Here are a couple of excerpts from yesterday's Jack Kelly column in the Pittsburgh Psychosis-Gazette, regarding the most recent Republican presidential candidates debate:
-- Even libertarian fruitcake Ron Paul seemed to be on his meds. -- The "debate" also was marred by the puzzling presence of Alan Keyes, who demonstrated yet again that he belongs in a straitjacket, not public office.Alan Keyes was the candidate for whom I enthusiastically voted back in 1996, and for whom I would have voted again in 2000 if his name had been on the ballot in Pennsylvania. He was a steadfast constitutionalist far and above his opponents in those two races. Ron Paul is the politician who made me aware of libertarianism and constitutionalism back in the late 1980s, and is the candidate for whom I would vote if the election were held today.
Jack Kelly is the PG's token "conservative" editorial columnist. I prefer to think of him as the voice of the nominally conservative establishment, much in the same way as the rest of the PG writers represent the liberal establishment. In short, he is a tool.
By dismissing Paul as a 'fruitcake" and implying that Keyes is clinically insane, Jack Kelly loses any credibility he once had in my eyes. Ron Paul and Alan Keyes are closer to the conservative ideal than any of the other candidates in this race. Both men have their flaws, and they do sound crazy to establishment observers.
That is fine. In a room full of lunatics, the sane man always seems like the crazy one.