• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

CPAC 2014

DavidJames said:
Maybe someone can correct me. Aren't we relying on less foreign oil now then at any point in recent memory?
Click to expand...

The point isn't which nation the oil comes from, it is that it comes from sequestered reservoirs. The best place for oil, coal and even natural gas, is deep in the ground.
 
Cain said:
You have Obama to thank for all these problems, but like a good liberal, he'll refuse to take personal responsibility.
Click to expand...

What problems? The only problem I perceive is people elected to public office to legislate and yet they refuse to do the job they were elected to do.
 
Mister Earl said:
:rolleyes:

Do you have anything meaningful to contribute, or will you just continue with infantile insults?
Click to expand...


The symptom was successfully identified, but the wrong treatment is being applied. Ignore.
 
Alferd_Packer said:
And the very last panel, on the very last day:



So how's that outreach program going, boys?
Click to expand...

I imagine it won't be quite as enlightened as this conversation:
Steve: Good afternoon, welcome to "Women's Problems". I'm your host, Steve. With me today, our panel of regulars - Brad.. Mike.. and Craig. Okay, let's get to it, come on we've got a lot of ground to cover..

Mike: Yeah.

Craig: Let's get to it!

Steve: We've got a lot of women's problems to discuss..

Mike: Damn straight! Damn straight!

Brad: Last time, we were talking about problems from women in careers. I've got a couple of things I'd like to get off of my chest.

Steve: Go ahead, man!

Brad: Any woman who wants a career, she's got two problems - 1. her career; 2. this baby thing. I don't care who she is, what she says - there isn't a broad alive who doesn't feel unfulfilled if she doesn't have a baby.

Mike: Damn straight! Damn straight on that! Yes!

Craig: If they could just make a decision and stick to it!

Steve: There you go.

Mike: Exactly, Craig. You get tired of hearing it, man?

Brad: I think I may want a kid.. when I'm 40, late 40's, something like that. If that happens, I'll divorce my wife and marry a girl in her 20's.

Mike: Right on!

Brad: I'll take that chance. That's life. But you're not gonna hear me whining about it all the time.

Steve: Well, that brings up another terrible women's problem - whining. That is a problem
...
Click to expand...
Daredelvis
 
The American Atheists were approved to have a booth at CPAC 2014. Then the grassroots got a bunch in their panties .... This is an email I just got from Dave Silverman, president of AA:

[FONT=&quot]Almost as soon as we announced that we would be attending CPAC, religious conservatives started to voice their outrage.

[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]This afternoon, I received a phone call from the American Conservative Union Executive Director Dan Schneider informing me that the ACU board is breaking its agreement to permit American Atheists to host an information booth at CPAC.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Schneider cited "the tone" of a quote from me in a CNN article about our booth.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]This is exactly the problem. The ACU, which has invited CPAC speakers such as Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, and Sarah Palin, is afraid of my tone? My ‘tone’ was clearly an excuse to back out after our press release angered religious conservatives.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Continuing to conflate religion and conservatism is not a viable strategy; this was apparently too scary for CPAC attendees to hear. America’s religious conservatives can deny it all they want, but soon they’re going to realize that ignoring the growing number of atheist constituents is a losing proposition.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]This isn't over. We're still going to CPAC, even if they don't want us there. We'll be there to represent the interests of the 20% of conservatives who are non-religious and to advocate for our position that religious dogma has no place in government.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot][/FONT][FONT=&quot]I'll keep you updated.
Click to expand...
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]What a bunch of wimps (the GOP I mean).
[/FONT]
 
SezMe said:
The American Atheists were approved to have a booth at CPAC 2014. Then the grassroots got a bunch in their panties .... This is an email I just got from Dave Silverman, president of AA:

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]What a bunch of wimps (the GOP I mean).
[/FONT]
Click to expand...

What's funny about that is CPAC is also going to be handing out some sort of award to somebody for supposedly defending the first amendment right.
 
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/372091/cpac-right-j-delgado

On Tuesday, news broke that the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) decided to disinvite an atheist group that had purchased a sponsorship booth. The predictable outrage ensued, with Twitter lighting up in a storm of snark and criticism. Media outlets rushed to misrepresent the situation (e.g., The Wire’s headline, “CPAC Conservatives Revoke Brief Truce with Atheism”) while even some conservatives attacked CPAC’s allegedly narrow-minded decision. It was one of those sought-after moments in which some get to peddle the “Look! I’m one of the reasonable ones!” shtick, either with reminders of their own atheism or with declarations that they are absolutely accepting of atheists and that CPAC was absolutely wrong.

That’s all well and good . . . until one reads about the group that was disinvited.

While CPAC often deserves criticism, any criticism should, at least, be well informed. Of course it would be fine for CPAC to host a group called “Atheists for Conservatism” or “Libertarian Atheists and Proud of It, Suckas!” But American Atheists is not a conservative group; it does not even purport to be a conservative group. More important, it is a group that seems openly hostile towards Christians or other people of faith.

Speaking of its CPAC sponsorship, the group’s president, David Silverman, said on CNN: “I am not worried about making the Christian Right angry. The Christian Right should be angry that we are going in to enlighten conservatives. The Christian Right should be threatened by us.”

These remarks triggered the revocation of the group’​s sponsorship.
Click to expand...

I think they achieved their objective. Plus they got their money back.
 
So Delgado should be asking, "Why did CPAC even approve AA's booth in the first place?" It's a pretty well-known group.
 
Alferd_Packer said:
The list of the first days panel discussions reads like it was put together by the editors of the Onion.



http://www.cpac.org/schedule-events

And the first day's special event:

ACU 50 & Fabulous Celebration sponsored by Tea Party Patriots featuring Carolina Liar sponsored by One America News Network
Click to expand...

I wonder how much the always generous Koch brothers paid for the CPAC web site.
 
From the same source

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell — under fire from both the left and the right this year — showed up at CPAC this morning brandishing a rifle.

With Bon Jovi’s 1986 hit “Livin’ on a Prayer” booming in the background, the Kentucky Republican strode onto the stage holding the the firearm above his head. He handed the weapon over to Oklahoma Sen. Tom Coburn at the podium, saying,” This is for you, for your distinguished service over the years.”

McConnell was giving Coburn the NRA’s “Courage Under Fire” lifetime achievement award.
Click to expand...
 
John Bolton.

under Barack Obama, you can murder his personal representative and get away scot-free.
Click to expand...

He's talking about Benghazi. Is he implying that we know where the killers are and refuse to do anything about them?
 
I suspect there will be a lot of "Benghazi!!" there. It's the right's current favorite conspiracy theory, especially since the birthers have continuously failed to provide their amazing new evidence.
 
The wackier wingnuts didn't even get invited. So they are holding an alternative conference across the street.

The wife of a sitting Supreme Court Justice wants to know if the Obama Administration has provided material support to terrorists.

At a panel on “Benghazigate: The Ugly Truth and Coverup” held by a rival conservative conference to CPAC, Ginni Thomas, a conservative activist and wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, asked a panel that included controversial retired General Jerry Boykin if the Obama administration had committed any crimes, in particular, providing material support to terrorists. The panel all responded affirmatively.
Click to expand...

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...-provided-material-support-to-terrorists.html
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom