Constitution Party Platform -- For Your Consideration

[Lucille]

I'm very surprised at the amount of support Chuck Baldwin and the CP has among Ron Paul supporters.

I urge the Baldwin supporters to read the Constitution Party Platform. I think you will find that is it quite unlibertarian, especially with regard to the war on drugs, gay marriage/adoption, abortion, prayer in school, etc.

The CP is a more fitting home for social conservatives rather than libertarians.

Constitution Party National Platform

I read all the Party Platforms and, for myself, the Libertarian Party Platform represents my beliefs. So, I left the GOP for the LP. I know Ron is encouraging us to stay in the GOP and make change there, but there is no use trying to appeal to the principles of those who have none.

I hope to see the GOP go the way of the Whigs, with its members splintering and going to the party where they belong:

Fiscal Conservatives and Civil Libertarians = Libertarian Party

Social Conservatives = Constitution Party

Hawks (Defcons) and Neoconservatives = Democrat Party (The Dems are the original "democracy-spreaders" and are only opposed to wars they don't start. Consider the Iraq war -- they continue to fund it, and continue to trash our liberties in the name of National Security. Obama will not end this war.)

I know many have a hard time with Barr's less-than-libertarian past, but he has renounced those votes and those attitudes, and I believe that he has had a sincere change of heart. The prodigal son, if you will.

AFAIC, writing-in Ron Paul is futile and truly a wasted vote. It is as he said:

"I don’t think that’s very productive. Supporters can do it, of course, but in most of the states it won’t count. And if they can change the rules in a primary and not count all the votes, imagine what they could do with write-in votes!"

People are free to vote their principles, but if this nation was ever ready for a third party, then that time is now.

The LP is the third largest party in the country. I would like to see the RPRs advance it and make it a true contender.

For your consideration.

 

[familydog]

I don't think the Constitution Party would consider themselves libertarian. I'm not sure why you are making the comparison. Kinda like how Ron Paul identifies himself as a conservative first with libertarian leanings. That's what the Constitution Party would say about themselves as well.

 

[Lucille]

I don't think the Constitution Party would consider themselves libertarian. I'm not sure why you are making the comparison. Kinda like how Ron Paul identifies himself as a conservative first with libertarian leanings. That's what the Constitution Party would say about themselves as well.

I'm making the comparison because, as you said, RP and his supporters lean "libertarian" while the CP and Baldwin lean "social conservative."

 

[familydog]

I'm making the comparison because, as you said, RP leans "libertarian" while the CP and Baldwin lean "social conservative."

You should make the distinction between the federal level and the state level. The Constitution Party is almost the same as the Libertarian at the federal level. You're right, they do lean conservative at the state level, but only marginally more than Ron Paul does. Like I said, the CP like Ron Paul identify themselves as conservative first, libertarian second.

Also, I don't see why the Constitution Party couldn't be considered fiscally conservative.

 

[Lovecraftian4Paul]

Chuck Baldwin earned a lot of initial support by sticking his neck out for Ron Paul. Barr really blew it by not endorsing Ron Paul and speaking out in his favor. Wayne Allan Root being on his ticket doesn't help either. The man made virulently anti-Paul comments on several occasions.

 

[Lucille]

Except, I'm not basing my vote on how a particular candidate treated Ron Paul. I'm basing it on the Party Platforms and which party most represents my beliefs.

If people are more ideologically aligned with small-government social conservatism, then the CP is the party for them. (Not that there's anything wrong with that! It's just not for me.)

I still can't help but find it odd that so many RPRs find the CP's Platform more closely aligned with Paul's ideology than the LP Platform, because it's just not.

 

[familydog]

I still can't help but find it odd that so many RPRs find the CP's Platform more closely aligned with Paul's ideology than the LP Platform, because it's just not.

Care to elaborate?

 

[Lucille]

Elaborate on what? My personal beliefs and opinions, the differences between the CP and LP platforms, which platform is most closely aligned with Ron's "libertarian leaning" ideology, or all of the above?

 

[familydog]

Elaborate on what? My personal beliefs and opinions, the differences between the CP and LP platforms, which platform is most closely aligned with Ron's "libertarian leaning" ideology, or all of the above?

Why you think that Ron Paul is more closely in line with the Libertarian Party platform than the Constitution Party. I think he falls comfortably in between both and doesn't really lean more one way or the other. Ironically, I see Barr being more in line with the Constitution Party than Ron Paul.

 

[SovereignMN]

Except, I'm not basing my vote on how a particular candidate treated Ron Paul. I'm basing it on the Party Platforms and which party most represents my beliefs.

If people are more ideologically aligned with small-government social conservatism, then the CP is the party for them. (Not that there's anything wrong with that! It's just not for me.)

I still can't help but find it odd that so many RPRs find the CP's Platform more closely aligned with Paul's ideology than the LP Platform, because it's just not.

Lucille, your logic baffles me. You are basing your vote by the party platform? Therefore your support of Ron Paul must mean that the Republican Party is the best party?

We are voting for the man, not the party.

 

[Lucille]

Libertarian Party vs. Constitution Party

Lucille, your logic baffles me. You are basing your vote by the party platform? Therefore your support of Ron Paul must mean that the Republican Party is the best party?

We are voting for the man, not the party.

But Ron is out. And as Ron has stated time and time again, this is not about him. It's about the ideas. Furthermore, Paul's ideology is not the GOP Platform, so the answer to your second question is not just "no" but "HELL NO."

After Paul dropped out, I made my choice based on the Platforms, so the answer to your first question is "yes." The LP Platform most represent my beliefs. So, Barr and the LP get my vote.

Baldwin and the CP are far too unabashedly religious for my tastes. (I can see why Alan Keyes found the CP an appealing alternative!)

The CP supports the war on drugs (on a local level and even at a limited federal level), and they oppose all gambling, all pornography, all abortion, and oppose the legalization of bio-research (embryonic stem cells) and, of course, gay marriage/adoption. I, for one, will not support a party that is endorses state-sanctioned discrimination and a continuation of the moralist "nanny state" attitude. (I'd also like to know how the CP thinks they can establish a "robust Christian nation" and, at the same time, maintain religious tolerance.)

Seriously! Don't we get enough "moral crusaders" and "quasi-theocracy" in the GOP?

Look, all I'm saying is, the CP is not for me, for those reasons. If other RPRs' ideology falls more in line with the CP rather than the LP, then great! More power to ya.

People can argue that they believe the CP is more closely aligned with Paul's ideology. However, from what I've seen of the CP, I believe they're dead wrong. And, after all, Ron did run for President once before -- for the Libertarian Party.

Libertarian Party vs. Constitution Party: similarities and differences
Bob Barr On Chuck Baldwin And Ron Paul Supporters
The Barr Effect, Confirmed
Stop Waiting For Ron Paul To Endorse Bob Barr Or Chuck Baldwin

 

[sophocles07]

Parts of this platform that annoy me:

Pornography, at best, is a distortion of the true nature of sex created by God for the procreative union between one man and one woman in the holy bonds of matrimony, and at worst, is a destructive element of society resulting in significant and real emotional, physical, spiritual and financial costs to individuals, families and communities. We call on our local, state and federal governments to uphold our cherished First Amendment right to free speech by vigorously enforcing our laws against obscenity to maintain a degree of separation between that which is truly speech and that which only seeks to distort and destroy.
With the advent of the Internet and the benevolent neglect of the previous administrations, the pornography industry enjoyed uninhibited growth and expansion until the point today that we live in a sex-saturated society where almost nothing remains untainted by its perversion. While we believe in the responsibility of the individual and corporate entities to regulate themselves, we also believe that our collective representative body we call government plays a vital role in establishing and maintaining the highest level of decency in our community standards.

Finally, we oppose any legal recognition of homosexual unions.

This part somewhat annoys me:

The Constitution Party will uphold the right of states and localities to restrict access to drugs and to enforce such restrictions. We support legislation to stop the flow of illegal drugs into these United States from foreign sources. As a matter of self-defense, retaliatory policies including embargoes, sanctions, and tariffs, should be considered.
At the same time, we will take care to prevent violations of the Constitutional and civil rights of American citizens. Searches without probable cause and seizures without due process must be prohibited, and the presumption of innocence must be preserved.

They make no express statement condemning the drug war.

 

[familydog]

But Ron is out. And as Ron has stated time and time again, this is not about him. It's about the ideas. Furthermore, Paul's ideology is not the GOP Platform, so the answer to your second question is not just "no" but "HELL NO."

After Paul dropped out, I made my choice based on the Platforms, so the answer to your first question is "yes." The LP Platform most represent my beliefs. So, Barr and the LP get my vote.

Baldwin and the CP are far too unabashedly religious for my tastes. (I can see why Alan Keyes found the CP an appealing alternative!)

The CP supports the war on drugs (on a local level and even at a limited federal level), and they oppose all gambling, all pornography, all abortion, and oppose the legalization of bio-research (embryonic stem cells) and, of course, gay marriage/adoption. I, for one, will not support a party that is endorses state-sanctioned discrimination and a continuation of the moralist "nanny state" attitude. (I'd also like to know how the CP thinks they can establish a "robust Christian nation" and, at the same time, maintain religious tolerance.)

Seriously! Don't we get enough "moral crusaders" and "quasi-theocracy" in the GOP?

Look, all I'm saying is, the CP is not for me, for those reasons. If other RPRs' ideology falls more in line with the CP rather than the LP, then great! More power to ya.

People can argue that they believe the CP is more closely aligned with Paul's ideology. However, from what I've seen of the CP, I believe they're dead wrong. And, after all, Ron did run for President once before -- for the Libertarian Party.

Libertarian Party vs. Constitution Party: similarities and differences
Bob Barr On Chuck Baldwin And Ron Paul Supporters
The Barr Effect, Confirmed
Stop Waiting For Ron Paul To Endorse Bob Barr Or Chuck Baldwin

If you don't want to support Baldwin that's fine with me, I respect that. I'm just confused on why you are supporting a candidate (Barr) that is everything you are coming out against in this thread. As a previous poster pointed out, you seem to be more focused on what the party says, not what the candidate says.

 

[american.swan]

Except, I'm not basing my vote on how a particular candidate treated Ron Paul. I'm basing it on the Party Platforms and which party most represents my beliefs.

If people are more ideologically aligned with small-government social conservatism, then the CP is the party for them. (Not that there's anything wrong with that! It's just not for me.)

I still can't help but find it odd that so many RPRs find the CP's Platform more closely aligned with Paul's ideology than the LP Platform, because it's just not.

HUGE mistake here. So your saying your more in favor of party and collectivism than voting for individuals. If your quote is correct a member of the GOP should vote for Liberal Neocon McCain even if he has no intention of following the party platform solely because he is the candidate for the GOP. So if Barr is still a neocon you don't care all THAT much about his conversion because your voting for the Libertarian platform FIRST, collectivist, the person second.

I disagree. Baldwin stuck out his neck for Ron Paul, I am going to stay a member of the GOP to reform the GOP and I support Baldwin, because I am going to vote for the PERSON who best represents my view.

 

[SovereignMN]

The CP cannot oppose "all gambling" because I'm a CP member and gamble.

Concerning gambling the CP opposes government involvement in it such at the lottery and the subsidization (welfare) of Indian casino's. They do have a statement that gambling promotes an increase in crime (which I don't agree with) but that isn't the same as calling for an outright ban. The CP also maintains that local communities have the ability to regulate gambling within their jurisdiction. That isn't libertarian but it definitely is constitutional.

 

[Shotdown1027]

Im a CP member (and National Committee Member, like SoviergnMN) who is for legalization of gambling at EVERY level, and a personal gambler--so obviously your statement is not true.

 

[mrchubbs]

I keep reading (again) how Baldwin supported Ron Paul and Barr did not.... That is simply not true.

Barr proposed the resolution to the Libertarian National Committee last December to allow Ron Paul to run as the LP nominee, which passed unanimously. To me that is even stronger than an official endorsement. That is putting your appreciation for a candidate into action rather than just words. Barr also donated to Paul's campaign.

I just don't see where there is any lack of support from Barr for Ron Paul.

Enjoy.

 

[familydog]

I keep reading (again) how Baldwin supported Ron Paul and Barr did not.... That is simply not true.

Barr proposed the resolution to the Libertarian National Committee last December to allow Ron Paul to run as the LP nominee, which passed unanimously. To me that is even stronger than an official endorsement. That is putting your appreciation for a candidate into action rather than just words. Barr also donated to Paul's campaign.

I just don't see where there is any lack of support from Barr for Ron Paul.

Enjoy.

False. Barr witheld an official endorsement unless Ron Paul became the Libertarian Party nominee. Why couldn't Barr just make an official endorsment if he believed in Paul so much? Party politics get in the way?

False. Bob Barr did not donate to Ron Paul. Bob Barr's PAC donated to Ron Paul. That was after Bob Barr's PAC donated to Jim Gilmore. So if Bob Barr's PAC giving money to Ron Paul's campaign counts as an endorsement, Barr must have endorsed the neocon Jim Gilmore first.

 

[MMolloy]

I keep reading (again) how Baldwin supported Ron Paul and Barr did not.... That is simply not true.

Barr proposed the resolution to the Libertarian National Committee last December to allow Ron Paul to run as the LP nominee, which passed unanimously. To me that is even stronger than an official endorsement. That is putting your appreciation for a candidate into action rather than just words. Barr also donated to Paul's campaign.

I just don't see where there is any lack of support from Barr for Ron Paul.

Enjoy.

Well since Ron wasn't going to run as a Libertarian... it was pretty pointless or a safe play!

Barr's PAC has also been supporting NeoCons so you don't have much of a point there either.

Chuck Baldwin was working on RP's campaign as if he was one of us... endorsing him (on video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c84pJ6E7BYg), writing articles critical of RP's opponents (Huckabee -- http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin411.htm; McCain -- http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin426.htm Giuliani -- http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin400.htm etc), giving speeches for him, appeared in adds for him (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXg7m...eature=related) etc.

 

[Theocrat]

Poll & Platforms

I'm very surprised at the amount of support Chuck Baldwin and the CP has among Ron Paul supporters.

I urge the Baldwin supporters to read the Constitution Party Platform. I think you will find that is it quite unlibertarian, especially with regard to the war on drugs, gay marriage/adoption, abortion, prayer in school, etc.

The CP is a more fitting home for social conservatives rather than libertarians.

Constitution Party National Platform

I read all the Party Platforms and, for myself, the Libertarian Party Platform represents my beliefs. So, I left the GOP for the LP. I know Ron is encouraging us to stay in the GOP and make change there, but there is no use trying to appeal to the principles of those who have none.

I hope to see the GOP go the way of the Whigs, with its members splintering and going to the party where they belong:

Fiscal Conservatives and Civil Libertarians = Libertarian Party

Social Conservatives = Constitution Party

Hawks (Defcons) and Neoconservatives = Democrat Party (The Dems are the original "democracy-spreaders" and are only opposed to wars they don't start. Consider the Iraq war -- they continue to fund it, and continue to trash our liberties in the name of National Security. Obama will not end this war.)

I know many have a hard time with Barr's less-than-libertarian past, but he has renounced those votes and those attitudes, and I believe that he has had a sincere change of heart. The prodigal son, if you will.

AFAIC, writing-in Ron Paul is futile and truly a wasted vote. It is as he said:


People are free to vote their principles, but if this nation was ever ready for a third party, then that time is now.

The LP is the third largest party in the country. I would like to see the RPRs advance it and make it a true contender.

For your consideration.

Hey, Lucille. Check this thread out when you get a chance.