Keyes looks to rescue GOP, announces run for president

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | September 15, 2007 | Joe Kovacs

[Man50D]

FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. – After two previous runs for U.S. president, former Reagan diplomat Alan Keyes has announced he's again seeking the White House in the 2008 election, and he'll take part in Monday night's Republican presidential debate here.

Keyes told syndicated radio host Janet Parshall he's "unmoved" by the lack of moral courage shown by the other candidates, among whom he sees no standout who articulates the "key kernel of truth that must, with courage, be presented to our people."

He added, "The one thing I've always been called to do is to raise the standard ... of our allegiance to God and His authority that has been the foundation stone of our nation's life" – and he decried the lack of "forthright, clear, and clarion declaration" from the current crop of presidential contenders.

As a result, Keyes said, "We're putting together an effort that's not going to be like anything before, because it's going to be entirely based on citizen action. We're going to be challenging people to take a pledge for America's revival," and elevate them from spectators in the political arena to participants.

[counterpunch]

Declarationist candidate.

Is that someone who thinks a letter to King George III trumps the Constitution as the law of the land?

 

[OneHun]

I welcome him into the race.  He won't hurt the conservative cause.

 

[justDave]

Nice thought. As far as his failed Senate run didn't the GOP ask him to run late in the game?

[ImaGraftedBranch]

I love Alan Keyes for one simple reason. He forces the other candidates to examine their conscience. I learn more about a Republican candidate by watching their interaction between themselves and Alan Keyes than by listening to years of soundbites from the candidates. He knows he has no chance - I doubt that he has ever truly desired to be President. He loves his country, and sees it going downhill rapidly (in a moral and cultural sense) and wants everyone who is in a position to do something about it to act.
It is not going to be comfortable for the other candidates, because Alan will not glide over moral issues — he attacks them ferociously. It requires other candidates to think before they speak, and for smooth-talkers, that is not something they like having to do.
And for the cynical — Alan doesn’t make money on his elections.

[rideharddiefast]

I agree, I think he would be an excellent Secretary of State.

[WildcatClan]

We need to secure our borders, continue the WOT, and we are currently at war in two TO’s. We need to neutralize NAFTA and all the other other globalist trade deals that threaten our sovereignty, economy and security.

We need some one who has done something in regard to these issues, not just talked about them. We have enough of those already, so I am not real excited about an Ambassador entering the race.

[RatsDawg]

Yeah, exactly when Keyes came out for reparations, I knew there was something wrong.

[davidosborne]

Sorry Alan... I love ya.. but you are a day late and a Duncan Hunter short my FRiend..

[goldstategop]

I suspect he's too forthright. He's a genuine social conservative. Those are rare as hen in the GOP these days. Alan Keyes does have a tendency to sound like a preacher, which may be more than many people can stand. But he does bring a lot of ideas to the table and I just think he's a man ahead of his time.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[NautiNurse]

He has previously run twice for President of the United States in 1996 and 2000 and three times for the U.S. Senate in 1988, 1992, and 2004 as a Republican.

...with wide margins of defeat and a long trail of unpaid campaign debts, while securing his own salary.

[harpu]

Oh goodie...out come the keyester’s again!!!

[harpu]

Oh goodie...out come the keyester’s again!!!

[Corin Stormhands]

Then what are we gonna do?

Well, if Newt and Alan have anything to do with it...lose.

[MARTIAL MONK]

bombastic windbag

If he runs for mother-in-law, he's got my vote.

[NautiNurse]

How can someone continuously bat zero?

Winning elections doesn't matter when there are idealists who are willing to shovel their hard earned money into Keyes' open pockets.

[WildcatClan]

I think Hunter and perhaps Huckabee are genuinely socially conservative. I really liked Keyes until the carpetbagger action in The Land of the Lincoln. I also have a strong aversion to that reparations crap he spews. What a load of nonsense!

[Stars&StripesNE]

The GOP needs one more candidate as much as Ted Kennedy needs another drink. We do tend to eat our own. Instead of focusing on winning by supporting strong candidates, we would rather insure a loss by spreading the wealth so thin that it will be impossible.

Egos anyone?

[goldstategop]

Hillary may be too strong for any one to beat. She's completely amoral and ruthless. She has principled and nice guys like Alan for breakfast, lunch and dinner. That's the advantage liberals have over conservatives: they can lie their way to power. Conservatives have a conscience and are in the habit of telling voters what they think. Do people want to be lied to? Hillary is willing to bet the election - and the White House - on that proposition.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[Stars&StripesNE]

The GOP needs one more candidate as much as Ted Kennedy needs another drink. We do tend to eat our own. Instead of focusing on winning by supporting strong candidates, we would rather insure a loss by spreading the wealth so thin that it will be impossible.

Egos anyone?

[Stars&StripesNE]

The GOP needs one more candidate as much as Ted Kennedy needs another drink. We do tend to eat our own. Instead of focusing on winning by supporting strong candidates, we would rather insure a loss by spreading the wealth so thin that it will be impossible.

Egos anyone?