Another One Bits The Dust

[Chump Change]

You mean you're against the very core of their entire platform?

 

Why are white supremacists as enthralled with the Constitution Party as you are?

 

http://www.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php?t=401492

 

Something tells me you'd fit right in at a Constitution Party rally...

 

Hey feller, who's the funny little man in your avatar?

[elegantelliotoffen]

Hey feller, who's the funny little man in your avatar?

 

It's Charles Manson's head on some kind of weird lizard or something.

[Alaska Darin]

wow, you missed the point of my post there. Can we say over your head?

Sorry I'm not more fluent in "sphincter speak". I'd say I'm trying to do better but that'd be a blatant lie.

[Alaska Darin]

You mean you're against the very core of their entire platform?

Yeah, I can see how you'd come up with that. You know, given the 20 examples I actually agree with.

 

I'm going to type this slowly, try to understand: I'm not a member of any political party. I agree with many of the things that the Constitution Party and the Libertarians campaign on. That doesn't mean (unlike you and the rest of the ilk) that I support them in any way (though I have voted for some Libertarian candidates).

Why are white supremacists as enthralled with the Constitution Party as you are?

I don't know any white supremacists, so I'm going to have to answer with "I don't know".

http://www.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php?t=401492

Something tells me you'd fit right in at a Constitution Party rally...

Because you desperately need to outwardly feel like you're special. That's one of the things the "Big 2" depend on. It's cool that you actually spent time finding a website on the subject and did some drilling down. You're really superior to the people here who have a high post count.

 

Shall I parade out a list of all the scummers who "identify" with your political beliefs, pretending all the while that's somehow a valid indictment?

[justnzane]

Sorry I'm not more fluent in "sphincter speak". I'd say I'm trying to do better but that'd be a blatant lie.

Holy sh-- man, you couldn't get that i was not being serious at all, and just ribbing ya. Wow

 

Do I really think that you are an Ivy League caliber elitist? puh-leeze. If you don't get the reference, you deserve to be beaten by a Billdo.

[/dev/null]

Holy sh-- man, you couldn't get that i was not being serious at all, and just ribbing ya. Wow

 

Do I really think that you are an Ivy League caliber elitist? puh-leeze. If you don't get the reference, you deserve to be beaten by a Billdo.

 

If he was an ivy league calibur elitist, do you really think he would stoop to the level of replying to you

 

Duh

 

Those who can do. Those who can't, teach. Those who can't teach, teach in Georgia

 

Hail

[justnzane]

If he was an ivy league calibur elitist, do you really think he would stoop to the level of replying to you

 

Duh

 

Those who can do. Those who can't, teach. Those who can't teach, teach in Georgia

 

Hail

 

I think you need to be beaten by a Billdo If Darin was Ivy League caliper, he would actually have a liberal bone in his body for a change, and quite possibly a heart that isn't 100% black.

 

Funny quote about teachin, but hardly true.

[The Dean]

Nothing better than citing the Southern Poverty Law Center. Was it too hard to go the the actual website of the party, instead of the typical liberal fear mongering rhetoric of the SPLC? I love the fact that it's titled "Intel Report". If it were an "Intel Report", it's likely that the person compiling it would know that "Assault" weapons are legal. Shoot, one would think that at least a couple of the lawyers at the SPLC might know that as well.

 

I don't have any problem with:

3. Returning to Constitutional Government

10. The return of all land taken by unconstitutional means.

 

 

OK, I have a serious question (or a small series of them, on the same topic). I have seen posts from you, and others, refer to some things as "unconstitutional" and/or refer to a return to "constitutional government". What does that mean, to you? I mean, the constitution is a text, and evolving text, at that. And, as a text, it is subject to interpretation. So, what interpretation is the "proper" interpretation?

 

The USA has given that role to the Justice Department and specifically to the Supreme Court? So, are you against the role of the Supreme Court as the arbiter of constitutionality? If so, who would you give that power to? Surely you don't believe that every issue of Constitutionality is so cut and dry, so black and white, that there are there aren't questions that need to be resolved.

[ExiledInIllinois]

OK, I have a serious question (or a small series of them, on the same topic). I have seen posts from you, and others, refer to some things as "unconstitutional" and/or refer to a return to "constitutional government". What does that mean, to you? I mean, the constitution is a text, and evolving text, at that. And, as a text, it is subject to interpretation. So, what interpretation is the "proper" interpretation?

 

The USA has given that role to the Justice Department and specifically to the Supreme Court? So, are you against the role of the Supreme Court as the arbiter of constitutionality? If so, who would you give that power to? Surely you don't believe that every issue of Constitutionality is so cut and dry, so black and white, that there are there aren't questions that need to be resolved.

 

Very good questions... I want to know too.

 

I am hoping that he can get past the "now that states like Alaska have benefited off the backs of others states, cut us loose schtick" he normally pukes out.

[elegantelliotoffen]

I agree with many of the things that the Constitution Party and the Libertarians campaign on.

 

Alaska Darin is a crackpot? Say it ain't so! I'd have never of guessed!

 

http://www.themediaconsortium.com/reportin...dex.php?tag=rnc

 

The Constitution Party has long been linked to anti-abortion groups that threaten violence, such as Missionaries to the Pre-Born, a sort of militia organization. Randall Terry, the former leader of Operation Rescue, has organized for the party and run for Congress on its ticket. When I interviewed Phillips 13 years ago, I asked him about alleged links between his party and militia groups, which he denied.

 

“We are not involved in the killing business,” he said. “Planned Parenthood is Murder Incorporated…That’s not our schtick.”

 

Phillips’ anti-choice rhetoric is often harsh, and his position — which echoes that of the Constitution Party — is uncompromising: No abortions, no exceptions. Here is how he stated it at an Operation Rescue rally in San Diego in 1996: Exceptions for rape and incest, he said, mean it’s “okay to kill some babies if they’re born to the wrong parents — if their dad was a rapist or a close relative.”

 

http://www.mhrn.org/newsarchive/0500cpm.html

 

The Constitution Party's connections to extremists originated while the party was still known as the USTP. Larry Pratt, director of Gun Owners of America, spoke at a 1995 conference. Pratt would later make headlines in 1996 when he was forced to leave Pat Buchanan's presidential campaign because of his ties to militia and white supremacist groups.

 

Another speaker at the conference was Matthew Trewhella. Trewhella is a notorious anti-choice activist and was a Wisconsin delegate to the 1995 conference. During his speech, Trewhella said, "This Christmas I want you to do the most loving thing and I want you to buy each of your children an SKS rifle and 500 rounds of ammunition." Trewhella has advocated forming church-based militias, because he thinks they are constitutional. He also signed a declaration saying that murdering abortion providers is "justifiable homicide."

 

http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/20/2008/3256

 

Prior to founding the Constitution Party, Howard Phillips, was the foremost American organizing support for the apartheid regime of South Africa and its African surrogates in the 1980’s. He organized trips to South Africa for American sympathizers to meet the top political, intelligence and military leaders of the apartheid regime, which was the only surviving post World War II nazi party still holding power. Phillips and his allies supported Renamo, which the Ronald Reagan’s State Department had condemned for having murdered over 100,000 civilians in Mozambique, as well as Unita, which was conducting killings in Angola. This writer attended one of his private organizing meetings where he marshaled his decades of political networking experience to push the Reagan State Department and the Congress to support the slave state of South Africa. Phillips was the 1992 and 1996 presidential candidate for his Party.

 

Randall Terry, who led the Operation Rescue blockades of abortion clinics, ran for Congress on the US Taxpayers Party ticket. He called for Christians to "take up the sword" and to "overthrow the tyrannical regime that oppresses them" so that they can install a theocratic regime based on "Biblical law." Other OR leaders involved with arrests for antiabortion actions were also Party leaders and candidates, according to the Planned Parenthood report.

 

Byron Dale, a 1994 convention speaker and workshop leader, had been a "confidant" of Gordon Kahl of the Posse Commitatus, a racist and anti-Semitic paramilitary group. Kahl killed two U.S. marshals in South Dakota before dying in a shootout. Dale said that he would kill any feds that tried to encroach on him.

 

Organizer Michael Bray had been convicted in 1985 and served four years in prison for bombing 10 clinics. He later wrote A Time To Kill, advocating the killing of doctors who perform abortions. He was characterized as the "father of violence" in Wrath of Angels, a book about antiabortion violence. Prior to this convention, a number of doctors who perform abortions had been wounded or killed and about 200 clinics had been bombed, torched or vandalized. The endorsement of these murders was not merely a symbolic statement

[elegantelliotoffen]

I don't know any white supremacists, so I'm going to have to answer with "I don't know".

 

They seem to love the CP's candidate Chuck Baldwin! But that's just a coincidence, right?

 

http://www.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php?t=495126

 

I believe Baldwin is like me, though I've never met him. So voting for him, as voting for Peroutka, will be very pleasant

 

I think his platform would benefit whites tremendously.

 

Writing in Ron Paul, or voting for Chuck Baldwin are the ONLY acceptable things to do IMO.

 

Win or lose I'm voting for Baldwin

 

I wish Baldwin would appear on the ballot in NY, but it appears unlikely.

 

I know Chuck Baldwin is a much better choice over McObama or Barr.

 

Chuck Baldwin seemed pretty good.

 

I am voting for him also. Why someone would not throw there support behind him is beyond me. Jesus Christ was hung on a cross some 2,000 years ago and if we are looking for the perfect man we will just be disappointed but we can go with the best Candidate and that is Chuck

 

Wow! I have finally found my candidate. I thought I wasn't going to vote, because neither McCain or Obama have my interests in mind...and I was so upset the Ron Paul wasn't in the running any longer...Now I will vote...for Baldwin

[elegantelliotoffen]

They seem to love the CP's candidate Chuck Baldwin! But that's just a coincidence, right?

 

http://www.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php?t=495126

 

Too Bad I can only use 10 quotes per post!

 

I rejoice whenever I watch Baldwin. He is definitely getting my vote.

 

Chuck Baldwin is the ONLY choice this election.

 

Get out and get involved in the Constitution Party. Convince others to do the same or at the very least vote for CP candidates.

 

The alternative is a egoistic (well thats self-evident) negro who will do anything to further his black interests and "destroy the white enemy" as his church has put it. Meaning simply, they care only about their own well being (I guess like after Katrina), and thats what its about even if it takes to destroy whites to further that. As the church said, they'd only accept God himself if he participated in this process. They seem to see that as obligatory, "destroy whites to further our interests". That is THEIR OWN words.

 

Negroe psychology? I dont know.

 

 

In either case, its just an outrageous situation and Baldwin as I see it is the only choice out there.

 

I really am in agreement with most of the positions of the Constitution Party, but even if the party achieved a national standing alongside the other two, it would still split the vote.

 

Chuck Baldwin belongs to the same denomination Ron Paul belongs to. And he is the only man running this year, Ron Paul included, who has the gonads to write about the "Money changers" and tie them directly to jewry, http://www.vdare.com/baldwin/080226_moneychangers.htm

 

and to write of "The Man Behind The Curtain," knowing that everyone knows who he is talking about.

 

Chuck Baldwin is far, far closer to the WN position than Ron Paul ever was.

 

Whites need to stop and think just how much real courage it takes for a Baptist preacher to take the positions Chuck takes in 2008. Balls? He's got 'em!

 

Chuck Baldwin is a solid candidate for Whites to rally behind.