Peroutka For President: Wasting A Vote—Or Sending A Message?

If you`d like to cast a ballot for
a conservative this year, forget

George W. Bush
and don`t even blink an eye at the

liberal drip
from Massachusetts who`s the hero of
the week. Ralph Nader, believe it or not, actually has

(not necessarily good or right) things
to say, but it would be preposterous to claim he`s a

The only conservative in the
presidential race this year I know of is a gentleman

Michael Peroutka
. Take a look at him.

Mr. Peroutka is the nominee of a
small "third party" called the Constitution
Party. I put the name in quotation marks because there
are now probably about 50

"third parties"
on the ballots in this country,
at least in those areas where they are

to be on ballots. The Constitution Party is
not on all of them but you can always write it in.

The party was founded in 1992 as
the U.S. Taxpayers Party and fielded its first
presidential candidate in that year—Howard Phillips, a

veteran and principled conservative activist
founder of the

Conservative Caucus.
After running again in 1996 and

, Mr. Phillips decided to take a break.

That`s when Mr. Peroutka rose to
international celebrity.

I am not going to try to persuade
you that Mr. Peroutka and his party will win the
election, and expecting to win has nothing to do with
why you might want to vote for him.

If you are of the view that

casting your ballot
for a candidate who is not going
to win is

"wasting your vote,"
you probably should stop
reading now.

As long as you think that, you
cannot expect to be able to vote for any candidate other
than those approved by the

One Party
that now dominates American government and

The point of voting for Mr.
Peroutka is not to win but to help create an alternative
to the One Party.

Of course you could do that by
voting for Mr. Nader, but that would not be a
conservative alternative. Mr. Peroutka is. The party`s
platform (available on its web page at
spells out exactly what it`s for, much more explicitly
than anything that will come out of the GOP convention.

The party defines itself as an
explicitly Christian party, dedicated to preserving the

Christian and biblical foundations
on which the
American republic and the U.S. Constitution

were based.
Hence, many of its positions—on

, pornography,

"gay marriage,"
morality in general—are fairly

But it also supports a strong
nationalist position. It`s opposed to the mass
immigration that today is probably the greatest single
threat to the nation and the survival of its people and
civilization. It favors what is fair to call a policy of

"economic nationalism,"
and it strongly supports
protecting national sovereignty.

On immigration, its platform
explicitly endorses a

moratorium on legal immigration
and opposes amnesty
for illegal aliens and the H-1B and L-1 visa programs
that allow foreign workers to take jobs from Americans.
It opposes


illegal aliens

U.S. citizenship
for children of

illegal aliens
born in this country.

If I had written the plank myself,
it couldn`t be better.

On foreign policy, the platform

World War II, the United States has been involved in
tragic, unconstitutional, undeclared wars which cost our
country the lives of many thousands of young Americans.
These wars were the direct and foreseeable result of the
bi-partisan interventionist policy of both Democrat and
Republican administrations.

Constitution Party is opposed to the continuation of the

interventionist policy
, with that policy`s capacity
to involve our country in repeated wars."

The platform doesn`t mention the

Iraq war
specifically, but the foreign policy plank
as well as what Mr. Peroutka said in a meeting I
attended in June make his position clear: He thinks it
was a blunder to go to war there and that we should get
out as soon as possible.

It was obvious to me and everyone
else in the meeting that Mr. Peroutka is a charming and
decent man of deep conviction and principle, and unlike

I know, he can express himself in
English. He has a ready grasp of the principles he
supports and knows how to explain them.

If he has a flaw, it is that he
tends to talk a bit too much about principles and not
enough about the actual issues.

Compared to

the flaws of the presidential wanna-bes,
that`s not
a problem, but he might do better to talk more about
what most voters are worrying about.

Should you waste your vote on
Michael Peroutka? No, you shouldn`t, as I just told you.

But if you consider the
alternatives, voting for him will not be a waste.



Sam Francis [email
him] is a nationally syndicated columnist. A selection
of his columns,

America Extinguished: Mass Immigration And The
Disintegration Of American Culture
, is now available

Americans For Immigration Control.

Click here
for Sam Francis` website. Click

to order his monograph
Ethnopolitics: Immigration, Race, and the American
Political Future.

His review essay on
Who Are We

appears in the

current issue

Chronicles Magazine.