Alan Keyes, the conservatives’ black attack dog, has been dispatched to Illinois to sully the image of Barack Obama, the state’s Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate. Illinois Republicans failed to find an indigenous candidate capable of sinking Obama’s rising star so they drafted Keyes, a 54-year-old Maryland resident and well-known talk-show host who has unsuccessfully run for president and… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (35)Page 1 of 1 pagesI would like to commend Salim Muwakkil for clearly illustrating that Mr. Keyes has a long record of being a puppet of the U.S. ruling class. When he defended the apartheid regime and UNITA, he certainly opposed the liberation and elevation of African people. However, to his credit, Mr. Keyes has endorsed Reparations for African-Americans, in the form of tax exemptions for slave descendants, while Mr. Obama has spoken out against Reparations. In reality both of these men are victims of ethnocide and forced assimilation and both to date are pawns of the Caucasian power structure which has always violated the human rights of Afro-Descendants.
Both Senator Kerry and President Bush fiercely oppose Reparations for Afro-Descendants while fiercely supporting both Reparations and massive military aid for Israel. The careers of both Keyes and Obama illustrate the wisdom of the Scruptures: No man can serve God and the devil at the same time. Or, if you prefer, no Black politician can really serve the masses of his people and the increasingly corrupt American ruling class at the same time.
Sincerely,
Malik Al-Arkam
www.AllForReparations.org
Posted by Malik Al-Arkam on Sep 8, 2004 at 4:57 AM Malik, that’s enough. Your push for reparations is futile and posting the same pathetic plea after every Muwakkil article is not going to get you anywhere. Give it a rest for Christ’s sake.
Posted by Ted on Sep 8, 2004 at 7:51 AM Interesting piece. Keyes is going to lose big time. I heard his anti-abortion rant at the RNC
and he struck me as non compos mentos. I’ve never
heard him say anything that wasn’t already first
uttered by the white Right or that was particularly interesting, same old boilerplate
rant a la Savage or Limbaugh. Interesting that
the GOP would play this race card so brazenly.
Obama gave a decent speech at the DNC but he is
really more of a DLC centrist than progessive.
I’d vote for him given the incredible alternative
but hopefully he will be better than Carol Mosely
Braun in her one term or that bozo Paul Simon.
Where do the Illinois Dems get these candidates ?
I know, I know, they are almost always better than the GOP candidates (except Chuck Percy)but that can’t be the standard. Obama has really lucked out this year, let’s hope he uses his
new opportunity wisely.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Sep 8, 2004 at 11:38 AM Alan Keyes is an extremely dangerous liar and rabid sociopath badly in need of a Hot Carl from the citizens of Illinois. Whichever group of alarmingly deranged Republican pederasts decided to loose this bug-eyed satanic freak in our state must be exposed and given Black-Eyed Dirty Sanchezes with extreme prejudice. The time has come for the defenestration of these vomitous faith-based idiots, starting with Keyes, to send them crawling broken and humiliated the hell back to whatever horrific sphincter they emerged from.
Posted by world b on Sep 8, 2004 at 11:52 AM World B,
I totally agree with your sentiments if not the
manner of expressing them. As an atheist I’m
getting sick of the fanaticism of these degenerates. I don’t spend my time down at
the BART station trying to convert them to
atheism. I think Keyes is actually clinical.
He looks and sounds like a madman.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Sep 8, 2004 at 2:13 PM Bring on the Lincoln-Douglas, er, Keyes-Obama debates.
This thread has set some kind of record for the most ad hominem attacks in the least number of column inches. Keyes must be on the right track to have brought out so quickly this much hardcore leftist invective.
Posted by Brooks on Sep 8, 2004 at 2:34 PM Michael H,
Well the ludicrous thing is that this “race” was lost before it ever began--even if Jack Ryan’s penchant for pansexual troilism hadn’t been made public, Obama would have buried him. After the implosion of Ryan’s campaign there were plenty native Illinoisian extremists slavering to take his spot as the loser (q.v. the abominably repugnant Jim Oberweis) so they could at least promote their own arch-piety for future evils. But just to be as sceptic as possible, the Republicans imported this gibbering lunatic to run amok and befoul the discourse in the state like a grass-fed, purple-assed babboon. Keyes is so unstable, though, he actually lashed out at Cheney’s daughter for her tribadism--he is absolutely disturbed--and the thought has just occurred to me that I should fax Keyes HQ and inform them that Bush paid for at least one abortion we know of back in his pantsless days.
Posted by world b on Sep 8, 2004 at 3:00 PM To Malik Al-Arkam,
Obama never spoke out against reparations. He believes, as I do, that the best reparations would be to invest in the inner city neighboorhoods through education, work programs, and other social investments.
Posted by Brian on Sep 8, 2004 at 5:22 PM Thanks, World B, for the update.
Fiction couldn’t top this !
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Sep 9, 2004 at 8:39 AM I’m with ya, Ted. The reparations bullshit is demeaning to this country, and ESPECIALLY to African-Americans. What - do African-Americans have such little self-esteem/confidence that they need a handout from the government? Are they not smart/capable enough to do for themselves?
Look at how well it has worked for Native Americans. Plus, where’s the anger at Africa itself? Contrary to popular belief, this country didn’t invent slavery, and it couldn’t have happened without the full support of Africa.
Enough already!
Posted by g-love on Sep 9, 2004 at 9:58 AM Thanks Salim, for the background info on where this Keyes character comes from. Just as I thought, he is not credible and his candidacy is an insult to Illinois’ electorate. However, intentional or not, it appears the Illinois Republican party has sucessfully served up the whole state on a silver platter to King Richard II. Daley owns the City, County, State and now all the Federal elected officials from Illinois. Obama could not be in the position he’s in if Daley didn’t want him there and Obama knows it. Also, what’s up with all this Reparations hating? If Conyers bill to study the effects of slavery on current day Black Americans were to pass there is certainly no guarantee that it would lead reparations or even a tax break. What is it about this study that scares white folks so much? It’s not the threat of reparations for Black Americans, it aint going to happen. Could it be that such a study would reveal something about white folks that they want to keep in the closet?
Posted by theloneous on Sep 10, 2004 at 8:18 AM What are you talking about ? Everyone knows the
history of slavery and the white, black and Arab
involvements in it.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Sep 10, 2004 at 9:06 AM I’m talking about HR 40, the Bill sponsored by Michigan Representative John Conyers, that would commission a study on the effects slavery, Jim Crow, and institutional racism has and/or has not had on current day Black Americans. The US House has refused to even consider bringing the Bill out of committee because the “R” word has been attached to it and politicians know white folks won’t vote for anyone proposing they give up any of the profits they extracted at the expense of the rest of the world. The study might lead to a better understanding of why Black folks in this country seem to lead in every negative statistical category and barely show up in the non-negative categories. Ever wonder why Black immigrants from Africa and the Carribean don’t seem to have the same hang ups as native born Blacks? Could it be that the system and practice of slavery here was peculiar to that practiced elsewhere? Think a study commissioned by the people that supported and benefitted from slavery and racism might shed some light on the issue? Maybe, maybe not, we’ll never know if we don’t make the effort. Or maybe it might put white folks in a bad light if the record showed what a sick pracice it was/is. The Bill has very little to do with the history of the slave trade and all to do with the effects US Government sanctioned slavery and institutional racism on American soil over several centuries has or hasn’t had on the decendants of those subjected to this barbaric system.
Posted by theloneous on Sep 10, 2004 at 1:28 PM The US Congress outlawed the slave trade in 1803,
since the US only became a nation after 1776, you
are talking about a narrow window here, not hundreds of years as far as the US Government is
concerned. Then most of the US, North, East and
West did not have governmentally sanctioned legal
segregation, only the South.
I don’t think the great majority of white people
profited from slavery or legal segregation.
Nor do I think most US workers are living off the
backs of workers abroad. Most are not getting any
multinational company profits and in fact most
foreign workers do prefer to work for the multinationals over their lower paying domestic
companies. I don’t think you can make a case that
the multinationals are responsible for the lower
pay scales of the indigenous companies.
How are third world countries going to develop
without foreign business investment ?
There is no great record of socialist command
economies working. Cuba has made some progress
but the collapse of the Soviet bloc wiped out
much of that.
Is it the opinion of the advocates of study of
reparations that black poverty here is the fault
of slavery ? Or legal segregation ? Both have been
abolished for some time.
Most white folks I know do not defend slavery or
state enforced segregation. I don’t know who
has to be shown the evils of slavery since almost
no one defends it.
So is this a guilt trip thing ?
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Sep 10, 2004 at 2:26 PM Theloneous, the only effect that slavery has had on current day black Americans is that they’re living in a much safer, more civilized, and more prosperous country and have a much higher standard of living than they would had their ancestors been left in Africa. To put it bluntly, they’re no longer living in grass huts and have slavery to thank for it. It doesn’t take a genius to see that blacks in America have it a hell of a let better than ones in Africa who don’t have to contend with a white majority. Maybe HR 40 should also study the effects of slavery on the entire American population and see if it has cost black Americans half as much as black crime and government handouts to blacks have cost the rest of the country.
Posted by Harry on Sep 10, 2004 at 2:35 PM Harry,
Thanks. There shouldn’t have been slavery, the
blacks shouldn’t have sold their fellow blacks
into slavery and the whites & Arabs shouldn’t
have purchased them, we’d all be better off.
But your right that the reparations thing is a double-edged sword. Blacks could end up getting
bills instead of checks.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Sep 10, 2004 at 4:06 PM I think Thomas Jefferson hit the nail on the head when he likened slavery to holding a wolf by the ears: “...we can neither hold him, nor safely let him go.” Slavery was a despicable institution but this country has been paying its reparations since Lincoln rightfully let go of that wolf’s ears. The costs of welfare and black crime are a prime example. If that’s not good enough then maybe the government should offer to provide any unsatisfied blacks (whose ancestors were slaves) with lodging and a livelihood in whatever part of Africa their ancestors were taken out of. How does that sound to you, Malik Al-Arkam?
Posted by Eddie on Sep 10, 2004 at 4:43 PM Eddie,
I like your kind of reparations ! I’d be willing
to pay taxes for THAT !
Thanks.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Sep 10, 2004 at 5:22 PM It is clear that your hate is founded in your arrogant elitism and your rank racism ................I love you liberals....or is it communists?....you believe in free expression as long as it only belongs to you.......you have the mind that is so easily drugged by communists........too bad ...you seem to have a bright mind that has been hijacked by your hate...........
Posted by r douglas on Sep 11, 2004 at 6:42 PM Communism is part of the great mosaic of this nation. It’s not an insult to call someone a communist.
www.geocities.com/queersagainstterror
Posted by Peter Miller on Sep 11, 2004 at 7:22 PM Michael:
Wasn’t expecting any response, didn’t think anyone was paying attention. The responses seem to go everywhere but none bothers to touch on why white folks are afraid of the HR40 study being done. What’s buried deep in that closet you people are in denial about?
Posted by theloneous on Sep 14, 2004 at 7:11 AM I’m all for the study but think it should be expanded to some other related areas that some
of the posters have mentioned.
Don’t really know how to respond to your rhetorical When will you stop beating your wife ?
question.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Sep 14, 2004 at 1:44 PM Theloneous you are really on to something. Turns out that the white guys are all terrified that colored people are all actually inferior to them. Thus white mans burden will be unending. . .
You have to feel really sorry for the poor colored’s in the US. If only they had been left in peace in Africa, then Africa would be a utopia by now - and the US would be impoverished (unless they could have enslaved the Indians to do all the work for them!).
Too funny!
Posted by WhiteGuy on Sep 14, 2004 at 2:15 PM The idea that a great advanced industrial society
like the USA was built on slave labor is ludicrous. The South would have won the war if slavery was a productive system. The South was
fundamentally anti-capitalist to the core.
Why is there no record of any advanced or even
civilized black society in Africa or any other part of the world ? It can’t all be Whitey’s
fault.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Sep 14, 2004 at 3:14 PM Check out a book called “ Exterminate The Brutes “..I forget the name of the author. It would help shed some light on reparations issue. We’ve been trying to wipe Black people off the Earth for quite awhile. I say do the study!
Posted by Lando on Sep 14, 2004 at 7:29 PM Then how come the black population GREATLY increases whenever they are living with whites,
whether the USA, former Rhodesia, etc. ????
We have been doing a lousy job if that’s our intent.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Sep 15, 2004 at 10:55 AM Not true, Neil. They never stood a chance but we
should have let them secede, good riddance.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Sep 17, 2004 at 9:42 AM The Confederacy had better generals and was winning every major battle for nearly three years. The North was losing badly even for a short time after Grant was placed in charge.
If Lee had listened to Longstreet’s advice at Gettysburg, the South would have prevailed and Washington would have fallen. Longstreet knew if Lee continued on the course he was taking, the Confederacy was doomed and it would a matter of retreat and defense from that point on.
The Union was lucky at Gettysburg--it was their Midway, if you will. From that point on, the rebels went on the defense, against the advice of Longstreet(who knew this would happen) and Jackson, who both wanted to continue the push to DC. Golng on the offensive had worked so well before.
Jefferson Davis was counting on French assistance and may very well have received it if Washington had fallen.
And the South still had their fragile rail line for supplies and as long as it remained opened, their battle-seasoned troops could continue their winning ways.Therefore I have to disagree about the South’s chances. Their leadership was superior, their battles were won in cake-walks for the first two to three years while the North suffered through McClellan, Burnsides and Meade. And like the Japanese commanders at Midway, early Union generals expected their enemy to react a certain way and would not change their plans, despite heavy losses and objections from their officers.
If Lee had been president of the Confederacy and Longstreet commander, it may have been taken only two years for the South to capture Washington and win.
Posted by Neil on Sep 18, 2004 at 4:11 PM Ok, thanks for the info.I probably should read up
on it.
One thing though, there is no way the South could
have conquered the North. DC is 40 miles below
the Mason-Dixon line, so a victory for the South
would have kept the then status-quo of secession.
But when the tide turned the North actually did conquer the South all the way down.
And I believe my original point about the economic superiority of industrial capitalism
over slavery still stands. Although if there
are any good arguments to the contrary I’m open
to hearing them.
Again, thanks for taking the time to lay out
this fascinating history.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Sep 20, 2004 at 11:01 AM Yes, it’s an amazing war to study. It seems as though there’s more resource material for this war than all the rest--but that’s probably not true.
I think there still might even be one civil war widow left alive or that could have been the last one that just died this year.Lee’s overall goal was to capture the capital and then negotiate peace. Northerners were expecting a DC invasion, even evacuating. The public opinion in the North of how Lincoln was handling things was pretty bad and for just reasons. Northern newspapers were crucifying him, portraying him no better than the Confederate press at times.
So after such a close call, part of the emotion of Lincoln’s address was relief.
In one of his biographies he said he feared a Southern victory. He didn’t exactly know where the war would go from there if Washington fell, leading readers to believe there probably would have been a treaty.The help Davis was counting on from France more than likely would have made up for the Northern industrial advantage, I think. French leaders had sent advisors and they reported to France the rebels were on the verge of winning the war.
But the shock of defeat at Gettysburg destroyed that confidence almost overnight.It’s interesting to think if a negotiation had taken place and two nations peacefully co-existed, where would the Confederate States be when the oil boom began?
I imagine three separate nations, possibly a fourth, occupying the lower 48.You’re welcome for the comments. I enjoy talking about war history, though I oppose almost every form of it. I know I digressed from the subject of the article. Sorry about that.
Posted by Neil on Sep 20, 2004 at 9:10 PM Whoops! I don’t oppose almost every form of war history--I oppose war.
That was funny.
Posted by Neil on Sep 21, 2004 at 8:49 AM Again, thanks, Neil. Been sick all week,
fractured some ribs early Monday AM.
Apologize for delay in responding.
Best wishes.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Sep 24, 2004 at 11:06 PM Thanks,
Outh! Sorry to hear that. That’s pretty painful--a knee or leg injury doesn’t hurt with every breath but ribs do.
Don’t think about the scene in Raging Bull where Joe Pesci gets in a fight and repeatedly slams a car door on the guy when he’s trying to get away.Still doing any work for renter’s coalition? They need you now more than ever.
Posted by Neil on Sep 25, 2004 at 11:31 PM Dear Neil,
Haven’t been involved with tenant work since
1999. Still stayed active after Nina and I became
homeowners in late 1997. At that point I had to
resign from the Oakland Rent Board, tried to get
(then) Mayor Harris to reappoint me as a neutral
but the landlord lobby blocked that. The Oakland
Tribune and KPFA did stories on it at the time.
We still stayed active in the Oakland Tenants
Union till summer 1999 but it got to be an unappreciated labor of love. They thought I
was too far Left and they were trying to make
little deals with reactionary Oakland politicos,
including Jerry Brown, who is much worse than
Harris, and Harris was not great.
Anything I can do to help tenants rights I’m
happy to do. My views on the evils of landlordism
have not changed.Best,
MikePS I like Joe Pesci, he always plays a mean villain !
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Sep 27, 2004 at 12:52 PM Page 1 of 1 pages -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by Salim Muwakkil
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1968 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
459 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
426 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2004 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
