This Might Be Strike Three for the Constitution Party

Back during the Badnarik campaign, Constitution Party candidate Michael Peroutka’s e-mail list was used to call Michael Badnarik a Sodomite because Badnarik rightfully believes that the law should apply equally to both straight and gay people. I called their campaign manager on the issue and the e-mail attack stopped.

A former client of mine, Aaron Russo, dumped the CP he founded because they had been taken over by a bunch of religious zealots.

Yesterday, Tom Kovach wrote an article stating that the CP is “the true third party.” Here’s the context:

According to research that I conducted in 1998, there were more than 400 political parties in America. (That number has grown smaller in recent years, but is still over 200 “” far larger than the “mainstream” media admits.) According to research by Richard Winger, the publisher of Ballot Access News, the third-largest political party in the United States is the Constitution Party. Thus, the CP is the true third party. Statistically, the CP has more members than any political party other than the Big Two.

Considering that I’m in frequent communications with Winger and the contact has been almost daily for the last few weeks, I popped him an e-mail for clarification on the issue. My question:

Do you know what research Kovach is citing?

Winger’s response:

No, I don’t. I guess if he finds any group that calls itself a “party”, he labels it a “party”.

I think I e-mailed him about this earlier. My article in the April 2006 Election Law Journal defines “national political party” the way the Federal Election Commission does. It’s a very, very easy definition. And it shows that there has never been a time when there were more than eleven parties in the U.S. Of course I’m not counting state parties, or local parties, and I’m sure he is. In many communities in Connecticut and Illinois, muncipalities use partisan elections, but the major parties, and even the minor parties that we are familar with, do not participate. Instead there are parties, two or three, organized just in that town, and they compete. So if one counts municipal parties, one could get into hundreds very easily.

I used to cite the data the Libertarian Party published about 600 officials in public office until I learned the data was not well maintained and probably inaccurate. Fortunately, Shane Cory removed it from the LP website. I’ve criticized LP campaigns for inflating data before. With Zero Dues in effect and no third party registration in many states, there is no real way to measure which party is larger except to look at head-to-head election results — neither of which are anything to be proud of. However, Petrouka did worse than Badnarik in the 2004 elections, both in money and in votes.

As I missed the Tennessee LP convention this year, I can’t speak to Kovach’s claim about cross-party nominations. I do know that some of the most exciting LP campaigns this year have serious cross-party implications: Loretta Nall (Alabama governor race) with the USMJ party, Kevin Zeese (Maryland U.S. Senate race) with the Green and Populist parties, William Weld (New York governor race) with the Republican Party, and Sue Jeffers (Minnesota governor race) with the Republican Party. Perhaps the Tennessee LP pulled out some parlimentary procedure to ensure that the candidates they support believe in equal treatment for people of all sexual persuasions and melanin content.

If Mr. Kovach wishes to respond (I’m really curious about the source of his numbers), I’ll grant him equal time on this site.

posted by Stephen Gordon
  • Devious David

    Boy, reading that document from ’94… there are a LOT of names I recognize and respect there. I seriously doubt that any of them are still involved. In fact, I would be surprised to. Maybe we can get our party overrun by the overly pragmatic? We could probably get ballot access out of it!

  • Chris Bennett

    Here’s what I understand: The CP has more registered voters than the LP but many in California register as American Independent thinking they are registering as an Independent. Every presidential year we out poll the CP nationally. Yes there are a few states in which they do outpoll us but I do not think they have ever gained 50 state ballot access like the LP has. The LP by far has more elected officals than the CP, in fact the Greens have more elected officals than the CP. Even with the LP going to a zero dues model, our membership still overshadows the CP. The LP IS undoubtedly America’s third largest party.

  • The Disenfranchised Voter

    The Constitution Party of now has obviously never even read the Constitution of the US…

    Fuck em.

  • nameless

    I’d prefer not to argue about who is third, I’d rather get libertarians elected.

    how does the LP tackle this immigration issue??

  • Timothy West

    In terms of actual elected party members, I’m wondering that. I think the Greens may very well be ahead of us at the moment.

  • Allen Hacker


    Entry is not immigration. One is either legitimate or illegal. If one is a citizen of another country and here illegally, one is an illegal immigrant.

    Americans have the right of free association. That includes the right to say who gets to move in, and to make rules about how they must do it. Thus, borders.

    The Quiz addresses letting decent people cross borders freely. This implies security checks at borders. Thus, no open borders.

    The Treaty of Guadalupe Hildago requires all governments and countries to respect its terms, including the borders, “religiously”. Thus, Vincente Fox is in violation of the treaty. But of course: his only alternative is to put down the corruption in his own country and make it a decent place to live. But he can’t do that, because either he is himself corrupt or he fears being removed by his cousin the chimp.

    La Raza is an international terrorist organization and every member thereof should be arrested for threatening …

  • Allen Hacker

    … for threatening the lives of American Citizens. This includes CA Lt. Governor Bustamonte nd every other public official who gives aid and comfort to this violent subversive organization.

    Read the platform. It is not a blueprint for anarchy, it is an outline for returning to minimal government; it repeatedly allows that, “while there are governments” they should be limited and respectful of their citizens. Since there will always be governments, we need to be talking about how to make them behave and do their legitimate jobs per the constitution.

    We need to sound sensible to the voters, 60% of whome hate the position we’ve allowed to be hung around our necks.

    We need to push hard for the erasure of “free trade”, an intergovernment boondoggle, and demand the restoration of the free market. We need to help voters understand that welfare, government education and medicare/aid serve as inadvertent government subsidies to unethical businesses who couldn’t compete without …

  • undercover_anarchist

    “Americans have the right to free association. That includes the right to say who gets to move in, and to make rules about how they must do it. Thus, borders.”

    What happened to the libertarian idea that individuals have the right to elect leaders for themselves but not for others?

    Is Allen Hacker really an alias for George W. Bush? The above quote is the greatest butchering of meaning I’ve seen in quite some time. How does the “American” “right” of “free association” equal border socialism and totalitarian regulation of labor markets and human movement?

    I am free to associate or not associate with you. You are NOT free to regulate who I hire, who I rent an apartment to, etc. If someone “illegally immigrates” on to your property, then defend it by lethal force, if necessary. Otherwise, mind your own business.

    When did so called libertarians become Marxists who believe in the “collective property” of the state?

    Calling for mass arrests of people for membership in an organization?

  • Devious David

    Isn’t Alberto Gonzalez a member of La Raza?

  • undercover_anarchist

    Mr. Hacker, maybe YOU should read the platform. Here is what it says on immigration:

    “We call for the elimination of all restrictions on immigration, the abolition of the Immigration and Naturalization Service and the Border Patrol, and a declaration of full amnesty for all people who have entered the country illegally.”


    But what am I even doing here? I have no doubt that the right-wing composed of the likes of Hacker and his ilk will have the immigration plank changed at the next opportunity. The only hope for the LP remaining a party of free markets and free minds is not the death of the CP, but its resurgence, taking the rightists of our party with them.

    And as for being the largest third party… The CP is a hate group, plain and simple. But I won’t play the statist role like Mr. Hacker and call for each member’s arrest. What the F was that???

  • Allen Hacker

    … couldn’t compete without those subsidies because they’d have to pay living wages no matter who they hired. That would mean charging what is necessary to survive as a business, and many products, like most fast “food” are not worth what they really cost.

    There’s a whole lot more to the issue than one person or one platform item, and that’s the problem. But it needs to be broken down into about 3 distinct real issues. Meanwhile, we need to repudiate the false language being foisted off on us by liberals to obfuscate the issue.

    There is no illegal immigration, that simply cannot happen. So there are no illegal immigrants. One is either a citizen, a visad visitor, a work-permit or green-card holder, or an illegal alien.

    We need to get tough with the corrupt governments that drive their people to desperate criminal entry here. But we can’t facilitate their corruption by letting thos refugees come in unchecked and thus leave the corruption intact.

    Mexico needs …

  • Allen Hacker

    … Mexico needs another revolution, and we are making a mistake in releasing them from the pressure. Instead of welcoming criminals unchecked, we should be sending them money personally, helping them to build businesses at home and even, if necessary, proving them the arms they need to defend themselves against their corrupt police and military.

    Is that succinct enough?


  • Allen Hacker

    The Constitution Party was doomed from the moment it married the AIP party. In fact, several AIP state chapters changed their names to Constitution Party in an effort to establish a new image. But they couldn’t shake their religious fanatics and more than we could shake our anarchists. So, in the same way that the LP platform was perverted into an extremist anti government movement rather than an anti cult-of-the-omnipotent-state movement, the CP perverted its freedom message by enshrining a single religion into its Preamble and turned off 65-85% of the voters.

    The AIP has been around for decades, so while it is technically correct to say that Aaron and those others listed founded the Constitution party, it must also be said that they gave it away in an attempt to grow fast enough to accomplish something.

    It’s too late for the CP, but it’s not too late for the LP. All we have to do is recover to the Dallas Accord and shout down anyone who vilates it.


  • Trevor Southerland

    In terms of organization and affiliate organization, the CP and GP are all essentially dead.

    The LP is the giant of third parties, and as everyone here well knows, we have a long list of problems… so that should tell you how marvelous life is in the CP and GP.

  • blowmedown

    Fine, Hacker. To use your terms as you have defined them, there is no accomodation possible between libertarian principles and “immigration policy”. Nappy how?


  • George Phillies

    Allan Hacker writes “the LP platform was perverted into an extremist anti government movement ”
    Milder phrasings have been heard from Democrats and Republicans.

    “Mexico needs another revolution, and we are making a mistake in releasing them from the pressure. Instead of welcoming criminals unchecked,”
    I am aware of no one who is welcoming orthodox criminals.

    “But [the CP] couldn’t shake their religious fanatics and more than we could shake our anarchists.”
    If you are an anarchist, you might wonder if Mr. Hacker wants to be tainted with your money.

    For those of you who have lost track, Mr. Hacker is Michael Badnarik’s campaign chair.

    I would strongly urge Mr. Badnarik to renounce his ties with this person, who appears to be actively opposed to substantial parts of the Libertarian platform. I concede that many of the ideas in Mr. Badnarik’s book have otehr issues, as I have discussed elsewhere.

  • George Phillies

    Michael Hacker writes “La Raza is an international terrorist organization and every member thereof should be arrested for threatening for threatening the lives of American Citizens. This includes CA Lt. Governor Bustamonte nd every other public official who gives aid and comfort to this violent subversive organization.”

    We should arrest every member of a group because some of its members have allegedly committed a crime? Actually I have seen a fair number of right wing attacks on La Raza, and I seem to have missed a list of their ‘terrorist’ deeds.

    Suppressing groups for acts of members, when those acts do not appear to be group policy, is a Communist idea. I would urge Libertarians not to support this authoritarian approach by funding Mr. Hacker’s paycheck. I will defend vigorously Mr. Hacker’s freedom of sppech, but I would urge you all to let him do it on someone else’s dime.-

  • George Phillies

    ““We call for the elimination of all restrictions on immigration, the abolition of the Immigration and Naturalization Service and the Border Patrol, and a declaration of full amnesty for all people who have entered the country illegally.””

    When we reach the libertarian world, this platform plank will happen spontaneously, even as it has in practice happened between the United States and, e.g., Sweden, namely that between free, wealthy nations there is only limited population movement and therefore there is no point to regulating immigration.

  • Rolf Lindgren


    I think we ought to go a little easier on Allen Hacker. Hacker is in the very difficult position of running Badnarik’s campaign. Its easy to post quick messages without thinking them through. I did’t take them all literally.

    Because he is in Texas, the complex immigration issue is absolutely huge. Our LP platform regarding immigration is not written for the real world. (without extended explanations)

    In Hacker comments, I sense he is thinking outloud about how to be a Libertarian on immigration in the real world.

    Hacker is in the real world right now.

    PS – I believe our platform should make a compromise between purists and incrementalists, by spelling out a dicotomy between practical today solutions and theoretical ideals.

  • Allen Hacker

    Gotcha, George!

    You’re not seeing a straw man while it’s biting you.

    I just presented the American majority’s view of the issue, and instead of taking the argument apart intelligently, you attacked me personally. But that’s just you, isn’t it?

    Is this how you intend to deal with the membership as Chair, and the people as President? Or is this just you cmpaigning for the nomination by trying to block Badnarik?

    Come on, you guys, you need to learn to respond to the arguments! Here’s your chance to get a little practice.


  • Gary Odom

    I know a lot of people in the L P and have great respect for them and many of their leaders, past and present, but I would be very reluctant to comment on the internal dynamics of that party because I would have to rely on my perceptions rather than actual knowledge which could end up simply displaying my ignorance of facts.

    Interestingly, that doesn’t seem to stop a lot of you out there making comments about the Constitution Party that are simply ignorant. For example, to suggest that the AIP (and the only AIP is the California AIP) merging with the CP is the reason for some of the religious intolerance in CP is absurd. We have led the fight against religious bigotry in the CP and its platform and we are winning.

    In 1992 when the CP was born only the CA AIP and the Nevada IAP had any connection with any previous national parties.

    Mr. Hacker, I certainly appreciate your distate for religious bigotry but you have your facts twisted.

  • Allen Hacker

    “Suppressing groups for acts of members, when those acts do not appear to be group policy, is a Communist idea. I would urge Libertarians not to support this authoritarian approach by funding Mr. Hacker’s paycheck.”


    This general truth is a lie when used as you have here. It is the express policy of La Raza to create Azatlan by destroying American ownsership of the Southwest through population subversion, lawlessness and violence. Thus you were not talking about La Raza, and therefore not responding to what I said. What was that, then? Posturing?

    Am I right that you’re trying to run for the nomination by attacking me with rhetoric in the attempt to make Badnarik look bad? Have you so little substance to sell?

    For you to attack someone for appearing to defend immigration laws after you’ve attacked Badnarik by defending driver licences is a bit questionable, wouldn’t you say?


  • Chris Bennett

    To be honest-there are many reasons why I haven’t donated to the Badnarik campaign. I have to defend George on this particular issue. When Michael won the nomination in 2004 (I was on the Russo staff), I stepped aside to see how things played out. Badnarik was the only alternative on the ballot in Illinois and I slowly came back to the roost and I did research for the campaign (their campaign stragedy was off in my opinion but hey I’m just a low-life Libertarian) Anyways if Badnarik wins the nomination in 2008, (if he intends to pursue it again) COUNT ME OUT! Michael is a nice fellow but I just think that someone else should become our nominee.

  • Allen Hacker

    Those of you who have quoted from the platform have failed to quote the entire section. And you’ve probably not noticed that the transition section is not transitional items at all but rather a list of ultimate demands each of which cannot be accomplished in a single fell swoop without severely disruptive repercussions.

    Since the platform is still being redeveloped, and we need a realistic transitional program to get from here to there, it’s up to us to develop one.

    Rolf, you are correct, except that polls show that the people of Texase and the people of California and almost the entire country agree within a few percentage points on almost all of the elements of the issue. Which is to say that they disagree with what my critics are saying on everything except opposing mass deportations.

    I’m being intentionally provocative here for two reasons. Need of a sensible policy on the issue; need to expose unthinking would-be opinion leaders.


  • Allen Hacker


    Please explain how, if your facts are not twisted, Christian fanatics managed to twist your Preamble in 2004 by inserting Jesus Christ and the Bible into it, thus making the CP a religious party?

    Could it be because the AIP was once in many more states than CA and NV and its denizens had been lurking in the Republican Party until the CP gave them refuge?


  • Allen Hacker

    No, blowmedown, I am not. You’ve just done the same dense thing so many of our members and critics do. I call it leaping to an occlusion.

    Your summary is non-sequitur.


  • Allen Hacker

    All this worrying about whether Michael will be the presidential nominee is predicated upon the one most glaring defect in the LP: it rests on the assumption that he will have nothing better to do in ’08 because neither he nor any other Libertarian can win a partisan race.

    Think about it.

    1. If you believe that and you’re still here, you must be mentally ill. :-)

    2. Should Michael win TX10 this year, it would be idiotic for him to abandon it to run for president. If you want to make sure he isn’t in the market in ’08, make sure his attention then is on getting re-elected.


  • KenH

    I have no problem with protecting our borders. Maybe I disagree with 5% of the LP platform but I’m not going to refuse to vote for LP candidates over that 5%.

  • Chris Bennett

    This is absurd. It has become the rip-on Allen Hacker forum instead of the post at hand. Just ignore him…he doesn’t pay my bills nor feed my children nor is he worth the piece of toliet paper I wipe my a$$ with. If you all have a problem with Allen’s incompetence e-mail him privately. The open bickering about his ilk has to stop.

  • Gary Odom

    The CA AIP delegation, of which I was a member, strongly opposed that regrettable change in the preamble as did most of the responsible leaders of the CP. The vote was very close and the supporters of that change were mostly new people, many who were religious zealots with no practical experience previously. The ones who supported it (mostly Peroutka’s people) certainly had no prior history in past incarnations of the AIP. If anything, they had been lifelong Republicans.

    Those individuals who are in the CP and also had been in the national AIP have resisted religious extremism and bigotry in the CP, not supported it. You just have your facts backwards.

    You seem to attribute the religious extremism in the CP to the very people who are fighting it within the party. I can’t help but be interested in your frame of reference on this matter. Where are you getting your information?

  • Allen Hacker

    Gosh, Chris,

    Couldn’t object to the bad behavior without getting in a bit of your own?


  • Allen Hacker


    Thanks for setting the record straight.

    Actually, I have my information from Vernie, and she told me the exact same thing you just did.

    So what was this about? I postured for a widespread misconception to see if anyone would rise to the occasion. You did. Well done!

    Now if someone would just deal with that other straw man rationally….


  • Allen Hacker


    Suddenly it’s very quiet.

    Gotta go now, got other work to do.

    Look carefully at what you’ve just been shown.


  • Thomas L. Knapp

    Quoth Allen Hacker:

    “Am I right that [George Phillies is] trying to run for the nomination by attacking me with rhetoric in the attempt to make Badnarik look bad?”

    I doubt it. You seem to have that job well in hand yourself.

  • undercover_anarchist

    Protecting “OUR” borders?

    Whose borders?

    Who is “our”?

    Fucking commie.

  • nameless

    unfortunately, I think Rush Limbaugh is at the forefront of this issue.

    step 1. secure the border, any other policy before that falls by the wayside as the illegals keep pouring in.

    step 2. identify the illegals. offer a chance to become legal through payment of restitution, whether it’s a fine (or heaven forbid, back taxes!… I suppose to be a libertarian solution it should be a considered a fine). Maybe businesses who require the labor from these individuals could have the option of paying the restitution for their workers

    Step 3. either initiate a guest worker program, or move to an open immigration policy. filter all incoming workers through certain entry points where background checks can be performed prior to entry. Criminals (which would include terrorists) would be turned away and anyone crossing the border at a point other than the designated entry point would be considered hostile by our border patrol.

    …but that probably isn’t libertarian enough for most people.

  • nameless

    simplicity works. the simplest plan is often the best.

    some of you may say that the simplest plan is to open the border and let whoever wants to come in, come in. that’s a terrible plan and destroys the sovereignty of the United States.

    the other simple plan is to close the border permanently. this is also a terrible plan since immigration was one of the fondations of this country.

    virtually free access at specific entry points appears to be the best answer, IMHO.

    I know this isn’t an original idea, and I’d give credit if I knew the source…but I don’t. Suffice to say that this idea isn’t my own.

    and I don’t know if it will get votes from the general population or not.

  • George Phillies

    And Mr Hacker writes:

    “For you to attack someone for appearing to defend immigration laws after you’ve attacked Badnarik by defending driver licences is a bit questionable, wouldn’t you say?”

    Mr Badnarik’s claims that you do not need a driver’s license to drive a car, that there is no requirement to pay the income tax, that the President is not Commander in chief of the armed forces in times of peace, that it is appropriate for the President of the United States to blow up someone else’s property because he does not like them (to be precise, he proposes blowing up the UN Building) are not sensible, let alone anything else.

  • Devious David

    There is no law requiring most people to pay an income tax. Whether or not the unlimited force of The State will be visited upon you if you follow the law and don’t is another question all together.

  • David Tomlin

    According to Wikipedia, a number of organizations use ‘La Raza’ (‘The Race’) in their names. If someone wants to rag on some group called ‘La Raza’, it would helpful to be more specific.

  • Andy

    I’ve studied the income tax issue and I agree with Badnarik. Even if one doesn’t agree with Badnarik about the legal requirements for income tax and drivers license, why would anyone who calls themselves a libertarian support these things? If enough people stopped paying income tax and stopped using Federal Reserve Notes the whole system would come crumbling down.

    Saying that the United Nations should be blown up may not be “politically correct” but I agree with this sentiment. The goal of the United Nations is a socialist one world government. The UN is NOT libertarian by any strecth of the imagination and they are tax payer funded (and remember that taxation is theft and that the Constitution makes no provision for UN funding) and their end goal is the destruction of American liberty. I consider the UN to be a criminal organization and they ought to be kicked out of the USA.

  • undercover_anarchist

    nameless: I agree with most of what you’re proposing from a practical, if not wholly philosophical, perspective. I do, however, oppose so-called “guest worker” status as the creation of an underclass of serf labor.

    I thought I heard Limbaugh opine on immigration before, and either he has radically changed his views, or I must be mistaken.

    If you want a sensible conservative opinion on immigration, go to Larry Kudlow.

  • David Tomlin

    Whose property is the UN building? For all I know it is the property of the U.S. government.

    If it is the property of the UN, perhaps Badnarik proposed to confiscate it in restitution for all the dues the U.S. has paid to the UN.

  • KenH

    “Protecting “OUR” borders?

    Whose borders?

    Who is “our”?”

    These United States of America.

  • undercover_anarchist

    So “we” collectively own the land? Karl Marx would be proud, Mr. KenH.

  • nameless


    that has been my problem with the guest worker as well. that’s why I put in the open immigration option. Technically, a guest worker would be a citizen of another country and may not have the protections of the “bill of rights”…and as is typical in human nature, when there is potential for abuse, we usually get abuse.

  • KenH

    “So “we” collectively own the land?”

    No, not at all. But we do share the national defense of our nation together. It’s one of the rare things that our national government actually has the constitutional duty to perform.

  • Kris Overstreet

    To get back to the original question- have the Greens or Constitutions passed the LP up- I offer the following.

    In 2004, Ralph Nader handily outpolled Badnarik in every state the two competed in. Badnarik outpolled Cobb in head-to-head by 190,747 to 119,859; Badnarik outpolled Peroutka by 228,119 to 144,498. As you can see, nearly half of Badnarik’s votes came in states where neither Cobb nor Peroutka made the ballot- representing the legacy of past organization and achievement rather than the triumph of ideas.

    Between 2000 and 2004 the Constitution Party gained over 40,000 Presidential votes; the Libertarians only about 10,000. CP elected officials numbers grow; LP elected officials numbers are either static or shrinking. I don’t believe the CP’s ideas are superior to the LP’s- but its organization, up until recently, has been gaining steadily on our own.

    Of course, the most important statistic here is this: nobody listed here got even 1% of the Presidential vote. That’s failure.

  • Allen Hacker


    You didn’t asnwer my question, which was, as you quote:

    “For you to attack someone for appearing to defend immigration laws after you’ve attacked Badnarik by defending driver licences is a bit questionable, wouldn’t you say?”

    Not gonna answer?

    Instead you offer mere opinion about Badnarik’s extremely libertarian positions:

    “Mr Badnarik’s claims that you do not need a driver’s license to drive a car, that there is no requirement to pay the income tax, that the President is not Commander in chief of the armed forces in times of peace,… are not sensible, let alone anything else.”

    An opinion contrary to libertarianism, at that.


  • Allen Hacker

    And George,

    When you say, “[Badnarik claims] that it is appropriate for the President of the United States to blow up someone else’s property because he does not like them (to be precise, he proposes blowing up the UN Building)”, you continue to misrepresent Michael’s comment that if the UN were to be shut down and the building demolished to make way for something more useful (housing?), he’d happily be the one to push the plunger.

    You’ve been corrected on this before. You are a college professor, yes? Certainly you must be familiar with the concept of intellectual dishonesty?

    *George Phillies for Chair/President: Licences, taxes, and self-serving misstatements! He’s everything you know and love about Amerika!*


  • Allen Hacker


    I’m willing to get back to the point, too.

    The LP has been a perennial failure because of the very thing you’ve witnessed here. People who demand an all-or-nothing platform and campaigns making sure that we get nothing, and self-serving misrepresentation employed by people who don’t merit what they desire making sure that nobody else gets it either.

    It’s time for everybody to pull together in the affirmative and find common ground, first with one another and then with the voters. And for those who can’t or won’t, to move out of the LP into some other aspect of the freedom movement where they can find the field that’s hosting the game they want to play instead of constantly subverting the game they don’t want to play anyway.

    Otherwise, yes, the question is moot, all three contenders have failed, and it doesn’t matter.

    We can do this. We can win. First we have to fire those who say we can’t and shouldn’t try. This is an organization, after all.


  • Allen Hacker


    If allowed to live, I promise to learn to type “licenses”.


  • undercover_anarchist

    If you think that a cabal of slave rapists meeting behind closed doors 200 years ago is the source of your rights, then I guess I can see how you would find the idea of Marxist collectivism on the borders appropriate.

    The Constitution should be viewed as a LIMIT on government, not as a sacred text compelling “duties and responsbilities” on individuals.

    Me, I’m for free markets and self-ownership. You don’t own me, you don’t own the “illegal” immigrant who wants to come here to work, and you don’t own the business that wants to hire him. You don’t own the apartment or house he lives in, and you don’t own his labor, the fruits of which he may or may not choose to send back to Mexico, just as I might choose to invest mine in an emerging markets mutual fund. You don’t own his mind or his tongue, and have no right to seek control of his thoughts, words, or the language thereof.

    Explain to me what “we” are protecting “ourselves” from? The free allocation of capital and labor? Freedom?

  • George Phillies

    Referring to the UN, Hacker claims: You’ve been corrected on this before.

    Hacker is not telling the truth. No one has previously claimed to correct my statement. Google saved the old Badnarik statement:
    Post #12 quotes Badnarik:
    “The day I enter the Oval Office, I will give notice to the United Nations. Member nations would have one week to evacuate their offices in the UN building in New York. They would have seven days to box up their computers, their paper work, and family photos. At noon on the eighth day, after ensuring that the building was empty, I would personally detonate the explosive charges that would reduce the building to rubble. The same type of rubble we had to clean up after September 11th. [emphasis mine] I want to send a message around the world that United States foreign policy had changed dramatically, and unmistakably.”

  • George Phillies

    Liberty magazine in an article by the late Bill Bradford reported why the UN quote was not uniformly seen, namely that after winning the 2004 campaign “…removed from the campaign website Badnarik’s promise to blow up the United Nations building”.

    With respect to Hacker’s other question ““For you to attack someone for appearing to defend immigration laws after you’ve attacked Badnarik by defending driver licences is a bit questionable, wouldn’t you say?”

    Mr. Hacker misses the point. I say that driver’s licenses are a legal requirement. Your candidate, Mr. Hacker, seems to disagree.

    Saying that licenses do exist is not the same as saying whether they should exist.

    Similarly, I maintain that the Federal Reserve Board is a branch of the Federal Government, its officers reporting to the President and Senate, while the candidate says in his book “The Federal Reserve Bank is a private company and NOT a part of the American govenrment…”

  • George Phillies

    Finally with respect to Mr. Hacker’s statement

    “Instead you offer mere opinion about Badnarik’s extremely libertarian positions:”

    The positions I quote are not libertarian at all, because they are statements alleging facts, and are simply wrong.

  • Thomas L. Knapp

    Quoth George Phillies:

    “Google saved the old Badnarik statement”

    The source you are quoting from is secondary, and while it does happen to be accurate in this particular case, it’s much better to grab the original. Here’s the record of the entire speech from Badnarik’s campaign site as of May 2004, just before the LP’s national convention:

    But … is there some particular reason why a blog post on the Constitution Party needs to become an anti-Badnarik thread?

    Tom Knapp

  • Michael Hampton

    Yes. No one here has anything better to do than to bash Michael Badnarik or squabble with each other. There certainly isn’t an out of control government looming large on the horizon which needs to be dealt with now. Our freedoms are quite secure and do not need our attention, so we can divert our attention to fighting with each other and have no reason to worry about anything else.

  • undercover_anarchist

    Oh my god! I could have crushed the state in the time I’ve spent conversing on this blog!

    Oh wait, no I couldn’t have.

    The reason this became a “bash Badnarik” thread is because Mr. Hacker found his way into the discussion. Mr. Badnarik is guilty by association. Although, I wouldn’t go as far as to call for his arrest, as Mr. Hacker has with anyone affiliated with any organization with the words “La” or “Raza” in the name.

  • Kris Overstreet


    The question is whether or not supporting Badnarik will make us more or less free. Hacker thinks more; Phillies thinks less.

    I’ve expressed my opinion of Badnarik before, but he’s now a party nominee and therefore I’m not going to say anything about him at all.

    The issue remains, though: are there candidates so bad that they do our cause more harm than good?

    Of course, you’re right- this is NOT a Badnarik thread, but a Christian Talib- er, Constitution Party thread.

  • nameless

    I give up.

    I’m voting replublican from now on until they have complete control of everything.

    I’m tired of thinking for myself. I’d rather have someone else do it for me from now on.

    just tell me to who to vote for and I’ll get right in line to do my patriotic duty.

  • Michael Hampton

    This whole thread demonstrates why I’m not involved in the LP at all, and probably won’t become involved again anytime soon. Not to mention it was a complete waste of my time.

  • undercover_anarchist

    So what do you guys want? A party where no one talks, argues, or debates?

    This thread was no more a “waste of time” than any other conversation I had today in my “real life.” Less so, probably.

  • Allen Hacker

    Okay, George,

    Thanks for finally answering. By the way, I thought it interesting that along the way you topped my every typo by referring to me as “Michael Hacker”. Where’s that damned Freud idiot when you need him?!

    I’m not going to pursue the Fed thing with you, you don’t listen well on the subject of federally-chartered corporations.

    Let’s check one last detail regarding demolishing the UN building. You referred to it as someone else’s property. Whose property is it, and did you know that when you wrote that?


  • Andy

    What exactly is wrong with saying that the United Nations should be kicked out of the USA and that the UN building should be blown up? The United Nations is an ENEMY of American liberty! The UN is for global taxes, global gun control, and forced population control. These are NOT libertarian stances! I will agree that saying that the UN building should be blown up is not “politically correct” but there is moral justification for saying it.

    The Federal Reserve is a merger between big government and big corporations (ie-international bankers). Read G. Edward Griffin’s book “The Creature From Jekyell Island” for an excellent analysis of the Federal Reserve. You can find it at The Rockefellers, Rothschilds, and JP Morgan were involved with the creation of the Federal Reserve for a reason and that was to protect their cartel.

  • Andy

    The current immigration situation is being manipulated by those who want to heard us into world government. This article exposes how the Bushite Neo-Cons were involved in setting up the immigration protests.

  • Tom Kovach

    I would not have even known that this site exists, if not for a Google alert for my name. It’s nice to learn via Google about an offer of “equal time”. (And, with a character limit, it’s not “equal”.)

    If a group calls **themselves** a political party, and meets the requirements of the election law for their jurisdiction, then they **are** a political party. That’s how the law works. It was not my interpretation of the numbers; just the numbers themselves.

    I exchanged e-mails with Richard Winger, too, but don’t have room to quote here. Suffice it to say that I referred to small parties — single-issue parties, single-candidate parties, etc. — in saying that there were hundreds. I was not referring to “nationally recognized parties”. According to Mr. Winger, there are only eight of those.

    According to Mr. Winger’s research, which he published in Ballot Access News, the CP is the third-largest in registered voters.

    The CP is not a “hate group”, and I resent that remark