Posted on 08/25/2004 2:09:41 PM PDT by yonif
He'd get my vote. Course, I'm not in Illinois.
So, you think i'm wrong, without any proof, evidence, or anything else to back up your claims.
Now you are just being dishonest and disingenuous.
How about we wait and see if Keyes clarifies these remarks that could have been taken out of context before we start spouting off about who is right and who is wrong, or is that too difficult for you?
I'm no living constitution kind of person - I'm a "constitution as the founders intended" person.
Don't like it? Too bad.
I'm sabotaging no one. Keyes is perfectly capable of doing it to himself.
Like I said, though, if Keyes clarifies his remarks and what the reporter said is incorrect then I will apologize for my criticisms of Keyes on this issue.
Fair enough?
What does that mean?
It means that he has no intelligent rebuttal for what I had to say...
Pretty simple, really.
It means: "Time to look for a hidden camera in the bathroom!"
What on earth are you talking about?
No one has to do anything to "stop Keyes".
You make it sound as if victory is his to lose. Or rather, as if his victory is someone else's to lose "for" him.
Keyes himself knows he's not going to win.
This, like every other campaign he's run, is a "for show" campaign. A way to get some camera-time, some mike-time, some moments in the debate, so to speak.
Those people who characterized him as "our Sharpton" weren't making a joke. That is a clinical definition of his role in conservative politics.
Neither Keyes or Sharpton is going to win any election.
The big difference seems to be in the supporters.
Keyes supporters, it seems, really do believe that ne does run some risk of actually winning an election.
My advice?
If you are truly dedicated to the man's parade, then enjoy it for what it's worth, just as the Sharpton camp followers do with their party.
But don't give yourself ulcers over it, fretting about "someone" or "something" happening that's gonna make Keyes lose. You're looking down the wrong end of the kaleidoscope!
Hunting is allowed in several national parks. In Va we can carry in all state parks, though the Northern Virginians (yankees) try to end that just about every year.
LOL
If my post was somehow misconstrued as a personal attack on Amelia, it wasn't. It was simply my opinion on the contents of her post, for which she probably (and I'm guessing on this anyway) got banned.
If someone wants to challenge any of my posts by saying their contents are leftist Democrat-like, (s)he can go right ahead. Viewers can judge for themselves the veracity of the comments. It'd probably just amuse me.
Another paper, the Peoria Journal Star, quotes Keyes as follows:
"I think it would be the best thing for this country if indeed we approach this the same way as we approach owning an automobile and took the steps that were necessary," he said. "You have courses that you can take and other things to reach minimal thresholds so that you can have access to this, that. As you wish to move to a higher threshold, you would take other courses until you could responsibly enter into them."
All sorts of passions, then the day after the election, quiet.
Alan will be back on the lecture circuit, fat and happy, regaling his faithful on the "interests" that kept him from gaining office.
Well, ideally.
But frankly, I have a bit of a gnawing fear that one of the "true believers", devastated at the "tragic loss" that was "caused by those evildoers" (i.e., anyone who didn't go "yumyum, more pleaaaaase" when they were passing the KA pitcher) goes 'round the bend, and finds out where one of us "teetolalers" lives in R/L, and decides to ensure that he'll "make sure that SOB Don Joe never stops Alan Keyes from winning again!"
Stranger things have happened in this world of ours. Far stranger things have happened. And when I see the sheer venom aimed at the non-drinkers, man, it do make my blood run cold when I think of what would happen if they'd find me where I sleep...
"I think it would be the best thing for this country if indeed we approach this the same way as we approach owning an automobile and took the steps that were necessary," he said. "You have courses that you can take and other things to reach minimal thresholds so that you can have access to this, that. As you wish to move to a higher threshold, you would take other courses until you could responsibly enter into them."
ROFLOL!
You've shown on this thread that you find whatever you want in the Constitution- you don't care two cents what the Founders intended.
Justice Scalia: "The living Constitutional judge never has to put up with that. Whatever he thinks is good, is in the Constitution."... like the right to own machine guns, bazookas, nukes and chemical weapons without restriction.
Well, rather than you and I debating the obvious here, why don't you just wait until she's available to respond? ;-)
I just saw that, thanks.
The problem with that idea is simple - Driving a car is NOT a constitutional right, so being required to "get permission and licensed" is acceptable.
The right to keep and bear arms, on the other hand, IS a constitutional right, and should NOT be compared to driving a car.
I guess I was right. Alan Keyes DOES want us to go asking Uncle Sam if we can "pretty please own a gun"...
I wonder if he'll get the NRA or GOA endorsements now.
Dude, you missed your calling.
And you owe me a keyboard!
You are a lawyer, crazy freepers are afraid of dark caves where you guys hang from the ceilings. (I'm an ex-lawyer)
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.