Arnold's corruption of Republican Party

World Net Daily ^ | 10/6/2003 | ALAN KEYES

[jmc813]

Primaries are the time for the fight between true believers and others in the party.

Who would you vote for if this were a primary, Arnold or Tom?

[Southflanknorthpawsis]

Yeah, right. You're crying rivers of tears...

No, the tears were probably shed by you and probably quite a few, but.........

I do have some sympathy because the consequences of your situation were not what I enjoy seeing. You can believe that or not; I don't really care.

But it still remains the truth that you went too far and I can see why you cannot turn back now.

[sd-joe]

I didn't say Keyes was not a good person. I said that he has failed in "electoral politics". He did not draw large numbers in his presidential run.

Ambassador is an Appointed position, not an elected position. When speaking of ignorance, check the mirror.

[Writesider]

He was still an "ambassador" to the UN. In fact, serving in the Economic and Social Council, where he represented the interests of the United States in the U.N. General Assembly.

[kellynla]

"And where exactly did Alan Keyes principle get him?" It might get Keyes in Heaven...now tell me what Arnold's lack of principle will get him?
"For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?" Mark 8:36

[Rabid Dog]

Sorry to butt but there is one question that has been bugging me. Arnold made an abortive run for governor during the last election. He dropped out - I believe due to other sexual harassment allegations. Do you have any memory of that? Did he run before, and if so - why did he drop out?

[cwb]

I think this is a great point. The Republican Party is as much a coaltion of views as the Democrat Party. While not as broad as the democrats, we still have our blue-bloods, moderates and social/religious conservatives. And as much as I respect the social conservative for their principled resolve...and believe in those tennants, there are other fiscal conservatives that are just as scared as these views as they are of the far-left's views. While I like Keyes and others who speak of morality, they can also be very condescending and arrogant. It often sounds as if it is "their way or the highway" and if you don't subscribe to their views, you are not a real Republican.

The Democrats have been successful as a "political" force because when it comes to elections, they put aside their differences and unite for a commom cause. When Republicans do this, they are accused of putting thier principles aside in exchange for power. Unfortunately, this is often the reality of "politics" in our current system. It is also a reality that politics is a compromise of values and ideals to form a middle-ground...we not only have to do it at the national level with the current governing two-party system, we have to do it at the party level. How else can you form a broad enough coalition that is strong enough to compete for governing...especially against another Party that doesn't play be the same rules. I hate to say this, but I would be as leary as living under the ideals of a Keyes' America as I would the other side. Not because Keyes' is an evil man...in fact from from it, but because compromise is something that's missing from the far edges. Ironically, it is these sharp edges that generally keep America relatively centered.

I can guarantee that the far-left could not win on its own merits, just as I do not believe the far-right/Christian Coalition could win on its own. The danger is when one of these groups decides it is their right to insist on which way the party goes. In doing so, the party's broad appeal becomes an exclusive group that alienates others. This is the reality of politics where each special interest group must decide if they want to go it alone (Greens, Libertarian) or compromise, working within the Party, to achieve their ideals. It may not always yield immediate results...but if it doesn't within the Party that most closely shares your views, it most likely will be worse in a country with such divergent views. It's sad, but sometimes compromise is needed to advance your ideals and agenda. And I'm sorry but I don't see any virtue in losing...even if it is only to show people how stupid they may be. The damage will aready have been done.

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

Like I said, it was oblique - but I still think it's reasonable to draw that conclusion based on what he did say.

If someone said, "Sir Gawain sat down and tried to figure out how much evil he could get away with," and "The bullet you hear is not the one that kills you," referring to you, would you consider them neutral remarks?

[EternalVigilance]

LOL..

[Miss Marple]

I don't know that he has done more than a few people who post here. Obviously as a public person he trumps me, or you, or anyone who isn't in the public eye.

However, to give him equal stature to the Pope in the fight against communism is going over the top, and I am not a Catholic.

[churchillbuff]

So you're ok with molesting - - ie physically groping - - of women? I'd love to hear you tell that to your mother, daughter, sister or wife if it happens to one of them on a bus, in a park or in a crowd. I'd love to hear the reaction when, instead of calling the police, you say, "don't worry dear, it's no big deal because it doesn't involve perjury or rape and the guy wasn't an elected official."

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

But he likes President Bush! < /extreme sarcasm >

[outlawcam]

You know, I find it interesting that you excoriate McClintock for not being a "team player," but when I suggest Arnold be a "team player" by stepping aside for the more qualified, candidate (who, polls show, is electible), you defend him. I don't hate Arnold. He has every right to pursue his ambition. What I don't like is when a bunch of otherwise good-hearted people are hoodwinked into voting for someone because they are told he represents their only choice. This is, demonstrably, not the case. If everyone who thought McClintock would do the best job as governor voted for him, he would not only win, but win in a landslide. Californians will deserve exactly what they get. Sadly, with Arnold as governor, it will affect everyone else, as well, for his strategy, as he has said it, is to petition the federal government for more money, and to crack down on waste.

What is waste, to Arnold? On that, he is ambiguous, but based on his admitted "socially liberal" philosophy, it is not what you or I might consider "waste."

The Ca Repub party wants to win,

And if they took their heads out of the sand for two seconds, they would see that this "victory" they will likely get will cost them their heart in the long run. "They" (because it is increasingly questionable whether the CARP and McClintock support the same things) could still win, without Arnold, but since they don't believe it, they cannot convince anyone else that they can win.

[sd-joe]

He has NOT run before.

[EternalVigilance]

He did not draw large numbers in his presidential run.

A million conservative Republicans is not chicken feed. And it would have been much higher than that if not for the McCain threat throughout some critical primaries.

And don't forget that those were the very people who after Philly backed George W. Bush, worked their hearts out in the political trenches, and held the right flank of the Party firm to defeat Al Gore.

[EternalVigilance]

However, to give him equal stature to the Pope in the fight against communism is going over the top, and I am not a Catholic.

Yes, it is.

[Sir Gawain]

Like I said, it was oblique - but I still think it's reasonable to draw that conclusion based on what he did say.

Then the reply should be "I believe Keyes thinks Bush is evil, based on this statement:" instead of "Keyes called Bush evil" (which never happened).

If someone said, "Sir Gawain sat down and tried to figure out how much evil he could get away with," and "The bullet you hear is not the one that kills you," referring to you, would you consider them neutral remarks?

I don't think I would care one way or the other, but I must confess it would be cool having legions of fans willing to fight to the death to defend me on a website.

[F16Fighter]

Devastating analysis by Keyes on the intellectual dishonesty and abject hypocrisy of those conservatives "forced" to vote for Arnold.

[Hillary's Lovely Legs]

Your request has been granted; From the NFRA speech, 8/25/01.

Dr. Alan Keyes is speaking... ...a person would come to me and say, "Well, you've got to acknowledge that we've got to get rid of Bill Clinton, that's the worse evil possible," and I tried to explain to them, no, the evil that you know, the evil that you recognize, the evil that inspires you to fight against it, that's not the worse evil you can face. The worst evil you can face is the insidious evil that creeps behind your lines, that demoralizes your leadership, that confuses your commitment and your understanding and that, in the end, defeats you, not because your enemy overwhelms you but because in your confusion, your doubt, and your lack of commitment to those things, you overwhelm yourself.

And I'm watching it happen right now. I watched the run-up to the stem cell research decision on the part of President Bush. Now, part of me was impatient with the whole process that we were going through because I watched the media hyping the "judicious" and "agonizing" decision that he was making, and I've got to tell you, there are times when somebody comes to me and says, "Oh, I'm agonizing over this decision," and the very fact that their agonizing tells me they don't understand the decision.

See, my problem is that I sit in front of a decision like that and I say this is a decision where somebody sat down to figure out how much evil they could get away with.

Note that Keyes goes to great lengths to attribute the word evil to George Bush but doesn't have the guts to apply it directly so in a very, very narrow sense, Keyes didn't directly call President Bush 'evil', but his meaning was implicit; George W. Bush is evil..........JIM SCOTT

[Rabid Dog]

Well, I'm pretty sure he was seriously considering it - before he got sidelined. I'll try to source it.