National Service Is Anti-Liberty and Un-American

THE UNZ REVIEW
– Ron Paul – 
19 October 2014 – 

Former Clinton Administration Labor Secretary Robert Reich recently called on the government to force young people to spend two years either “serving” in the military or performing some other type of government-directed “community service.” Neoconservative Senator John McCain has introduced legislation creating a mandatory national service program very similar to Reich’s proposal. It is not surprising that both a prominent progressive and a leading neocon would support mandatory national service, as this is an issue that has long united authoritarians on the left and right.

Proponents of national service claim that young people have a moral obligation to give something back to society. But giving the government power to decide our moral obligations is an invitation to totalitarianism.

Read the full article here.


Conscription
 
The Constitution Party opposes all forms of National Service – military or civilian.  Read the Constitution Party Platform plank on Conscription.

Conservatives Have Lost; Look for Restorationists

THE JOURNAL
– 17 October 2014 –
Letters to the Editor –
Jeff Becker, Constitution Party of West Virginia

marriage.p

The word marriage, or any reference to this sacred institution, is not found anywhere in the U.S. Constitution. As such, the Tenth Amendment applies and leaves decisions on marriage completely up “to the States respectively, or to the people.” Federal courts have absolutely no jurisdiction on the matter. There can be no argument here. Known as the principle of interposition, lead constitutional author James Madison confirmed this in his “Virginia Resolution of 1798” where he wrote, “…the States…are in duty bound, to interpose for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining within their respective limits, the authorities, rights and liberties appertaining to them.”

So it is a real shame that Attorney General Patrick Morrisey has decided so soon to give up, cave in and not fight for what is clearly an established rule of law – West Virginia’s long-standing ban on same-sex unions. But, is this really any surprise considering that for the past 30 years, Mr. Morrisey’s party has embraced the Log Cabin Republicans – a group of gay and lesbian conservatives and their allies? And until June of this year, GOProud was another Republican homosexual group that included so-called “conservatives” including Anne Coulter and Grover Norquist within their leadership.

It couldn’t be any more obvious to me that the word “conservative” no longer has any connotation of traditional American family values. Conservatives are only conserving the destruction wrought by the radicals and are not doing anything to restore our country. Instead, we need restorationists. Look for and vote for them instead.

The Issue that Threatens to Unravel Both the Constitution and the GOP

THE WASHINGTON TIMES
– 6 October 2014 – 

With the 35-year marriage between Christians and the Republican Party already on the rocks, a U.S. Supreme Court with a majority of Republican appointees just put the religious liberty of every believer in the GOP base in unprecedented peril.

The GOP was already struggling to maintain the loyalty of its conservative base, and one of its last, best talking points was the importance of judicial appointments. Now that talking point has also been blown to smithereens. The John Roberts court gave us Obamacare, the narrowest wording possible when siding in favor of Hobby Lobby, got rid of the Defense of Marriage Act, and, on Monday, opened the floodgates for an onslaught against the First Amendment.

Read the full article here.


 

FamilyRead the Constitution Party platform plank on the FAMILY.

Could Civics Education Reduce Voter Apathy?

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
23 September 2014 – 

US Capitol

When it comes to understanding how our government works a shockingly large number of Americans have very little knowledge.

A recent Gallup poll found that fewer than 40% of Americans could identify which party controls each chamber of Congress.

Another survey, by the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania, found about the same number of Americans were able to correctly name all three branches of government.

Read the full article here: Civics Education and Voter Apathy  

Is The Constitution Dead?

17 September 2014
by Robert W. Peck, State Chairman
Constitution Party of Washington
 
constitution-flag-225 Today we celebrate the 227th anniversary of the U.S. Constitution and ask the question, “is the Constitution dead?” Has it survived despite the many years of degradation it has suffered or did it succumb long ago?

 

The other day I was confronted with the idea that perhaps the Constitution is already null and void and has been for some time now based on the many unconstitutional acts of the federal government, some beginning as long as a hundred years ago. I’ll be the first to admit that much, perhaps even most of what the federal government does, is not allowed under the Constitution. But does that mean that the Constitution has failed, that it doesn’t work, that it is no longer valid, has become irrelevant and that we should quit contending for the founding principles of the American Constitutional republic? Or does it merely mean that we the people have ignorantly and foolishly elected persons who are now subjecting us to an unconstitutional, and therefore alien, form of government?

I believe some people confuse conservatism with Constitutionalism and the conservative movement with the current efforts of Constitutionists. The two tend to be treated as synonymous and lumped together under one title. I admit that some who are called conservatives are Constitutionists, though not all, and Constitutionalism is what conservatism once was, or sought to be. However, Constitutionalism and modern conservatism are quite different entities. I contend that it is conservatism that has expired and lapsed into irrelevance while the principles of Constitutionalism remain ever relevant and worthy of our most valiant efforts to contend for.

 

Conservatism began as an attempt to “conserve” or “preserve” our Constitutional form of government and its accompanying liberty. Conservatism also came to include endeavors to preserve the traditional Christian morals of our society. Conservatism has been failing for a half century now as everything that it sought to preserve has been continually slipping through the fingers of the Christian-conservative-right. With each defeat, the banner of conservatism moves a little to the left and finds itself planted on a new piece of ground from which it attempts to preserve the new state of affairs. Much of what is being called conservatism today would actually have been fought against by the founders of conservatism. If Barry Goldwater, the acknowledged founder of the conservative movement, were to come back from the dead, he would slap John Boehner and the Republican leaders silly and call them liberal, socialist traitors and enemies of the Constitution. It could easily be argued that conservatism is dead, or at least that the “new conservatism” is irrelevant, useless and not worth spending effort contending for. But what about Constitutionalism?

 

If I may use an analogy to help us see the matter – let’s suppose that there is a small town of good, generally moral people, most of whom attend the town’s one church. There is no tavern in town and no vices are publicly practiced. One day a bar opens for business and the town’s people start getting drunk, including some of the church goers. The pastor starts a movement to “conserve” the morals of the community and preserve its current state. Over time, more and more people start hanging out at the bar until hardly anyone is left attending church. Then a nightclub with strippers opens up and the town’s people start leaving the bar and heading for the nightclub. So the preacher now moves out of his church and takes up residence at the bar where he begins pleading with people to “conserve” the current morals of the community by staying at the bar and not go to the nightclub. Next an opium den opens and… well, you get the picture, the cycle just keeps repeating.

 

Has the preacher’s attempts to “conserve” the morals of the community failed? Quite obviously. However, has the Bible been defeated? Have it’s precepts been disproved as irrelevant and no longer worth contending for? Absolutely not! The Bible is still as relevant as the day the bar moved in to town. The Bible still holds the answers to all the troubles of the town’s people and is the cure for all the woes for which they seek to become intoxicated enough to be able to cope. The counsel of God’s word can still fix every problem they have. The Bible is totally relevant, totally applicable to their situation and its preaching and teaching in the community is needed now more than ever.

 

The U.S. Constitution, as well as the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights, are to the nation much like the Bible is to the church or to the individual. The Constitution, and the Biblically aligned principles that the founders based it upon, are still relevant, still right and still hold the answers for what ails government and society today. The Constitutional principles have not been defeated nor disproved any more than the Word of God has been defeated or disproved, they simply haven’t been practiced in awhile, and that to the detriment of society.

 

Government may not currently be following the precepts of the Constitution, but the document and the principles upon which it was established are still true, are still sound, are still the law of the land and would still produce liberty, peace and prosperity if observed. Like with the Bible, it is when men are not following sound principles that those principles are in the greatest need of being taught, preached and proclaimed so that a wayward nation can find its way back by following the voice of the American founders crying out to us through our founding documents and through those who are still contending for the principles that they embody.

 

Constitutionalism has not been defeated nor disproved, it simply hasn’t been practiced, but that doesn’t mean we should stop contending for it.

Happy Constitution Day!


Robert W. Peck is a Christian, Constitutionist and political activist who serves as the chairman of the Constitution Party of Washington and is a member of the Constitution Party National Committee. Bob lives in Spokane Valley, Washington where he is a landlord-handyman.  You can find more of his writings at: American Perspective

Free and Fair Elections

Home Front with Cynthia Davis
16 September 2014

ballobox

 

What’s involved in getting a candidate on the ballot? Do political parties matter? In this episode of Home Front, Cynthia Davis is joined by Jim Clymer, former chairman of the national Constitution Party, and Gary Odom, former national Field Director to talk about what happened with Ron Paul, what George Washington said about the way we do things and why we need better options when we go to vote. Both Jim and Gary discuss the situation from their own experiences — as candidates, Constitution Party leaders, lawsuits — and why they are pressing on with the battle.

Listen here:  Free and Fair Elections

 

 


Cynthia Davis is a former four-term state representative in Missouri, ran for Missouri Lieutenant Governor in 2012, and is the creator of the Home Front with Cynthia Davis podcast.

How to Lose a Constitution—Lessons from Roman History

– 29 August 2014 – 
Lawrence W. Reed
President, Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)

 

I begin with this remark of the celebrated Roman historian Livy, written 2,000 years ago:

There is an exceptionally beneficial and fruitful advantage to be derived from the study of the past. There you see, set in the clear light of historical truth, examples of every possible type. From these you can select for yourself and your country what to imitate, and also what, as being mischievous in its inception and disastrous in its consequences, you should avoid.

The history of ancient Rome spans a thousand years—roughly 500 as a republic and 500 as an imperial autocracy, with the birth of Christ occurring almost precisely in the middle. The closest parallels between Roman and American civilizations are to be found in Rome’s first half-millennium as a republic. We in our day can derive the most instructive lessons from that period. The tyranny of the empire came after the republic was destroyed and that’s the truly awful consequence of decay that America can yet avoid.

Read the complete article here.