I'm a Republican, or My Serious Look at Peroutka
Well, considering that I have a number of third party supporting friends (online and offline, I believe), I decided it was time to look into Mr. Peroutoka of the Constitutional Party. The Constitutional PArty is basically the only third party that ever seems to come close to my beliefs… or so I thought.
I now have some non-Kerry bones, or should I say “Kerry-ion,” to pick. I've said before that I might lean toward the Constitutional Party if it had a chance. I had never seriously perused their platform however. After doing so, I hereby recant anything I've ever said that implied my support of this party. The GOP represents my views much better, I'm sorry for ever insulting the Grand Old Party by suggesting otherwise in favor of this party. Note the following is a selection of the things I disagree with Peroutka on.Note: Another new presidential quiz is included at the bottom of this post with a “shocking new revelation” — on economic issues, I'm not most like President Bush! Well, actually this is not shocking, but would you read on if I said results with “ordinary, bland and rather plain results”?I. On Selection of Judges
When both John Kerry and the debate moderator challenged Mr. Bush to say if he is for or against Roe v. Wade, Mr. Bush was silent, saying only that he would have no litmus test for judges which means, of course, he would have no pro-life, anti-abortion litmus test. In other words, Mr. Bush is saying that the abortion issue is so unimportant that he would not, in any way, make it a qualification for any judges he would appoint.
I think most people know President Bush would likely select pro-life judges. What the president has always insisted on, though, is that he should not have a litmus test on judges. We should not re-legislate from the bench. If a perfectly impartial judge would find that nothing in the constitution bans abortion (I'd be surprised about that!), then the proper solution would be to pass legislation in Congress not to appoint judges who are biased and legislate from the bench — even if that legislating from the bench going “our way.”
This is important. Judges should not rule based on their personal opinions, but on the constitution. President Bush's one qualification for judges is that they be strict constructionists. If we are confident that the constitution is on our side, then a strict constructionist would support the pro-life cause. The key is that he should support the cause because of his strict interpretation of the constitution, not because he reinterprets the constitution as a partisan just like the liberal activist judges.
II. On Free Trade
Peroutka advocates the dangerous policy of withdrawing from the WTO and NAFTA (and, if you didn't guess, he does not support the Free Trade Zone of the Americas). Here's the problem with that: free trade is the only economically sensible position, in my estimation (backed up by most economists that I know of).
In the global market, it is necessary, for instance, that I can get computer components as affordably possible from Japan, Taiwan, etc. (Note, I do have problems with not restricting trade with China, but I'm talking as a whole here.) Moreover, free trade works both ways: if countries can freely export to us, we can freely export to them. Placing tariffs and other restrictions on imports from countries with normalized relations just causes problems: take, for instance, the recent retaliatory tariff war between the U.S. and the E.U. that hurt Florida produce growers.
Isolationism is not an option.
Moreover, even though keeping jobs in the U.S. is a noble cause, first you are going to have to show me the American workers who want those jobs. The country seems to be no longer interested in manufacturing jobs, so if you try to stop imports, what do you do? You cause a government induced shortage. We should instead let the invisible hand of the market guide itself. Here's where I'll tip my hand towards libertarianism. We ought to keep the government out of trade as much as possible by making trade as free as possible.
III. On Civil Rights and the Defunct Confederacy
I'm of the mindset that completely equal rights between those of different skin colors is part of the inalienable right to freedom given to us by our Creator. That does not mean I support affirmative action and other reverse discrimination policies, instead, I think the government should just stay out of the issue as much as possible (albeit, I'd keep equal opportunity requirements that prohibit racist policies by employers, etc.). In other words, I support the “colorblind” policies advocated by the Republican Party.
So far I have not found any direct remarks by Mr. Peroutka on the issue, but having a Confederate Flag on a link to “Southerners for Peroutka,” which itself links to a page with a Confederate Flag on a capitol building speaks volumes. Delving into that (apparently) official site then takes one to a set of books on topics such as “Why Jefferson Davis was Right.” Is Peroutka running for president of the Union or the Confederacy? Moreover, the “We Have a Dream” captioned picture of the capitol with a confederate flag seems to strongly indicate a backlash against Martin Luther King, Jr.'s “I Have a Dream Speech,” based on the allusion made by the quote juxtaposed with the picture.
Is this the kind of stuff we would want in a president of the United States?
Christian Science Monitor Presidential Quiz
Take it here. Found on Reverend Mike's House of Hash.
Join the Conversation
RE: I'm a Republican, or My Serious Look at Peroutka
That quiz shows the trouble I’m having with this election. In all three categories, I fall right smack in the middle. In economy and foreign policy, the nudge goes to Kerry. In culture, Bush. There were too many questions where none of the four answers reflected my thoughts on the issue.
Back to the 3rd party discussion, I actually like the Green Party. In local politics, I support them highly and often vote for GP candidates. At the national level, third parties are still pretty much a joke. I’m not going to throw away a vote when the real race is going to be so close.
RE: I'm a Republican, or My Serious Look at Peroutka
OK you have me quite confused.
“If a perfectly impartial judge would find that nothing in the constitution bans abortion (I’d be surprised about that!), then the proper solution would be to pass legislation in Congress not to appoint judges who are biased and legislate from the bench — even if that legislating from the bench going “our way.”
I think Mr Peroutka clearly shows how the constitution covers this:
“The pre-born child, whose life begins at fertilization, is a human being created in God’s image. The first duty of the law is to prevent the shedding of innocent blood. It is, therefore, the duty of all civil governments to secure and to safeguard the lives of the pre-born.”
By appointing judges who “cannot read” (sorry that sounds harsh, don’t know how else to word it) you are in essense supporting obortion. Plus lets be clear, Bush is not fully against abortion, if he was he would not support stem cell research using “material” as a result of abortions. And to appoint a judge who “might” get it wrong is playing with fire.
In Bush’s own words: “balancing the ethics and the science….To destroy life to save life is – it’s one of the real ethical dilemmas that we face.”
IMHO, no its not. It should be a black and white issue, you either support life from its conception till its natural ending, or you don’t.
As for NAFTA and all the rest, you and I are clearly on opposite ends of the spectrum here so I’ll agree to disagree.
BTW, please provide that link you found with the confederate flag. From everything I have read and everything I have seen, he’s totally against racism of any kind including reverse.
Kevin said : “I’m not going to throw away a vote when the real race is going to be so close.”
Imagine if all the people who really liked a third party voted for them. Go back in history and you’ll find that “wasting your vote” motto was started by the Dems’ when Perot was running. They saw votes being taken away so decided to let the spin doctors take over. You wanna see Kerry and Bush squirm, allow third party candidates into the debates.
RE: I'm a Republican, or My Serious Look at Peroutka
Strong opinions reap strong responses, Bro. Tim
The current trade agreements favor corporate giants and bring a complete loss of national sovereignty. I don’t like them either, but I’m for open and free trade. To reject is NAFTA and such is a very long way from isolationism.
On the issue of “Ol’ Dixie” — I keep one on my wall. You’d be hard put to confuse me with any racists. It’s about heritage, and I’m not going to let some idiots define for me what that flag means. I’ve presented plenty of evidence elsewhere the Civil War was not about race, except in the minds of the ignorant. It was about taxes and the Constitution, and Lincoln’s socialism.
RE: I'm a Republican, or My Serious Look at Peroutka
Mark: First — I wasn’t aiming at you, if you were wondering… I hope it didn’t seem that way. I just kept hearing about Peroutka, and just decided to blog about it afterward. My point is, I agree, you agree, and I think President Bush agrees that life from conception is covered under the Constitution. Therefore, by saying he supports those who interpret the constitution in a strict fashion, I believe the President is saying that he will support pro-life judges, just as he has during his first term. Mr. Peroutka, by suggesting that President Bush’s support of judges who interpret the constitution strictly is not going to lead to pro-life judges, is not confident that a truly strict constitutional interpretation will lead to pro-life decisions. Like any claim on how one selects judges, what the President actually selects is up in the air, but I think based on what he says, he has essentially affirmed the pro-life position without suggesting he’d violate the concept of judges impartially interpreting the constitution.
The president’s choice on stem cells is one I’ve grown to see the like a bit better over the past three years. The ones the federal funding supports are ones that were already “processed”/killed at the time he made his decision. Therefore he did not support killing them, but decided to not let their deaths be in vain. I’m not sure I fully agree with it, but it seems like something that can still be pro-life.
As far as the dixie flag, you’ll find it on the left column of every page, but here’s the direct link to the Southerners for Peroutka: http://www.southernersforperoutka.com/ .
On NAFTA and stuff, I’ll agree with you on our disagreement.
I’m libertarian leaning on economic issues (though not totally).
Ed: Yup, strong responses are a Good Thing (tm).
I’ll agree that NAFTA is not the ideal solution. What I find bad about Peroutka’s policy is that he does not seem to advocate replacing them with new free trade agreements but instead protectionist policies with the goal of “saving jobs.”
Regarding “Ol’ Dixie,” I guess I tip my yankee hand here (being in Missouri, I also have a dixie hand, I suppose… y’all know what I mean?). I may be reading too much into it, but things like the “We Have a Dream” with the confederate flag on the capitol image seems to have some less than innocent allusions. Links to suggestions such as that the North remains a imperialist in the South also rings very bitter (last I checked, most of the fastest growing cities are in the south), I think. My final point here would be that, regardless of what its connotations were “back then,” at least in areas that aren’t the deep south — like here in Missouri — the confederate flag generally implies more about the bad things of the Confederacy than the good things of our fellow Americans in the south. Putting it on a national campaign page seems… a bit odd to me.
RE: I'm a Republican, or My Serious Look at Peroutka
Tim said “First — I wasn’t aiming at you, if you were wondering… I hope it didn’t seem that way. “
No insult taken. But thanks for making it clear.
As for the Dixie reference, I’m just a dumb white New Englander that grew up with friends of all colors. It never really hit me how bad it “was” or “is” until a little African American (AA) kid ran into me while I was in the Underground Mall while visiting my brother in Atlanta. In my typical way I picked the kid up, asked him if he was ok and smiled. Heck kids running around malls happens every where. You just sorta brush them off and send them on their way. The father’s first words to me were, “you’re not from around here I take it?” Me the dumb NE guy replied, “oh does my accent give me away?” The husband and wife smiled at each other and then had their kid apologize to me. It took a AA friend of mine to explain what the father had actually meant. My friend by the way grew up in another part of Georgia. Sorry with re-inactments becoming more and more popular I guess I just figured it was that.
RE: I'm a Republican, or My Serious Look at Peroutka
Mark, I know what you mean. FWIW, I think Missouri is probably a lot more like the NE than the deep South. In an ironic twist, the only person I know with a Dixie flag (complete with a “General Robert E. Lee” license plate cover) is a neighbor from Maine. Go figure.
RE: I'm a Republican, or My Serious Look at Peroutka
The quiz set me close to hard core GOP. I drifted slightly on economic issues towards libertarian but not enough to kill the elephant. I ended up with 3 GW’s.
RE: I'm a Republican, or My Serious Look at Peroutka
Good job, Warren!