• 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!

Schlapp: Romney Wouldn’t Be “Physically Safe” At CPAC

calamity

Privileged
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Feb 12, 2013
Messages
160,900
Reaction score
57,849
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
Holy crap!

Schlapp: Romney Wouldn’t Be “Physically Safe” At CPAC


“We won’t credential him as a conservative. I suppose if he wants to come as a non-conservative and debate an issue with us, maybe in the future we would have him come. This year, I’d actually be afraid for his physical safety, people are so mad at him.

"People"? Uh, no. Not people, Matt. Your people; you are, after all, the CPAC chair.
 
If CPAC can't ensure someone's physical safety then they either need better security or more civilized attendees.
 
There's a 404 Error for your article.

Thanks


Just a moment...

AH...I think it's because Joe does a browser search before letting people into his site--blocks haters.


I wonder if he's not embedding

Edit: looks like the above link works.
 
Last edited:
I guess this is Matt Schlapp admitting that the Cult of 45 is a violent movement.
 
I guess this is Matt Schlapp admitting that the Cult of 45 is a violent movement.

Confirming what we have been saying all along.
 
Re: Schlapp: Romney Wouldn’t Be “Physically Safe” At CPAC

I guess this is Matt Schlapp admitting that the Cult of 45 is a violent movement.

I think that cancer you're talking about has already metastasized to other structures.

Here's a better link of anyone cares to read anything this asshole Schlapp or his wife has to say.

CPAC Head Takes Next Step to Violent Dictatorship: 'We Cannot Guarantee Mitt Romney's Safety'

It is now such that the “base,” made up of very religious “good people,” the “real Americans,” who are white, middle or upper-middle class Christian heterosexuals, may turn violent against anyone they perceive to have acted insufficiently loyal to their man-god.
 
Last edited:
Re: Schlapp: Romney Wouldn’t Be “Physically Safe” At CPAC

I think that cancer you're talking about has already metastasized to other structures.

Here's a better link of anyone cares to read anything this asshole Schlapp or his wife has to say.

CPAC Head Takes Next Step to Violent Dictatorship: 'We Cannot Guarantee Mitt Romney's Safety'

It is now such that the “base,” made up of very religious “good people,” the “real Americans,” who are white, middle or upper-middle class Christian heterosexuals, may turn violent against anyone they perceive to have acted insufficiently loyal to their man-god.

And to think, people used to mock me for calling these goons Nazis.
 
If CPAC can't ensure someone's physical safety then they either need better security or more civilized attendees.

Or insist he/she doesn't show up. They chose the latter.
 
Re: Schlapp: Romney Wouldn’t Be “Physically Safe” At CPAC

And to think, people used to mock me for calling these goons Nazis.

Who stopped mocking you and why?
 
Republicans say to Christians. Get over that Jesus stuff, there is a new sheriff in town and he's too smart to allow himself to be hung on a cross. that's what happens to losers. Turn the other cheek indeed.

Romney isn't a Christian. He has been hiding the fact he is a Mormon. This Charleton has been exposed as the unloyal fraud he is. People wanted to trust him however his opinions on Russia and Healthcare sound straight out of Adam Schiff's playbook.
 
If CPAC can't ensure someone's physical safety then they either need better security or more civilized attendees.

not enough guns there must be the problem.

filthy creatures from the underworld they are

this counry had been better than this

thanks, trumpets
 
So when colleges cancel non-liberal speakers because *safety concerns* that must REALLY upset you.

Yes?

:)

trumpism at it's best

fallacy after fallacy
 
I've been saying this since the tea party days. In the GOP it's either the far right way or the highway now.

There are very FEW moderates in the GOP, and the few that are left need to fear for their safety.
 
Re: Schlapp: Romney Wouldn’t Be “Physically Safe” At CPAC

I think that cancer you're talking about has already metastasized to other structures.

Here's a better link of anyone cares to read anything this asshole Schlapp or his wife has to say.

CPAC Head Takes Next Step to Violent Dictatorship: 'We Cannot Guarantee Mitt Romney's Safety'

It is now such that the “base,” made up of very religious “good people,” the “real Americans,” who are white, middle or upper-middle class Christian heterosexuals, may turn violent against anyone they perceive to have acted insufficiently loyal to their man-god.

I say Bring It On gonna happen sooner or later anyway at this rate.
 
Re: Schlapp: Romney Wouldn’t Be “Physically Safe” At CPAC

I say Bring It On gonna happen sooner or later anyway at this rate.

Please explain, what do you mean by "bring it on"?
 
Romney isn't a Christian. He has been hiding the fact he is a Mormon. This Charleton has been exposed as the unloyal fraud he is. People wanted to trust him however his opinions on Russia and Healthcare sound straight out of Adam Schiff's playbook.
What on earth makes you say such a stupid thing?

Romney never "hid" being a Mormon. :doh
 
Back
Top Bottom