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.
Good stuff. Unfortunately though, that’s IAP, which isn’t affiliated with us.
We’ll be happy to post what we can of yours on AIPNEWS.com, though. Just send it to me and we’ll look it over. Contact@aipnc will work.
BTTT for Amb. Keyes!
“Obama is a radical communist, and I think it is becoming clear.”
If Alan Keyes is right, and I believe that he is, we must begin to understand that we are divided as a nation between communists and not-communists and that the twain shall never agree on anything.
All ‘republican’ congressmen had better realize that ‘reaching across the aisle’ will get them their hands cut off. We are no longer a nation of two political parties, joined by the love for it, but of two factions with different and opposite ideas of the direction that they want to take this country.
I’m not going to walk on eggshells for your benefit or anyone elses. Quit being a pansy.
Keyes was a placeholder in a senate race he knew he couldn’t win. He went up against a filthy Chicago machine that had already shown that nothing was too low or off limits. For that I respect him.
The second amendment is completely about giving pause to tyrants. I will not deny it that function, which it excels at. To date, it has never had to be used as such internally...and I pray with all energy of soul it never does.
But at the same time I work for the very political change that you mention and is still within our grasp...I will not rule out its primary functiuon because I want potential usurpers to fear it.
If we talk, and particularly act, like it has no meaning...then it will have no meaning and the tyrants will forge their chains.
From the Declaration:
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.They understood human nature...which despite all the technical advances since that time, has not really changed at all. So they provided the means in the constitution to do the same thing they did, if, God forbid, it ever became necessary.
I pray it never does and am with you in my commitment to working towards a political change in 2010 that harolds a more complete change in 2012. I just pray the other side will gracefully accept such a victory on our part should it occur. If they do, and if they do not do anything out and out over the line constitutionally in the mean time, there will be no need to use the 2nd amendment in such a fashion and it will have once again served its deterent function.
That post is offensive to you?
You never addressed the Fitzgerald fiasco. You never addressed Keyes as a carpet bagger (no one ever asked him to attempt to win “the thankless job” which was in the bag for the CONSERVATIVE GOP, when Fitz was around). The king maker RINOs stabbed Fitz in the back, so your point about “blue state inevitabilities” is actually the absurdity.
I don’t need Keyes, of all people, to tell me to wake up. I’ve been awake.
Probably fraud and consiracy to commit fraud for starters.
Where are the rest of the words in this sentence from the above article?
“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 “?
They will do that anyway, and they will manufacture quotes if necessary. I will not temper the absolute truth for fear of such.
And it is also the goal of the democrats — I don’t see anyone of them protesting Obama’s actions. The democrats have become Obama’s lapdogs.
It was an answer to the question in Post #21, which was a question posed to Post #6...
That’s the reason why it had to be said... (per Post #6)...
"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 believe there is no common ground with the brain dead
who voted for looks. I just wish we could get a divorce
from them and that they would leave us alone somewhere.
XLNT Response
Among the natural rights of the colonists are these: First a right to life, secondly to liberty, and thirdly to property; together with the right to defend them in the best manner they can.
Samuel Adams
The liberties of our country, the freedom of our civil constitution, are worth defending against all hazards: And it is our duty to defend them against all attacks.
Samuel Adams
My response was in connection with Post #6, which was *questioned* as to why it was necessary to even say that (per Post #21).
Thus, I came in on that and said (basically) “Yes, it’s necessary to say that the change is going to be by political means and that mechanism, and not by armed revolution.”
I say that (and others say that) because there is a group that says, “We will engage in armed revolution, if we have to.”
My answer to that is to say that I will only engage in the political means and mechanisms that the founding fathers gave us and I’m making that clear right now.
Obviously others have made it clear that they will engage in armed revolution...
I see two problems with this statement.
First off, I agree that getting "people" to change their minds and vote for Republicans is a good idea but it would only work if the people who voted for Zero were in fact real people. I propose that a much larger percentage than we might suspect, actually consists of "Made Up" people. In other words vote fraud. In my opinion, it is nigh impossible to convince someone who doesn't exist to change anything. Add to that ACORN getting about $5b in the "Stimulus" bill. How many additional votes will that buy I wonder.
Second, I am not sure that there are any Conservative republicans on deck for the 2010 House and Senate races. It would/will take a "Real Conservative" with a fire in their guts to reunite the conservatives and fight the corruption. Don't see any now and if they are not out there now, they probably won't make it by 2010.
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.