Immediately after breaking from the Reform Party there was talk of this, however the AFP’s growth momentum was strong and the argument revolved around “Why don’t they merge with us, then?” There was also some brief talk about bringing the USIAP into the fold, but that didn’t go anywhere either.

The second chairman thought it was a good idea and started something called “The Clarion Call Committee” towards that end, but after its formation that was the last I heard of it, and the folks left behind after various splits and shuffles have a bad taste in their mouths over it. The bylaws now say the AFP can never merge with another party, but I don’t think that was the case when all this was happening.

They still ended up endorsing Peroutka in 04, I imagine they’ll do the same for Baldwin.

His logic is a bit flawed in that I believe Congress ratified our membership in NATO, which obliges the US to come to the defense either militarily or economically, with the military option under the command and control of US military and civilian leadership.

That’s how I understood it as well, I think he might be confusing it with the way UN forces work (someone correct me if I’m wrong).

It’s all part of the plan to have every non-Republican/non-Democrat voter establish their own political party and only vote for themselves.

Of course the last time NATO was invoked was after 9/11 when we were attacked. Think that maybe Mr. Hill is oversimplifying the role of NATO, although his argument about declarations of war is valid and credible.