Posted on 08/19/2004 5:27:04 AM PDT by kattracks
His voice rising to a yell, Republican U.S. Senate nominee Alan Keyes told a bipartisan civic group Wednesday he "will not budge" from his belief that descendants of slaves should be exempted from income taxes to help heal the wounds of past discrimination and segregation.The former presidential candidate disdainfully brushed aside questions over whether his suggestion should apply to rich African Americans such as Tiger Woods, Michael Jordan or Oprah Winfrey.
"Do you know how many Oprah Winfreys there might have been running around in the 1930s or in the 1920s or in the 19-teens that got nowhere because the doors were shut in their face?" Keyes thundered. "If you think that because I wear a conservative label, I have forgotten that history and am not mindful of that injustice -- then I will tell you now that you are wrong."
Keyes delivered his blistering defense at a luncheon of the City Club of Chicago, scolding fellow conservatives who challenged his proposal and evoking the struggle of his African-American parents, saying they had talent and "hearts and spirit and strength and faith."
"Why didn't they get to a point where they could stand on this platform?" Keyes aked.
Vying against Democrat Barack Obama, Keyes drew heat from conservatives earlier this week when he proposed exempting descendants of slaves from income taxes for a generation or two, a view he insists "involves a traditionally Republican, conservative and market-oriented approach."
On Wednesday, Keyes ridiculed the fuss over his position, saying it is simply a tax break, something "Republicans and my conservative brethren" don't object to when applied to a "wealthy corporation."
Conservative activist Jack Roeser met with Keyes for what Roeser called "a long argument and an intense one" over the issue before the speech. A Barrington businessman, Roeser said he still is not sold on Keyes' reparations proposal, but still plans to support him anyway. "I will tell my friends that this is a good man, and we should support him."
I've heard people making that point - that the real purpose of this proposal is to eliminate the income tax altogether (and presumably replace it with a sales tax). I guess the full plan has a schedule something like this:
2004 - Keyes wins election promising African-American's reparations by exempting them from the income tax for two generations.
2005 - Keyes convinces the Congress to grant reparations to African-Americans by exempting them from the income tax for two generations.
2006 - Keyes convinces the Congress to eliminate the income tax for everyone and to replace it with a sales tax.
Now, at that point, do you suppose that African-Americans might wonder what happened to their reparations?
Your faux outrage is a sight to behold.
Since when did you start caring about conservative principles?
No. They'll wonder why WE got reparations, too :o)
Talk about out of the frying pan and into the fire! If conservative white voters are jumping ship from Keyes to Obama, they're going to be in for a very rude awakening.
With the Senate majority in doubt, I just can't see not voting for the Republican...almost no matter what.
Delusional to the bitter end, eh? How sad.
It's been a pleasure.
The pleasure is all yours.
1) Barack Obama has been annointed by the media and the Democrats as a "future star" in the Democrat party.
2) The national Republican Party will be watching to see if the public will vote pro-life.
3) The national GOP will be watching to see if party activists will send money to an "extreme Conservative."
4) If Alan Keyes does better than expected, we will get more Conservative, Pro-Life, Pro-Constitution candidates in the future.
5) If Alan Keyes does worse than expected, we will get more pro-choice, "liberal" Arlen Specter-type candidates.
6) Obama voted to defend "live-birth abortion" (Allowing babies born alive during botched abortions to die from lack of care.) Hillary and Ted Kennedy wouldn't even vote for this. If this is not a winning issue, the GOP can take "pro-life" off the table as an issue.
7) The national media will be waiting for the opportunity to claim that Republicans are racist and will not vote for a black man.
8) The media knocked Jack Ryan out of the race. A bigger victory for Obama over Keyes than would have happened versus Ryan will reward them and encourage more of the same against other GOP candidates. An improved showing in IL by the GOP will punish the media for trashing Ryan. If Ryan was your man, avenge him by supporting Keyes.
9) Supporting Keyes in IL will help Bush win IL.
10) It will indicate that the GOP is made up of people who can intelligently debate ideas (slavery, reparations, tax cuts, freedom) and support someone who makes an attempt to debate ideas. If Keyes is shunned for being willing to debate ideas, we will only be rewarded with more bland, packaged candidated who spout platitudes.
11) Obama or Keyes? Who do you want voting on the next several Supreme Court nominees?
Liar.
No, I don't hate you despite your moronic behavior.
Get thee behind me, anklebiter.
Last word freak.
Keyes is very wrong on the "reparations". From the top, it sounds like a grab-money game, with no way to disprove any claims. My grandparents came to USA in late 1880's, and they never had a thing to do with slave trade. I will not put one red cent into a fund to repay any "slave" ancestor anything. They can all return to the genocide in Africa if they don't like it here. My taxes have paid enough money to educate alot of persons of all colors. I don't own them a damn thing, and neither does USA. Keyes is way off the mark on this item. If he is running on this and this alone, he is going to make a laughingstock of himself. Sad to see someone who benefited from the good education system in USA (vs Africa)making such a fool of himself, and embarrassing the GOP in the process. Someone needs to do more stringent vetting before picking candidates, IMO.
I don't think anyone calling for reparations will ever be elected president. And if he is, it'll probably cause another civil war. You can't punish people for something their great-great-great grandpa did, especially people whose great-great-great gandpa didn't do it. Keyes goofed big time here.
Oh, gee, that's a tough one.
I mean, now I gotta first figure out if I SUPPORTED him for all those years UNTIL YESTERDAY because I "generally don't like him" or not.
I tell ya what. I'll get back with you after I figure that out. But first, I've got more pressing matters to take care of. I need to take a crap, catch up with a couple of books I'm reading, play with the cats, chase the dog around the yard, catch some zzzz'z, stuff like that.
Good for you! Hatred is toxic, but only to the hater.
I've always found it best, when dealing with the likes of this Don Joe chacter, just to laugh. It keeps you sane and, as an added bonus, drives them absolutely freaking nuts!
Since when did you start caring about conservative principles?
lol, are you JUST NOW catching up?!? Just go back and read your posts, aristotle.
anklebiter.
Don't get your hopes up, McGreevy.
DJ, you are one funny dude.
:o)
I agree with you. This was one of the big problems I had with Ronald Reagan. He took millions of low income people off the tax rolls.
He is still my HERO.
I am not sure where Keyes is going with this reparations thing...but I am not so Dim as to abandon him and help Obama win. Sometime you have to take 90% of what you want instead of staying at 0% (Obama) until you find someone who will give you 100%.....
Alan should have thought about that before he drove away his base and lost any hope for election.
His stupid race based tax plan, may have cost us the senate... and that will cost MORE babies, not less.
Bingo.
After all, the underlying premise of "reparations" is "wealth transfer/redistribution" (coincidentally an underlying premise of socialism, but hey...)
Take away the inherent "unfairness", and you took away the reparations!
I mean, if the premise of "reparations" is to "take from whitey and give to the brothers", and suddenly, you're NOT taking anything from W to give to B, then there are no more reparations!
And at that point, you can bet something's gonna have to give, or else!
I think we all know that this "plan" ain't gonna work, ain't gonna happen, and isn't even intended to happen -- that it's just a "bomb-throwing" exercize on Alan's part.
The big question is why Alan has decided to become a bomb-thrower.
The way I see it, the possible answers ain't very pretty. Either he went nuts, or he's been lying to us all along, or... hell, I dunno. Cranial accident?
You certainly are.
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.