[P.O.E.]

The Economist has drifted so far to the left over the last 10 years, it's getting irksome. I suppose they suffer from journalistic groupthink when it comes to politics. If it wasn't for the fact the magazine has articles on events you can't easily find in one place in the western press (e.g., in Africa, Asia, on technology, economic theory, etc.), I'd nix my subscription

ANYway, I'm awfully proud of the showing you folks put up at CPAC, and I guess it must be having an impact for the international press to be making such a fuss.

[syriacus]

CPAC sounds less frightening than a NARAL conference.

[TLBSHOW]

The left is so far left they are Anti-Americans

[unspun]

Sounds like this poor writer's tender sensibilities have been wounded by just being at CPAC.

Perhaps he needs to visit with some nice socialists, for council. Maybe the Ba'th Socialist Party.

Q: What's the difference between nationalist socialists and internationalist socialists?
A: Internationalist socialists conspire openly.

This chap is so liberal, he things France is conservative.

[jaz.357]

Clear the calendar freepers! Next year WE DOUBLE the attendance! PS: Where can I get the "No Muslims=No Terrorism" stickers? (Ann Coulter)???

[I still care]

Actually, this was a pretty nice article. After you get past the opening lines and the title, it is fairly accurate. The funny part is, most Americans would think there is nothing wrong with most of was done at CPAC. It is hysterical to think of the liberal left being terrified and upset by "Fight crime, shoot back!" t-shirts. I think I would like a bumper sticker that says that for my car....

[wizardoz]

Do you wish that George Bush would quit pussyfooting around with the United Nations and simply march into Baghdad?

Yes.

Do you regard the recent tax cuts as nothing more than a prelude to the biggest chop of all, the abolition of the income tax?

Yes!

Do you wish that America would unleash Ariel Sharon?

YES!

You are not alone.

YES!! YES!!

So what's the problem?!

[Interesting Times]

This is interesting... the leftist press generally ignores CPAC. Suddenly this year we see a number of hit pieces trying to paint the convention as an assembly of wild-eyed loons thirsting for blood, and whining about its malign effect on young impressionable minds.

Sounds like progress to me.

[jaz.357]

...draped in red, white and blue and backed by 18 American flags!... *GASP*NOOOOOOOOOOOOO

[geedee]

Why hold the conference in Virginia, where conservatism is in the drinking water and liberal-baiting a sport? Next year, try Paris.

Why? Do the French need another spanking? We'll send Rummy, don't get excited.

[unspun]

" Two other figures dominated the conference: Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. Arab fanaticism now plays the same role for conservatives that Communism played until the fall of the Berlin Wall: "

Funny how that wall just fell down, all of a sudden.

" ...it justifies both a vigorous foreign policy abroad and an ever-vigilant approach to potential subversives at home. "

Such extreme notions. Afterall, those towers in New York city were garish displays of capitalism (and those in it were just capitalists).

[RobFromGa]

Arab fanaticism now plays the same role for conservatives that Communism played until the fall of the Berlin Wall: it justifies both a vigorous foreign policy abroad and an ever-vigilant approach to potential subversives at home.

Is he saying that Communism wasn't a real threat?

Is saying that Radical Islam is just a made-up enemy of American Freedom?

Is he saying that a vigorous foreign policy abroad and vigilance at home are BAD things?

The Economist has really gone over to the Dark Side on this "reporting".

[IronJack]

If this clown thinks conservatives are frightening, he must have missed the Paul Wellstone Circus and Sideshow.

[First_Salute]

The truth can be frightening for some.

[jla]

Why hold the conference in Virginia, where conservatism is in the drinking water and liberal-baiting a sport?

And here I thought it was just the arsenic that W was poisoning me with.

[Aarchaeus]

The Right, unrestrained.

Right on!!!

I wonder if the people at The Economist have forgotten that the opposite of Right is Wrong?

[headsonpikes]

Bump. At least the Economist covered it; that's a first.

[leadpenny]

I wonder if the Economist has a Correspondent at this PAC:

Role of the Church in Black America (On C-SPAN, Eight Hours of . . . ?)

[Mudboy Slim]

The Economist?! What a buncha gutless Euro-MORONS...MUD

[TLBSHOW]

Terry the Dnc man LOL

[Seeking the truth]

Here are the Bush "Pray for Him" tee shirts