The realities involved are that Keyes is violating his own principles, and his 28% in the polls shows he doesn't even have the backing of the registered Republicans (national average is 34%) and has absolutely no support outside the party. Given those numbers it's a fair assumption that at meast a few party activists have decided to take his election off.
He stopped being an honest principles conservative the minute he chose to be a carpetbagger.
I have no fear of FR scrutiny, I'm not the one running around insulting people and fleeing from the issues. Deal with the facts, how do you address the FACT that Keyes himself said snipping spots from where you don't live is wrong?!
Thanks for the response. Here are my principles and facts on the matter, which I gain are also the good doctor's:
1. This acceptance of the IL GOP invitation to run for US Senate, is utterly, thoroughly, and in black and white, federally constitutional. It is an act according to both the spirit and letter of the law, after all other options are judged by a nominating body of a state to be inadequate, for someone from out of state to accept the invitation of that body.
2. As Dr. Keyes has demonstrated as well as explained, just as at the time Ft. Sumter was fired upon, there arise issues and causes that reach beneath the Constitution and into the very raison detre for our nation, expressed in our Declaration.
"Among these," are our most primal individual and corporate rights. Of individual primacy is that we are all living human beings created to live under God's "natural" law. Of foundational corporate primacy is that we are a nation, rather than a collection of independent states. It just so happens that by Article 10, our nation leaves those powers not granted by the People to Federal Government, to individual People and their states.
We must not confuse a primal right or responsibility, upon which our nation is created, with the nationally granted powers (that is, those powers granted by our nation, once our nation was already founded).
If, for primal issues of our most basic human rights and responsibilities, we cannot find our footing deeper than our Constitional "first floor," within the "foundational" responsibilities and rights of the Declaration of Independence, then we will one day be forced to find it in the one Declared corporate right/responsibility laying deeper yet: the replacement of our nation's foundation, by creating a yet newer nation, separated from its unbearable former tyranny.
If murder is not unbearable, what is?
If the deconstructionist denial of meaning, by redefinition of the word for our most basic societal contract (marriage) is not ontologically and epistemologically unbearable, what is?
This argument very much reminds me of those I've had in FR who believe Lincoln was an unconstitutional tyrant. ;-)
Alan Keyes principles in this are expressed in his acceptance speech, linked to at the bottom of http://www.unspun.info/supportkeyes
And as Keyes points out, Hillary shopped and plotted to find a state to represent. Keyes, after reluctance/refusal was compelled by a sense of the overridinng responsibility I just addressed, to accept an invitation of a state and party in crisis.
I think you will agree that it is generally wrong to fire a gun in one's urban back yard.
I think you will also agree that there are very rare times when overriding reasons necessitate it.