Jeane Kirkpatrick, chief UN ambassador under President Reagan:

Let me just say that I believe Alan is a very remarkable person. I know him very well because he did work for me for a number of years, . . . and you come to know someone well when you see them every day.

Alan is a principled man of a lot of integrity. He’s a brilliant political scientist—and I speak as someone who has been a political science professor for thirty years, and so I know political science competence when I see it.

[I] know the difference between somebody who knows what they’re saying and somebody who doesn’t. Alan is very, very well informed in political science quite specifically—he could enter almost any classroom and illuminate it, but especially in political science. I wish him all the best in this race.

... Alan has very substantial knowledge as well as experience with international affairs…..

Sen. Peter Fitzgerald:

Alan Keyes is perhaps the most articulate spokesperson anywhere in the country. He has few equals in his understanding of the issues or his ability to articulate core values and principle.

Thomas Sowell:

After serving overseas as a foreign service officer, he rose within the State Department to become Assistant Secretary of State during the Reagan administration.

What Alan Keyes has become best known for, however, have been his staunchly conservative views on the family, military defense, and other conservative causes. He has been part of the conservative movement since his teenage years.

Rush Limbaugh:

I think ninety percent of the people who listen to Alan Keyes know in their hearts he’s right, but they don’t want to reorder their lives to live that way. . . . [Supporting] Alan Keyes is not just committing to Alan Keyes! It is saying to yourself: “I have got to fix my life. I’ve got to straighten up and fly right, I’ve got to accept responsibility for things.”

Paul Harvey:

So you’re less than enthusiastic about any of those fellows running for [office]?

How would you respond if one of them should give first priority to restoring the moral environment of the marriage-based family?

Suppose he should say “If you think money makes people happy, just look at Hollywood.”?

Would you vote for one with experience in government who says that government expanding itself at the expense of family values has been a destroyer?

Suppose he were to say “Welfare, taxes and education were all mistakes of an earlier era. They didn’t work.” He says only work works.

“Welfare” he’ll say “discourages marriage and promotes illegitimacy.”

“Taxes” he’ll say “have forced more and more families into two parent working situations, leaving their children to be reared by nobody.”

“Government” he’d say “has been planting weeds.”

“Churches once took the lead in charity and should again. Not just with material help, but with moral and spiritual and emotional help.”

Affirmative action is a patronage program that benefits too few people.”

And if this candidate’s credentials include a Harvard doctorate and, as I say, experience in government and if he’s been president of a university, would you vote to support him?

Well you can if you want to. He is running.

His name is Alan Keyes.

We already suffered through 8 years of presidency by a guy with the smallest resume in presidential history. (http://www.whitehouse.gov/president/biography.html) President GW Jr did have a $42 muillion dollar war chest and daddy’s name ID entering the primary for 2000 along with being Governor of Texas which he got against Ann Richards at a time most of Texas didn’t like her failed first term.

Chuck Baldwin (http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/sketch.html) having no experience in government is a safe bet for the CP party to stand firm on thier platform, but; it’s not going to be enough to grab votes in November outside the base; especially with Bob Barr running as a Libertarian candidate now.

By the way, Alan Keyes never became a CP member so he only switched from Republican to Independent.

-Larry Breazeale, Msgt. (ret.) USAF
National Chairman of the National Veterans
Coalition, AIP/CP…www.nvets.org,
Orange County Central Committee member

note Noonan’s comments down the page

beware

I figure the American Heritage Party, as well as all the dissafilliated parties in Oregon, Montana, and Alabama would all view him as too much of a “compromise”.

However, the CA-AIP would be a huge stepping stone.

What about the CA-AIP?

Frankly, I’ll not be playing Tom Hoefling’s childish games. Its seems clear to me who is a “pup” in the world of politics. He couldn’t pull off victory for a high-name recognition candidate in a minor party. We won on basically everything we fought for,except VP.

I’m counting on it.

I was told to mark his words, that the CP party would be judged by God for our vote for Baldwin….

Sean

..paulie, borrow his book, you tightwad! ..or go to www.monetary.org where i believe his challenge to ?your von mises dinks is posted..

..but DO THINK for yourself, paulie, ..and admit it, YOU paulie, don’t know of even one ‘monetary historian’..and i would bet a bundle YOU, paulie, can’t honestly explain the origin, nature, reality, etc. of those ‘thing$’ for which you and your Republicrat friends eagerly pro$titute yourselves..

(..i love yanking these Republicrat money dummies!..they ‘know’ more about Silly Ray Montana’s shocking new pics than they do the very money for which they readily french-kiss the anal sphincters of some monstrou$ bankster$ !)

Not in Illinois! He’d be laughed out, before he even got there. He’s like Oberweis in Illinois, his significance diminishes after every race. It’s like one of those cartoons where you see the guy shrink, his voice getting higher and higher till, POOF! he’s gone.

While he may not have “poofed” yet, his voice certainly went up several octaves.