• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

CPAC chair: Christie didn't 'deserve' an invite this year

Re: CPAC head: Christie "doesn't deserve" to be a Republican

bubbabgone said:
  • CPAC has lots to do with Obama.
  • Does ODS stand for Obama Defensive Syndrome?
  • Easy to think that if you get your news from folks like the recently departed Ed Schultz.
Click to expand...

Possibly of interest.

"The difference between a misfortune and a calamity is this: If Gladstone fell into the Thames, it would be a misfortune. But if someone dragged him out again, that would be a calamity." --Benjamin Disraeli :cool:
 
Re: CPAC head: Christie "doesn't deserve" to be a Republican

Bronson said:
Seriously is this the kind of moderator this website wants as it's representative? Someone who goads and baits the other side with endless mocking and snark? How are we supposed to take you seriously when you post garbage like this?
Click to expand...

You would think you could counter what I say. Funny how you can't.
 
Re: CPAC head: Christie "doesn't deserve" to be a Republican

Jack Hays said:
Possibly of interest.

"The difference between a misfortune and a calamity is this: If Gladstone fell into the Thames, it would be a misfortune. But if someone dragged him out again, that would be a calamity." --Benjamin Disraeli :cool:
Click to expand...

:funny .... :thumbs:
 
Re: CPAC head: Christie "doesn't deserve" to be a Republican

bubbabgone said:
  • CPAC has lots to do with Obama.
  • Does ODS stand for Obama Defensive Syndrome?
  • Easy to think that if you get your news from folks like the recently departed Ed Schultz.
Click to expand...

Redress said:
No, CPAC is not about Obama, nor is this thread. Desperate attempts at diversions are desperate.

Derangement, Drrangment not defensive. Not everything is about Obama.

Ed who? Do you have anything but diversions from the topic?
Click to expand...

Looks to me like bubba is the more fair and on point. Just sayin' . . .:peace
 
Re: CPAC head: Christie "doesn't deserve" to be a Republican

Jack Hays said:
Possibly of interest.

"The difference between a misfortune and a calamity is this: If Gladstone fell into the Thames, it would be a misfortune. But if someone dragged him out again, that would be a calamity." --Benjamin Disraeli :cool:
Click to expand...

heh heh ... and that was before an even better example showed up.
 
Re: CPAC head: Christie "doesn't deserve" to be a Republican

Jack Hays said:
Looks to me like bubba is the more fair and on point. Just sayin' . . .:peace
Click to expand...

What do you think the topic of the thread is? If it is CPAC and Christie, then you are entirely wrong factually.
 
Re: CPAC head: Christie "doesn't deserve" to be a Republican

Jack Hays said:
Looks to me like bubba is the more fair and on point. Just sayin' . . .:peace
Click to expand...

Maybe to someone with ODS it looks like it's on point, but THIS thread is about CPAC and Christy. Not Obama. But hey, keep rockin those ODS glasses.
 
Re: CPAC head: Christie "doesn't deserve" to be a Republican

Redress said:
You would think you could counter what I say. Funny how you can't.
Click to expand...

Counter what?

You have yet to offer anything of substance
 
Re: CPAC head: Christie "doesn't deserve" to be a Republican

Bronson said:
Counter what?

You have yet to offer anything of substance
Click to expand...

So you don't think not inviting one of the most successful conservatives in the country is a little embarrassing? Nor the whole race brouhaha? Nor the stuff said about the republican who changed his mind on SSM? Nor having Trump as a major speaker? Really?
 
Re: CPAC head: Christie "doesn't deserve" to be a Republican

Redress said:
What do you think the topic of the thread is? If it is CPAC and Christie, then you are entirely wrong factually.
Click to expand...

TheNextEra said:
Maybe to someone with ODS it looks like it's on point, but THIS thread is about CPAC and Christy. Not Obama. But hey, keep rockin those ODS glasses.
Click to expand...

There is no need for me to restate my point. You two have made it for me. Thank you.:2wave:
 
Re: CPAC head: Christie "doesn't deserve" to be a Republican

Jack Hays said:
There is no need for me to restate my point. You two have made it for me. Thank you.:2wave:
Click to expand...

Is your point that you are wrong? Cuz the thread does have a topic, and it isn't Obama.
 
Re: CPAC head: Christie "doesn't deserve" to be a Republican

Einzige said:
CPAC chair: Christie didn't 'deserve' an invite this year - First Read



The bit in bold particularly bothers me. Everyone needs to "live by the parameters of the movement"? Does that include individuals who are not conservative and who do not desire to live like a conservative lives? I thought individualism was a conservative trait (not that our conservatives would know authentic individualism if it punched them in the nose)? How far is Cardenas willing to go to force others to "live by the parameters of the movement"?

At any rate, demanding ideological purity certainly is not convincing. I'm one of those rarities who do not believe that any ideology actually correlates to reality one-to-one, and that the mark of a successful ideology is how well it adapts itself to the conditions of material reality, what it can trade off and where it can hold firm. An insistence on purity makes me less convinced, not more.
Click to expand...

Redress said:
Is your point that you are wrong? Cuz the thread does have a topic, and it isn't Obama.
Click to expand...

Second paragraph of the thread-launching post refers to ". . . . the conditions of material reality . . . ." That lets in just about anything, unless of course you're determined to restrict discussion to lefty agit-prop.:2wave:
 
Re: CPAC head: Christie "doesn't deserve" to be a Republican

Jack Hays said:
Second paragraph of the thread-launching post refers to ". . . . the conditions of material reality . . . ." That lets in just about anything, unless of course you're determined to restrict discussion to lefty agit-prop.:2wave:
Click to expand...

I am not limiting the discussion at all. I am pointing out when some one tries to divert from the embarrassing reality of the topic.
 
Re: CPAC head: Christie "doesn't deserve" to be a Republican

Redress said:
I am not limiting the discussion at all. I am pointing out when some one tries to divert from the embarrassing reality of the topic.
Click to expand...

And again you make my point. Thank you.:2wave:
 
Re: CPAC head: Christie "doesn't deserve" to be a Republican

Jack Hays said:
There is no need for me to restate my point. You two have made it for me. Thank you.:2wave:
Click to expand...

You're right there is no need as you didn't have point. :2wave:
 
Re: CPAC head: Christie "doesn't deserve" to be a Republican

And the never ending quest for the one true conservative continues....
 
Re: CPAC head: Christie "doesn't deserve" to be a Republican

Jack Hays said:
Another content-free contribution. Well done.:sarcasticclap
Click to expand...

Just following YOUR lead :2wave:
 
Re: CPAC head: Christie "doesn't deserve" to be a Republican

winston53660 said:
And the never ending quest for the one true conservative continues....
Click to expand...

That GOP tent is getting smaller and smaller.
 
Re: CPAC head: Christie "doesn't deserve" to be a Republican

Jack Hays said:
And again you make my point. Thank you.:2wave:
Click to expand...

I can see how you would hate it when people address the topic, yes.
 
Re: CPAC head: Christie "doesn't deserve" to be a Republican

Redress said:
Did you know this thread had nothing to do with Obama? ODS is a sad, tragic thing. It also does not change the fact that CPAC has not been good publicity for republicans or conservatives.
Click to expand...

bubbabgone said:
  • CPAC has lots to do with Obama.
  • Does ODS stand for Obama Defensive Syndrome?
  • Easy to think that if you get your news from folks like the recently departed Ed Schultz.
Click to expand...

TheNextEra said:
Just following YOUR lead :2wave:
Click to expand...

QED:peace
 
Re: CPAC head: Christie "doesn't deserve" to be a Republican

Redress said:
I can see how you would hate it when people address the topic, yes.
Click to expand...

When you do that, let me know. That will be a good test case.:yes:
 
Re: CPAC head: Christie "doesn't deserve" to be a Republican

Jack Hays said:
When you do that, let me know. That will be a good test case.:yes:
Click to expand...

I have several times. You?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom