Alan Keyes: "Uncle Sam's dangerous drug" (Implies Bush Is Worse Than Hitler!)

WND ^ | Saturday, December 15, 2001 | Dr. Alan Keyes

[Keyes For President]

WorldNetDaily: Uncle Sam's dangerous drug

This is a WorldNetDaily printer-friendly version of the article which follows.
To view this item online, visit http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=25705

Saturday, December 15, 2001

---

---

Uncle Sam's dangerous drug

---

By Alan Keyes

---

© 2000 WorldNetDaily.com--> © 2001 WorldNetDaily.com

House and Senate negotiators reached agreement this week on education legislation that the president is expected to sign quickly. And the House of Representatives, in an overwhelming vote uniting Democrats and Republicans, passed the bill on Thursday. Representatives Tom DeLay and Peter Hoekstra led a small group of the conservative remnant in opposing the $26.5 billion package, which Bush Republicans are trying hard to portray as a prudent implementation of conservative principle. But it is, in fact, the culminating capitulation of the conservative attempt to reform the federal government's role in education.

What I wrote about the bill in September remains true today: Instead of the promised attempt to rein in government domination of education, we have an education bill that ramps-up federal funding, increases federal control and was cooperatively stripped of all elements of support for genuine school choice and local control.

However distracted conservatives may be by the drama of the war against terror, we should not let this moment pass without noticing the comprehensive defeat that Bush education policy, enshrined in the bill, represents.

Apparently ended is the struggle conservatives have waged for decades to head off the nationalization of K-12 education. Constitutional language, American tradition and fundamental principles of self-government all weigh decidedly against any federal involvement in local education. Since the first election of Ronald Reagan, the Republican Party had stood for a rollback of that involvement, even abolition of the Department of Education. Now, at the federal level, we have abandoned the argument with the public about the costs and dangers of federal involvement in K-12 education. The current bill does not artfully advance an incremental version of the principled position of President Reagan. Indeed, it takes us in precisely the opposite direction.

It also utterly and finally reneges on one of the most important of President Bush's education policy campaign promises. Candidate Bush called for cutting funds to failing schools and returning to the parents that money in a limited voucher scheme. The bill about to pass Congress for President Bush's signature will give failing schools more money! And the voucher proposal was jettisoned shortly after the inauguration.

The increase in federal education funding in this bill is staggering – over 40 percent in one year. This is more than the education budgets of an average-sized state, such as Iowa or Colorado. With the money, President Bush has eagerly taken on himself, on behalf of the national government, responsibility for the educational performance of the nation's children. No rhetoric about flexibility and local independence will prevent the inevitable – ongoing torrents of federal money, bilge about federal resolve to "leave no child behind" and ever increasing levels of federal oversight and control.

And what will happen when an extra $8 billion fails to improve our children's learning? And fail it will, because real improvement in government schools is blocked by administrative inertia, obstructionist unions and statist secularism in the professional educational establishment. Sad history and all the data show that these impediments are increased, not diminished, by federal dollars. But still the cry will go up for more money, and a more aggressive federal commitment. What will President Bush say next year when another $8 billion increase, or $12 billion, is demanded to make real reform happen? After all, the federal government can leave no child behind. What next? Shall we pass the "Lake Woebegone Act" and decree that all the children shall be "above average?"

Most discouraging of all is that the new bipartisan federal education initiative is such a distraction from the deepest source of our educational problems – the demise of the two-parent, marriage-based family. The family is the school of character and must be the primary agent in education. No federal spending can effectively energize the real reform we need – reform in which parents get control of their own lives, reassert effective, wise and moral control over the lives of their children, and extend that control finally to the common life of our public schools.

As with most federal welfare, federal education money is a drug that obscures and intensifies underlying problems. The Republican Party used to preach "Just say 'No!'" Now we are increasing the dose and inviting the country to party on. It's a prescription for GOP and national addiction that immeasurably weakens our children's future. Let us pray it does not ultimately cost us our capacity for responsible self-government.

---

Be sure to visit Alan Keyes' communications center for founding principles, The Declaration Foundation.

---

Former Reagan administration official Alan Keyes, was U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Social and Economic Council and 2000 Republican presidential candidate.

[PhiKapMom]

At any rate, I hope people on this thread will consider my suggestions. I especially hope that Keyes for President, who posted this obvious flame-baiting thread, will re-consider his actions and refrain from such activity in the future. Continued insults only produce polarization. If the insults continue, I must conclude polarization is what is desired. And then I am left to wonder..to what end?

Very well put! Would like to know myself the purpose of this thread and what Keyes for President and the rest of the Keyes supporters hoped to accomplish. Am not particularly fond of the Education bill myself! I just find this whole "Trash Bush" continual threads by keyes supporters every few weeks suspect and wonder what the ulterior motives are. Guess keyes needs to say and do things that trash Pres Bush in order to keep the donations coming in to support himself and the paid staffers that like to come on here and shoot off their mouths about how bad the President is and why they don't like him!

[Keyes For President]

Just want to make a few points.

I never hurl insults or call names.

I have made repeated appeals on this forum for civility and rational discourse and debate between our two "factions."

The wisdom or lack thereof in me posting this satire is debatable. What I was attempting to do here is illustrate the absurdity of some of the attacks Keyes comes under everytime he expresses an opinion that isn't 100% in agreement with the President by being absurd myself.

No one on either side in this continuing "feud" can honestly claim that I am the cause of the polarization that exists between the two factions here. Things here couldn't be any more polarized than they have been over the past few months.

I was just having a little fun in making a point. Now I can totally understand why some people who recognize themselves in my satire might be a little upset. You know, the people who attack Keyes not for what he said or wrote, but for the look he had when he said it or for what he "really meant" when he wrote it.

I've also illustrated how some people jump in to respond without actually reading the article. I've questioned people in the past whom I suspected were commenting on something Keyes supposedly said without actually reading the article. On this thread, there have been some people who are upset with Keyes for "equating Bush with Hitler" or "slurring Laura Bush" even though Keyes did no such thing. They just took it for granted because someone (me, in this instance) made an unsubstantiated charge.

What I don't understand is why some people here take these things so personally and get personally offended, rather than merely politically upset. I thought this was a political discussion forum. Don't we all expect to hear a dissenting view at times and can't we respond without personal attacks? Again, I challenge anyone here to find me ever personally attacking anyone, even though I've been called some nasty things over the years.

If I am to be criticized for starting this thread, that's fine. I'm not above criticism. But to be consistent, how about admonishing those on the "other side" who have weekly trashed Keyes without actually addressing the substance of his essay, or those who just come on Keyes related threads and talk amongst themselves baiting those who agree with Keyes by calling them cultists, extremists, kooks, etc.

I don't believe what I did was uncalled for, considering the past history here and the context in which I did it. I don't plan on doing it again, as I think I made my point.

Regards and Merry Christmas,

[Keyes For President]

I've been informed.

It's good to be informed!

;-)

Great work KFP! 700 replys so far. Keyes rocks on!

Hey, I can still put a$$es in the seats!

:-D

Regards,

[Miss Marple]

Well, Merry Christmas to you (and I won't take offense at the Hitler reference....I guess).

You tried to stir up trouble. Admit it. I have refrained from personal comments, and I will continue to do so. But if I had posted a similar thread, you and your allies would have gone ballistic...and you know it.

This post was NOT based on the validity of Dr. Keyes' comments. The article had already been posted on another thread, but there weren't enough hits, especially of the contentious kind. So you posted this one to stir things up.

There is a lot of agreement with Dr. Keyes on this issue...although I do not think this bill is the smoking gun proving Bush a "traitor" as some would say. So why do you want to stir everyone up and cause flame wars?

I do not understand this, unless the motivation is to divide all of us. You see, no one attacked Dr. Keyes on the other thread, but that isn't apparently what you wanted.

I think you should re-think your tactics, myself. I think what you did wasn't very nice.

[Luis Gonzalez]

I don't know you from boo, nor do I ever recall speaking to you.

On your first post to me on this thread, you used words such as "republocrats", "gullible sheeple", and "earthworms (i.e., no backbone)".

I simply asked if you'd be crawling back under whatever rock you had crawled out from.

The thing I hate about Libertarians such as yourself, mind you, there are many whom I greatly respect even in disagreeing with them, is you complete hipocrisy, as illustrated so well in your accusing me of ad hominem attacks in the wake of your opening volley of ad hominem attacks, and your sheer arrogance in believing that you, and only you really understand freedom.

You are full of crap, or yourself...same thing really.

[Keyes For President]

You see, no one attacked Dr. Keyes on the other thread, but that isn't apparently what you wanted.

Before I posted this thread, I did a search for "Keyes" as I do before I post any of his articles. It did not show up, because the other poster did not put "Keyes" in the Subject line as he normally does.

That also most likely explains why no one on the other thread attacked Keyes--they didn't know the thread had anything to do with him.

I still don't see you admonish those on "your side" for stirring up trouble. Of course in your eyes, maybe they never do.

I do not understand this, unless the motivation is to divide all of us. You see, no one attacked Dr. Keyes on the other thread, but that isn't apparently what you wanted.

I thought I already addressed this and explained it in the previous post.

Oh well....

[Miss Marple]

If you will go back through my posts on this thread, you will see that I admonished everyone from this kind of behavior. You I have singled out because you started the whole thing.

You knew that this would provoke people. You have as much as admitted it. The title to this was very unusual, and it would have been what I searched for if I were starting to post it, so I don't quite buy your explanation.

I am asking you to consider the tactics you use, and the company you keep. I think you are better than this. Good night.

[LloydofDSS]

>>Libertarians claim to be tough on crime, but how do they define crime?<<

Very simply, if a crime has occurred, then show me the victim. The victim should go down to the police station and fill out a complaint. This is how police work is done. Gambling, Prostitution and Drug use are only three examples of laws against peaceful behavior that do not have a victim. Now do you see it?

Libertarians are perfectly willing to get very tough on "real" criminals. Those are people who harm others physically or steal from others or do anything that produces a clear cut victim.

>>Libertarians want Prostitution to be legalized. Now if that ever happened, for sure, the overall crime rate would decrease, on paper.<<

There has never been any study that has shown that crime would increase if the vice laws were struck down. Yet there are dozens, hundreds of studies that show that crime will drop dramatically if vice laws are repealed.

>>Drug and prostitution are considered by the libs. to be vices, even though these seemingly personalized problems affect everyone involved and then some. <<

Just because someones behavior "effects" everyone around him does not mean the government should throw him in jail. I don't understand the logic that would lead you to take such a ridiculously harsh and unchristian approach to people who have problems with drugs, alcohol or gambling.

[Rowdee]

..." If I see one more Patriot (sic) Act, or one more Education Bill, these people can forget about my vote in 2002 and 2004 for one damn Republican. They better start dealing with the fact that conservatives and libertarians are their base, not the liberals"....

Well......I'm tired of drawing lines in the sand.....I'm tired of the "one more bill like this or that"....using Professor Quigley's book, Tragedy and Hope, I would suggest that we have a two-headed monster of a party--the fire-breathing head changes to the opposite side occasionally, but nothing ever changes--things still keep getting burnt up.

I've observed how the GOP operates regarding 'smaller government' up close and personal at the state level (not to mention fedgov)--the concept of 'smaller government' is a tidbit tossed to the 'faithful sheeple'.....spending continues onward and upward! And the faithful keep saying, "if they don't stop this..." or "one more time of doing ......." or whatever. And the party, neither Demlican or Repubocrat gives a rats' patootie about how you or any other 'faithful' feels--they believe they have a lock on your patronage and patriotism--after all, what are you gonna do, vote for Gore or Clinton? They've already figured out there's enough Dems pissed off enough to stay home and not vote that should the 'faithful sheep' take that option, it is a washout.

..." When I have a complaint like this, they better come up with some reasons why a vote for their guy really means anything "....

See my previous comments. Also realize, the Repubocrats attempt to justify everything wrong that they do just like the Demicans! No difference!

Well, I'll have you know there's folks here at FR who believe that that crust o'bread beats no crumb! :)

Hopefully, more and more people will come to the conclusion they are getting screwed by Rs as well as Ds.....these guys make deals with each other to guarantee only an R or a D makes it....why....because it benefits their survival at the public teat!

[dcwusmc]

Clearly your posts are so full of venom and ignorance that facts have absolutely no room therein. What VA office do you work for so I can avoid it entirely. WIth YOU as an advocate, vets are DOOMED worse than they already are!

[Luis Gonzalez]

I almost missed your post!

Please check out my campaign platform on post #647, I may never get elected, but none thing for sure, I'll never have to compromise my ideals.

[VA Advogado]

Clearly your posts are so full of venom and ignorance that facts have absolutely no room therein.

I only want to hep chew.

[Rowdee]

..."Very well put! Would like to know myself the purpose of this thread and what Keyes for President and the rest of the Keyes supporters hoped to accomplish"....

Keyes for President has said numerous times already his reasonings for posting under the title that he did and the comments he made as the first post to the thread.

..." Am not particularly fond of the Education bill myself!"....

Thank you for at least mentioning Education, PKM, though it would be interesting to hear your reasonings for not being particularly 'fond' of it.

..."I just find this whole "Trash Bush" continual threads by keyes supporters every few weeks suspect and wonder what the ulterior motives are"....

For the record, there is NO "Trash Bush" continual threads by Keyhes supporters or anyone else.....I presume you prefer that everyone who doesn't such up to the President merely stick their head in the sand for 4 years or LIE about how great it all is? For the record, also, Dr. Keyes WRITES a weekly column--sort of like Ari Fleischer holds a press conference each day! It's called 'having a job' in both instances--nothing sinister or shadowed by either of these men or their jobs.

..."Guess keyes needs to say and do things that trash Pres Bush in order to keep the donations coming in to support himself and the paid staffers that like to come on here and shoot off their mouths about how bad the President is and why they don't like him!"...

Guess bushbabies need to say and do things to trash Doctor Keyes in order to show their adoration is equal to or greater than the Klinton Kneepadders were.

What you are saying is akin to defamation of character in your suggestion of donations to support himself---sort of like the lying you did about JC and Doctor Keyes' relationship OR was that you were actually SLIMING JC by letting the cat out of the bag that he uses people while stabbing them in the back.....when evidence abounds all through Free Republic that he is a columnist and writer, as well as nationally known speech maker!