What is "is"?

You probably remember that phrase from the Bill Clinton impeachment hearing when the former president outdid himself by shifting the light of the arguement from the factual basis which brought about the hearing in the first place.

The Independant American Party (IAP) of Nevada, which is the Consitution Party (CP) affiliate in that state, has accomplished something similar in Tampa this weekend.

I'm in Tampa, Florida for the Constitution Party's spring National Committee (NC) meeting where the primary topic was the expulsion of the IAP for refusing to come into compliance with the National pro-life Plank of our Platform.

Sadly, the vote was 57 to 41 with three abstensions (read those as 'no' votes) and two glaring absences from the Michigan party against the motion to disaffiliate Nevada.

Those who opposed the motion were successfully able to shift the focus away from the facts and center the debate on anything but the facts. Although probably most people came to Tampa with their minds made up already and a rehash of the facts didn't matter.

To be honest, going into this meeting I was undecided. I don't believe there is anything to be gained by forcing a split -- that is by "kicking out" a state affiliate. However, the evidence of the Nevada Party's blatant and willful disregard for and of the affiliation agreement that all State Party's must sign in order to be affiliated with the Constitution Party on a national level was glaring. Even to the point of statements made by members of the Nevada Party heretowhich had not been spoken publicly, at least not at a CP gathering.

To briefly recap for those on this list who have no idea what I'm talking about, roughly two years ago the State Chairman of the Independant American Party of Nevada, one Christopher Hansen, engaged in a private email dialogue with one (or more) people in which he stated that he personally held exceptions regarding abortion, those being for rape, incest and fetal deformity. In other words, he stated that he was "pro-life" save those few exceptions.

In December of 2004 at the Nashville, Tennessee NC meeting a motion was brought forward which made those "private" emails a public matter claiming that the duly elected Chairman of a State Party, in this case Nevada, was not in full compliance with our National Platform and the Constitution Party's 100% pro-life, no exceptions, Plank. That motion called for disciplinary action to be brought by the Nevada Party, or the National Committee of the CP if Nevada was unwilling to deal with it.

That motion failed for very good reason by a vote of 44 to 14, and I was one who voted against it.

Then in April of 2005 at our Salt Lake City, Utah meeting the issue presented itself again. At that time the leadership of the Nevada Party presented the National Committee with a piece of paper stating that the Nevada IAP and its Officers would fully support the Constitution Party Platform, including the Sanctity of Life Plank and further that the IAP's own State Platform was a 100% pro-life document to which the Party leadership would also support. This document was signed by the Officers of the IAP of Nevada, Chris Hansen included, and was accepted by the National Committee as evidence that the issue had been dealt with.

After the vote in Salt Lake my friend John Clark, in his very unique perspective on the matter, commented to me that Nevada had handed the National Committee "a platter of warm stinky poop" and the National Executive Committee had held its nose and said "thank you".

Then in September of 2005 at the Columbus, Ohio National Committee meeting some people who didn't like the smell of the Utah solution brought the issue up again stating that Nevada's unwillingness to deal with this matter in a manner that would resolve the non-compliance of their State Chairman required the National Committee to take action.

I was not at that meeting but I understand some very unkind things were spoken by certain, rather highly esteemed members of the CP National Committee, and in an effort to bring harmony and calm back to the table, Dr. Chuck Baldwin offered a resolution which basically stated that the CP National Chairman was to meet with the IAP of Nevada's leadership and determine if their actions had truly satisfied the NC's compliance requirements, and report back to the National Committee at the next scheduled meeting.

Which brings us to today's events. Chairman Jim Clymer, a man whom I have a great deal of respect and admiration for, gave his report in which he stated that during his meeting with Chris Hanson he was told that, while the IAP of Nevada will fully support the National Platform, he (Mr. Hansen) personally could not because of the doctrine of his church and his obligation to his faith.

To date, in my opinion, everyone had been trying to sidestep the opinion of Chris Hansen by claiming the evidence was based on private emails and that those emails should have remained private, not a point for attack.

This morning Chairman Clymer stated unequivically that Mr. Hansen has no desire to change his view. Furthermore, the IAP leadership is satisfied and "has confidence in" Chris Hansen's leadership as Chairman.

To ice the cake as it were, Janine Hansen (the 'big sister' of Chris), another person whom I respect for her work in the Party, stated that she indeed has the same exceptions for rape and incest -- while claiming she is pro-life!!!

Well, that did it for me. I was not in favor of disaffiliation because I thought it would do more harm that good. But for two people to stand before the body politic and state on one hand they are pro-life but on the other hand they hold personal exceptions and that it's OK for a child conceived out of rape or incest to be punished for the sins of the father was enough to convince me that there are deeper issues than those of just Chris Hansen.

The real issue was not if someone said this or that, the facts presented were no longer in dispute by the admission of those accused. The real issue was, will the National Committee continue to hold its nose over this issue for the sake of "unity" or would they vote to uphold the priciples upon which this Party was founded.

Again, sadly, the vote was to accept the now larger and more stinky plate of poop, basically ignoring the facts and place loyalty over principle.

There has been talk that several other State affiliates will end up leaving the Constitution Party as a result of this, among those are Ohio, Maryland, Michigan, New York and perhaps Montana. We won't know the true depth of the fallout until many months from now, perhaps not even until the next National Committee meeting in the fall of this year.

I know, having spoke with various individuals, that the Constitution Party will be losing some wonderful people over this regardless of what various state affiliates may or may not do. It saddens me greatly and the burden of what I will do weighs heavily on my heart.

How can I justify the time away from my family to attend these meetings when I know that I will be in fellowship with some who say it's OK to kill babies and a governing body who's willing to accept that? How can I maintain a membership in a Party that has voted to sanction the taking of innocent life rather than expell those who hold a view that is any less than 100% pro-life?

The IAP of Nevada has stated, rather shamefully in my opinion (and this is MY opinion column) that if they get elected they will work to eliminate 99% of all abortions. Silly me... I thought 100% of all babies were created in God's image regardless of how the egg was fertalized or the anticipated "quality of life" that child might have.

I will certainly be in prayer over this matter. I sincerely hope you will too. Whether or not you are associated with the Constitution Party you have subscribed to this list so you have some basic agreement with the principles the CP stands for.

The only thing that keeps me holding on is the fact that the CPoW is its own Party. We have our own concerns here in Wisconsin that have nothing to do with the CP National. While we are affiliated with the CP National, we have no obligation to that organization, unless we want to have a Presidential Candidate on the ballot in 2008. And as things stand currently we may not even have ballot access in 2008 so that is less and less of an issue as each day slips by.

It's late and it's been a long day. May God Almighty hold His nose a little longer as we mortals deal with the stench of this decision.

[NOTE: A fellow Oregonian constitutionalists has posted a poll at:
http://www.christianheritageparty.us/ regarding what CP'ers might do at this point]

=============================================================
If you enjoy these commentaries and have not already subscribed to the list, click here to be added and you will receive an email notice when a new post is available.

If you have subscribed in the past and no longer wish to receive these commentaries then click here to be removed from the list. You will receive one final message confirming your desire to be removed.

If you aren't sure how you came to receive this then perhaps someone you know forwarded it to you. Please feel free to forward this message with the SUBSCRIBE / UNSUBSCRIBE info in tact. Always use Bcc: and clean up a message before you forward it. No one likes scrolling through forwards or reading between all the >>> junk. Thank you for your support!