Constitution Party of Idaho: ‘Whose fault?’

 Whose fault?Published on the Constitution Party of Idaho’s website on July 18th, 2016 (Via Cody Quirk at ATPR yesterday)

In difficult circumstances, we admit to a fault—often we resort to Scriptures for guidance. The certification of a presidential candidate for the printed ballot of the Constitution Party of Idaho is just such a circumstance.

The condition is one of an unequal yoke, a difficulty cautioned against several times in the Bible. “Do not plow with an ox and a donkey yoked together.”—Deuteronomy 22:10.

The process of the national party’s naming a nominee allegedly is equitable and truthful. Using such allegations, many demand that CP-Idaho accept the national yoke. However, for a yoke to distribute the burden of draft properly, it must be like to like…otherwise it defies physics as well as Scripture. It is both a matter of mechanics (which is to say process); but also a matter of cruelty (which is an ethical issue).

First, the disparity between the power and size of the ox over that of the donkey would forever disproportionately transfer burden unequally upon the donkey, through no fault or intent by the ox. With two animals having such different rates of “leg drive,” the yoke cannot equalize torque.

Second, given the difference in stride and power, the donkey would have to race to keep up with the ox, under a deferentially heavier burden. And that becomes a matter of cruelty. Doubtless, as the labor in the field wears on over the course of the day, it would require an ever more forceful and heavier hand upon the lash.

In turn, the donkey at some point will attempt to throw off the unequal yoke, and kick at the ox. The risk is injury to both animals…which would preclude getting field preparation work done.

The problem has nothing to do with the respective nature of these animals. Rather, it is the logic of placing them under the unequal yoke in the first place. It is clear that the nomination process employed by the national party is inequitable and, we dare to say, untruthful.

In opposition to the incessant braying and bucking of our compatriots in the national party, CP-Idaho’s ox has been strong in its stride, powerful in its work, methodical in its duties. CP-Idaho has grown over the past couple years by a factor of 8.8 times in membership. As for the hee-hawing national party at large…not so much.

Our ox is yoked to just such an ass. The inequality cannot be more evident. CP-Idaho held a verifiable, organized, fair and honest primary election to determine our state affiliate’s preferred candidate for President.  Our braying detractors owe us at least that much credit.

On the other hand, where is the evidence that other state affiliates did the same? If they cannot demonstrate that they have done so, not only is the yoke incomparable, but it violates parliamentary rules of order as well. If this is an actual national political party with standing, parliamentary rules demand honor, and this even if the wisdom of Scriptures is ignored entirely.

With statewide membership, organized parties are required—if they are honest—to provide a uniform method of voting, one which enables all members a vote (Robert’s Rules, Section 46). The question is:  did this occur? Without question, it did in Idaho. Our national delegation went to Salt Lake with an absolute representative preference ballot. Did our compatriots in respective state affiliates do so?

If they did not, then the ballots cast at Salt Lake were merely individual personal preferences. If that is the case, then the verifiable Idaho Presidential Primary results should, indeed must, also be tallied individually—being like to like. Were the yoke equitable, it would be…one man one vote. And this has nothing to do with the “Electoral College”. It has to do with the kind of ballot cast.

CP-Idaho’s primary ballot remains untainted. On that, we do not believe there is even a question. But there are certainly questions regarding the kind of ballot our fellow state affiliates cast at convention. And therefore, CP-Idaho is well within our right to ask for proof that a statewide preference ballot ever occurred in the bucking and braying respective state affiliates.  At a minimum, these should be in evidence, if the yoke is equal:

  • Date of statewide preference ballot taken prior to Salt Lake Convention.
  • Location(s) where the statewide ballot was cast.
  • Candidate Names upon the ballot.
  • Number of statewide ballots cast.
  • Percentage of registered statewide Constitution Party base voting.
  • Form of the ballot (e.g. mail-in, proxy, direct primary, county caucus).
  • Names of election judges certifying the ballot.
  • State affiliate standing rules governing their national delegates.

If our fellow state affiliates cannot demonstrate the above, then that yoke is anything but equal. It’s not that CP-Idaho blames its bruised ribs on the ass it is yoked with, and surely we have been kicked repeatedly of late. No, the fault lies with the farmer who hitched them, pretending nothing was wrong, and then shows an utter indifference to the plight of the mismatched beasts.

As Proverbs 12:10 put it:  “A righteous person knows the needs of his beast; but the compassion of the wicked is cruelty.”

KL: A day earlier, an article called “2016 Idaho convention: An honest dialog about thumbs” was published on the Constitution Party of Idaho’s website by outgoing chairman Floyd Whitley in which he said that the national Constitution Party has a system of super-delegates. Read the article here.

27 thoughts on “Constitution Party of Idaho: ‘Whose fault?’

  1. Tony From Long Island

    Any political party that ever “turns to scriptures for guidance” should NEVER called the “Constitution” Party.

  2. Joe

    something is out of whack when you have a state party with different candidates than its national party..whatever all the rules and such say, just work it out. Its too difficult already trying to break the two party stronghold.

  3. Mike Warner

    That is certainly ONE TAKE. The other is that the GOP controlled State of Idaho put the Constitution of Idaho into a position of operating a primary which as a party nationally we don’t support. The primary system was invented and pushed by progressives so the elites with the money could control the outcomes. As a party we prefer conventions to select our nominees both at the state and national level.
    I understand Idaho CP may not have had much choice in this regard but had it maintained the convention system the problems would have naturally worked out more smoothly.
    It seems to me the author of this post and Cody Quirk are working hard to stir up things between the state parties and destroy the gains Idaho has made.

  4. Bob Haran

    The writer doesn’t have a clue how a national political party functions. The purpose of political parties is to gain control of the government by having their candidates elected to public office. The Constitution Party National Convention selects the parties national candidate for President and Vice President, not the state parties. Darrell Castle is the Constitution Party nominee for President of the United States, Darrell Castle rightly should be on the Idaho ballot for the Constitution Party.

  5. Floyd Whitley

    “Darrell Castle rightly should be on the Idaho ballot for the Constitution Party.”

    Rightly? Why? Because he’s entitled? Castle forfeited Idaho by choosing not to stand at primary. He made that choice. He will be held to the consequences of his choice. Idaho will do it even if you will not.

    The Idaho election code, stated by the ID SoS, is clear: “Idaho gives the political parties recognized in Idaho the option of conducting a Presidential Primary Election in March 2016 or conducting a caucus in accordance to their party rules.”

    It does NOT say that recognized parties in Idaho have the option of a primary or a caucus…and Mr. Castle gets his own set of rules, or that he is entitled to some other process and can avoid accountability.

    Or, do you believe Mr. Castle is entitled to a different set of rules than everyone else, Mr. Haran?

    As for clueless, I realize that all you so-called “local” government disciples talk a tough line. And rail against party establishments…so long as that villain is some OTHER party establishment. It depends, I supposed on whose ox is gored…or kicked in the ribs, in keeping with the article’s genre.

    Anyhow, prove that you walk it. Not just talk it.

    As for clues on how a national party works, please show me the legitimate statewide preference ballots upon which (necessarily) each state affiliate’s delegation cast a representative ballot at Salt Lake. If you cannot meet that basic element of electoral and parliamentary process, then Idaho’s ballot sadly was the only truly representative ballot in evidence.

    You who talk the line but just won’t walk it. And that, my friend, is called hypocrisy…which apparently the CP has confused with representative democracy.

    Show me the ballots.

  6. Cody Quirk

    “It seems to me the author of this post and Cody Quirk are working hard to stir up things between the state parties and destroy the gains Idaho has made.”

    No, we just report more objectively then other minor-party reporters/journalists that usually give positive coverage to the CP 😉

  7. Floyd Whitley

    “whatever all the rules and such say, just work it out”…sure, that can be done.

    1. Mr. Castle withdraws.
    2. He finally honors his word that he would not be a candidate.
    3. The runner up candidate having the next highest vote at national convention replaces him.
    4. Said replacement names his own running mate, subject to viva voce of a special National Committee meeting called for the purpose.

    How’s that? See, CP-Idhao’s we’re not intransigent. We’re willing to work within the rules.

  8. Floyd Whitley

    “destroy the gains Idaho has made”…Those gains were gotten because we, CP-Idaho, stand upon ethics, real principles, and equitable rules. We are not a party of personalities. We are a party of process.

    “The primary system was invented and pushed by progressives”…actually, this is not subject to such a weird conspiracy theory.

    The primary system was created in response to the political party corruptions of insiders in their political party establishments after the 1968 Chicago riots. In fact, the primary system was invented to counter just exactly the kind of corruption that was demonstrated in Salt Lake with Mr. Castle.

  9. Floyd Whitley

    Also, Mr. Haran: “The Constitution Party National Convention selects the parties national candidate for President and Vice President, not the state parties.”

    You should go back and read the Constitution of the Constitution Party again. In it, under Article III, Paragraph 3, “Nothing in this Constitution or the bylaws shall confer upon the national party any authority to direct the internal affairs of any state affiliate.”

    The ballot in Idaho is our internal affair. We take up our rights fully and completely. We refuse abridged ballot rights.

    In any case, by your logic, the national party can “order” each and every state to bow down to whomever their back room deals.

    Good luck running that past the respective state attorneys general or secretaries of state.

    You are flat out wrong. Yours is a prescription for a despotic party. Idaho rejects that vision.

  10. J.R.Myers for President

    Idaho had a legitimate primary, No other CP affiliate can claim that. In fact, most of the delegates in SLC were pretenders. They were not legitimately selected by ANY lawful process. The 2016 CP Convention in SLC wasn’t simply flawed, it was corrupt. One can try to put lipstick on a pig…

  11. Tony From Long Island

    All of this hub bub over someone who will get less than .02% of the vote. Reminds of the good old days of the LP 🙂

  12. Bob Haran

    I think the time has come to disaffiliate the Idaho Constitution Party unless they reorganize and elect new officers who are willing to cooperate with the national committee and who will not sabotage our national political efforts for selfish reasons. Darrell Castle is the legitimate Constitution Party nominee for President of the United States, any state affiliate that does not accept that fact is not a part of the Constitution Party but merely a renegade party using our good name.

    For God and Country,

    Bob Haran, Arizona.
    Constitution Party National Committee.

  13. Bob Haran

    Idaho must understand, they either help the team or get off the team, it’s that simple.

  14. Cody Quirk

    Those comments are certainly going to go over well with the Idaho CP folks… Especially with their state convention coming up in a few days right now.

  15. Floyd Whitley

    “selfish reasons”…yeah like following the rules and applying them equitably for all.

    As for state affiliation, Mr. Haran, you do realize that under Article II, Section 2.2 State Affiliation, paragraph 2, clause (b)…one of the requirements for state affiliation in the first place is to have (quote):

    “Adopted official organization documents, which provide democratic procedures.”? Do you not?

    Democratic procedures applies to the presidential nomination process as much as (and more than) any other. Robert’s Rules tells you the same thing.

    Again, show me your statewide preference ballots. A simple request. Or did the Arizona affiliate just decide all on its own to ignore that Bylaws requirement? If so, it is your state affiliate that is in breach of the bylaws and parliamentary rules.

    Rest assured, Mr. Haran. Idaho definitely has these procedures in place and operational…and is prepared to defend our rights against such thuggish threats.

  16. J.R.Myers for President 2016

    The national CP is now tasting the bitter fruit of a rigged nomination from a poisoned tree, the 2016 CP convention. Funny how some now want to forget all the unethical, illegal and immoral behavior culminating in the SLC coronation. Shame on those who call bitter, sweet. Who exchange the truth for a lie. Who prefer darkness to light. Who hold themselves out as righteous examples, yet inside, are full of deadmen’s bones.

  17. Floyd Whitley

    Yeah, Clinbeard, apparently in collusion with Haran to try a two pronged assault on CP-Idaho–Haran here on IPR and Clinbeard on CP-Idaho’s facebook page–is the resident legal half-wit.

    Clinbeard (South Carolina?) is also the point guy for national CP to gain ballot access in a number of states, one of which is Arizona–which of course is Haran’s state outfit.

    Which is too funny. Between the both of ’em, they’ve been busy sniffing the back crack of Idaho looking for any “gottcha!” opportunity to force their illegitimate nominee. They’ve been so busy trying to browbeat Idaho, what with reciting Idaho Code and By-Laws and all, that they just never get around to ballot access in Arizona…or anywhere else. Easy to talk a line. A lot different when you’re called to walk it.

    By they way, the map on the national website regarding current “In Process” ballot access work in 23 states is…well, dare I say?…bogus. And they know it.

    That says all you need to know about (a) their veracity and (b) their mental acuity.

  18. Bob Haran

    Politics is war by other means and mutiny in the middle of battle is treason. I too disagree with the way things went at Salt Lake City, what the Idaho CP is doing however is harming the party and our cause. If they can’t wait until after the campaign to rectify a wrong, and they do have a good case, then they should leave the party and stop doing it harm.

  19. Don J. Grundmann, D.C.

    As a delegate to the SLC Convention and a seeker of the Presidential nomination of the CP I write to state that –
    a) the nomination was NOT ” rigged.” Voters had a preference for Darrell Castle due to their personal knowledge of him, his long participation in the party, his previous Vice-Presidential candidacy, and many other factors. If the Idaho choice did not win this was NOT due to anything ” illegal, unethical, or immoral.” It was based on the personal preferences of the delegates – something which Idaho, and Mr. Myers, as just 2 examples, does not accept.

    B) We can count on Idaho, if following the example of Mr. Whitley, to never accept any CP Presidential candidate which is not approved by them. ONLY a candidate who wins a Idaho CP primary will be accepted by Idaho and everyone else; i.e.; the whole party, can go to Hell. Hence why would they ever attend a convention again since the party should ALWAYS follow them and not the reverse; i.e.; ONLY they, and any and everything that they do, are correct and only if a state copies Idaho will they be acceptable to them.

    C) In 2008 the CP was the 3rd largest party in the country but we had attracted the attention of the Republican Establishment who infiltrated the party and performed a criminal act ( which I document at TheCorruptionofAlanKeyes.blogspot.com ) in their attempt to destroy the party; i.e.; silence the 3rd party Christian/conservative message.

    Fast forward to 2016 and we have Mr. Whitley filling in for the criminals simply by putting his enormous ego forward, under the cover story of ” following the rules,” to drag the party down as best he can because of the perceived inferiority of every other party worker than himself.

    Well Mr. Whitley, in the fight for the survival of our nation we in the fields and on the battlefield are striving as best we can to fight the best that we can. In this battle I can expect my fellow CP members to do their very best in lending a hand of aid to me as I will to them in the vicious and horrific fight to save our country. This will be in complete contrast to your continual urination on the party itself and the fighters within it which and who does and do not approach your own Christlike standards.

    We here on the battlefields of our respective states can expect not a helping hand but rather a continuous kick in the face from yourself while you are busy in the never ending preening of your feathers as to how superior you are.

    I think that it will be fine that Idaho stays in the CP but we, the soldiers in the battlefield of all of the other states, simply have to realize that the last thing you will do is aid us or the party; i.e.; the greater overall battle which we are all ( or ALMOST all ) fighting for. Rather you will forever bellow and snort about ” process,” ” procedures,” yada, yada, yada, while the nation burns.

    For myself I will accept my fellow soldiers for their flaws and humanity while appreciating their many many many individual sacrifices on the field of battle.

    While we are fighting in the trenches I will leave you to your never ending proclamations of your moral, ethical, and everything else superiority.

    We will know that, as with Mr. Quirk in his own way via trumpeting you and many other actions, we can count on you only for yet another knife in the back or urination stream and nothing more.

    Have fun. I know that you will.

    Don J. Grundmann, D.C. Chairman, Constitution Party of California

    unethical illegal immoral

  20. Cody Quirk

    So I take it the national CP is going to attempt an independent presidential petition in Idaho?

  21. Floyd Whitley

    Psycho-babble, Grundmann.

    National has a copy of our Rules & Procedures governing our National Delegation. So too, I believe, does your illegitimate nominee.

    You should read them sometime. That way maybe you wouldn’t make a complete jackwagon out of yourself…assuming that is genetically possible in your case.

  22. Floyd Whitley

    Show me the ballots. Very simple request.

    Unless you are admitting that there were indeed no rules and no verifiable democratic statewide process in the SLC convention. But then, that would mean your nominee truly IS…illegitimate.

  23. David W. Hartigan

    The Gentleman from California, Mr. Grundmann, succinctly points out the entire problem with the system in his first paragraph. He states the first part of the issue is that: “a) the nomination was NOT ” rigged.” Voters had a preference for Darrell Castle…etc.” If this were true, there would be evidence to support this claim. This evidence would consist of registered Constitution Party voters selecting a candidate of preference at the particular state’s primary or caucus. (If a state were not ballot qualified, voters could have been contacted somehow, perhaps via a mail in ballot.) If these are indeed the voters of which the Gentleman is speaking, there is no way the selected candidate, (any for that matter), was selected by the voters as many, including California’s, primary was after the scheduled Constitution Party National Convention. Mr. Grundmann then puts the spotlight on the second part of the issue when he states that “It was based on the personal preferences of the delegates – something which Idaho, and Mr. Myers, as just 2 examples, does not accept.” So the evidence he is stating in this part is that the majority of the CP delegates at convention were acting on their own behalf in “super-delegate” style. This has to be the case with so many states that had not held their primaries. So why should any State or individual accept this as business as usual? So much for representing the people. It is either the voters or the personal preferences of the delegates. Which is it? Idaho stands with its voters like it or not. Keep that in mind when bashing the Idaho affiliate. You are attacking our voters as well. As far as the voters in other states are concerned, take a look at how many states held their presidential primaries after Apr 17:
    http://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2016-presidential-primary-schedule-calendar/.
    Delegates from all of those states should have abstained and waited to hear from their registered voter base with the nominating convention held after the DNC’s. At the very least this would avoid the appearance of impropriety. If the CP were to begin to gain traction the convention date and the presidential candidate selection process will be used to put a quick end to it. This only makes strategic sense. Everything we do must be above board or the D’s and R’s will wipe us out with it. The process must be fair and open to public input and scrutiny. If it is not, that too will also be used against us by the other parties. The procedures are open to governmental and bureaucratic scrutiny. We all know how bad that can get.
    Here, a writer points out another concern when he states that: “The Constitution Party National Convention selects the parties national candidate for President and Vice President, not the state parties.” When the reality should be this: “the National Convention is convened to nominate and select a candidate for President and Vice President, whom the voters of the several states have chosen themselves in primaries and caucuses assembled and sent delegates to vote on their behalf.” This former illustrates again the fact that the voters are left out. The latter statement includes the voters. Selection should not be left to the National Party or the State affiliates. We cannot say that we represent the people if they are left out of the process.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *