Constitution Party of Idaho: ‘Whose fault?’

 Whose fault?Published on the Constitution Party of Idaho’s website on July 18th, 2016

In difficult circumstances, we admit to a fault—often we resort to Scriptures for guidance. The certification of a presidential candidate for the printed ballot of the Constitution Party of Idaho is just such a circumstance.

The condition is one of an unequal yoke, a difficulty cautioned against several times in the Bible. “Do not plow with an ox and a donkey yoked together.”—Deuteronomy 22:10.

The process of the national party’s naming a nominee allegedly is equitable and truthful. Using such allegations, many demand that CP-Idaho accept the national yoke. However, for a yoke to distribute the burden of draft properly, it must be like to like…otherwise it defies physics as well as Scripture. It is both a matter of mechanics (which is to say process); but also a matter of cruelty (which is an ethical issue).

First, the disparity between the power and size of the ox over that of the donkey would forever disproportionately transfer burden unequally upon the donkey, through no fault or intent by the ox. With two animals having such different rates of “leg drive,” the yoke cannot equalize torque.

Second, given the difference in stride and power, the donkey would have to race to keep up with the ox, under a deferentially heavier burden. And that becomes a matter of cruelty. Doubtless, as the labor in the field wears on over the course of the day, it would require an ever more forceful and heavier hand upon the lash.

In turn, the donkey at some point will attempt to throw off the unequal yoke, and kick at the ox. The risk is injury to both animals…which would preclude getting field preparation work done.

The problem has nothing to do with the respective nature of these animals. Rather, it is the logic of placing them under the unequal yoke in the first place. It is clear that the nomination process employed by the national party is inequitable and, we dare to say, untruthful.

In opposition to the incessant braying and bucking of our compatriots in the national party, CP-Idaho’s ox has been strong in its stride, powerful in its work, methodical in its duties. CP-Idaho has grown over the past couple years by a factor of 8.8 times in membership. As for the hee-hawing national party at large…not so much.

Our ox is yoked to just such an ass. The inequality cannot be more evident. CP-Idaho held a verifiable, organized, fair and honest primary election to determine our state affiliate’s preferred candidate for President.  Our braying detractors owe us at least that much credit.

On the other hand, where is the evidence that other state affiliates did the same? If they cannot demonstrate that they have done so, not only is the yoke incomparable, but it violates parliamentary rules of order as well. If this is an actual national political party with standing, parliamentary rules demand honor, and this even if the wisdom of Scriptures is ignored entirely.

With statewide membership, organized parties are required—if they are honest—to provide a uniform method of voting, one which enables all members a vote (Robert’s Rules, Section 46). The question is:  did this occur? Without question, it did in Idaho. Our national delegation went to Salt Lake with an absolute representative preference ballot. Did our compatriots in respective state affiliates do so?

If they did not, then the ballots cast at Salt Lake were merely individual personal preferences. If that is the case, then the verifiable Idaho Presidential Primary results should, indeed must, also be tallied individually—being like to like. Were the yoke equitable, it would be…one man one vote. And this has nothing to do with the “Electoral College”. It has to do with the kind of ballot cast.

CP-Idaho’s primary ballot remains untainted. On that, we do not believe there is even a question. But there are certainly questions regarding the kind of ballot our fellow state affiliates cast at convention. And therefore, CP-Idaho is well within our right to ask for proof that a statewide preference ballot ever occurred in the bucking and braying respective state affiliates.  At a minimum, these should be in evidence, if the yoke is equal:

  • Date of statewide preference ballot taken prior to Salt Lake Convention.
  • Location(s) where the statewide ballot was cast.
  • Candidate Names upon the ballot.
  • Number of statewide ballots cast.
  • Percentage of registered statewide Constitution Party base voting.
  • Form of the ballot (e.g. mail-in, proxy, direct primary, county caucus).
  • Names of election judges certifying the ballot.
  • State affiliate standing rules governing their national delegates.

If our fellow state affiliates cannot demonstrate the above, then that yoke is anything but equal. It’s not that CP-Idaho blames its bruised ribs on the ass it is yoked with, and surely we have been kicked repeatedly of late. No, the fault lies with the farmer who hitched them, pretending nothing was wrong, and then shows an utter indifference to the plight of the mismatched beasts.

As Proverbs 12:10 put it:  “A righteous person knows the needs of his beast; but the compassion of the wicked is cruelty.”

Ox Donkey 1

One response to “Constitution Party of Idaho: ‘Whose fault?’

  1. Pingback: Constitution Party of Idaho: ‘Whose fault?’ | MassCentral, United States

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s