The Alan Keyes Lesbian Daughter Scandal
September 30, 2004

Over the past couple of days, Democrat vampires have been giving themselves hernias over the recent suspicions that Alan Keyes' 19-year-old daughter, Maya Keyes is a lesbian. Nate Livingston of "Black Cincinnati Blog" seems to think that conservatives, especially black, Christian ones are hiding out on this issue,

For all their holier-than-thou lecturing to us common folks, our friendly neighborhood Christian conservatives seem mighty silent on the Maya Keyes situation. It's not just the white Christian bloggers who remain silent, everyday I read a number of blogs run by people who call themselves Black Christian conservatives but I have yet to read where one of them has called for Alan Keyes' to publicly comment on the scandal, encourage his daughter to fess up and sin no more, and take personal responsibility for his prior statements.
I assume the "prior statements" to which Livingston is referring would be those where Keyes called homosexuality an "abomination". Since the gauntlet is thrown, don't think I won't have something to say.

First of all, will the entirety of all the blogosphere please get a grip. For goodness' sake, Rathergate has sent the entire Left of the blogosphere running, trying to crack the next big story. The walls are not going to come crashing down on this one folks and I'll tell you why after I confirm the facts. Because I desire to be a "good journalist" (she says half-heartedly), it's worth nothing that everything up until this point is alleged.

Thus far, the abundance of speculation and reporting with regards to this story has taken place on the internet. The last few weeks of CBS scandal have confirmed that if ever there were a place for a story to be cracked, it'd be the internet.

The Democrat-worshipping Daily Kos, (which is by the way, now a "certified" Google news source, God help us all) reported today that a TV host on a local public television show "Chicago Tonight" covered the story on-air Wednesday evening. Other than that, mass media coverage has mostly been nilch. Perhaps most papers and news stations are smart enough to know you have to be careful when you're reporting on speculated information. Then again, that logic doesn't exactly hold up, not even for me. The NY Daily News picked up on it, as well as the ever-wholesome Wonkette, who managed to call Keyes a "rampant homophobe", one of the many words Anna Marie Cox uses incorrectly.

So here's the media's (and mostly Liberals') beef: they want Keyes to come out (for lack of a better phrase) with a statement on this whole situation. No doubt, there is ultimately hope that Keyes will be forced to back off from his harsh stance against the homosexual lifestyle. This is of course, the goal of those who support the "non-existent agenda"--to discredit those who are against them.

The Illinois Leader, a Conservative news source, also noted Keyes' silence in a recent Southside Chicago Town Hall meeting,

"the press was anticipating that Ambassador Keyes would break news Monday night in response to web-related questions which began to appear over the weekend on gay blogs and gradually found their way onto Rich Miller's CapitolFax Monday morning.

Miller's daily newsletter alluded Monday to an expected revelation as to whether Alan Keyes' 19 year old daughter Maya and Vice President Dick Cheney's daughter Mary could have similar sexual proclivities.

All day Monday web bloggers fanned the rumor flame and discussion loops added to the speculation that Keyes, who has been outspoken in the U.S. Senate campaign against the homosexual lifestyle, may parent a teenager who has experimented with homosexuality and has posted photos of herself and her girlfriend on the internet.

But as Keyes left the Southside township meeting exiting directly behind the podium, he was uncharacteristically resistant to media questions as he quickly slid into the passenger front seat of his white Lincoln Continental with his daughter Maya in the back seat. Neither of the two chose to respond to questions being raised "all over the internet" one reporter said, about Keyes' daughter.

The fact that Maya Keyes is only 19-years-old will be a concern to many. I need to compile my research and I'll opine definitively on this tomorrow. I've already drawn my conclusions, but it's always nice to back it up with facts. And what pray tell does the peanut gallery have to say to this?

Posted by Ambra at September 30, 2004 4:41 PM in Politics
Bookmark and Share

 


 

 

 

I know I'm going to get hammered for this, but here goes:

Keyes is smart not to say anything, and I doubt he ever will. His daughter is 19 years old. 19-year-olds are exactly the types to engage in lifestyle experimentation, including flirtations with homosexuality. No matter how vehemently she may say she's gay today, there's a significant chance that she won't be by the time she's 30.

I know anecdotal evidence is meaningless, but I have plenty of stories about girls who were gay in college who graduated and got married and had kids. Actually, and this could just be some weird coincidence, but of the 8 gay people I knew best in college, all but one of them is now happily married with children.

Many young adults subscribe to Robert Heinlein's philosophy that if you only had the time, you could love everyone, which of course, in his view, meant you could have sex with them, too. This same group of people doesn't understand the downside of all this "activity", but as they grow up, they start to figure it out.

Sure, you could "love" anyone -- or everyone, for that matter -- but is that how you want to live your life? This hedonistic approach is at heart so selfish it can never bring happiness. It's nearly impossible to find happiness if all you're doing is trying to please yourself. As people, we're bigger than that, we need larger, more noble goals to pursue, to have some sense of fulfillment.

I think we all owe it to ourselves to find the one person with whom we can share the richest, most satisfying relationship. I've tried both approaches and am here to testify: committed heterosexual monogamy (read: marriage) rules.

Anyone with strong convictions is a target.

Keyes is a big one because he places morals on the high.

I feel bad for the family. If she is currently identifying as a lesbian, the family is going through a lot.

From what I've seen, there is a lot of sexual "experimentation" going on with young women.

The stories I can tell...

It is my honest wish that one of Bush's daughters turns out to be gay... and if Tom DeLay has a daughter, ditto there.

Ambra, "Democrat vampires?" Wow.

There are "vampires" within all political parties. In this case, it is the bloodsuckers looking for a hit.

JAB:

I simply cannot conceive why you would wish for those things.

You would also have to wish, then, for John Kerry's daughter to be a Klan member, wouldn't you, just so he could experience what it feels like to have a child espousing views he detests?

Crazy wishes. You just don't get it.

Glen...

I wish for it because only then will they start to understand... but of course, that is just my opinion...

Many years ago, I was sort of "fundamentalist" on the gay issue... mainly because I was gay, and couldn't/wouldn't accept or deal with it... I even recall "preaching" to my gay friends in college that it was not in God's plan for them, and that they should pray for healing... all the while, dying inside as I repressed my own homosexuality... until there was nothing left but a hollow emotionless shell... i repressed all emotions because if any got I out, I thought they would rush out uncontrollably...

Long story short... many years later... I am a very well-adjusted, very happy gay Christian man in a wonderful, fulfilling monogomous relationship...

So... yeah, I do wish more conservatives had gay kids... mayb, just maybe, they can get beyond the ridiculously stereotypes...

first. just having a gay child does not change most people's moral views on homosexuality. Sorry, i know the left doesnt like that, but its true.

second. The hypocrisy, of trying to out a 19 year old. Then turn around and talk about wanting to be left alone, to live your life. Hypocrisy!. This is not about Keyes, its about his daughter's right to be left alone.

third. I dont care, if all his kids were gay.

May I say "Who Cares?" I can understand this being a source of embarrament for Mr. Key's given his position on homosexuality, but this is NOT a big story. This is personal stuff that really should be left alone. Same for the whole thing about Jack Ryan, the guy Keys is replacing. This is the first I have heard of it and my only reaction I can muster is "So ..." In any case I don't see how this can reflect on Mr. Keys. 19 year olds often rebel against there parents and I suspect that this is all it is.
(Sheesh I am defending Alan Keys ... again what is the world coming too ? )

I don't know if it is true of course, but basically I am sick and tired of these hypocritical Republican "family-values" candidates that turn out to be.....well....let's just say....waaay less than that.

Out here in California we have had our fill of them. About 10 or so years ago our Republican "family-values" senate candidate was found a few weeks before the election to have a live-in girl friend, to frequent strip clubs and regularly buy pornographic mags.
He lost.

Then in the next election our so-called "Christian" family-values Republican candidate divorced his wife after the election and then some months after that declared himself to be a homosexual. But lately, he says he's not sure..he might be a bisexual. Whatever.
He lost.

Then the next Republicna guy...the one who ran for governor (the election before Arnold)....came out against homosexual rights. He even went on Christian talk programs to espouse this. Then two week before the election it was found out that he accepted contributions from the Log Cabin Republicans (the Repub. gay group). When asked about this by the Christian talk raido guys, he was nowhere to be found.
He lost.

Sigh.......

And you wonder why this conservative Republican often votes for democrats.

Sigh........

I don't know if it is true of course, but basically I am sick and tired of these hypocritical Republican "family-values" candidates that turn out to be.....well....let's just say....waaay less than that.

Out here in California we have had our fill of them. About 10 or so years ago our Republican "family-values" senate candidate was found a few weeks before the election to have a live-in girl friend, to frequent strip clubs and regularly buy pornographic mags.
He lost.

Then in the next election our so-called "Christian" family-values Republican candidate divorced his wife after the election and then some months after that declared himself to be a homosexual. But lately, he says he's not sure..he might be a bisexual. Whatever.
He lost.

Then the next Republicna guy...the one who ran for governor (the election before Arnold)....came out against homosexual rights. He even went on Christian talk programs to espouse this. Then two week before the election it was found out that he accepted contributions from the Log Cabin Republicans (the Repub. gay group). When asked about this by the Christian talk raido guys, he was nowhere to be found.
He lost.

Sigh.......

And you wonder why this conservative Republican often votes for democrats.

Sigh........

I got an email with the link to the photo from Mr. Livingston last night. This was my response:
Not sure why you think I would be interested in the photo but here's a link
for you:

http://mt.ektopos.com/parablemania/archives/000787.html

Samantha Pierce

Ambra. Thank you for taking the time to carefully consider this delicate situation and offer your thoughtful comments. I don't think I've ever been called a vampire before (and maybe you weren't calling me a vampire here) so I'm not sure how to take it. I think I look good in Black so I won't worry too much about the crack.

Did vampires bring down Jack Ryan or James McGreevey? Or was it their conduct that did them in?

I can't wait to read your blog tomorrow. Please consider addressing Diane R's comments and the following situations.

- Rush Limbaugh's illegal drug usage.
- Newt Gingrich's sexual affair with intern after blasting Clinton for Lewinski.
- Strom Thurmond's racist positions after fathering a Black child.
- Bill Bennett gambles away $8 M while authoring the "Book of Virtues".
- Bob Livingston's adultery and alleged engagement in taped sado-masochistic sex talk.
- Dr. Laura Schlessinger preaching morality but posing nude.
- Bob Barr's freaky sexual escapades.
- J.C. Watts' and Dan Burton's out-of-wedlock children.

I'm reading your blog everyday and lovin' it.

I think it was a fair statement (and true) to say that there are vampires on both sides of the fence.

Why the finger pointing?

I thought the 'well Susie Q. did it too!' argument died circa 3rd grade.

I'm pretty sure this is an exercise in futility, because anything I will say will be viewed as rationalizations, hair-splitting, and such-like unworthy arguments or refutations. Here goes nothing:

Rush Limbaugh's illegal drug usage We know that Rush was definitely addicted to prescription drugs, and was taking massive amounts. We don't know that it was illegal. There have been a lot of innuendos and rumors flying around, but very few hard facts. He hasn't been charged with anything, and it's extremely unlikely he will be. If you want to believe the "testimony" of a convicted felon and his wife, given to a supermarket rag, that's your business -- I don't. I also know the Palm Beach DA was out to get Rush, because of his politics, and trampled all over his civil rights (even the ACLU jumped in on Rush's side over the way his medical records were obtained.) IMO, the whole thing is a witch hunt.

Now, as to his drug use: if you can't discern the difference between someone's use of prescription drugs to deal with debilitating pain stemming from a back injury, and the use of illegal "recreational" street drugs, that's your problem, not mine. Here's one big difference: Rush took those drugs to enable him to function in society. Without the drugs, he would be in so much pain he couldn't do his job. Street drugs make it impossible for people to function in society. Does that matter at all to you? Probably not.

Newt Gingrich's sexual affair with intern after blasting Clinton for Lewinski I don't know whether or not Gingrich had an affair, but let's assume he did. Was he abusing the Oval Office to conduct it? Did he lie under oath (commit perjury) about it? Did he go on national tv and say, "I did not have sex with that woman?" You folks don't seem to get that Clinton was NOT impeached for having an affair, he was impeached for COMMITTING PERJURY. Which, by the way, is a crime, the one for which he was disbarred. (Sorry for shouting, but this point always gets me riled up.)

Strom Thurmond's racist positions after fathering a Black child Does no one ever learn from their mistakes in your world? Are we not allowed to repent and reform? I can't and won't defend Thurmond's racism, but isn't it likely that after losing the battle to keep the country divided along race lines, Thurmond actually realized he was wrong? He was a well-respected man in the senate when he retired. And unlike former KKK big wig (and revered Democrat) Robert Byrd, Thurmond was never recorded on a Sunday morning talk show spewing the N-word the way Byrd has on more than one occasion.

Bill Bennett gambles away $8 M while authoring the "Book of Virtues" Get a clue: gambling is not illegal, and Bennett's family was not in any way harmed by his recreational gambling. I haven't read his book. If you can point me to a particular reference in which he wrote or said that gambling is evil, then I will join you in calling him a hypocrite. I'm not going to go there, though. My father (God rest his soul) loved to go down to the dog track and lost quite a few bucks over the years. My mother considered it part of the household entertainment budget. When my dad was alive, he and my mom attended Mass together every day, and he was an Extraordinary Minister of the Eucharist as well. If Bill Bennett, or my dad, were harming his family in any way by his gambling, then it would be a serious sin. But from everything I've heard about the Bennett case, that's not a problem.

I'm omitting the ones I don't know anything about, which leaves me with:

Dr. Laura Schlessinger preaching morality but posing nude This one I can speak to directly, because I've actually heard her talk about this. I also have identical experiences, so I can speak from my own heart as well. When did Dr Laura pose for those pictures, and when did she start her radio career as a moralist? I think you'll find that there is a rather large gap in years between the two events. You present it as if Dr Laura were currently posing nude while simultaneously ragging on people for their immorality. Dr Laura herself says she did that when she was much younger and working in a very different moral framework. I can say the same thing for myself -- I was in my twenties, I think Dr Laura was, too.

So, what happened between then and now? We grew up. We learned a lot about a lot of different things. We repented, we reformed, we built new lives.

Does the fact that we did things in the past that we now realize were wrong, sometimes very wrong, preclude us from ever passing judgement on anyone, ever again, lest we be called a hypocrite? I don't think so.

You may disagree, but you would be wrong. If Dr Laura were posing nude now, I'd say, "Fire away! She's a hypocrite," but she's not doing it now, in fact she has said that regrets doing it. We are allowed to be sorry for the mistakes we've made, aren't we? Yes, as long as we don't make them again.

If you say, "Ooops, sorry," you better not do it again, because then the apology was just an excuse to escape punishment, and you are a hypocrite. But that's not what I'm seeing with Dr Laura, and, God help me, that's not what's going on in my life, either. There is such a thing as a sincere reformation (Dickens wrote about one in "A Christmas Carol," but everyone seems to forget that Scrooge eventually died a popular and happy man), but there is a societal skepticism that refuses to accept that possibility when the person in question is a member of the opposition.

Dr Laura can pass judgement, I can pass judgement, because not only have we been there, done that, but we've seen the error of our ways, and turned away from those sinful lives. Believe me, having such experiences makes you hopeful for humanity: if I can recover, anyone can.

But it's not enough for us to say, "I repented from my sins," we have to be sure that we never stray from the straight and narrow path -- and I'm doing my best not to. I'm pretty sure Dr Laura is doing the same, especially since her life is frequently examined under the media microscope.

Well, I'm pretty sure that didn't convince anyone of anything they didn't believe before they started reading, but at least I put it all out there. Whaddya think?

Joan: well said. Like Ambra said, "Democrat vampires"

Joan, I tip my hat to you. Excellent stuff! I may quote you...

*Alex imagines Ambra looking very silly tipping her hat*

Couldn't resist.

JAB,

I am with you up to a point.

I am uneasy that homosexuality is so often singled out by public moralists. Those who experience same gender sexual attraction, including those who self-identify as 'gay' or 'homosexual' are no more or less sinful than the rest of us. We all fall short of the glory, even our dear host, Ambra, as I am sure she will agree. I think it is better that you are no longer in denial about your sexual attraction (though I think to say that you were 'repressed' before is more a political statement than anything else). It is also better that you are in an exclusive relationship rather than being promiscuous. Some things are closer to the truth than others.

That being said, I don't agree that homosexuality is, in any way, normative behavior for anyone. Scientifically (physilogically), psychologically, theologically, I am convinced the facts argue against the normalization of homosexuality. That is my opinion, I know, and I could be wrong, but I believe I am correct.

That is NOT a judgement of you, as a person, rather a judgement of the actions and the inclinations of homosexuality. Believe me, you may have it more together on the whole than I. I've got my own struggles and hang-ups. The only difference I can see is that I am not trying to justify or normalize them. I want the standards to remain where they are, even as I fall short.

Does the alcoholic rightful shrug his shoulders and say 'oh well, this is how God made me?' (I dare say, there is more evidence of a biological dimension to alcoholism than any shown for organic homosexuality). Does the guy who is addicted to internet porn rightfully tell his wife "This is me, get used to it?" Does the pedophile say, with justification, "I deserve to experience 'love' as I desire"?

In closing, to say that you wish that certain people would have gay children is, to say the least, dodgy, and certainly a poor device in trying to make your case.

JAB
How, as a christian, do you reconcile your desire that others would stumble and then justify their sins? Would it not be more appropriate to deny your self for the sake of Christ than Crist for your own sake? Would it not be more appropriate that you PRAY that people find fulfilment in the Lord, and that there children do as well?

GLEN
You make a good point.

Aw man, you missed your chance!
{ Comments are now closed for this entry. }




Archives
Columns
Contact
Media

Enter your Email

 

 



Why I'm Not a Republican Parts I, II, III, IV
Reflections on the Ill-Read Society
The ROI of a Kid
The Double-Minded Haters
Hindsight
Hip-Hop in Education: Do You Wanna Revolution?
Oh parent Where Art Thou?
Requisite Monthly Rant: the State of the Nation
College Curriculum Gone Wild
Walmart Chronicles
An Open Letter to American Idol
Gonorrhea and the City