IPR turns 5; Paulie Turns 41

After a 36-hour period of nonstop work by Jason ?GE? Seagraves, IPR went live 5 years ago today with our first post, on May 20, 2008. Our predecessor site, Third Party Watch, operated between May 2005 and May 2008 before being purchased by Richard Viguerie right before the Libertarian presidential nomination in 2008, which led to the creation of IPR and Green Party Watch. TPW limped along for a few months after that, but was never the same.

In the past year, IPR was sold for the second time, this time to Warren Redlich. We have dealt with, and continue to deal with, an increase in troll attacks, and thus more debates on what to do about it, if anything. Some cosmetic changes in site appearance have been made, but a more large scale revision is being planned. Unlike in past years when I took breaks, we currently have Chris Lesiak, Jill Pyeatt and others posting just as many articles as I do when I am here. We’ve finally fixed the problem of author bylines not appearing in the articles when they are not accessed from the index page.

Among sites that are similar to ours, more have come and gone (or come and remained pretty much dormant) in the past year. Ballot Access News is the only one that comes anywhere close to the active commenting ?community? we have here.

We no longer have the same sitemeter system for measuring traffic that we did in past years, so traffic comparisons between years and multi-year measures are no longer possible. Four years ago today we had over 3,300 posts and close to 49,000 comments. Three years ago today we had almost 5,500 posts and close to 89,000 comments. Two years ago today, over 8,200 posts and close to 130,000 comments. A year ago, over 9,600 posts and over 162,000 comments. Today we have over 11,100 posts and over 195,000 comments in the course of five years.

By sheer coincidence, since I was not there when the site started, I (Paulie) also turn(ed) 41 just as IPR turn(ed) 5. I can’t immediately think of anything too fun about the number 41, other than 4+1 = 5. Maybe I’ll celebrate the 20th anniversary of my 21st birthday and drink accordingly. I’m back on facebook now, and my phone number is still 415-690-6352.

Thanks to everyone who writes for, reads and comments at IPR!

Do you have some news concerning third-party or independent politics you’d like to share?  Is there a website, or an event IPR readers should know about?  Well, here’s the place for you.  This open thread is for a topic that might not relate to anything we’re talking about elsewhere.  It is for YOU.  And we need you!

Morality, Not Socialism, Strengthens A Nation.
by CPOW
April 6, 2013

WHEREAS, George Washington stated, ?Religion and morality are indispensable supports for political prosperity.? William Penn stated, ?If men will not be governed by God, then they will be ruled by tyrants.? and Samuel Adams stated, ?While the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but once they lose their virtue they will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader,? and

WHEREAS, It is almost impossible for Americans under forty years old to remember an America that wasn?t drug crazed and sex-obsessed, and it is appropriate for CPoW remind younger generations that, the Chinese general, Sun Tzu, said, in order to conquer a nation, you must first demoralize it. Joseph Stalin said, “America is like a healthy body and its resistance is three-fold: its patriotism, its morality, its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within.” Nikolai Lenin said, ?We will encircle the United States, which will be the last bastion of capitalism. We will not have to attack. It will fall like an overripe fruit into our hands,? and

WHEREAS, On Jan. 10, 1963, Congressman Albert S. Herlong Jr. of Florida read a list of the 45 Communist Party USA Goals for 1958 into the Congressional Record. These tactics are well worth revisiting today in order to gain insight into the strategies of much of our so-called liberal elite,
such as:
?#24- Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them “censorship” and a violation of free speech and [the] free press.?
?#25- Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, TV, and radio.?
?#26- Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity: as normal, natural, and healthy.?
?#40- Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.?
?#17- Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda… Get control of teachers’ associations. Put the party line in textbooks,? and

WHEREAS, As recently as Spring 2011, a mob of Communists and other Socialists took over our State Capitol, while promoting abortion and sodomy as well, chanting the same old slogans, ?God is Dead,? ?If it feels good do it? ?Make Love Not War,? in addition to shouts of ?Change? and ?Democracy? which are also decades old as well, and

WHEREAS, Promoting the Moral Order as based on the Ten Commandments of God is among our party?s fundamental tenets, unlike other political parties who will not uphold the Moral Order, and

WHEREAS, Nations can be conquered by internal subversion and our financial and political crises are the results of our moral crisis, and

WHEREAS, This resolution is presented to confront the many ?fifth column? (subversive) politicians and citizens, regardless of party; whether Whig, Green, Reform, Libertarian, Democrat or Republican;

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Constitution Party of Wisconsin, in convention assembled, at Wisconsin Dells, Wisconsin, on this sixth day of April in the Year of our Lord two thousand thirteen and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred thirty seventh, calls upon our national officials to reject and state officials to nullify any action by the U.S. Courts that would establish any recognition of “same-sex marriage.” We call upon our Wisconsin legislators to uphold the recent Wisconsin Constitutional Amendment that defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman and prevents the establishment of any counterfeit, such as domestic partnerships. We call upon all state officials to outlaw acts of sodomy. We further call upon the Wisconsin State Legislature to repeal the provisions in the Wisconsin State Statutes that allow for “no fault divorce.” We reject the notion that sexual offenders are deserving of legal favor or special protection, and affirm the rights of states and localities to proscribe offensive sexual behavior. We stand against so-called “sexual orientation” and “hate crime” statutes that attempt to legitimize inappropriate sexual behavior and stifle public resistance to its expression. We oppose government funding of “partner” benefits for unmarried individuals. And we call for the impeachment and removal of all such politicians who refuse to enforce the Moral Order.

NY State 2008 Presidential Ballot

Ian Wilder of onthewilderside* writes: The Green Party press release below points out that Governor Cuomo is looking to make bad law worse in the name of making it better. New York has a terrible party system, where the same candidate can clog up the ballot running on a multitude of lines. There are 2 ways for that candidate to get on the lines of parties that she does not belong to: 1) The party leadership signs a Wilson-Pakula form allowing the non-enrollee to run on their line. 2) The candidate gets party members to sign a petition to open up a write-in primary called an Opportunity to Ballot.

Cuomo is looking to get rid of the Wilson-Pakula form (Method 1)so that non-enrollees can raid third party lines. I would celebrate it if Cuomo was getting rid of Wilson-Pakulas to stop corporately-funded candidates from using their bribes corporate donations from stealing the lines of minor parties (parties who often don’t have the funds to fight court battles). Cuomo is trying to make his proposal sound like a road to more grassroots democracy. But, in fact, his plan is actually a method of decreasing ballot choice and turning the ballot lines over to the best-funded, least ethical candidates. Prior experience that local Green Party members have had with Opportunity to Ballot petitions has shown the danger of opening up ballot lines with no protections.

We have had experience with local Republican judge candidates tricking local Green Party enrollees into signing their Opportunity to Ballot petitions (method 2) to get onto the Green Party ballot line. The Republican candidate never explained what their party registration was or what the petition was for. The Green Party members just assumed that anyone bringing them petitions must be Green Party members also. When the Green Party members found out they had been deceived they worked, successfully, to keep the Republican from getting the Green Party line.

Let me be clear, I agree with the Green Party press release below. It makes no sense for a candidate to run on more than 1 party line. It just clogs up the ballot and creates what the Supreme Court calls “voter confusion.” New York’s fusion party line, where a candidate runs on more than one line, should be repealed completely.

But if the corporately controlled legislature and Governor don’t wish to repeal fusion party lines, then they should decrease — not increase — fraud upon voters. If the requirement for the Wilson-Pakula form is repealed, but fusion ballots are left in place, then steps must be taken to prevent fraud upon the voters. With the repeal of Wilson-Pakula, the legislature must protect the voters from fraud by requiring the registration of the candidate be placed on the top of the petition in large face bold type print.

Green Party Opposes Cuomo’s Unconstitutional Attacks on Political Parties

The Green Party said today [May 1, 2013] that the proposals by Governor Cuomo and the IDC [Independent Democratic Conference of the NY State Senate] to allow non-party members to petition their way into other parties’ primaries is unconstitutional, a violation of their first amendment rights. The Green Party pointed out that Cuomo’s proposal is similar to the existing opportunity to ballot law, which the Greens and other ballot law experts contend is unconstitutional. The existing law allows non-party members to force a primary with the opportunity for party members to write in any candidate they want by collecting signatures. Apparently what Cuomo and the IDC wants to do is make it even easier for major parties to raid third parties by allowing the usurper’s name to actually appear on the ballot without the need to write it in.

Green Party rules do not allow candidates of other ballot qualified parties to run on their ballot line. The Board of Elections in the last election failed to enforce the rule, and allowed two Senate Democrats to appropriate the Green Party line through an opportunity to ballot petition. “The Green Party and our members have a first amendment right to say that our candidates support our platform and refuse to accept contributions from corporate interests. Cuomo and the IDC aren’t interested in preventing
corruption. They just want to further weaken political parties and make it easier for the candidates with the most money to buy elections,” stated Gloria Mattera, Green Party Co-Chairperson.

Allowing candidates to run on the ballot line of parties that they don’t belong to just confuses voters. The Green Party asserts that both laws (the existing opportunity to ballot and the new proposal) violates their constitutional first amendment right to freedom of association to determine who represents their party. Prior court decisions strongly support the right of the Green Party to determine who represents them on the ballot (e.g., California Democratic Party v Jones (2000) and New York State Board of Elections v Lopez Torres (2008).

Cuomo and the IDC are pretending that they are responding to the present Wilson-Pakula line that allows party leaders to sanction non-party candidates to receive the nomination of their party. Senator Malcolm Smith, a member of the IDC, has been indicted for attempting to bribe Republican Party leaders in NYC to grant him a Wilson-Pakula. Rather than eliminating the ability of candidates to run in parties they don’t belong to, Cuomo and the IDC want to allow candidates to raid as many parties as they want.

________________________________________________

Ian Wilder is the spouse of Kimberly Wilder, an IPR contributor. The Wilders write and blog together at onthewilderside.com.

NY State 2008 Presidential Ballot

Ian Wilder of onthewilderside* writes: The Green Party press release below points out that Governor Cuomo is looking to make bad law worse in the name of making it better. New York has a terrible party system, where the same candidate can clog up the ballot running on a multitude of lines. There are 2 ways for that candidate to get on the lines of parties that she does not belong to: 1) The party leadership signs a Wilson-Pakula form allowing the non-enrollee to run on their line. 2) The candidate gets party members to sign a petition to open up a write-in primary called an Opportunity to Ballot.

Cuomo is looking to get rid of the Wilson-Pakula form (Method 1)so that non-enrollees can raid third party lines. I would celebrate it if Cuomo was getting rid of Wilson-Pakulas to stop corporately-funded candidates from using their bribes corporate donations from stealing the lines of minor parties (parties who often don’t have the funds to fight court battles). Cuomo is trying to make his proposal sound like a road to more grassroots democracy. But, in fact, his plan is actually a method of decreasing ballot choice and turning the ballot lines over to the best-funded, least ethical candidates. Prior experience that local Green Party members have had with Opportunity to Ballot petitions has shown the danger of opening up ballot lines with no protections.

We have had experience with local Republican judge candidates tricking local Green Party enrollees into signing their Opportunity to Ballot petitions (method 2) to get onto the Green Party ballot line. The Republican candidate never explained what their party registration was or what the petition was for. The Green Party members just assumed that anyone bringing them petitions must be Green Party members also. When the Green Party members found out they had been deceived they worked, successfully, to keep the Republican from getting the Green Party line.

Let me be clear, I agree with the Green Party press release below. It makes no sense for a candidate to run on more than 1 party line. It just clogs up the ballot and creates what the Supreme Court calls “voter confusion.” New York’s fusion party line, where a candidate runs on more than one line, should be repealed completely.

But if the corporately controlled legislature and Governor don’t wish to repeal fusion party lines, then they should decrease — not increase — fraud upon voters. If the requirement for the Wilson-Pakula form is repealed, but fusion ballots are left in place, then steps must be taken to prevent fraud upon the voters. With the repeal of Wilson-Pakula, the legislature must protect the voters from fraud by requiring the registration of the candidate be placed on the top of the petition in large face bold type print.

Green Party Opposes Cuomo’s Unconstitutional Attacks on Political Parties

The Green Party said today [May 1, 2013] that the proposals by Governor Cuomo and the IDC [Independent Democratic Conference of the NY State Senate] to allow non-party members to petition their way into other parties’ primaries is unconstitutional, a violation of their first amendment rights. The Green Party pointed out that Cuomo’s proposal is similar to the existing opportunity to ballot law, which the Greens and other ballot law experts contend is unconstitutional. The existing law allows non-party members to force a primary with the opportunity for party members to write in any candidate they want by collecting signatures. Apparently what Cuomo and the IDC wants to do is make it even easier for major parties to raid third parties by allowing the usurper’s name to actually appear on the ballot without the need to write it in.

Green Party rules do not allow candidates of other ballot qualified parties to run on their ballot line. The Board of Elections in the last election failed to enforce the rule, and allowed two Senate Democrats to appropriate the Green Party line through an opportunity to ballot petition. “The Green Party and our members have a first amendment right to say that our candidates support our platform and refuse to accept contributions from corporate interests. Cuomo and the IDC aren’t interested in preventing
corruption. They just want to further weaken political parties and make it easier for the candidates with the most money to buy elections,” stated Gloria Mattera, Green Party Co-Chairperson.

Allowing candidates to run on the ballot line of parties that they don’t belong to just confuses voters. The Green Party asserts that both laws (the existing opportunity to ballot and the new proposal) violates their constitutional first amendment right to freedom of association to determine who represents their party. Prior court decisions strongly support the right of the Green Party to determine who represents them on the ballot (e.g., California Democratic Party v Jones (2000) and New York State Board of Elections v Lopez Torres (2008).

Cuomo and the IDC are pretending that they are responding to the present Wilson-Pakula line that allows party leaders to sanction non-party candidates to receive the nomination of their party. Senator Malcolm Smith, a member of the IDC, has been indicted for attempting to bribe Republican Party leaders in NYC to grant him a Wilson-Pakula. Rather than eliminating the ability of candidates to run in parties they don’t belong to, Cuomo and the IDC want to allow candidates to raid as many parties as they want.

________________________________________________

Ian Wilder is the spouse of Kimberly Wilder, an IPR contributor. The Wilders write and blog together at onthewilderside.com.

Posted on the Libertarian Party’s Facebook page on May 19th:

Libertarians aren’t necessarily conspiracy theorists or gun-toting lunatics. We’re mostly good people who enjoy freedom. #VoteLP

Follow the Libertarian Party on Twitterhttps://twitter.com/LPNational

Some reactions from Facebook:

George Philles, longtime LP activist:

Aren’t necessarily” is an astonishingly unfortunate way to put it…For starters the post indicates that many Libertarians are conspiracy theorists and gun-toting lunatics.

Hillary Cable, poster:

Yes, very weird. I also take issue with “gun-toting lunatic.” Gun owners aren’t lunatics. Did Libertarian Party’s FB account get hacked by a liberal or something? Jeez.

Why are you playing to the left with this post? No need to apologize for being libertarian, people. Very weird!

Jeff Billman, poster:

 It is, but then I have to admit, there are gun-toting lunatics and conspiracy theorists in the Libertarian Party. Still, this is a very weak plea. It’s a bit like a cheap fast food restaurant saying, “Our food isn’t all horse meat! There’s some beef in there, too.”

Rob Joyce, poster:

It isn’t conspiracy theories to question any “official” story the government gives us.

Mark Daniels, poster:

What a completely senseless post.

Kenton Merrill, poster:

 There are many different types of Libertarians. That is the beauty of individual liberty. We don’t all think the same, but we generally agree on freedom being the answer.

Chad Wildrick:

You mean I can’t be a gun-toting lunatic and a good person who enjoys freedom simultaneously?

Tiffany Wilde, poster:

but some of us are. i am both a gun toting “lunatic” and a conspiracy theorist.

Dave Hunt, poster:

Some conspiracy theories are true, and very few gun-toters are lunatics. You’ve been trying to take advantage of Rand Paul recently alienating some of his supporters, but you are doing the same thing with such ill-considered posts.

Here is the link to the original post:

https://www.facebook.com/libertarians/posts/10151597961247726

Support the cutting-edge newspaper that provides the best in news, analysis, and humor from a working-class perspective. This corporate-free zone needs your backing!

Check out Socialism.com for more stories. Like us on Facebook or donate to keep the presses running and stories coming.

April-May 2013 – Volume 34, No. 2

EDITORIAL

Congress lets the ax fall

April 2013

Months of drama in D.C. over the national debt peaked on March 1 in ?sequestration? of federal funds to scores of programs. This fancy word masks the truth ? austerity. And austerity by any name still stinks.

The cuts are ?across-the-board,? to military as well as social programs. But military spending is so bloated that even ex-generals call for reductions. Social needs have been under the ax for years. The new cuts will literally starve, kill, and throw people onto the streets.

Programs slashed include Head Start, food aid, low income housing, child care, AIDS drugs, Native American healthcare, and unemployment insurance. Federal job losses and furloughs will cut air traffic control, food and health inspections and pollution cleanup.

The sequester is designed to pit these desperate needs against Social Security and Medicare, setting up these earned benefit programs for huge cuts. No matter that they?re funded from separate payroll taxes and never caused the debt.

This is the twilight of capitalism. Profits can only soar by taking them out of ordinary people?s hides. The bad news will continue until working people dump their misleaders who urge faith in Obama ? and inaction. We?re fighting for our lives!

EDITORIAL

In solidarity with Venezuela

April 2013

The 14 years of Hugo Chávez? presidency gave U.S. elites plenty of fits. They were appalled that Venezuela?s oil wealth was used for things like alleviating poverty and building schools and health clinics in poor neighborhoods.

And then there was the people-powered defeat of a CIA-backed coup to oust Chávez in 2002. This was an historic first for the toilers of Latin America, but to the globo-exploiters it set a frightening precedent.

Chávez spoke much about 21st century socialism. But his Bolivarian revolution left the profit system in place. At the end of the day, a revolution is something that needs to be finished ? through the working class taking power and changing class relations.

Again and again the long-impoverished people of Venezuela have exhibited a fervent desire for socialism. The imperialist plotters in Washington will see the death of Chávez as an opportunity to quash such hopes and put the nation?s corrupt, U.S.-dependent oligarchy back in charge. And Cuba will be next in line for the predators.

In these perilous times, those living in El Norte have a special obligation to the poor and striving people of Venezuela: to be ready to fight like hell against any form of U.S. intervention in Latin America.

EDITORIAL

Bradley Manning: ?A clear conscience?

April 2013

Anyone who stands up to racism or sexism on the job quickly finds out management cares little about whether these prejudices prowl the workplace. But they are ready to demonize the individual who exposes it.

Such was the case when Bradley Manning downloaded the U.S. government?s dirty laundry to Wikileaks. The military threw him in the brig, where he was held in solitary confinement and subjected to torturous and humiliating treatment. Politicians in both parties vilified him as a traitor who endangered U.S. troops.

After two years in detention, Manning recently admitted to 10 of 22 charges brought against him ? that is, he acknowledged being a whistleblower. He did not confess to aiding the terrorist enemy, but rather to exposing war crimes by U.S. soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as the despicable bullying that is U.S. diplomacy. His 35-page statement was no apology, but a clear explanation of why he brought to light things like the ?bloodlust? on display in classified videos.

Manning faces up to 20 years in prison for what he has admitted to. He should be getting a medal! Far from betraying his people, he has acted with uncommon valor.

Stop the criminalization of whistleblowers! Release Bradley Manning!

To get involved, see bradleymanning.org.

EDITORIAL

Ethnic studies victory

April 2013

At long last, a blatant right-wing lawsuit against Mexican American Studies in Tucson, Ariz. has been thrown out of court. Its primary targets were teachers Sean Arce and José González, who organized a dedicated defense against the racist Tucson school district. They need help raising $8,200 in unpaid legal fees. Donations can be mailed to Raza Defense Fund, 300 South Convent, Tucson, Ariz. 85701, or visit the Raza Defense Fund online.

Click here to see the current Freedom Socialist. To subscribe to the FS by postal mail, email, or audio CD, visit here or send $10 for one year or $17 for two to Freedom Socialist, 5018 Rainier Ave. S., Seattle, WA 98118.(Students $8 for one year, strikers and unemployed $5, overseas airmail $18.) Please contribute to sustain our work. You can donate now via  To see the booklist at Red Letter Press or to find out more about the Freedom Socialist Party, go towww.socialism.com, or reply to this message. We would love to hear from you! Friend on Facebook | Forward to a friend

Freedom Socialist Party Keeping you up to date on the FSP.Our mailing address is: Freedom Socialist Party 4710 University Way NE, #100 Seattle, WA 98105

May 17, 2013

It is a common misunderstanding that those who support the legalization of cannabis, if only for medical reasons, are a gaggle of pot smokers in the pejorative sense who do little to contribute to society as hard working Americans. Across all political and economic lines, the use of cannabis has been consistent and the number of Americans who support its legalization (or decriminalization) is on the rise. The problem is whether the will of the people can be expressed in our laws against those who lobby and campaign against it.

?I?m not advocating everyone go out and run around with no clothes on and smoke pot,? [Rand] said. ?I?m not a libertarian. I?m a libertarian Republican. I?m a constitutional conservative.?

He was right at one point ? he is NOT a Libertarian. The legalization of cannabis is one of the most important pillars to the taxation and spending cuts that are central to the libertarian belief in smaller government as the key to American prosperity. He says he is a constitutional conservative, though it doesn?t seem clear where in the Constitution he picked up the position that legalization was unconstitutional. It seems that Rand is trying to be an apologist and bridge the gap between Libertarian and Republican.

Rand Paul says he does not want to end the Drug War. A Pew Research poll in April, 2013 shows that 52% of Americans support legalizing cannabis. Additionally, 72% of Americans believe government efforts to enforce these laws cost more than they are worth. People have shifted away from a belief that cannabis presents a moral issue. It?s an issue of personal freedom and government expense.

LEAP VIDEO

It is the position of the Libertarian Party that, ?Drug prohibition does more to make Americans unsafe than any other factor.? The LP concludes its position in stating, ?By ending drug prohibition Libertarians would double the resources available for crime prevention, and significantly reduce the number of violent criminals at work in your neighborhood.?

What Rand Paul has done is associate cannabis use with people who run through life with abandon and disregard for the public peace and economic support of their families and nation. This is far from the truth as we concern ourselves with liberty and the financial well-being of our country. While appealing to those Republicans who think it good policy to refute the strong personal testimonies of real people who laud the use of cannabis in their various uses and medical treatments, he has abandoned Libertarian principles

The following is an article from the June 2013 issue of Reason magazine about the Free State Project. It is part of the front page series called “Experiments in Libertarian Living.” The three experiments are FSP, free cities in Honduras and secessionionists in Australia. Garrett Quinn is a frequent contributor who covered the 2012 Libertarian Party National Convention in Las Vegas.

Notably, Free State member Hardy Macia, who moved from neighboring Vermont, passed away on May 13th. He was a frequent Libertarian Party candidate for public office, who most recently ran for U.S. Congress in New Hampshire’s 2nd district and earned 4.4% of the vote. He was a former member of the Libertarian National Committee (LNC) and played an instrumental role in Gary Johnson’s 2012 presidential campaign. Johnson said the following in a post in memoriam on his Facebook page:  ”If we needed our website fixed, an online town hall organized, or a place to crash in New Hampshire, the answer was always the same: ‘Call Hardy’.” There are many Libertarians involved in the FSP.

Here is the article:

http://freekeene.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/FSP_Reason_2013June.pdf

Riley J. Hood is the chairman of the Constitution Party of Wisconsin (CPoW). He ran for U.S. Senate in 2012 as a write-in candidate and received 70 votes. The following are three new articles from him on education,  the IRS and the separation of church and state. 

C-Scope, A Race to the Bottom

Published May 17th, 2013

?Ever learning and never able
to come to the knowledge of the truth.? II Timothy 3:7

By Riley J. Hood-CPoW State Chairman

            C-Scope is another, in a long train of federally mandated, State administered experiments in social engineering. C-scope burdens the local taxpayer to pay costs of technology initiatives, additional administrative staff, training, and textbook compliance. Even if the Feds paid for C-scope, it is still our tax money. It isn?t as if Arne Duncan is working a night job, to pay for it.  C-Scope is another un-Constitutional attempt by the federal government to impose national standards. Your children are the guinea pigs in this latest socialist experiment. According to Alan J. Borsuk, ?The Common Core got its start well before Obama was elected and is not directly a federal program, although steps the US Department of Education has taken have put the weight of the administration behind the effort.?

C-scope repeats the tired mantra that standardized testing, new textbooks and technology, will result in smarter kids. These things don?t equate to better education, they do equate to a fat government contract for the companies who produce such materials, who also are the usual lobbyists for the latest education bill.

Wisconsin signed on to C-scope; obtain a ?No Child Left Behind? waiver. That?s like swallowing the spider to catch the fly. Wisconsin would have been better off not signing on the either. The losers are your local school board and especially your children. C-scope?s one-size-fits-all, assembly line approach severely limits individualized attention to differing learning styles.

C-scope is not merely content to destroy the minds of public-school children, but calls for controlling traditional schools, namely home, private and religious schools. C-scope will also pull on those government strings attached to school choice to impose its ?standards? on charter and choice schools. C-scope also represents the continuing invasion of child and family privacy, including data that has nothing to do with education.

C-scope promoters are aping the line that Wisconsin has such low standards. Again, according to Borsuk, ?The Common Core movement has swept across the nation in the last five years. It arose largely from among governors, state education chiefs, corporate leaders and education advocates who believed the nation as a whole was not aiming high enough in education and that the wide variation from state to state in defining good achievement and what it takes to get a high school diploma was a problem.? Low standards are a result of 100 years of socialism in education; designed to crank out drones, with no desire to think on their own. C-scope is more dialectic and praxis, the forerunners of C-scope have made a nation of functional illiterates, C-scope will worsen, not solve this condition.  The ?higher we aim,? toward the socialist utopia, the lower we will descend. The State of Wisconsin is caught up in C-scope, not only are the Democrats, but the Republicans on the wrong side of the issue, again.

The IRS Must Be Abolished

Published May 14th, 2013

?The happy Union of these States is a wonder; their Constitution is a miracle;
their example the hope of liberty throughout the world. Woe to the ambition
that would meditate the destruction of either.?-James Madison

From The Constitution Party of Wisconsin-Riley J. Hood Chairman

            Recent events have brought to light the targeting of Tea Party groups by certain elements of the IRS. Should agents who abuse their powers be punished? Yes. But America needs better than that. The IRS is there to collect a direct tax, the income tax. A federal direct tax was never part of our Nation?s founding, and it took the 16th Amendment passed in 1913, to impose an income tax upon Americans. The IRS may be allowable, but it will always be un-American.

The CPoW position on the IRS and the federal income tax is straight forward, both must be abolished. There is nothing in the 16^th Amendment that says we must have an income tax.  As long as we have a confiscatory tax, and a tax code that the average American can never fully comply with, our citizens will continue to be at the mercy of the whims of IRS bureaucrats. When the IRS is abolished, is when the bad behavior will stop, and not before.

Separation of Church and State

Published May 16th, 2013

?Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord, and the people
whom he hath chosen for His own inheritance.? Psalms 33:12

By Riley J. Hood-CPoW State Chairman

            When I was first elected State Chairman, I was asked about my views on religious freedom. I was amazed that many in that room were all worked up about the rights of Cultists, Muslims, Atheists and Infidels. I was accused by some of forcing my religion upon them.

• The term ?religion? during the founding era, still had its normal meaning, as opposed to the slang that Billy Graham popularized, ?It?s not a religion, it?s a relationship.? The normal meaning is the public expression of your inward Christian faith. False religions were labeled after their founders Islam was called Mohamadism, the JW?s were called Russellites, and so forth. The Masonic view of religion is based on their liberal credo: ?the Father of God and the Brotherhood of Man,? and that whatever you believe about Him are all equally valid, came into popularity much later.
• Separation of Church and State appears nowhere in the US Constitution, and the First Amendment begins with ?Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,? By the way, monuments and memorials are not laws, if you can?t handle looking at the 10 commandments, there are no thought police to throw you jail. The only thought police in America right now are the ACLU, who are busy imposing their Atheism on the majority of this nation, through their perversions of our Law system.
• During the 2012 campaign, I received a piece of mail from a wag who said we needed separation of Church and State to protect the State from the Church. This unstable soul cited Islamic Terrorists. I informed him, Churches are Christian, Mosques are Islamic; he was confusing the two. Our founding fathers weren?t confused about this: ?Probably at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, and of the [first] Amendment to it now under consideration, the general, if not universal sentiment in America was, that Christianity ought to receive encouragement from the State so far as was not incompatible with the private rights of conscience and freedom of religious worship. Any attempt to level all religions, and to make it a matter of state policy to hold all in utter indifference, would have created universal disapprobation, if not universal indignation.? Joseph Story-1840 (Americas God and Country Encyclopedia. of Quotations by William J. Federer)  The thought of having to protect heavily armed policemen, FBI agents, and our Armed Forces from a memorial in the shape of the Cross is ridiculous in the extreme. Communists take such measures seriously. Lenin who said ?millions of dead are to be preferred to the notion of God.?

So as you could guess, I?m concerned about the people whose religious freedom made America, namely Christians. For example, Roger Sherman wrote, ?Admiring and thankfully acknowledging the riches of redeeming love, and earnestly imploring that Divine assistance which may enable us to live no more to ourselves, but to him who loved us and gave himself to die for us.?(Americas God and Country Encyclopedia. of Quotations by William J. Federer) Patrick Henry wrote, ?It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been supplied a place of safety, prosperity, and freedom of worship here.?

Yes, I do believe in rights of conscious, but never to the point where shrill voices come into CPoW and dismantle our Party, and tear it down to the level of their liking, such as attacking our Preamble. I also take the same view of America; religious freedom is not a charter for ?national suicide? or a license for domestic enemies such as Muslims and Atheists, who have been forcing their will on America, to destroy us. They may have rights to freedom of conscious; they do not have rights to takeover America, and replace it with an alien form of government, such as Communism, or Sharia Law. So I don?t put any energy into securing the religious freedom of America?s enemies. Their ?rights? are well secured in these days of political correctness. I put my energy into securing the rights of Christians, and then Patriotic Americans, whose freedoms are being suppressed. These people are in need, not America?s enemies.

To read more, go to the blog of the CPoW chairman: 

http://www.constitutionpartywi.com/