Posted on 02/22/2009 2:04:10 PM PST by Jeff Head
Edited on 02/22/2009 3:07:58 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
KHAS-TV Channel 5
Kurt Casper
Hastings, Nebraska
19 February 2009
Alan Keyes, a 2008 presidential candidate who is also a plaintiff in one of the many lawsuits challenging Barack Obama's constitutional eligibility to occupy the Oval Office, charged at a pro-life rally that unless Obama's social and economic policies are stopped, the United States as we know it is over.
Keyes' comments were part of an interview with a reporter from KHAS-TV at a fundraiser for the AAA Crisis Pregnancy Center in Hastings, Neb.
"Obama is a radical communist, and I think it is becoming clear. That is what I told people in Illinois and now everybody realizes it's true," said Keyes, who ran unsuccessfully against Obama for the state's open Senate seat in 2004. "He is going to destroy this country, and we are either going to stop him or the United States of America is going to cease to exist."
Keyes also reasserted his belief that unless the question of Obama's eligibility to serve as president is answered definitively, America may face the startling crisis of an executive branch run by a "usurper."
"Is he president of the United States?" Keyes asked the reporter of Obama. "According to the Constitution, in order to be eligible for president you have to be a natural born citizen. He has refused to provide proof.”
"I'm not sure he's even president of the United States," Keyes continued, "neither are many of our military people now who are now going to court to ask the question, 'Do we have to obey a man who is not qualified under the constitution?' We are in the midst of the greatest crisis this nation has ever seen, and if we don't stop laughing about it and deal with it, we're going to find ourselves in the midst of chaos, confusion and civil war."
Keyes, who stated he refuses even to refer to Obama as president, labeled the man in the Oval Office as "somebody who is kind of an alleged usurper, who is alleged to be someone who is occupying that office without constitutional warrant to do so."
Keyes' comments included harsh criticism of Obama's policies on immigration, abortion, and the mortgage crisis.
He concluded the interview by railing against the president's push for hundreds of billions of dollars in government economic stimulus spending.
"We are claiming that a bankrupt government can save a bankrupt banking system", Keyes said.
I agree with you about his runs for President. He should give that pipe dream up.
I disagree however, with your statement that he should shut up, or that he is responsible in any way for the election of Zero. For obvious reasons, he is one of the few people that can call out and challenge ‘bama, and not be labeled a racist. He’s a valuable asset, not a liability.
For obvious reasons, he is one of the few people that can call out and challenge ‘bama, and not be labeled a racist. He’s a valuable asset, not a liability.
Not failing is not the dems winning the election, but their inability to govern correctly! FDR did not help with the Depression, it was the attack on Pearl Harbor and WWII that brought the US out of the Depression.
I’m new here, and I didn’t know how to make an independent comment. Just wanted you guys to be aware that the lefties are freaking over some of the things you are saying. Kind of seems to me that they are taking it out of context, but I wanted you to be aware.
http://skyewriter-novemberfifth.blogspot.com/2009/02/online-calls-for-killing.html
You are dead on the facts. Obama has always been a hard core commie. Obama has supported everything that has destroyed every democracy in history. He is a huge fan of gays, and; socialist policies, and; anyone who has studied or even paid attention to history can see what has ruined every democracy in the world.
Obama preached change and he never defined the changes. His message was change and hope, and; he now uses fear and immediate gloom and doom if his polcies are not implemented right now. He is the enemy from within. His advisors make the KGB look like choir boys.
You said — “And just exactly how would having a media that is mostly censored by one party play out in your fair scenario of the civil system? I’ve traveled around in the last few years. It appears that all the countries in the entire west are experiencing massive lies and distortion of information.”
Actually, we live in a time — today — in which it’s impossible to eliminate ideas from the public sphere. Furthermore, the “speed” at which ideas can circulate is far beyond any other time in history. If there was *ever* censorship or “controlling” of ideas, it was in past decades and past centuries, because people did not have the means or ability to get contrary ideas (about whatever is going on in their world) from any other sources than government approved ones.
Back in the last century and before the Internet, the nation pretty much was “cohesive” and “united” in ideas and values, because these were the ideas and values that were controlled and disseminated among the public. And sure, many of them were correct, while others were just a convenience of the government and the powers that controlled the media.
So, I don’t see that it is possible — at all — for the control of ideas to happen. There may be attempts by some, but it’s *more difficult* than it ever was in any other period in the history of this world — to do so today, than at any other time.
Now, as to what are lies and what is the truth — that’s always been the problem. That requires discernment, as it always has in any age — *even* when you have *totally free* flow of idea without any control at all.
IN FACT — it’s *harder* to distinguish truth from fiction (i.e., lies) when information is *totally free* — than when it is controlled. That’s because the “lies” are told with as convincing abilities as the truth and there is nothing to stop them from being disseminated freely and widely...
You still have to deal with the logistics of getting someone “out of office” and getting someone else “into office”. And in those logistics, it’s exactly as I said — you have two dates to deal with — and they are 2010 and 2012...
No matter what you want to say about it, you have to deal with those two dates and people better make the right preparations for them, if they want to win and make a difference...
IIRC, Watts said he supported 0bama. If I am wrong, someone correct me. But if he did, he’s crossed off my list for all eternity.
Hmm - do you have an account there?
Do I have an account where?
If you’re asking if I have an account at the blog from which I posted the link, no. It’s a blogger blog, and depending upon who owns a blogger blog, it varies as to who can post a comment there. This blogger apparently has it open to anyone to post at this point, though someone posted a comment there earlier today which the owner immediately deleted.
The owner of that blog stated that no debate on this post is welcome. So if someone wants to post a different opinion than hers, it will likely be deleted.
Free speech. Heh.
Never heard that one.
I remembered reading about it, after I posted the comment I did a google search, didn’t find anything completely damning, just sort of. Apparently on a Hannity show he pretty much sort of said he supported the jackal. Just ‘cause a “black” man was running it was really historic, great, all that crap.
I wasn't addressing getting someone in or out of office. The 2010 election is still a ways away and a great deal of things can happen before then.
For example, a national emergency could be declared, even one of a financial order, by presidential fiat before then and things would be real different, real fast. There is even the haunting specter, within the framework of such a mental exercise, that the 2010 elections may never be held. A "Catastrophic Emergency", like that mentioned in NSPD 51 could be declared.
IMO a lawyer, and not even a particularly good one, could twist...(b) "Catastrophic Emergency" means any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions;...to fit our current economic "crisis" into a national emergency. There are, of course, a plethora of other executive office decrees that could also go into effect if such an emergency were declared.
If it was imaginable during the Bush administration isn't just as, or even more imaginable during 44's tenure in office?
Was the subject of presidential powers too touchy? It seems that you are tactfully trying to divert the topic away from that with this divergent statement of yours.
In getting to the summary of your statement, you said — “Was the subject of presidential powers too touchy? It seems that you are tactfully trying to divert the topic away from that with this divergent statement of yours.”
No, not too touchy, but simply one in which the voters and the political parties have no part. You can talk all you want about it, but it won’t make a bit of difference, because it’s not a matter of “vote” for it to happen or not happen.
My point is that if one wanted to *do something* (in which you do have the ability to *do*) — that has to do with the 2010 and 2012 elections. And so, if one is to *actually accomplish something* — that is where it’s going to happen.
—
Now, in regards to the issue of executive orders, I know of nothing you can do to affect those one way or another, other than getting another President in office. So, I choose to get another President in office, which is something that is “do-able”...
And, on another aspect of executive orders, I’ve been hearing about this “taking over the government by executive orders” for decades now, and through several administrations. If that happens, then it would seem that the founding fathers have a flaw in the system that they set up...
So, if you really wanted to do something about that, it would seem that one would have to get a Constitutional Amendment put on the books that would limit the powers of the Presidential Office, to put forth these executive orders”. But, I doubt you can accomplish that — so I guess we’ll be left, instead, with another few decades of people warning about the imminent takeover of the U.S. by executive orders.
In the meantime, I’ll be voting in the elections... LOL...
You said — “Free speech. Heh.”
The idea of “so-called” — Free Speech — has never extended to places like blogs or even Free Republic. In fact “free speech” is very limited in the “real world” context (in practice).
It doesn’t exist here and it doesn’t exist on other blogs and it doesn’t exist in newspapers and it doesn’t exist in television and it doesn’t exist in radio — in that I can insert my own type of “speech” into “any venue” that I choose to do so. Any of those “venues” can choose to “cut out” my own type of “speech” if they choose to do so — and pretty much 100% of the time, they *do choose to do so* (i.e., cut off my speech if they don’t like it...).
I may be able to “start another venue” — depending on my abilities and finances, but that’s about it. And in the “real world” (as we “walk around in real life”) — even that “free speech” is *very limited* to certain “cordoned off areas”... (i.e., only allowed in certain “physical spaces” predetermined by certain authorities...).
Hmmm..., an interesting read on some of those comments over there.
My only point was that they scream about their rights to free speech when they want to talk, but want to censor it when we do.
And yes, the comments over there are interesting, to say the least.
He reduced unemployment significantly before WWII and kept people going...keep in mind the unemployment numbers do not use the WPA and CCC figures as well as other government created employment.
“That gun looks illegal”
There are no ‘illegal’ guns, only unconstitutional laws...
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.