- Mark Treat (CPartyUSA Chief Web Officer)

Our founding documents established for the first time in history, a form of government where individuals had control of their own efforts and property.  We know the unalienable rights that fueled the passions of our Nation’s founders were based on Natural Law and biblical teaching.  To provide for yourself, and to take responsibility for yourself and your family is occasionally difficult.  Personal responsibility for your own actions requires honest and virtuous citizens in order to be a successful form of governance.  This was the focus for the founder’s support for publicly funded education. According to the histories I found, they believed that the aim of publicly funded education should be to create good citizenship and virtue.  I found no evidence suggesting they believed public monies should support any other aim.

We know that some of our neighbors will not conduct themselves in an honest and virtuous manner, making self-government somewhat insufficient at times. We need the local, State and Federal levels of government to support, defend and protect those unalienable rights we hope to enjoy.  We need local government, where the citizens of our neighborhoods and towns and cities band together to mutually provide the services that each community deems important.  The State, before the Federal government, should deal with the broader problems that cities and towns cannot adequately address by themselves.

The Constitution of the United States binds the States together under a Federal government for six very specific reasons: to form a more perfect Union (than that allowed under the Articles of Confederation), establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and then to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.

A more perfect union beyond that allowed under the Articles of Confederation is established.  The Federal government then has legal authority under our Constitution for the five remaining defined purposes and those are the only considerations that the Federal government should address.

If we accept that establishing justice essentially means that our citizens have equal access to the law, then we can say that our Federal government has failed to ensure this basic function that it was created to provide.    Perhaps if our representatives spent as much time on considering the fairness of the legislation they adopt for all of our citizens as they do their own self-interests, there would be much less strife in our society.  This more than anything else would ensure fulfillment of the third legitimate function of the Federal government, to insure domestic tranquility.  Doesn’t it seem as though most of the recent political posturing, legislative actions and executive orders are designed specifically to insure domestic disharmony between the varied interests of our citizens?

Our Federal government cannot be said to be providing for the common defense of our people, just ask the people of our southern border States, or the families of those who perished on 9/11/2001.  For many years, we have been involved in the affairs of other nations under the guise of national interest.  One can make an argument that our involvements, or meddling, in the affairs of other nations have placed America’s people in danger.   What is our national interest in any nation outside our own?  It is clear from my studies that most of the founders, including our first and most celebrated President believed we should never become entangled in the affairs of foreign nations nor enter into permanent alliances with any other Nation.  Have we not over time, rejected this wise counsel?

A messy area of examination is the role of government in promoting the general welfare of our people.  All one really needs to do, is define the distinction between promoting and providing for the general welfare of our people.  If a function of government could be classified as providing for the general welfare, then I believe it is proper that the function be administered by each individual State, as it’s own people dictate.

Securing the blessings of liberty should be the ultimate role of our Federal government but instead, the actions of the various branches have ended making us slaves to foreign debt, and left us feeling we have no choice but to roll back and restrict our government to operate within the legal parameters of the Constitution.  I believe that enough circumstantial evidence exists to prove that the two major parties have no interest in doing what needs done.

The Conservative Party (NC) believes in the intelligence, resiliency and resourcefulness of the American people.  If you find yourself in agreement with these concepts, then engage with us to re-establish the defined limits and boundaries authorized.

Come home America!

David Schott, President
Conservative Party (North Carolina)
August 2011

Having said that, however, it’s clear the liberal media suffered some “blow back” resulting from their less-than-balanced reporting of the anti-Mubarak demonstrations.  It became increasingly obvious the U.S. media supported the anti-Mubarak (AM) factions from the very start. Their supportive reportage minimized early incidents of violence, down-played the destruction of priceless Egyptian artifacts, excused home robberies and grocery store looting by AM factions.  As a matter of fact, the media and AM factions developed a symbiotic relationship. The AM’s got plenty of media coverage so they could prance in front of TV cameras.  In return, the media got ready access and interviews to help boost ratings.  It was the media’s newest reality show called “Cairo Shore”.

That explains the numerous protest signs written in perfect English flaunted by smiling AM protesters wearing Yankee baseball caps preening for CNN.  It would have been like the Rodney King rioters holding up “Can’t we all get along?” signs done in Arabic to impress Al Jazeera TV.  Improbable at best.  While not supporting AM’s overtly, the media certainly encouraged anti-government protesters indirectly by providing such extensive, breathless and sympathetic coverage. 

Pro-Mubarak factions (PM’s), however, were nowhere to be found until five days into the revolt.  No PM’s were interviewed, covered or quoted for a whole week.  Mubarak ran Egypt for 30 years yet the media could not find anyone in Cairo who supported him or the government.  When the media finally did mention PM factions, the coverage was pointedly negative.  PM’s were tagged as “thugs”, “goons”, “paid government stooges”.   It never occurred to anyone in the liberal media that there might actually be people in Egypt that – heaven forbid – support or approve of the Mubarak government.

Everything PM’s did was wrong while everything AM’s did was right.  On 2/4/11 Fox News reported an assassination attempt on Egypt’s new VP; two body guards were actually killed. Since this was likely perpetrated by an extreme AM group, however, the media and the Obama Administration have studiously avoided the subject. Why?

The media’s anti-government bias is also clearly exemplified by its ill-conceived attempt to rehabilitate the image of The Muslim Brotherhood. The Brotherhood is banned in Egypt for good reason: it tried to assassinate President Abdel Nasser; was officially accused of assassinating President Anwar Sadat; conducted numerous terrorist attacks in Egypt; openly opposes the Egypt-Israeli Peace Accord; wants to impose Sharia Law and; has ties to Al Qaeda. And yet, despite all these obvious red flags waiving high in the wind, the media now portrays the Brotherhood as a bunch of poor, misunderstood Boy Scouts.  But those Brotherhood guys know about real “blow-back” so the media and Obama should be very careful.

Mark these words: The liberal U.S. media will give The Muslim Brotherhood more sympathetic coverage than it ever gave the Tea Party.

In short, the media took sides instead of doing proper, neutral reporting.  As a result, PM’s perceive the media as anti-government and anti- Egypt.  This explains – but does not excuse – their hostility and violence towards the media. That sentiment might also be adopted by the Egyptian military which will not bode well for America’s influence in that region for many years to come.

H. Michael Hervey
Chairman
Conservative Party USA

“How does [the argument] relate to having two males or two females marry each other and have children as they have in California,” he questioned, the Times reported.”

It is a fact of nature that two males or two females cannot procreate, the primary purpose of cohabitation which mankind call marriage.

During his long (too long) years in the Senate, John McCain had always promoted himself as the quintessential “Maverick” who ran counter to Republican trends.  He constantly proved that when he co-sponsored the McCain-Feingold Bill (Campaign Finance Reform), opposed the Bush Tax cuts, supported global warming legislation, conspired with Ted Kennedy (and President Bush) to pass amnesty for illegal aliens and opposed the construction and improvement of the border fence.  McCain even sided with Obama on closing Gitmo. During his ill-fated run for President, McCain and Palin pushed that “Maverick” thing to the breaking point.

But all that changed when McCain ran for yet another Senate term. During the primary race he swerved 180 degrees out of phase with his previous positions on immigration.  He recently quipped that America should now “..build the dang fence” that he previously opposed. He then expressed strong support for AZ’s new immigration law when he opposed such legislation on many fronts before. The most dishonorable practice during the Primary, however, was his constant repudiation of the “Maverick” legacy he worked so hard to create during his 2008 presidential campaign.  In other words, McCain sold his soul, ethics, integrity and political legacy in return some measly primary votes. It was the most shameful display of crass political maneuvering since the Arlen Specter/Charlie Crist party switchbacks. It was such an obvious, despicable and cynical operation that even Steve Wonder could see the holes.   Say what you will about J.D. Hayworth, even with his mistakes he would have been true to his conservative values. Always.

But McCain has no honor. McCain has no “Code”.  His integrity lays naked and shattered at his clay feet.

Which brings me to the main point if this essay. In spite of this obvious and blatant McCain ploy, Arizona Republicans STILL voted for him.  They STILL voted for McCain despite his clear dishonesty on a core illegal immigration issue they feel strongly about.  In effect, Arizona Republicans invited McCain to lie to them again and renewed his gold-plated RINO License to revert to his old Republi-Dem positions.

And McCain will reverse himself – soon. He will break the hearts of many conservatives – again. And AZ Republicans will richly deserve his treachery because they are so gullible and dysfunctional. Sadly, the rest of America will also suffer because McCain is a major cog in the Washington ruling class system that is so disconnected from its citizens.

H. Michael Hervey
Chairman
Conservative Party USA

I hope you will be able to attend at least one of the 4^th of July events of celebration in your area.    If you have time, please read the Declaration of Independence to your children.  They need to hear it.

Marie A Cole

The home of the convention will be the Loew’s New Orleans Hotel.  The hotel is located at 300 Poydras Street, New Orleans, LA 70130.  Check-in policies and hotel information can be found here.  The main hotel phone number is 504-636-3300 .

Room Cost is $126/night for single or double occupancy.  This special rate includes taxes and state fees.  Please make your reservation directly with the Hotel Reservations department by calling 866-563-9792.  Be sure to mention “Conservative Party USA” when you call to assure this special rate. Naturally, a standard credit card required and rooms subject to availability.

For convention activities, the Registration Fee is $175 per convention attendee.  Be an early bird and register for only $150 per attendee if paid by June 15, 2010.  This fee will entitle you to all the convention activities including the reception on Thursday night, July 22, the banquet on Saturday night (evening wear required), July 24, and the business meetings held during each day (casual dress) of the convention.  Please make checks payable to the “Conservative Party USA” and mail to:

11814 Coursey Blvd #530

Baton Rouge, LA, 70816

Attn: 2010 Convention.

On the assumption that most people will be flying, the most economical transportation from the airport to the hotel is the New Orleans Airport Shuttle.  The rate is $38 round trip or $20 one way per passenger.  This will provide ample savings over the normal $30 one way per person taxi fare.  Please contact the shuttle service to reserve by calling 504-522-3500 or visit their website linked above.

If you plan to drive to the convention, be aware that the hotel provides valet parking with a convention discount of $20.00 per night.

Part of the business of the convention will be the debating of Party Planks.  As a member in good standing of the Conservative Party USA, you are eligible and invited to submit suggestions for consideration to be included in the Party Planks.  The National Site of the Conservative Party USA offers the abstract form for you to make your suggestion.  You will also find on this site the method that will be used for approval of planks submitted by the membership.

I look forward to seeing you there.

Marie A Cole