tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7401694557024894060.post3128666768541010125..comments2023-09-13T11:06:15.170-04:00Comments on Alan Keyes is LOYAL TO LIBERTY: Notre Dame: Promoting the Glamour of EvilAlan Keyeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00205437413964197871noreply@blogger.comBlogger86125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7401694557024894060.post-75532052589498020782009-05-11T23:24:00.000-04:002009-05-11T23:24:00.000-04:00ALAN,
THE BARACALDO FAMILY HERE IN MIAMI, FL jus...ALAN, <br /><br />THE BARACALDO FAMILY HERE IN MIAMI, FL just love and pray for you.<br /><br />WE LOVE U AND THANK GOD FOR YOU BEING IN THIS WORLD.<br /><br />GOD BLESS YOUThe Gifts Finderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01432755199871742848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7401694557024894060.post-51248891639430346842009-03-28T17:39:00.000-04:002009-03-28T17:39:00.000-04:00I guess I can sorta see the "Poverty" "Center" par...I guess I can sorta see the "Poverty" "Center" part....Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7401694557024894060.post-52206052173858665462009-03-28T14:46:00.000-04:002009-03-28T14:46:00.000-04:00My apologies to readers for embedding the wrong li...My apologies to readers for embedding the wrong link in my preceding post. <A HREF="http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/012834.html" REL="nofollow">Here</A> is the right one.Terry Morrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00166609562028309038noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7401694557024894060.post-59106036787200205222009-03-28T06:09:00.000-04:002009-03-28T06:09:00.000-04:00Chiu wrote:Oh yeah...the Southern Poverty Law Cent...Chiu wrote:<BR/><BR/>Oh yeah...the Southern Poverty Law Center...you know one time I wrote them asking if they knew any good militias I could join? They never wrote me back, for some reason.<BR/><BR/>That's pretty funny. But speaking of the hate obsessed SPLC, you might be interested in, if you've not seen it yet, the <A HREF="http://rpc.blogrolling.com/redirect.php?r=3f0e53b3c3bf26a044a5422ec218876a&url=http%3A%2F%2Famnation.com%2Fvfr%2F" REL="nofollow">architectural monstrosity</A> that is its headquarters.Terry Morrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00166609562028309038noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7401694557024894060.post-64296557375578645222009-03-27T00:27:00.000-04:002009-03-27T00:27:00.000-04:00I don't repeat party lines. You'll notice nearly e...I don't repeat party lines. You'll notice nearly everything I have said here is fact. I can't speak for why he's fought these requests, because only he knowsThe Silent Consensushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13036992920595543071noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7401694557024894060.post-81819736515378565482009-03-26T21:18:00.000-04:002009-03-26T21:18:00.000-04:00SC,Are you aware that Dr. Keyes is party in at lea...SC,<BR/><BR/>Are you aware that Dr. Keyes is party in at least two lawsuits? You should ask him who's fighting against him in court?<BR/><BR/>Last I saw there have been at least 19 brought to court, not all of which BHO has had to directly defend. Many were denied on technicalities -- like claiming the suer does not have standing. To prove standing, military personnel are now suing, demanding quo warranto. <BR/><BR/>Phillip Berg's, a Democrat, has three suits against BHO. I believe the first one was denied due to standing. But it looks like he is demanding quo warranto also.<BR/><BR/>So, to answer your question, my proof is that BHO's personal attorney, Robert Bauer, is arguing against Phillip Berg's case now. He has also argued some of the other cases (some of which, I'll admit, were poorly reasoned by the plaintiffs). I believe (and if Dr. Keyes is still monitoring this post) that Bauer and the DNC are also the ones fighting him in court.<BR/><BR/>One very funny thing about your claim to not trust any politician: Boy, you've parroted the BHO party line perfectly throughout this post. It's so obvious that you are a healthy skeptic of BHO that you accept without qualification everything he claims. Typical liberal -- say one thing, do the exact opposite. Once again, why has BHO fought these requests tooth-and-nail?Maurisahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06489369133555827520noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7401694557024894060.post-40711434637842220802009-03-26T20:28:00.000-04:002009-03-26T20:28:00.000-04:00Oh yeah...the Southern Poverty Law Center...you kn...Oh yeah...the Southern Poverty Law Center...you know one time I wrote them asking if they knew any good militias I could join? They never wrote me back, for some reason.<BR/><BR/>Why <I>aren't</I> there any good militias? It's like one of those basic duties of a patriotic citizen, according to the Founding Fathers. I content myself with going shooting with my brothers and such occasionally, but it seems like a proper militia should be more...regulated, perhaps? The army was fun, but I really understand the basic suspicion of an organization that ultimately answers to the government rather than the people. Of course half the people I ever go shooting with are currently in the military. Even if the organization is controlled by the government, the soldiers are just regular guys.<BR/><BR/>Well, given that I don't personally own any serious firearms (just a little .22, though it is pretty nice), I suppose I could personally do a bit more...but I'm actually kinda lazy. Also, I hear that the gun-stores are all sold out anyway. Of course that makes me paranoid that maybe everyone else has started a militia and just not invited me.<BR/><BR/>Or...militias are just so unfashionable that everybody just settles for old army buddies. Unfortunately I was never Reserve or Guard so I don't live near anyone I knew in the Army. Also, being a peacetime army, we were more like co-workers than brothers-in-arms. I guess that I'm lucky to have actual armed brothers, in that case.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7401694557024894060.post-65745180331648410722009-03-26T19:10:00.000-04:002009-03-26T19:10:00.000-04:00Mau,Are you misreading what I'm saying or taking m...Mau,<BR/>Are you misreading what I'm saying or taking me out of context? It's one or the other. I never said they gave CAC a half a billion dollars. I just said they contributed a half a billion dollars to educational causes and CAC was within that. Reread what I said closer and I have no contradiction.<BR/><BR/>Where is proof that he's fought to prevent authority from seeing his long form? I have yet to see proof from any credible source. As far as trusting vs. not trusting Obama, I don't have full trust in any politician, and he's no exception.The Silent Consensushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13036992920595543071noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7401694557024894060.post-29370905236351583502009-03-26T14:59:00.000-04:002009-03-26T14:59:00.000-04:00SC,You're stuck on the relationship between BHO, F...SC,<BR/><BR/>You're stuck on the relationship between BHO, FactCheck and Annenberg. Besides you giving evidence for the relationships between the three (immediately after denying any relationship), you ignore the important point -- Annenberg and FactCheck are not qualified to determine whether his COLB is valid and sufficient.<BR/><BR/>The individual Secretaries of States (who certify election results) are. So, why has BHO fought tooth-and-nail to prevent the legitimate authorities from ever seeing his birth certificate? Why has he spent upwards of $1,000,000 fighting to prevent any real authority from seeing a piece of paper that costs $12.50 and would end his legal costs in this matter?<BR/><BR/>Given BHO's promise for transparency and his obvious breaking of that promise (as you've admitted), why would you trust him?Maurisahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06489369133555827520noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7401694557024894060.post-55470062528983654282009-03-26T14:23:00.000-04:002009-03-26T14:23:00.000-04:00Is it Dr. Keyes or Ambassador Keyes, or either?Is it Dr. Keyes or Ambassador Keyes, or either?The Silent Consensushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13036992920595543071noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7401694557024894060.post-19968137447004368672009-03-26T11:49:00.000-04:002009-03-26T11:49:00.000-04:00SC,Besides your curious denials of affiliation bet...SC,<BR/><BR/>Besides your curious denials of affiliation between BHO and Annenberg, only to contradict yourself in the very next sentence ("Annenberg is not and never was in bed with Obama . . . [they just gave the organization he was the chairman of a half billion dollars]"), this is, once again, irrelevant.<BR/><BR/>Let me repeat: No Annenberg related organization has the authority to certify eligibility requirements for candidates. Once again, the lawsuits filed in California have cited legal precedent that candidates eligibility must be established by the Secretaries of State.Maurisahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06489369133555827520noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7401694557024894060.post-3385021479177737662009-03-26T05:47:00.000-04:002009-03-26T05:47:00.000-04:00Silent Consensus wrote:Terry,I realize it's hard t...Silent Consensus wrote:<BR/><BR/><I>Terry,<BR/>I realize it's hard to read sarcasm, as I've been fooled at times, but that's what it was. I don't disagree with anything you said.</I><BR/><BR/>Okay, it was sarcasm. I can go along with that. I probably should have paid closer attention to what you were saying and the manner in which you were saying it. But next time give us a wink or a nod or something; some indication that you're intentionally being sarcastic. :-)<BR/><BR/>And by the way, I should have said in the final sentence of my reply to your statements, instead of "Otherwise it is of no value to anyone," rather "Otherwise it <I>and that from whence it proceeds</I> --in this case the Constitution and the form of government it establishes-- is of no value to anyone.<BR/><BR/>Now, I'm personally not of the variety who enjoys seeing the overused "unconstitutional" bandied about all of the time from the right or the left. My personal opinion on that is that the constitution can be read and interpreted in any variety of ways, and thus made to seem consistent with virtually any philosophy of government that we can squeeze into the form of a "republic." I personally and generally prefer the term "extra-constitutional", a term which seems to me to generally be a more accurate descriptive. <BR/><BR/>I mean, the constitution isn't <I>in and of itself</I> the "Supreme law of the land" as many people (wrongly in my opinion) suggest. No; the supreme law of the land, by the very words of the constitution itself is "This Constitution, <I>and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States,...</I> (emphasis mine). Which to me is an important distinction to make, because it is in the italicized portion of the statement declaring constitutional supremacy that most of the disagreement between Americans resides, not within the statement that the constitution is the supreme law. What is most important in the statement, in other words (at least to my way of thinking), is what kinds of laws and treaties and so forth We the People think or determine to be consistent with the "pursuance thereof."<BR/><BR/>You and I, of course, come at that from different points of view.Terry Morrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00166609562028309038noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7401694557024894060.post-87375339821743176202009-03-26T04:59:00.000-04:002009-03-26T04:59:00.000-04:00Dr. Keyes,I note that beneath the comments to this...Dr. Keyes,<BR/><BR/>I note that beneath the comments to this entry you've managed to attract the attention of the leftist organization "People for the American way," as well as a left wing blogger who declares your site to be "hate-filled." <BR/><BR/>What a wonderful all-purpose word the word hate-filled is among leftists. They can barely write down a sentence about anyone to the right of themselves without employing the word hate or some derivative thereof.<BR/><BR/>Next thing you know your site will be linked up at the "Southern Poverty Law Center," well known and well respected in the leftist world for "keeping an eye on the radical right." It'll be interesting to see how many times they use the word "hate" and its many derivatives in their soon to be published report (I'm sure) referencing this site.Terry Morrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00166609562028309038noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7401694557024894060.post-55116418130018241822009-03-26T04:07:00.000-04:002009-03-26T04:07:00.000-04:00Chiu wrote:Sometimes I'm tempted to think that Sil...Chiu wrote:<BR/><BR/><I>Sometimes I'm tempted to think that Silent Consensus is just really too dumb to realize how far left such public institutions as the "official" media and "leading" candidates have swung in the last few decades.</I><BR/><BR/>Hear, hear! Recall that Colin Powell was favorably quoted in this discussion from his Meet the Press appearance in which he endorsed Hussein Obama for president. Powell observed in that interview that the Republican party had begun to move too far to the right and that he was disturbed by this. <BR/><BR/>Anyone that actually believes that the Republican party has moved to the right over the last several years is living in a whole 'nother reality. The truth of the matter is that the republicans have moved steadily to the left while Powell and Co. have moved in the same direction at an accelerated pace. It all boils down to Powell's sense of relative motion. To him the republicans appear to be moving to the right, when in reality they're steadily on pace moving to the left along with him, just more slowly.Terry Morrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00166609562028309038noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7401694557024894060.post-9436028580612637282009-03-26T03:35:00.000-04:002009-03-26T03:35:00.000-04:00I do need to make a correction. "The fact that McC...I do need to make a correction. <BR/><BR/>"The fact that McCain, clearly a left-leaning politician..."<BR/><BR/>Should read, "The fact that McCain, clearly a left-leaning politician <B>compared to me</B>..."<BR/><BR/>Yes, McCain is left-leaning compared to Ambassador Keyes and other people on this forum. He is anti-torture, pro-stem cell research, pro-amnesty, pro-combatting global warming, anti-Federal Marriage Amendment, anti-estate tax expiration, and pro-prescription drug importation. Those are positions which happen to overlap with liberalism, some with conservative justification. The only ones I'd say he has liberal justification for is stem cell research, amnesty, and against estate tax expiration. The rest can be justified on conservative grounds, just like Ambassador Keyes and his position on trade overlaps with some liberals, but he's not liberal on trade. <BR/><BR/>But, if you stop looking at the spectrum from where you are at and start looking at it from outside, you will see that McCain leans to the right. <BR/><BR/>That aside. I highly doubt that those who supported McCain in the general election did so because they wanted Barack Obama in office. And this is completely irrelevant to the original point anyway: FactCheck.org is not biased toward Obama and especially not due to Annenberg.<BR/><BR/>And Chiu, I have never attacked you or questioned your sincerity on this forum. If anything leads you to believe otherwise, I apologize. I would appreciate the same standard of civility from you that you can expect from me. And I realize it's hard to find someone with liberal ideology who relies on logic to the extent I do.The Silent Consensushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13036992920595543071noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7401694557024894060.post-22635883059992562592009-03-26T01:22:00.000-04:002009-03-26T01:22:00.000-04:00The fact that McCain, clearly a left-leaning polit...The fact that McCain, clearly a left-leaning politician, was chosen as the Republican candidate in the first place was nothing more than a scheme to get the far left into office.<BR/><BR/>Sometimes I'm tempted to think that Silent Consensus is just really too dumb to realize how far left such public institutions as the "official" media and "leading" candidates have swung in the last few decades. There is a certain uncritical bluster in each of his posts that would tend to suggest mental limitations. But I'm pretty sure those limitations are self-imposed. Or, more probably, pretended.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7401694557024894060.post-11971376496818944192009-03-26T00:59:00.000-04:002009-03-26T00:59:00.000-04:00Mau,That is a ridiculous comparison and I'm prepar...Mau,<BR/>That is a ridiculous comparison and I'm prepared to say I know you are smarter than that but you just know the stupid people aren't and will fall for it. <BR/><BR/>The only similarity they share is they have gotten sponsored from the same charitable organization. A much better comparison would be to link two entities who have gotten a contribution from the same person. Donald Trump gave money to both the Kerry and Bush campaign, doesn't mean the campaigns were related. <BR/><BR/>Regardless, Annenberg is not and never was in bed with Obama. They sponsored an educational cause (as part of <A HREF="http://www.nytimes.com/1993/12/18/us/clinton-hails-annenberg-s-500-million-education-gift.html?scp=1&sq=annenberg+%24500+million+schools&st=nyt" REL="nofollow">$500 million</A> in educational grants in 1993, by the way) that Obama coincidentally was a part of way back when, and they sponsored what is now APPC which runs FactCheck.org. This in no way implies any conflict of interest. Neither of them were started by Annenberg. Neither of them have been run by Annenberg. They were started by people with an idea and Annenberg provided money to get it off the ground.<BR/><BR/>Annenberg has never tried to influence anything FactCheck has written. Even if we assumed they have, I highly doubt Leonore Annenberg would have them write with a bias toward Obama when she supported McCain. Either way the notion that they are in bed with Obama fails.The Silent Consensushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13036992920595543071noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7401694557024894060.post-2629902558743706162009-03-25T22:23:00.000-04:002009-03-25T22:23:00.000-04:00SC,I guess, according to you, my sister and I aren...SC,<BR/><BR/>I guess, according to you, my sister and I aren't related merely because we have the same parents.<BR/><BR/>Regardless, Annenberg has no authority in this case. The Secreataries of States do. So why has BHO not submitted his birth certificate to them? Why spend upwards of $1,000,000 to prevent authorities from examining a $12.50 piece of paper? BHO has demonstrated a knack for lying as you admit about his obvious lack of transparency. But, yeah, your right -- this completely irrational act is the mark of honesty and integrity.Maurisahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06489369133555827520noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7401694557024894060.post-31648624266030824802009-03-25T21:47:00.000-04:002009-03-25T21:47:00.000-04:00Terry,I realize it's hard to read sarcasm, as I've...Terry,<BR/>I realize it's hard to read sarcasm, as I've been fooled at times, but that's what it was. I don't disagree with anything you said<BR/><BR/>Mau,<BR/>They are not related. The only similarity they have is having received money from Annenberg Foundation. Having a similarity =/= are related. It was not a change in rhetoric, I was simply refuting the idea that they are similar because they're both run by Annenberg Foundation. They aren't.The Silent Consensushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13036992920595543071noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7401694557024894060.post-44585342970464639302009-03-25T20:23:00.000-04:002009-03-25T20:23:00.000-04:00Every blog has at least one Silent Consensus. They...Every blog has at least one Silent Consensus. They are invariably anonymous and in all probablity have never contributed anything of note to society in their entire lives. You see, if they had they would be using their real names and presenting their credentials for all to admire.<BR/><BR/>It is easy to believe isn't it?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7401694557024894060.post-58627580697376392502009-03-25T16:33:00.000-04:002009-03-25T16:33:00.000-04:00SC,Did you know the word "gullible" isn't in the d...SC,<BR/><BR/>Did you know the word "gullible" isn't in the dictionary? I noticed you're no longer claiming that FactCheck and CAC are not related. Now FactCheck just isn't run by Annenberg. I suppose your change of rhetoric is tacit admission that they are related.<BR/><BR/>Regardless, the COLB, whether it is enough or not, was examined by a non-authority. This just in: No Annenberg related organization has the authority to certify eligibility requirements for candidates. Once again, the lawsuits filed in California have cited legal precedent that candidates eligibility must be established by the Secretaries of State.<BR/><BR/>Since you're slow on the uptake, I'll repeat that California's Secretary of State is not related to or run by FactCheck or APPC.Maurisahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06489369133555827520noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7401694557024894060.post-63479491268070530992009-03-25T14:35:00.000-04:002009-03-25T14:35:00.000-04:00Silent Consensus, By your reasoning no one is qual...Silent Consensus, <BR/><BR/>By your reasoning no one is qualified to determine the guilt or innocence of someone charged with a crime unless they were there to witness it. And we know how unreliable witnesses can be at times, none of which keeps us from going forward seeking justice whether we have a particular stake in the outcome or not. But as our founders pointed out time and time again, a law or a provision implies the means to enforce it. Otherwise it is of no value to anyone.Terry Morrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00166609562028309038noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7401694557024894060.post-5458860368239061252009-03-25T12:24:00.000-04:002009-03-25T12:24:00.000-04:00Correct. Annenberg does not run the various projec...Correct. Annenberg does not run the various projects. It finds projects it likes and sponsors/endows them. They have given money to over 5,200 projects totaling $8.2 billion. FactCheck also gets money from the Flora Family Foundation, but that's neither here nor there. <BR/><BR/>I fail to see why a COLB is not enough. Annenberg has examined it firsthand and all the claims challenging its validity (no bumped-up seal, no signature, etc...) have all been shot down. <BR/><BR/>Ok, I don't think anyone's qualified to determine his eligibility unless they were present at his birth. How much further do you want to go?The Silent Consensushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13036992920595543071noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7401694557024894060.post-84710832574020721932009-03-25T07:03:00.000-04:002009-03-25T07:03:00.000-04:00There is legal precedent is California if the cand...There is legal precedent is California if the candidates qualification is challenged, he must prove it.<BR/><BR/>Getting back to APPC and CAC, both were funded primarily by the Annenberg Foundation throughout their lives, but factcheck is not run by them?<BR/><BR/>As for them being unbiased, their site has twelve stories on the front page as of today. Every one is pro-democrat or very liberal. But that is a diversion. No Annenberg project is qualified to determine the validity of a birth certificate and hence their qualification for office. Why has BHO not released his birth certificate? Why did his lawyers fight it in California? Why is he fighting it in the Quo Warranto cases brought by service members? For someone who claims to be informed and informative, you don't seem to be very curious.WingletDriverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04007296783840122255noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7401694557024894060.post-43129785224193149962009-03-25T00:25:00.001-04:002009-03-25T00:25:00.001-04:00and to answer your last question, no I am not clai...and to answer your last question, no I am not claiming it and have never implied it. Are you claiming that the Secretaries of States who validate election results are presented with everyone else's birth certificate?The Silent Consensushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13036992920595543071noreply@blogger.com