Constitution Party National Committee Passes Resolution on Arizona Illegal Immigration Law

The following resolution was voted on and passed by the Constitution Party National Committee on May 1st, 2010, in Minneapolis.

Whereas, The Constitution Party platform affirms the integrity of the international borders of these united States and the Constitutional authority and duty of the federal government to guard and to protect those borders, including the regulation of the numbers and of the qualifications of immigrants into the country; and

Whereas, the Federal Government has wrongfully neglected its role to guard and protect our borders, and thus all Americans, from an unprecedented invasion of illegal aliens;

Whereas, the State of Arizona, in the dire straits of enduring the brunt of most of the illegal crossings of the national border, has passed Arizona Senate Bill 1070 which was signed by Governor Jan Brewer on April 23, 2010; and

Whereas, this Arizona law enables its Law Enforcement officers to enforce federal immigration law using federal standards protecting the rights of all citizens, and are required to do so without violating civil rights and without resorting to racial profiling;

Whereas, the Arizona law does not require new documentation such as a national ID card, but uses existing identification documentation to establish a presumption of legal status;

Therefore be it Resolved, that the Constitution Party National Committee stands with the people of Arizona and applauds the State of Arizona and its Governor Jan Brewer for its recent action to protect and defend it citizens, our country, and the sovereignty of both the State of Arizona and the United States of America.

No news yet on whether there were other resolutions which were passed.

85 thoughts on “Constitution Party National Committee Passes Resolution on Arizona Illegal Immigration Law

  1. Mark Seidenberg

    It should have stated in the third Whereas. “Senate Bill 1070 as amended by House Bill 1062”. I have been spending some
    time in Arizona working to get that issue through
    the AZ legislature, while attending College, viz.,
    Palo Verde Community College in Computer Science.

    My question is why the CP is giving applause to
    Republican Governor Jan Brewer, viz., a RINO?

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman,
    American Independent Party an affiliate with
    the America’s Independent Party since June 27,
    2008.

  2. Thomas L. Knapp

    The Constitution does not enumerate a federal power to regulate immigration.

    The documents of the time (the anti-Federalists pointed out the omission), and the fact that the first federal immigration regulation wasn’t passed until 1882, indicate that the framers didn’t INTEND or IMPLY any such power.

    “Constitution” Party, my ass.

  3. Thomas L. Knapp

    Bob,

    Yes, some would say that.

    But that’s not what the “Constitution” Party said.

    What the “Constitution” Party did was conjure up a non-existent federal power out of thin air, then assert an emergent/contingent, rather than constitution-based, “states right” to exercise that power due to federal negligence.

  4. Jeremy Young

    Mark, the CP is applauding Brewer for her action on this bill. They’re not saying they support or like her overall. It’s the same as when I applaud Jim Bunning for trying to audit the Fed, even though he’s a hateful human being.

  5. Mark Seidenberg

    To: Thomas L. Knapp:

    Please explain what your point was about immigration regulation in 1882, because Cody
    Quirk asseverates that I am “lacking in intelligence on American politics”. Could that
    be because I have duel citizenship, viz., United
    States and Canada.

    You are just incorrect that the “first federal immigration regulation was not passed until
    1882.” The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882,
    (22 Stat. 58) was not the first such law. Please
    note the Act of February 28, 1803 entitled
    “An Act To Prevent The Importation Of Certain Persons Into Certain States”. That passed Congress and became law 79 years earlier.
    It was to exclude negros, mulattos, or others
    persons of colour (sic.). {It went into effect on
    April 1, 1804.}

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman,
    American Independent Party, affiliated with the
    America’s Independent Party since June 27, 2008
    1

  6. Don Grundmann

    ” American Independent Party, affiliated with the America’s Independent Party since June 27, 2008.”

    Response – The personal corruption of Mark Seidenberg, his involvement in filing false documentation with the California Secretary of State to deceive that office regarding the true status of the American Independent Party and his attack upon it, is documented at TheCorruptionOfAlanKeyes.blogspot.com. No true vote was ever taken to disaffiliate the AIP from the Constitution Party. Seidenberg conspired to construct false documents claiming such vote occurred. The American Independent Party is still the California branch of the Constitution Party. ” America’s Independent Party ” was formed by and for the corruption of Alan Keyes.

    Don J. Grundmann, D.C. Vice-Chairman American Independent Party, California branch of the Constitution Party

  7. Cody Quirk

    Mark, you don’t even understand why we are praising Jan Brewer in the first place.

    You are a moron, end of discussion!

  8. Thomas L. Knapp

    Mr. Seidenberg,

    Nice try. Are you being intentionally dishonest, or did you just grab something without checking it out first?

    The law in question is not “An Act To Prevent The Importation Of Certain Persons Into Certain States,” it is “An Act To Prevent The Importation Of Certain Persons Into Certain States, Where, by the Laws Thereof, Their Admission is Prohibited.”

    The law created no restriction on immigration whatsoever. It recognized restrictions on importation (of slaves) by states, and was an attempt to recapture revenue expended having naval vessels or port officials intercept assist in enforcement of those state laws at federally controlled points of entry.

    In other words, it is a law which confirms EXACTLY what I said — Congress understood that it did not have the authority to regulate immigration.

  9. Mark Seidenberg

    TO Cody Quirk,

    Back in 1970, I was a student at San Francisco State College. I was working for College President S. I. Hayakawa as an employee of the State of California.

    One day he told me about a left wing take over of
    a Japanese – American Organization named the
    Japanese American Citizen League that passed
    a resolution calling for “reparations for WW II
    interment of Japanese Americans”. Governor
    Jan Brewer is a member of the Japanese American Citizen League.

    Dr. Hayakawa was against the idea of reparations,
    because it was demeaning to Japanese Americans and make them “basket cases”
    and the idea of reparations caused his “flesh to
    crawl with shame and embarrament.”

    Again why is the CP giving “applause” to Arizona
    Governor Jan Brewer who is a member of the
    Japanese American Citizens League that calls
    for the reparation for World Wat II of Japanese
    Americans.

    Dr. Hayakawa would turn over in his grave if he
    knew that the Governor of Arizona belonged to
    an organization that called for reparations.

    Has the CP sunk so low that it would applaud
    Governor Jan Brewer who is a member of this
    pro-reparations organization.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman,
    American Independent Party affliated with the
    America’s Independent Party since June 27, 2008.

  10. Starchild

    Indeed it is sad that the “Constitution Party” uses that name, when they so obviously don’t believe in upholding the Constitution (see Tom Knapp’s comments @4 and @10).

    I suppose they see the name as a selling point, but to me it just says they lack integrity. If they were more honest they’d change their name to the Conservative Nationalist Party, or the God & Country Party, or something like that.

  11. Steve Schulin

    I notice the first sentence of the resolution refers to the “united States”. The choice to capitalize States alone is a contrast to the choice made in the first line of the Constitution itself. What’s up with this, Constitution Party?

  12. C James Madison

    Here is a portion of Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution which enumerates the powers of Congress:

    “To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;”

    Arizona should not be repelling invasions but is doing so as a result of the lack of action and the immediate necessity. ( I say immediate even though illegal immigration has been a serious problem since 1988.)

  13. Mark Seidenberg

    TO: Thomas L. Knapp

    You are correct on the full title of the Act of February 28, 1803. However, wrong on the point of law. Prior to January 1, 1808, Congress
    did not have the authority of the Constitution, Article I, Section 9, Clause 1, So all Congress was doing was passing a law to enforce the laws
    of the several states. That changed on January
    1, 1808.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman,
    American Independent Party, affliate of the
    America’s Independent Party since June 27, 2008.

  14. Thomas L. Knapp

    Mark,

    OK, presumably you can point to the Constitutional Amendment which became effective on January 1, 1808, giving Congress a power nowhere previously extended it and until that date explicitly prohibited it.

    You may think that the Constitution gave Congress authority over immigration. The guys who WROTE the Constitution, and 93 years’ worth of US Congresses, disagree with you.

  15. wolfefan

    Hi Mark –

    Why is any group “calling for” reparations to Japanese Americans, since those reparations have already been paid? Is the JACL arguing that more reparations are needed? I looked at their website, but found no call for reparations. In case I missed it, do you have a link we could read?

    Oh and FYI – the president who signed the bill which paid reparations to Japanese Americans? Ronald Reagan.

  16. Mark Seidenberg

    TO: Steve Schulin,

    In answer to you inquiry in Post # 15. It could be any or combination of some or all of these issues.

    1. The drafter has a problem with the event in
    York, Pennsylvania on November 15, 1777 at
    the Second Continental Congress.

    2. Goes to the rights of secession by a state.

    3. Upset the Republic of Colombia picked
    the name before the United States of America
    could take the name Columbia.

    4. Likes to sing ” Hail Columbia”.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman,
    American Independent Party, affliated with the
    America’s Independent Party, since June 27, 2008.

  17. Just the tip of the ice berg .......... Lake

    Starchild // May 5, 2010:

    “………. the “Constitution Party” uses that name, when they so obviously don’t believe in upholding the Constitution …….. I suppose they see the name as a selling point, but to me it just says they lack integrity ……”

    [been saying that for years! (and their so called veterans organization, merely a partisan recruiting ruse ……….) ]

  18. wolfefan

    Hi Mark –

    Thanks for the link. I was confused when you said that the group was “calling for” reparations as if it was something that hadn’t already happened.

    Best wishes…

  19. paulie

    Here is a portion of Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution which enumerates the powers of Congress:

    “To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;”

    None of which is in any way relevant to immigration or emigration.

  20. Cody Quirk

    Again why is the CP giving “applause” to Arizona
    Governor Jan Brewer who is a member of the
    Japanese American Citizens League that calls
    for the reparation for World Wat II of Japanese
    Americans.

    = Again, just how stupid can you be to not see that we’re praising the AZ governor ONLY on the recent bill she signed into law.

    You are still a moron, Mark.

  21. Mark Seidenberg

    TO: Paulie,

    Article 1, Section 9, clause 1 states: “The migration or importation of such persons as any of the states now existing shall not be prohibited
    by the Congress prior to year (1808) but a tax or
    duty may be imposted on such importation, not
    to exceed ten dollars for each person.”

    It was not until November 2, 1926, that Article 1,
    Section 35 was repealed from the Oregon Constitution which stated: “No free Negro, or Mulatto, not residing in this state at the time of
    the adoption of this Constitution (1857) shall come, or be within this state, or hold any real
    estate, or maintain any suit therein; and the
    legislature Assembly shall provide by penal
    laws, for the removal, by public officers, of
    all such Negros and Mulattoes, and for their
    effectual exclusion from the state, and for
    the punishment of persons who shall bring them
    into the state, or employ, or harbor them.”

    Also not it is still the law in Alaska, The Act to
    Prevent The Exercise of Foreign Jurisdiction
    within the limits of the Territory. It was extended to Alaska from Oregon in 1884 and
    it is still the law. The law was orginally passed
    in Michigan and was then extended to Iowa. Then Extended from Iowa to Oregon. That was
    the practice in the 18 th & 19th century, viz.,
    beyond the States in the Territories to pass
    excusion laws into one territorial legislation and
    Congress would just extend that law to another
    territory. That was how Congress got around the
    restrictions Paulie.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman,
    American Independent Party, affilated with
    the America’s Independent Party on June 27, 2008.

  22. Don Grundmann

    ” [been saying that for years! (and their so called veterans organization, merely a partisan recruiting ruse ……….) ”

    Response – Thankfully the Constitution Party not only has more integrity than any other party but also than their partisan critics such as so-called veterans defenders who can’t hold a candle to the work that the CP has done and is doing to defend veterans and their interests.

    Don J. Grundmann, D.C. Vice-Chairman American Independent Party, California branch of the Constitution Party

  23. Mark Seidenberg

    TO: Thomas L. Knapp

    Also you 1882 date does not include the Nationality Act of July 14, 1870 and the
    Garfield Act of 1872,

    To: Don Grundmann

    You have not been a member of the AIP State
    Central Committee, since September 2 – 3, 2008
    at mid-night. Please stop calling yourself “Vice
    Chairman American Independent Party it is a lie.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman,
    American Independent Party, affiliated with the
    America’s Independent Party

  24. Don Grundmann

    Mark SeidenLiar – I am the duly elected Vice-Chairman. You are the fake who has lied countless times inclusive of conspiring to file false documents with the Secretary of State office. If you are really the Vice-Chairman then you will tell your lawyers that you no longer want to run like a dog from an actual trial in King v Robinson. You will tell your lawyers that you want no further delaying tactics of any kind and that you want to go to trail as soon as possible. If you do this then you can show in an actual trial that you are telling the truth. We both know that since you are a coward you have no intention of having a trial because such an event would expose that you have been lying all along just as I illustrate at TheCorruptionOfAlanKeyes.blogspot.com. You are a liar just as your handlers/controllers are liars. You are a traitor to the nation.

    Don J. Grundmann, D.C. Vice-Chairman American Independent Party, California branch of the Constitution Party

  25. AZ Border Dude

    Boy am I glad I don’t belong to any party. I am registered to vote but not with any party; that’s truly Independent. Such tirades as these spoil the thrust of the article and the thought that the support might be genuine.

    Gov. Brewer is no more Rino than Tinker Bell. She is very politically savvy as this shows. She knew there would be hell to pay and she deftly lured the Prez into it. For decades AZ has been saying we need the borders controlled and DC has been giving us the finger at every turn. Her single pen stroke lit a fire that has turned out tons of Illegal Immigrants to protest. Where was DHS during those events. They could have probably rounded up nearly half the illegals in the nation.

    I have been watching conditions on the border for over 30 years and it has been deteriorating lately. Because of where I reside, I’m wary of going out at night without personal protection. I am a gun rights believer as, obviously, Gov. Brewer, since she signed another knee jerk bill; the right of anyone in Arizona to carry a firearm concealed without a permit.

    The only people that care about the Japaneese thing are not really here in AZ. I do know some folks that were interred in those concentration camps and they were terrible. The big difference between them and the Nazi camps was the lack of geonocide. Reptrations are the easiest way to squeek out of losing a lawsuit. Which is what woud have happened otherweise.

    Some of the folks seem to have bought into the concept fostered by the Progressives as to Gov. Brewer’s abilities. She got off to a rocky start as a result of the awful fiscal mess left her by our illustrious Secretary of Homeland Security when she bailed out of here to greener pastures. Gov. Brewer has taken ahold of the bull and is wrestling it into submission more and more every day. From the polls it appears whe will be re-elected. The Progressives don’t have anyone anywhere near her talent to put up.

    Brewer kicked Washington in the political groin and got their attention. I’ll bet they have some very choice words of endearment for her.
    Y’all have a pleasant day, now.
    Gerry, the AZ Border Dude
    No official of anything and no office to list. True Independent voter.
    Want to annoy a Progressive and a Conservative; register INDEPENDENT —
    then vote.

  26. Thomas L. Knapp

    Mr. Seidenberg,

    You write:

    “Also you 1882 date does not include the Nationality Act of July 14, 1870”

    Why would it? It relates to naturalization (which Congress is given power over in the Constitution), not to immigration. They are two entirely different things.

    “and the Garfield Act of 1872”

    … which naturalized people born in Oregon Territory en masse. Once again, naturalization, not immigration.

    It wasn’t until 1875 that an activist Reconstruction Supreme Court waved its magic wand and created a power of Congress to regulate immigration.

  27. Steve Schulin

    Thanks, Mark Seidenberg, for your answer to my question. I’m still hoping that Constitution Party folks here will be able to explain why their party committee’s resolution refers to “united States” instead of the capitalized “United States”. As I mentioned earlier, the first line of the Constitution capitalizes both words, and it seems striking that the party which has such a fine name would diverge from the Constitution in this matter.

    And Mark, I haven’t thanked you enough for the great investigative and other work you’ve done in defense of the Constitution in the matter of the eligibility of Sen. John McCain and [alleged] President Barack Obama to serve as President of the United States.

    I recall meeting Don at the CP convention in Kansas City a couple of years ago. He mentioned that it was his idea to change the name of the party some years ago from U.S. Taxpayers Party to Constitution Party. That was a great idea, Don. Do you have any insight into what’s up with the use of “united States” in this resolution?

  28. Lencho

    Thanks for a voice of common sense and reason Boarder Dude. The dialogue prior to your input has been distracting and politics at its worst. It does describe a dialectic of shadows, at least on one side of the argument. Truth and honor will never emerge so long as deception and pride enter the arena of dialogue. To stand in defense of truth is the unfortunate ground one is reduced to take at times.

    Unfortunately once some people have been introduced to the dialectic of reason, they get the taste of it in their mouths and either argue for amusement, and are always contradicting and refuting others in imitation of those who refute them, like puppy-dogs, they rejoice in pulling and tearing at all who come near them; or they have a hidden agenda to push. When a person matures, he will no longer be guilty of such insanity; he will be a dialectician who is seeking for truth, and not the eristic, who is contradicting for the sake of amusement or agenda. The mature truth seeker will have a moderation of his character which will increase instead of diminish the honor of the pursuit.

    I too do not like political parties. Unfortunately, one must pragmatically consider the manipulated dialectic of the two party system in America. Indeed, as in the immigration debate to this point we see that the love of men has waxed cold. Only one individual has opened the way to see beyond the shadows of the patterns of this world. For the declaration of Jesus Christ in the platform, and for the necessity of putting forth candidates who can bring God back to the political debate and hopefully be candidates of principle and not personal gain is the hope that those of us Constitution Party members hold to.

    Please, let’s find a way to be kinder and gentler to each other in our efforts to find the good, the true and the beautiful. If we differ, let us differ in honor and caring one for the other. Unless we can run the gauntlet of all objections, and readily prove or disprove them, not by appeals to opinion, but with the common goal of shedding light on absolute truth, never faltering at any step of the argument—–unless we can to all this, we will know nothing of the truth and apprehend only a shadow, if anything at all, which is given by opinion and not by rational objective reason coupled with an invitation and appeal to the Sovereign of us all for His enlightenment. We may not trust each other because we have become jaded and cynical. Only by finding the path He showed us can our trust and confidence in each other improve.

  29. Don Grundmann

    ” I recall meeting Don at the CP convention in Kansas City a couple of years ago. He mentioned that it was his idea to change the name of the party some years ago from U.S. Taxpayers Party to Constitution Party. ”

    Response : Steve – I would like to take credit for the idea of changing the name but I cannot. To my memory I was simply referring to the name change; a process that I was not involved in.

    Don J. Grundmann, D.C. Vice-Chairman American Independent Party, California branch of the Constitution Party

  30. paulie

    None of which is in any way relevant to immigration or emigration.

    = According to your interpretation.

    According to reality and the standard definition of words. Migration today is no more an “invasion” than it was in 1910 or 1850.

  31. paulie

    @28. Maybe I missed something? I see you note something about importation of slaves, nothing about limiting immigration of willing persons.

  32. paulie

    “…could have probably rounded up nearly half the illegals ”

    1) No human being is illegal
    2) Economy would have fallen on its face, to say nothing of administrative costs of this ridiculous scenario
    3) “Round up…” how’d that work out for the Germans in the 40s? Or Stalin? Or…. ?

  33. paulie

    It wasn’t until 1875 that an activist Reconstruction Supreme Court waved its magic wand and created a power of Congress to regulate immigration.

    Exactly. No such power has ever been legitimately granted to or exercised by any government. The power to define trespass belongs only to actual property owners. Giving it to government means that they own or co-own all the land in the US, which is a really bad idea.

  34. paulie

    refers to “united States” instead of the capitalized “United States”.

    From what I have read, that is how it was generally done before Mr. Lincoln.

    As I mentioned earlier, the first line of the Constitution capitalizes both words

    Are you sure? If you have a link to a photocopy of the original that would help. It is possible that if you are referring to a transcript that they capitalized it after the modern fashion. You could be right, but you may want to check.

  35. Just the tip of the ice berg .......... Lake

    paulie // May 6, 2010 at 4:57 pm

    “…could have probably rounded up nearly half the illegals ” ………….
    3) “Round up…” how’d that work out for the Germans in the 40s? Or Stalin? Or…. ?

    a) how about … Japanese orientated USA residents ????????????????

  36. Just the tip of the ice berg .......... Lake

    paulie // May 6, 2010:

    Doctor Donald J. Grundmann = According to your interpretation.

    paulie = According to reality and the standard definition of words. Migration today is no more an “invasion” than it was in 1910 or 1850.

    Lake = having dealt with logic and the Chiropractor in 2004 I find it impossible to do so at the present time!

  37. wolfefan

    Hmmm… when I went back to check the link it didn’t work… I apologize. There are plenty of pictures on Teh Interwebz for folks to find… both words are capitalized.

  38. LP "sane" member

    IF there is ONE thing that all sides of the Libertarian Party can AGREE on, it is that the Constitution Party is a “fraud” and should change their name indeed — yes to # 14.

    They would be the first bunch to trample on the 1st amendment and start to whack GLBT folks, while making sure we all read the Bible each morning, afternoon, and evening. Put them in the same box with Islamic nutjobs.

  39. paulie

    wolfefan,

    Thanks for the info. I’d be curious to hear from those who know more about this. I remember reading in the past that the uncapitalized u was common in the pre-Lincoln era, but I don’t remember where I read that. If anyone has additional information, please post.

    Lake,

    I was quoting/respoing to Quirk, not Grundmann, in the selection you quote.

    Member,

    While I’m far from being a fan of either self-styled Christians or Islamists mixing their religious peculiarities with politics, I’m forced to agree with Bill Maher that in today’s society, the excesses of the Islamic theocrats tend to be far worse than those of the “Christian” ones. This wasn’t always the case in the past – see Crusades, Inquisition, Witch Burnings, etc.

    In the Islamic calendar, it is now the year 1431 AH, and Islamic fundamentalists today behave much like “Christian” church-and-statists in our own year of 1431 AD did.

    Don’t get me wrong – this is far from justifying stirring the hornet’s next by “fighting them over there” or curbing our civil liberties to “fight them over here.” In fact, I’m more inclined to agree with those that say that “they’re over here because “we” (sic) are over there.”

    Still, the reality is that it’s the Islamic nuts, not the “Christian” ones, who make a habit of doing things like issuing death threats against comedians, cartoonists, authors, etc., among other things.

  40. Mark Seidenberg

    To: Thomas L. Knapp & Paulie

    I thought you would like a clear understand how the first exclusion immigration law got enacted
    by Congress. It was on January 17, 1803 that
    the people of Willmington, North Carolina memorialized Congress that group of Free Negroes and Mulatoes arrive in there port as
    immigrants from the Island of Guadeloupe.
    This caused a panic because they thought these
    immigrants came from Hispaniola Island to cause trouble among the Negro Slaves in the
    area. Congress acted with the Act of February 28, 1803, which went into effect on April 1, 1804.

    Therefore the first Act on immigration exclusion
    was enacted on February 28, 1803.

    Does this help you understand how far back in time Congress had exclusion of Immigrants in
    these United States of America.

    Unlike the CP we in the AIP recognize the event
    in York, PA on November 15, 1777.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman,
    American Independent Party, affiliated with the
    America’s Independent Party, since June 27, 2008

  41. Thomas L. Knapp

    Mr. Seidenberg,

    Here’s a link to a copy of the law you reference:

    http://abolition.nypl.org/content/docs/text/Act_of_1803.pdf

    As anyone who cares to read that law can clearly see, it creates no federal immigration regulation whatsoever. It merely instructs port officials to deny entry to persons excluded under STATE laws.

    It wasn’t until 1875 that Congress believed itself to have the power to pass federal immigration restrictions. That’s when the Supreme Court told them that they’d been wrong for 85 years in believing themselves to have no such power.

    It wasn’t until 1882 that Congress actually exercised its newly created power with the Chinese Exclusion Act.

    Those are historical facts. They will remain historical facts no matter how tightly you screw your eyes shut, no matter how hard you click your heels together, and no matter how mightily you express your wish that what actually happened had happened differently.

  42. "Multiple Liar[s] ??????" .......... Lake

    LP “sane” member //
    May 7, 2010 at 12:15 pm
    “IF there is ONE thing that all sides of the Libertarian Party can AGREE on, it is that the Constitution Party is a “fraud” …….”

    [Lake: and why did you limit your
    reply to the (so called) Libertarians?
    Do you consider INDEPENDENT
    Political Report as a de facto LP site?]

    Post Script: could not agree more
    and this goes back to 2003 or further!

  43. Alexander S. Peak

    While I am pleased to see the Constitution Party use the phrase these united states, I am saddened to see that Constitution Party is unaware that the U. S. Constitution in no way grants to the federal government the authority to regulate or centrally plan human migration. It has the constitutionally-recognised power to set uniform standards on who is and who is not a citizen, and to steal (it would sat “tax”) up to ten dollars from each emigrant to these united states—nothing else.

    To Mr. Madison, I am not convinced you and I understand the term “invasion” in the same manner as one another. An invasion is a violation of property rights, and only individuals can possess rights, not governments.

    If Jose comes onto your privately-held land without your consent, that is an invasion of your property rights. But if you are a landlord, and Jose wants to rent from you, and you want to accept Jose’s money, no third party, not even the government itself, has any legitimate authority to infringe upon your freedom of contract. If the government does, then it is invading upon your property rights, and you have every right to defend said property rights from the government. (In fact, I believe this is why they wrote the second amendment.)

    Let’s use another scenario. Let’s say you own a farm, and let’s say the army of the Chinese Communist Party invades. Let’s say that, in their invasion, they cross your land without your consent. Even if they don’t trample upon your crops in the process, they have still invaded upon your rights, and you have a right to seek restitution. But, if they do trample upon your crops, that’s even worse, and you have the right to seek even more restitution.

    But let’s say a bunch of exiles from China decide to emigrate to these United States, and let’s say they don’t violate the legitimate property rights of any individual in the process. Let’s say you own a farm, and your neighbour owns an apartment complex. Let’s say he decides to rent out his apartment complex to the Chinese immigrants. Do you have a right to go over to your neighbour’s land and infringe upon his property rights? I’m sure you will agree with me that you do not, and for the same reason he and his tennants have no right to come onto your farm and infringe upon yours. Even if each and every Chinese immigrant is a gun-toting member of the NRA, they have not threatened you or your property, and as such, you have no right to invade upon your neighbour’s land.

    In conclusion, immigration is not invasion, no matter how many people immigrate. Invasion is invasion, such as when someone enters your home without your consent, or when someone walks across your land without your consent, or when someone snatches your apple without your consent, or when someone interferes with the nonviolent operation of your private business without your consent.

    Respectfully yours,
    Alex Peak

  44. Trent Hill

    “While I am pleased to see the Constitution Party use the phrase these united states”

    This is something the CP is very careful to do. They ALWAYS say “these” instead of “the”.

  45. Mark Seidenberg

    To: Thomas L. Knapp on post # 49

    First I stand corrected about the effective date of the Act of February 28, 1803. The effective date was April 1, 1803 and not 1804 as I orginally stated. It had been may years since I
    read that Act of Congress and I missed the effective date.

    However, you are legally wrong as to your other
    issues. Note the Act of Congress of July 16, 1790. Under that act the Virginia Migration
    Act of 1783 that excluded Free Negro from immigrating into the Commonweath of Virginia
    was applied to the District of Columbia “until
    Congress shall otherwise provide by law” an alternative law.

    I have not found Congress repealing that Virginia Migration Act of 1783 in the District of
    Columbia. Have you found an act that repealed
    or replaced that act?

    Again looking at the territory of the Commonwealth of Virginia by the Act of the
    General Assembly of December 30, 1788 or
    the Act of Congress of July 13, 1787, I have
    found no law that limited the scope of the
    Virginia Migration Act of 1783, until Michigan
    Territory passed the Act to Prevent the Exercise
    of Foreign Jurisdiction in the Territory of Michigan. Have you found any repeal or limiting
    laws on the Virginia Migration Act of 1783 until
    Michigan acted against Ohio and the British from
    Canada. Remember British troops did not depart its last fort in Michigan until the mid-1830’s from the war of 1812.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman,
    American Independent Party, affiliated with the
    America’s Independent Party since June 27, 2008

  46. frank Colt

    Thanks to arizona and gov. brewer…in a strange change of events they have started more push and talk of A AMNESTY BILL in response to arizona’s knee jerk actions….Amenesty advocates are working furiously at this time to draft a bill…thanks jan

  47. Mark Seidenberg

    TO: Thomas L. Knapp

    I just looked at your website. I not you have an
    interest in Paine. Did you know that Paine in his
    broadside PUBLIC GOOD errored in the newspaper date by two weeks. Thought you be
    interested. I have tried with no success in trying
    to emendate that error out of Public Good, but non of the publisher want to correct or footnote
    that error.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman,
    American Independent Party, affiliated with the
    America’s Independent Party since June 27, 2008

  48. Thomas L. Knapp

    Mr. Seidenberg,

    Are you stupid or just congenitally dishonest? We’re well beyond the point where the plausible conclusions have been narrowed down to the one or to the other.

    Congress, in addition to being the legislative branch of the federal government, is also the plenary local government of the District of Columbia. Or, as the Constitution puts it, Congress has the authority:

    To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government
    of the United States

    Congress’s constitutional powers over DC are without limit.

    Congress’s powers as a federal government making legislation which is effective in the several states are strictly limited, however — and nowhere in the Constitution is the power to regulate immigration found among them, nor until 1875 did it assume that that power was somehow implied.

    Once again, the facts will remain the facts no matter how inconvenient to your position they may be.

  49. Mark Seidenberg

    TO: Thomas J. Knapp

    You are just incorrect as to the rights of the general government after January 1, 1808. It was just withheld to Congress until 1808.

    The laws of Virginia and Maryland applied to the
    District of Columbia until repealed by Congress.
    Have you seen a repeal of the Virginia Migration
    Act of 1783 for the District of Columbia prior to
    Article Amendement 14?

    As for exclusion migration laws they were passed
    in many states all over the United States of America prior to 1868. Read the Black Code
    laws around the different states. The Act of
    February 28, 1803 is a good example of how the
    general government assisted the several states
    in enforceing their own exclusion immigration
    laws prior to the events of January 1, 1808.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg

  50. wolfefan

    Hi Mark –
    I googled “Virginia Migration Act” and got no results. Do you have a link to the law you are referring to?

    Thanks…

  51. 21st century American politics ??????" .......... Lake

    Mark Seidenberg //
    May 9, 2010 at 5:02 pm
    REgarding: Thomas L. Knapp

    Markie Poo,

    [a] got a shot of the Noonan golf shirt on the digital camera.

    [b] no word from Diane Templin, Ms Fence Sitter 2010

    [c] no word on San Diego AIP primary ballot

    [d] originally from the Heart land, I have tried to work with the Lib’s blue collar working class Missouri sage *sarcasm* Thomas Knapp for years. I found out good and early that Doctor George Phillies was a deceitful and illogical dishonest (so called) Libertarian activist.

    Despite warnings of similar behavior per Knapp I continued to have hope for him as potential viable member of the Loyal Opposition and foe of the Duopoly Establishment.

    Sorry to say: George Phillies, Junior, and out and out liar! Both guys have honorary ‘Spin Doctorates’!

  52. Mark Seidenberg

    TO: Wolfefan’

    I do not know if the Virginia Migration Act is on line in its 18th Century form. My suggestion is go to a university law library and ask to see THE CODE OF VIRGINIA: with the Declaration of Independence and Constitution of the United
    States and The Declaration of Rights and Constitution of Virginia. {Published pursuante to An Act of the General Assembly of Virginia,
    Passed on the Fifteenth day of August 1849,
    by William F. Ritchie, Public Printer.

    Then go to page 747 (note in two volumes)
    It is listed under Offenses Against Public Policy
    as Chap. 198, section 28.

    I am sorry my set in to old to bend the pages to
    make you a photo copy and mail to you.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman,
    American Independent Party.

  53. Mark Seidenberg

    TO: Thomas L. Knapp

    In your post # 49 you asseverated that the Act of February 28, 1803, created “no Federal immigration regulation whatsoever”. You are
    just wrong. Let’s take the Virginia Migration Act
    as codified in 1849 under “Offenses Against Public Policy” as Chap. 198, Section 28 as sighted above. It created 4 proviso by which
    the General Government would not enforce
    that Virginia Law, viz., 1) a native of one of the
    several states or the District of Columbia. 2)
    a Citizen. 3) a registered seaman of the United
    States. 4) a seaman native of countries beyond
    the Cape of Good Hope.

    Prior to the Article Amendment 14 in 1868 that
    was very clear. See the United States Supreme
    Court case of HADDEN vs. POTT, 72 US 518,
    520. It explained what was ment by the fourth
    proviso.

    Who should the post reader beleive as to the
    meaning of the fourth proviso, you or the views
    of the nine members of the Supreme Court?

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman,
    American Independent Party

  54. Thomas L. Knapp

    Mr. Seidenberg,

    All the spinning in the world will not change the fact that the Act of 1803 was an act under which the federal government enforced a STATE immigration law.

    There were clearly some congresscritters who WANTED national regulation of immigration, but who understood that the Constitution didn’t allow for it. That they hung their laws on the hooks of enforcement of STATE laws is additional evidence of that understanding.

  55. Don Grundmann

    ” Lake: does that include the Constitution Party of California, a non existent entity ??????”

    Response – The American Independent Party is the California branch of the Constitution Party – despite anything that ” The Fool ” may claim to the contrary.

    Don J. Grundmann, D.C. Vice-Chairman American Independent Party, California branch of the Constitution Party

  56. Spin, spin, spin, spin .......... Lake

    Don Grundmann as pure insanity ……….

    (hit the Constitution Party national site and just try to find patriots Edward Noonan, Markham Robinson and Mark Siedenberg. You literally do not know what you are talking about.)

    2000: deform / reform movement

    2004: Natural Law Party

    2008: Constitution Party

    as verified by independent sources,
    a half a dozen non California and non
    Texas organizations considering a
    21st Century path other than CP!

    You are a deluded and dangerous
    person whom needs to be watched
    if not incarcerated! You are not
    half the person you were in 2004!

  57. Don Grundmann

    to ” The Fool ” – YOU, as a supporter of the attacks of homosexual perversion upon children, are the last person to speak of ” deluded ” except in reference to yourself. I am sure that veterans and their families, who you claim to be a defender of, will appreciate your support for the forces which attacked the U.S.S. Liberty in 1967; killing 34 and wounding 171. You do this by your support of Robinson, Seidenberg, and Noonan who are if not outright then simply the next closest thing to being open Anti-Defamation League ( ADL ) agents; those who put the interests of Israel above those of our nation. And since the ADL works hand-in-glove with the Southern Poverty Law Center of Morris Dees, an outright communist disinformation organization that is dedicated to attacking and destroying our nation, should we then be surprised that ” The Fool ” supports such agents? Only these treasonous organizations, long known for their domestic spying and espionage actions, and nitwits like ” The Fool ” would ever dream of calling ultra corrupt traitors like Robinson, Seidenberg, and Noonan ” patriots.” The presentation of such an idea by ” The Fool ” shows exactly where his loyalties lie in regard to our nation.

    Don J. Grundmann, D.C. Vice-Chairman American Independent Party, California branch of the Constitution Party

  58. _

    I think this grundmann must have homosexual fantasies as he is totally hung up on the gay agenda. Also, he likes to talk about children…any intelligent person would see that there is something terribly wrong with this guy. We shoudl advoid conversing with him as I am sure he is being watched by federal authorities and or state….if not he should be..

  59. Spin, spin, spin, spin .......... Lake

    “I am sure he (wackie, Doctor Donald J. Grundmann) is being watched by federal authorities and or state….if not he should be..”

    …… as the Southern California FBI told me about (current federal felon, former congress member) ‘Puke’ Cunningham the thicker the file, the greater our interest!

    [a] are you a registered California American Independent Party citizen ???????????

    [b] have you received your county voters’ hand book ?????????

    [c] have you complained to irs.gov, ftb.ca.gov, chiro.ca.gov ??????????

  60. Don Grundmann

    And so we have ” – ” ( Mark Seidenberg ) and ” The Fool,” an open supporter of traitors to the nation and a staunch defender of attacks upon children by the homosexual community. Both willing to betray the country and the children of the country. Both rats who will spread any lie at any time. ” Birds of a feather…”

    Don J. Grundmann, D.C. Vice-Chairman American Independent Party, California branch of the Constitution Party

  61. Jill Pyeatt

    Don Grundmann is absolutely obsessed with homosexuality. It’s his favorite thing to talk about.

  62. Don Grundmann

    No Jill. I actually talk more about the defenders of homosexuality like you. You know – those who will sacrifice the children of our nation to make themselves ( in their own imaginations )look good. You know – fake Christians who will defend the emotional pathology of homosexuality ( i.e; sin ) no matter how many children are destroyed by it. You know – fake Christians who will totally reinterpret the Bible and say that it actually endorses the sin and soul sickness of homosexuality. You know – just like you.

    Don J. Grundmann, D.C. Vice-Chairman American Independent Party, California branch of the Constitution Party

  63. Alexander S. Peak

    I am proud to be a defender of homosexuality.

    In fact, I wish I were a homosexual, just because I know it would piss off certain irrational people if I were.

    Homosexuals rock!

    Also, open them borders nice and wide, because any federal policy beyond stealing a maximum of ten dollars from each emigrant to the United States is technically unconstitutional. The only borders that should be defended are the borders between a person’s private property and the outside world.

    🙂

  64. Don Grundmann

    Mr. Peak – It is refreshing in a way to meet a proud psychotic. Garden variety psychotics are ashamed ( as they should be ) of their soul sickness but you are certainly different in that you are part of the mass produced herd having pride regarding your infection. But of course that is what the Social Engineering Plantation Masters have been busy producing – mass numbers of psychotics who are prideful of their pathology. An allegorical movie which showed your community was ” I am Legend.” And yes you are really no different from an actual homosexual since though you claim not to be one you stand in defense of the pathology. Hence you have the same soul infection. My condolences to you.

    Don J. Grundmann, D.C. Vice-Chairman American Independent Party, California branch of the Constitution Party

  65. Thomas L. Knapp

    Mr. Grundman,

    If you find meeting proud psychotics “refreshing,” I rather suspect you get a nice jolt of energy every time you use a mirror.

  66. Don Grundmann

    Mr. Knapp – I can understand that you are a complete supporter of the philosophies, and especially the objectives, of your friends Peak, Pyeatt, Lake, etc. above. No surprise there.

    Don J. Grundmann, D.C. Vice-Chairman American Independent Party, California branch of the Constitution Party

  67. Alexander S. Peak

    Mr. Grundmann,

    You’re right. How psychotic of me to ever think that humans are self-owners, and that this self-ownership justifies and legitimises those nonviolent sexual acts that you find scary.

    Obviously, I’d been socially engineered to think that. I was sick in the head. (Just like Winston Smith.)

    But no longer! No longer shall I be a slave to the Social Engineering Plantation Masters! No, for now I’ve seen the light; now I realise that homosexuals are like zombies or something.

    So, from here on out, I will advocate that big government regulate all sexual impulses. I mean, what better way to free people from their slavery to the Social Engineering Plantation Masters, right?

    But all sarcasm aside, I do want to thank you. Here’s where I get serious. You write that I am “really no different from an actual homosexual.” I agree. For, like every homosexual out there, I am the legitimate owner of my own body (as well as my allegedly-infected soul), and as such I have the natural, inalienable right to do with it as I please so long as I do not infringe upon the self-ownership of anybody else in the process.

    Best regards,
    Alex Peak

    P. S. I wonder what your opinion is of this essay by James Redford.

  68. Spin, spin, spin, spin .......... Lake

    I have never tried to be ‘friends’ with fellow Missourian Thomas Knapp, living in my old neighborhood in the Heart Land. Years ago
    I was rebuffed
    by egotistical sand paper egg head George
    Phillies.

    I was told by many folks that the Knappster
    was merely Phillies lite. I continued to try to
    work with him as he was improving his
    writing style and was a potential ally with
    abused veterans and the horrible war
    mentality of the DC neo cons and so called
    Lib Republicans like W. A. R.

    I no longer respond to Knapp’s comments
    as he is outed as a Phillies type of spin
    doctor. I respect his anti W. A. R. stance
    and his vastly improved columns, but a
    ‘friend’ —— not in this life time.

    Cocky, self assured, I am sure that Tom
    could care less of what I thought of him
    on any particular day. Out side of Saint
    Richard Winger, a personal hero, and to
    a lesser degree ‘paulie,’ I could really
    care less what I am thought of.

    reasons to post on Ballot Access News,
    Third Party Watch, Independent Political
    Report:

    [a] to mount some kind of action against
    the Duopoly Establishment

    [b] to leave a written trail of discontent

    Grundmann, some one I personally
    endorsed in 2004, is just taking a
    tangent to coo coo ville. To bound Knapp
    and I, except by ‘home state’ and
    anti war stance is just ludicrous.

    Grundmann ? No surprise there!

  69. paulie

    So, from here on out, I will advocate that big government regulate all sexual impulses.

    Sounds kinky.

    I wonder what your opinion is of this essay by James Redford.

    http://praxeology.net/anarchist-jesus.pdf

    One of my all time favorites, I’ve linked it here and elsewhere many times.

    However, it is too advanced for most people and usually if they respond, it is only to the title, without showing any evidence of having read it.

    I did get one who started replying to it a chapter at a time, but it’s been quite a while since I received an installment and I’m afraid he may have given up. A shame, if so, since I’d love to see a serious rebuttal some time.

    Another thing I’d like to see is more popularized, easier to read/digest stuff encapsulating the same theme.

  70. goodness

    Let’s pray a candidate from the American Independent Party or Consitution Party NEVER get elected. Goodness.

  71. Don Grundmann

    Mr. Peak, ” goodness ” – Not too long ago, as a continuation not only of the history of our nation but of the world as a whole, the idea of teaching children ANYTHING regarding homosexuality, inclusive of homosexual practices and especially teaching ” respect ” of homosexuality in any form, would have been considered totally outrageous and the advocate of such actions would have rightfully been considered as an enemy of their community locally and children in general. Flash forward a few years and a docile lemming populace; having been socially engineered to believe that they ( as lemmings ) are ” enlightened thinkers;” not only rush to the defense of homosexual perversion but openly promote its advancement and teaching in our public school system and in all other cultural venues. Yes, in the ” old days ” what you refer to as ” big government,” which was actually the cultural norms of sexuality that allowed our civilization to thrive and prosper through such actions as protecting children from sexual predators and attack, actually set cultural standards both overt ( legal ) and covert to protect and nourish our future. The total success of social engineering is manifested by its successfully manufactured drones – like both of you – who prattle on about being a ” self- owner;” the practical realization of which extends far beyond your own self and to the imposition upon our society, culture, and nation of the sick standards which your ideas endorse and celebrate. Hence you are both textbook ” success stories,” part of the mass produced widgit equivalent replacement humans that have no shame or guilt in the slightest degree, for the Plantation Masters of the nation.

    Don J. Grundmann, D.C. Vice-Chairman American Independent Party, California branch of the Constitution Party

  72. Sacramento Patriot Report// May 23, 2010 at 10:05 pm????????? .......... Lake

    Potential allies gave Ms Nightingale 2009 to show what she was about. In 2010 she now has one June 8th American Independent Party primary opponent and a boat load of critics ……….. including and especially former cohorts! Not only did she single handed drive ‘Save Our State’ into the ground, but she was ruled as fraudulent in a local, current civil trial.

    Investigate Mark Robinson as an alternative AIP candidate for Government! Investigate Nightingale on http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com ! Know that there is no ‘California Constitution Party’ nor that Ms Nightingale is the de facto November 2010 AIP candidate. Lies! We hate it in Democans and Republicrats, why tolerate it in non Dems and non GOP!

Leave a Reply

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