution Party’s 2004 presidential candidate, Michael Peroutka, devotes a full hour to an analysis of the Constitution Party’s most recent national committee meeting in Concord, New Hampshire. It seems that Mr. Peroutka has finally severed all ties with the Constitution Party, or, more accurately stated perhaps, the Constitution Party has severed all ties with him. The broadcasts includes reports from leaders of the Constitution Parties of Ohio, Texas, and Wisconsin. You can listen to the broadcast here.

Another member of the Constitution Party of Wisconsin has published a report on the meeting entitled “The Death of a Party” here.

69 Responses to “Reports from the Constitution Party National Committee Meeting in Concord”

  1. rj Says:

    Well, gee, that lasted long.

    Question for CP members/enthusiasts. From one of the links:

    “Well, over the summer many state affiliates chose to remove themselves from association with an organization that would allow for any compromise on the issue of life, specifically abortion and when it might be OK to perform one. “Never” is what we all thought the obvious answer was, but we were all obviously wrong as the leadership of the CP has now pointed out.”

    Does “state affiliates chose to remove themselves from association with an organization that would allow for any compromise on the issue of life” include the death penalty?

    One thing I can’t stand about the majority of anti-abortion activists and anti-death penalty advocates is that most are only for one and not the other. (Disclaimer: I think abortion and the death penalty are wrong) If you’re going to claim Christian moral high ground, you can’t pick and choose which parts of the Bible to like.

  2. Tom Bryant Says:

    Doesn’t the Old Testament implement the death penalty for a variety of offenses?

  3. rj Says:

    ^ And the New Testament revokes it. Jesus in one of his sermons tells the Pharisees that the old Jewish way of carrying out certain acts to appease God no longer apply.

  4. Mike N. Says:

    Speaking of the Bible, Lord Hacker is writing the “Bible of Infinite Wisdom”... available as soon as you send him enough money to publish it.

    The Austin Chronicle reports:

    http://thirdpartywatch.com/2006/12/06/badnarik-begs-for-another-200k/#comment-75932

  5. Trent Hill Says:

    Well,its a sad day for the Constitution Party.

    They fared very well in the 2006 elections (as far as Third Parties go), and im sad to see the political power they’d garnered over the past 6 years dissapear, they might have been a vehicle for Third Party Victory in ‘08.
    The fact is that the Constitution Party are States Right Advocates. The entire controversy sourrounds the Nevada affiliate on the Constitution Party, they want to make exceptions to the “pro-life” stance based on Rape and Incest. And the National Party, quite literally, does not have the authority to overstep that boundary and tell them they can’t. They cannot even dissafiliate Nevada (very easily) without Nevada first submitting a Letter of Withdrawl. (Which is what Ohio did).
    At any rate, we should all mourn the fall of this party. Not because we espoused it, or hated its views, but because it was doing well for Third Party Ballot Access.
    Perhaps it can still keep it together.

  6. Kris Overstreet Says:

    Personally I find it interesting that the American Heritage Party does away with any pretense that they aren’t seeking an American theocracy. The CP still claims that they aren’t in favor of theocracy, despite certain religion-based platform planks.

    It would be interesting to see if a rump CP, without the most rabid Christian Taliban members, would end up merging with the Libertarians, or vice versa.

  7. Trent Hill Says:

    IN September (I think), there was a meeting between American First Party, the American Party, and the Independant American Party. The Constitution Party’s chairman (Clymer) was supposed to attend,but couldnt due to Hurricane Charlie complications. The meeting was supposed to outline the advantages and disadvantages of a merger between those parties. And I do indeed think that alot of Paleolibertarians would be drawn into this party. A Christian-influenced, pro-life, states’ rights, low taxes, pro-2nd-amendment party could draw a LOT of voters. Notice that I said Christian influenced, but not Christian. By no means do I advocate the sort of Theocracy that the American Heritage Party advocates, or some members of the Constitution Party advocate.

  8. Freelancer Says:

    Randy Stufflebeam received 19,000 write-in votes for governor.

  9. Sean Scallon Says:

    Parting is such sweet sorrow….

    Since CPOW (Constitution Party of Wisconsin) has lost its ballot status in the state because it couldn’t even run at least one person for statewide office this past election, what loss is there if it disaffiliates? Another group will no doubt spring into its place.

    CP members have decided that states rights is an important part of its party doctrine and not one they are going to violate for one state. Now if many CP members think that is a violation of principals, they have every right to leave. I happen to think the views of the Peroutkaites and others are too nationalistic and Lincolnian for my tatses and the CP has said it will not sacrifice states rights as an important tenant of its party platform.

    Many Peroutkaites are not interested in winning anything when it comes to politics and only invovled in politics as an extention of their anti-abortion activism. If they feel that way, there are better ways for them to affect politics, like through Peroutka’s Institute for the Constitution, for example. Better than to waste tiome with elections they’re not planning to run or win.

    It will be interesting to see if the Peroutkaite defections will help consolidate the non-major party right because the CP’s religiosity was a turn off for many of them.

  10. Anthony Distler Says:

    This doesn’t come as a shock to me, but it shakes up 2008 quite a bit. All the pressure and media attention was going to be on Jim Gilchrist for founding the Minuteman Project and his tough anti-immigration platform. The Constitution Party should have recieved a major boost in 2008 with Gilchrist’s involvement. However, the party has been crumbling for about a year now, and it doesn’t shock me to see it fall to the ground.

    As a Reform Party member, I know what it’s like to see one’s political party destroyed like that. I’m hoping that with the Constitution Party going down, it’ll help the Reform Party rebuild. Unlikely, but it’s possible.

    Is the American Party, American Hertitage Party and the American First Parties form together, it will definately take the place of the Constitution Party, and it will be like nothing changed…almost.

  11. matt Says:

    A briefcase full of cash in the right hands can lead people to create all sorts of divisions. And don’t think the RNC can’t afford it.

  12. Chris Fluharty Says:

    I am the Vice Chairman of the newly reformed, now much more active, and larger Constitution Party of Missouri. We are and always will be a party and not a church. We are leading the fight in Missouri against Illegal immigration, eminent domain, and so much more. I am rather surprised the Third Party Watch would choose to run American view as opposed the official press release for the National meeting. I am curious to what plank that someone would consider religious based. We are a states rights, small government, pro-life party.

    RJ- Chapter and verse and book where Jesus ends the death penalty. There is no such verse. God is the same yesterday today and forever, to change his mind on the death penalty would make him schizophrenic.

    We are moving ahead w/o those would hold us back by desiring to establish a church rather than a party. We have some great potential presidential candidates talking to us. Many states are moving past dis affiliation and are going forward w/ ballot access, such as Missouri.

    So I hope in the future Thirdpartywatch.com will publish real releases from the real Constitution party instead of the views of a disgruntled disaffiliate.

  13. Chris Fluharty Says:

    Mr. Distler,

    How can you say it is crumbling? We here in Missouri are larger and more active then we have been in 10 years. People are sick of the two party system and the Libertarians do not satisfy the moral conservatives. So the CP will be a major threat and will grow. I know for a fact we will have more votes in 2008 then we had in 2004 in both National and here in Missouri.

    Matt are you saying that the RNC is behind the strife of the CP. I doubt it. Some in the party have a different vision and those visions conflicted. The disaffiliates had convictions and I admire them for those convictions and I am glad they left so we can move on. It is not the end of the world just the start of a new chapter.

  14. Anthony Distler Says:

    I’m saying crumbling as a national entity. I’m sure you have a great organization in Missouri. However, with some of the recent releases of different state affiliates breaking off from the national party, and then this little press release, it sounds to me like the Constitution Party is in disarray.

    I’ll bring up the Reform Party again, because I have quite a bit of knowledge on it. The Reform Party, once quite large, is practicly dead as a national entity. There are still great state affiliates in Flordia, Colorado, and Texas, for example (and currently trying to rebuild here in Pennsylvania). I think the Constitution Party is heading in that direction.

    However, I don’t have a lot of knowledge on the situtation. I may be wrong. Mr. Fluharty, were you at the convention? If you were, please share with me and the rest of us here your experience, and what actually happened.

  15. Citizens For A Better Veterans Home[s] Says:

    dear rj - ‘schizophrenic” is just a nick name for “dual personality”
    and/ or “multi personality”! In its more proper form it stands
    for “Split” from “Reality”, including, but not limited to “split personality”!

  16. rj Says:

    “RJ- Chapter and verse and book where Jesus ends the death penalty. There is no such verse. God is the same yesterday today and forever, to change his mind on the death penalty would make him schizophrenic.”

    Do you sacrifice a lamb on a holy alter when you realize you have committed the sin of lust? That was changed by God cause it no longer applied in the New Testament world.

    Quick google search. Pretty much what the Christian scholars say is that Christians should show mercy always, but that does not apply to authority government cause it was never disavowed. So death penalty is not illegal in a secular society, but in a society ruled by the church (i.e. theocracy), it should be illegal. One can take this two ways:

    1.) Theocracies are not possible in the real world.
    2.) Christianism is/will be a failed philosophy, cause secular governments are by nature non-Christian on purpose cause they could not govern otherwise.

    I’m not going into a religious argument cause it’s one of those things you don’t debate on the internet. I look at the world in this way though:

    Sin is sin. And all men and women are sinners. No one sin is greater or lesser than any other is how I was taught (i.e. There is no such thing as a “small sin” and a “big sin”). So how, in a Christian worldview, can you punish one man’s sin while not punishing your own? I guess this is an extension of Jesus telling the Pharisees to let he who had never sinned be the first to throw the stone at the hooker.

  17. Chris Fluharty Says:

    rj you cannot debate it because it is not true. Showing mercy and the death penalty for severe crimes are apples and Oranges. The book of Romans says the the civil authorities do not yield the sword in vain. Christian can and must support the death penalty. As a born again Christian my sins are forgiven just as anyone who ask for forgiveness. However, just like David’s baby w/ Bathsheba died in spite of repentance, the punishment for the crime must be carried out. You view of Christianity is very liberal and neglects the God of Judgement. While he is Love he is still Judge.

    I agree that a theocarcy is impossible. God has better things to do then run America. The CP does not and will not ever be a theocratic entity.

  18. Freelancer Says:

    Oooh, hoo. You go girl, I mean man. :)

  19. Gary Odom Says:

    Okay, enough is enough. This past National Committee meeting of the Constitution Party in Concord, New Hampshire was one of the best, most enthusiatic and most constructive political meetings I have attended in over 35 years of political activity. Considering the relatively remote location for most people, the meeting was remarkably well-attended. Most of the states were represented. Many who could not attend sent their greetings and expressions of support.

    People who expect politics to be without adversity probably also expect honey without bees. Frankly, however, there was no outward sign of any adversity at the meeting with the possible exception of one member trying to make an issue regarding the new Missouri affiliate and falling flat. In fact, a new large and pro-active party in Missouri, of which Chris Fluharty who posted above, is an active member, was approved by an overwhelming vote to be the new CP affiliate in that state. Progress was made in matters concerning communications and party building and steps were taken to determine the time and location of our National Convention.

    There was phenomenal attendence; there was a terrific group of speakers who were very well received; there were reports of new and increased activity in many states; and we have also had very positive reports, since the meeting, of new activity in some states that was directly generated by the enthusiasm that prevailed at the meeting; there have been expressions of interest from some prominant people about possibly being candidates for national office and, finally, there is a general consensus among Constitution Party leaders that the party is in better shape now than it has ever been in in its 14 year history. Everyone is certainly entitled to their opinions, but we could not be happier about the progress of the Constitution Party.

    The Constitution Party currently has full page ads running in Human Events and Washington Times Weekly. We are working hard all across America. The party is on the move and interest in the party, across the nation, is at an all time high.

  20. rj Says:

    “You view of Christianity is very liberal.”

    Your suggestion that I am liberal is amusing. Constitution Party arguments behind closed doors must be lots of fun.

    “I agree that a theocarcy is impossible. God has better things to do then run America. The CP does not and will not ever be a theocratic entity.”

    Good. Now can you tell the rest of American conservatives that please?

  21. NewFederalist Says:

    As a person who has followed many minor parties over the past 40 years I find it difficult to see just how the CP is supposedly disintegrating right after electing a State Representative in Montana (something neither the Greens nor the LP managed to do) and setting a record for write-in votes in Illinois. Yes there is disagreement and dissention within the party but the same can be said for the Reform Party (which is probably less healthy than the CP) as well as the Greens and LP. The problem with ALL minor parties is fanaticism. No one seems to care that they might disagree with the Democrats and Republicans much more. Until that hurdle is overcome minor parties will remain minor.

  22. Mike N. Says:

    after electing a State Representative in Montana (something neither the Greens nor the LP managed to do)

    BINGO!

    Oh but the LP is mulling over it’s 2008 presidential candidate that is sure to bring eminent electoral success…

  23. wyatt earp Says:

    Nick Wilson may have been closer to the Mark (or perhaps the Con) than he could have guessed. This was posted on the Hacker Begs thread by Doc Holliday:

    This was emailed to me.

    http://www.success-talk.com/host6.asp?hd=20

    New host Allen Hacker talks about his up coming program, the State of Aescir. He explores his understandings of the Galactic Consciousness and how we each play a role in it.

    ===============

    Does this have anything to do with the “ten thousand years of freedom” thing?

    “Ultimately, it’s about the future of freedom in our world for the next ten thousand years.”
    -AAH

    1. doc holliday Says:
      December 11th, 2006 at 5:00 pm

    This was also emailed to me.

    http://www.aescir.net/

    check out FAQs, glossary, and site map.

    Still haven’t found a client list, though.

    1. doc holliday Says:
      December 11th, 2006 at 5:01 pm

    Last email I received: re Hacker

    Apparently, Allen was a former Vegas Scientology staffer who was kicked out of scientology and tried to start his own cult. He promoted himself as a “group” but in reality it was only him.

    (link posted by Mike Nelson yesterday)

    “The former Las Vegas Scientology Staff Allen Hacker,

    calling himself the “Speaker” for
    his one-man Acceptance Services Mission “Group”, - it
    consists only of one person, himself, and zero assets - has already been declared Suppressive
    due to his public support of
    the known anti-social-personality Dennis Erlich.
    (see RI-ACT-57, enclosed)

  24. Jason Says:

    TPW —Austin and other recent contributors,

    As a very active reader, and at times a participator of this site, I urge TPW to get their information from the leaders of the Constitution Party. In other words, why not go directly to Mr. Clymer or Mr. Phillips for you information? The recent meeting by all accounts was a smashing success; with many distinguished speakers taking part aside leadership to add clarity to the vision for the future of the CP.

    This talk of disarray is negative, and might I say, down right erroneous in its entirety. The words “disaffiliates and disarray” are in just about every post. Have the elections of November of this year already been removed from your memories? Has anyone asked or even know of the efforts to reestablish party organization in respective states?

    The gentlemen—and I use that word loosely—who the TPW contributors got their information from are nothing more than a group of misfits no bodies, who live in a fantasy land where they think their views and opinions are undeniable and absolute truth. They have a whole website that is dedicated to far out views, hate, and the destruction of the CP, and America for that matter. After their repeated attempts to sabotage the CP, they are now only left with their angry little circles, while the CP simply reloaded and pressed on. It is not fair that the TPW would take the word of such men (Michael Peroutka, John Lofton and the likes) to speak on CP affairs, especially when they have absolutely nothing to do with this party.

    On another note, let us move pass the notion that the CP is in “disarray” and it will go under at any moment. This party is gaining momentum and is destined to be a Big Player in ‘08. The distractions of extreme ideology and tunnel vision are no longer a matter of concern for the CP. We are more interested in bringing back America to the Americans of this country, and restoring this great Republic. That is the only agenda of this party.

    TPW I urge you to give attention to this mockery of insight and bring about a balanced and informed point of view to all fairness of the CP and TPW readers.

    Thank you,

    Jason

  25. wyatt earp Says:

    aye aye aye!

  26. Chris Fluharty Says:

    rj I would not so much say you are a liberal but that your views on Christ are those of a typical liberal. Pastors like Rick Warren and such preach peace love and groovy colors but forget that there will be judgement.

    The CP is a very morally conservative party. However, to say one religious belief is the only way and to begin to make public policy on that belief is contrary to everything the founders intended. I am not sure why you think most American conservatives believe this. There is nothing in the Constitution forbidding the acknowledgement of God. In fact it acknowledges Christ by using the phrase “in the year of our Lord” This was not customary at that time. In fact dating was usually done by saying in the” year of King so and so” So by the founders doing this the in essence said there is no king but Jesus. This does not mean he needs to make our laws for se.

  27. Trent Hill Says:

    Fluharty and and Jason are actually more or less correct.
    I am a Louisiana member of the Constitution Party,and have been following the past month’s events VERY closely within the CP.
    The fact is, that of all these state affiliates that dissafiliated, only Oregon had secured ballot access for 2008, and I believe the CP will retain that ballot access. The Extremist-Theocratic elements of the party were purged. We have seen (through the controversy over Nevada’s leadership) that the CP is ready to confront problems within the own party,and is actually in a stage of building, despite the minor defections. Looking at the state totals for Peroutka ‘04, Oregon and Montana are the only losses that truly affect anything. That is however, taking for granted that ALL of those voters aren’t going to vote Constitution in ‘08, which they almost certainly will, if they did in ‘04. As for Arkansas, Maryland, and New York, they are relatively non-existant,with the Arkansas State Chapter not even garnering 200 votes in the ‘04 election. Now, we in the CP appreciate EVERY vote that comes our way, but not at the cost of violating States’ Rights.

  28. Trent Hill Says:

    I do have one question.
    Considering Rick Jore is Vice Chair of the Montana Constitution Party, is he now dissafiliated? It seems the CP actually CANNOT claim a state legislature.

  29. Grant Says:

    rj- you still haven’t quoted a chapter and verse on what Chris asked you:
    Is this because there is NO SUCH VERSE?

  30. Trent Hill Says:

    Jesus’ greatest commandment was to Love.
    Forgiveness was his most basic endeavor here upon earth. That is why RJ is saying what he is saying. And he is, in a sense, correct. However, secular government with Christian influence has a responsibility to protect the people, not to base its laws if discipline upon the Bible. The Constitution Party fully recognizes the Freedom of Religion. However, the Freedom FROM Religion is a myth.

  31. Freelancer Says:

    Why is it that CP news seems to get the most conversation around here.

  32. Freelancer Says:

    Oops! That’s with a question mark “?”.

  33. Travis Maddox Says:

    I am the newly elected State Secretary and Ballot Access Coordinator for the Constittution Party of Missouri and I can tell you first hand we are growing very fast. Every day when I get home from work my email is full of emails from supporters all across the state and even joining states. Most all of them are offering there support as volunteers. I could make a full time job right now just dealing with the paperwork and keeping in contact with them. Not to mention the work in coordinating ballot access. We are getting support from people representing all walks of life. We have a great thing going here in Missouri, the people are tired of the two party Socalists. They want and need change and they are realizing that we offer the best platform for that change.

  34. Mike N. Says:

    Travis,

    Congrats and good luck!

  35. Eaglet Says:

    Thank you for that report, Mr. Odom. I wanted to hear more news from those that actually observed the Constitution Party National Committee meeting.

  36. Chris Fluharty Says:

    Could be freelancer that we (CP) are doing more then talking about change and are actually working towards it. Plus everyone is drawn to controversy and that seems to be the word of the day.

  37. Timothy West Says:

    The problem with ALL minor parties is fanaticism. No one seems to care that they might disagree with the Democrats and Republicans much more. Until that hurdle is overcome minor parties will remain minor.

    there ya go.

  38. torah Says:

    Just to clarify,

    rj Says:

    December 11th, 2006 at 10:47 am
    ^ And the New Testament revokes it. Jesus in one of his sermons tells the Pharisees that the old Jewish way of carrying out certain acts to appease God no longer apply.

    That was the Pharisees’ oral law, not the Law. Oral traditions and decrees are different. The context was on those, not Moses’ law.

  39. RCAIP Says:

    Exactely guys!

    Yeah, if the CP was breaking up, why then do we already have NEW state affiliates in Ohio, New York, Arkansas and Missouri, of course? In fact why does former fanactic state-affilates whose state committees are small enough to share a table booth at Denny’s count?

    DER!

    Austin, you should’ve Taken on Gary Odom as a TPW constitutionalist writer instead of this guy.

    I really could give a flying f*** what P-U-ka and the TAV cronies think of the CP- they lost- maybe if they had power they wouldn’t, or they would’ve split the CP like the RfP, but they didn’t- they’re little pathedic crybabies that claim to be the real-deal christians- but I can see the sharp teeth and drool under those sheepskins!

    The meeting went great and even without Gilchrist, we could have someone like Jerome Corsi or even Ron Paul running for us in 2008.

    And I’m glad P-U-ka and his inquisitors are gone, that means the Constitution Party has just had a cancerous tumor removed!

    I guarentee you we’ll have new state affiliates in every state that left by 2008, even in Oregon and Montana! Any more leave and we’ll replace them with better people- HA!

  40. RCAIP Says:

    And Brad Winthrop,

    Any articles you post here and I’ll always be there to make my voice heard from now on.

    I made the same promise on cowardly Peroutkite Reed Heustis’s spewge and he ran out of TPW with his tails between his legs.

  41. RCAIP Says:

    Hmmmmm,

    Then again, this criticism of the CP might be a good benifit to us and help build the Party.
    People like John Lofton and Dan Hoyt protrary the Party as unbiblical, republican-lite and so on- such retoric would actually show that we’re not a extremist Party as some have perceived, it may even attract us more votes and members from the practical conservative mainstream if we’re scolded by the nuts- proving we’re not really far-out there if religious wackos don’t like us.

  42. Jason Says:

    I’m shocked and a little concerned of this mess. After reading another headline by Brad, I’m beginning to wonder if this is a little intentional.

  43. Craig Says:

    Gen 9:6: “Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God made He man.” I think there is a difference between a doctor sticking a pair of scissors into the back of the head of a baby two months before the due date and the executioner injecting poison into a man who has killed many.

  44. Stuart Richards Says:

    Why is it that CP news seems to get the most conversation around here.

    Because the Constitution Party really doesn’t have as organized an online presence as, say, the Libertarians.

    Up until very recently, the Libertarians have had places like Hammer of Truth, [email protected] and the like to debate internal party politics while there isn’t really any major overarching site like that (to my knowledge) for the Constitution Party yet.

    Therefore, any coverage of internal CP affairs gets a disproportionate amount of comments due to pent-up demand for such a forum.

  45. RWR Says:

    Re: Trent Hill’s question: “Considering Rick Jore is Vice Chair of the Montana Constitution Party, is he now dissafiliated? It seems the CP actually CANNOT claim a state legislature.”

    In fact, the Constitution Party of Montana strictly forbade the use of the names of its candidates in national Constitution Party materials; therefore, you are correct that their claim of having a state legislator is untrue.

  46. Chris Fluharty Says:

    Then Rick Jore needs to stop claiming to be a CPer. How trival!

  47. Trent Hill Says:

    I find it AMAZING that the Constitution Party of Montana is so bass ackwards.

    Lets look at this.
    Montana broke away due to the fact that the National Leadership wouldnt force a State Party to do sometihng. This is anti-states-rights, and very Federalist/Lincolnist.

    However,
    Before they ever left the National Constitution Party, they didnt allow the CP to use they candidates in national news coverage? This is very pro-states-rights.

    Something is off,right?

    Furthermore,the entire idea of forcing EVERY member of the party to ONE HUNDRED PERCENT agree with EVERY plank in the National Platform is prety rediculous. Its very fantical/radical thinking,and is the reason Minor Parties remain minor.

  48. Joe Says:

    Trent,

    Where your reasoning goes off-track for me is when you write “Montana broke away due to the fact that the National Leadership wouldnt force a State Party to do something.”

    I am not in Montana, but it seems to me the issue was never forcing IAP Nevada to do anything. Even if the Constitution Party had voted to disaffiliate IAP Nevada in Tampa, IAP Nevada would still be free to continue electing the leaders it wanted and endorsing the candidates it wanted to. Nobody was trying to force IAP Nevada to do anything. What the Constitution Party of Montana said was that they did not want to be associated with a state party that elected leaders and endorsed candidates that would allow abortions in the cases of rape and incest. Since the Constitution Party voted in Tampa not to disassociate IAP Nevada, they decided to disassociate themselves from the Constitution Party. That sounds to me like a perfectly reasonable application of their own “states rights,” so what exactly is the beef?

  49. RWR Says:

    I think you have it ackwards, Trent. That ban on the national CP using CPMT candidates came in July with their disaffiliation, not before. Now that they are completely distinct entities, MT doesn’t want national dishonestly representing them as an affiliate as though it is THEY that are successful. I can see why they wouldn’t want their hard work usurped by someone else, can’t you?

    Your point about platform agreement, however, is a valid argument. Not one with which I agree completely, but still an opinion an honest man can have.

    And Chris, Rick Jore IS an elected official from the Constitution Party. Just not the same Constitution Party. Perhaps a little confusing, but completely honest.

  50. Chris Fluharty Says:

    If you all can live with yourselves it is honest. It seems you all would want to change your name if you were that offended. I think it was because you all did not want to loose your ballot access. How convenient.

  51. Trent Hill Says:

    I can agree that Montana dissafiliated because they did not want to be associated with Nevada, who’s leadership supported Abortion in the case of Rape or Incest. However, they specifically have complained about the National Council’s refusal to dissassociate with the Nevada party. The National Party, as a principle of States’ Rights, did not want to intervene in a Federalist manner.

    I can see why Montana, Missouri, Arkansas, Maryland, Oregon, and New York left, however, it would have been FAR more effective to continue the dialogue on this particular issue. The leadership of the Nevada Party could have been subverted,simply by relying on the Parties own platform (The State platform still does not advocate Abortion). It might have taken time, but it could have been accomplished. All these respective State Parties have done is work to weaken the chance of their beliefs being implemented. Especially due to the fact that Rick Jore was the only State level politician elected in the Constitution Party, he could easily have made some change, as well as the fact that Peroutka was the ‘04 nominee. Im not saying it was not their perogative to leave, I simply think it was not the best course of action.

  52. RCAIP Says:

    “I am not in Montana, but it seems to me the issue was never forcing IAP Nevada to do anything.”

    =Except to make them change their stand on abortion, which already was pro-life but not pro-life enough for a radical minority.

    “Even if the Constitution Party had voted to disaffiliate IAP Nevada in Tampa, IAP Nevada would still be free to continue electing the leaders it wanted and endorsing the candidates it wanted to.”

    =Yep, and they still would elect people to local office as they did, unlike some parties that are so purist, their state convention meetings are held at McDonalds.

    Nobody was trying to force IAP Nevada to do anything.

    =BS! They wanted them to leave mainly because of the LDS faith of their leaders!

    What the Constitution Party of Montana said was that they did not want to be associated with a state party that elected leaders and endorsed candidates that would allow abortions in the cases of rape and incest.

    =In other words- ‘Our way or the Highway.’

    “Since the Constitution Party voted in Tampa not to disassociate IAP Nevada, they decided to disassociate themselves from the Constitution Party. That sounds to me like a perfectly reasonable application of their own “states rights,” so what exactly is the beef?”

    =Unfortunately, the Montana delegates VOTED to kick out a state party in Tampa because that Party wasn’t in “comformity” with the national Party. They went against the belief of ‘states rights’ by doing that. Which shows a bit of hypocracy there.

  53. Vincent Darrah Says:

    =Except to make them change their stand on abortion, which already was pro-life but not pro-life enough for a radical minority.

    This is not true. The CP Platform says that they are 100% pro-life. Not that they are just pro-life, but 100%. All the states that voted to disaffiliate IAPNV wanted was for the National Constitution Party to adhere to their platform. What is the use of having a platform if you arent going to adhere to it? That was the entire issue. Are you going to adhere to your platform or are you going to let someone usurp it. And if you arent going to adhere to it, why havent you changed it? The Constitution Party platform still claims that they are 100% pro-life but they obviously arent.

  54. Trent Hill Says:

    The National Leadership itself is. The leadership of the Nevada Party isnt. Not only that, but when asked,the Nevada Party even reaffirmed the 100% pro-life issue in their platform, but simply did not remove the leadership, as the National Party had no right to demand the removal of a STATE affiliates’ leadership. Seeing as the CP respects the State’s rights, and has LOOONG had a policy of non-intervention in State Leadership, that would risk going against TWO former policies in order to uphold ONE.
    Furthermore,there is decent evidence that the Affiliates who left the National Party left on religious grounds.

  55. Vincent Darrah Says:

    I left, and it had nothing to do with religion. I dont like hypocrisy. And have you read the CP Constitution? I have a copy and NO where does it say that they cant or shouldnt disaffiliate a state party for not upholding the platform that they ALL agreed too.

    They had no problem disaffiliating the IL CP when it suited them and the reason was alot flimsier than the case against IAPNV.

  56. Trent Hill Says:

    It doesnt say they CANT or SHOULDNT. What it says is that they are an orginization who respects States’ Rights. Besides, what would they have gained by ousting Nevada? Its much easier to influence that leadership by keeping them in the party,rather than exiling them,and severely weakening your party. Why not keep the power, improve the situation, and have NO one leave?
    The only reason Missouri, Montana, Arkansas, New York, and Oregon left is because they werent looking to create a political party, they were looing to create a church.

  57. Joe Says:

    Trent,

    I am a member of the New York party and was present when our disaffiliation resolution was discussed. Nowhere in it does it say anything about us wishing to create a church, nor did anyone during our discussion say anything of the kind. I voted to disaffiliate because I could not in good conscience remain in a party that voted to allow a state party remain that knowingly elected leaders and nominated candidates that would allow abortion in the cases of rape and incest.

  58. Trent Hill Says:

    So you wished for the National Party to dissafiliate Nevada,rather than rehabilitate?
    You wished to alienate the second largest state party, rather than convince them o the merits of your position, or otherwise combat the (percieved bad) ideologies of that leadership?

  59. Joe Says:

    Yes, we did wish for the National Party to disaffiliate Nevada. Here is the resolution our state party passed on April 10 of this year:

    Whereas the National Committee of the Constitution Party has been
    troubled for more than a year and a half by events arising from a
    decision by the chairman of the Independent American Party of Nevada
    (IAPN) to publicly air views in clear opposition to the pro-life
    plank of the National Party, and

    Whereas the IAPN chairman has refused to publicly recant his
    statements, but has affirmed his position, and

    Whereas the National Committee by majority vote at its meeting in
    Columbus, Ohio, in the fall of 2005 has requested the Independent
    American Party of Nevada to address the situation, and

    Whereas the Independent American Party of Nevada has responded by
    stating in writing to the national Constitution Party chairman the
    IAPN support for its state chairman, thus elevating the issue to the
    level of a scandal that threatens the pro-life position and message
    of the Constitution Party, and

    Whereas leaders in the national Constitution Party have failed to
    address the scandal but have instead publicly attacked and unfairly
    maligned individuals seeking to promote the party’s pro-life
    identity, and

    Whereas several state affiliates, including Michigan, Ohio, Montana,
    Alabama, Oregon and New York have formally called for disaffiliation
    of the IAPN in accordance with the powers granted to the National
    Committee by its bylaws, and

    Whereas a disaffiliation motion brought to the floor of the National
    Committee in Columbus, Ohio, in 2005 was ruled out of order by the
    National Chairman;

    Be it hereby resolved that the Constitution Party of New York shall
    formally cease its affiliation with the national Constitution Party
    if the Independent American Party of Nevada is not disaffiliated
    from the national Constitution Party as of April 23, 2006.

  60. Paul Says:

    As a principal in the New York CP, I reflected considerably before voting on the issue of disaffiliation with the national party organization.
    The National Party was hypocritical in not standing up to Nevada. And I blame the party leadership for that.
    This “states rights” gabage is just that! States Rights comes into practice in Government, not in political parties. Political parties are advocates of principles, whether they be good or bad. When a platform is proposed and adopted, it should be held to. That has been the problem with major parties. If the major parties, such as the Republicans stuck to their principles, I would still be one of them. But, both Republicans, Conservatives, and others have waffled on their principles. That is why I joined and support the Constitution Party. If you propose to be 100% pro-life, then be it. Do not become hypocrites like the others. It’s that simple.

  61. RCAIP Says:

    I left, and it had nothing to do with religion.

    =What a load of crap- I’ve read the TAV forums. Here’s a quote form your friend Reed Heustis-

    “...Fourteen years after its seeding, the Constitution Party began to bear its godless fruits. At its 2006 National Committee meeting last Spring in Tampa, Florida, the Constitution Party voted to continue its affiliation with a Nevada affiliate, owned and operated by Mormons, that regularly supports pro-abortion candidates and officers. As a consequence of its pro-abortion, anti-Christian actions, eight Constitution Party state affiliates have disaffiliated from the Pluralist national party, and more are likely to follow. Meanwhile, the entire western region of the Constitution Party has fallen into complete Mormon control. Some National Committee members justified their votes on the grounds of “religious liberty.” Others justified their votes on the grounds of “party growth.” Others on “states’ rights.” Others on “family loyalty.” Still others on demonic Mormonism itself. Vain imaginations. High things…”

    =Gee, does it sound like the Abortion issue was the sole reason?

    I dont like hypocrisy.

    =You’re speaking it, Vince.

    And have you read the CP Constitution? I have a copy and NO where does it say that they cant or shouldnt disaffiliate a state party for not upholding the platform that they ALL agreed too.

    =Neither does it say they can.

    They had no problem disaffiliating the IL CP when it suited them and the reason was alot flimsier than the case against IAPNV.

    =Because the old Ill. CP was full of anti-non-Calvinist bigots.

  62. RCAIP Says:

    =Except to make them change their stand on abortion, which already was pro-life but not pro-life enough for a radical minority.

    This is not true.

    =Yes it is, the target was the Mormons, not the ‘no-exceptionists’.

    “None of us are happy with the situation as it presently exists, but the Exec Comm has adopted a policy that winks at dead babies—as long as the dead babies are dead Mormon babies—after all, the Mormon policy permitting the killing of unborn thieves-in-the-womb, bastard children (C. Hansen’s words) or foetally deformed babies requires deliberation with the Priest and divine confirmation, and no Calvinist Demoniac, as Mr. Hansen calls us, is likely to be given such divine confirmation or audience with the Priest. After all, “forcing” a woman to carry such a child might cause her significant spiritual damage or ruin her soul, while aborting the baby puts that baby straight into heaven and might even save the girl (according to Scott Bartlett, SD Chairman and Regional Co-Chairman). You know, in New Hampshire it is illegal to sell fireworks to minors who reside in New Hampshire—but NH can sell fireworks to minors from Massachusetts—afterall, who really cares about Massachusetts kids, right?”

    -Scott Whittman

    The CP Platform says that they are 100% pro-life. Not that they are just pro-life, but 100%.

    =The CP Sanctity of Life says that Government cannot take life WITHOUT JUSTIFICATION. In other words, while rape or incest doesn’t count. Other circumstances do, like to save the life of the mother. So that is exceptionist right there. Not 100%

  63. RCAIP Says:

    “This “states rights” gabage is just that! States Rights comes into practice in Government, not in political parties.”

    -Except for a political party that believes in the US Constitution, including the 10th Amendment.

  64. Joe Says:

    What do the words of Reed Heustis and Scott Whiteman have to do with Vincent Darrah’s reason for leaving the Constitution Party? Can’t each individual speak for themselves and explain their own reason if they choose to bother?

  65. RCAIP Says:

    Vince claims that abortion was the SOLE reason.

    Vince is wrong!

  66. Zubastikoff Says:

    cheap tickets bagotville

    dirt cheap tickets really cheap

  67. Have Says:

    World largest dating portal

  68. impareexakare Says:

    http://www.google.com
    http://www.yahoo.com
    http://www.msn.com

  69. EmbehizCimb Says:

    http://forum.thedjproject.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=93

Leave a Reply