Posted under Alan Keyes
This is old news (Sept 09). I’m sorry I missed it at the time, but I just stumbled across it (in the thread I linked to in the post below) and felt inclined to pass it along because … well because it is just so much fun to needle bitter ol’ Alan Keyes.
For background, Alan Keyes has endorsed Bill Johnson, a movement style conservative Senate candidate in Kentucky. To be fair, Johnson seems right on most of the issues except he is an interventionist on foreign policy. Johnson is running against Establishment candidate Trey Greyson and Rand Paul. Johnson seems to be getting little traction because the rightward and otherwise anti-Greyson support is going to Paul who leads in the polls.
Anyway, in his endorsement of Johnson, Keyes takes a swipe at Rand Paul on foreign policy. (Funny how he felt it important enough to take a swipe at the rightward Paul by name but not the centrist Establishment man, Greyson.)
Ron Paul’s son is mounting a well funded effort to exploit the rising tide of voters who identify with the conservative name. But like his father, he rejects Ronald Reagan’s ‘Peace through strength’ acceptance of America’s leadership for freedom in the world. Like his father, he echoes Barack Obama’s illogical willingness to pretend that America is to blame for the hateful attacks directed against us by Middle East terrorists.
Keyes is a bitter sore loser. He lost his bid for the nomination of the Constitution Party to the much lesser known Chuck Baldwin because the CP rejected Keyes’ neocon interventionism. The CP has been basically non-interventionist from the beginning because it was initially formed as a hopeful vehicle for a Buchanan third party run, but Ron Paul’s campaign definitely solidified the place of non-interventionism on the “far” “outside the mainstream” right and among Constitution Party activists. Keyes could definitely see the finger print of the Paul campaign on the mindset and rhetoric of his Constitution Party detractors. Keyes and his allies tried to downplay his interventionism when he was seeking the nomination, but once he lost the nomination he seemingly embraced an even more hyper and unapologetic form of it as if to spite us all.
Keyes faults Paul for his failure to accept “America’s leadership for freedom in the world.” Perhaps Dr. Keyes would like to point out what part of the Constitution authorizes America to be the leader “for freedom in the world.” Last I checked, Rand Paul was running to be a UNITED STATES Senator representing the great Commonwealth of Kentucky, not the Emperor of the World.