Posted on 10/11/2004 11:11:38 AM PDT by SJackson
Voters have nothing under control. Even when they can get a candidate to openly tell them where he stands, and if they can get him elected, their represntative will likely be overruled by the all-powerful courts. Voters only THINK they have control.
MrLiberty's profile, for those looking in:
"Just a libertarian disillusioned with the political process. I share the economic views of conservative Republicans and the social views of Harry Browne. Well, I guess I share his economic views too, then, since he is for small government, as am I."
"I am also a huge opponent of the WoD and I work tirelessly for an end to it."
Lies.
Keyes can sue me if he wants. Unfortunately, he's a public figure, so he'll have an uphill battle. In addition, I thought Keyes was supposed to be against frivolous lawsuits. That would certainly be one.
Your misrepresentation of Alan Keyes' character and mental state is a damnable lie.
Troll begone...
It's been proven.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/02/20/opinion/meyer/main541396.shtml
"Alan Keyes is actually an important footnote to the history of American political campaigns. In 1992, Keyes ran for the Senate in Maryland and paid himself, from donated campaign funds, a salary -- $8,483 a month."
If he was too poor to run then he shouldn't have. It's wrong to take money from your campaign donations and use it to enrich yourself.
It was very unChristian of Mr. Keyes.
But don't call me a liar when I just cited my proof.
Sorry to disappoint you, but not a troll.
If marriage is about love then what about others kinds of love that are non-sexual? If it is about sex then what about casual or group sex? The point in state-recognized marriage was to encourage stable relationships between mothers and fathers. There is no state interest in seeing homosexuals stay together. The only possible interest would be about STDs, but then that could be used to outlaw sodomy altogether. The state's interest in marriage is not about pleasure or even love. It is about the raising and nurturing of future generations. The marriage laws apply equally to all people. To say they discriminate would be the same as saying Social Security is age discrimination. All programs discriminate of sorts. The question is whether or not they apply equally to all.
Woo hoo! Rich oligarchs should be the only people to run for office.
You spoke in the present tense, which made your post a lie.
You just signed up today. Why don't you go on over to DU? They'll love you.
As opposed to people like Keyes who have lived off the govt dole for years, first as a UN ambassador. He's worked in government for the vast majority of his professional career.
What a failure he is as a candidate. He got crushed in both Maryland campaigns and he is going to be destroyed this time around. I said above that we would have been a lot better off had we nominated any state rep in Illinois. At least they would have been able to get 40%. Keyes is looking to go down hard and it almost seems like he wants to. He's just a terrible candidate and while he is a good public speaker, he's obviously not a very good communicator.
'Lived off the government dole'? Sheesh...
I suppose you think the President has been living off the dole for the last four years, eh? What with that big paycheck, private jumbo jet and pretty nice digs in DC...?
You're silly.
Good post.
I've been trying to understand the anti-Keyes folks' motivation for a while now, but it always ends up pointing in such an illogical, even crazy direction that it seems almost impossible such thought systems would exist, especially within the "conservative circle" of FR.
Keyes is a great speaker, but he blew his chance for greatness with this campaign. And I think because of his tremendous speaking skill, had a chance at high office. But he's never going to be able to distance himself from some of his more intemperate remarks now. He's the Pat Buchanan of whatever portion of the political spectrum he occupies.
You said, "I try to be intelligently vociferous, not vicious. And I think vocal opposition to Keyes and his sorry excuse for a campaign is a legitimate position for people who would like to see sane and stable Republican candidates get elected...
I think up to that point, I could almost be persuaded to agree with you. But then you continued:
"...instead of being swept out to sea in the tidal wave of Keyes' obnoxious rants. Keyes' behavior has been so appalling that he's freed up Obama's time to run around the country drumming up money and votes for Kerry/Edwards, while Keyes stays "home" and does further damage to other Republican candidates who are actually electable."
I've heard Keyes on many occaisions, even on topics I disagreed with him on, but have ALWAYS been impressed with his ablity to concisely express both his views and the reasons for them. He may be extreme. He may have uncommon opinions. He may be too confident of extreme conservative opinions to be electable. But he is concise, and articulate, and extremely gifted in terms of expressing the reasons for his views. To characterize Keyes' speech as "obnoxious rants" is an extreme mischaracterization of Keyes' ability to speak, and strongly suggests prejudicial malice.
I don't know EVERYTHING that has transpired in his campaign, but what I have looked into has CONSISTENTLY revealed, that his words and actions are AGRESSIVELY distorted by the press, and that a component of Republicans and freepers seem to be AGGRESSIVELY spreading the same distortions. You acuse him of freeing up Obama's time "to run around the country drumming up money and votes for Kerry/Edwards". From my point of view it's obvious that those who repeat the oponent's talking points, and attack Keyes from his own ranks are responsible for freeing up Obama's time. And then they use his sabotaged campaign to justify their attacks. I don't know what your real motivation is, but it's clearly not the circular reasoning you suggest.
Someone, probably EV, mentioned giving aid and confort to the enemy. Fonda and Kerry both tried to undermine our war efforts in Vietam by making illogical arguments, malicious defamation, and expressing contempt for our troops... spreading KGB propoganda from inside our own country. The analogy is unmistakeable:
"At least Ryan had good tastes in women. Except for sanctimonious crowd that support Keyes now, most Republicans would have voted for Ryan despite the scandal."
"Guts? LOL. The guy is a loon. He shows no fear because he is crazy. And he certainly did not come to Illinois to help anyone but KEYES. WIth KEYES, its always about Keyes."
"For defaming the vice president's daughter and being a general nuisance to the entire country. I can't mask my disgust of Keyes."
Hardly.
President Bush has a JOB.
Keyes doesn't. Campaigning is not a job. He takes money for running his mouth at a campaign event. That's most unimpressive.
You mean Fitzgerald actually visited the State? Really??? He's been a non-entity here as far as I'm concerned.
Judy Barr=Topinka was exactly right in forcing Ryan off the ticket. I know for a fact, from one of Andy McKenna's operatives, that the stuff about Jack Ryan was known way before it came out. He lied to all of the Republican leadership in Illinois.
Alan Keyes is a HORRIBLE candidate. The only thing I blame Judy for is not running, herself. Our party in Illinois should be called the Gang Who Couldn't Shoot Straight, but that isn't because of Barr-Topinka.
PS: Andy McKenna was my candidate. I'm a conservative Republican, but I'd rather see Barr-Topinka in the Senate over the socialist Obama. At least we'd have fiscal discipline w/Judy and a vote for the president!
Shhhhhhhh.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.