Posted on 04/25/2008 10:36:59 PM PDT by Kurt Evans
The link to audio of the speech is reproduced in post #2.
It's 22 minutes long.
Thanks for posting the speech. Keyes is a modern day Ezekiel. He has never been a great candidate. Sadly, I think we’ll come to rue our failure to listen. It’s not that we didn’t elect Keyes President, I don’t think that was ever central. It’s that while everybody who heard him particularly early on proclaimed their love for the message, but darned if anyone would actually fight for those values. I fear we shall soon regret that we did not.
Perhaps your memory is short, but by the time Super Tuesday came along, the race was already Romney vs. McCain.
I had started out for Thompson, but he had dropped out long before the primary came around here. Once Thompson left the race, I began supporting the remaining candidate I thought was best. That candidate was Romney. I have no problem quickly adjusting the the new reality as it comes about. It’s called being pragmatic. It’s called choosing the best available option.
I am dismayed by the historical revisioning taking place here, but not surprised. I don’t expect everyone to know exactly where I stood on what over the weeks and months. I don’t think I’m that important.
However, I invite you to search back and read all of my posts for as many months and years back as you like. You will find yourself both informed and entertained.
I would betcha' that most of the votes for Keyes would stay home without the choice, or write in, or leave blank... And that is a HUGE number, if I reckon right. So it is no skin of McCain's nose (melanoma pun not intended).
It isn’t a bet on a “dark horse.” You are not playing with a full deck if you believe that.
It is precisely a 'dark horse' by the very definition.
And it certainly isn’t going to change this election.
Stranger things have happened...
McCain or Obama. No one else.
Then Obama it is, with a chastised (r) party throwing away it's leadership and going back to basics, including opposing liberalism.
Victory or defeat in Iraq.
Then defeat it will be.
Tax increases or tax cuts.
Bullcrap. Tax increases. You may bet on that either way.
Limited government or full blown socialism.
Total bullcrap. See tag.
Free trade or protectionism.
Bah! "Free-Traitorism" Hunter got that one right. See tag sommore.
You make the choice.
You bet I will. I will make the choice that does not suffer my principles. That choice WILL get me all you wish for, and more, as that choice will only be for a Reagan Conservative. Without such there is no win, and no choice whatsoever.
I totally disagree with McCain on Global Warming™, cap and trade, etc. There are countless things I disagree with him on. There are countless things I disagree with President Bush on, too. But I still voted for him, and would again if I had it all to do over again.
On the big issues, I agree with McCain. There is very little common ground, if any, with me and Obama or Hillary.
Victory or retreat in Iraq is the big one for me. That alone makes or breaks it.
McCain certainly has some intrusive ideas regarding the role of government. But they pale in comparison to the ideas of either Democrat. And most importantly, McCain wants to cut wasteful pork barrel spending. Both Democrats want to expand government spending exponentially.
I think the one area where McCain has the most credibility is on that issue, and I think it is the one issue where Republicans, and conservatives in particular, have lost faith in the Republican party, and politicians in general.
I do think that John McCain is the one candidate who can really restore that trust. It seems to me like it is the congressional Republicans who are resisting any effort to restore the American people’s trust in Republicans as the vanguards of American tax dollars. It is the congressional Republicans who still just don’t get it, that they blew our trust. McCain gets that, and perhaps as president, he can drag the rest of them along, kicking and screaming.
>Victory or defeat in Iraq.You are no patriot.
Then defeat it will be.
*blink* *blink* : |
It’s called being pragmatic. It’s called choosing the best available option.
Ahh, there we go! the ever elusive 'electability'! Suffer one's principles for expedience, and one is sure to end up with... well, McCain. Wish in one hand, Sh*t in the other, and what do you get? McCain.
I am dismayed by the historical revisioning taking place here, but not surprised.
I have revised nothing, relying upon your own words, as one can plainly see.
However, I invite you to [...] read all of my posts [...] You will find yourself both informed and entertained.
There is no need. I read you quite often, and I agree with your statement, while reserving the right to disagree generally.
McCain was doing Bush’s bidding on Amnesty.
I do believe that wholeheartedly.
The Big Tent GOP believed they had been given a pass on illegal immigration. Bush has been playing footsie with Mexico since before he was elected, and no one said “boo”.
No one cared, because there were much bigger issues at hand.
Bush tested the waters many times, and got virtually no resistance.
In fact, everything he did seemed to get cheered on by the Right, as though he was Barack Obama blowing his nose at a rally.
So it is no wonder, being that Amnesty was part of Karl Rove’s Big Tent Strategy from Day One, that Bush eventually tried it. McCain was just his chosen man to do it. It was Bush passing the electoral torch to McCain. They were blindsided. Neither knew there would be the backlash there was.
I do believe that Amnesty was Bush’s issue, from the start.
I think McCain could take it or leave it. I don’t think he’ll revisit it again.
Unlike Bush, McCain has gotten the message that people want border security first.
BTW, you didn’t “prove” anything to me.
Bush, Obama, Clinton, any of them would sign cap and trade legislation.
We The People must defeat it in congress.
And that is where it will be defeated.
If such a thing ever got so far that only a presidential veto could stop it, then it is already too late.
But on matters of wasteful spending, where Bush has signed, time and time again, McCain would veto. That is where the president counts.
Don’t forget, McCain voted against Bush’s MediCare expansion. McCain said it was too expensive, too large a government expansion. Republicans all rallied around it, marveling at their own victory and what it would mean for votes in the next election.
Now, years later, Republicans have all come around late to McCain’s view. McCain has always battled expanding government spending. We can trust him to continue as president. I think he will be more Reagan than even Reagan was on this issue.
He advocated America’s defeat in war.
So what I said was no exaggeration.
If anything, it was not strongly worded enough, and I believe the vast majority of FReepers would back me up on that.
It was not I who laid out the parameters. It was you. It was you that gave me no choice. It was you that foisted this false and un-American position upon me, that I MUST vote for your sullied and abusing candidate, or that I MUST vote for the other.
Mark my words, sir: If in fact your wish comes true, you will find, without a doubt in my mind, that your ignoble and dishonest candidate and his 'friends' will not win you anything. A betrayer betrays. That is what they DO.
As to my patriotism, I will gladly lose the war if it preserves us our sovereignty- A thing which Bush, McCain, and their ilk have been all too quick to subvert.
You do not hold the high ground in this discussion, because you would continue to support the very destruction of our country by way of watering down the electorate with the Mexican hordes, and by causing the very borders of our land to disappear.
You would support our sovereignty on the seas being subverted, and our sovereign courts to be subsumed, and put into submission before the world court, all of which, I might add, being governed by the UN, puts that sovereignty under the control of the very Arab nations that our troops are fighting in!
So don't get on your high horse with me. It is neither patriotic, or in our military's favor, nor in our country's favor to vote for ANY of the current choices.
You are no better than Murtha, or Pelosi, or Reid, or Feingold, or Durbin, or Ted Kennedy.
But, but... those are all of John McCain's friends... surely patriots all, no? Can't you see how very hypocritical your position is?
I think a cap and trade system is unviable and would never get out of congress.
I think it is a non-starter politically.
I also think that cap and trade stands diametrically opposed to McCain’s free-market economic vision. He is going to have to make a choice of one or the other, and he has been talking up free markets and less regulation a lot more than cap and trade recently.
Surely he must know that he would never be faced with signing such a bill, which is why he can speak about it so irresponsibly.
I did not say you had to vote for one or the other, only that in the end we will get one or the other.
I said that with one you get victory, with the other you get defeat.
And you said “defeat it is.”
Those are your priorities.
They are not mine though, I can tell you that much.
I have never seen McCain actually do a Mexican hat dance.
I have seen Bush do one, though.
If McCain wants to be a true National Defense president in more than just rhetoric, unlike Bush - and I do believe he does - then he must understand that securing our nations borders is part of that.
As to my patriotism, I will gladly lose the war if it preserves us our sovereignty- A thing which Bush, McCain, and their ilk have been all too quick to subvert.Ah, but you present here a false dichotomy, and a false choice.
Too bad there isn't one.
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.