This is a very powerful read from the Constitution Party

[IRO-bot]

As a non-christian constitutionalist, neither do I. One does not have to be a christian to be a constitutionalist, so WTF?

Shouldn't their party be renamed the Jesus Christ Party?

Not saying I wouldn't vote for a Chuck Baldwin type, but I'm not joining something that would have me be in agreement with those statements that are quoted... if I did, I would be lying, and I doubt they want liars in their midst.

+1. Like I said. I would be fine if it just said Creator and not Mr. Jesus.

 

[Caulfield]

The reason this letter kills the LP letter, is because the LP is scrambling trying to build the party, they are not focused on principle.

Yes I know that Libertarians were HUGE ing supporting RP, I am not dissing Libertarians, but the Libertarian Party (the Party, not the members) is nowhere near the CP organization, imo.

The Libertarian Party out-fundraised all other national third parties combined last year (including the Constitution Party), has more candidates elected to office nationally, and has better access to the ballot.

What exactly does the Constitution Party do better than the LP?

 

[Goldwater Conservative]

+1. Like I said. I would be fine if it just said Creator and not Mr. Jesus.

Agreed. Thomas Jefferson is held in high esteem by many constitutionalists and classical liberals, yet he was a deist. Over 90% of the population believes in a higher power, and most of the rest probably aren't offended by mentioning or appealing to a vague "God" (many of them probably do it themselves), but making it specifically about Jesus and the Christian Bible is an instant turnoff for most of the population, and with good reason.

 

[Russellk30]

Won't happen. My previous post can tell you why.

I don’t think it is an impossibility. After all, there are many different organizations within the Republican Party. I agree with you that the CP has a heavy religious tilt, but besides that their positions are mostly libertarian in nature.

I do have to say that the LP and CP have much in common than say the Liberty Caucus and the Social Conservatives within the Republican Party.

As long as a group supports a small Federal Government, Ill listen to what they have to say. If the freedom movement is ever expect to become relevant, it cannot be fractured.

 

[mtmedlin]

So why not take over Both the LP and the COnsitution Party. Hell, the LP nominated its presidential candidate with around 500 votes. If we could find a new candidate (read my siggy) that we could nominate on both the LP and Consitution Party. We have enough people to unite these two parties and continue the Revolution even if Ron doesnt win. If he does win the Republican nomination, then he could reach across party lines and offer the LP's or the CP's presidnetial candidate the VP spot.

 

[beachmaster]

If the freedom movement is ever expect to become relevant, it cannot be fractured.

Agreed. That's why it's such a shame the CP insists on putting in this divisive Jesus litmus test for any would-be members.

 

[wgadget]

Chuck Baldwin wrote an article saying RP should run Constitution Party.

 

[beachmaster]

Recruit Judge Andrew Napolitano for the Libertarian Party!

Hell yeah I'd go for that!

Napolitano/Barr in 08! (under ANY party banner)

 

[Russellk30]

Unalienable rights granted by a Creator is the foundation upon which the U.S. was built. That Creator was recognised as the God of Christianity. Not denominational Chistianity just Christianity in general.

The Constitution Party does not aim to force you to be a Christian, their goal is to restore the respect and authority of the Constitution.

Without the recognition of a Creator there can be no unalienable rights as everything simply becomes subjective and a violation of ones rights simply becomes "not nice" as opposed to being morally wrong.

Are you to say that in a completely atheistic society, innate freedom is impossible? I refuse to believe that. I consider my creator the natural world, which is not incompatible with the wording of the constitution. You may not agree with me, but I am not asking you to. I only ask that you do not shape my government in the image of your religion.

 

[Nickel]

Alan Keys! Really?

The Constitution Party is incorrectly named... similar to how Greenland is incorrectly named (no offense to anyone from Greenland).

Argh.

 

[Russellk30]

So why not take over Both the LP and the COnsitution Party. Hell, the LP nominated its presidential candidate with around 500 votes. If we could find a new candidate (read my siggy) that we could nominate on both the LP and Consitution Party. We have enough people to unite these two parties and continue the Revolution even if Ron doesnt win. If he does win the Republican nomination, then he could reach across party lines and offer the LP's or the CP's presidnetial candidate the VP spot.

and then merge them together! That is a great idea! Lets do it! Im in.

 

[Caulfield]

and then merge them together! That is a great idea! Lets do it! Im in.

To be a delegate at the national convention, you must be a member in good standing with your state party. Additionally, the party bylaws would more than likely prevent any "merger." You can't just merge a party that is based on a secular basis of freedom and one that is based on a religious basis of freedom, at least, one won't blend into another. More than likely, you'd have to get the Constitution Party to fold and get the members to come into the LP. There are plenty of religious LPr's (myself, for example), but you're not going to find a secular Constitution Party member (otherwise he'd be a Libertarian).

 

[mtmedlin]

and then merge them together! That is a great idea! Lets do it! Im in.

There nominating system leaves it open to allow for a group to come in and change the direction of the party. 1000 supporters could show up to the LP convention and change their platform (a little) and choose the candidate.

 

[RoyalShock]

I am a Christian, but feel like the CP could scale back the overt Christianity references without sacrificing their integrity. And do you know the best way to accomplish that? Join the party and work toward rewording the platform.

I have thought about joining the CP and was very close until discovering Dr. Paul and his message. I'm now in a holding pattern as a registered Republican. It's still too early in the Revolution to switch horses. The next four years will tell us a lot:

1) We know McCain is going to suffer a humiliating defeat in November.
2) If things go our way, we should see a gain in conservative congressional seats.
3) Unfortunately, the Middle East conflicts will rage on, but how it progresses should say a lot as to Paul's position vs. the neo-cons.
4) If the economy and the dollar continues to suffer, we may be able to capitalize on a big "we told you so" and gain credibility in the eyes of many.

The next few years could give the Revolution the traction it needs to make some strides.

 

[Caulfield]

There nominating system leaves it open to allow for a group to come in and change the direction of the party. 1000 supporters could show up to the LP convention and change their platform (a little) and choose the candidate.

Again, this is not true. As of the beginning of this year, the state parties had their delegate count locked in. Additionally, to be a delegate to the national convention, you must be chosen by the state party as a delegate, which means you have to be a member in good standing with that state party. Read: member of the Libertarian Party.

I'm not sure what the individual state requirements are to be a member in good standing, but I wouldn't guess it would be that stringent; however, you'd have to join up with the national party as a member.

 

[DeafPalmdale]

How about merge both LP and CP into the Revolution Party?

 

[literatim]

The Libertarian Party out-fundraised all other national third parties combined last year (including the Constitution Party), has more candidates elected to office nationally, and has better access to the ballot.

What exactly does the Constitution Party do better than the LP?

It has more members. They put country before party and really try and get anyone elected that matches their party line, no matter their party affiliation.

 

[robmpreston]

Isn't the constitution party pretty heavily Christian based in its beliefs?

 

[Caulfield]

It has more members. They put country before party and really try and get anyone elected that matches their party line, no matter their party affiliation.

Actually, it only has more members by technicality. If you want to count members, technically the Independent Party of California has the most members (which is an offshoot of the Constitution Party), and only because when people in California are switching to independent, they don't realize they're registering with another political party.

Even if you're not convinced, for all those "members," they still vastly lack the funding and ballot access that the Libertarian Party has and the number of people elected to office. When it comes to third parties, the Libertarian Party is basically it.

 

[Russellk30]

There nominating system leaves it open to allow for a group to come in and change the direction of the party. 1000 supporters could show up to the LP convention and change their platform (a little) and choose the candidate.

Don’t be such a downer. It may take a little while, but if the Christian libertarians in our movement join the Constitution Party for a few years and everybody else joins the Libertarian Party, we can be close to a merger by the next election cycle. I am sure there is already some mutual respect between the two.

This seems like a much more productive approach than reforming the “unreformable” Republican Party. If one does not understand the power of the Republican Party and how difficult it would be to unseat them, just ask yourself if the Taft revolution ever actually took over the party. If that was the case, something would have been accomplished but the size of government just kept going up. The Taft Republicans were purged from the party and many formed the Libertarian Party.

If one truly wanted to follow in the footsteps of the Taft Republicans, we should consentrate on third party.