Resolution Opposing "Top Two"
The Boston Tea Party National Committee passed by a vote of 6-0 (1 not voting) a resolution opposing "Top Two".
Whereas the Republicans and Democrats have been crafting rules to favor themselves and keep off "minor" competitors, and
Whereas Justice William O. Douglas writes, "The right to run for public office seems a fundamental one." (Lippit v Cipollene (1972)), and
Whereas Justice Stevens concluded, "it demeans the strength of the two-party system to assume that the major parties need to rely on laws that discriminate against independent voters and minor parties in order to preserve their positions of power." (Timmons v. Twin Cities Area New Party (1997)),
Be it resolved, the Boston Tea Party National Committee opposes any and all laws that hinder not only the rights of those seeking office, but the right of the voters to choose whom he wishes for that office.
Party Chair, Darryl W. Perry writes, "When elections first began in the United States of America voters did not use government printed ballots. In fact no one in the world used a government printed ballot before 1856.
Since that time, the Republicans and Democrats have been crafting rules to favor themselves and keep off "minor" competitors. They've been so "successful" in some States that it's virtually impossible for an independent or "minor party" candidate to make the ballot.
"Top Two" is just another attempt by the Republicans and Democrats to maintain power."
Christina Tobin of StopTopTwo.org states, "In reality, we're being sold the illusion of participation. A blanket primary like Top Two requires more money to win, making the influence of money even greater. Then, the candidates with the most special interest money will be our ONLY choices in November."
Perry adds, "We, the independents and members of "minor parties" need to join together to stop these attempts to limit voter choice."
The Boston Tea Party was founded in 2006 with a one sentence platform, “The Boston Tea Party supports reducing the size, scope and power of government at all levels and on all issues, and opposes increasing the size, scope and power of government at any level, for any purpose.” In October 2008, the party's National Convention adopted the four point program of the Campaign for Liberty. Their program calls for an end to overseas occupation, a restoration of privacy and other liberties, no increase in the national debt, and a thorough review of the Federal Reserve. During the 2010 convention the Party adopted a new program to End the Wars of Aggression, End the Fed, End the War on Drugs, End the Abuses of Liberty, End the Immigration Fiasco.





Comments
deepcover187:
Nicely said. There is never just two opinions in an argument. It's an absolute fallacy to believe that. Science needs to finally be applied to politics in the means of thinking critically. We have two sides of gay marriage. But there is also a third side, the side I'm sure you can relate to, is that we don't even need to argue about it because the constitution does not permit the opinions of the majority to take away the liberties of the minority. Top Two only validates petty two opinion drama clubs and destroys constructive thinking. Why do you think that ever since the government took over public education that our international test scores have gone down. Why do you think the minimum passing grade scores are perpetually being lowered. After No Child Left Behind, all it took for people to barely scrape by in my school was to take a college class, not do homework, and only meet standards testing to get a standards credit instead of a college credit. But in my senior year, I noticed all the foreign exchange students were very determined. And I would always laugh when the ignorant sheeple would mock these kids behind their backs, stating they were stupid niggers and what not. They were smarter than all of us, they actually made it into the Top Ten of the class.
The point of all the education mumbo jumbo I am trying to make is that we are making the public ignorant so there's an ever present battle of "good and evil" or two opinions.