Thanks Bob

[sopwith21]

Originally Posted by Lighthouse View Post
And you still want to call me a liar? You've already called Bob Enyart a liar.

Actually, that was me. And I didn't call him a liar; I observed that he spoke a lie in reference to his specific accusations against Ron Paul and libertarians.

Whether or not Bob Enyart is a consistent, pathological liar I do not know. I suppose one could accurately call Enyart a "liar" in the sense of "how many banks do you have to rob before you're a bank robber?" But that really wasn't the point. I still hold out hope that overall, Enyart has some integrity and honesty. The person is far less important than the fact that the lie has been spread and it needs to be corrected, apologies need to be issued, and restitution needs to be made for the damage he has done.

 

[PKevman]

If you go to China you're still on the same planet.

And if you go to Mars you're in the same Solar System. What a lame argument buddy. :chuckle:

 

[PKevman]

And for the record, the South made their fair share of mistakes.

Just as the North did!

And I wouldn't dispute that. Neither would President Lincoln, God rest his soul.

 

[PKevman]

After both of you have posted the 2 bills Alan Keys has tried to pass to stop abortion and posted the exact bill he said he would enforce once he gets into office I will extend the courtesy of doing the research both of you should have already done.

Well you might want to get your facts lined up first. Your facts and your father's facts are at odds with one another. He says 17 states and you say 12 states. Did you make a mistake, did he, or was your research different?

Keyes is anti-abortion. Everyone knows it. Everyone knows that he has always brought his faith into his politics. That is no secret at all.

Whether he tried to pass a bill isn't relevant in the sense that he has not served in positions in which he was able to propose those types of bills. So it's not a relevant argument. However if your goal is to educate yourself, then I would encourage you to examine Keyes on the issues HERE.

I'll say that I don't even agree with Keyes on everything, but he's the best candidate I've found so far.

Also, are you pro-life? Do you want abortion to be illegal? If so, please post for us the bills that you have tried to pass to stop abortion. Otherwise, you could drop that argument also because it breaks down pretty easily.

 

[PKevman]

I think Alan Keyes on Civil Rights is pretty good as well:

We cannot cure a past injustice with another injustice. (Oct 2007)
Preferential affirmative action patronizes blacks & women. (Oct 2007)
Wrong to treat sexual behavior like race. (Oct 2007)
Marriage exists for the sake of procreation. (Oct 2007)
Massachusetts gay marriage required judges legislating. (Oct 2007)
`Separation of church & state` misinterprets Constitution. (Oct 2007)
Address Black community with solid Republican principles. (Sep 2007)
Defend the natural family against the gay lobby. (Sep 2007)
We need a constitutional amendment to stop gay marriage. (Sep 2007)
Marriage can't be understood apart from procreation. (Oct 2004)
Gay sex is selfish hedonism. (Sep 2004)
Preferential affirmative action is patronizing. (Aug 2004)
Gay marriage destroys fundamental moral institutions. (Jul 2004)
The path to your freedom is standing firm for God's will. (Feb 2004)
We live under the tyranny of the federal judges. (Feb 2004)
Protect religion from the state, but not vice versa. (Feb 2004)
Right to acknowledge God is the foundation of all our rights. (Feb 2004)
Public display of the Ten Commandments is a state's right. (Oct 2003)
The belief that you can't legislate morality is nonsensical. (Oct 2003)
Affirmative action turns back the clock. (Aug 1995)
HIV workshop violates parents who think gay is immoral. (Jul 2000)
Leaders must face racial bigotry, not ignore it. (Feb 2000)
Our rights come from God, not from the Constitution. (Jan 2000)
Ten Commandments & prayer should be in schools. (Jan 2000)
Conducting gov’t in Spanish assaults our linguistic unity. (Jan 2000)
Signed pledge to reinstitute ban on gays in military. (Jan 2000)
No separation of church & state; fight uniform irreligion. (Jan 2000)
Oppose gay agenda in military & marriage laws. (Jan 2000)
Warns that Supreme Court has advanced gay marriage agenda. (May 1999)
Preferential affirmative action is patronizing. (Jan 1999)
“Hate crime” laws will be used to punish anti-gay opinions. (Oct 1998)
Gay rights aren’t like racial rights, because it’s behavior. (May 1996)
Black heritage comes from survival in America, not Africa. (May 1996)

I would be curious as to where Keyes has said reparations need to be made to blacks Americans for the crimes of the past. I'm not totally opposed to it, in fact, but I'd like to see it and examine the position. So far I haven't seen that, but I could be missing it, as my time for this stuff isn't what it used to be.

 

[S†ephen]

Well you might want to get your facts lined up first. Your facts and your father's facts are at odds with one another. He says 17 states and you say 12 states. Did you make a mistake, did he, or was your research different?

I believe I made a mistake as my research was a bit different.

Keyes is anti-abortion. Everyone knows it.

So is Ron Paul.

Whether he tried to pass a bill isn't relevant in the sense that he has not served in positions in which he was able to propose those types of bills. So it's not a relevant argument. However if your goal is to educate yourself, then I would encourage you to examine Keyes on the issues HERE.

I've already read it. I believe I was actually the one who found it before you.

I'll say that I don't even agree with Keyes on everything, but he's the best candidate I've found so far. Also, are you pro-life? Do you want abortion to be illegal? If so, please post for us the bills that you have tried to pass to stop abortion. Otherwise, you could drop that argument also because it breaks down pretty easily.

Fair enough. Let's change the question then.

What has Keys done to stop abortion? Please don't give me his words. If the man is truly against abortion and is serious about becoming president what has he done?

Also, as I'm sure you've studied. Alan Keys makes exceptions for abortion when the mother's life is in danger. So I believe this argument (against Ron Paul) falls apart pretty easily.


"I MAKE an exception only for the physical life of the mother. Given the unalienable right to life (i.e., self-preservation) I see no way in principle to avoid making this exception. I would ACCEPT the rape and incest exceptions only as a matter of political necessity if that is the best legislation we could achieve at the time. I see no grounds in principle for making these exceptions, but as a matter of political prudence it would be suicidal for the pro-life movement to reject these people."

Source: Letter to David Quackenbush Jun 30, 1995

 

[drbrumley]

"I MAKE an exception only for the physical life of the mother. Given the unalienable right to life (i.e., self-preservation) I see no way in principle to avoid making this exception. I would ACCEPT the rape and incest exceptions only as a matter of political necessity if that is the best legislation we could achieve at the time. I see no grounds in principle for making these exceptions, but as a matter of political prudence it would be suicidal for the pro-life movement to reject these people."

Source: Letter to David Quackenbush Jun 30, 1995

Is that Alan Keyes saying this?

 

[S†ephen]

Is that Alan Keyes saying this?

yes.

 

[PKevman]

You should extend the courtesy of answering him his question Pastor Kevin. Everyone here is bending over backwards to defend their position and you and lighthouse have barely posted a thing in defense of Keys except or how great you two believe he is. Please stop poking holes in our arguments and show some solid proof in yours.

:ha: In other words you are saying, "don't ask us to show proof, and don't question our arguments". If you're arguments were foolproof, why is it so easy to poke holes in them? :think:

You're on a site that was created to debate issues. Instead you're dogmatically holding to your own positions, and steadfastly refusing to consider the other side of the coin. All the while your dad is busy accusing anyone who disagrees with him of refusing to consider the other side of the coin or "lying".

But I think that you guys are completely unwilling to consider that the whole anti-government, conspiracy theory, (they're spying on everything we do and say, spying on our emails, listening to our phone conversations, etc... all things I've heard from your dad constantly), that you are unwilling to consider that THOSE VIEWS are what is wrong and have robbed you of your objectivity as it relates to the topic of government and politics.

I am completely open and willing to consider objective evidence that is presented. I have stated it repeatedly. Instead of continually telling me I will reject it and making that decision for me, why not present it and let the chips fall where they may!

 

[drbrumley]

yes.

Oooops PK! There went your candidate.

 

[PKevman]

Post the proof that Alan won't keep it legal. Aside from his worthless words.

And I've already stipulated that there is no proof. I simply said Keyes is the best candidate I've seen so far. You won't admit that there is no proof that Paul will do anything he claims he will do.

There is no proof that any politician will do something in the future because the future does not exist, and is not knowable.

 

[PKevman]

Is that Alan Keyes saying this?

And I find that statement completely lamentable, and would in fact give me serious pause in voting for him.

It doesn't change my position on Ron Paul in the least.

I hope that Keyes has changed that position in recent years, and will definitely be researching it more.

 

[PKevman]

Keyes loves the sound of his own voice, that much is for sure.

I notice no one here who supports his "candidacy" has taken him to task for supporting reparations. Typical.

I'm not completely opposed to reparations, but I would find Alan's positions on abortion for rape and incest victims and the life of the mother issue to be a more solid reason for me not to vote for him.

 

[drbrumley]

You have yet to address any of my questions and Ron Paul's Being Pro-Life Is Necessary to Defend Liberty

 

[drbrumley]

I'm not completely opposed to reparations

Say what?

 

[PKevman]

Before calling people who disagree with you "fools," I would recommend some serious historical work. You can start researching my cousin HERE. If there were any way to defend my own bloodline, I would do it... but there is not. Truth is more important than my previously held beliefs. Abraham Lincoln was a wicked man and the South was, indeed, in the right. Of course, you won't believe this, either, but all I can do is present the truth. Its up to you to accept it.

You should follow the same advice when calling people who disagree with you liars.

Why should the views of this book be accepted over the myriads of books and direct quotes from Lincoln that show a different picture than this book shows?

Another guy tried to claim that Lincoln was a homosexual. Do you buy that too?

 

[S†ephen]

:ha: In other words you are saying, "don't ask us to show proof, and don't question our arguments". If you're arguments were foolproof, why is it so easy to poke holes in them? :think:

No Mr. Kevin that is not what I am saying. I am saying that any argument can have holes poked in it by its doubters and I would appreciate your answering of the questions asked instead simply poking holes in ours. I can attack and poke holes in your argument any day of the week. I would like to see my questions answered on top the merciless hammering I get from you and lighthouse without a single answer.

Please don't twist me around like that when you know very well the respect I have for you. I completely value what you say and dismissing or twisting my posts is to me (personally) terribly insulting.

But I think that you guys are completely unwilling to consider that the whole anti-government, conspiracy theory, (they're spying on everything we do and say, spying on our emails, listening to our phone conversations, etc... all things I've heard from your dad constantly), that you are unwilling to consider that THOSE VIEWS are what is wrong and have robbed you of your objectivity as it relates to the topic of government and politics.

Mr. Kevin I think that I speak for my dad as well when I say I would love to believe that viewpoint. It is a much easier nicer viewpoint to believe. But I cannot ignore the blatant facts that support the opposite of what you post.

But my father and many other men I know have been in the same position as you are right now. They were saying the same things. And they are the ones who have changed their views.

 

[PKevman]

Say what?

If you study your history you will find that the utter poverty in the black community that has existed for generations go back to the way our government treated black people after slavery was outlawed.

I didn't say I was a supporter of reparations either. I just said I wasn't entirely opposed to it. I happen to have a lot of close friends who are black and a mentor who is black. Many in the black community are not even for reparations, so it's not like its something that is going to happen.

I would like to see the logic behind it, the data, and what people would be paid reparations and how much. Then I could make a more informed decision. Isn't that the responsible answer?

 

[S†ephen]

There is no proof that any politician will do something in the future because the future does not exist, and is not knowable.

Then why do you continually attack Ron Paul for this?

 

[drbrumley]

You should follow the same advice when calling people who disagree with you liars.

Why should the views of this book be accepted over the myriads of books and direct quotes from Lincoln that show a different picture than this book shows?

Another guy tried to claim that Lincoln was a homosexual. Do you buy that too?

You want to know about your bigot, here ya go. More to come. I like you, but your revisionist history has got to go.

In his first inaugural address Lincoln supported a constitutional amendment (the Corwin Amendment) that would have prohibited the federal government from ever interfering with Southern slavery. He even orchestrated the maneuvering of the amendment through the Senate with the assistance of William Seward.

He voted against black suffrage in Illinois; opposed allowing blacks to testify in court in that state; voted against abolishing the slave trade in Washington, D.C. during his one term in Congress; supported the Illinois Black Codes that deprived the few free blacks in that state any semblance of citizenship; supported the Illinois Constitution which prohibited the immigration of black people into the state; was a "manager" of the Illinois Colonization Society, which sought to use state tax revenues to deport blacks out of the state; and his occasional talk of compensated emancipation was always tied to immediate deportation. His rhetoric spoke of "human dignity," but his actions proved that he was lying.