Just when you think that it's utterly impossible for Keyes to find yet another corner of the Republican party to alienate, somehow, he does it.
Republican U.S. Senate candidate Alan Keyes declared Tuesday that Jesus, if he were able to vote in Illinois this year, would oppose Democrat Barack Obama because of votes Obama has cast in the state Senate against anti-abortion legislation. "Christ would not vote for Barack Obama because Barack Obama has voted to behave in a way that it is inconceivable for Christ to have behaved," Keyes said.
The comments were the latest in a series of controversial remarks made by Keyes, a conservative former talk show host and presidential candidate imported from Maryland by the state GOP after primary winner Jack Ryan dropped out of the race. Keyes made his remarks in a news conference that he called to focus attention on a Downstate campaign speech Obama gave recently in which, according to a Carbondale newspaper, he said he didn't want to just beat the Republican in November but give him "a spanking."
"The reason I do is because he exemplifies the kind of scorched earth, slash and burn negative campaign that has become the custom in Washington, and it is the reason why we can't get anything done," Obama said, according to the Southern Illinoisan of Carbondale.
Keyes said Obama's use of the term "spanking" could evoke strong images of black adults being treated like children in the eras of slavery and Jim Crow. He declined to say whether he thought that was Obama's intent, but added, "I think it's possible that Barack Obama meant many things."
Beat him, whip him, show him that you care ... wait, I'm mocking the wrong candidate.
More seriously (well ...slightly), these days, it's difficult for Obama to get press on his own merits, but then, given the type of press that Keyes is getting, Obama may not mind all that much. The GOP was, at one time, trying to paint Obama as too extremely liberal for Illinois, but since Keyes came on the scene, they've pretty much given up trying. He's alienated the national and local party leadership, the moderates are literally hiding from him (I'd have given money to have seen Judy Barr Topinka hiding behind a potted plant to avoid him), and now he's coming out with statements that are likely to make the religious conservatives think, "Um ... ok, ew." (Mind, most of the religious conservatives in Illinois were not likely to have voted for him anyway. However, now they have an excuse aside from the obvious.) At the rate he's going, the man may well set record lows for votes in a senatorial election.
Granted, as the man says, "People understand this: whatever the cost in terms of the reaction, I'm going to stand for the truth as I understand it," and after two failed presidential campaigns and two failed senatorial campaigns in Maryland, the Illinois GOP Politburo should have known what they were getting. And most assuredly, they went in knowing that they were likely backing a loser; they just wanted a loser who would pull attention to himself in a way that less assertive candidates might not.
Somehow, though, I'm pretty sure that this was not precisely the type of attention they were wanting.
Posted by iain at September 08, 2004 02:59 PM
