Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Top Ten Reasons I’m Not Going To CPAC

Top Ten Reasons I’m Not Going To CPAC

10. I’d have to drive, which would not be sustainable and green.

9. I hear there are a lot of college kids swooning over people who don’t deserve to be swooned over.

8. It’s too political, and there’s nothing I hate more than politics.

7. What’s her name with the nice glasses and sharp publicity photos said not to.

6. Someone might think I’m conservative.

5. I will be portrayed as brave by RINOs and the MSM.

4. People who hate me anyway might say mean things about me.

3. I’m preserving my options to become an MSNBC commentator.

2. I’d have to talk to people.

1. No one invited me.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Donald Douglas | March 2, 2013 at 2:33 pm

Only one reason for me: ‘Pamela Geller Banned From CPAC!

    I agree. I don’t read Geller because I disagree with many of her rants, but giving up her sex appeal is totally unacceptable.

      Since Pam Geller is a Conservative/Constitutional American patriot shining the light on the evil called islam, I take it you support the anti-Semitic death cult that follows the Book of Satanic Verses?

    CPAC should be like ComicCon. I would bar Stormfront and NAMBLA, but basically any legal organization can show up and set up a table provided they don’t disrupt things. So if CAIR, Daily Kos, the DNC, etc. want to set up shop, so be it. Let them (provided they pay the fee and do not disrupt things).

    The theme of the show is set by the invited speakers. That list should be determined by the sponsors. I have no problem with Grover Norquist speaking (I like his fiscal message) provided he is not throwing Pam Geller under a bus. I have no problem with not making Kris Kristiekreme a speaker, I do have a problem of going out of their way to publically disinvite him (how does this help?).

    So while I am not going, I am not discouraging anyone from going. The more conservatives get together and talk the better. It is a great way to make contacts and promote the cause. Beyond that: Disagree with the list, set up your own conference. The more conferences the better.

    http://conservative.org/cpac/2013/ Nothing wrong with these speakers (they tend to be mainstream GOP heavy, but that is okay). I would have included a few more, but this is an okay list.

    But we want the meeting to be inclusive. It is about exchanging ideas.

    Uncle Samuel in reply to Donald Douglas. | March 3, 2013 at 8:48 am

    More on that here: http://www.therightscoop.com/the-real-reason-why-pam-geller-was-not-invited-to-cpac/

    Looks like some Islamization (taqquia) has been happening within CPAC. Islam is a racist hate group from its core texts on up and always should be seen as such.

    Tolerance of Islam is for fools.

Yeah, Prof, me neither.

All the really cool people are not going.

(sniffle)

Can’t believe you left out the biggest reason: the sequester zombies!

An event like this is supposed to be “strange bedfellows” time. I’m sorry to see that somebody at CPAC is brain-dead.

Tea, anybody?

At least you didn’t get invited to C-PAP either! (Sorry, couldn’t resist.)

[…] seriously, there are guys like Reynolds, Jacobson, Althouse, and Volokh who would be both great to meet, and wonderful to hear. Specific topics of […]

TrooperJohnSmith | March 2, 2013 at 3:23 pm

I ain’t going, ‘cuz if I ran into ol’ Rancid Prius, I might jist tell ’em what I think ‘a his brand of so-called leadership. Him and his bunch ‘a RINO-infested hacks ain’t got enough guts amongst all of ’em to string a cheap tennis racket.

1. Let me make sure I have this straight:

a. Top-20 conservative bloggers Jacobson and Geller (and maybe others) are not invited.

b. Gay-marriage advocates who self-identify as conservatives are not invited.

c. A highly popular Northeastern Republican (!?) governor is not invited.

2. This, at a time when the coalition needs expanding. Brilliant, just brilliant. You go, Stupid Party!

3. Yet another piece of evidence about how the Reagan legacy was squandered. No, it’s not all the fault of the RINOs. You go, Stupid Party!

4. ACU/CPAC sounds like yet another conservative/GOP faction that would rather maintain its death grip on their share of power rather than adjust to a political landscape that is rapidly changing to their disadvantage. You go, Stupid Party!

5. Newt will speak at CPAC. I hope he rips these clowns a new one. Hopefully Sarah Palin will do the same.

    Ragspierre in reply to gs. | March 2, 2013 at 3:49 pm

    You continually conflate CONSERVATIVES with REPUBLICANS.

    They aren’t the same. At. All.

    That said, I agree generally with Goldberg WRT his point about this being a place where people should come with ideas and differing viewpoints, and let them be vetted.

    Good all around for the health of the movement.

    I ain’t skeered.

      You continually conflate CONSERVATIVES with REPUBLICANS.

      They aren’t the same. At. All.

      At present the only electorally serious home for conservatives is the Republican Party. Unless that changes, I will continue to mention them together. I don’t see the need to further clutter my too-cluttered prose by making the distinction.

      Conservatives and Republicans are not identical groups, but conservatives are the biggest subset of the GOP. The influence of RINOs in the GOP is out of proportion to their numbers. The main reason for that, afaic, is conservative ineptness at coalition politics: an ineptness which too many conservatives seem unwilling to acknowledge, let alone rectify.

        Ragspierre in reply to gs. | March 2, 2013 at 4:30 pm

        Several unsupported assertions in there.

        Care to provide something besides just naked claims?

        RINOs ARE Republicans. Unless YOU are a Republican, you have no business telling Republicans who they are or are NOT.

        Those “RINOS” sure are powerful and dominant. Or are they simply Republicans who understand their party?

        And, while conservatives (small c) and the GOP have common cause, insisting on conflating them is just wrong.

        We ARE discussing CPAC. See…??? Not GOPPAC. Or MixedBagPAC. Certainly not ChristiePAC.

        Conservatives and Republicans are not identical groups, but conservatives are the biggest subset of the GOP.

        Frankly, you couldn’t tell that from the candidates the GOP nominated for President the last two times around:

        2008: McCain – in 2004 he was openly lobbying to be John Kerry’s running mate. McCain’s own VP pick – Sarah Palin – was targeted for ridicule by the media and Democrats (expected) and McCain campaign aides (unfortunately, also expected).

        2012: Romney – the father of RomneyCare. ‘Nuff said.

        So while conservatives may be the largest group in the GOP, the “moderates” still have more power than they do.

          So while conservatives may be the largest group in the GOP, the “moderates” still have more power than they do.

          Agreed, completely.

          Ever since Reagan, conservatives have had less power, both nationally and within the GOP, than their numbers and energy imply. It follows that we’re not doing something right.

          Newt, the only living Republican of his caliber, gets it. He engineered a fundamental shift in the makeup of Congress. When he says that the GOP is no longer competitive at the national level, his opinion has special weight.

          How many whacks of the clue bat will it take until conservatives acknowledge that our predicament is mainly of our own making?

        Ragspierre in reply to gs. | March 2, 2013 at 4:54 pm

        Hell, we can’t even get agreement HERE on what is…or is NOT…a “conservative”.

        How you assert that “conservatives” are the broad base of the GOP is WAY unsupported.

        I’m going to stir the pot a little faster. I’ve long thought if “conservatives” were ship’s navigators the maritime industry would be in a heap of trouble. We seem intent to sail the ocean by setting a course once and for all, with no deviations. The jetties, lighthouses, islands and other ships of the world will just have to move out of our way or disaster follows. It’s not our fault. We set the right course.

        Democrats seem much more social and prepared to adjust as things change. Republicans want to fix it once and forget it. In the long run I suppose it’s nice to make one’s own decisions, but the ship of state never runs smooth and it takes both types of thinking to avoid rocky shoals, IMO. We need to learn to adapt without surrendering our souls (shudder).

        TrooperJohnSmith in reply to gs. | March 2, 2013 at 7:29 pm

        Magnificent! Even our internecine squabbles are the things of substance. Unlike the Left, which operates on a hive mentality, we can still disagree. Within our political spectrum, there is still variance and degrees of belief and opinion. Ironically, is that our greatest strength or weakness or perhaps, both?

        On the Left, their only serious disagreements concern things like, the advantages of euthanasia versus eugenics. The party of diversity runs from it like vampires from sunlight.

        For all our friends out there, I offer this: http://i1072.photobucket.com/albums/w362/TrooperJohnSmith/Beware_of_RINO.jpg

    Bruno Lesky in reply to gs. | March 2, 2013 at 4:40 pm

    There are several places on the LI site that reference Newt’s recent relevant comments. Just to make sure you see it —

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2013/03/newt-gingrich-what-is-to-be-done.php

    Uncle Samuel in reply to gs. | March 3, 2013 at 9:08 am

    The coalition does not need expanding – the Conservative message needs clarifying, conviction, credibility and communicating.

    McCain, Romney and Christie, Coulter and SE Cupp are not genuinely conservative.

LukeHandCool | March 2, 2013 at 3:29 pm

“I’d have to talk to people.”

Professor J,

The first step to dealing with your social phobia is admitting you have it.

Like you, I’ve always felt like an extrovert trapped inside a social phobic’s body.

At least you don’t suffer from the humiliating outward symptoms I struggle every day to deal with: Severe facial sweating (hyperhydrosis), and blushing.

It’s a curse, but as this curse goes, you don’t have it too bad.

Now, as I told Anne, at the Legal Insurrection Summer Convention Weekend Bash in Las Vegas, you just surround yourself with Mrs. Jacobson and Anne and Leslie and Fuzzy Slippers and the whole bevy of beauties will run interference for you. You won’t have the LI masses actually pawing you and breathing their intoxicated breath in your face … they’ll just leave the convention with the impression they connected personally with the good Professor. You might have to shake the occasional unwashed hand that breaks through the ladies’ pass protection, but, that’s a small price to pay.

Meanwhile, Joel and David and Bryan will be off on the other side of the convention room, coaxing the crowd over to their side and away from you with juggling tricks and drinking games, etc.

There’s always a way.

10 Greatest Inventions for Social Phobics (in no particular order):

Sunglasses
Voice mail
Xanax
Urinal dividers
ATMs
Internet
Texting
Supermarket self-checkout machines
Alcohol
Robot hairstylists

LukeHandCool (who, at a job interview once, was sweating so badly that the interviewer suggested Luke remove his tie and unbutton his collar … and then remove his suit jacket. Needless to say, Luke didn’t get the job, and, self-fulfilling prophecies being what they are, he freaked out the lady interviewing him at the next job interview by making her feel she was seated in the front row at the Shamu show at Sea World, right in the splash zone)

    10 Greatest Inventions for Social Phobics (in no particular order):

    Xanax

    Alcohol

    I don’t question your prudence & mean no offense by noting that susceptibility to biochemical addiction can change as the body ages.

    Bruno Lesky in reply to LukeHandCool. | March 2, 2013 at 4:50 pm

    OMG! Is there really a summer LI Las Vegas convention bash?

    It would be entertaining, I think, to meet the folks behind the posts!

I’m with you Professor. I am like soooooo over the yearly CPAC knicker-twists.

Buck up Professor.

You are almost as persecuted as Chris Christie.

Get a hold of his degree of power and access and then you’ll really begin to feel his kind of suffering!

    snopercod in reply to Cheerful in Marin. | March 2, 2013 at 5:20 pm

    I’m depressed to learn of Grover Norquist’s Islamic ties. I can only respond with a piece of an essay written by William Hazlitt in 1826:

    As to my old opinions, I am heartily sick of them. I have reason, for they have deceived me sadly. I was taught to think, and I was willing to believe, that genius was not a bawd, that virtue was not a mask, that liberty was not a name, that love had its seat in the human heart. Now I would care little if these words were struck out of the dictionary, or if I had never heard them. They are become to my ears a mockery and a dream. Instead of patriots and friends of freedom, I see nothing but the tyrant and the slave, the people linked with kings to rivet on the chains of despotism and superstition. I see folly join with knavery, and together make up public spirit and public opinions. I see the insolent Tory, the blind Reformer, the coward Whig! If mankind had wished for what is right, they might have had it long ago.

I’m sequestering my presence.

Can the Professor be more specific who he was targeting with #7?

7. What’s her name with the nice glasses and sharp publicity photos said not to.

    BannedbytheGuardian in reply to freeperjim. | March 2, 2013 at 6:14 pm

    SE Cupp.

      TrooperJohnSmith in reply to BannedbytheGuardian. | March 2, 2013 at 7:35 pm

      Careful writing her name, lest it come out as SE C-cupp.

      Kill me. Go ahead. She’s smart, and she’s hot. That’s the perfect woman. Plus, she is a classically-trained ballerina. And her BA is from Cornell.

        And her integrity is from Benedict Arnold.

        BannedbytheGuardian in reply to TrooperJohnSmith. | March 2, 2013 at 8:28 pm

        Firstly a Ballerina is an elite dancer who has reached past Principal dancer of a top company to achieve wide recognition. That puts her out.

        Secondly any ballet dancer from corps to principal ranges from AAA to A tops . I did see a B girl once in a Russian company but she was more lyrical than athletic & was very pretty with beautiful arms.

        SE Cupp looks the beanstalk type – a distinctly American style.

        Other than that she is 34 single childless & on ‘ one last chance on the merrygoround’.

        trooper – she ain’t moving to Texas.

Who’s the RINO here who gave one of the Prof’s funniest posts EVER a “thumbs down”?

10. I’d have to drive, which would not be sustainable and green.

On Friday, NYTimes announced: “The Times is discontinuing the Green blog, which was created to track environmental and energy news and to foster lively discussion of developments in both areas.”

Because I don’t look good in keffiyeh and brown shirt.

Best reason for not going to the CPAC conference: Like the Titanic there are not enough lifeboats.

The ACU/CPAC are political SCAM artists. Sure, they throw some crumbs/bones to real Conservatives; but that’s just the game the Scammers must play to keep the SCAM/money flowing.

I will be a CPAC so anyone who wanted to speak with WAJ can speak with me instead.

Mike
The Political Commentator
http://politicsandfinance.blogspot.com

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend