Alan Keyes comes out in support of President Bush, denounces Democrats, "our survival is at stake!"

Transcript of Hannity & Colmes ^ | Feb 4, 2004 | Alan Keyes

[EternalVigilance]

On another thread in recent days, I made reference in a post to you concerning those on FR who are, in my opinion, just as damaging as the Bush-haters. They are those who are looking for a fight with conservatives EVERY day, and on virtually any issue. With 'friends' like them, GW doesn't need enemies.

You're one of the brightest guys around, and I think you well know a number of the ones I'm referring to. A couple are sharpening their skills on this very thread...a thread that no true supporter of the President would have cause to stir up trouble on.

'Nuff said.

Regards

[EternalVigilance]

Appreciate your posts on this thread.

Classy.

[MEG33]

Amen,Jim.We must come together for the good of the nation and defeat the democrats in November.I have yet to find a perfect President.I enthusiastically support Bush for President.

[MissAmericanPie]

I am sure you are aware that some of the worst liberals on the Supreme court were put there by Republican Presidents. I would like to know the credentials of Bush's appointees. I agree that it's vital to keep the house and senate and to grow the number of Republicans in both. I get the first chance to do that now that Frost has been nutered. If the FTAA and amnesty is to be stopped it will have to be there.

With the workers program illegals get eventual citizenship along with voting rights and there is nothing in the plan regarding protection of our borders or stopping future illegal invasion. The only way to influence that outcome is with a republican house and senate, if it can be influenced at all. And I think striking fear in their hearts over their political careers is about the only way to make an impression.

All this program says to me is that for Republicans to have any hope at all of garnering any votes from these new citizens and keeping the 50/50 balance that exists now, they will have to promote liberal ideals and promote like invasion, and therefore move ever farther to the left until they have entirely replaced their conservative base. If conservatives are vital to their election at present I strongly feel we need to walk away from the negotiating table with a big chunk of red meat.

I did hear something encouraging, Bush has not released the funds for that huge education bill and Ted Kennedy is steaming over it, lol. Ted scowled all during the State of the Union address. So there is evidence that Bush is playing a smart game. I was happy to see that article, it was light at the end of the tunnel. Maybe the education bill is not the only thing he has not released the funds for.

It may prove tragic that Bush has alienated conservatives, he rolled the dice and bet the farm on being able to replace them with cross over votes and minorities. No one knows what the payoff for that gamble will be until Nov.

The polls are not looking good at present, and that gamble looks to have been more destructive than constructive, but then for some reason the Republican party has yet to begin to campaign. That may turn around. But no matter it is vital that we hold onto the house and senate. I hope that disgruntled conservatives, of which I am one, will at least show up at the ballot box in cases where a congressman or senators seat is in the balance.

[EternalVigilance]

Great posts. Your words are wise, and I hope people listen to them.

[William McKinley]

So let me get this straight- the comparison to a DUizon deserves mockery but the comparison GeronL made about slavery and concentration camps doesn't?

[Jim Robinson]

Well, look at it this way, how many conservative or non-liberal activist judges have been appointed by the Democrats in the last several decades? I think the chances for getting better judges appointed are much higher with the Republicans doing the appointing. Anyway, it's the whole package, national defense, judiciary, tax cuts, etc. Whether it's Kerry or Dean or Edwards, it'll be Bush vs a liberal loser Democrat. Barring acts of God or national tragedy, there are no other outcomes possible. Kerry, et al, will give us everything we despise. I'll be much happier with Bush.

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

A Democrat in the White House at this time of grave peril for our nation's very survival is unthinkable! 7 posted on 02/04/2004 11:35:59 PM PST by Jim Robinson

Indeed. Just imagine what they would do to the Supreme Court. Keeping Kerry in Massachusetts is the number one priority for 2004.

[William McKinley]

It's the one that Clinton signed, the Senate rejected, and subsequently the Democrats have come to embrace. Pretending the Democrats haven't been backing the Kyoto treaty ever since the Senate voted against an early draft of it is simply tomfoolery.

[Jumper]

Keyes is correct about both spending and the war on terrorism, and since Bush has spent like a good democrat there is no way in hell democrats will put a democrat before their own national security/social security at this point. The best thing the democrats could do is to shut up and not draw attention to their anti-American/pro-UN soverinty stance as they both lose this election and further support.

The democrats, since Clinton was election in 1992 have seen a steady errosion of their elected candidates/incumbents and Republicans now hold more seats at the State and National Level for the first time in 60 years!

[William McKinley]

You have your facts slightly wrong. The Senate never voted on Kyoto. Clinton refused to submit it to the Senate for ratification, since he knew it would be rejected, and he wanted to keep it alive.

The 97-0 vote was not on Kyoto, but rather on the Byrd-Hagel resolution, which was phrased in a way that made opposition to the resolution politically impossible; it stated "the United States should not be a signatory to any protocol... [that] would result in serious harm to the economy of the United States."

Gore started making the argument that global warming would end up costing us more in the long run so that signing the protocols would be in the interests of our economy. In other words, the Democrats regrouped after the first setback and were gearing up to get it passed.

And while the Byrd-Hagel amendment got 0 votes against it, the support for it could be better guaged by the vote on McCain/Lieberman's "Kyoto Lite" bill S.139 which got 43 votes. Not enough support to get it through yet, but close enough for worry.

Which is why it was good, and important, that Bush put a stake through the heart of Kyoto.

[MissAmericanPie]

Kerry received 10 grand from the Chinese military for one of his former campaigns, from what I understand. I wonder if he will be called upon to discuss taking influence money from non-citizens?

[EternalVigilance]

Very good historical analysis on your part.

Senate votes can be incredibly deceptive, unless one takes a very close look at ALL of the circumstances that go into any particular one.

[William McKinley]

There is only one answer for people in your boat.

There comes a time where you have to step back and look at your allegiences objectively, and reconsider if old friends have become foes and if old enemies have become friends.

If you think that:

1) Bush and Ashcroft are the biggest threats to liberty since the Third Reich,

2) That the current administration sells out the American people to corporate interests,

3) That this administration is corrupt,

4) That the threat of terrorism is overstated and that the Democrats would be as good, or better, on the issue,

5) That we should not have gone into Iraq and our national interests were harmed by us doing so,

and

6) That these things are the most important considerations this coming election

Then you should think to yourself- when did I become a Democrat? You should think to yourself- why am I hanging around with a bunch of people on Free Republic who disagree with me on the most important issues? You should think to yourself- why am I not posting on DemocraticUnderground, where almost everyone agrees with you on points 1 through 6 (even if they disagree with you on taxes and the optimal size of government). Hell, the Democrats are moving away from gun control so that is one less impediment.

If you really feel the way you have been posting on this thread, make the jump- your mind already has.

[William McKinley]

Russia didn't ratify it.

Russia didn't ratify it-- after Bush made it clear that it was not going to be ratified by the US within the time constraints within the protocol. They weren't about to hamstring their own economy even slightly unless we were completely hamstringing our own.

What you presented as a reason to not give Bush any credit, is a reason to give him credit.

[verity]

Fool!

[GailA]

BTT, our local talk radio host made a comment yesterday while talking to our local Memphis former heads of RATS and GOP parties that her heinousness shillary has switched her preference to hanoi john. Has any one else heard this or seen it in print?

The Breck Girl and Weasley drew 125 & 150 people to their stop over in Memphis yesterday..this was a crowd BTW according to our local fish wrapper.

We will also see MORE of the kind of judges that Kali has on the bench and possible 2-3 SCOTUS appointments of the ilk of shillary, ireland, ginsberg, etc.

I shudder to think what they will social engineer on us if they are allowed to appoint any one to the Supreme Court.

This is a battle for the Soul of America.

I can give a little on domestic spending in order to preserve America for our children.

[GailA]

We won't have gridlock, GOP senate and house seats will be flushed out if GW is ousted. Then the RATS will be in total control.