Rick Jore's Role as a CP State Representative in Montana
Jennifer McKee of the Missoulian State Bureau writes a great article about Rick Jore, the CP state representative for Montana. With 50 Republicans and 49 Democrats, Jore now has a considerable power with his swing vote. Rick made history as the first Constitution Party candidate elected to a state level office. Congratulations, State Representative Jore!
To read the article, click here.
posted by Matthew R. Perry at
11/14/2006 10:39:00 PM
15 Comments:
Rick Jore and the Constitution Party of Montana disaffiliated from the national Constitution Party earlier this year, due to that party's failure to disaffiliate another state party that knowingly elected a state chairman and endorses candidates that would allow abortions in the cases of rape and incest.
By
Joe, at 11/15/2006 12:13:00 PM
It's my understanding that the national party is coming to some sort of understanding to remedy this situation so hopefully an agreement may be made without any compromise. We'll just have to see.
Thanks for your e-mail, Joe.
By
Matthew R. Perry, at 11/15/2006 04:48:00 PM
This is a victory for the Constitution Party of Montana, not the national Constitution Party.
Since 1992, the national Constitution Party (originally the U.S. Taxpayers Party) has pursued a Pluralist direction in league with Mormonism, which is the foundational issue as to what led to its pro-abortion vote in Tampa last Spring. Many Christian activists have left the national party, including Jore's Montana affiliate. Others have joined the explicitly Christian American Heritage Party (http://www.americanheritageparty.org).
As long as the mission of the Constitution Party is not explicitly Christian, future compromises on Life and other issues is guaranteed.
By
Anonymous, at 11/16/2006 01:45:00 PM
Scott Bartlett and Bill Shearer have no desire to reconcile with the principled state parties that have left. They both have said good riddance and Scott bragged to the assembled members of the CPMN that new affiliates were formed in Ohio and Missouri to replace those that had disaffiliated. There is no desire by national to reunite or reconcile.
The only understanding that is taking place is that the national party wants it there way or the highway. Chris Hansen is now Bill Shearer's heir apparent that is the "sort of understanding to remedy the situation."
The group now calling itself the Constitution Party National Committee may very likely merge with the Independent American Party by 2008 and change its name to the Independent American Party. The Hansen clan will be thrilled and they will install their puppet Frank Fluckiger as the new national chairman and move the national headquarters to Salt Lake City UT. This is my speculation. I am not a prophet and I can be wrong. This is merely my theory.
By
Captain_Neon, at 11/16/2006 03:25:00 PM
Goodness! Thanks "Captain Neon" for the update! How difficult it is, it seems, to keep "third parties" together. The question is, will these other disaffiliated parties come together?
By
Matthew R. Perry, at 11/16/2006 04:25:00 PM
Matt,
What sort of sort understanding to remedy this situation without any compromise have you heard about? This is the first I have heard of any such thing. The only thing that could begin to remedy the situation as far as I'm concerned is the disaffiliation of IAP Nevada, and at this point even that will probably be too little too late.
By
Joe, at 11/16/2006 04:33:00 PM
The National CP has NO business claiming Rick Jore's victory. Neither Jore, nor his State, are part of the National party. They withdrew from National when National leaders upheld those who allow baby-killing in cases of rape, incest, HEALTH of the mother, and fetal deformity.
National does not recognize the disaffiliated States and has been actively working to supplant them. Therefore it is immoral of them to suddenly recognize Montana, temporarily, to bask in his victory.
If National works out an acceptable compromise (which would probably require the resignations of Hansen, Shearer, Clymer, et al) THEN maybe they will have a right to celebrate.
By
T.G., at 11/16/2006 04:36:00 PM
How can principled state parties possibly become reconciled "without compromise" with the current national CP leadership, in light of that leadership's obvious compromise with apostates and cultists who view the slaughter of the innocent victims of rape and incest as acceptable if not necessary
By
Camp Director, at 11/16/2006 04:40:00 PM
Chris Hansen left a comment on this blog back on May 27, 2006 showing a clearly Mormon outlook on the abortion issue. While I certainly thought that James Clymer and the National CP were trying to work out something, it seems clear that a wide chasm has developed the more I read of late.
Yet, the Mormon contingent helps the CP stay viable and strong out West, so the thoughts of the CP breaking ties with Hansen or others who hold so much sway is indeed a problem that must be addressed.
If the CP is worth saving, it is worth taking a strong stand, especially in these early years. We have something here worth fighting for --- faithfulness to Scripture and a distant second to the Constitution of the United States.
By
Matthew R. Perry, at 11/16/2006 05:16:00 PM
I was at the last two national meetings. I don't observe any repentance from the group which considers the by-laws more important than the Bible. I have left the CP and the Taxpayers Party of MI chigan. I have no right to engage in compromise of God's laws as the present leaders of the CP assume they have. I distribute bumper stickers to all who will use them. Roe vs. Wade '73 to '06 46,000,000 murdered God counts too In Their Service, CGO, <'))><
By
Carl Oehling, at 11/16/2006 05:17:00 PM
Matt,
You say you have something there worth fighting for: faithfulness to Scripture. I think faithfulness to Scripture is indeed worth fighting for, but where do you have it in the Constitution Party? Faithfulness to scripture means not supporting in any way whatsoever, any candidate who does not pledge and act to defend and promote the inviolable right to life of innocent human beings, from the moment of conception to natural death -- without exception. Yet, the Constitution Party voted in Tampa not to disaffiliate a party that knowingly elected leaders and endorsed candidates that would allow abortion in the cases of rape and incest.
Are you a member of the Constitution Party of Kentucky? Is the Constitution Party of Kentucky still affiliated with the Constitution Party? If so then I humbly submit that you are not being faithful to Scripture. "The Constitution Party needed the Hansens to stay viable out West," is hardly an excuse I would want to stand before my Creator with on Judgement Day.
Earlier you wrote "the national party is coming to some sort of understanding to remedy this situation so hopefully an agreement may be made without any compromise." What can possibly remedy this situation short of a disaffiation of state parties that knowingly elect leaders and endorse candidates that would allow abortions in the cases of rape and incest, either voluntarily or by vote of the national executive committee?
By
Joe, at 11/16/2006 06:03:00 PM
Time for a Christian party. The Constitutional Party is quickly becoming the Mormon Party. Did I hear someone say something about the American Heritage Party? Now that's a Christian party!
By
Anonymous, at 11/16/2006 08:35:00 PM
It's time for a Christian party! The Constitutional Party is quickly becoming the Mormon Party. Every Christian worth his good salt should leave that party now.
Did I hear someone suggest the American Heritage Party? Now that's a Christian party, and one worth joining!
By
Anonymous, at 11/16/2006 08:38:00 PM
What about Jim Clymer's statement on May 17, 2006 which included this quote:
The platform of the Independent American Party continues to be in full agreement with the platform of the National Party on the life issue. It stands clearly opposed to abortion and provides for no exceptions; in addition the IAP has adopted and approved the National Platform in its entirety. Chris Hansen’s exceptions position on the life issue is his personal view and not the official position of the party in Nevada.
...those National Committee members who were present in Tampa made the difficult decision that the Nevada party has not violated its terms of affiliation. They did so because they realize it is not the Nevada Party’s policy to espouse an exceptions position on the life issue. That does not mean that those present voted to endorse the fact that the Nevada party continues to support Chris Hansen as chairman. Chris Hansen is running for Governor this year, and, needless to say, the Constitution Party National Committee will not be supporting him in any way.
Plus, I will post tomorrow Chuck Baldwin's article, "Can Constitutionalists Ever Come Together?" tomorrow. I personally am torn between being splintered over the views of a few and being united under one platform. I'd like to hear your thoughts.
By
Matthew R. Perry, at 11/16/2006 08:54:00 PM
The more I am reading about this (due to my father's injuries over the past few months), the more I understand your issues.
In fact, Reed Heustis whom I highly respect has left the Constitution Party, writing a very compelling article on the matter.
If you gentlemen will permit me, I need to take some time to pray over this and to see. I really felt as if I had found a party to belong to. It's not looking good.
By
Matthew R. Perry, at 11/16/2006 09:18:00 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home