An important item–calling for an independent Commission on Redistricting–was committed given time constraints at the end of the 2014 State Convention.  The proposed resolution calls for eliminating the machinations of partisan gerrymandering by establishing an independent commission to redistrict Idaho.

As it stands now, unaffiliated voters are disfranchised entirely, their fate left to the manipulations and deal making by the two big-box parties.  This is inexcusable, given that unaffiliated voters far and away represent the absolute majority of Idaho’s registered voters.

For all intents and purposes, because redistricting is now decided in the Court, we propose that the redistricting commission’s appointment originate with the Court as an independent agency–one less likely to be the victim of gerrymandered infringements.  Our view is:  why not cut to the chase?

It has become now a ritual.  Every ten years, redistricting ends up with the Court under an ever increasing number of litigations in response to gross manipulations under gerrymandering.  In 2012, redistricting disputes came close to forcing a delay in the primary ballot, which is truly indicative of a dysfunctional and broken system.  Besides, failure to properly seat the commission after a call by the Secretary of State automatically defaults under Idaho Statutes to appointment by the State Supreme Court anyhow.

Our proposed resolution at the 2014 Convention appeared as Resolution 9.  Unfortunately, full discussion could not be allotted sufficient time as the Convention neared adjournment.  Thus, this important resolution was committed to the State Central Committee to dispense.

Attention to this remaining business item from the 2014 Convention is mentioned here due to its relative importance to fundamental fairness in Idaho representation.  It demonstrates serious work undertaken at State Convention–despite mischaracterizations leveled at us from certain hedonistic quarters of so-called “modern” society.

Registered Constitution Party of Idaho members are referred to Resolution 9, posted on this website.  Your opinions regarding this resolution are actively encouraged by your State Central Committee prior to dispensing this remaining business item in the next meeting.  Feel free to contact us:  Constitution Party of Idaho, PO Box 186, Coeur d’Alene, ID 83816.

Donate Now! Please contribute! The Constitution Party of Idaho Legal Defense Fund.

We mentioned 1st Amendment issues before, i.e. 2 August 2013 “Oh my word!” which addressed the ludicrous Seattle government’s attempt to ban what they and they alone deem as “disruptive words”…such as “citizen.” Our article today is a follow on satire…of sorts.

Not always are Bill of Rights infringements undertaken by government. Sometimes they would be grabbed away by big-business…which has now fully grafted itself into our government by the shadows of financial “arrangements”. They already own our so-called free elections outright. They routinely control tax exempt favoritism; and money supply; and even foreign policy. Now apparently they will have the English alphabet and even the color spectrum itself, if permitted.

Enter the massive multi-national spirits conglomerate Brown-Forman with its legal gunslingers. They demand seizure of stuff that belongs to a small distillery in Tennessee. Popcorn Sutton’s is in their extortive legal gun sights under a trumped up claim of trademark infringement. Reported by the Associated Press (AP), Brown-Forman’s flagship brand, Jack Daniel’s, alleges Sutton’s Tennessee White Whiskey (i.e. moonshine) has ripped off their label design. They further allege Sutton’s brand “confuses” consumers into believing that it is associated with Jack Daniel’s.

Thus, Brown-Forman’s guns have surrounded the small homestead, and now essentially demand that the entire local distillery, its product, assets, the whole caboodle must be surrendered up to them. This form of legal extortion can bankrupt the small guy, and they know it. But, they covet Popcorn Sutton’s deed just like ruthless cattle barons of yesteryear. To take it, they allege Sutton’s used “similar fonts,” a similar bottle shape; and even the use of a black label with white lettering. Apparently, use of black and white must be restricted by the courts to Brown-Forman’s exclusive control. Ditto “square” geometry.

This leads us to inquire. What lettering upon a black label do they realistically believe is permissible to others? For if not white lettering, then how do they suggest such a label be legible? The question as we see it is this: Does the Jack Daniel’s trademark grant exclusivity over the use of black and white? If true, then there are a number of kindergarteners, yard sales and church bingos that had best beware too.

We have looked at the two labels (provided in the AP release), and quite frankly do not see the “similarity” of fonts, or even design, as the guns allege. We’re not so confused as the Brown-Forman guns claim. Whether the “square” bottle is similar we cannot say; but we note a lot of similar square bottles are already in existence. Brown-Forman protests too much, we’thinks.


The AP referenced a similar case in Vermont, one where a Vermont local produce grower contracted a local tee shirt silk screen shop to print up shirts saying… “Eat More Kale” back in 2000. Chic-Fillet International—which branded the poorly spelled “Eat Mor Chicken”—took issue and expended great gunnery efforts to try and run the kale grower and tee shirt printer out of town. But every once in a great while, an independent tough cuss says no to such extortion. Live Free or Die, as it were.  As we understand Chic-Fillet failed.

Too much freedom (including freedom of expression) has already been usurped by the unholy alliance of mega-corporations melded into government, which includes the courts. Under legal parasitism, the People are commonly trampled and buffaloed by hired gun attorneys—bled dry. Our legal system long ago gave up any pretense of equality. Small guys, frankly, rarely have fair shots in it. Still, we will exercise our 1st Amendment right. Consider us filing amicus curiae brief. It will be laconic, to wit: “Pu-lease. Seriously?”

Every September 17th, our Nation honors the creation of the Constitution or the United States, when members of the Constitution Convention signed the document and sent it forward to the States for ratification in 1787…226 years ago.

We ask our members to mark their calendars.  On 17 September 2013, Lewis-Clark State College (LCSC) in Lewiston, Idaho will host a discussion panel of current pertinent constitutional concerns. The program will run from 6:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. in Room 115, Sacajawea Hall.  The topic of discussion will pertain to the 4th Amendment and present day widespread domestic surveillance under a host of Federal offices from NSA to the IRS.

The program, “Domestic Spying and the Fourth Amendment,” will be empanelled by five LCSC professors from several departments.   It promises to be an interesting and up-to-date discussion.  The event is also free and open to the public. All CP-Idaho members are encouraged to attend the LCSC discussion. Do your part to honor our Constitution by your involvement in the discussions of a limited government. Keep our Constitution alive.  Study it.  Dare to discuss it.  For it is just as relevant and just as wise today as it was over two hundred years ago…perhaps more so given how far away from it we have drifted in our modern expression of Federalism.

For further details please visit the LCSC website

From the theater of the absurd, we learn in today’s wires that the City of Seattle (as Left as it gets here in the Northwest) has issued a formal advisory. Weather, you might ask? Earthquake? Tsunami? Escaped criminals?

No. A matter far more urgent and necessary to address…political correctness.  A campaign of sorts is underway to root out all “disruptive words.”

Apparently, the good city on the Puget doesn’t like certain sounds. Seattle has declared that the use of the term “citizen” must be avoided. It is professed to violate sensitivities of non-citizens. Hence, the term “citizen” is to be banished and “resident” is to replace it…not that these are equivalent. But, when you are inventing a lexicon wholesale, who’s to quibble, eh?

And not that you were asking, but the term “brown bag” is also somehow, under the Seattle commissars, deemed “disruptive” too. Formerly, it referred to a home-made lunch. Now, evidently it is declared as racist. How exactly, we are uncertain. Nor do we know whether Buster Brown Shoes have been forbidden in the Emerald City.

What’s a good citizen to do with a brown bag lunch in Seattle, home to the Space Needle? There’s another word for that device, but then we truly would be politically incorrect.  Ah well, we wish Seattle well in its campaign to root out what they deem disruptive words.  Soon enough, they’ll doubtless be Left with merely grunts and screeches…which, as we think of it, does sound like the sum intelligence of the Left.