>
Posted on 04/14/2008 10:11:41 PM PDT by TBP
“You’ve convinced me that you are going to help put Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama in the White House.”
This is how a friend of mine tried to wrap up a political discussion last weekend. The circumstances were unusual, even if the comment was not. Usually, you’ll find a lone Keyes backer being numerically outgunned by a bunch of RINOs. In this case, the sole McCain supporter found himself faced with an enthusiastic and well-informed circle of Keyes people.
It is interesting that he had nothing to say about our arguments themselves. A good guy at heart, he conceded the moral and civic points that we raised. Then, disappointingly, he fell back on the same old “lesser-of-two-evils” approach that the Republican leadership has been serving up for decades now. The idea that the only way to win is to concede defeat at the very outset, by backing a candidate who doesn’t stand for conservative principle in the first place, has itself come to fruition in the presumptive nomination of John McCain as the Republican candidate for 2008. Is this not, in and of itself, enough to convince us at last of the wrong-headedness of this approach?
This type of thinking constitutes textbook “enabling behavior,” in the vernacular of popular psychology. Just as the wife of an alcoholic is supposed to “save the family” by calling in sick for her hung-over husband, we conservatives are being pressured to “save the White House for Republicans” by facilitating the socialist mentality. “What are you trying to do, get me fired?” the husband demands, if she mentions any qualms. It is easy to see that, if he did lose his job, the fault would be his own and not hers. Why then can we not see that it is up to the politician to earn the conservative vote, and not up to the conservatives to put into office a politician who has chronically failed them?
The pressure to be political enablers needs to be staunchly resisted. The once-great Republican party has, in nominating John McCain, crossed the line from viable to suicidal, and many well-intentioned Americans know it. That is why they are saying they will not vote for him, even at the cost of not voting at all. Yet to allow the RINOs to effectively disenfranchise us is not acceptable, either. So, where do we go from here?
Before we look ahead, let’s look back. The Republicans are the heirs of the Lincoln legacy, but what does that truly mean? During the era of slavery, there was a party — the Democrats — that refused to stand against the ungodly and un-American evil of its time. There was another party — the Whigs — that let its opposition to slavery be watered down to the point of irrelevance. It was in this context that a third party known as the Republicans providentially arose.
Lincoln didn’t make it his life’s objective to rehabilitate a dying political party. During the nineteenth century crisis of the Republic, he saw to it that American identity and sovereignty — as well as the dignity and life of every American — was, in principle, preserved. There were challenges, and unspeakable sacrifice, but Lincoln’s cause was ultimately the cause of God Himself, and it was God who saw it through.
In our own time, we have again seen the American mission assaulted not only from without, but also from within. Socialism renamed “liberalism” has been foisting an ersatz version of our country’s character upon us, while the existing party structure has proven unable or unwilling to stand in the gap. God, however, is still able to achieve His designs for this world, and it is with Him that we must finally cooperate.
Alan Keyes, as you know, has ended his lifelong affiliation with the Republicans. This is a step the Ambassador has not taken lightly, and neither should any of us who are considering a similar move. He has chosen to seek the presidential nomination of the Constitution party, and he asks that you prayerfully consider supporting him in this path.
Many of you took the time to respond to the questionnaire we sent out regarding whether or not Alan ought to go third party. The overwhelming majority of responses were in favor of his doing so. You wrote: Alan has always been the best choice, and the Constitution Party is an exciting, hopeful option for the millions of disappointed Americans who do not know another choice exists.
I will vote for Dr. Keyes based on his life’s work and not on his party affiliation.
I have always voted Republican, but today we have no “life” protection under their party. It is a fearful thought to envision life under the domination of any current (major party) candidate.
Either way, I am supporting Alan Keyes for President of the United States of America. I have voted for him before and I will continue to vote for him until elected.
As a Republican it is hard not to fall in line, but if Alan Keyes joins the Constitution Party and runs as its candidate, I will not only vote for him; I will switch my party affiliation.
Understanding all that he stands for, I will vote for Alan Keyes no matter what!
We the people have no choice in this election. As soon as Alan Keyes makes it formal and runs on a third party ticket, I will be joining that party with him. True patriots have no choice. Dr. Keyes has frequently noted that he is running for President because principled conservatives are being offered no way of participating in politics in this country without violating their own beliefs. To say that Alan is the “best choice” expresses this fact, yet inadvertently masks another reality. As Americans and as believers, we recognize that there are things that lie beyond the reach of our own decisions.
Keyes truly is the choice about which we have no choice; a vote in acknowledgment of that which cannot — strictly speaking — be voted on in the first place. We too hold certain truths to be self-evident. Among them are the fact that the lesser of two evils is still evil, and that if John McCain fails to be inaugurated next January, he and the Republican leadership will not need to look beyond the frames of their own mirrors in determining exactly who is to blame.
Not sure I follow all of that, but the fact is, it’s moot anyhow. John McCain is insupportable, leaving principled conservatives no choice but to create an alternative for the American people to pick from.
In fact, what he offered was an example against, and instead of big government social programs that currently act as reparations:
"The idea I have often put forward to address this challenge involves a traditionally Republican, conservative and market-oriented approach: removing the tax burden from the black community for a generation or two in order to encourage business ownership, create jobs and support the development of strong economic foundations for working families. "This has the advantage of letting people help themselves, rather than pouring money into government bureaucracies that displace and discourage their own efforts. It takes no money from other citizens, while righting the historic imbalance that results from the truth that black slaves toiled for generations at a tax rate that was effectively 100 percent. "I have also made it clear that while I believe that the descendants of slaves would be helped by this period of tax relief, my firm goal and ultimate objective is to replace the income tax, and thereby free all Americans from this insidious form of tax slavery. It is well known that this is one of the key priorities of the Keyes campaign." Keyes2004.com: Keyes on reparations for descendants of slaves "Unfortunately, the government-dominated approaches of the Great Society, which purported to heal and repair the legacy of historical damage, actually widened and deepened the wounds. They undermined the moral foundations of the black community and seriously corrupted the family structure and the incentives to work, savings, investment, and business ownership.
'Reparations' involve money going from one pocket into another. One can argue, as Keyes does, that current social programs act as, and in lieu of, slave reparations- Taxes going out of the pockets of citizens, and invested by the government into the black community in the shape of affirmative action, welfare, and etc.
The 'tax break' you adamantly call reparations, removes governmental involvement, removes black dependency upon the government, and stops the government from taking money out of your pocket to fund it.
Whether you agree with it or not, It is hardly reparations for slavery.
Oh, I don't know... It isn't like McCain was 'chosen by the people', either. If Perot can garner 20% of the electorate, consider if you will, what an actual Reagan Conservative can do, especially against a liberal Republican who is the antithesis of Reagan Conservatism.
Tax breaks for slave descendants = reparations.
Tax burden would be shifted to non-descendants to compensate descendants.
Keyes is no Reagan conservative...instead he is the flip side of the Obama "Angry Black Man Opportunist" coin.
Very similar to David Brock. Work with conservatives when it advances his interests...then turn on them when the money is be made elsewhere.
i knew someone would respond with that... he may not have been chosen by conservatives, but he was chosen by Republicans... we had a conservative in the race... Duncan Hunter... he garnered just about no support... Alan Keyes will garner very little support... had Duncan Hunter run in a third party right from the start, then perhaps he would have "stood out"... coming up with someone at this point in the game is not going to work...
It's over.
What's the use?
We've lost the Republic.
Nonsense. There is no compensation to descendants.
He is a Reagan Conservative by the very definition.
instead he is the flip side of the Obama "Angry Black Man Opportunist" coin.
Utter pap.
Very similar to David Brock. Work with conservatives when it advances his interests...then turn on them when the money is be made elsewhere.
Turn on them?
No, he was largely propelled by independents in open races, in RINO states we will never win. He flat out lost in every single Republican stronghold by region.
we had a conservative in the race... Duncan Hunter...
Actually there were three Conservatives- Hunter, Tancredo, and Keyes.
[...] he garnered just about no support...
by the time conservative states got a chance at election, all were banned from debates, and one of the three was already out. By the time Hunter succumbed, only three conservative states had voted. Keyes was levered out of the game so severely that many here still aren't even aware he was running.
Alan Keyes will garner very little support...
I think you are incorrect. There are a lot of votes and a lot of money that is *not* going to the Republicans, nor has it been going to them since the immigration debacle. The RNC is broke. McCain is broke. There is very little grassroots support. Where is it all? Do you think it's all going to show up magically on McCain's doorstep when there is no other choice? Guess what: It isn't ever going to be McCain's.
That means there is a whole lot of buried gold in the way of money and votes if someone can get to the conservative base... Especially the Christian Right. Keyes plays VERY well with the Christian Right. That's enough to get him on the map. As a Reagan Conservative, he has it within his potential to harness all three pillars of the Reagan Coalition to his cause. If the Christians lift him up enough to be seen, he will be a mighty contender. Mighty.
had Duncan Hunter run in a third party right from the start, then perhaps he would have "stood out"... coming up with someone at this point in the game is not going to work...
The problem for 3rds and indies is a lack of finances. The two major parties suck up all the money and the air... It is impossible for a 3rd or an indie to begin with the big dogs, because the money WILL run out. That is why they play the last (and most important) 3 months.
Considering the tone deaf leadership of the pubbie leadership, and the outright animus toward their candidate, considering the festering sores left from the betrayals of the Bush administration and Republican senators, I would suggest a Reagan Conservative running as a 3rd will have a very good chance.
i'm not talking about McCain's money and, really, i am not even talking about his campaign... i am talking about a late-in-the-game third party option... i am not against a third party... i think it's always stupid to try it as a last-minute resort... it doesn't matter how much money is out there... that money is not going to Alan Keyes... when has he ever garnered a lot of support? never... and he won't now... there are a lot of conservatives who are unhappy with McCain, but that certainly does not mean they see Keyes as their man... you name three conservatives who were in the race... none of them were widely supported... all put together they did not muster up a lot of support, and they aren't going to be supported now--7 months before the election... a third party option needs to be an option at the start of the election season for it to be taken seriously... this last minute--boo-hoo, our man didn't win so we are going to run him in a third party--tactic is not effective...
as much as many do not want to admit it, McCain was voted for by Republicans... RINOs, unfortunately, are Republicans...
it’s not over... we have three years to come up with a viable third party option...
>
I beg to differ.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5747800/
http://www.keyes2004.com/news/040818reparations.php
http://michellemalkin.com/2004/08/17/alan-keyes-is-making-a-mess/
Then, by your own logic, I do Conservatism a great favor to vote against them, if for no other reason than to take votes away from them, as they are an enemy as much as the Democrats are.
Differ if you would, but one of your own links denies your premise:
http://www.keyes2004.com/news/040818reparations.php
"I have also consistently maintained that the history of slavery, racial segregation and discrimination did real damage to black Americans, left real and persistent material wounds in need of healing. "I have consistently opposed the effort to extort monetary damages from the American people. As I have argued in the past, the great sacrifices involved in the Civil War represented the requital in blood and treasure for the terrible injustices involved in slavery. In this form the so called 'reparations' movement represents an insult to the historic commitment that many Americans made to the end of slavery, which included the sacrifice of their lives.
This much is obviously true, by way of Keyes' comments in this regard over years of history.
"Unfortunately, the government-dominated approaches of the Great Society, which purported to heal and repair the legacy of historical damage, actually widened and deepened the wounds. They undermined the moral foundations of the black community and seriously corrupted the family structure and the incentives to work, savings, investment, and business ownership. "In various ways through the generations since the end of slavery, America has tried to address this objective fact, but without real success. This was at least in part the rationale for many elements of the Great Society programs of the sixties, and for the original and proper concept of affirmative action developed under Republican leadership during the Nixon years.
It is these "government-dominated approaches of the Great Society" that he is pointing to, a bare fact, and most obvious, as I am certain you will agree. What follows is his proposition for fixing what those programs have caused, or caused in great part:
"This has the advantage of letting people help themselves, rather than pouring money into government bureaucracies that displace and discourage their own efforts. It takes no money from other citizens, while righting the historic imbalance that results from the truth that black slaves toiled for generations at a tax rate that was effectively 100 percent. "The idea I have often put forward to address this challenge involves a traditionally Republican, conservative and market-oriented approach: removing the tax burden from the black community for a generation or two in order to encourage business ownership, create jobs and support the development of strong economic foundations for working families.
This is an obvious attempt to stop the 'reparations' already in effect, namely those same government programs that he had railed against previously.
I am for this, in principle, although I hasten to add that I would limit such an idea to the inner city ghettos, and to regions where conditions are similar. I would hope that Dr. Keyes implied or imagined the same.
If one would look into his past statements in this regard, he likens it to what the Romans did for cities or regions that were failing from disaster, so the suggestion that he means 'regional or affected areas' is not far fetched or without precedent.
I do not believe such areas can sustain the 'welfare rug' being summarily pulled from beneath them (which would, I admit, be the ultimate fix), as the nature of socialist programing foisted upon these people for generations have left them without the means to do otherwise.
With that in mind, I think this an admirable stab at a problem that has eluded repair for decades, and while it leaves such areas at an advantage 'for a generation or two', it also removes (or incrementally declines) the cost of supporting those areas, and the control thereof, from administration by the government, and thus leaving an otherwise taxed citizenry with their money in their pockets.
The application of this new and different method of helping the downtrodden goes right to the heart of liberalism, striking it a deadly blow right where it began, and where it is at it's strongest, and should be considered for that, if for no other reason.
knock your socks off... i don't care for whom you vote... i'm just discussing the inevitable failing of a third party entering the race at this point... i am not here to try to persuade anyone into voting for John McCain... i simply believe Alan Keyes or just about any other conservative entering the race at this point would have the same effect as would a grape hitting Jupiter...
good evening!
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.