Conservative Conference Beset By Accusations of Pro-Gay Takeover, Muslim Agenda

[Gerald]

WASHINGTON -- Allegations of a pro-gay takeover, boycotts, embezzlement and terrorist-loving board members. Sounds like a Hollywood version of a conspiracy thriller, but it's not.

It's the buzz around this year's Conservative Political Action Conference, the nation's single largest annual congregation of conservative leaders. Conservatives riding a new wave of momentum thanks to the strength of the Tea Party movement and big wins in the November midterm election should be riding high ahead of this year's CPAC,scheduled to take place in Washington on Feb. 10-13. But the conference, which has met for 38 years, has found itself beset by conflict that even its founder seemed to acknowledge in a recent e-mail with FoxNews.com.

"This year, some have been critical of CPAC because of who will be attending and others because they want others rather than those likely to be featured to speak," said David Keene, the embattled president of the American Conservative Union, which has hosted CPAC every year since 1973

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011...est=latestnews


Note: Published January 16, 2011

[Skybird]

Suhail Khan, hear hear - the mastermind behind the Ground Zero mosqaue and the grandmaster of pouring right those sweet words into trusting American ears that many Americans want to hear in order to be encouraged in their good will towards Islam. While the man at the same time has links to Islamic terror networks, has hosted leading memebers of Al Quaeda repeatedly, preaches djihad and conquest, murder and hate on his stays in Pakistan and is associated with the ultra-orthodox Muslim brotherhood. But he smiles so kindly and speaks with a soft voice, so let's be nice with him, yes!? It'S so good to hear right what we want to hear. That way, we must not set up a fight in resistence, but can relax. Life can be so comfortable!

And the gay issue again. Well, it should not be any issue at all. Not on this convent, or anywhere else. Not in favour of it, not in resistence to it. The only ones making it an issue time and again in their mission for gaining special recognition going beyond the normality, are gay activists themselves. Being treated normal like any other, is just not good enough for them. They want to be treated special, and being recognised as something of special status, and gain special public attention. Leave the gay neighbour of yours alone and deal with him the way he deals with you, which most likely is what he wants anyway (most of them are ordinary people and not some exhibitionist freaks or messianic political activists), and will result in neighbourhood relations not different to that of many others. But those activist groups and Christopher Street Day freaks you can send to hell. While I would defend said neighbour, I would not care at all for the latter. You provoke other people? You likely get what you ask for and get the reaction that you have provoked. Fair deal. See, that also is "freedom".

[Takeda Shingen]

ibl

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

ibl

IBO

[Morts]

in before flame war

[the_tyrant]

Vote for gay, trans-gender muslim guy for president next time!

[VipertheSniper]

I don't know what to say Skybird, but you should hear yourself talking.

I can understand a certain dislike for people parading on Christopher Street Day, because it's not our business what sexual preference they have, but if someone is attacked our insulted because of that, it's still homophobia in action. Just because someone openly displays his homosexuality it's suddenly ok? Don't think so.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by VipertheSniper

I don't know what to say Skybird, but you should hear yourself talking.

I can understand a certain dislike for people parading on Christopher Street Day, because it's not our business what sexual preference they have, but if someone is attacked our insulted because of that, it's still homophobia in action. Just because someone openly displays his homosexuality it's suddenly ok? Don't think so.

Maybe you want to listen to yourself first!? "Someone openly displays his homosexuality"...? Maybe I am also a sexophobe then because I oppose sexual intercourse on the traffic crossroad, and am against certain kinds of porn movies being shot as intended provocation in public space, on the boulevard, within sight of passing pedestrians...?

I take offense from that thing happening and me needing to witness it, and I rate it as an attack on my private integrity and widely established, long since upheld moral standards and taboos with which I have grown up - like most other people in our countries too. Leave the sexually more delicate private stuff where it belongs: in people's private homes, and clubs and etblissements.

When I got attacked, I struck back. When I get hit, I hit back. When I see somebody provoking somebody, and the latter shows a natural defending or angry reaction to that, I couldn't care less.

Which means I help the gay man who behaved like any ordinary person around and without reason suddenly gets beatenm up by somebody. When he provoked his attacker first by word or deed, I lose interest to do so. And not only becasue he is gay, but I would lose interest with any "victim" provoking the other beyond a certain degree.

When you put your hand on the hot stove, expect to get burned.

[VipertheSniper]

Maybe I didn't express myself accurately... I certainly didn't mean sex on the street. In case this wasn't a deliberate misunderstanding, I'll try to put it another way:

People like to stereotype, there's the "gay" stereotype that the homosexual marching at Christopher Street day would probably fall into, and there's the "hetero" stereotype that the homosexual keeping this matter private would fall into, if someone is insulted, beat up or whatever because he fits into the "gay" stereotype, it's still homophobia.

And for some people this is enough to beat someone up, they don't need more provocation than someone fulfilling a certain stereotype.

I know when you're begging for attention with your looks or behaviour, you're inevitably also going to get unwanted attention, but that doesn't justify getting beaten up or verbally abused. I mean you wouldn't tell a rape victim, she asked for it by the way she dressed, would you? Or not help her if you saw it happening.

[ETR3(SS)]

If I were to quote myself in my signature and attribute that quote to myself, is that considered narcissistic?

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Maybe you want to listen to yourself first!? "Someone openly displays his homosexuality"...? Maybe I am also a sexophobe then because I oppose sexual intercourse on the traffic crossroad, and am against certain kinds of porn movies being shot as intended provocation in public space, on the boulevard, within sight of passing pedestrians...?

I take offense from that thing happening and me needing to witness it, and I rate it as an attack on my private integrity and widely established, long since upheld moral standards and taboos with which I have grown up - like most other people in our countries too. Leave the sexually more delicate private stuff where it belongs: in people's private homes, and clubs and etblissements.

When I got attacked, I struck back. When I get hit, I hit back. When I see somebody provoking somebody, and the latter shows a natural defending or angry reaction to that, I couldn't care less.

Which means I help the gay man who behaved like any ordinary person around and without reason suddenly gets beatenm up by somebody. When he provoked his attacker first by word or deed, I lose interest to do so. And not only becasue he is gay, but I would lose interest with any "victim" provoking the other beyond a certain degree.

When you put your hand on the hot stove, expect to get burned.

So what's your stance on brazenly open displays of heterosexuality? "Girls Gone Wild" or Mardi Gras or any of the Spring Break clubs in Mexico? Is that provocation? Is it offensive? Is it cause to condemn heterosexuals all over?

Originally Posted by ETR3(SS)

If I were to quote myself in my signature and attribute that quote to myself, is that considered narcissistic?

I think so.

[Skybird]

Mookie,

I indeed would welcome a little bit more self-restraint by some hetero people, regarding their behavior in public, mardi gras and spring break. It is about nudity, prolly behaviour, and provokating obscenity. That does not mean I am prude or want to kill joy for the kids who suffer their hormone storm. But when locals have so many complains about German young tourists on Mallorca behaving bad and loud all night and turning the beach into a alcohol-filling station including free vomitting opportunity, then I have full understanding for such complaints, and locals considering sanctions of any kind - like I have understanding for people turning angry and even physical if a porn crew shots a scene on a bank in a public park, just behind a bush (I once ran into that in Berlin, some SM-movie apparently, and I did not like that happening to me at all). If people think they need to pose with their sexual drive, and I need to witness that and get confronted with their narcissim and exibitionism that violates most people'S sense of shame, then I rate that as an attack not different from a severe offense, name calling and even a physical attack. And when I get attacked in any of these ways, I reserve the right to defend myself and strike the attacker as hard as needed to make him stop.

Viper,

I have said often enough that I very well differ between

- normal gays, of whom since months I have said that we should let them live in peace and do not care for their private
business and make no big tamtam of them if they don'T do that on their behalf, too (kind of don't ask, don't tell!), and

- freak gays doing what I complaind about above, whether it be Christopher Street Day, or just behaving any day like an azz.

If you look like a bitch, dress yourself like a bitch, behave like a bitch, act like a bitch, talk like a bitch - then you probably are nobody I must value, respect and must care for, but you most likely simply are a bitchy bitch.

With normal gays not making a showact of themselves I'm fine, and always was. And I'm not even uncomfortable about them (because Steve and Gammelpreusse said they are, in the other thread). They can expect neither advanatges nor disadvanatges from me. I just do not accept them being equalised in status, recognition and tax benefits with families and hetero couples (see the other thread, I will not explain it all again here).