Comments on: Constitution Party on Hawaii Ballot

by: hugh

Sat, 05 Apr 2008 01:29:01 +0000

I match my strength against your routine losses. Kind of tells you something, huh?
Where did you learn to spell? I know plenty of people who just moved here that command the English language will less errors then you. Perhaps you need to be re-qualified to vote to double check your citizenship. dumbassTexan

by: TexasConservative

Fri, 04 Apr 2008 22:56:39 +0000

LOL—I knew it your just a secularist who hides behind the CONSTITUTIONAL planks in order to take out natural law advocates. YOUR the dumbest guy ever, the GOVERNMENT is us idiot! We are the government, we impose laws as long as they respect certain minority rights. YOU saying my MORAL interpreation is individual is your individual interpertation so shut the hell up, next time 20 million illegals cross the border, lets see what logical and amoral argument you will use when money is being made in the trillions. THEN your so called government morality will fail you as it has over and over. YOUR just a secularist being revealed, you suck—I feel like IM talking to a computer

by: hugh

Fri, 04 Apr 2008 05:32:30 +0000

TC, start making sense. YOU cannot define what is moral for OTHERS. You may WANT to inflict your individual (or your religion’s) version of morality on others, but that is what government is for. Governments decide and enforce the laws. YOU decide what is moral for YOU. You are always free to exercise more restraint than what the government allows, not less.
Society changes – and our constitution was designed to change with it and control the new issues that arise out of those changes. Your individual interpretation of what is moral is meaningless to others.

by: Cody Quirk

Fri, 04 Apr 2008 00:34:39 +0000

is the constitution party an explicitly christian political party?

= NO!

by: TexasConservative

Fri, 04 Apr 2008 00:14:57 +0000

There you go, how do you stop slavery if it is legitimate? YOU just do! How do you stop abortion even if it legitimate, or gay marriage, or gay bashing or whatever else act we view as immoral but maybe legal if it follows the law of the lands set by tradition or consensus? IT takes action at some level, even personal, sometimes the federal govt—COME ON think for yourselves!

by: hugh

Wed, 02 Apr 2008 23:26:41 +0000

Who would be so silly as to want Alan Keyes in the CP? Keyes running on any 3rd party is a sure way to reduce the credibility of that party. His base support has crashed down to about 15 diehard fanatics on his site. One of his claims to fame is his refusal to compromise his principles. YET, that is EXACTLY what he has done to join the CP. Shall the CP be led by a HYPOCRITE? His views are very different than the CP in foreign affairs. Keyes used to get a few million votes, now after failing in every election he gets less then 0.1%. He has fail written all over him.

by: SovereignMN

Wed, 02 Apr 2008 13:58:42 +0000

It’s real simple. I believe that abortion should be outlawed. I believe that slavery should be repealed. I believe that government should be completely race-neutral (thus no segregation).

However; I also can read and realize that the Constitution is silent on these matters. It specifically states that any authority not explicitly granted to the federal government is reserved to the States or people. Therefore the federal government has no AUTHORITY to tell Alabama how to deal with segregation just like it has no AUTHORITY to tell Iraq that is needs democracy.

“BUT—sometimes things have to to change to stick to the moral framework that brought about the constitution”

Don’t forget that the moral framework that brought about the constutiton thought slavery was perfectly legitimate. At some point in time all orginal 13 colonies permitted slaves. By the late 1700’s the northern colonies had outlawed slavery because since they were not agricultural colonies (like the south), the only slave labor was in physical labor like construction and the whites did not want to compete with the free black labor. So it wasn’t some moral superiority that caused the northern colonies to outlaw slavery, it was dollars and cents.

I agree that sometimes change is necessary. However change can be brought out in better ways than Lincoln’s method of invading a country. You can bring about change by passing a constitutional amendment. You can bring about change by allowing the free market to work naturally.

by: TexasConservative

Wed, 02 Apr 2008 04:35:41 +0000

Using the term “classic deflection” is a classic deflection itself. Yeah my point is, how else do you argue for the end of slavery—State’s rights said it was ok for slavery to exist in some states while not in others, so how do we reach a consensus if some say, some say no. Federal action taken? What about desegragation? States’ rights also were violated. BUT—sometimes things have to to change to stick to the moral framework that brought about the constitution. YEAH and for the posterity deal, taht is referring to the slaughtered unborn. You tell me how else can you can you overturn Roe vs Wade—States’ Rights again? But what if 50% of all states says “ABORTION is cool”, thenwhat? Yeah, then you need a federal mandate, and of course there is gay marriage… and I never said being anti-Lincoln is pro-slavery—stop being so defensive. I think being too much for States rights in order to end any moral collapse can also be dangerous. OK!

by: Trent Hill

Tue, 01 Apr 2008 17:34:02 +0000

Michael,

That is my impression also. I think he’ll run for Senator before President.

by: Michael

Tue, 01 Apr 2008 17:30:58 +0000

Ventura gave a newspaper interview where it sounded like he might be more interested in running for senator from Minnesota (Coleman vs Franken) than for president.

by: Trent Hill

Tue, 01 Apr 2008 15:23:55 +0000

Travis,

We’re collecting money right now to air radio-advertisements and place ads in the local newspapers. All of this is going to be done to increase the turnout for our candidates and hopefully gain more members. Here in LA, iv made a personal goal of AT LEAST doubling the presidential vote total from 2004. If we get someone with a big name, i’ll shoot for 10x the vote-total.

by: Travis Maddox

Tue, 01 Apr 2008 15:20:37 +0000

This is great news. I’m getting very excited. This is going to be a great year. I know that here in Missouri we have a great slate of candidates that are going to run. A few have a real chance of wininng. I talk to people almost everyday about whats going on in politics and now more than ever are regular people ready for great third party candidates.

by: Trent Hill

Tue, 01 Apr 2008 15:00:45 +0000

Soveriegn,

Im not sure that was his point. I believe he was pointing to “all men were created equal” as a plus of Declarationism.

by: SovereignMN

Tue, 01 Apr 2008 13:22:49 +0000

“it also matters to free slaves”

Classic deflection. Being anti-Lincoln = pro-slavery? Nice try.

by: Red Phillips

Tue, 01 Apr 2008 11:56:45 +0000

it also matters to … the unborn who might have an argument for their posterity, and the idea of the noble lie in terms of raising children taught by way of piety.

What?