Posted on 09/02/2004 1:57:29 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
I take that back. I don't know that you want me. But just try not to leave tht impression.
You've got jail...just kidding...you've got mail :o)
*LOL* Thank you.
I'm trying to get better at keeping up with that. :-}
You managed,without being mean or nasty,or mentioning by name or by intimation,to make evident the disingenuousness and/or hypocrisy,and/or ignorance and/or malevolence of those many posters,who come on thread after thread,and time and time again,rail on and on,saying the same old thing. All the while they claim to be conservative,republican and caring citizens.
I have no problem with folks not marching in goose step,nor do I not recognize that certain people find others offensive,I think it's almost obligatory to tell others that they differ and why. But these threads with the same old people repeating the same old stuff over and over and over,are truly bizarre. There has to be something almost sinister behind it.
Anyway thanks for the good laugh,it was a very clever,well written post.
LOL, thanks :o)
I appreciate you trying to draw me into a flame war, but I fail to see how saying that Keyes' campaign tactics could use improvement equals protecting communists.
Does he want to win? If so, he needs a good message AND good tactics to get that message out.
Two Illinois Republicans will not be voting for Keyes--my cousin and her husband. They won't vote for Obama. They just won't vote in the Senate race. They will vote for Bush/Cheney and for their congresswoman (DuPage county).
They're in town for our family renunion. I asked them yesterday morning, "what do you think about Alan Keyes?" My cousin rolled her eyes. Her husband started ranting, "what were they thinking?" He cited Keyes' comments on slave reparations, Mary Cheney and that he was from Maryland.
Oops! I stand corrected. Have a good weekend.
LOL! I can credit my involvement in politics and my willingness to stand up to my liberal college professors and fellow students to him. I wasn't always the outlawcam you see today! Heck, I wasn't always conservative. Pro-defense and pro-tax relief, yes. Ardently pro-life and anti-homosexual, not really. :)
As for humility... It's hard to look at that objectively, I think, because having read so many of his speeches and writings, and having attended a few speeches in person, I have sensed a deep humility in him that motivates him to stand up to a --ahem-- hedonistic society. I'm not talking about everyone, obviously, but at the time I came across Keyes, that term certainly applied to me. In fact--and I'll explain it to you over FRmail if you want--Keyes was one of the means God used to bring me to Christ. So I am exceedingly grateful to him for it.
That should read: "Ardently pro-life and anti-homosexual agenda, not really."
If homosexuality is good and right and the NT is all for it --- then why is GW Bush against homosexual marriage? If Keyes is not allowed to be influenced by morality then why is Bush allowed?
Hard on for Obama talking points placemarker.
However, we do agree on the goals and at least our prayers are common. That can't be all bad. :)
I will keep doing the work I do to save the unborn and pray for the souls of the homosexuals.
I want those who might choose abortion to understand that it is life they hold within from the moment of conception.
I detest the gay lifestyle, but would rather see them shown God's love and way of salvation than to call them names and bare my teeth.
I will do my best to resist the temptation to damn them and only drive them further into the pit of the lost.
I think these approaches are more productive and therefore, since my goal is to change hearts, find this far more desirable than the paths Keyes chooses.
That's the second time I've seen that theory advanced here, and I find it just as absurd as I did the when I read it the first time.
With all the absurdity that passes for argument, I figure I'll throw in my two noncents once in a while.
I appreciate your efforts, and I will also do my best to do God's will. I do think, however, that you make an incorrect presumption about what Keyes does. If you only read the press accounts and not the actual transcripts, I can see how you might come to that conclusion. Unfortunately, the media portray only a small part of the argument, take it out of context, and then caricturize it, and I think it is unfortunate that good people like you and others do not see the same thing that I see. Don't take that the wrong way; you think I'm wrong, too. ;)
I think if you go here and click on the "Gays and Lesbians in the Republican Party" link, you may see what I mean.
The real fault is with the media, who care not for real debate, since debate requires reason (of which many are incapable) and has a tendency too often to lead to the truth and uncover the lie.
No wonder Keyes is such an ardent advocate of open debates. Most simply want to hide behind whimsical opinion and never debate substantial issues, hiding behind the anti-selfgovernment opinion that we ought not discuss anything of religion or politics --- too devisive.
I must tell you that my thoughts and sense has only been further confirmed by FR and the numerous Keyes threads over time. Most of his defenders (not all) are nasty and immediately pull the same stunts. IOW, if one does not buy into Keyes or see him as the pure voice of all that's good, he/she is immediately called a Rino, not a conservative, not a Christian, yada, yada.
It happened to me as recently as last night. It reflects on Keyes and also comes close to mirroring his attitude. I suppose some people find that tasteful; I do not.
So here we are at the standoff, lol. You see a saint, while I see a flawed sinner. I see a man that misses the mark because he cannot master self control. And the beat goes on. :)
I don't think Keyes is a saint. I think he's a statesman.
BTW, I've observed that the pendulum swings the other way, as well, if criticism dare be leveled at other members of the GOP. We all must be careful at how we represent ourselves and the candidate we support.
Your tactic might be prudent, but for the fact that there is a current campaign begun by the courts to diminish marriage even more than it has been. Why is Keyes so adamant about "attacking" homosexuals? The reason is simple. There is a effort on the far left to make marriage meaningless. Keyes is actually defending marriage, utterly misunderstood by the mainstream media. We should fly to his standard rather than shout at him to take it down.
I applaud your prayer for homosexuals. However, does that relieve us of the duty to defend the basis of society, namely marriage and family?
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.