Jude 2

I didn't realize that Alan Keys was so "in your face" to Obama. Interesting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gG-_1ZILuzA

Youtube has a bunch more of his videos, check 'em out.

Brian wrote:I didn't realize that Alan Keys was so "in your face" to Obama. Interesting.

Brian, Alan Keyes moved to Illinois from Maryland to run against Obama for the U.S. Senate seat after the previous GOP contender dropped out of the race. After Keyes lost the race, he immediately moved back to Maryland. This was after he had railed against Hillary Clinton for being a carpetbagger by moving to New York to run for the Senate seat there.

Keyes' campaign in Illinois was nothing but negative. I never heard him say anything positive. It was all attack, attack, attack, criticize, criticize, criticize. He had nothing positive to offer Illinois. The only reason he was there was to win a seat for the Republican Party. He showed no indication that he cared for the people he was running to represent or had anything positive and constructive to offer them.

It's not surprising at all that Keyes is criticizing Obama. That's all he ever does, is criticize. I had voted for him in the Colorado primary in 1996, but I lost all respect for him during his Illinois carpetbagging campaign.

hey Tim just curious, was it really because of "carpetbagging" or is it his hard line position concerning his views on bringing his faith active to the political arena? really, no offence just wondering because he really is "in your face" with faith and claiming (not that I disagree fundamentally) that the founding fathers and the establishing of the United States was extremely christian faith based and blaiming almost all of our current social, moral, and economic problems on the countries moral decline and the removal of God from the public school and political arena's. Just curious Tim.

Brian wrote:hey Tim just curious, was it really because of "carpetbagging" or is it his hard line position concerning his views on bringing his faith active to the political arena? really, no offence just wondering because he really is "in your face" with faith and claiming (not that I disagree fundamentally) that the founding fathers and the establishing of the United States was extremely christian faith based and blaiming almost all of our current social, moral, and economic problems on the countries moral decline and the removal of God from the public school and political arena's. Just curious Tim.

Brian, I voted for the Constitution Party candidate for President in both 2004 and 2008, so, no, it wasn't because of what you said. It was because of what I said: Keyes is a mean-spirited hypocrite who has nothing contructive or positive to say. Listen to him speak; he's consumed with anger, and there is precious little else that comes out of him. I wouldn't want a next door neighbor like that, let alone a President.

I listened to Keyes for a number of years and grew to really, really admire the guy. In a large degree, I still do. He argues from an ideological as opposed to practical point of view, and I find that very appealing. But, at the same time, the arguments he puts forth don't offer any solutions. He's critical of past actions and present ideologies, and doesn't explain how what his own ideology of "why-things-broke-then" will work, in operational terms, now and in the future.

And, yes, it did strike me that he moved to Illinois long enough to run against Barack Obama for the Senate seat after making HRC out to be a carpetbagger. So, strike one for the guy on consistency and strike two on him for not being forthright and honest about that now, IMO.

dolfan wrote:He argues from an ideological as opposed to practical point of view, and I find that very appealing. But, at the same time, the arguments he puts forth don't offer any solutions.

dolfan, I understand why you think this.. but in actuallity conservatism is the solution he is putting forth. I will grant you that where he fails is to continue to articulate the conservative position over and over... rather than appear to constantly attack.

To his possible defense.. he may actually do his best to articulate conservatism in the same discussions.. but that part always lands on the media editing floor... but that might not be true.

Mac, maybe that's the way to take him. I'm not sure. I saw him live once at the UA Law School. Fascinating speech. I was glued to him, man. He has gifts of oratory that many would love to have, for sure. And, I guess in a way, though, that's why I'm still waiting on the rest of the story from him, but he's never delivered. If the rest of it is just, "hey, you know, Go Conservativism!", that doesn't do it for me. Even if he got specific about that, and I'd at least give him credit for trying, it still wouldn't be the message to win me, personally. So far the battle between conservatives and liberals has gotten us to here where we are today, each one wanting control and each set wanting their side to prevail, but not much more or much else.

dolfan wrote:So far the battle between conservatives and liberals has gotten us to here where we are today, each one wanting control and each set wanting their side to prevail, but not much more or much else.

It's open for interpretation... but I personally don't see it this way. To me it's been a battle over who can buy the votes, whether Democrat or Rino Republican. Conservatism has not been applied since the days of Ronald Reagan and his policies that grew us out of the early 80's Carter Recession.