Posted on 05/10/2007 9:45:34 PM PDT by jdm
“Do I have your word on that?”
Yes.
What kind of authority is Alan Keyes on what it takes to be president?
I know of no one more knowledgable or qualified in that regard.
"After all, Alan, I should be the one thanking you, because you did such an extraordinary job in the first 7 years of our administration: working with Jeane Kirkpatrick at the United Nations, serving as the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Economic and Social Council, defending our country against the forces of anti-Americanism.
I think particularly of your work at a conference in Nairobi where you and my daughter Maureen worked to eliminate the disgusting ``Zionism is racism'' resolution from that conference's final report and earned the gratitude of all Americans. And there was your performance as my Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs, where you pursued successful reforms of the United Nations and opposed with every ounce of strength in your body all those who have served to foster and legitimize state-sponsored terrorism.
Alan, I should be thanking you -- and I am -- because every time I asked you to do your best, you did that and better. Every time I asked you to stand for America, you stood tall, and you deserve not only my thanks but the thanks of every citizen of this great country."
*snip*
"I've never known a more stout-hearted defender of a strong America than Alan Keyes. He truly knows that freedom works." - Ronald Reagan
Will Dr. Keyes be running this year? If not, will he be supporting the Republican nominee? I know he is a principled conservative, but what is his stand on ‘voting for the lesser of two evils’? Does he propose revolution as the only realistic solution at this juncture?
I don't know. But, I think every patriotic American should strongly urge him to do so. His voice and his message are critically needed at this point in our history.
If not, will he be supporting the Republican nominee?
He has always had a deep commitment to the Republican Party, on historical and moral grounds. But, the answer to your question depends on who that nominee is, and whether the Grand Old Party chooses to adhere to its historical commitment to what is right.
I know he is a principled conservative, but what is his stand on ‘voting for the lesser of two evils’?
I'll let him speak to that.
From his speech to the Constitution Party in December:
"Final point. What are you all going to do in this critical time? Because I have to tell you, I believe that the time we are facing is the time for which God has set you apart. I don't exactly know what's going to happen in the Republican Party. But I can tell you what is liable to happen. What is liable to happen is, in 2008, under the pressure of all kinds of phony nonsense, including the betrayal of principle by well-named and known so-called leaders of moral groups and faith, a pro-abortion nominee or ticket will be placed by the Republican Party before the American people--pro-abortion, either in fact as McCain and Romney are, in fact, or in profession, as Giuliani is. But it doesn't matter, does it?--the betrayal will be the same.
When that betrayal occurs--and it will occur, I would hope, after a bitter fight--and for those of you who are constantly asking yourselves, "Every time Alan says anything to us, it sounds to me like he's one of us," don't worry. On every issue, as I often tell Howard Philips--he's a good buddy of mine from quite a ways back now, and who is one of my sterling examples of that character which is otherwise missing in American political life.
Well, I'm often heard to say, I'm staying in the Republican Party. There are good people in the Republican Party. You know this as well as I do. There are decent folks just like yourselves--people who want to see the right things happening in this country--large numbers of them. They keep voting, hoping first, and now hoping against hope, now listening to these phony arguments, where people say, "The lesser of evils. Got to vote for the lesser of evils." They don't bother to tell them that we rigged and manipulated the primaries, so that the only choice you'd have would be the lesser of evils. They don't tell them that. Karl Rove doesn't announce that in the newspapers. I don't know why. [laughter] He just does it.
But that being the case, you have to ask yourself, which part of the scriptures is it where Christ says, "Do the lesser evil?" [laughter]
Where is it?
Where is it in the prophets that it says, "Cease to do evil. Learn to do lesser evil"? [laughter] I don't think it says that. It says, "Cease to do evil. Learn to do good."
As Christian people, some folks woke up. Some folks stepped forward for leadership. Some folks moved into positions where, in this party or that, they were championing, in a difficult environment, things that were needed for the moral heart and conscience of this country. They did it in order to do good, not to do a little less evil than the other guys. And I say it unequivocally, it is wrong to vote for the lesser of evils when you yourself could stand up and offer this nation what is good. [applause]
And that is the great challenge that I think is faced. One way or another, I believe that the banner of truth, the banner of good, the banner of decency, the banner of constitutional American principle, grounded in the Constitution and ultimately in the great principles of the Declaration, they must be represented in the battle that is to be fought in the Republican Party. The standard of right must be raised. It must be raised unequivocally. It must be raised actively. It must be raised without compromise and without calculation. The good and decent hearts still trapped within that party of manipulation must be called to at least one more time to see if they will rally to truth, to see if they will give their hearts to what God requires--and I believe that they are still there and in goodly numbers.
But can I predict what will happen? Well, I'll tell you. If I were to base my predictions on what has happened up to now, then ungodly money and political interest and greed and divisiveness will lead to a triumph of the lesser evil that turns out to be the greater evil because it's the one that slips past you unnoticed. And it will win again, but in that moment, as we have seen in the last election, good many people in that election decided that they were going to sit it out, stay home, because they weren't going to vote for the lesser of evils. Now, I think a good many people, after they have given their hearts once again in the Republican contest to a cause that is then betrayed, will be looking for a home. And when, this last time, Republicans abandon their principles and betray the truths that alone make them a party worthy of their national position, who will be ready?
Because I know for sure that if they nominate some pro-abort at any place on the ticket, I will leave the Republican Party. I have said this before, and I will do it. But I think that it's really important that neither I nor others leave the party alone. We must take with us all those we can rouse so that a new possibility is created for America.
Does he propose revolution as the only realistic solution at this juncture?
No, and he never has. He counsels the sovereign citizens of this country to rise up and govern themselves, righteously, wisely, and with justice. Do you agree with him?
But, the answer to your question depends on who that nominee is, and whether the Grand Old Party chooses to adhere to its historical commitment to what is right.
I'm curious, did he vote for George H.W. Bush in 1988 and 1992? If so, how did he reconcile Bush's flip on the abortion issue?
But, the answer to your question depends on who that nominee is, and whether the Grand Old Party chooses to adhere to its historical commitment to what is right.
Seems to me that now would be a good time for him to switch to the Constitution Party as it's obvious a 'true-believer' who's never switched their position is not going to get the GOP nomination (even Fred Thompson was pro-choice in his past). Or is he just going through the formalities, waiting for the actual nomination day? (The writing's on the wall)
Alan Keyes is a good man, and very convincing. That's a great speech on the 'lesser of two evils', but it's a prescription for another failed third-party run. It seems pretty clear that the two-party system will persist until our destruction. It's easy to pretend revolution isn't the only viable solution and very easy to be ideologically pure. Keyes would be a great leader in a more perfect world, for a humanity less fallen.
The flaw i see in his paradigm is his too-high expectation of humanity: He counsels the sovereign citizens of this country to rise up and govern themselves, righteously, wisely, and with justice. Do you agree with him?
We're living in the midst of living out the above charge. Notwithstanding our financial prosperity, you see how well that turned out from a principles standpoint.
The problem with purists like Keyes is that I know of no examples where a nation lost and straying from its founding principles gets back to where it started through the political process (at least with this much distance in time from our founding, 230+ yrs). Federalism is a word maybe 0.05% of the people even understand.
This historical reality outweighs the fantasies of the purists who will not compromise their principles to vote against the greater of two evils.
Politics isn't like religion - if one loses every election, one doesn't 'gain in the end' by going to political 'heaven'. Compromise is implicit - it's just a matter of how much. Keyes and others deeply religious enjoy the luxury of not seeing political losses as real failure.
Since we don't live in a monarchy or dictatorship, a 'good' politician is one that first can get elected, and second that is 'good' in the moral sense. If you can't do the first, you can't do the second.
Essentially, until one has the stomach for revolution, I believe one has a duty to vote against the greater of two evils - for the candidate who will do the least damage, or make the most repairs on a compromised (human) endeavor.
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.