search
top

You Can Take Your CPAC and Shove It!

Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) is today, tomorrow and Saturday. All I have to say is that CPAC and the American Conservative Union that runs can go get bent as far as I’m concerned. Why? Because they have chosen to exclude gay conservative groups from their conference. I will not blog about CPAC, blog about ACU, except to say that they are short sighted and narrow minded, who are afraid to tell social conservatives to suck it up and deal with the fact that there are gay people in this world, and some of them are generally conservative.

I grant conservative groups their religious views on homosexuality. I don’t agree with it, but I get it. Is this really the year to be narrowing the coalition? Is this a good election to say we don’t need those votes? Sorry, but another four years of Obama is going to do a lot more to hurt “family values” than being near gay people for a few days.

25 Responses to “You Can Take Your CPAC and Shove It!”

  1. ParatrooperJJ says:

    As is your choice, but the majority of Rs disagree with you…

  2. Dannytheman says:

    Ignoring it will not make it go away! I already let my CPAC friends know how I feel, which agrees more with you. All we can do is educate, and hope some important people speaking there will open the door for the future.

    There is so much wrong in politics that we can argue over, Adam and Eve versus Adam and Steve should not be one of them!

    • Sebastian says:

      It takes courage to be a gay conservative. The leftists in the gay community will ostracize gays who don’t toe the line. If they want to get excited about conservative candidates and values, they can help the ball move forward. I say welcome their votes and help.

  3. SGB says:

    I have to agree with Sebastian. With the very serious issues facing the Republic (Survival), ostracizing a group of like minded people politically because of their sexual orientation is a bad idea.

    While I grant social conservatives their religious beliefs, just as I keep mine close to my heart, I do not find there to be a rational explanation for excluding people who can help advance the cause of more freedom. Bending to the stereotypes of the left merely strengthens their hold.

    This WILL change but the timing should be now to avoid even more powerful consequences later.

  4. Sage Thrasher says:

    Gay rights activists are also prominent in RKBA rights,e.g. if you’ve ever been to a SAF conference. Anti-gay bias is a losing issue that gets worse the younger the voter group you try to appeal to.

  5. Zermoid says:

    “Sorry, but another eight years of Obama”

    Uhm, 4 not 8 dude.
    He’s already got 4 years, if he’s re-elected (shudders at the thought) he gets another 4 years, not 8. Unless he declares himself Dictator for Life anyway……

  6. ActionSaxon says:

    I agree with Sebastian.

    It all comes down to Aggression. Do you think that it is okay to force your beliefs on other people? If you do, what do you think about them forcing their beliefs on you? If your way is so good, lead by example. The “Wise restraints that make men free” are self imposed, not enforced by others.

    “Your freedom to swing your fist ends at the other man’s nose” (-T.M.) Cuts BOTH ways.

    I am a financially conservative WASP heterosexual male gun owner. I don’t care about YOUR choice of partners as long as they are consenting adults (ever wondered why they call it the age of consent?) The Democratic Party lost me before I was old enough to vote because of their behavior in MY state (NY.) The GOP is loosing me because they pander to bigots. Yes I said it, BIGOTS! You are absolutely entitled to live as you choose, exercise freedom of association and worship as you choose. I will even help to protect YOUR rights to do so! It doesn’t mean I have to choose to live your way and I’ll be damned if I will let you FORCE me!

    I guess this is where the Libertarian movement comes from…

  7. “Is this really the year to be narrowing the coalition?”

    Aren’t you doing that right now?

    • Sebastian says:

      I’m OK with SoCos in the coalition, if they can agree to compromise on some things. I have to compromise on quite a bit, like abortion, drug policy, and fourth amendment issues, to stay in the coalition myself. I think accepting gays into the coalition, even if you don’t accept their lifestyle, isn’t much of a compromise.

      • Bitter says:

        Here’s the thing, you’re not actually actually asking them to compromise. You’re not telling them they must conform to you. This is about backing candidates, and different parts of the platform will appeal to different parts of the coalition. Sometimes, we won’t back the same candidates, and that’s okay.

        I think the frustration here is that CPAC pretends it represents a wide portion of the conservative movement, yet they run out a group that supports most of the general right-side-of-the-aisle platform. That’s the issue. It would be like running NRA out because they support Sunday hunting that provides temptation that keeps people out of church.

        I also think it’s worth noting that under David Keene’s leadership, ACU did allow GOProud to participate in CPAC.

      • Considering gay marriage is pretty much the hot button social issue in current politics, it’s a pretty big compromise. Also SoCos have largely given to get on abortion. Drug policy and fourth amendment issues are not solely SoCo planks in the party platform. I think you’ll find a lot of younger SoCos who would be fine with a more libertarian viewing of those issues as well.

        More importantly, you’re whole post is “I’m not having anything to do with the ACU or CPAC because of GOProud. The current fight is too important for this divisiveness.” But you’re also being divisive. Your reaction to their stupid divisiveness is not peacemaking. It is picking a side and intraparty condemnation. This is also divisiveness and is not helping.

  8. I’m actually quite surprised CPAC did that.

  9. Watchman says:

    An important factor in this is that SOCOs (as represented at CPAC) often give lip service to gun issues to lure us into a coalition that will advance their fortunes, while they don’t deliver anything substantial for us. Meanwhile, they never compromise one iota on their SOCO issues in order to empower anyone but their own.

    When you receive alerts from some of our national gun rights organization (other than the NRA) that hype some candidate or praise some legislator, check the background of the individuals hyped. Nine times out of ten you’ll find they have sterling credentials as a SOCO — usually a religious conservative — but only sketchy credentials as a gun rights advocate — at least in terms of anything other than gesture and rhetorical politics.

  10. ecurb says:

    I hate posting just to agree with the OP, but…
    *nods in complete agreement*

    Many of us are willing to make a lot of compromises to avoid caucusing with freedom-hating ninnies on the left.
    It seems very short-sighted to lose a double opportunity like that, but the right’s strategic planning is awful these days, as shown by the deliberate alienation of socially conservative hispanics.

  11. NukemJim says:

    ” The GOP is loosing me because they pander to bigots. Yes I said it, BIGOTS! You are absolutely entitled to live as you choose, exercise freedom of association and worship as you choose. I will even help to protect YOUR rights to do so! It doesn’t mean I have to choose to live your way and I’ll be damned if I will let you FORCE me!”

    IMHO the Republican Party has been taken over by crazies who are more concerned about their ideas than reality.

    From what I’ve read the majority of americans are MOR but the Republicans have gone increasingly extreme in some areas and the Democrats already were extremists in the other direction. But it is increasingly difficult to find MOR candidates to vote for.

    Becoming increasingly worried about long term prospects.

    NukemJim

    • Wes says:

      lol, soon “libertarian” will be the new “moderate.” Or maybe it already is.

  12. Wes says:

    There’s a great video on youtube of Michelle Bachmann at a meet and greet, and a little, shy, 8 or so year-old boy walks up with his mom. He’s really quiet, so Bachmann bends down to hear him. He whispers in her ear: “My mom is gay and doesn’t need fixing.”

    The Republican Party sure is good at alienating people. Hell, the “small government party” even banned online gambling, thus alienating a whole lot of people for years to come. I can fight in Iraq, but I can’t play poker?

  13. Andy B. says:

    I have been preaching for awhile now that America may be approaching a condition analogous to that of Germany in the early 1930s, where in fact the only two viable and energetic political factions are the extreme left and the extreme right.

    In that scenario the “middle” position is not “moderate,” it is libertarian — resisting coercion by either the left or the right and rejecting authoritarianism from either faction. Unfortunately what is known in politics today as libertarian has been heavily perverted to mean “social conservative with a few quirks,” but that’s a subject for another thread.

  14. Buycotts are a far better idea. What is the alternative to CPAC? Should I seek out a video feed from the Occupy crowd from the sidewalk of CPAC?

top