Walk Out on Rumsfeld at CPAC!?!
- Thread starter Joshua Parrish
- Start date
Andrew-Austin
Member
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2007
- Messages
- 4,997
If seeing Donald Rumsfeld receive such an award is akin to whiffing a really foul odor, which it is, then yes it is rather meek to just passively inhale that odor and sit there pretending its lavender scented febreeze just because you are worried how whacked out neocons will perceive you.
- Joined
- May 10, 2007
- Messages
- 11,277
I'd say some people here are more calculated in how they represent themselves. Caution is good. Cowardly, not so much.
specsaregood
Member
- Joined
- May 21, 2007
- Messages
- 39,143
Nothing says win like going to a conservative networking conference and doing something provocative to impress the many liberals in the crowd.
sailingaway
Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2010
- Messages
- 72,103
Except that I'd have left before even the whiff, right after a standing ovation for Rand. You want others to join your protest. Not agreeing with you is rejection of your premise, and nothing else. Calling people names won't make people who disagree change their minds.
sailingaway
Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2010
- Messages
- 72,103
- Joined
- May 10, 2007
- Messages
- 11,277
The majority here believe that walking out politely, not doing something provocative, is the right thing to do.
If walking out quitely after Rand's finished is considered provacative...
CPAC already crowned who the winner is. It's definitely not Rumsfield.
I'd like to make a distinction between the conservatives, and those who are not. We surround them.
Andrew-Austin
Member
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2007
- Messages
- 4,997
Fine, I realize its just caution that is making people think about this, but after thinking about it you decide to sit through the award ceremony/speeches, and maybe even applaud, that can probably fairly be called cowardice.
It sounds like misrepresenting not representing. Are you (or whoever is there) going to clap as well just because it would be rude not to clap? You don't want to hurt Rummy's feelings by not clapping.
Whatever, maybe I'm wrong on something seemingly subjective. It sounds most reasonable not to attend the Rummy award ceremony at all, but personally I would be tempted to take up a seat only to abandon it as some speech or whatever began.
But to sit there, suggesting at least passive acceptance that he deserves the reward? How is that not degrading oneself?
- Joined
- May 10, 2007
- Messages
- 11,277
You must be confused, I am going to walk out if an opportunity presents itself.
Regardless of what we do, the media is going to say we're all homosexuals and that's why Ron Paul won.
Our movement is constantly criticized for talking much but doing little. Every time I turn around, someone is complaining about our rights being violated by the state and ranting that “people will not do anything about it”. The people are constantly getting blamed for the tyranny of the state. While some of the blame is deserved, the reasons are more philosophical and not for this conversation. The point is that here is a chance to actually do something that is newsworthy yet is non-violent and has a very low risk for bad press. Look, huge numbers of people hate this guy and even more people are sick that he is getting this award. So here comes a good man with a good plan for polite (enough) disagreement, and we are told we should NOT DO ANYTHING. Why? Because it would be “RUDE”!? OK Miss Manners, so it will end up that, even with all the objection (as reported throughout the MSM), Rumsfeld will receive this peace award without any detectable dissent from the audience?? Is that the objective? I mean if we are worried about bad press, I worry about what kind of press our nation will get from the world when our prime warmonger is awarded for his tyranny and not a hint of objection is seen or heard from the people at the ceremony.
So we are always told we’re supposed to do something about state tyranny, BUT now we are instructed to not be rude when the state gives its main mass-murderer a peace award. I don’t know which is more sickening; the award, or the instructions. Give me a break! Not doing something will be far ruder to a very large chunk of the observing world.
I think the individual that said something to the tune of “I know I will be walking out” has it right. Make it an individual decision and forget about whether the group plan will work or not. Or maybe there is a less rude way; just stand up and turn your back for the duration of the speech. Look at it this way: If you end up being the only one to “jump in the cold water”, there is a very good chance that the next day you will be a hero to a great percent of the world – and everyone will want to know your name.
Personally if I had a chance to go and declined to chance to do something, my next day would probably not be all that great.
So we are always told we’re supposed to do something about state tyranny, BUT now we are instructed to not be rude when the state gives its main mass-murderer a peace award. I don’t know which is more sickening; the award, or the instructions. Give me a break! Not doing something will be far ruder to a very large chunk of the observing world.
I think the individual that said something to the tune of “I know I will be walking out” has it right. Make it an individual decision and forget about whether the group plan will work or not. Or maybe there is a less rude way; just stand up and turn your back for the duration of the speech. Look at it this way: If you end up being the only one to “jump in the cold water”, there is a very good chance that the next day you will be a hero to a great percent of the world – and everyone will want to know your name.
Personally if I had a chance to go and declined to chance to do something, my next day would probably not be all that great.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 10, 2007
- Messages
- 11,277
I would recommend against it. If you have the opportunity, just walk out politely.
sailingaway
Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2010
- Messages
- 72,103
NO ONE here is suggesting people should stay for the farce of calling R the 'defender of the Constitution.' People would likely vomit, which would also be rude. The question is whether people walk out en masse right after Rand's speech, not waiting for the next event, and leaving R to face an empty room, or wait until R is introduced and stand up and walk out in the 'abandon it only as he begins' approach you mention second.
However, people have different ideas on the action to take. My view is that the entirety of being at CPAC is goal oriented (Ron Paul 2012) and I would evaluate actions that reflect on Ron strategically towards that goal, not towards satisfying any other agenda. I would gladly walk out on the man in a noncampaign oriented setting. But others disagree and will act as they think most appropriate. Personally, I'd really enjoy the spectacle, I just wouldn't think it was worth adverse impact on Dr. Paul's campaign.
sailingaway
Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2010
- Messages
- 72,103
I saw an article yesterday saying that one way the Young Americans for Freedom was taken over from the Goldwater supporters who started it, was that the new neocons just made it unpleasant enough so our sort just didn't want to spend time there. The article indicated this is about when the Libertarian party formed (I have no idea if that is true.) However, one thing the article mentioned that was done to drive out the fiscal cons was to refer to them derisively as gays and pot smokers.... a favorite term being 'lazy fairies' -- for 'laisse faire'......
So if they follow with your hunch it will be well grounded in tradition....
JVParkour
Member
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2008
- Messages
- 749
Here is what I think you should do. From my past experiences at CPAC, there is usually a few minutes of delay between speakers. I say that everyone sits tight after Rand talks for a few minutes, until you see the guy introducing Rumsfeld prepping off to the side. THEN AND ONLY THEN should everyone walk out. I think this is the best strategy because it doesn't give the crowd that will be outside enough time to come in and fill up the empty seats. If you leave as soon as Rand is done, then other people will have a chance to come and fill the empty seats, defeating the purpose. So, I say wait till like, 10 seconds before the guy comes up to introduce him.
The walk-out point will be made, no disruptions, respectful, and still tactful because other people wont have enough time to fill the empty seats.
The walk-out point will be made, no disruptions, respectful, and still tactful because other people wont have enough time to fill the empty seats.
- Joined
- May 10, 2007
- Messages
- 11,277
Agent provacateurs have been used for decades as you know. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_provocateur US specific: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO
If we give up on our own genuine polite activism in fear of the way we will be portrayed, then they win.
They will portray us as bad even when we're good. The real independent news websites - social news, forums, etc, will take note of the good activism.
By the way, it looks like Victoria's Secret has a new line called Agent Provacateur. I'm sold!
specsaregood
Member
- Joined
- May 21, 2007
- Messages
- 39,143
That is not the suggested behavior I was referring to. In fact, I agree wholeheartedly with that. Get up and leave after Rand's speech; leaving the good seats for the people that actually want to hear captain aspartame. No need to wait and interrupt things.
- Joined
- May 10, 2007
- Messages
- 11,277
lol, I'd like to think this is the page most are on.
If we can propagate this as the plan, it would be nice.
When trying to organize and you take volunteers and agent provacateurs into the equation, you are left with an endless number of outcomes. So really, there is no organizing. It's hayekian chaos!
I'd like for us to take special note of anyone that does try and cause a truly provocative disturbance.
Take note of the black boots they are wearing.
trey4sports
Member
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2007
- Messages
- 12,588
i was thinking more of a walk-out-when-Rumsfeld-is-announced type of thing, so as to show I wont support neocons
Similar threads
