Monthly Archives: April 2008

Alan Keyes Sour Grapes – He Won’t Endorse Baldwin

Keyes shows his neocon colors here. Not intervening all over the globe would be irresponsible.

Alan Keyes had some news today for his new — or is it old? — buddies in the Constitution Party: He’s not backing the party’s newly minted nominee Chuck Baldwin.

No way, no how, Keyes told Prime Buzz.

“His policies of appeasement and non-involvement (in foreign affairs) are irresponsible and unsustainable,” Keyes said.

SPLC tries to intimidate Vermont secessionists (and fails)

I thought HarrisonBergeron might interested in this interview Rob Williams posted on his site Vermont Commons (www.vtcommons.org). Some flunkie from the SPLC is giving Williams the third-degree because the Second Vermont Republic group which Williams is affiliated with just happened to be at the same secessionist conference as the League of the South ( a major sin in their eyes) and Williams brushes her off.

Clearly there are people scared not just of the secessionist movements, but the joining of the old left and old right. Nearly 12% of Vermonters supported independence in a poll in February and it’s obvious some want to split the movement by using connections to the LOS as a way to tarnish non-Southern groups like the Second Vermont Republic.

Sorry, it’s not going to happen. Perhaps the SPLC should get ready for the next secessionist conference in November.

Why Southern pride must die

If you’ve ever wondered what stokes anti-Southern hatred, here’s a short but powerful explanation. It’s from The Big Box Swindle, a book I’ve previously mentioned. Here, this eye-opening expose of the hidden costs of the megachains analyzes how local small businesses and citizens successfully prevent the big boxes from sucking the life out of their downtowns:

Today, who prevails in a big-box fight often hinges on how local residents conceive of themselves. Opponents of these projects appeal to people’s broad sense of being citizens and stewards of their community, which is why they often choose names like “Our Town.” Chain retailers, on the other hand, win by getting people to assume the narrow role of consumer and to see the issue as simply a matter of shopping options. Although dominant today, this consumer identity is a relatively recent invention; it only became a powerful force in American politics in the years after World War II. p. 205

Isn’t that exactly why Southerners are targeted by the multicult/globalists? Continue reading

Welcome to Edgerton, Quebec, Canada, Mexico, etc.

You knew it was coming. It was only a matter of time when unlimited immigration would lead to a situation like this reported in the Madison, Wiconsin online newspaper The Capital Times. Edgerton, Wisconsin is small town not too far from where I grew up in Beloit. Mexican immigration to nearby dairy farms and food processing plants has increased the Mexican population 10-fold. So what was once a steady Norweigian-American town is now bilingual. And the end result, you guess it, the Pledge of Allegiance in Spanish.

The North American Union won’t come fast enough. In some ways it’s already here. 

Transcript of Howard Phillips’ Anti-Keyes Broadside

… The sign of the Missouri delegation says “Principle Over Politics,” and that’s what I’m here to talk about with you today. First of all, thank you for all the help everyone in this room has given to this party and I thank, especially, each of you who assisted me in my campaigns for the presidency for which I am very grateful.

The Democrats say that this election is about change. I say it’s about choice, not in the abortion sense, but in the sense of our deciding whether our party will continue to exist. There is already a neocon party. It’s called the Republicans. There is a candidate for the nomination of our party who until about a week ago was a Republican and who is a neocon and supports all the neocon principles.

We have to choose between being a neocon party or the Constitution Party. The neocons favor a continued presence in Iraq, and indeed the gentleman to whom I refer favors an ongoing U. S. presence in the Middle East. Neocons favor continued U. S. membership in the UN. Our party is on record against it. But this gentleman is for it. Our party is against foreign aid. It’s in the platform, but this gentleman favors continuing and indeed expanding foreign aid. Our party has passed resolutions and in its platform said we should get out of NATO which our membership in which requires us, if we honor that treaty, to go to war whenever one of the member nations of NATO comes under attack. Pat Buchanan wrote a great column the other day, “Should America Go to War for South Ossetia?”

Continue reading

An Open Letter to the Constitution Party by Kevin Thompson

Editors Note: Our friend Kevin Thompson sent this along. I do not agree with some of it, but I do think that Keyes and his followers were mislead somewhat and this disaster could have been avoided.

An Open Letter to the Constitution Party,

I was a member of the Constitution Party before Alan Keyes, and will be after. If Alan had won the nomination, I would have gladly backed him and worked on his behalf. I have even taken some flack from those in my party for that stance. Alan Keyes is a great American and the loudest voice for the pro-life movement.

However, I will fully support our nominee, Chuck Baldwin. Chuck Baldwin is a patriot and a man who would do us all well in the White House. I have a deep respect and admiration for the man. I think it would be best for Alan Keyes to do the same. Listen, let’s be honest. Something has to be said for the fact that Alan Keyes never joined the CP. Why would a party reject one of their own candidates for a man who has shown no party loyalty or even membership? This is our party, not the party of Dr. Keyes. Had Dr. Keyes joined us officially, perhaps things would have been different. Instead, Keyes supporters marched in, having joined little over a week ago and immediately tried changing our platform. What else did you think would happen? It felt like our party was undergoing a take-over attempt. It could have been handled differently.

Continue reading

James Antle’s Follow-up Post Keyes’ Defeat

Here is James Antle’s follow-up article on the Keyes defeat. In the original article he qoutes me. Unfortunately he doesn’t in the follow-up. Oh well. There goes my 15 minutes. He does, however, quote Georgia Constitution Party Chairman Ricardo Davis. 

Sorry for all the Keyes posts in a row. I’m not gloating. Just searching the net for the fallout.

Thomas DiLorenzo on the Defeat of Alan Keyes

Here is Dr. DiLorenzo’s take at the Lew Rockwell Blog.

Good for my old friend Howard Phillips and the Constitution Party for preventing yet another neocon takeover of a traditional conservative, limited government organization — the Constitution Party. Keyes is the quintessential Neocon insider: He was a student of the flamboyant “Straussian” Alan Bloom at Cornell, and lived in the same house as Bloom, along with several other male neocons who called the womens’ dress-wearing Bloom “master.”; he studied at Harvard under Straussian neocon Harvey Mansfield; and he entered national politics as a sidekick of neocon UN Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick during the Reagan years.

Shortly after the publication of The Real Lincoln in 2002 Howard Phillips had me on his local cable TV show in Virginia to discuss the book. During one of the breaks he mentioned that he had asked Keyes to join the Constitution Party and he declined, saying that he agreed with just about everything the Party stood for except for its criticisms, mostly from Howard, of Lincoln. Lincoln idolatry is, of course, the defining characteristic of a Straussian Neocon Warmonger like Keyes, for The Legend of Father Abraham is what “justifies” the American empire and its expansion.

The American Conservative on Alan Keyes’ Defeat

Here is Daniel McCarthy’s take on Alan Keyes’ defeat at the Constitution Party Convention.

The Constitution Party — back then it was the U.S. Taxpayers’ Party — was founded in the early 1990s in the hopes of getting Pat Buchanan to make a third-party run in ‘92. What liberals and others who fail to look beneath the surface rhetoric of the culture war have never understood is that while Keyes and Buchanan both speak out for traditional values, they have fundamentally different political philosophies. Keyes is an antiabortion neocon. The Constitution Party, whatever its flaws, is far from being a neocon outfit. So it has rejected Keyes and nominated instead Pastor Chuck Baldwin, a critic of the Iraq War and national-security state as well as a social conservative. The press thinks this is an upset, but anyone who knows what the Constitution Party has actually stood for will not be surprised at all. 

BALDWIN WINS CONSTITUTION PARTY NOMINATION!!!

From the Convention in Kansas City, I am very excited to report that Chuck Baldwin has defeated Alan Keyes, his principle opponent for the nomination. Congratulations to the CP. They did the right thing. A non-interventionist party nominated a non-interventionist candidate. Keyes would have split and destroyed the Party. Baldwin is nearly flawless on the issues.

I’ll have more to say later when I have more access to the Internet.

Chuck Baldwin in 2008!

Does Winfrey Ride The Beast?

by Frederick Meekins

At one point in her career, Oprah Winfrey was pretty much seen as a harmless crank as to the casual viewer catching the show in passing assumed that the program dealt primarily with her seesawing weight and whether or not her shackup might secretly prefer to be paid in three dollar bills. However, as she has amassed considerable power and influence during her 20 plus years in the public limelight, this broadcaster is no longer an innocent afternoon distraction filling the time between when one arrives home from work and when dinner is set on the table but rather has intentionally set out to subvert American culture and the spiritual well being of the nation. Continue reading

Republicans worry convention will not be fascist enough

As the head the online division of the Republican Party, Patrick Ruffini has the thankless task of teaching technological neanderthals how to get past the making-fire phase to putting it to more productive uses.

Apparently he’s a little worried that Ron Paul’s Republican National Convention delegates might keep the convention from being a recreation of the Nuremburg Rallies according to this blog post from TAC.

Continue reading

Oh to be in England …

… now that devolution’s there

But here’s one commentator who isn’t happy that old empires are being replaced by human-scaled political formations. As the super-sized nation-state totters and reels, historical cultural affinities are spontaneously reviving themselves:

In its place comes a vast phalanx of somewhat ill-defined racial types, clamouring for recognition — from Catalonia, the Basque region, Flanders and the two Galicias, from Transylvania, from Friesland, Brittany, Wales, Scotland and Ireland, ad infinitum.

The author, Rod Liddle, tries to delegitimize the revival of historical identities as “tribal stuff” which he dismisses as “the most atavistic and baseless of principles.” But why, if identification with one’s extended family is baseless, has it defined human history so profoundly, and, more important, why does it continue to shape current events (including today’s never-ending presidential campaign)?

Mr. Liddle indulges in the nihilism and extreme sceptisicm that multicult/globalists often resort to in claiming that races don’t exist because, so they claim, it’s impossible to put anything into a category — especially people:

Which brings us to what is meant by ‘English’, that race represented by a patron saint from Cappadocia or maybe Palestine, which converses in a modern derivative of low German, was created by an invasion from France and whose gene pool is hopelessly mingled with that of our Celtic neighbours and that of any number of influxes from France, from the Jewish diaspora, from Africa, Asia and the Caribbean.

This kind of thinking can be shot down with but a whiff o’ logic. Aristotle’s categories are just as appropriate for human categories as they are for anything else. Folks like Mr. Biddle assume that an other-worldly ideal must be the starting point for any system of knowledge; since all attempts to pack reality into those ideals fail, then knowledge is impossible.

Pshaw! Let’s instead work with what’s real and build our ideas around that. A nation, just like an individual, arises from a whirlwind of apparently disparate and accidental causes. What’s more, both nation and individual never stop adapting. That’s the real world philosophical idealists can’t explain, and therefore dismiss as not quite real. However, Aristotle’s categories of substance, relation, place, and time correpond well with our understanding of genetic history, family ties, nationality, and history. Richard Weaver provided one of the best explanations of how categories are essential to human knowledge. In his essay, Status and Function, he wrote:

… we see things maintaining their identity while changing. Things both are and are becoming. They are because the idea or general configuration of them persists; and they are becoming because with the flowing of time, they inevitably slough off old substance and take on new. The paradox of both being and becoming is thus continuously enacted. We say that there is a “nature of things,” but this nature ever appears in a changing embodiment, so that if we attended only to the latter, we should no sooner say of a thing that “it is” than we should be obliged to say “it was” or “it is now something else.” It is an ancient observation that “no man steps in the same river twice,” yet we continue to conceive it as a river and to call it by one name. At one and the same moment permanence holds us enchanted and change urges us on. Visions of Order, p. 23.

Existence, argues Weaver, is identified by both status and function, that is, by what a person or thing is and what he or it does. There is something essential that lives on despite the changes a thing, person, or culture experiences. The same applies to nations, says Weaver:

The same process is visible even when we look at the political state. It persists under one name, and it may even affirm in its organic law that it is indestructible. But its old leaders pass on or are removed, and new ones appear. But while these individual particles are being shuffled and replaced, “the state” goes on, maintaining some character and identity through all these changes. The most conservative state must yield something to the pressure of historical increment, and the most “progressive” one conserves something that it considers its special form and spirit.” Visions of Order, p. 24

With that in mind, notice that Mr. Liddle eventually stumbles upon the answer to his own objections:

But when I examine precisely what it is to which I feel allegiance, I find that it is that bleak and discredited notion, the nation state: Great Britain. It is Britain, not England, with which I feel a shared identity and, try as I might, I cannot separate the southern province from the rest simply because we say ‘now’ instead of ‘noo’ or ‘noy’ …

And isn’t that the whole point? We’re in an age of redefining who we are. When I was younger, it was the Free World vs. the Soviet Bloc. “We” included Americans, Danes, and others, such as Vietnamese south of the 17th parallel, while “they” were Russians, Chinese, and Vietnamese north of the 17th parallel. Despite the “universalism” of their Marxist-Leninist ideology, ancient loyalties split the Russians and Chinese and united the Vietnamese.

The massive influx of legal and illegal immigrants from Africa, Asia, and the Caribbean that Liddle tries to list as just one more component of British identity is actually corrosive to it. That’s why floodtide immigration is simultaneously dissolving the idea of “Britishness” while focusing attention on the actual and historical meaning of “Englishness.”

Meanwhile, in the last days of the republic once known as “America” …

The Pennsylvania Polka

Kudos to Ron Paul’s supporters in Pennsylvania for not giving up and providing some 128,000 votes to Rep. Paul, bringing him close to the magical one million total for the year and also providing him with a few convention delegates as well. 27% of Pennsylvania Republicans don’t like John McCain and if McCain can’t bring them into the fold then it doesn’t matter how beat-up the Democratic Party nominee is, he’s a sure loser in the fall, especially if the LP nominates Bob Barr next month and the CP nominates Chuck Baldwin this weekend.

This is Paul’s best showing in a primary all year. In some Pennsylvania counties his vote totals neared 30 %

Barak Obama has had every chance in the world to finish off Hilary Clinton and cannot do it. It’s amazing this is happening given the bandwagon effect in the modern presidential primary process (which McCain used to win the GOP nomination). All indicators give Obama the nomination and yet voters seem quite willing to keep this campaign going.  The only people who want this primary camapaign to end are Washington politicos. I wonder why? What happen to the exciting convention struggle everyone was hoping for this year?

Continue reading

Neocons and Hillary sittin’ in a tree

Gee, just one little speech promising to commit genocide against Muslims, and the Neocons fall head-over-heels in love with you:

Hillary Clinton’s got the momentum.

She’s already put up big campaign fundraising numbers in the follow-up to her victory, and we should expect to see a Clinton bump in public opinion in states holding upcoming primaries, especially Indiana, the next crucial test for Obama’s working-class appeal.

This Bud’s for you, Hillraiser!

She had him at “obliterate.”