Posted on 08/24/2004 4:15:41 PM PDT by Willie Green
For education and discussion only. Not for commercial use.
Alan Keyes has upset the liberal game plan to crown law school lecturer Barack Obama as the new leader of blacks in America. Ted Kennedy and Hillary Clinton like Obama because he imitates their votes, but Americans like Keyes because he is straightforward about issues we care about.
The Keyes-Obama race for the U.S. Senate from Illinois reminds locals of a similar contest in 1950. Then a conservative Republican traveled up and down the Land of Lincoln and toppled one of the most powerful liberals of that time, Senate Majority Leader Scott Lucas.
The victor in that race, Everett McKinley Dirksen, played to the grassroots rather than to the media. His stunning upset showed that the voters were ready to break with New Deal liberalism and join the Republican landslide in 1952.
Everett Dirksen, the greatest orator of his time, won because he articulated public opposition to the follies of the Truman Administration. Dirksen was equally persuasive whether he was negotiating with a small group over an arcane section of legislation or declaiming broad themes without a microphone to a thousand voters on the hillsides of southern Illinois.
Illinois voters have the opportunity this year to hear Alan Keyes, perhaps the greatest orator of our time and a man with a fund of knowledge about issues that matches his eloquence. His biggest obstacle is not that he is not an Illinoisan, not that he is black, but that the media have already anointed Obama as the winner after viciously destroying his other opponents.
Obama had demanded six debates with his Republican opponent when he was Jack Ryan, a businessman unaccustomed to political argument. Reminding us of history's famous Lincoln-Douglas debates, Obama confidently said the people of Illinois are owed these debates because they deserve more than packaged television ads and rehearsed sound bites. Now that Keyes has replaced Ryan as the Republican nominee, Obama wants only two or three debates. Did the history of the Lincoln-Douglas debates change between Ryan's resignation and Keyes's nomination?
The media were touting Obama's Harvard degree, but Keyes's Harvard Ph.D. is more accomplished than Obama's law degree. Besides, we already have too many liberal lawyers such as Kerry and Edwards running the Democratic Party for the benefit of the trial lawyers.
Alan Keyes is a walking encyclopedia on a wide variety of subjects including the Constitution, the proper role of government, and foreign policy. He was an ambassador to the United Nations during the Reagan Administration, and we can count on him to address the important issues that were conspicuously missing from Obama's speech to the Democratic National Convention.
Obama is one of the most leftwing Senate candidates Illinois has ever seen, a me-too vote for Kennedy and Clinton to raise taxes and toady to the teachers unions. Obama supports abortion rights, socialized medicine, and affirmative action, and he opposes private gun ownership.
Obama voted against the "live-birth abortion" bill which was designed to protect live babies born of botched abortions. Obama voted "present" on an Illinois bill to ban partial-birth abortion, and "present" on a bill to notify parents when their minor children seek an abortion.
Obama wrote a letter to the Windy City Times, Chicago's premier gay news source, to promise his support for gay marriage. He said, "I opposed DOMA [the Defense of Marriage Act] in 1996. It should be repealed and I will vote for its repeal on the Senate floor. I will also oppose any proposal to amend the U.S. Constitution to ban gays and lesbians from marrying."
Alan Keyes, on the other hand, is the country's most eloquent defender of the right to life. He is supremely ready to tackle the cultural issues that will be the key to victory in the 2004 elections -- abortion, traditional marriage, parental control over education, and supremacist judges inventing "rights" such as abortion, sodomy, same-sex marriage licenses, and sending pornography into your kids' computers.
Bill Cosby recently made headlines by decrying the decline in education for African-Americans. Keyes is ready to take on the teachers unions and hold them accountable for failing to teach youngsters how to read.
The Bush-haters rally behind Obama, not because his father was African, but because he can be counted on to protect the teachers unions, abortion, and gay unions. The Democrats had hoped to elect Obama by simply playing the race card, but the nomination of Alan Keyes has checkmated that strategy.
Obama's campaign contributors tell you what you need to know about his liberalism. His donors include George Soros, Hillary Clinton's Leadership PAC, People for the American Way, Planned Parenthood, the National Abortion Rights League, the National Education Association, the American Federation of Teachers, and Progressive Choices.
Alan Keyes has exposed the lie that the Democrats are the party for advancing minorities. Those who want a leader, regardless of race, who will speak up for traditional values such as marriage, life, and education choice, will vote for Alan Keyes.
So, Alan thinks that he will be advancing the pro-life platform with a resounding loss?
When the candidates are an unfailing defender of life and a committed supporter of abortion, I would vote for someone even if I WAS HIS ONLY VOTE!
That's a very tempting proposition, Luis.
Have you extended the same offer to our host?
Vanity: Alan Keyes for Senate
Aug 23, 2004 | Jim Robinson
Jack Ryan would have been a better candidate that Alan. Thanks to the media, we don;t have that choice.
With a very short campaign window, someone with instant name recognition was needed. Ditka would have been great. He said no. Alan has that name recognition.
To answer your question: Alan (even if he loses big) will advance the pro-life platform better than if NO ONE EVEN TRIED TO PRESENT IT.
The MEDIA blasted Ryan out of the race. If Ryan was your man, the media suceeds when you fail to support Keyes. To punish the media for knocking Ryan out of the race, Keyes must do better that Ryan would have done. Republicans are griping at each other over the situation (Keyes in the race.) The media caused the situation and is laughing their heads off and being so much smarter than the GOP.
The ultimate goal for the GOP should be that after the election, there is a big pow-wow of the Dims and media where they ask, "Who is the idiot that knocked Ryan out of the race, WE COULD HAVE BEAT HIM???"
Keyes is going to kill this guy in the debates. It'll be closer than everyone thinks.
What, precisely, are those issues? Also, do you believe that posters on FR should be allowed to campaign against George Bush (and indirecly, for Kerry) if they disagree with Bush as strongly as you seem to disagree with Keyes? Or is it only Keyes that freepers are to be allowed to actively oppose on this site -- even though he's the official Republican candidate for Senate in Illinois?
Sorry, but you're wrong. Read her subsequent posts to me -- explaining why she thinks Keyes' conservatism is a demerit, undermining his electability.
You're right.
These kind of races are ultimately determined by who the electorate perceives as 'Senatorial'.
Keyes is going to make Obama look like the small-timer he really is.
You're already doing that.
LOL. Point semi-taken. What with the surprise nature of it all, yes, I can understand. But... the notion holds true regardless. I believe that after the presidential primaries, Keyes was supportive of Bush. I have no facts to back me up, but I'm pretty sure I would have seen the facts to discount my premise by now.
Dear Willie: I have, with city rabies control. But that doesn't count -- or does it? Maybe like motor voting.
the 'friendlies' have all been told to stfu... but not in so many words.
that includes me.
"Don't you ever know when to shut up?"
Yes, me too, which is why I said what I said about "self"-censoring myself.
There are so many jokes I could crack (mostly warmed-over from the ex-sov-union) but why even bother at this point?
Well yes, of course. He criticized Keys, how was it that they put it? Oh, right -- he criticized him "AFTER he was selected."
You see, those who had any objections should have spoken up before he was selected, like, for example, during the primaries, I guess.
Um, on second thought...
But... but... but... how can it be "wrong", if it works?
See?
There's no dissent after all!
We all love the man.
So you were once again WRONG for predicting that this candidacy would cause divisiveness. There's no dissent at all!
Let's hear it for Cabaret!
Can we all join in a hearty chorus of "Tomorrow Belongs to Me"?
I do believe you just trumped Luis, Willie!
Let's hear it for POWER!
Hooray! Etc.
You mean, "Thanks to Jack Ryan, we don't have that choice," right?
It was JR who did whatever it was he did that gave the media whatever it was that they had. And it was JR who withdrew from the race.
Voluntarily.
For whatever reason, JR chose to do something that gave "the media" something they could use for talk-fodder, and by the same token JR chose to call it quits.
"The media" didn't play any part in it, other than the "TUVM, Jack" part.
Fantastic!
Now, how do we get them to suspend the elections, so that "the debates" will suffice "for purposes of election"?
Do you believe that the GOP will benefit if FR is shut down for CFR violations?
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.