Blogging the CP National Convention

I’v been at the convention for 5 hours now, and already too much has happened to possibly include in this post, at least not without boring the masses. I arrived at 2p.m. central and explored the convention’s offerings. The many tables outside the doors show just how conservative this group is. Everything from the National Traditionalist Caucus to the John Birch Society.

Everywhere there are arguments—based wholly upon the Presidential nomination. People stood around politely talking about the North American Union and the Federal Reserve, but inevitably arguments have broken out left and right. Foreign Policy, Foreign Aid, Mandatory National Service, and Islamofascism—these are all issues that no one expected to be hotly contested issues at the CP Convention. Even myself and Tom Hoefling, Keyes’ political director, got into a heated exchange.

There are more Alan Keyes-friendly delegates than I originally suspected. A couple dozen by my count, and they also have captured the votes of California’s delegation. By my count, this is leading to a fun convention, and one where people’s feelings are going to get hurt. I suspect if Keyes does not receive the nomination, he’ll continue his race for President. I fear that people may see the rejection of Keyes as an anti-catholic or anti-black maneuver, which is laughable considering some of his leading opponents are Paul Venable of Idaho and Ricardo Davis of Georgia—both African-American men.

Enough about my analysis. So far the Credentials and Platform committees have met. The newest platform is one which utilizes Constitutional or Original Intent quotes to hold up it’s respective planks. At least one plank got the axe, although it could’ve been more (indeed, I wish it were more). As I write this, Richard Viguerie is delivering a speech to the National Committee about how to change the debate on conservatism.

Keyes is making a massive effort—and I’m incredibly impressed. He’s been up in his hospitality suite for the past 10 hours constantly speaking with delegates or conducting radio interviews. It really is a mammoth effort. While I disagree with Keyes on the war, I’v certainly grown to respect the man’s endurance.

57 Responses to “Blogging the CP National Convention”

  1. SUPER DUPER FAKE Texan Says:

    His endurance? wow, sounds like Im reading a MSM article. I have been watching the live video, and his meeting with CP gubernatorial canddiate Dr. Thompson made me smile. I can assure you based on the conversations which are being held in Dr. Keyes room and being shown live on the internet are more transparent than any report I have read

  2. Steven R Linnabary Says:

    Will the convention be on CSPAN?


  3. Ben Says:

    Ricardo’s opposition to Keyes does not surprise me. I am surprised by Paul Venable’s opposition to Keyes. Trent (or any one attending the convention), who is Paul supporting? Up until a few days ago, I thought Baldwin would get the CP nomination. However, after reading Ed Noonan’s comments against Dr. Grundmann and Mr. Baldwin, I believe it more likely that Dr. Keyes could get the CP’s nomination. My prediction has always been balanced on the edge of a knife, but after reading about Trent’s surprise at the number of Keye’s delegates I am more inclined to expect Keyes will get the CP nomination. Trent, please continue to blog away, and I hope you lend your computer to other TPW regulars attending the CP convention. I (and probably others) would be fascinated to read your collective thoughts as your convention progresses.

  4. Ben Says:

    There will be no live coverage of the CP convention on CSPAN. They will do a highlights program about the convention at a later date.

  5. Stephen Gordon Says:


    Good job on the coverage. Thanks!

  6. Jared Says:

    Any streaming audio of the convention?

    Also, thanks Trent for the coverage. I love reading this stuff…

  7. disinter Says:

    Did they announce the second coming of Heyseuss or was it the typical fear mongering masturbation session?

  8. Uber Texan Says:

    Keyes = sure to embarrass the CP if nominated

  9. Jared Says:

    They announced the second coming of Strauss, not Heyseuss.

  10. disinter Says:

    They announced the second coming of Strauss, not Heyseuss.

    Much better.

  11. Glen Livingston Says:

    Any chance opf building the Constitution Party into a replacement party over and above the Republican Party will end up in abortion if the CP nominates Alan Keyes for President. It, the CP, will lose its credibility as as political party that speaks out against unconstitutional, undeclared wars if it nominates the warmonger Keyes. Sorry to say but my conservative and constitutional Christian vote shall go elsewhere, maybe over to the Libertarians who have have the chance tht the CP will thus forfeit.

  12. Robert Says:

    The Chuck Baldwin pins and stickers are plentiful and he clearly has the support of the National Leadership. I would expect that he will carry the nomination easily.

    The Keyes followers tried to make numerous amendments to the party platform on Wednesday evening. They were all shot down, usually in overwhelming fashion. I hope that Keyes and his supporters will stay even if he does not get the nomination but that may wishful thinking.

    Richard Viguerie was a mess! He was championing Newt “New World Order” Gingrich and Bill “Neo-Con” Buckley as Conservative heroes. At one point I thought he might be booed of the stage. That nonsense might work with clueless Republicans, but not in the CP. Why was he invited to waste our time?

    I wish Ron Paul was here.

  13. Stefan Says:

    Thank you Trent, appreciated. Now, although some neoconservatives have studied under Leo Strauss, one cannot (necessarily) make Strauss responsible as the father of their global-political thought. Strauss was more an academic theoretical philosopher. I may point out that for instance further in history, the German philosopher GFW Hegel were interpreted by his students in two different schools, the so called right-Hegelians (Kuno Fischer etc.) and the left-Hegelians (Karl Marx etc.). I know Keyes was a roommate of Kristol, but this does not mean they are allies in thought. Note, I know too little about Keyes to be allowed a comment on the possible differences between Kristol and Keyes.
    Strauss’s daughter also seem to disagree witht he notion that her father’s philosophy lead to neoconservatism:

    It seems like Keyes may get the nomination? though like you I would also be very much against the Iraq war. Keyes was as ambassador to the UN more negative about the UN as institution, as far as I know. He did debate Obama for the senate race, so it would be interesting if he is to be the CP nominee match with Obama (if he is on the main or VP slot).

  14. Andy Says:

    It sounds like the Constitution Party’s Presidential Nomination campaign has turned into an even bigger clusterfuck than the Libertarian Party’s.

  15. Cody Quirk Says:

    Good Job buddy, I wish I could be there, but work and finances have me in a bind.

    Keep us informed indeed!

  16. Cody Quirk Says:

    Up until a few days ago, I thought Baldwin would get the CP nomination.

    = Looks like it is going to be quite a roller coaster until Saturday. I hope it turns out for the better.

  17. Stefan Says:

    Glen, yes that seems to be the case, if the CP nominate Keyes and the LP nominate
    a pro-life conservative-libertarian like Barr, the latter may well be a good alternative and better to unite under one third party than to have it split up between CP and LP. It could just be a tactical vote, which means you do not have to join the LP on a permanent basis. Anyway, it would be good if there could be some cooperation and possible merger with the LP, well understanding the differences between the parties.

    Robert: Oh, so is Chuck Baldwin running? Yes, Richard Viquerie has contributed towards conservatism but he does not strike one as a deep philosophical coherent thinker. One does not know why he could not endorse Paul, though he said positive things about him. He cannot then complain about McCain on his blog One could perhaps in the Col War still understand the need for a big security government in the COld war times, and thus Buckley’s contribution, but the cold war is over since almost two decades and there is still no small, limited conservative government. Buckley and Viquerie have later described the Iraq war as a mistake, but he could not get him along to support Paul? Not very principled, not really the guts….

  18. disinter Says:

    Go Keynes!!

  19. Robert Says:

    “Oh, so is Chuck Baldwin running?”

    Dr. Baldwin handed me a “Chuck Baldwin for President” pin earlier today.

    I would vote for Alan Keyes for Vice President but I don’t think that Dr. Keyes would go for that.

  20. disinter Says:

    Rev. Keynes for CP prez Praise Heyseuss!

  21. citizen1 Says:

    I expect the vote to be Baldwin 60% to Keyes 40%. This is closer than I expected originally. There are a number of Keyes supporters here, but how many state delegations do they represent more than 50% of and how many state delegation heads support him?

  22. disinter Says:

    Rev. Keynes for our savior

  23. Mike Gillis Says:

    What failed amendments to the platform did the Keyes people try to make?

  24. Tom Hoefling Says:

    Awful stuff like this. We’re such awful people.


    Mission Statement

    The mission of the Constitution Party is to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity through the election, at all levels of government, of Constitution Party candidates who will uphold the principles of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States. It is our goal to limit the federal government to its proper functions and thereby re-establish government of, by, and for the people. It is also our goal to attract, inspire, and rally sovereign Americans who are willing to assert their God-given rights in support of these purposes, and to welcome all such patriotic citizens into the party.


    The Constitution Party gratefully acknowledges the blessing of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ as Creator, Preserver, and Ruler of the Universe and Protector of these United States. We hereby appeal to Him for mercy, aid, comfort, guidance, and Divine Providence, as we seek to merit His intervention which “hath made and preserved us a nation”—and as we work to restore our nation upon its historical ideals.

    This great nation was established by Christians, upon Biblical principles and the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason, people of other faiths have always been, and continue to be, afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here.

    In seeking to return our Republic to its Declaration-based, Constitutional birthright, the Constitution Party is committed to limiting the federal government to its delegated, enumerated, Constitutional powers, and to restoring American jurisprudence to its original Biblical common-law foundations.

    The U.S. Constitution established a Republic rooted in Biblical law, and administered by representatives who are Constitutionally elected by the citizens. In such a Republic, all Life, Liberty, and Property are protected because law rules.

    The Constitution Party supports the original intent of the Constitution, as written, and as illuminated by the Declaration of Independence. The Constitution Party calls on all those who love liberty and value their inherent rights to join with us in the pursuit of these goals and the restoration of these founding principles.

    Principles of American Self-Government

    We affirm the principles of inherent individual rights upon which the United States of America was founded—that:

    •All persons are created equal. They thus have equal natural rights as a gift of the Creator.

    •Our duty to acknowledge and respect the will of God exists prior to all government. Accordingly, so does the liberty of religious conscience.

    •The authority of the Creator must be respected for liberty to endure.

    •The unalienable right to life precedes all human law, including the Constitution.

    •Individuals have a natural right to acquire, secure, and use property for their happiness and safety.

    •Individuals have a right and a duty to form governments to secure their rights.

    •Individuals are authorized by the Creator to defend their inherent rights—as are the communities and governments they form. From this authority proceeds the right and duty to defend national sovereignty and security, and the individual right to bear arms.

    •Governments are made legitimate by the consent of the free and equal persons who form and sustain them. Governmental powers are always to be understood as a delegation from the persons who, together, form the political community.

    •To enjoy the right of political self-government, individuals must be capable of personal self-government—the virtue of self-control. People without decency cannot be secure in their liberty.

    •The institutions by which liberty is fostered—especially the marriage-based two-parent family, the churches, and other associations that seek to preserve the foundations of society—are to be protected and cherished.

    •The vocation of citizenship in a free republic is noble and honorable. Public service and citizen activism, especially in the defense of the rule of law, deserve praise and respect.

    •The worst failures of government—such as those which lead to excessive concentration of power, consolidation of the branches, usurpation of the people’s liberty, or withdrawing the protection of law from the people—constitute tyranny or anarchy, and may and sometimes should be resisted, even to the point of rebellion, as our Founders declared.

    •Free speech and a free press are required for the practice of responsible liberty, as necessary means by which the people may act together to govern themselves.

    •All persons have a right to equal treatment under the laws.

    •It is the duty of the people, individually and in their associations, private and public, to declare these principles of self-government, including the fundamental American creed that our liberties come as a gift of the Creator.

    •History makes clear that if left unchecked, it is the nature of government to usurp the liberty of its citizens and eventually become a major violator of the people’s rights. It is essential, therefore, to vigilantly bind government with the chains of the Constitution and carefully divide and jealously limit government powers to those assigned by the consent of the governed.

    Constitutional Requirements

    On the basis of the above “self-evident” truths, we as a party are committed to the strict, thoroughgoing application of the Constitution to all matters of public policy. Only by faithful adherence to the Constitution, which defines our Republic’s legal framework and secures our individual rights and liberties, can we sustain the legacy of self-government bequeathed us by our forebears.

    Of necessity, therefore, the rest of the Constitution Party platform centers in the Constitution—and its application to all vital issues of domestic and foreign policy.

    Position Statements

    Standing firmly on the Constitution, we as a party take the following positions on vital issues.

    We recognize that not all who uphold our founding documents will concur with every position stated herein—since the application of theory to practice lends itself to legitimate disagreement among colleagues and friends who’ve come together upon shared beliefs and commitments.

    Let us therefore emphasize our common beliefs and de-emphasize our differences, as we seek to apply the principles of our founding documents to our country’s pressing problems—which is our reason for existence as a party. In the spirit of the far-reaching cooperation that is essential to restoring our country to its foundations, let us all agree that, in principle, any reasonable position that truly reflects the language and intent of the Constitution, as interpreted in light of the Declaration of Independence, has a place of acceptance and credibility within the party.

    Let us also agree that the party platform should, as a rule, steadfastly avoid any position that cannot be defended on strict Declaration-based or Constitutional grounds—in the interest of building party unity and strength upon shared principles.

  25. Mike Gillis Says:

    I’m a bit lost.

    What were the failed proposed changes?

  26. Tom Hoefling Says:

    For the record, that rewrite of the CP platform’s beginning portions was rejected, in case anyone didn’t quite pick that up from my post.

    The actual work of the platform committee will be released and voted in on later today.

  27. Tom Yager Says:

    Thanks for covering the convention for us, Trent. How does the CP’s nominating process work? Are the delegates selected at your state conventions pledged to certain candidates, uncommitted, or does it vary state by state?

  28. The Dylan Says:

    As a steadfast Libertarian, I will admit that the Constitution Party would do well to nominate Chuck Baldwin and Mary Starrett. This is a ticket that would be true to the CP platform and to the founding principles that gave birth to our free republic. And as a constitutionalist and strong Ron Paul supporter, I would consider voting for the Constitution Party in ‘08 (if the LP doesn’t nominate someone like Bob Barr, for example).

    Alan Keyes would be such a mistake for you guys. He would do to the CP what Nader did to the GP. (Best vote totals you’ve ever seen one year, then take all the volunteers and money into his next vanity project.) While I would love for the LP to be the only party working for smaller government, I honestly don’t want to see the Constitution Party destroyed this way. Keyes is an opportunist interested only in self-promotion. He doesn’t seem to understand what a strong national defense is really all about and he’s certainly no constitutionalist.

    By the way, you’ve got to check out Trent Hill’s book, “Ron Paul and the New Revolutionaries”. Libertarians and Constitutionalists should be inspired by Dr. Paul’s example to join forces for real change. It will be interesting to see if anyone gets his endorsement. He endorsed Badnarik in ‘04 and remains a Life Member of the LP, so why not our banner?

  29. Robert Says:

    Keyes proposed changes to the platform included:

    Changing no foreign aid to foreign aid when the President needs to use foreign aid.

    Changing withdrawal from the UN, NAFTA, etc. to reexamine membership in the UN, re-examine NAFTA, etc.

    In terms of deploying troops into a foreign field of battle, removal of the word “require” in relation to a Congressional declaration of war.

    Change withdrawal of troops from around the world to reconsider current deployments, etc.

    Essentially he was trying to make the CP platform come into line with his foreign policy positions.

    All of these items were listed as “Minor Revisions” to the Foreign policy section.

    None of them were passed.

  30. theCardinal Says:

    I have to ditto TheDylan and no we are not related despite the thes prefacing our names. I am a Libertarian/Republican fencesitter with CP admiration and I don´t want to see the party wrecked by Keyes. I grew up with a deep admiration for Howard Phillips and the TCC and I would hate to see his hard work go to junk.

    As for another childhood hero Richard Viguerie should be forgiven for his apostasy. He´s always been all over the place in terms of relationships - he´s always for the underdog - but he has always hewn to a populist conservatism that he wrote about way back when in the mid 80´s in his best book “The Establishment vs. The People”. When Newt was a no body speaking to a cavernous House with only a CSPAN camera rolling it was Viguerie who plastered him on the cover of Conservative Digest. Likewise it was WFB who gave Viguerie his first shot when he was a nobody. Its true that Viguerie fashions himself a thinker when he really isn´t but give the man some room to work with, he is a fascinating person and more historical knowledge of the movement than anyone alive.

  31. Alarmed Alaskan PLEASE READ Says:

    It appears that Keyes is a man without a party. HE HAS NOT EVEN JOINED THE CP YET! His loyalty is in question. No, I correct myself. He has displayed NO LOYALTY.
    He can’t be trusted. Many have said this and his past proves it.
    Unless he pledges full support to the party even if not nominated.
    Is he willing to put ONE PENNY to our cause unless he has HIS WAY 100%?
    He TRULY is looking out FOR JUST HIMSELF and not his, or our, cause.

  32. Robert Says:

    “Richard Viguerie should be forgiven for his apostasy”

    As a Christian, he is forgiven.

    As a member of the Liberty movement he is not. So called “friends” that should know better but refuse to do anything about it are in fact worse than enemies.

    Newt is pro homosexual agenda, pro abortion, pro globalist elite. He has not the first redeeming quality.

    Buckley is an absolute tool for the establishment and nothing more. He has done more to tarnish and destroy the word “Conservative” than anyone in history. He should be regarded as the Benedict Arnold of the 20th Century.

    Thus “more historical knowledge of the movement than anyone alive” is being used against the CP and all it stands for. We must recognize this or we will fall for more betrayals like the 1994 “Contract with America.”

    How many times do we need to emulate Charlie Brown kicking a football held by Lucy?

    Identifying your enemy is critical to victory.

  33. David F. Nolan Says:

    Because it is obvious to almost everyone that the American people are hugely dissatisfied with the two old-line parties this year, we are seeing a number of people who failed to gain traction with the GOP and the Dems looking to be the nominees of alternative parties: Keyes, Gravel and McKinney being prime examples. While they may be sincere in their desire to work for change, I think you have to look at these “carpetbaggers” with considerable skepticism. I’m always suspicious of anyone who joins an organization and immediately wants to be at the top of the hierarchy. If you suddenly decide you’re a Libertarian or a Green or a Constitutionalist , then run for some lower office on that party’s line before seeking the Presidential nomination.

  34. Ben Says:

    I can’t agree w/ Mr. Nolan more.

  35. Steven R Linnabary Says:


    OTOH, sometimes though, greatness is thrust upon the newbies. When Calvin Warburton switched his affiliation to Libertarian in ‘92, he was nominated for Veep (he didn’t get it, it went to Nancy Lord).

    When I was on the LNC, somebody remarked to me that any sitting state rep would immediately go straight to the head of the class if they switched to the LP (or any other opposition party).

    Something about being the biggest fish in the pond, I guess.

    Sorry about the mixed metaphors.


  36. Old Whig Says:

    Those ‘minor’ revisions would turn us into a junior subsidiary of GOP Inc. I’m glad they were shot down.

    I voted for Keyes against ‘W’ in 2000. I have to say I’m disappointed in him now.

    Wish I was there.


  37. Cody Quirk Says:

    Looks like the platform that Tom listed failed.

    BTW it’s Keyes you idiot! Disinter makes Don Imperato sound like he will be the LP nominee for Prez.

  38. disinter Says:

    Praise Rev. Keynes! Bow down before Rev. Keynes you silly children.

  39. John Lofton, Recovering Republican Says:

    Lot of searchable stuff on our site re: CP, Keyes, Viguerie and more. But, I’m encouraged. Any group that boos Viguerie can’t be all bad! I’d love to know more about this, please….

    John Lofton, Editor,

    [email protected]

  40. SUPER DUPER FAKE Texan Says:

    If you watch the live feed of alan keys website—you can see him discussing the nation with other delegates. Trust me, the conversations are much deeper than any comedy central bit, check it out if you can hang with the mental gymnastics

  41. Alarmed Alaskan Says:

    Keyes live? Now that’s an oxymoron.

  42. Mike Gillis Says:

    “In terms of deploying troops into a foreign field of battle, removal of the word “require” in relation to a Congressional declaration of war.”

    Regardless of platform isn’t this already REQUIRED under the US Constitution. I mean, not that anyone enforces this anymore.

  43. johncjackson Says:

    I think you give newt way too much credit. If those things were true I would be a big fan.

  44. johncjackson Says:

    I like this choice on the ballot:;

    John Maynard Keynes
    Reverend Alan Keynes
    Maynard James Keenan

  45. Richie Says:

    You can watch the convention live at Keyes website - As much as I can’t stand him, I have to give him kudos for providing streaming.

  46. SUPER DUPER FAKE Texan Says:

    The campaign are trying to be more transparent than anyone else, even though its kind of low tech—its interesting to see men dicuss policy in front of Americans instead of behind closed doors

  47. Craig M. Says:

    I am very interested in who wins the nomination. However, I do want to remind many out there that if we had 218 Congressman who supported the Constitution, we could at the very least prevent our country from heading towards a furtherance of the national debt. Please tell others about the Constitution Party and elect CP’ers to state reps, state senate, and the House of Reps. Many people I speak with are aware that the Democrats and Republicans have become of one heart and one mind (with the exception of a few).

  48. Katrinka Yobotz Says:

    Alan Keyes’ speech to the Constitution Party is available here:

    Alan Keyes Constitution Party Speech

  49. theCardinal Says:


    I get your point but disagree. sometimes friends grow apart but that is no reason to disown them. WFB is the one that got me to enjoying conservatism but I dropped him by the time I was 16. Newt got me to looking things differently but moved on when he seemed to forget what was really important. it doesn´t mean that i can´t appreciate what they did to get me started in my intellectual journey. attributing the darkest motives to those who disagree with us gets us nowhere. I´m sure that Viguerie feels the same way. And as devout as he is - he is consistently pro-life so he opposes the death penalty and has for over 20 years - i doubt he will ever turn on someone who ever dealt him a helping hand. As a good Christian I am sure that he sticks around just in case the others see the light.

  50. matthew Says:

    Does anyone really understand Keyes’s opinion on the war in Iraq? It seems like a lot of people hate Keyes because they’ve been told Keyes supports the war. It’s not that simple, though. Keyes has repeatedly said that he disagreed with invading Iraq like Bush did because it is not our duty to force democracy onto other countries, as Bush tried to do in Iraq. Keyes wants to end the war, but not in a way that will threaten our American security and safety. If we pull out of Iraq now, with unfinished business, we are surrendering to the enemy and the Middle East would then view America as backing down and becoming an easy target. Keyes believs we must stay in Iraq to finish what we started. If we leave Iraq in the state of chaos in which it is in now, we risk our safety here in America. Keyes has the right idea!

  51. Charles Davidson Says:

    Keyes made some very good explainations for his foriegn policy ideals at the transparent Constitution Party convention. Our Constitution Party likes to keep things simple and that’s good, however Keyes reminds people that everything is not clean cut when it comes to be non-interventionist. WW2has been held up as the supreme example of a “good war” but we were covertly aiding the UK long before December 7th, and blocking Japanese shipping lanes. Following December 7th we decared war, but immediately sent troops and aid to Europe under Roosevelts direction and Churchills pleading. WW2 is an example of a good war(no wars are really good) but WW2 is more an example of what Alan Keyes describes than non-interventionism. I give thanks waking up every morning under the Stars and Stripes and not under the Nazi Swastika or Rising Sun
    God bless America and and let freedom ring

  52. Paul Greenawalt Says:

    Truth of the matter why does these Libertarians stay inside there own party. Ron Paul is not CP he was a Libertarian before he moved to the GOP so he could get voted in.
    Ron Paul is a Moron and a moron would follow him. You guys act like a cult of a man who is not even there.

    FYI Truth of the matter is if Keyes is not on the ballot I and many people will note vote CP.
    So the few tiny 200,000 of moron ron paul/baldwin voters can lose again and be laughed at like in 2004

  53. Robert Says:

    Failing to identify our enemies is a major reason we are in the trouble we are in today. For example, Goldwater knew that Eisenhower was a socialist and called his domestic policy a dime store new deal. Robert Welch knew that Eisenhower was bad news and published “The Politician” to expose him.

    WFB, Newt, Irving Kristol, Bush I & II - these guys are the ENEMY! Their record shows them to be considerably WORSE than Bill Clinton on his best day. Jimmy Carter could only hope to have caused as much havoc as King Bush II. Patriot Act, Military Tribunal Act, Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act, McCain-Feingold, 9+ Trillion in Debt ……this could go on for quite some time. These guys are wolves in sheep’s clothing and anyone who will try and convince you they are just sheep, especially when they are in a position to know better, are also wolves. Sure they will line up with us on some issues because that is how socialists work. Don’t be naive.

  54. Catholic Trotskyist Says:

    Robert, thanks for helping to divide the conservative movement so that Republicans votes will be stolen and the Obama Socialist Revolution will be ushered in.

  55. Robert Says:


    Says the socialist!

  56. Trent Hill Says:

    “So the few tiny 200,000 of moron ron paul/baldwin voters can lose again and be laughed at like in 2004”

    As opposed to the 50,000 Keyes voters?

  57. woody Says:

    I am an Alan Keyes supporter because he is the one candidate who consistently demonstrates a understanding, and an ability to articulate coherently, the frequent complexity of principles upon which the policies he champions are based.

    While other candidates’ commitment to life I won’t impune as half-hearted, they do frequently appear half-witted, seriously expecting us to swallow the notion (potion?) that the right to decide who is human is a state’s right?

Leave a Reply