An inconvenient question about the Mount Vernon Statement
Scroll for updates…GOP Senate candidate Marco Rubio of Florida condemns civilian trials for terrorists…
Today is the opening of the Conservative Political Action conference (CPAC) — the storied annual gathering of the Right. As I noted the other day, it’s also the season for a bumper crop of conservative manifestos, action plans, and ideological contracts.
The Mount Vernon Statement, which lays out broad principles for “constitutional conservatism,” has garnered the most buzz. An elegant tribute to limited government and the Founding Fathers, the document carries the signatures of movement leaders, Beltway heavyweights, and veteran activists. Two of the most prominent backers: the American Conservative Union’s David Keene and Americans for Tax Reform’s Grover Norquist. Keene and Norquist are also CPAC chairman and CPAC board member, respectively, and partners in the Constitution Project.
I have an inconvenient, but necessary, question for those who sign their names:
Do you agree with Keene and Norquist’s views on national security and immigration enforcement?
Because in the name of “constitutional conservatism,” Keene and Norquist support the Obama/Democrat majority approach of civilian trials for terrorists. And in the name of “constitutional conservatism,” Norquist supports de facto open borders and dangerous pandering to Muslim grievance-mongers.
Here’s a bracing reminder of Keene and Norquist’s statement chastising Republicans for opposing the KSM/Gitmo civilian trials in NYC, Illinois, and elsewhere on American soil:
The scaremongering about these issues should stop.
Using a state of the art but little used prison facility like the one at Thomson, Illinois – with any appropriate security upgrades our law enforcement professionals deem necessary – makes good sense for the tax payers who invested $145 million in the facility and who are seeing millions wasted every month at the costly, inefficient Guantanamo facility. It makes sense for the community which will benefit from the related employment and has absolutely no reason to fear that prisoners will escape or be released into their communities.
But most of all it makes sense for America because it is a critical link in the process of closing Guantanamo and getting this country back to using its tried and true, constitutionally sound institutions. (emphasis added)
GOP MA Sen. Scott Brown opposes civilian trials for jihadists and made it a key campaign item. The Republican leadership on Capitol Hill opposes civilian trials for jihadists. A majority of Americans oppose civilian trials for jihadists. And it’s a sure bet that the vast majority of grass-roots activists at CPAC oppose civilian trials for jihadists.
Which makes them all “scaremongers” who oppose “constitutional conservatism,” I guess.
It’s no surprise that Norquist remains obstinately and radically out of touch with the movement conservatives he purports to represent. I outlined the GOP’s Grover Norquist problem last January when he moderated a debate among RNC chairmanship candidates and it bears repeating at length since so many activists are still unaware of the record:
Party power player Norquist and the ATR propose to help fix the GOP’s problems.
Norquist is part of the problem.
Some of us have not forgotten how Norquist made common cause with the left-wing zealots at People for the American Way in a forum bashing the Patriot Act — and how he forged even more dangerous alliances in the name of Muslim GOP outreach. Flashback from my column in October 2003:
Alec “the Bloviator” Baldwin has a new bosom buddy: Beltway Republican strategist Grover Norquist.
The Bush-bashing actor-turned-activist and the Muslim vote-courting political organizer joined together at a Washington, D.C.-area conference last weekend to perpetuate bald lies about the Patriot Act and to oppose the “repressive” War on Terror (repressing terrorist suspects apparently being a bad thing).
Baldwin and Norquist’s panel, titled “Strange Bedfellows,” was sponsored by the ultraliberal group, People for the American Way (PFAW). When PFAW head and panel participant Ralph Neas ranted about the lack of judicial and Congressional oversight of the Justice Department’s terror investigations, the audience applauded passionately. According to National Review Online reporter Byron York, Baldwin (the “moderator”) then turned to Norquist for comment.
“Ditto,” Norquist replied. Never mind the flat-out falsity of Neas’ claim. The smarmy Baldwin looked at his panelists and proudly remarked: “Can’t you feel the love?”
…Norquist’s kissy-kissy partnership with a washed-up Hollywood Clintonite is the least of his unseemly alliances.
Consider: The conference they attended last weekend was hosted by the National Coalition to Protect Political Freedom (NCPPF), which was co-founded in 1997 by Sami Al-Arian — the former University of South Florida professor charged earlier this year as a fund raiser and organizer for the Palestinian Islamic Jihad terrorist group. The money Al-Arian allegedly raised went to terrorist operations overseas that killed at least two Americans. In 2001, Al-Arian’s NCPPF gave Norquist an award for his work to abolish the use of secret intelligence evidence in terrorism cases. Al-Arian was the keynote speaker. Insight investigative reporter Ken Timmerman says Norquist told the magazine he remains “proud” of the award.
Among other major participants and sponsors of the NCPPF conference was the American Muslim Council (AMC). In January, the group accused President Bush of “calling on God to kill innocent Iraqi children.” The next day, the group instructed mosque directors to block FBI counterterrorism efforts. Late last month, AMC founder Abdurahman Alamoudi was charged with illegally accepting money from Libya for his efforts to persuade the United States to lift sanctions against that nation. He also allegedly attempted to smuggle hundreds of thousands of dollars to Syria, which federal officials say was intended for delivery to Damascus-based terrorist groups.
Alamoudi’s arrest is part of a larger Justice Department investigation of terrorism funding focused on Saudi-backed Islamic foundations and businesses based in Herndon, Va. (Alamoudi is also responsible for founding the American Muslim Armed Forces and Veterans Affairs Council to “certify Muslim chaplains hired by the military,” including Capt. James “Youssef” Yee — charged last week with taking classified information home from Guantanamo Bay.) A so-called “moderate,” Alamoudi is on record praising the terrorist group Hezbollah and proclaiming: “We are all followers of Hamas.”
Norquist’s lobbying firm is registered as a lobbyist for Alamoudi. Alamoudi provided seed money for Norquist’s Islamic Institute, which shares space with Norquist’s Americans for Tax Reform group. The institute is run by Alamoudi deputy and former AMC government relations director Khaled Saffuri. Saffuri and Norquist have worked closely with Bush senior adviser Karl Rove to give radical Muslim activists access to the White House. No doubt because of their efforts, Alamoudi was invited to a White House prayer service after the Sept. 11 attacks.
If any Democrat activist had such shady connections, conservatives would be on him like white on rice. Instead, Norquist has gotten away with smearing his critics — most notably, former Reagan official Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy, one of the most decent and patriotic Republicans I’ve had the honor of meeting — as hatemongers.
Alamoudi pleaded guilty in 2004 to accepting hundreds of thousands of dollars from Libya in violation of U.S. law and attempting to hide it from the government.
Another reminder from Insight magazine of how Norquist tried to silence those who questioned his reckless strategic decisions by branding them as racists and bigots:
Norquist was Alamoudi’s most influential Washington facilitator, authorities believe, noting that Norquist reminds friend and foe alike that he is close to the president’s powerful political strategist, Karl Rove.
Norquist, who previously has denied any suggestion that his work facilitated any wrongdoing, not only introduced Alamoudi to Washington GOP power circles but also Sammy Al Arian, whom prosecutors arrested earlier this year for alleged terrorist activities. Federal law-enforcement sources say they are focusing on some of Norquist’s associates and financial ties to terrorist groups.
Alamoudi ran, directed, founded or funded at least 15 Muslim political-action and charitable groups that have taken over the public voice of Islamic Americans. Through a mix of civil-rights complaints, Old Left-style political coalitions and sheer persistence, Alamoudi helped inch the image of U.S.-based Islamists toward the political mainstream and induced politicians to embrace his organizations. He sought to secure the support first of the Clinton administration in seeking to repeal certain antiterrorist laws, but when Bill Clinton failed to deliver, Alamoudi defected to Bush, then governor of Texas. Alamoudi and other Muslim leaders met with Bush in Austin in July [2000], offering to support his bid for the White House in exchange for Bush’s commitment to repeal certain antiterrorist laws.
That meeting, sources say, began a somewhat strained relationship between the self-appointed Muslim leaders and the Bush team. Some senior Bush advisers voiced caution to Rove, who is said to have disregarded such concerns, seeing instead an opportunity to bring another ethnic and religious group into the GOP big tent. A photo of the Austin event shows Bush with Alamoudi standing over his left shoulder, flanked by the former head of the Pakistani Communist Party, several open supporters of the Hamas and Hezbollah terrorist groups and other individuals Insight is trying to identify.
Canceled checks obtained by Insight show Alamoudi provided seed money to start a GOP-oriented Muslim group called the Islamic Institute, which Norquist originally chaired and now is led by former Alamoudi aide and former AMC staffer Khaled Saffuri. A White House memo obtained by Insight prepared for coordinating Muslim and Arab-American “public-liaison” events with the White House shows that the Islamic Institute was instrumental in establishing the connection. The memo, from early 2001, provides lists of invitees and the name, date of birth and Social Security number of each. Norquist, as the first chairman of the Islamic Institute, tops the list.
Alamoudi and others, including Norquist, tried to keep critics at bay by branding them as “racists” and “bigots.”
Refresher from Frank Gaffney: “A Troubling Influence.” See also Mona Charen, Kenneth Timmerman, Insight, The American Spectator, and Cal Thomas.
Will the next RNC chairman remain silent about Norquist’s security-undermining strategic alliances? Will the next RNC chairman openly reject the same race-card-playing strategies that have corrupted a money-grubbing party establishment? Or will the field of candidates kiss the ring and hold their tongues?
The guaranteed silence on these issues today will speak volumes.
To borrow a signature phrase of the Tea Party movement, it’s time to be silent no more. Open-borders Norquist is backing shamnesty ringleader John McCain in Arizona and pushing a new “comprehensive immigration reform”/illegal alien amnesty II initiative.
We need real alternatives to Obama politics and policy, not echoes wrapped in constitutional packaging. Which is why, as much as I respect GOP Sen. Jim Demint, I disagree with his call to vote out any politician who refuses to sign the Mount Vernon Statement.
Caveat emptor.
Update: Marco Rubio’s opening statement included a line condemning civilian trials for terrorists. He received a standing ovation from the audience.
We know who wasn’t standing.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- A LEADER is a dealer in HOPE; therefore, there is NO TEA PARTY Leader! « Temple of Mut
- Obama stimulated a single week loss of 31,000 more voter’s jobs; continues to spend like a mad man « VotingFemale
- The Mount Vernon Statement: And so it begins » Right Pundits
- Hyscience
- Never Yet Melted » Mount Vernon Statement
- Oh no you di’int! — Pursuing Holiness
- Mt. Vernon, Tea Parties and parties - scarlettsays’s Diary - RedState
- Mt. Vernon, Tea Parties and parties - scarlettsays’s Diary - RedState
- » Links To Visit – 02/18/10 NoisyRoom.net: Where liberty dwells, there is my country…
- Thursday Wrap-Up « Countenance Blog
- Blog @ MoreWhat.com
- Ironic Surrealism v3.0
- Hard Starboard
- When DEMs go to Minority in Congress; They will defend Filibuster « VotingFemale
- Michelle Malkin vs. Mount Vernon - radicallyright’s Diary - RedState
- I'm Rethinking My Support of the Mount Vernon Statement | The Lonely Conservative
- Tel-Chai Nation
- Residential Garage Doors
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Legal Insurrection
» Poll: Angle-Reid In Dead Heat
Sister Toldjah
» Ethics charges against Rangel revealed – PLUS: Pelosi claims “swamp-draining” success!Daily Caller
» Daily Caller High: Vol. XVIIRedstate
» I told you Sharron Angle is OkayAmerican Thinker
» Real Sherrod Story Still UntoldHot Air
» Q2 GDP: 2.4%Hot Air
» Obamateurism of the Day
He did in the last election, even running interference for McCain for a time in order to hinder Huckabee. He’s an actor, and a pretty good one.
Who but a damn troll would have a problem with that? No Family is NOT a 1960 commune nor a couple of faggots adopting “love children”.
alligators are hungry
I still say the Huckster rain interference to help McCain.
We’ll never know for certain, I suppose.
Stinky crop of candiates, except Duncan Hunter, and he was purposely ignored.
I prefer the “Contract From America” thus far. Less mamby pamby…
I also find it interesting that Norquist’s wife, Samaah Alrayyes, is of Palestinian heritage. They married in 2005.
She went to work at the Islamic Institute which was founded by Khaled Saffuri.
How did they meet and does she or someone she’s associated with, have, or had, some influence over him? Or did Grover Norquist always travel in these circles? That would be circles made up of terrorist financiers.
I condemn thee Fred Thompson, as a senile old fart. Right over here is an ice floe with your name on it, safe travels.
On February 18th, 2010 at 10:36 am, Red State Skeptic said:
Correct. We have a different interpretation of what those words mean.
Obama doesn’t like our Constitution because it is, in his words, “A charter of negative liberties. Says what the government can’t do… not what the government must do on your behalf.”
Liberals/”progressives”/socialists have a vastly different interpretation of our Bill of Rights.
For example, conservatives look at the first amendment and see a limitation on Congress. Liberals look at the first amendment and see words that are not there (“separation”, “church”, “state”) and see limitations on individuals and churches.
Conservatives look at the second amendment and see a limitation on Congress. Liberals look at the second amendment and see a limitation on individuals.
Etc.
Speaking of “respect for the Constitution”, how do you explain this:
On February 18th, 2010 at 12:42 pm, Ed Mahmoud abu al-Kahoul said:
If your hypothesis were correct, Huckabee would have quit the race at CPAC 2008. Instead, Huckabee was the only candidate who kept fighting all the way until McCain clinched the 1191 pledged delegates.
If you want to talk about a candidate running interference for McCain, ask yourself why Romney quit the race on February 7th, less than 48 hours after pledging to fight all the way to the convention. And why, a week later, did Romney “release” his delegates to McCain? There is only one answer… Romney was trying to help McCain and give McCain an advantage over Huckabee.
Who was the only Presidential Candidate who committed to Senator Jeff Sessions’ 15 point action plan to restore law and order to America’s broken immigration system?
The answer: the candidate you disrespectfully call “the Huckster”.
My disrespect for the Huckster is not an oversite.
He embraced La Raza as governor of Arkansas. He is good on social issues, but otherwise, I don’t trust him.
I accept Romney’s excuse for dropping out, McCain had such a substantial lead in the delegates to continue battling would be futile and only hurt McCain in the general election.
Huckster, the lying snake oil salesman, stayed in so he’d have delegates at the convention. Not because he had any illusion of winning. For throwing the race to McCain, he was hoping a presence at the convention might get him named as McCain’s running mate.
Look up Hucksters 180º flip on illegals when he decided to run for President.
Huckster is why Obama is President now.
This article is the precise reason I read Michelle Malkin’s blog. Always a true conservative, she brings us the information we need to make informed decisions. I received the email to add my name to the Mt. Vernon statement last night and plannned on doing it this morning. I will hold off until I make sure it is exactly what it purports to be rather than a hidden RINO EID.
…establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity
That’s what I would call a manifesto. Plus, keep the government hell out of our lives, property and businesses and stick to national defense.
Understandable, if you are Romney. Huckabee was owed a little “payback” for his alliance with McCain to stop Romney.
Sauce for the goose.
Norquist is a closet Muslim (probably) with ties to terrorists. Practically a melanin challenged Obama.
All you need to know…
No…… He is part of the correct answer to the question, “What did the GOP do wrong that put Obama in the White House?”
Answer: D – all of the above.
2008 was a variant of an old joke. “How many members of the Republican Leadership does it take to change a flat tire.”
Normally, one, unless it is a blowout, then the whole team shows up.
Gosh, I feel like a stupid sheep…easily led…sigh…
Thanks Michelle for bringing it to this gullible girl in activist training!
Cathy B in AZ
bringing it to this gullible girl in activist training’s attention!
sheesh! preview didn’t even help me! LOL
They’re not criminals. They’re kooks. I guess y’all are either too young or uninformed to know much about them, but the society was founded in 1958 by Robert Welch, who believed that Eisenhower was a communist conspirator, and subscribed to the “New World Order” theory that the world was controlled by an illuminati of elites as represented by the Bilderber, the Trilateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations. William F. Buckley famously denounced them in the National Review in the 60s. I can’t find that online, but here is WFB recalling the brouhaha.
Can’t disagree with RSS on that one.
They were pretty looney.
Here’s a blog post from JBS.org supporting Debra Medina (the truther) for governor of Texas. Apparently because Rick Perry attended Bilderberg in 2007? http://www.jbs.org/forum/view-postlist/forum-1-water-cooler/topic-485-video-debra-medina-texas-governor-debate-jan-29-2010
And how is that any different from you and the rest of the Democratic Party and your conspiracy theories about how Bush invaded Iraq to get its oil?
Well Gee.. I was going to research this later, possibly this weekend. Ms Malkin did it for me
I do note that illegal immigrant labor seems to be doing just fine.
With one in ten American out of work, that bugs the crap out of me.
Oh well, have a great day all
Your damn rights there will be, here’s mine. why would I respect and support in anyway someone that supports another long term Good Ol Pal candidate that is more against conservatives than he is for them?
Up here in BLUE ORYGUN where I’m at they have Thompson and his wife on the radio in the afternoon, jeez talk about elevator music. I’ve seen molasses move faster than this guy talks…puts me to sleep as he wanders off on a side rail.
He’s a typical country club Repukican, talks out of both sides of his mouth, I’m so sick of these old fossils. I can say that, I’m 64.
And while I’m at it, I have given up on Sarah Palin as well…she’ll never make it to the WH supporting Juan.
Anyone who believes that is a kook, but tell me a leader in the Democratic Party, or any elected official who has claimed that. Besides Cynthia McKinney.
I can tell you that Michael Moore believed that, and that Moore was the guest of honor at the Dems nominating convention in 2003.
I can tell you that John Kerry, your parties presidential nominee for 2004, claimed on the campaign trail that Bush lied about the reasons for invading Iraq.
And I can tell you that Madelaine Albright, your parties former Secretary of State, said that she believed Bush had Obama in custody somewhere and was waiting until the right moment to announce that he had him.
Those are just some random examples and not an exhaustive list. If the GOP was like the Democratic Party it would run a Bircher for POTUS.
Which is also why otherwise normal people with a different approach to things than we have, like Evan Bayh are fleeing.
I really think he’s had enough of the group lunacy inside his party. You can disagree with Bayh, but he loves his country and is a reasonable person. Can you call his peers in his party either of those things? He’s sick of it.
Resolved: Michael Moore is a big fat idiot. But “guest of honor”? He was specifically barred from speaking. He did attend both the DNC and RNC.
Lied about the reasons for invading Iraq? I don’t think so. Kerry accused Bush of proffering faulty intelligence, but I don’t remember him ever saying there were other motives.
Freudian slip?
Albright never said this publicly, but acknowledged saying it facetiously to a Fox News anchor.
He is also a kooky conspiracy nut who alleged that the Iraq war was about oil.
He was seated next to ex-President Carter, not just some schlub out on the convetion floor.
If Bush was in fact “proffering faulty intelligence” then what was the real reason for the war? The Democrats claim was never merely that the intel was faulty, it was that Bush had commited intel fraud, made it all up, hidden itel he disliked that made Iraq look innocent. I’m sure that you remember this.
Ah, “facetiously”. Ha ha, that Albright is sure a kidder. How do you know that the Birchers were not being “facetious”?
I have heard Marco Rubio speak quite a few times.
Marco Rubio…2012
He is the real deal! I am ready for a money bomb for him!!
You tell me! Bush did proffer bad intelligence. There is no doubt about this fact. He used intelligence that was doubted by his own administration and CIA, and chose not to use intelligence that discredited his claims. There were reports from the CIA before the war even began that Dick Cheney was pressuring them to provide intelligence linking Saddam Hussein to 9/11.
As for motives of why Bush wanted to go to war, I personally don’t think it was so nefarious that he wanted to make money of their oil (he hasn’t). I remember seeing a puff piece interview with him after Bush v. Gore settled the 2000 election, but before he had been inaugurated, when he spoke of how disappointed he was when the US didn’t finish off Saddam Hussein during the first Gulf War. I think he honestly believed Saddam Hussein had to be removed from power no matter the costs, and he lied to convince everyone else that the benefits of invasion merited the loss of thousands of American casualties and hundreds of billions of dollars expended.
And you’re here denouncing kooky conspiracy theorists, huh?
RSS and flenser,
In terms of Democrats and Iraq, all one needs to do is take any prominent Democrat and compare their comments regarding the Iraq Threat in 1998 to their comments in 2002.
It does not matter what view (the 98 view or the 02 view) they really have. The skew in their comments from 98 to 02 tells me that national security was NEVER a motivating factor in their comments.
Politics, not the truth, not duty, was the motivation for their comments in each instance. So why would you EVER trust them to protect this country?
On February 18th, 2010 at 1:09 pm, Ed Mahmoud abu al-Kahoul said:
Link please.
McCain has spoken to La Raza, but I don’t believe Huckabee ever has.
Romney is not a man of his word. He promised the night of February 5th that he would fight all the way to the convention. Then Romney met behind closed doors with unnamed “prominent Republicans” on February 6th. I believe he was offered something in return for quitting. The next day, February 7th, Romney quit the race with the excuse of “I simply cannot let my campaign be a part of aiding a surrender to terror”.
That lame excuse was designed to paint Mike Huckabee into a corner. Because, if Romney were to be believed, then if Mike Huckabee didn’t quit and hand the nomination to John McCain on a silver platter, then Mike Huckabee would be “letting his campaign be a part of aiding a surrender to terror”.
It’s like saying, “if we don’t all concede the nomiation to John McCain, then the terrorists have won”.
That is bovine excrement.
When Romney quit February 7th, McCain had the lead, but McCain did not clinch the nomination until almost a month later (March 4th). I would have preferred to see Romney be a man of his word and keep the promise he made February 5th. If Romney had won some of the primaries that McCain won between February 7th and March 4th, we would have been better off. McCain was almost out of public financing money. McCain may never have clinched the 1191 pledged delegates, and we would have had a brokered convention, with the distinct possibility of a more conservative candidate than McCain emerging the winner. I would have been fine with that winner being Romney. But Romney’s choices helped ensure a McCain loss to Obama.
Huckabee didn’t have to reach 1191 to win the nomination. If Huckabee had kept McCain from reaching 1191, Huckabee could have emerged from a brokered convention as the party’s nominee.
That’s a lie.
I do not doubt that if Huckabee had been offered the VP spot, he probably would have accepted it.
What did Huckabee’s delegates do for us? Secure a true conservative as VP. When McCain was actively floating the idea of choosing a pro-choice VP, Huckabee’s delegates threatened that they would walk out of the upcoming convention. McCain did not want to see that happen, so he chose a VP that would win their support… Sarah Palin.
If you liked having Sarah Palin on the ticket, thank Mike Huckabee.
Huckabee, as Governor, had to deal with a Federal Government that was open-borders. In one example, he was presented with the decision of whether or not to give in-state tuition to children of illegals. He chose to do so, reasoning that if the Feds would not secure the border and enforce immigration law, then the state was better off with more educated, rather than less educated, children of illegals.
When running for President, of course his perspective changed, becuase now he would have the power and authority of the Executive branch to do the right thing.
I think those who supported TARP are why Obama is President now.
Bush and McCain supported TARP, and gave Republicans a bad name. Many voters saw Republicans as the problem, and voted for “change”.
Romney was silent.
Huckabee spoke out strongly against TARP, and offered true conservative solutions to the problem at hand.
Exactly.
It never has been; and it is not now.
Again, dead-on correct.
A question that at once is rhetorical, and also answers itself….
Well, once again, this demonstrates that there are far too many politicians involved in politics.
It is time the citizens of this Republic took control of the government again.
Simply put, they all need to go. Some need to go worse than others but they all need to go. I think we shall see a bunch of these people “democratically retired” in November though some are choosing to “self-retire” earlier.
Norquist, Huckabee, Romney, McCain, Crist, Graham, and many others are simply not to be trusted. Never has “Fool me once, shame on you; Fool me twice, shame on me” been more applicable.
The old etymology of politics: From the words “poly” (many) and “ticks” (blood sucking parasites).
I’m just curious (1) how you propose to take the politicians out of politics and (2) what you are going to replace them with. Nature abhors a vacuum, and the absence of political “matter” in congress would simply suck in the closest substance in Washington. More politicians.
I’m rather resigned that corruption in government is not an occasional event but a state of being. The answer is to scare the critters into compliance via self preservation rather than seeking any non-existant altruistic motive.
How an a statement that is so funny be also so PAINFULLY true.
Brillant! Hat tip!
The sad thing about CPAC is they drag out the RINO’s like Newt and call them conservatives, and expect us to believe what they have to say. Put more faith in the teaparty an forget this CPAC. The American people deserve better.Vote Freedom First and throw out all these money grubbing politicians out.
We need Comprehensive Immigration Enforcement, not reform. We need to restore respect for the law and the faith of the American people that their government is not selling them out. Amnesty for the illegal aliens is also amnesty for the corrupt companies who have been employing them. Money trumps everything, including love of country. Multi-nationals have no loyalty to country by definition, they see us as a market, not a nation. They see people as workers, documented or undocumented, no difference. If they can’t send the work to where the labor is cheaper, then they want to bring the cheap labor here. If citizenship becomes meaningless, this is no longer The United States of America.
If we love our Constitution and our representative Republic and we intend to keep it we must not surrender our sovereignty or abandon the rule of law. Profits must not supercede security. We should not create a new path to citizenship. We have a path to citizenship, more generous than any other country, illegal aliens have ignored it and bad choices do have consequences.
Such attitudes will destroy the Tea Party Movement. Engage Newt if you disagree and debate the stuffing out of him. Acting like the Left will do the Movemment no good.
Swede,
Politicians can be removed from the process at the polls. The major problem is that it appears to take decades of EPIC FAILURES such as we have seen since Reagan to get the people motivated to make these sweeping changes.
The problem of “too many politicians in politics” would be mitigated by term limits but it does raise a point you mentioned. “Nature abhors a vacuum.” If we get rid of elected politicians we are probably going to essentially give more power to regulators and professional Congressional staffers who could easily morph into another permanent bureaucracy. That is a real concern. Reduce the size of Congressional staff when you enact term limits and you may well move more power to regulators.
The answer is term limits, reduce the size of Congressional staff AND reduce the number of regulations and regulators. That is, vastly REDUCE the size and scope of the central government. Simple, eh?
“Power corrupts.” But, we can work to minimize the accumulation of power. As the sign on the National Archives says “Eternal Vigilance is the Price of Freedom.” This means NOT sucking it in for 20 years at a time but being active every year, year after year.
If “We the People” are serious about our Republic we are simply going to have to do a better job of keeping these blood-sucking ticks under control…
I’m also against civilian trials for terrorists.
Actually, I’m against trials for terrorists. More efficient to just shoot them when you catch them.
What? “shoot them when you catch them?”
Navy SEALs have learned that you can’t be mean to them when you catch them, much less shoot them!
BTW, how do you say “You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed to you. Do you understand these rights as they have been read to you?” in Pushto? Is that something all soldiers must memorize now?
staying tuned for updates, did MM wander off somewhere?
thankfully C-span had it on all day.
so much for a live blog
I did not sign the conservative manifesto because when I read it, I had no idea what it meant. Basically everything they say can be read by anyone to mean exactly what they want. Everything in it is so vague as to be meaningless and would have no affect on anything even if completely adhered to by those elected to office.
As long as David Keene is the face of CPAC (or even remotely associated with CPAC), count me out.
http://tinyurl.com/kow6xn
Jesse Jackson style shakedowns (FedEx) get NO “attaboys” from me.
astonerii,
why sign anything?
the founders did that for us.
It is our job to do what our families did or in other folks case the reason
thier family came here.
translation: WE HAVE A CONSTITUTION
lets defend it!
Brian,
There is no perfection to be found outside of God. CPAC has positive attributes that are silly to chuck aside.
What group exists that fits your bill and earns your 100% endorsement or are you a perpetual whiner?
It is amazing what people will do for a few million dollars. It is even more interesting how people in Congress often sell out for so much less. Remember Dan Rostenkowski, was stealing stamps from the House Post Office…
Dissing Jesse Jackson and his organization for corporate shakedown tactics while giving a pass to Keene and his organization for the same behavior would be hypocritical. As best I’m able, I’m not going there. If that makes me a perpetual whiner, make me a tee shirt and I’ll wear it.
Keene’s letter to FedEx is a lot like those idiots who run around on a rampage of crime and insist on video taping their criminal acts which are ultimately used to convict the idiots…
That Keene would have the audacity to put this offer in a letter is amazing! That he would turn around and flip on the issue weeks later is stunning! This kind of behavior is the reason the term “political whore” was coined.
Wrong is wrong. I have lost a great deal of respect for the ACU…
I follow the Tea Party stuff more for entertainment. Who needs a “manifesto” anyway?
Truth be told, I want the Tea Party to become powerful for two reasons: it drives the MSM nuts, and it may actually force the Repubs up off their fannies.
That’s the problem with neocons, 9/12ers and Beltway Republicans. They all actually think they are Conservatives when if fact they don’t have a clue.
Dude, looked at your profile. Are things that bad in biochem? I read (on one of the Amy Bishop stories) about another ex-scientist now driving a delivery truck for a living.
International law and tradition, down through history, dictates that such people, when caught, should be executed. Period. But, we have to be “pc” and “be nice” to the Islamic religion. It’s how you lose a war.
(shrug) Good stuff happens. Bad stuff happens. It is all part of life. Right this minute is bad. We’ll see how we do with INR. If things go well, we might be making and selling product by early summer.
Norquist has got to go. He IS the problem. He’s the poster boy for islamic spies infiltrating conservative politics. Kick him out. Hell, ship him back to arabia with his muslim wife.
Until conservatives realize that we cannot have a ‘dialog’ with muslims, or with liberals, we will not win. Period. There is no compromise on their side, but they are the ones whining about “big tent” bullsh*t.
You want a big tent? How about 80% of the American people? Send the liberal elites back to their coastal cities to rot with their nanny state policies.
Another thought on what
Ed Mahmoud abu al-Kahoul said:
Romney’s supporters, and many of Huckabee’s supporters (myself included), wanted Romney to keep his word and keep fighting. If you watch the video of his 2008 CPAC speech, there were audible shouts of “NO!” when Romney said he was quitting.
And here’s what Ed Morrissey has to say about the effect it had on the entire atmosphere of CPAC: