The Constitution Party - America's 3rd largest party

[XxXxINSIGHTxXxX]

what are their thoughts when it comes to Glenn Beck?

[Lucas6194]

I am proud to be a constitutionalist.

[trucking42witness]

I for one am sick , and tired of this political duopoly promoting their one world order, and their huge tax machine.

[finefilth]

it will be infiltrated and subverted

[JimProfitandJulz]

Damn, hot old bitch, and talked about my big three issues. I'm anti-war, want strciter immigration borders, and prolife legislation. Fuck yeah.

[GMCsarge]

as far as history of politics goes.. I personally feel nobody has done more to promote corruption through campaign finance and mishandling of money than political partys and their corporate influences, and thus have allowed the masses of american people to become powerless through this system.

[GMCsarge]

...A Lot more progress would be made in efforts more quickly if we could just do this. Being divided "party" wise just dilutes the public resolve and ability to do anything about the issues that need attention in the here and now, and of itself has nothing to do with the constitution or the defense of such. While the Government is busy regulating our rights, most of the people are squabbling about political ideals and who's right or wrong or better than the other.

[GMCsarge]

people need to quit worrying about your loyality to any political "party" and concentrate on being "American". Celebrate our likenesses not our differences. Diversity is word of division, not unity. Lets try to work on the things we agree with, not things we differ on.

[ukburger]

Is this party more National Conservative than the Republicans?

[jimeckland]

Yes !! We are more conservative than the Republicrats !

[ukburger]

Thats good, I hope all Republicans and Democrats vote Constitution for REAL change.....I would not mind the Libertarian party.

[usgop]

The Constitution Party? Why have I not heard of this one?? I will check it out now..I'm sick of the two controlling parties!!

[toyrocketastronaut]

Vote for Constitution Party Candidates in the 2010 elections!

[comicb00kguy]

The Founding Fathers would vomit in disgust and rage to see the two pathetic losers offered as candidates for President. I support the Constitution Party so I can vote for a candidate who represents the values I believe in.

[OhRick]

Most of the founders where "God fearing" But had the hard-earned experience and good sense to keep government out of religion and vice-versa.

A biblical-based government would not be representative of all, and would be as divisive as the Constitution Party clearly is.

Back then the numerous religions were at each others throats... as they are today! Government is hard enough to run. Christians are far from united. Congress would never get anything done!

Smart men, those founders were.

[knowyourrino]

Again, "no religious test", and no "establishment of religion". Combine that with no "prohibiting the free exercise thereof", and you have true religious freedom.

However, "Our constitution was made for a moral and religious people; it is wholly inadequate for to the government of any other." (John Adams)

Benjamin Franklin explains why: "Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters."

[knowyourrino]

As I see it, it is essential that we recognize our rights are unalienable because they were "endowed by [our] Creator", not granted by government.

The Declaration of Independence goes on to declare the very purpose of government is "to secure these rights".

Remove God from this equation, and from whence do we derive our rights? What makes them unalienable?

An establishment of a religion was wisely prohibited, but the Founders saw a widespread recognition of God to be essential to liberty.

[knowyourrino]

As for the claim of our Government not being biblical-based, your view does differ with many of the Founding Fathers.

Such as:

"We have staked the whole future of our new nation, not upon the power of government; far from it. We have staked the future of all our political constitutions upon the capacity of each of ourselves to govern ourselves according to the moral principles of the Ten Commandments." - James Madison, "Father" of the Constitution

[OhRick]

Baptist theologian Roger Williams, the founder of the colony of Rhode Island, was first credited with the wise tenet of "Separation" 5 years before the Bill of Rights, due to the horrible persecution between the numerous denominations towards each other. (Freedom of religion, also means freedom from religion.) The constitution makes no establishment for Public Schools. So, it's safe to assume "School" was more privately funded. As a free American and a Christian, he was free to make statements.

[knowyourrino]

Exactly why the First Amendment includes a prohibition against "an establishment of religion".

Forcing a religious belief is just as bad as forcing no religious belief.

[numberonesurvivor75]

This is not entirely accurate. The Articles of Confederation made provisions for public schools on the western frontiers and this provision was not removed at the Constitutional Convention.

[OhRick]

This is a party that will never get anything done. It will never be a serious contender with a platform of legislating morality.

Separation of church and state.

You will only paralyze yourself with infighting on each others version of religion.

Too bad! We need a new party that thinks as Ron Paul does. He is pro-life, but advocates the issue as a state one, not a federal one.

It's just, too paralyzing an issue.

[knowyourrino]

Virtually all legislation has a moral basis ... thou shalt not kill, steal, etc.

You do have a good point though. Inasmuch as the Constitution Party can stay away from a "religious test" for their party, they can be effective. (There is a small minority among them that wants only one denomination of Christianity in their party. See US Constitution, Art 6, Sec 3)

Where in the Constitution does it establish this "separation of church and state" you refer to?

[OhRick]

As you know (or, you wouldn't have asked?)

The "separation of church and state" is a legal and political principle derived from the first amendment... "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . ." Thomas Jefferson "implied it" in 1802. The Supreme Court has quoted it several times. Not to mention, any glance at history will reinforce the prudence of such a position. I would argue that little legislation has a moral basis?

[knowyourrino]

So, "separation of church and state" really is just "Congress shall make no law ...". Apparently, it is only a restriction on Congress.

Did Jefferson (who actually coined the phrase "separation ...") mean for it to completely isolate government from religious values?

Remember, this is the same man who insisted Bibles ever must be the most prominent book for teaching in our public schools, and went to great length to ensure it. Hmmm.

[knowyourrino]

The Supreme Court USED to quote this from Jefferson's letter, in it's entirety, as justification for Government NOT to restrict any free exercise of Religion in public or private.

It wasn't until the 1960's that they reduced it to just the simple (out of context) phrase of "separation of church and state", to try to remove all public reference to God, including prayer in schools, etc.

This is 180 degrees different from nearly 200 years of Supreme Court references to Jefferson's letter.

[OhRick]

I would love to continue this discourse, but YouTube is apparently approving your post, and not mine?

[knowyourrino]

I am told I can fix that. It should approve you now.

[Spazman173]

Isn't the Libertarian Party America's 3rd largest party?

[knowyourrino]

I believe it was. It all depends on how you count the size.

In terms of voter registration, the Constitution Party has been shown to have passed the Libertarian Party as the 3rd largest.

[WeCanAllGetAllong]

Great video! Get involved.

 Pssst Do something!

[karn3022]

It is my right to prosper and enjoy the fruits of my labor and it is my right to make mistakes and learn from my failure.

Give a man a fish and feed him for a day, but teach a man to fish and feed him for a lifetime

[Whoo69]

It's a little hypocritical to say, "Well, I think this program is a handout, so my tax dollars shouldn't go to it", and also say, "Let's ban funding entirely" when there are probably lots of taxpayers who DO agree with federal funding. What about those people's preferences? Should they take a backseat because YOU personally don't like it? If I said we should cut such-and-such program, you'd say "tough shit" if you happened to agree with it.

[knowyourrino]

"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on the objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents." - James Madison

"For authority to apply the surplus [of taxes] to objects of improvement, an amendment of the Constitution would have been necessary."

--Thomas Jefferson

Those who want to send their own money to charitable causes are always free to do so.

Any questions?

[Whoo69]

The problem with this kind of mentality is that you are only opposing paying for things which you disagree with. But the fact is, it would not only be very messy and complicated for the gov't to act in such a way as to not use certain people's tax dollars who say they don't agree with a program, but it's ludicrous. I don't agree with the war or this bloated military budget. Does that mean that I can lobby government to not pay my tax dollars for it? Of course not. Doesn't work that way.

[knowyourrino]

Of course, you are correct.

It should work as the Constitution dictated, that is, only for things found in the 3 categories I listed here in another post, for agencies authorized by the Constitution.

[Whoo69]

Thomas Jefferson and Tom Paine, in fact, HATED organized religion and were deists. Hell, Paine may well have been an atheist. But you have no right to put the Founders in the same camp as religious fundamentalists of today. George Washington would be just as scared as I am of Jerry Falwell. Thomas Jefferson, I'm sure, would NOT favor the 10 Commandments in front of a courthouse. I think they'd respect religious diversity in 21st-Century America, which is NOT a christian nation anymore.

[knowyourrino]

Thomas Jefferson, writing in 1803: "My views... are the result of a life of inquiry and reflection, and very different from the anti-Christian system imputed to me by those who know nothing of my opinions. To the corruption's of Christianity I am, indeed, opposed; but not to the genuine precepts of Jesus himself. I am Christian in the only sense in which he wished any one to be; sincerely attached to his doctrines in preference to all others..."

Not exactly a deist.

[knowyourrino]

Thomas Paine was clearly a deist, not atheist. Read his essay "The Age of Reason" if you are unsure of this.

As for the 10 Commandments, if the founders were opposed to displaying them in govt buildings, why are they etched in stone on the walls of the Supreme Court Building?

Jefferson even sought to make sure all schools had plenty of Bibles to teach from, and warned against abandoning it as a school text.

Hmmm.

[knowyourrino]

The important point is, Christians and non-Christians worked together in securing our Liberty, respecting "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God" (Declaration of Ind.), recognizing that our rights are from God, and thus, Govt has no authority to meddle with them.

Those who respect this ORIGINAL INTENT of the Declaration of Ind. and US Constitution should work together to preserve them, whether theist or atheist.

If this describes you, we welcome you.

[Whoo69]

"Life, liberty, and limited gov't"? Uh, I'm afraid that's NOT in the Declaration, maam. Go read it again. It says "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." Of course, being as conservative as you are, you probably changed that last phrase because you think saying "the pursuit of happiness" gives the welfare state legitimacy, which you conservatives think is "sooo evil", even though it infringes on no one's rights and is totally voluntary.

[knowyourrino]

She didn't say the phrase came from the Declaration, just making a statement of CP priorities.

And just how is the welfare state totally voluntary? Can I opt out of paying for someone else's government handout?

[Whoo69]

I meant it's totally voluntary to accept entitlements or not. You're not forced to take welfare; you have to actually drive to the welfare office and apply. And as for "paying for someone else's handout", there are plenty of "handouts" which we all pay for collectively in taxes. Is the Post Office, a federal corporation, a 'hand out'? What about public schooling, funded by property taxes and sometimes federal and stater funds? Or public libraries? Public museums?

[knowyourrino]

"hand outs" in my view are any form of wealth redistribution. These are generally justified by the "general welfare" clause. However, they are not general, but for specific classes of people.

The words are "promote the general welfare". "Promote" is very different from "provide" as in "provide for the common defense".

The Constitution only allows collecting taxes for three things:

1. payment of debts

2. defense

3. general welfare

Taking from one group to give to another is none of these.

[youngindependent90]

this year will be my first year to vote and i have decided that i will join the constitution party. =)

i do not know if you can register in the constitution party, so i will just vote for its nominee

[destinoproductions]

until i visited their website, i never realized this political party is so very "christian" - no separation of church and state here...interesting.

[knowyourrino]

If you properly understand the meaning of "separation of church and state" there is no problem here.

Is this phrase found in the Constitution?

No. It came from a letter written by Jefferson to assure the Danbury Baptist Church that there would never be a government sponsored Church because of the wall of separation established by the first amendment.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof".

[knowyourrino]

"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and Morality are indispensable supports." -G. Washington

Why?

Read the 2nd paragraph of the Declaration of Independence:  "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are ENDOWED BY THEIR CREATOR with certain unalienable Rights ...".

The Founders felt our rights come from God and therefore Government cannot take them away. Remove God from this and WHAT SECURES OUR RIGHTS?

[Whoo69]

You lunatic.  Do you actually believe that liberals don't believe in rights just because they favor a welfare state? Do you actually think I, as an atheist, don't believe in rights?? Of course I do! I just don't think they come from "god" because I don't believe in God. I think rights are natural. You're born with rights. Of course, in reality, as long as you don't infringe on someone else's life, you have infinite rights, but some more conservative elements, probably like you, think not.

[knowyourrino]

What rights do you believe in? "Life, Liberty and Property"? (Phrase used more commonly in Founders writings)

Or do you prefer the Liberal view of rights, like right to a certain income level, medical care, etc. as the Communist Manefesto guarantees?

"as long as you don't infringe on someone else's life"

Does this include killing of my own children, born or unborn?

[MccainsaLIBERAL]

Listen, If you Truly call yourself a CONSERVATIVE, You cannot Vote for McCain. Its that simple. If you reward him and put your stamp of approval on him with your vote, you will never ever get Conservative Principled Govt. Things will never change until YOU change. No more 'lesser of 2 evils' as the Framework as to how you Vote. No more 'well i have to vote for X to prevent Y from getting IN'  Keep doing that and you truly get what you deserve. Vote your Heart, conscience and Principles !

[DuncanHunter1]

If we Analyze The Repub Pres. Nominations of 96' 00' 08', DOLE - BUSH, MCCAIN, we find that all 3 Nominations were based SOLELY on Popularity and Name recognition and NOTHING else. They were NOT about issues, core guiding Principles, traditional Values etc. McCain is the last straw, the Repub Party is FINISHED ! It now means practically Nothing to be called a 'republican' , as you are slightly less Liberal than a standard Democrat. What good is that ?? Whats the point of it all ?

[jdonovan90]

i couldnt agree more. and i would love to see your man mr. hunter kick obama or clintons but in a debate (something i dont see john mccain doing).

[omcx1]

I hope you are prepared to deal with a HUGE increase in membership if McCain manages to get the nomination. I am a Republican (but not for much longer) who is actively pushing for people to switch to the Constitution Party. Even if McCain does not get the nomination, the support he has from the Republican leadership is all I needed to see.

[DuncanHunter1]

OMC, im with you 100%. Back in 04' theres no way i could have tolerated the Radical Liberal sellout KERRY or the Moderate Liberal internationalist Fraud BUSH. So i voted my conscience and heart and voted for the C. Party Candidate and to this day feel great about it. If only people STOPPED Voting this 'lesser of 2 evils garbage' we would turn all of this around fast. ALL True Conservs need to stand up and support this great principled honest Party ! The Repub party is Phony.

[knowyourrino]

In this Presidential race, if it is down to McCain vs. Obama or Clinton, IS THERE A LESSER BETWEEN THESE EVILS?

[DuncanHunter1]

KNOWYOURINO, Whether you realize it or not the whole concept of Constantly herding you into the 'lesser of 2 evils' Framework is inherently Evil and Destructive. To sit here and Analyze that 'well Obama is a Negative 12, but at least MCcain is only a Negative 9, so therefore im FORCED to vote for McCain ' is the CORE of the problem in this country !!! Keep voting 'lesser of 2 frauds' and nothing will ever change. My Standards are much higher than yours , i want a TRUE Conservative !

[DuncanHunter1]

KNOWYOURINO, if i misinterpreted your Intent with your comment i apologize. i thought you were arguing in DEFENSE of voting for McCain, i just realized that this is your Video, and i think you Agree with me in that there is actually almost NO difference between them.  Am i correct ?

[knowyourrino]

Precisely.

[BlueEagle8]

Register Republican and vote for Ron Paul! It's the Constitutions only chance.

[peacemaker94]

what do You mean.

[cmacattack34]

a vote for either the demorats or the repubs is a wasted vote- CP4EVER! bring america back the way it is suspose to be

[Larryk12308]

Here in NY they make it almost impossible to get on

the ballot. I wanted to vote for Peroutka in 04 but the NY election committee rejected the CP's petition saying many of the signatures were invalid. There was a write in campaign launched but how on earth do write in someone on a voting machine? Nevertheless in year 00 I was proud to cast my vote for Howard Phillips. That year the CP managed to get on the ballot.

[Flohoff]

The constitution party needs to get behind Paul

with the current legislation we may not see another election before we are totally bankrupt and our military rendered useless for lack of funds.

[garibayd1980]

If Ron Paul doesn't get the GOP nod, I'll probably go Constitution again. Voted for Peroutka in 2004. I hope Corsi is not the nominee. He wants to interfere in the Middle East. Also they should focus more on secular nationalist issues: Immigration, Trade, Foreign Policy, Lower Taxes, Less Government, Federal Reserve, and reversing Civil Rights laws over Abortion.

[scottferrie]

5 stars

[garibayd1980]

If they support Corsi they can kiss my vote and their zionist leaning party goodbye. He supports Israeli wars. No to Jerome Corsi!

[residentfan2]

While I understand your claim that you are the "3rd largest party in the United States", I'm not certain if that is accurate. Are you talking about numbers of people registered in your party, or the total votes you have received nationwide as a party or the number of candidates you have elected?

[knowyourrino]

Great question!

This claim of being the "3rd largest party" is in terms of voter registration.

[cmacattack34]

i just joined the CP party in MN- glad i did- all the other 2 major parties do is sling mud at each other- like that gets anything done.

[JesterzWraith]

Like GodsCry below, I was a GOP dupe. I'm tired of being fed the same old line, "No new taxes, Balance the budget, Reform Medicare, Reform Social Security, Reduce the size of government" by both Republicrat and Demoblican alike. I've switched to the only honest alternative, the Constitution Party.

Read the Platform, check the candidates records, become an informed voter. Join us in the Constitution Party.

[volwolf]

The two parties, with the conventional news media's acquiescence, refuse to allow Third Parties an equal chance of presenting their ideas nationally to the American people. They also have made ballot access extremely difficult. It is a travesty that in a free society there is such a tyrannical-like control of politcal ideas.

[GodsCry]

I've switched from the GOP to the Constitution Party. I believe we should have gone to war, but that the Congress would have readily declared war Constitutionally at the behest of the American public.

[voiyour]

This sounds like just another version of Republican. Sounds exactly like "W" when he was campaigning in 2000 - before he was co-opted by the neocons.

This will just splinter the Repubs, much like Nader did for Gore.

Unless you can find an EXTREMELY persuasive, charismatic candidate, eg Ross Perot, we're stuck with 2 parties.

[knowyourrino]

Yes, the Constitution Party sounds a lot like the Republicans USED TO.

Republicans still sometimes talk this way, but rarely put it into practice once elected.

Republicans have largely become redundant, in practice differing from the Democrats in WHERE to spend our money, not how much to spend. Neither seem to represent the Constitutional limits of a small Federal government anymore. It is almost more of a ONE PARTY SYSTEM.

[DuncanHunter1]

We can Trace the Demise of the Repub party back to 96'. That year we had Excellent truly principled consistent Conservatives in KEYES, BUCHANAN, FORBES etc running for the Nomination. Instead the old dinosaur has been DOLE gets it. The man had NO chance against the savvy Clinton. DOLE was a Nice guy, but he was just a standard bearer of the Old guard, he was a 'conventional standard republican' Not a true Conservative. Then in 00 the Party base Nominates the Global Liberal in BUSH.

[scottae316]

It is just this attitude that keeps the two parties in power. Don't listen to the "waste a/your vote mentality. Also, if we don't get conservatives from Republicans why give them my vote?

[boltwevl]

I have been a Constitution Party member since 96, and I believe that voting for constitutionally minded candidates is the only way this country is going to be save.

I believe that Ron Paul is a Constitution Party member disguised as a Republican. I may even temporarily switch my voter registration to Republican so that I can vote for him in the primaries. Of course I will switch my affiliation back to the Constitution Party right after the primary vote.

[hulka99]

It's time that the people who do the work that makes American strong and free, wake up and realize that the lip service the Republican Party gives us on social issues like educational reform, smut and garbage in our media, protection of the unborn, and sexual immorality is not worth the undercutting of our economic security and our domestic sovereignty.

[ivanchou]

I joined the CP last year and became a Constitutionalist after 12 years of being a Republican. Ever since the damn neocons hijacked the GOP and much of the conservative movement I now identify myself as a paleocon. Today's GOP is not the party of Robert Taft who I look up to. The closest are Ron Paul and Pat Buchanan.

[iamgodspeak]

Granted, I don't know many people in the CP (so it's entirely possible I just put my foot in my mouth) but I do try and keep up as best I can. I guess it just bothers me that, although the CP and I agree on roughly half of their platform, they seem to care more about principles than they do about people.

[knowyourrino]

It is those principles of freedom that will best protect the people.

[iamgodspeak]

What worries me is that I have never seen anyone from the CP go beyond those reasons. Not that they aren't legitimate reasons, but it disturbs me that no one in the CP has voiced their opposition on the grounds that thousands of our soldiers and tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians have died as a result of Bush's lying to Congress and to this country.

[knowyourrino]

You are right. It is an atrocity that so many innocent people are dying. However, when an act is unconstitutional, there is no need to go any further in arguing its merits or vices. When the constitution is completely discarded, all who disagree with those in power may be held without trial or executed at the whims of their tyrranical leaders. As bad as the loss of life is now, it will only get worse if we loose our free form of government.

[hoosiertoo]

I haven't voted for a Republican since Ronald Reagan in 1980 - and I would would have voted for Adolf Hitler to get rid of Jimmuh Carter (not really!)

I've voted - some would say I've wasted my vote - many times in the past on 3rd party candidates, usually Libertarian.

The lesser of two evils is still evil. Vote your conscience, not your party.

[Denryu2]

I agree w/comments so far, except for Mitt Romney = good candidate. Ron Paul is awesome as is Alan Keyes. That is a GOP ticket I could vote for!

The great thing about the Constitution Party is they support good candidates from all parties - they are about Principles not Politics. They have a 70 minute speech by Alan Keyes on their website as well as the announcement of Ron Paul that he is running for President (do we still capitalize that word after the last few administrations?)

[intheedoitrust]

That's my party! That is what I believe. And I will continue to vote for them.

[yaiknowscrewme]

Iam interested in tancredo..but with stupid comments from mary starret like "unconstional wars" mixes them in with with the lefty tards.Dumb move!!There is truly nobody to vote for.

[knowyourrino]

I'm not sure how calling the war in Iraq unconstitutional could be a stupid comment. Read the Constitution! Only Congress has power to declare war, not the President!

The left are against the war because Bush is for it. Constitutional minded people are against violating the Constitution, no matter who is doing it.

[iamgodspeak]

(1) I am on the left and I oppose the war for the same reasons the Constitution Party does. It is blatantly unconstitutional, illegal and immoral.

[ptrewitt]

To prevent one person (like a king) from have the authority of starting wars, the founding fathers gave the power to declare war solely to Congress, and no one else. Period. Mary Starret is correct.

[JesterzWraith]

The President declared war on "terrorism". A concept or method of insurrection cannot be defeated, to declare war on it is ludicrous. For the war to be Constitutional, it must be declared against a foreign government "in defense" of the United States ONLY. "Provide for the common defense", sound familiar?

We were not attacked by Iraq and "pre-emptive warfare" is the "communist" defense doctrine...

[jjelder06]

I want to run for President of the United States in the year 2024 for the Constitution Party. Of course, I would have to raise enough money. I already believe and support 97% of what the Constitution Party stands for. Just ask me what I believe and what I stand for and I will tell you

[jjelder06]

I think that it is amazing how vast the cont. party is. In my area, there is I, who works at Target, a guy who works for Budweiser, a real estate agent, and more. There are blacks, whites, and Hispanics, rich and poor, men and women, educated and no so well educated, young and old. The reps and dems have their own things going (reps: rich, white, old, men mostly. dems: poorer, multi racial, young, woman mostly

[jjelder06]

I have been with the cont. party since last year (I turned 18 last year) and I think that it is great, I voted for Mary for Oregon governor, but she lost with only 4% of the vote, but did better than Green and Libertarian parties who go 1% each. I think that it is amazing how vast the cont. party is.

[jzyehoshua]

I refused to vote for Bush in 2004 because of the Iraq War, or for Kerry because of abortion. I am happy to have the choice to vote for men like Peroutka with a clean conscience who are against the killing of both unborn and born children (partial birth abortion), unconscionable wars, and sending U.S. jobs overseas.

[GodSaveUs80]

How could anybody say Mitt Romney and Ron Paul in the same breath, let alone support them both?

[hpmc61]

Constitution Party is well worth looking into.

It's insane that we watch our country being changed with breathtaking speed, in directions most Americans DON'T like, everything being 'negotiable', except for these 2 sacred cow parties

[Newt4Prez]

In case the Republican Party did not get the message in the last election, the next election should be made obvious by casting a vote for the Constitution party. I only wish Newt could be convienced to switch.

[jimeckland]

Remember Newt Gingrich pushed through Approval of the World Trade organization in a lame duck section of congress !

[xenlev]

Joined the Constitution Party last year because the other two are morally bankrupt and utterly corrupt. BTW, Ron Paul is the Libertarian candidate for Pres, and I will probably be voting for him.

[ptrewitt]

The is the greatest news that I've heard in quite a while. Americans are getting fed up with the two party duopoly that has ruined our country for their special interests and have abandoned the people. Restore America to its Constitution Republic!

[sisillip]

Why does the media portray this country as a two party system? That's like only having chocolate and vanilla ice cream. Yuck.

[jimeckland]

The Republicans and Democrats are in reality "The Incumbant party'. 2 birds of the same feather !

Jim

[micahstubz]

I had lost hope for the republican party but Mitt Romney and Ron Paul are two very good candidates for 2008. I think a powerhouse whould be Romney (strong leader) as president and Ron Paul (knows his stuff) as Vice President

[rexlward]

Please do not vote for Mit. All you have to know about him is that he is a Massachusetts politician. He pushed and signed universal health care there. He's another liberal masquerading as a conservative.  I'm a Mormon, so his religion is not an issue with me. I just don't agree with him politically. Ron Paul for president.

[jimeckland]

those two will never work together. romney is Establishment and Paul isn't !

[MountainMn]

I quit the Republican party after 29 years of watching them become as bad as if not worse then the Dems. The simple fact is that they are not two parties, but one party with two different agendas that prey on the passions and fears of the innocent people they are sworn to serve.

[Lyleandres]

I quit the the Republican Party because they are no different than Democrats. In California they are the American Independent Party. I would like to see that changed to unify it country wide.