AFP Summit This Saturday

Americans For Prosperity will hold their Defending The American Dream Summit this Saturday at the Cobb Galleria. Click here for the details.

Americans for Prosperity-GA is set to unveil “The Aftermath Initiative”, a conservative counter-strategy with Take Back America Breakout Sessions and electrifying speakers at this weekend’s Defending the American Dream Summit. Don’t Miss This Event! Get Tickets NOW at www.AmericansForProsperity.org/Georgia.

The day long event is becoming a central rallying point for conservatives and tea party-type activists with appearances by prominent speakers and training sessions on how to use both new and traditional media to get out the vote in Decision 2010. Sessions will also focus on campaign strategy and grassroots mobilization. Training will be led by experts from The Leadership Institute, Americans for Prosperity, Faith & Freedom Coalition and others.

Among the scheduled speakers is some guy named Erick Erickson.

22 comments

  1. I Am Jacks Post says:

    “So that’s the crux of the strategy? Get out the vote 2010?”

    Nope. To liquidate unsold copies of “Dark Horse.”

  2. Game Fan says:

    But my question is how does this pass without a vote by the Senate? I still don’t get it. And where’s the outrage? Even Eric Von Hessler (Mr. Tea Partier/”We want more freedom”) is on the same page with USA Today. “It’s a done deal folks”… WTF?

    • ByteMe says:

      How does what pass without a vote? The reconciliation bill was being debated today with votes to follow.

        • ByteMe says:

          I still don’t understand the issue you are perceiving.

          The HCR bill passed the Senate and House under usual procedures rules and was signed into law. The reconciliation plan changes the numbers around and is proceeding under reconciliation rules.

          Where exactly is the Senate not voting on something?

          As for the outrage you seek, I’m sure Fox News will have something for you soon.

          • GOPGeorgia says:

            Byte be honest.

            It was not passed under “usual procedures.” Which subcommittee voted for approval of it?

            • ByteMe says:

              Why does a subcommittee have to vote for it? Are you saying that having the full House vote for it and your representative record his Nay is not enough to make it a law?

              Seriously?

              Grift is right: that’s gonna make a snappy bumper sticker when compared to “Vote Republican If You Don’t Have a Pre-Existing Condition.”

              • GOPGeorgia says:

                Byte, being honest, most bills are passed through subcommittees. You said it was passed in the usual way. I am saying it wasn’t. I didn’t say that violated the rules of the house, I’m just saying that it was not handled in the usual manor. I didn’t say it wasn’t a law. It still feel it’s unconstitutional, but that will be decided by the SCOTUS and not by us.

                There are things in the bill that I like, but that doesn’t make it consitutional or the best bill it could have been.

                There are snappy bumper stickers out there: “Kill the Bill”, “Repeal the Bill”, “Can you hear us now?”, and so on. I wasn’t out to make a bumper sticker argument, but if I were, I think I’d try: “Flip this House” with a pic of the white house or the capitol…. or maybe one pic for 2010 and the other for 2012.

                • ByteMe says:

                  Rhetorical question: what’s the point of having a bill go through subcommittee?

                  Answer: It’s to research, debate, and change it.

                  Multiple committees already dealt with the exact same topic last year and had numerous votes and meetings and so forth. There was no need to research anything further, debate anything further, and change wasn’t an option given the Republican strategy of being for “No”. Subcommittees and even committees for examining the bill would be a waste of time and money.

                  So there we are. Nothing unusual about what went on. Very logical outcome to a very clear set of input. Or are you also going to claim that the Republican strategy of “No” and incessant unnecessary delay is “usual” and desired?

                  • Bill Greene says:

                    Actually, if the Republicans would really use a strategy of “No” and incessant delays, it WOULD be desirable, but it would be VERY unusual, as they have proven to have very little testicular fortitude in the past.

                    • Game Fan says:

                      So, unless I’m missing something here, (and I may be, just asking) the House and the Senate did NOT vote on the identical bill. I mean these so-called “procedures” are real nifty and everything, and we can surely thank some “Republicans” who don’t have a clue about conservatism for participating in the charade, but this doesn’t exactly lend credibility to dis here new “law”. I mean, I know it’s a lot to ask but do ya think that maybe, just maybe our so-called “leaders” could go by the “procedure” for passing “laws” in the manner that we all learned about in schoolhouse rock? You know, the way the Constitution authorizes? The way the entire system of government is intended to operate?

                      (Newser) – Nancy Pelosi thinks she can pass the Senate health care bill in the House without forcing members to vote on it. Instead, she’d have lawmakers vote on a package of popular fixes for the Senate bill, and deploy a House rule that allows that vote to be used to “deem” the health care bill to be passed, the Washington Post explains.
                      http://www.newser.com/story/83380/pelosi-may-skip-vote-on-senate-health-care-bill.html

                    • ByteMe says:

                      GF: you’re looking at old news. The D&P strategy wasn’t used. The House voted FOR the Senate bill (HR 3590, which is now the law). They then voted for a reconciliation bill that adjusts the numbers and that bill went back to the Senate, where the Parliamentarian stripped a few provisions out as being outside of reconciliation process and the Senate voted for that. Now this bill is back in the House for a final vote.

                      And next they get to go out and screw up the financial system more than it’s already screwed up.

                  • GOPGeorgia says:

                    Byte,

                    Do you really think the GOP offered no amendments to the bill? We all know that none were considered by the Dems, but I think you are being less than honest. If you like, send me your e-mail and I’ll send you about 70 different amendments that were offered but not considered. Such much for being bipartisan.

                    • ByteMe says:

                      Actually, if you watched the vote-o-rama, numerous (a hundred?) amendments were offered up in the Senate for the reconciliation bill… and all were not only considered by the entire Senate, but then voted down.

                      Remember: blatant corruption and mismanagement has consequences in most of the country (just not in Georgia, it seems).

                    • GOPGeorgia says:

                      I didn’t watch the reconciliation bill vote, but I did try to pay attention to the vote on the main bill held on Sunday.

                      Here’s what CNN thought of it:

  3. Game Fan says:

    Right now, if there were such a thing as a national referendum, I’d say a majority of Americans, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, independent, ect… would prefer a “do over” with health care legislation. Something that’s seen and understood by anyone with an interest in the subject, including the politicians voting on the matter. A simple bill which is voted on by the House, the Senate and possibly signed by the prez. The same bill. With more than 72 hours to read the damned thing. Because right now, it doesn’t look like the Democrats have learned anything about the “hope” and “change” that put them there in the first place.

  4. benevolus says:

    I don’t think they really want to Take Back America. They want to Take America Back. As in, to 1954. Or maybe 1854.

Comments are closed.