Time: Sat Jul 26 08:00:00 1997 by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id HAA15909; Sat, 26 Jul 1997 07:25:58 -0700 (MST) by usr06.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id HAA11939; Sat, 26 Jul 1997 07:24:16 -0700 (MST) Date: Sat, 26 Jul 1997 07:23:43 -0700 To: (Recipient list suppressed) From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar] Subject: SLS: Alan Keyes, on Guarding the Taxpayers' Interest <snip> > >KEYES 2000!!!!!!!! > >Please distribute this transcript! > >The Alan Keyes Show >July 21, 1997 >Hour 1: Segment 4 >Subject: Republican Abandoning the Taxpayers > >Surprise, surprise! Guess who isn't the least bit >swayed by any of the information that's coming out >in these hearings, about what the Chinese were up >to, and so forth and so on. Betcha can't guess. >Give you three guesses. Who isn't the least bit >influenced by it? > >Well, it's the Clinton Administration, of course! >Taking the position that it all amounts to >nothing, should have no effect on our policy >toward China. I have a feeling they're going to >take this approach no matter what is brought out >by these hearings. Because their commitment -- >along, sadly, with the commitment of some folks >who even sit on the Republican side -- is to >ignore whatever the Chinese may say or do -- the >Chinese communist government, that is -- ignore >whatever that Chinese communist government says or >does, because if you take any steps to react to >their human rights abuses or anything else, you'll >be interfering with our ability to pursue the huge >profits that some people see in our trade with >China. Now, these huge profits may not be >materializing for Americans at large. In fact, >they may be finding that competition with slave >labor in China is hurting their economic >prospects, as it helps to kill jobs in the United >States and so forth. > >But who is paying any attention to the interests >of the working, taxpaying people of this country? >This is one of the things that has been much on my >mind, in the course of the last several weeks, as >a long term question and challenge for our >politics. As I look at the way things are shaping >up, you can kind of see who represents the >interests of the big government bureaucrats, and >all of the whole network of consultants and >producers, who depend on government largesse. >Clearly, that party of government is quite >squarely represented by the Democrats, and by, >particularly, of course, the liberal Democrats, >who are the tail that wag the dog of the >Democratic Party. > >And it used to be the case that when I surveyed >the American scene I could say to myself: "And >who represents the hardworking, taxpaying people >of the United States?" And that was, of course, >the Republicans. They were the ones who were >supposed to do that. But now admittedly, the >media and all these people, they portrayed the >Republicans as only interested in the corporate >interest, and so forth and so on. But until >recently, I would have said that that was not the >case. More and more, though, as one judges by the >way that Republican leaders are behaving IN power, >as opposed to OUT of it -- now that they have >control of the Congress, as opposed to what they >did and said as they were pursuing that control -- >in power, they have in fact been acting in a way >that fulfills the caricature of Republicanism that >has been put out there, over the years, by the >media. It's almost as if the leadership revels >in being a caricature of itself, in serving the >big-money corporate interest as opposed to the >populist interest of the hardworking, taxpaying >population of the country. > >With that abandonment, on the part of the >Republican leadership, of the taxpaying people, >you are left with a question: "Who is going to >speak for them? Who is going to speak for you?" >In terms, particularly, of the national counsels >of this country, I think that is a serious void >that is being left now, by a Republican leadership >that does not understand the secret of its own >political success. And that's not a void, I >think, that is going to go unfilled forever. > >Obviously, some folks already have the idea, >because that is presumably where the title of one >of the parties that's offering itself as an >alternative out there comes from: The Taxpayers >Party. Because they are interested in standing up >and speaking for the working people of this >country, who pay the bulk of the taxes that >support the federal establishment. And they are >interested in somehow trying to serve the interest >of those working people, both in maintaining a >strong and expansive, healthy economy, that can >provide jobs for ordinary working folks in the >country, and in terms of cutting back the size and >power and tax bite of the government, so that >folks who are out working hard will be able to >keep control of more of their own resources. >That, to me, is the absolutely quintessential and >fundamental agenda of the future. Combine that >with what needs to be the top priority given to >restoring the country's moral health and the >strength of its basic moral institutions like the >family, and you have the agenda that serves the >best interest of America in the years ahead; it's >not very hard to come up with. And yet it seems >very hard, for the people who in the past >professed to be committed to that agenda, to stick >with it. > >And I know I came in for criticism last week, >because I refused to shut up about this. I am >talking about it continually, and I will talk >about it continually, because I think it's the >major political crisis that we are faced with >right now as a people. It goes hand in hand with >the larger moral crisis that this country >confronts in terms of its basic institutions. And >the true, decent, self-government oriented heart >of the American people -- that heart is not being >spoken for in the national councils right now, >because of the abandonment by the Republican >leadership of what ought to be their true >positions. And one needs to pound away at that, >every single moment of every single day, till they >come back to their senses. And I think that's one >of the roles that we have to play here in talk >radio, in terms of speaking about the things that >a lot of folks would rather we shut up about. > > > > > ======================================================================== Paul Andrew Mitchell : Counselor at Law, federal witness B.A., Political Science, UCLA; M.S., Public Administration, U.C. Irvine tel: (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night email: [address in tool bar] : using Eudora Pro 3.0.3 on 586 CPU website: http://www.supremelaw.com : visit the Supreme Law Library now ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech, at its best Tucson, Arizona state : state zone, not the federal zone Postal Zone 85719/tdc : USPS delays first class w/o this As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice. We shall not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal. ======================================================================== [This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.]
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail