Posted on 01/04/2002 12:25:32 AM PST by kattracks
Edited on 05/26/2004 5:03:11 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
THE folks at Msnbc are talking to former Republican presidential candidate and former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Alan Keyes about hosting a 10 p.m. show up against Fox News' new hire, Greta Van Susteren. Meanwhile, Van Susteren, a lawyer before her O.J. Simpson commentary turned her into a CNN star, reportedly has penned an eight-page memo detailing CNN's demerits. She plans to keep the document secret as long as CNN doesn't try to paint her as an ungrateful traitor.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
It is really amazing that you folks can go around referring to a quote without reading it. I will just point out you use of the word if. IF the GOP loses. Not the GOP will lose in November, but IF it loses in November. This is your quote and your phrase, and it makes all of your references to this quote, on this thread and others a lie. I might say a BIG lie. Even a Joseph Goebbels' style BIG lie.
LOL... And the beat goes on!!!
I think it would be great if Dr. Keyes has his own show. As you know, I don't always agree with Dr. Keyes' postions; but respect immensely his exquisite intellect, the ability to articulate with great clarity his thoughts and the strength of character to remain consistent. These are qualities that few have been blessed with, as can be evidenced by many of the posts on this thread.
rdf mentioned malice, I find hypocrisy as just as disgusting.
[[[Why does the company you keep show up on a thread that merely mentions a rumour that Keyes might be offered a chance to host a cable TV show just to launch yet another round of unprovoked personal attacks against him?
You don't see me doing things like that. ]]]
and
[[[They don't even realize how hilarious they are! They are making this place seem more like Fool's Republic. ]]]
Ratings will tell the final outcome of his success at MaSsaNBC.
Not to mention calling him Bush-lite on the radio, but you probably don't believe Ole Okie and I on that one! READ the entire quotes from the article and then tell me that keyes supported Bush and thought he could win!
Your teal posts are always a site for sore eyes!
Best always,
If Keyes was such a superior debater, and especially since McCain had trashed Christian conservatives, do you really think that the networks would have allowed McCain to be destroyed in a debate by Keyes if Bush hadn't shown up? Think on.
In fact, I will suibmit that the networks showed that debate because they were counting on Keyes to destroy Bush. It didn't happen because Bush was awake on all suits and merely looked pleasant and friendly, which is the actual point of the Presidential Debates, regardless of what you people think. The object of being in the debates is to get votes, and if you have to do a tap dance or sing opera, you do it. Period.
Well, my goodness.
Do you mean that I might be paid by the Keyes people?
I shall be more eloquent in future.
Maybe they will notice me.
HEY, OVER HERE!!!!!!!
Howlin, who said that good morals
require agreement with Keyes?
I don't agree with all of Keyes ideas.
You still haven't said why you dis-like Keyes.
Miss Marple listed her reasons,
even though the reasons made no sense.
What's your beef?
YOU: "Yes. Honest criticism is good.
I notice whenever someone like Keyes offers even the slightest honest criticism of any policy of President Bush, some Bush supporters here on FR (the Bush worshippers) go ballistic. They respond with name calling and personal attacks on Keyes, while Keyes focuses on disagreements in policy.
Take a good look at this thread as an example. Merely the mention of a rumour that Alan Keyes might be hosting a show on MSNBC has elicited personal attacks against him and his character. The show doesn't even exist yet!"
Sigh, I see it's the usual type of "debate" and slipping around the issues. You made a blanket statement about "Bush worshippers and Keyes bashers" on the thread. So I assumed you had read the thread. Silly me. Let me point you toward the criticism that I address. Surely you won't address the point at hand?
As posted by me above:
"To: carenot
"It seems to be the reason most people voted for GWB."
Let me educate you there. I voted for Alan Keyes in the primary last year. I then observed his behavior after it was already obvious that he had lost the nomination (ie. at the convention) I wondered what kind of animosity he could have toward his party to withold his delegates in that way. Then I started paying closer attention to his supporters. It became very clear from there. I not only voted for GWB in the general, but I volunteered for him. Ever since then, Keyes and his supporters have done nothing but attack GWB and I have to ask why? Steve Forbes doesn't do this....."
Lost, I'm afraid on the GOP establishment crowd, their ears plugged up with bushwax.
Arrogance almost always leads to delusion
It really is true. You folks don't know anything about poltical campaigning. The statement that you are the only candidate who can win, that your opponent will lose is a statement made by every political candidate who is not either a frontrunner or posing as one.
Statements of this type have been used for centuries, including the Ike people about Taft, the LBJ and JFK people about each other, the Goldwater and Rockefeller people about each other, the Nixon and Reagan and Ford people about each other, and on and on. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that Hamilton said it about John Adams. And THIS is Dr. Keyes big crime. It would be laughable if it were not so despicable. The ignorant trying to educate the educated.
Then what the Sam Hill are ya yellin' about?
You have no honor, Miss Marple.
You want your President to look good.
I wanted a man of principles,
a leader for our country
instead of the fluff we have in office now.
Well, you got your wish.
Look at the pretty man.
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.