Previous 11 - 20 Next
"It seems like once again the ACU has taken a bold step to make some serious policy statements. As someone who has attended the conference for many years now it seems a bit odd that the ACU is not being so inclusive. I was always under the impression that CPAC was meant to include all parts of the conservative movement, whether we all agree or not." 1.) It first requires that you invite conservatives (Christie and GOProud don't qualify). 2.) CPAC is completely wrong on policy when it comes to illegal immigration, and amnesty is not a conservative position. When it comes to that issue, they've screwed up.
In response to:

In Defense of Chris Christie

Stoic Patriot Wrote: Feb 27, 2013 4:47 PM
Ucant, Just like Romney. =)
In response to:

In Defense of Chris Christie

Stoic Patriot Wrote: Feb 27, 2013 4:36 PM
"Enough with the internal expulsions, name-calling, bans and retaliatory boycotts." No, we need more. Enough of the socially liberal, fiscally conservative garbage. Burn them alive.
In response to:

In Defense of Chris Christie

Stoic Patriot Wrote: Feb 27, 2013 4:32 PM
"You may not love the guy; hell, you might not even like him -- but how on earth does it make sense to tell him to get lost?" When the guy says he agrees with Cuomo on 98% of the issues, people tend not to like folks like that. He won't be at CPAC, and that's just fine.
And so, Mr. Doherty finally starts waking up. Huzzah!
I'm an atheist, but I find this to be a refreshingly honest article, right in every respect, particularly as it comes to the salvation vs empowerment and prosperity aspects.
In response to:

TIME: Abortion Advocates are Losing

Stoic Patriot Wrote: Jan 03, 2013 9:10 PM
"I do believe pro-life activists have been making significant progress throughout the years to expose the horrors of the procedure and to promote the precious gift of life." I certainly hope they are, and will continue pushing for such progress, including at this year's March for Life.
"Increased high-skilled immigration is almost universally supported by economists as a net gain for... ALL Americans." When you have 8 percent unemployment, including many high-skilled people, mind explaining HOW that makes any bloody sense!?
In response to:

Rick Santorum Redux?

Stoic Patriot Wrote: Nov 27, 2012 9:09 PM
Actually he did. He was first elected to the Senate in 1994, then won re-election in 2000, but was defeated in 2006. He failed to get a third term is what you mean.
In response to:

Rick Santorum Redux?

Stoic Patriot Wrote: Nov 27, 2012 8:37 PM
"Say it isn't so. Rick Santorum has announced that he is "open" to running in 2016 Please, please. NO." Coming from the lady who was falling all over herself to prop up Romney as the greatest thing since sliced bread, I'd say this is great cause for a 2016 Santorum candidacy.
I said it many times, including the hat trick night of Missouri, Minnesota, and Colorado: Go Santorum! Game on!
Previous 11 - 20 Next
Friday, May 24 | 06:26 AM ET
Friday, May 24 | 06:26 AM ET
Friday, May 24 | 06:26 AM ET
Friday, May 24 | 06:26 AM ET