Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
I AM NOT THAT GUY

New CPAC head apparently plans to ban Dick Cheney next year

14 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

The new head of CPAC, the biggest conservative conference of the year, just said that you're not welcome to next year's conference if you support gays in the military and/or marriage equality for gays. At first he said "groups" wouldn't be welcome, then he went on to say that individuals would be welcome if they didn't support lifting the ban or marriage.

That means ####### Cheney is banned from CPAC.

As is Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Admiral Mullen and Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

And Ted Olson.

And Laura Bush.

And let's not forget that Sarah Palin tweeted a comment about the gay ban being silly.

CPAC may need to trade that big tent in for a pup tent next year.

The good news, at least the official hate groups may now come back next year. Pretty clear where the GOP's loyalties lie. Better to have the attendance of a group listed alongside the Klan than to have some gays (and gay-lovers) show up.

http://www.americablog.com/2011/02/new-cpac-head-apparently-plans-to-ban.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CPAC Will Prohibit Pro-Gay Marriage, Anti-DADT Sponsors in 2012

Americablog flags an interview with new ACU President Al Cardenas, who says that groups requesting "participant" status in the annual conservative conference -- a status that means sponsorship and a role in event planning -- will be "vetted." What this means for pro-gay groups:

If you are a group -- and this has got nothing to do with your orientation -- if you are a group of straight couples, and you advocate gay marriage, that's not within the scope of what we believe the three legs of the stool of the movement are. So it's got nothing to do with your orientation. It's got to do with the principles you advocate. There are a number of gays in America who don't advocate gays in the military or gay marriage. They'll fit within the tent.

That would mean no participating status for GOProud, which advocated for the repeal of DADT*. It would not bar people with these positions from taking the stage, which is good, because doing otherwise would bar ####### Cheney, Pat Toomey, and Ron Paul.

UPDATE: GOProud Chairman Chris Barron argues that none of this would prevent his organization from having a strong role in CPAC again, because DADT is already gone.

"If it's a question of policy, based on our 2011 Legislative Agenda there shouldn't be a question," he said. "Should be a slam dunk that GOProud is back next year."

*I originally said GOProud also advocated for same-sex marriage; its official position is that marriage is up to the states.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/weigel/archive/2011/02/17/cpac-will-prohibit-pro-gay-marriage-anti-dadt-sponsors-in-2012.aspx

Edited by Some Old Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look the facts are: it has to decide whether it is CPAC or LPAC (Libertarian-PAC).

It can't sell both Hotdogs and Steak to stay in business for long.

Libertarians have long been part of the Republican Party tent and the Party seems to be doing just fine. In fact, without libertarian (small l) support I doubt they'd win as much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Libertarians have long been part of the Republican Party tent and the Party seems to be doing just fine. In fact, without libertarian (small l) support I doubt they'd win as much.

Valid point however, because someone wants to walk a mile with you does not mean he can dictate the direction.


type2homophobia_zpsf8eddc83.jpg




"Those people who will not be governed by God


will be ruled by tyrants."



William Penn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Valid point however, because someone wants to walk a mile with you does not mean he can dictate the direction.

You can either work with him and set the direction together or you can sit down and go nowhere.

Or, find another walking partner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can either work with him and set the direction together or you can sit down and go nowhere.

Or, find another walking partner.

You speak as if this walking partner is a 50/50 relationship, last time I checked the American people voted "yes" to a lot more Conservative ideas and people than Libertarian ones.

The libertarian element has a voice but, it would be ruinous to give them a platform from which to champion causes in direct conflict with basic core tenets.

Imagine prolife democrats getting a special platform to push for repeal of Row at leftwing PAC.


type2homophobia_zpsf8eddc83.jpg




"Those people who will not be governed by God


will be ruled by tyrants."



William Penn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You speak as if this walking partner is a 50/50 relationship, last time I checked the American people voted "yes" to a lot more Conservative ideas and people than Libertarian ones.

The preponderance of polling data shows Americans are more libertarian than conservative on many social issues - the war on drugs and homosexual civil rights being two examples. Abortion is a case of the opposite being true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The preponderance of polling data shows Americans are more libertarian than conservative on many social issues - the war on drugs and homosexual civil rights being two examples. Abortion is a case of the opposite being true.

But there is only one poll that counts.

:P


type2homophobia_zpsf8eddc83.jpg




"Those people who will not be governed by God


will be ruled by tyrants."



William Penn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But there is only one poll that counts.

:P

We don't elect people on the basis of single issues. On the subject of the war of drugs, consider this - the last three elected presidents have all been open about their illegal drug use. Does that sound like an electorate that is conservative on the issue or libertarian?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't elect people on the basis of single issues. On the subject of the war of drugs, consider this - the last three elected presidents have all been open about their illegal drug use. Does that sound like an electorate that is conservative on the issue or libertarian?

Certainly not Libertarian or they would be current users rather than "repentant" users.


type2homophobia_zpsf8eddc83.jpg




"Those people who will not be governed by God


will be ruled by tyrants."



William Penn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Certainly not Libertarian or they would be current users rather than "repentant" users.

You assume their stupidity to want to use drugs if they were not legally prohibited? Now that I think about it, you are probably right!! :lol:

btw, your siggy is one of the more offensive ones I have seen here!

Edited by james&olya

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
- Back to Top -


Important Disclaimer: Please read carefully the Visajourney.com Terms of Service. If you do not agree to the Terms of Service you should not access or view any page (including this page) on VisaJourney.com. Answers and comments provided on Visajourney.com Forums are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Visajourney.com does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. VisaJourney.com does not condone immigration fraud in any way, shape or manner. VisaJourney.com recommends that if any member or user knows directly of someone involved in fraudulent or illegal activity, that they report such activity directly to the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. You can contact ICE via email at Immigration.Reply@dhs.gov or you can telephone ICE at 1-866-347-2423. All reported threads/posts containing reference to immigration fraud or illegal activities will be removed from this board. If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by contacting us here with a url link to that content. Thank you.
×
×
  • Create New...