That's certainly one way to keep your head buried in the sand about an ugly Keyes issue.
Posted on 09/15/2007 4:08:21 AM PDT by 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
Keyes is perfectly qualified then. LOL!
The states are now "protected" if at all be the people themselves of the respective states. Why this is not just as effective, if at all, as state legislative election of US Senators does not seem immediately obvious.
Are you some sort of fan of Alexander Hamilton??? His Federalist Party was effectively dead before he was. Its successor, the Whig Party did not last long. The Republican Party came next and abandoned the Lincolnian tyranny soon enough to survive although the old Hamiltonian temptation is threatening the GOP yet again. Whenever the Hamiltonian impulse arises against the interest of the general public, the general public kills off the Hamiltonian Party du jour. "Suffer to the max so that the rulers may prosper personally" is not very salable politically in a democratic republic such as ours.
AND, history is not easily amended to sanitize Hamiltonianism.
Let's hear your pontification about Keyes sleight of hand with the Minuteman (MCDC) evaporated funds.
What section granted it?
The Constitution was to make the Articles of Confederate more perfect, and those Articles were perpetual.
When the States agreed to the Constitution, they knew it was a permanent deal and that was acknowledged even by its opponents, such as Patrick Henry.
The Tenth Amendment limits federal powers to those explicitly granted in the constitution. I have looked and looked and never seen anything to the effect that, if a state should secede, the fedgov may send the army to murder, rape, loot and pillage the civilian populations of such states. Where is that???
If a State attempts to secede, it is in violation to its obligations to the other states and in a state of Rebellion.
Now, since nothing has been done since to the Constitution to specifically forbid secession, you must still think that the right exists.
No government would give the right for parts of it to leave without a legitimate grievance.
That would not be a nation, that would be a coalition of sovereign nations, which the United States never was.
There was never a time when (with the exception of Texas) any State ever existed by itself and operated separately as a sovereign nation.
Even in the secession, it was a unified effort that immediately attempted to form another nation.
This act was expressly forbidden in Art.1, sec 10, the forming alliances with other states.
Now, if secession had been considered a viable option by the Founding Fathers, they would not have forbidden States to unite together against other states.
The CSA Constitution had the same restriction in it.
The states are now "protected" if at all be the people themselves of the respective states. Why this is not just as effective, if at all, as state legislative election of US Senators does not seem immediately obvious.
Not quite sure what you mean by this.
The reason that State Legislature's electing of Senators was an important defense of Federalism, was that the State Legislatures put the Senators in place as the State Representative.
Thus, the Senator always knew that he was representing that State.
Much like a Congressman is directly representing his own district. Direct Election of Senators removed that restriction and the Senators now can make direct appeals to the people of the State without taking the States best interest to heart.
It makes the Senate a more 'democratic' Body when it was to be the 'aristocratic' one, detached from the whims and shifting moods of the people.
Are you some sort of fan of Alexander Hamilton??? His Federalist Party was effectively dead before he was. Its successor, the Whig Party did not last long. The Republican Party came next and abandoned the Lincolnian tyranny soon enough to survive although the old Hamiltonian temptation is threatening the GOP yet again. Whenever the Hamiltonian impulse arises against the interest of the general public, the general public kills off the Hamiltonian Party du jour. "Suffer to the max so that the rulers may prosper personally" is not very salable politically in a democratic republic such as ours. AND, history is not easily amended to sanitize Hamiltonianism.
And Hamiltonianism is not so easily dismissed either.
Hamilton was concerned with the stability of the nation, and rightfully so.
The United States did not have to suffer through the traumas that racked the French and Russian revolutions.
Both Hamilton and Jefferson sought to protect individual liberty, but each simply leaned in a different direction, Hamilition toward stability which meant a stronger Federal Government.
As Jefferson himself stated in his first inaugural address,
But every difference of opinion is not a difference of principle. We have called by different names brethren of the same principle. We are all Republicans, we are all Federalists. If there be any among us who would wish to dissolve this Union or to change its republican form, let them stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it.
http://www.bartleby.com/124/pres16.html
On the MCDC issue, you’ll have to address your question to someone who knows anything about it. Other than a few rumblings here by some malcontents, I’ve never read anything of the sort, and thus have no basis to perform any research.
I already conceded that he paid himself a salary during his first campaign and his first campaign alone, and I explained why that should be considered acceptable for anyone (except, perhaps, incumbents who are already paid through taxpayer money and can campaign without fear of losing it).
Campaign debt is not unusual. Most of them get settled, as Keyes past ones have been.
What is unusual is people paying themselves a salary, but I think our distaste for it ensures only those who do not depend on a salary (those who are already elected or already wealthy) stand a strong chance of being elected independently.
That's certainly one way to keep your head buried in the sand about an ugly Keyes issue.
Distasteful is that Keyes promptly lined his own pockets without similar regard to paying debts incurred during his campaign. I have little respect for a candidate who doesn't manage donated funds properly. Makes me suspicious of his intentions with my mandatory tax donations.
Tell you what. Rather than hurling insults, why don’t you just provide a link or three?
That is certainly your right, but don't fool yourself into thinking that this is an unusual case.
For the record, I'm opposed to matching funds as a rule, but given the role money plays in campaigns, I wouldn't demand anyone cripple themselves by refusing matching funds if they choose to run a campaign.
LMAO !!!...........Funny !!
Here you will learn that The Declaration Foundation, just one of Keyes' charities, admitted to state authorities in Pennslyvania that it:
Enlighten yourself. Quick, before you send him any more money. A charity that "misstates the truth" about whether its people are tied to its vendors deserves a wide berth. That is the trap door through which donation dollars end up in the pockets of the principals. Here's how it works: you donate to the XYZ cause. The people running it spend 60 or 70 per cent of donations on fund-raising. Those same people own the direct mail outfit, the list broker, etc. that are used to do the fund raising. Your dollars end up in their pockets. By the time "expenses" are covered, very little ever goes to the cause you think you donated to.
The fact that the Keyes organization stipulated to doing these things ought to give anyone pause.
He got in at the last hour. If only Alan knew how to sale himself along with his ideas. I’d vote for him in a heartbeat but his form of truth not only doesn’t resonate with the public but it also puts them to sleep. Alan is a good man and if the world were a better one he could be President but for now we are stuck with what we have.
Perhaps most significantly, Mr. Keyes ran such an utterly inept race for his Senate run that his opponent didn’t need to campaign against him to be assured of winning. This freed up his opponent to run around the country headlining fundraisers for other Democrats and sending his own previously non-existent name recognition into the stratosphere. If we end up with Barack Obama as President, it will be thanks to Alan Keyes.
The guy had too much class to embarass his ex by continuing the race. Keyes merely had the grace to be the sacrificial lamb.
“If this Keyes guy sucks soooo bad and can’t get 1% why do you even care? “
I’ll start to care when that 1% is the difference between Rudy losing to a real conservative (and there are several in the race) and Rudy winning because the conservative vote got split. Never mind that Tancredo, Brownback, and Hunter have excellent pro-life pro-family records - Alan is the uber-social-conservative to out-conservative these already far right candidates ... As if we have a shortage of fringe candidates with Ron Paul in the race.
Real conservatives have bigger fish to fry than feeding Alan Keyes’ vanity. The Democrats are set to give the “GI-bill-for-illegal-aliens”, raise taxes, and get US defeated in Iraq before its too late and we end up winning. Lets do something about *that*.
My personal least-favorite President is FDR.
The particular complaints you have about Lincoln were decisively settled in April, 1865. I think well of Lincoln because, although he did not start the war (it was started by the rebels who fired on Fort Sumter), he didn’t let the Union get destroyed. He saved the American Union. The consequences for the history of the American people would have been quite different and quite dire had that not been so.
You don’t have to run for President to articulate ideas.
In fact it is a detriment. Someone as outspoken and no-holds-barred as Alan is better simply speaking his mind without the false assumption that his speeches would end him in the White House some day. ... only as a guest.
“He will bring issues out that we SHOULD discuss as a party.”
As if Tancredo, Brownback, Romney, Gilmore, Huckabee, Guiliani, McCain, Hunter, Thompson, and Ron Paul havent brought enough out there?
“Alan moved to and ran for the Illinois US Senate at the request of the Chairman of the Illinois GOP. To label him as a “carpetbagger” is not really deserved.If you will recall Jack Ryan was running against Obama. Jack got caught up in a sex scandal and dropped out. No Illinois republican had the balls to step up and take Ryan’s place, hence they went outside the state fo a candidate.”
Not so. the primary unner-up Oberweis was willing to run and had money to boot. The Illinois GOP first tried Mike Ditka, and then over-reacted and probably thought they needed a black man to run against Obama or something stupid like that. The ultimate problem is that Keyes is incapable/unwilling of running a campaign to win.
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.