Just when I was getting tired of writing about Republicans, here comes Alan Keyes to bring the fun:
After two previous runs for U.S. president, former Reagan diplomat Alan Keyes has announced he’s again seeking the White House in the 2008 election, and he’ll take part in Monday night’s Republican presidential debate here [That’s the “Values Voter Debate” sponsored by WorldNetDaily’s own Joseph Farah — should be chock-full of wingnutty goodness - ed].
Keyes told syndicated radio host Janet Parshall he’s “unmoved” by the lack of moral courage shown by the other candidates, among whom he sees no standout who articulates the “key kernel of truth that must, with courage, be presented to our people.”
He added, “The one thing I’ve always been called to do is to raise the standard … of our allegiance to God and His authority that has been the foundation stone of our nation’s life” – and he decried the lack of “forthright, clear, and clarion declaration” from the current crop of presidential contenders.
Actually, before I go back to talking about Keyes, let’s take another look at the luminaries who’ll be in attendance at WND’s VVD tonight:
Questions will also come from 40 of America’s leaders including: Paul Weyrich, founder and president of the Free Congress Foundation; Phyllis Schlafly, founder and president of Eagle Forum; Don Wildmon, founder and chairman of the American Family Association; Judge Roy Moore, a WND columnist with the Foundation for Moral Law; Rick Scarborough of Vision America; and Mat Staver of Liberty Council.
That sounds like a whole lot of wide stances, if you know what I mean. Can the stalls of Fort Lauderdale contain them?
Anyway, Alan Keyes. Here’s his site RenewAmerica, and if you haven’t visited it, you must. This is the kind of world in which “Fox News [is] blasted for supporting [a] pro-homosexual group.” You can find Keyes’s archive of WND columns here. Let’s take a random sample:
“Surely,” say the demagogues, “an embryo in a Petri dish can’t be compared to a 10-year-old girl. They are materially quite different.” But as the 10-year-old differs materially from the embryo, so the distinguished scientist with an IQ of 176 differs from the 10-year-old. As a matter of fact, the potential of the 10-year-old can’t measure up to the proven achievements of the adult. Our sense of justice isn’t based on their material condition, but on a moral principle that asserts the worth of every human being, regardless of material condition. If we abandon that principle because an embryo is not as materially developed as a 10-year-old , what shall we say when someone points out that we are not as materially developed as the scientist whose knowledge may save thousands, or the general whose skills are needed to defend millions. Will we accept the judgment that our claims of right are irrelevant because our betters have developed the material know-how and means to benefit or destroy us?
Oh… oh yes, this is going to be fun.
Alan Keyes, Presidential Debates | No Comments »