Very Interesting Interview with Dr. Alan Keyes

An interview of Alan Keyes by Mike Ferguson on Missouri Viewpoints:

Just hours after falling short in his bid for the Constitution Party’s Presidential nomination, former US Ambassador Alan Keyes sat down with Mike Ferguson to discuss his thoughts on the events of the party’s convention, the state of America and his political future.

Dr. Keyes made it clear that he is not done working in politics, saying he is “…called to a role in politics…”

Disputing claims by some of those in the CP leadership, Keyes states that he was invited to stand as a candidate for the nomination and then proverbially stabbed in the back by many in the party.

He described his opinion of Constitution Party saying it “…professes to be for liberty and self-government [and] is, in fact, governed by a spirit of dictatorship and despotism.” Keyes also stated he believes he was rejected because he would not sign on to some party platform positions he described as “…not truly Constitutional.”

During the interview, Keyes said he will stay involved in politics in some way and that he “…will continue to champion all those things that are consistent with what I believe to be the calling to stand for the justice and liberty that our country is rooted on: the authority of Almighty God.”

When asked is his campaign for the Presidency will continue as an Independent this year or if he will run for office again in the future, Keyes was noncommittal, saying he plans to pray about what is next and “It’s in God’s hands.”

Here’s the video:

47 Responses to “Very Interesting Interview with Dr. Alan Keyes”

  1. -J- Says:

    Well, this really sums it up. A lot of people saw Keyes’ attempt at the nomination as pure opportunism and I think this interview settles the matter. Keyes was interested in the Constitution Party for the nomination and nothing else no matter what his minions may say.

  2. Charles Davidson Says:

    I was a Black Friday and sad day for the CP to see it’s founder Howard Phillips go “postal” during a time it was appropriate to encourage party unity, and annunciate the Constitutional positions of her candidates. Anyone who has followed Alan Keye’s fights with the RNP has reviewed the topics brought up by Phillips regarding interventionism, Michael New, and reperations. If these lies came from the Mccain , Obama, or Clinton political hacks it would have been expected. The travesty that Phillips publically distorted the facts was beyond belief for someone who proclaims himself a truthful, devout, Constitutionalist.

  3. G.E. Says:

    What a disgrace to humanity.

  4. Dylan Waco Says:

    The issue is simple. Is Keyes an interventionist? Yes. Is non-interventionism a key part of the Constitution Party platform and general philosophy? Yes.

    Nominating Keyes would have been a repudiation of the platform and philosophy the party claims to represent. Would the CP have endorsed a pro-choice candidate? How about one that favors open borders? The answer to those questions is an obvious “no” and that there was any compromise allowed for a staunch interventionist like Keyes is very worrisome in and of itself.

  5. Catholic Trotskyist Says:

    Yes, this does make it clear that Keyes had no interest in the Constitution Party unless he can take it over. I encourage all socialists, even if they don’t really believe in God, to pray for Keyes to run as an independent, so he and Baldwin can steal different segments of the Republican vote and propel the Obama Revolution to success.

  6. Sean Scallon Says:

    Funny words coming from a man who STILL hasn’t decided whether he’s a member of the Constitution Party.

    Made up you mind yet Alan?

  7. Kerwin Says:

    Keyes is finished - DONE - FOREVER - except in his own mind.
    He has failed in everything that requires a vote. He has never held a real job that he obtained by interview and exceeding the other people trying for the job.
    Don’t let the door hit ya…

  8. Jerry Baner Says:

    I see a City Council run in Keyes future.

  9. disinter Says:

    He described his opinion of Constitution Party saying it “…professes to be for liberty and self-government [and] is, in fact, governed by a spirit of dictatorship and despotism.”

    Well, he at least has that part right.

  10. Jared Says:

    Keyes has been finished and there is no way he’s resort to running for city council. That is way below him.

  11. Mike Theodore Says:

    Let’s not forget, my learned colleagues. The Honorable Ambassador “will continue to champion all those things that are consistent with what I believe to be the calling to stand for the justice and liberty that our country is rooted on: the authority of Almighty God.”
    That’s right, folks. “It’s in God’s hands.” It’s been in God’s hands for the last 6 runs. hint hint, wink wink.
    God Hates You, Alan.
    Fuck Off
    k thx

  12. Charles Davidson Says:

    CP/Phillips please ponder the following as you get on you high alters of Non-Interventionism…WW2 is touted by the CP as the Holy Grail of good wars. Before December 7th the Roosevelt blocked Japanese shipping lanes and militarially supplied the UK at Churchills pleading. Following December 7 Roosevelt did NOT fight Japan who were responsible for the day of infamay, but instead sent troops to Europe. So on this example the CP is condemning itself.

    Unless you haven’t noticed the Democratic and Republican Parties are corrupt and eroding liberties. There was not a more credible vocal critic of the corruption than Alan Keyes, as he was a party member himself.
    Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee were nothing more than “enablers”
    Why do you pat yourselves on the back after Howard Phillips has shot the messenger?

  13. G.E. Says:

    The CP believes that “good war” B.S.?

    There have been two good wars in U.S. history. The Revolutionary and the War for Southern Independence. That’s it. WWII was not America’s quarrel.

  14. Jerry Baner Says:

    GE, I’d have to agree with you on that one.

  15. John Lowell Says:

    There could have been nothing clearer than the purposes Keyes brought with him to the CP Convention. The arrogance and presumption were both transparent and utterly stupifying. He got exactly what he deserved there. Although I have no attraction to them particularly, the CP did the self-respecting thing this weekend and deserves plaudits for it.

  16. SovereignMN Says:

    GE: “The CP believes that “good war” B.S.?”

    Not all. Definitely not all.

    John Lowell: “The arrogance and presumption were both transparent and utterly stupifying.”

    Agreed. First they tried to replace the ENTIRE platform with nothing but the DOI, Constitution, Federalist Papers and Founding Fathers quotes. When that failed they tried to remove all language about UN removal, elimination of foreign aid and returning federal land to the states from the platform. When that failed they were left with the nominating process. When that failed they were left with sour grapes and claims of “back-stabbing”. Not all the Keyes supporters left bitter and those that remained in the convention I will commend. Hopefully they stick around and continue to build the party.

  17. Trent Hill Says:

    GE: Iv never heard anyone in the CP speak in favor of the CP being a just or good war.

  18. Protestant Revolutionary Says:

    Catholic Trotskyist: a warm welcome to you from your nemesis, yours truly.
    Keyes will not be so stupid to run as Indy (he would need millions to get ballot access alone) and if he would get, he would get less than 1 percent, so it will make no difference. I encourage the Green Party, Nader-Gonzalez, Gravel under the Reform Party, the Socialist Party and the Communist party to form a left fringe alliance to separately deplete Obama from votes on the left and centre, and to propel Ron Paul/Bob Barr/Mary Ruwart to win as a fusion candidacy of the LP and CP or GOP or under the flag of the Jefferson Republican Party. It is time for a new Republican Party. Note that this name will help getting the votes from all the older people, while we/they have already a lot of younger voters locked up. This way the world poverty tax of almost 1 B US$ for the US will be avoided, that is part of the Obama way to financial destruction.

  19. Quietus Says:

    G.E.: There have been two good wars in U.S. history. The Revolutionary and the War for Southern Independence.
    A Southron apologist. Oh, goody.

  20. G.E. Says:

    Trent - I’m speaking of “The Good War”—what some libertarian and conservative apologists say of WWII. Charles Davidson says this is Phillips and roughly the CP’s view of history. Is he right?

    Quietus - I’m not an apologist for the white supremacist, pro-slavery Confederacy, but I support their constitutional right to secession against the white supremacist, pro-deportation-of-blacks, anti-free trade, pro-fiat money and income taxation, anti-Jeffersonian Northern imperialist/mercantilists.

  21. Kevin Thompson Says:

    I am just wondering why after loosing in 2000, Keyes eventually endorsed Bush but will not do so for Chuck Baldwin - a man who shares his views and conviction - who is 20x the pro-lifer that Bush is supposed to be.

  22. Joe Says:

    I am not a member of the Constitution Party and was a Keyes delegate in 2000, but I think Alan’s criticism of the party is pretty unfair. He calls the party a dictatorship, but didn’t the members vote for the nominee? Didn’t the chairman and the founder of the party disagree? Also, he says the party oppose some things that are not unconstitutional and uses foreign aid as as example. He is wrong about that, and even if it were not unconstitutional it would still be dumb policy. He also wrongly claims that the party wrongly claims that the United States can just quit the United Nations.

    He argues that having one issue in common can overcome disagreeing on another issue. Maybe so, but not so in this case. Apparently he had an opportunity to make that case and not enough members bought it. On the other hand, his being hurt at even being invited doesn’t make sense either. Overlooked I think is the fact that he did receive 125 votes, the second highest among the candidates, so it is not like inviting him was completely absurd.

    As for the “Good War,” I was a member of the Constitution Party for about six year and at the convention in ‘04 and on the platform committee, and while I am sure you could find a couple of members who think of WWII in that way, it would be a mistake to characterize the party that way. In my experience, most would probably agree with the sentiment expressed above that if there were any good wars in American history those were the American Revolutionary War and the war for Southern independence, a sentiment that I share.

  23. Ben Says:

    Trent, just for the record, when Bill Shearer was alive he often evoked WWII as a good war. He was as much the CP as Howard Phillips is. They both were equally, if not in different ways, responsible for the birth of the CP. Phillips provided the seed; Shearer the womb.

    Kevin, I think it is pretty obvious. Keyes is an opportunist. He saw value in endorsing George Bush because he expected some sort of benefits from George Bush when he became President. Baldwin will not be elected President so Keyes sees no benefit to him personally in endorsing Baldwin.

  24. Steven R Linnabary Says:

    Speaking strictly as an outsider (a Libertarian):

    Keyes can hardly be expected to condemn his past. He WAS the UN ambassador. Few people will claim that their meal ticket in the past was immoral or otherwise wrong. Just a tad presumptuous on his part.

    Keyes was also undoubtedly being presumptuous when he thought that he could win the CP nomination with his pro interventionist platform.

    Keyes did bring to the table some “star power”, which brought more media coverage than the CP has EVER had. The CP should get ready for very little MSM coverage the rest of this year, most of which will be of the mockery sort. That being that the CP is too conservative for even Keyes!

    PEACE
    Steve

  25. Stefan Says:

    There is never a “good” war, as what is good when innocent people or people having to obey the orders of authorities die? One can speak of war as a “necessary
    evil” or as a “justified war” in self-defense or for freedom when all other ways and means of attaining basic freedom have failed.

    Keyes should have mentioned that he was already offered an invitation to join the CP in 2002, by the same Howard Phillips. He could/should have discussed with Phillips the issue of joining the CP already at least a month or two ago when it was clear he was not going anywhere in the GOP primaries and did get some media exposure. He is strong on charisma and rhetoric, but a bit weak on detail IMHO. He did achieve something in the past, but seem to only strife for the highest jobs. Perhaps he should be a bit more modest and see if there is a congress seat that he has a good chance of getting, rather than wasting his and other people’s time by running third party with a new party they seem to start (Declaration Party etc.. see his site). He would be too ambitious to go for a city mayor job, it appears.

  26. Jeremy Young Says:

    Joe, you say:

    “I am not a member of the Constitution Party and was a Keyes delegate in 2000”

    Way cool! Weren’t there only like 5 of you at the RNC that year? That must have been a lot of fun.

  27. John Lowell Says:

    Kevin Thompson,

    We both know why Keyes won’t endorse Baldwin. His CP “candidacy” was from start to finish an exercise in the worst kind of cynicism. Baldwin can thank his lucky stars that some form of unity with him wasn’t fashioned from this gathering. Not having the good opinion of Keyes, a war and aggression supporting neo-con lickspittle, can be counted as definitive. Now if we could only get Baldwin out of that St. Charles costume he’s been wearing for so long and, without giving one iota on his opinions, relate to the world outside himself without the conspicuous displays of religiousity, I’d be happier about him.

  28. Kelly Parker Says:

    No war is a “good war”. Some war is more necessary than others but no war is good.

  29. Guy Fawkes Says:

    What a strange man. Again, with the nomination of Chuck Baldwin, the CP would do well to rename themselves to something more relevant to their interest. Something with Jesus in the title would be more appropriate I think.

  30. John Lowell Says:

    Guy Fawkes,

    Actually, there’s only limited merit in your suggestion, Guy. The CP is so rife with the very pharasaical displays of religiousity to which Christ raised objection that something more Jewish might better be chosen. Perhaps something with banquet or scribe in the title.

  31. Quietus Says:

    but I support their constitutional right to secession against the white supremacist, pro-deportation-of-blacks, anti-free trade, pro-fiat money and income taxation, anti-Jeffersonian Northern imperialist/mercantilists.

    Yeah, sure, claim equivalence between the North and the South and all that. But if you want to put this in an 1860’s context, consider this: who fired upon whose fort first?

  32. Kerwin Says:

    Keyes is going to run as an independent. That is almost hilarious if it was not sad and stupid. He has not won anything - ever!. Can his supporters (TOM H. and the Stones and about 10 others) see that? How totally clueless are they? (no need to answer - we can see).

    Go home and be a dad, Keyes. START SOMEWHERE. That’s a good place to start.

    Win your daughter’s support first. Then maybe dogcatcher (start somewhere you are qualified). Perhaps, “you want to supersize that?”

  33. Trent Hill Says:

    “Charles Davidson says this is Phillips and roughly the CP’s view of history. Is he right?”

    Not to my knowledge GE, although I think Paul’s and Buchanan’s recent statements on the matter really affected that alot.
    But to my knowledge, no CPer except perhaps a few of the WWII vets, feel WWII was “Good war”

  34. Mark Dankof Says:

    Keyes’s defeat in Kansas City clarifies the whole question of whether or not the Constitution Party is a paleo-conservative/America First party, or a neo-conservative entity promoting Bush’s War for Empire and the Zionist State of Israel. My blog at Al Bawaba discusses this in greater detail at http://blogs.albawaba.com/kramfoknad. The Keyes/Constitution Party scene was also discussed on my show for the Republic Broadcasting Network this am, which may be heard on the station archives at http://www.republicbroadcasting.org for “Mark Dankof’s America” on April 27th.

  35. Catholic Trotskyist Says:

    Protestant Revolutionary, I appreciate your contributions. But how will this right-wing fusion candidate stay together long enough and recruit more of the masses in order to surpass John McCain? He and the Bush/Clinton/Nader/Israeli conspiracy is what this country really needs protection from. Hopefully, this far-left fusion candidate will expel Nader after it is nominated, and endorse the Revolutionary General Barack H. Obama, who along with Jeremiah Wright will then convert to Catholicism.

    Left-wing Third parties and divided third parties like the LP are worthless until the Fringe Alliance strategy comes about. Right-wing third parties like the CP are important in bringing the left to power. Look at Perot.

  36. Karsten Says:

    This may be politically incorrect, but Keyes’s stupid abortion analogy made me fall on the floor laughing.

  37. Sean Says:

    “Agreed. First they tried to replace the ENTIRE platform with nothing but the DOI, Constitution, Federalist Papers and Founding Fathers quotes. ”

    Are you sure that was the Keyes group? That was done by Mr. Venable of Idaho, and he was quite a solid CP guy (and from a Trent Hill comment, I presume a Baldwin supporter). The focus was on clarifying the platform into founding documents, and moving the existing platform into statements of the CP.

  38. citizen1 Says:

    Venable was and is a solid Baldwin supporter. I also at first thought that move was a Keyes move but it was not.

  39. SovereignMN Says:

    I stand corrected then. Thanks for clarifying.

  40. Red Phillips Says:

    Keyes supported the change in the Preamble and the changes on foreign policy.

  41. Teno Says:

    Charles Davidson Said : “I was a Black Friday and sad day for the CP to see it’s founder Howard Phillips go “postal” during a time it was appropriate to encourage party unity …”

    Howard Phillips WAS encouraging party unity. He showed several areas where Keyes was not in line with the CP. How can they have UNITY when they disagree on several important issues? Accepting Keyes would not have been unity, it would have been DIVISION. And it’s better to be divided by truth than united by error.

    Several people said it was an inappropriate time for Phillips to undress Keyes. Well, when would have been an appropriate time? AFTER the vote?

  42. Red Phillips Says:

    Teno, IMO, the Party should have never acted as if Keyes should seek the nomination and would be an acceptable nominee in the first place. A united front from the leadership early on might have headed this disaster off at the pass. Tell Keyes and his supporters that they are welcome in the Party, but he would just not be an appropriate nominee. All the name dropping and footsie playing did, to some degree at least, mislead the Keyes supporters.

    But you are right, had Keyes been the nominee, the Party would have fractured. The unifying move was in denying Keyes the nomination.

  43. Mitch Turner Says:

    Let’s get the facts straight before we talk about the invitation to Keyes. I was on the VA delegation to the CP convention and have known Howard Phillips since 1996. His statement of what happened (this is all first hand info, heard by me from the individuals):
    —The CP Executive Committee invited Keyes to consider the CP nod.—Howard Phillips and Darrell Castle talked to Keyes for over 2 hours about his positions.—After this, Phillips told Keyes his positions were out of sync with the CP and he SHOULD NOT COME to the convention, and that he would oppose Keyes’ nomination.—P.S. Jim Clymer is Alan Keyes’s lawyer (for his campaign).

    The night before the vote, Keyes, talking to a group until late hours and answering some questions I asked him, painted a picture of not needing the CP or the headache of another campaign, having been invited by the CP, and then being surprised to have people rejecting his participation. He never even hinted that Phillips had told him not to come, and why—I found that out the next morning from Phillips.

    During that evening conversation, Keyes clearly implied that depending on the outcome he would have to decide whether to tell his supporters whether “the spirit was really [in the CP].” Immediately after the vote, Keyes campaign manager Tom Hoefling was trashing the CP to a KC reporter. So I guess they decided.

    It is most unfortunate that due to personal egos and agendas, people think someone was slighted. There will be much misinformation spread, and that will only hinder the cause for which we care. I’d encourage anyone who sees such to give the accurate story.

    Mitch Turner, CP-Va State Committee, CP National CommitteeI can be reached through the CPV website at http://constitutionpartyva.com.

  44. Sean Says:

    Thank you Mitch. I think it may be worthwhile for the CP to come up with a list of facts regarding the Keyes debacle, as I’m sure the misinfo will spread.

  45. Cody Quirk Says:

    Trent, just for the record, when Bill Shearer was alive he often evoked WWII as a good war.

    = You never read the California Statesman, have you Ben?

  46. Conspiracy Theorist Says:

    The Constitutionalist Party comes of as the party of 1950s Dixiecrats. It seems they push a constitutional view to bolster states rights which are then abused to discriminate even though a government agency cannot discriminate based on the way the constitution was written. The only change that was needed was to redefine the concept of person, which did not apply to slaves at the time but clearly does now.

    Also, they push this Judeo-Christian values thing. I guess that claim would be true if the believe in one god is Judeo-Christian but it is also Islamic and Zoroastrian. The founders believed in one god, yes, but not a Christian one. Jefferson and others envisioned a prime mover, a creator, who had little to do with everyday life. The claim that the country was founded on Judeo-Christian values is not completely accurate but has not stopped politicians from using the line for everything from American Imperialism, at the turn of the century, to the restrictive social legislation seen today.

    The Constitutionalist Party really does not represent the original intent of the document but instead perverts it like the Dixiecrats of old. Keyes fits in with his strong faith in a Christian god but I am not surprised they did not nominate a black presidential candidate. It just seems like that kind of party.

  47. Conspiracy Theorist Says:

    Whoops…never mind. Seems there is a Constitutionalist Party and a Constitution Party. I was mistakenly referring to the Constitution Party as the Constitutionalist party. The Constitutionalist Party seems like they are interested in a strict interpretation of the Constitution while the Constitution Party, the party Keyes was angling for, is the party that seemed bigoted and religiously closed-minded. Sorry to all you who are a part of the Constitutionalist party, my mistake.

Leave a Reply