I had been planning on voting for President Bush this election due to the probability of several Supreme Court justices being appointed under the next administration and the President’s apparent opposition to abortion and gay marriage, but the more research I have done, the more I realize I will not be able to vote for President Bush with a clear conscience. The more I think about it, the more I believe God wants me to vote for the person who appears the most honest, knowledgeable, and righteous and in comparison to the Presidential Candidate of the Constitution Party, Michael Anthony Peroutka, I do not think President Bush comes close. But if I vote for Mr. Peroutka, won’t I be taking a vote away from Bush? Yes, and I will do it with a clear conscience, believing that with God all things are possible and if God’s people in this nation would exercise their faith to a greater degree and place principle above pragmatism, God might show forth His mighty and merciful hand and cause Mr. Peroutka to be elected. While Mr. Peroutka is on the ballot here in Carroll County, MD, he is not on the ballot in all areas, which means you would have to do a “write in” vote in order to vote for him (see www.constitutionparty.com). Following are some excerpts from a very informative interview conducted by Michael Marcavage with Mr. Peroutka in which Peroutka amazingly concludes, "They should fear Mr. Bush being re-elected more than they should fear Mr. Kerry being elected..." You can read the full interview at http://www.repentamerica.com/peroutkainterview.html Emboldened emphasis added by me. Excerpts from the interview:PEROUTKA: My campaign themes are God: Family: Republic. If elected, I will, in my official capacity, acknowledge God, Defend the Family and Restore the American Constitutional Republic.The pulpits of America are generally so weak that the people of America have not heard or been taught that the lesser evils, as well as the larger evils, are still evil. We as citizens have also fallen for the gospel of pragmatism over principle. We think that we have to manipulate things, even to the point of making deals with devils, instead of trusting God for the results of faithful living and action. The sovereign God of the Universe says clearly that He is able to do all His holy will. We are to recognize his Lordship, and act (vote) accordingly.I would be a Christian president. I would publicly speak of Christ with personal affection. I am a Christian. That is what I am with every fiber of my being. I realize that I am not being elected to evangelize America. That is not in the job description for a president according to the Bible or the Constitution. But, the people will elect me knowing that I am a Christian and I could no more lay that aside and operate as though Jesus is Lord of everything except me and my office than I could stop being a male, or a husband, or a father. I do fear God, and that fear of God and my Christianity will make me a better, more trustworthy, kind, and wise civil magistrate. I have learned a great deal of Scripture by studying the founding documents of our great nation.But, it is not within the jurisdiction of the Presidency to intrude into the sphere of the family beyond the provisions authorized by the Constitution. But, in an American form of government, "all laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void." Marbury v. Madison. Most certainly, anti-Constitutional court decisions are not binding. So, when it comes to the abortion issue, I would exercise all authority within my power to assure the Constitutional guarantees to life with no abridgement apart from due process of law… I would do everything in my power to end the national disgrace of abortion, starting with a formal acknowledgment of the legal person-hood of every child from the moment of conception. I would appoint U.S. Attorneys – by recess appointment if necessary – who will secure the right to life of the unborn. Finally, to your question about sodomite marriage: There is no such thing, and no matter how many times people say there is, it doesn’t make it true. Sodomites need to be pitied and prayed for as well as protected from themselves by re-establishing the States’ laws forbidding such perversion. Don’t ever think that homosexuals don’t reproduce. They reproduce through political pressure, manipulation of our educational system, and lying to the general public about it being hereditary instead of a choice. This is a perversion that needs to be exposed for what it truly is and I will speak very clearly to this scourge on our nation.I will seek to protect any and every man’s civil rights under the law. But, the State’s will be allowed to prosecute those engaged in the act of sodomy as they were able to before the Federal government stripped away States rights in this area. The ‘civil union’ idea is just another scam for those who want to buy votes with your tax dollars and exercise unlawful authority over private insurance industries and other providers of services for families. Bush wants to be re-elected and his catering to what he knows to be repulsive is pandering for votes.First, we do not support any sodomy-based policy, let alone marriage, but the Federal Marriage Amendment is wholly unnecessary, dangerous and inappropriate. If the Supreme Court can ignore the First and Second Amendments with impunity, what is to lead me to believe they would remain obedient to another Amendment appended to the Constitution? In addition, it puts the basic Godly institution of marriage under the authority, and therefore the governance, of the Federal Government to define, refine, direct and wholly pervert. So, you inquire, what is my solution? The federal government has an obligation under Article IV §4 to ensure to each member State that it, and every other member State, will be Republican in form of government. Thus far, sodomy-based marriage has not been, and I expect never will be, enacted in proper republican fashion. Rather, it has been, and will be, imposed by judicial fiat. Such an action is not republican in form, and will be utterly resisted to the grave if necessary under a Peroutka Presidency. The obligation of the Full Faith and Credit clause of Article IV, §1 is to give full faith & credit to another member State's legitimate public Acts, Record and Judicial Proceedings. When a State, or Federal Judiciary oversteps its bounds, that Proceeding will be ignored. Finally, ask yourself, who is the definer of marriage? Certainly it is not the United States government, nor even the State government. The author and perfector of Marriage is none other than the LORD Almighty.It is, by the way, within the power of the President to end legal abortion tomorrow, as I would do my first day in office. Don't let alleged "pro-life" Presidents tell you differently. The President has an obligation under Article IV, §4 to ensure to each member State that it will be republican in form of government. Any action that is not republican in form will be utterly resisted to the grave if necessary under a Peroutka Presidency. Abortion was made "legal" (more correctly, the prosecution of abortion was made illegal) in these United States by judicial fiat, which is anti-republican in form and in violation of the Separation of Powers and Article I, §1 of the Constitution vesting all legislative power of the Federal Government in the Congress. In an American form of government, "all laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void." Marbury v. Madison. Most certainly, anti-Constitutional court decisions are not binding.You are right that Mr. Bush has sold out on those issues by supporting Mr. Specter, but that is not all that is wrong with this political prostitution by Mr. Bush. If Mr. Specter is reelected, he becomes the senior Senator chairing the Judicial committee. His pro-abortion, pro-sodomite, politics will become the acid test for those nominated to Federal judiciaries. This is a very dangerous endorsement by Mr. Bush. It shows how diametrically opposed to the Constitution Party's principles our president is.MARCAVAGE: Many will say that you are taking votes away from President Bush, and a vote for you is a wasted vote. Others fear having John Kerry as President; therefore, they refuse to even consider voting for you because they say you cannot win. What is it that you say to them— are there any words of comfort that you can provide to those that oppose you because of fear? PEROUTKA: They should fear Mr. Bush being re-elected more than they should fear Mr. Kerry being elected. They really do have the same goals and ambitions for America, without due regard for the rule of Constitutional law. Bush will be able to have his illegal way unchecked by a Republican Congress where at least Kerry would have some resistance. America will not be quite as far down the socialist trail with Kerry as with Bush, though I admit that Kerry would want to take it further than does Bush at this time.To see a side by side comparison of some of the shocking similarities in policies between Bush and Kerry check out: http://www.constitutionparty.com/news_print.php?aid=113