Topic: CPAC has begun and so continues the infighting and wrangling ....

[Pandora]

... between "factions".  The Libertarian/Fi-Cons heaping opprobrium on the SoCons because GOProud was not invited to speak.

http://pjmedia.com/vodkapundit/2013/03/13/gay-haters-gotta-hate/

That's Stephen Greene targeting Cliff Kincaid for being a "gay hater" because he dares to decry the GOP's pale imitation of identity politics, particularly as regards homosexuality advocacy:

"The term “gay conservative” is being used by some news outlets in connection with the upcoming Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) and whether certain homosexual groups should be invited to appear. There is no such thing as a “gay conservative,” unless the term “conservative” has lost all meaning. But there is a homosexual movement that has its roots in Marxism and is characterized by anti-Americanism and hatred of Christian values."

Tell me where he's wrong because I agree with him.  The most visible, vocal of them are everything he describes them as being, and even from the supposed "right" side of the aisle comes the smear of "hater" because, today, telling the truth is seen as a radical act.

Greene makes references to his good friend, a blogger who calls himself "Gay Patriot", as the best example of big-tent Conservativism via inclusion, totally missing the point made by many of the commenters that there's no good conservative reason for the guy to identify himself first as "gay", second as "patriot".

[Glock32]

They pretend that it has no bearing on the larger scale, even as we now have conferences at universities that aim to normalize incest, pedophilia, and bestiality. They pretend that you can put a wall around strictly economic issues and to hell with everything else, as if you can have anything like a trustworthy economy on a social backdrop bereft of morality. They pretend "what people do in their own homes" has no bearing on the rest of us until it's the rest of us being expected to redefine marriage and all that it entails (adoption of children), until the rest of us now have to accept a redefinition of male and female as being whatever an individual wants it to mean. Now you can get a passport issued with the sex being the one you choose to "identify" with.

I am really tired of being told social issues are merely irrelevant wedge issues. The social issues are exactly the part of America that has rotted and left us with what we now endure every day.

[IronDioPriest]

I have no issue with homosexual conservatives, so long as they leave me the hell alone and don't get any on me. I do have an issue with homosexual groups, regardless of their ideological claim. If half the attendees at C-PAC were conservatives who happen to be gay, it wouldn't bother me half as much as a sole gay advocacy booth set up in the corner proclaiming homosexuality as the thing that unites it and conservatism its cause, because I know the agenda of such groups will inevitably be to transform the larger group to bend to its will regarding its primary unifying cause.

Go-Proud exists for one reason: to cause conflict within the conservative caucus and division over its agenda.

[Pandora]

I have no issue with homosexual conservatives, so long as they leave me the hell alone and don't get any on me. I do have an issue with homosexual groups, regardless of their ideological claim. If half the attendees at C-PAC were conservatives who happen to be gay, it wouldn't bother me half as much as a sole gay advocacy booth set up in the corner proclaiming homosexuality as the thing that unites it and conservatism its cause, because I know the agenda of such groups will inevitably be to transform the larger group to bend to its will regarding its primary unifying cause.

Go-Proud exists for one reason: to cause conflict within the conservative caucus and division over its agenda.

Concur. 

It's the different agendas competing for attention, legislation and money causing division, which leads me to ask why it is acceptable and tolerated that there *are* competing agendas.  If we're not all just Conservatives promoting the same agenda and principles, then what exactly are "we" doing and what's the point.

Women's "issues", "gay issues", children's "issues", "minority issues"?  WTF.  All very Proggy sounding to me.

[IronDioPriest]

Coalitions of special interest groups are by their very nature non-conservative, save those special interest groups that are defined by their conservatism. Interest group coalition politics does not mesh with conservatism. Oil and water.

That is why the Republican brand is so damaged. They've abandoned the principles in favor of trying to cobble together special interest groups like the Leftists do.

If we could just get a few more Blacks/Latinos/homosexuals/soccer-moms/youfillintheblankheres, THEN we could have a winning coalition. They've killed the brand dead.

[Glock32]

Right. It should be "we believe the government that governs best is that which governs least; no one know what is best for the individual but the individual; the Constitution is the framework and government is subordinate to it; the Constitution is not up for election at any time and cannot be countermanded by statute, if you want to modify it then there is a process to do so and it deliberately imposes a difficult test".

Those basics create a civil society that is automatically beneficial to everyone without regard to their special this or that, because their special this or that doesn't matter. What matters is that they are individual human beings possessing inherent liberties. Period. End of story.

[Weisshaupt]

I am still trying to figure out why I should care about CPAC in general, much less who attends or who is allowed to speak.
At this point a bunch of people jibber-jabbering about what defines Conservative values is moot.   No freedom loving, Constitution Upholding, American Patriot  will ever be elected to office again.

Anything short of a call to unified  disobedience  to the illegitimate govt is pointless.  They have stopped obeying the Constitution, stating that in modern times its irrelevant. Since that document creates their offices and  defines their power, they too are irrelevant.  I want to hear their screams about how we are braking the law. The Law says we MUST.  And we say, I do not recognize your law,  for it was formed without my consent. You want my submission, show the world what you really are. A Bully. A Thug. A person who beleives that Might makes right.  You may win by killing me, but my compliance, and my sanction of your actions is not on the table. Do as you will, take what you will be force,  but you will do it without the mask of legitimacy.

[Pandora]

I am still trying to figure out why I should care about CPAC in general, much less who attends or who is allowed to speak.

No reason to care at all, really.  I created the thread as an outlet for my own outrage that I no longer recognize where the hell I live or who the hell these people are.

At this point a bunch of people jibber-jabbering about what defines Conservative values is moot.   No freedom loving, Constitution Upholding, American Patriot  will ever be elected to office again.

Anything short of a call to unified  disobedience  to the illegitimate govt is pointless.  They have stopped obeying the Constitution, stating that in modern times its irrelevant. Since that document creates their offices and  defines their power, they too are irrelevant.  I want to hear their screams about how we are braking the law. The Law says we MUST.  And we say, I do not recognize your law,  for it was formed without my consent. You want my submission, show the world what you really are. A Bully. A Thug. A person who beleives that Might makes right.  You may win by killing me, but my compliance, and my sanction of your actions is not on the table. Do as you will, take what you will be force,  but you will do it without the mask of legitimacy.

Yes.

[Alphabet Soup]

I have no issue with homosexual conservatives, so long as they leave me the hell alone and don't get any on me. I do have an issue with homosexual groups, regardless of their ideological claim. If half the attendees at C-PAC were conservatives who happen to be gay, it wouldn't bother me half as much as a sole gay advocacy booth set up in the corner proclaiming homosexuality as the thing that unites it and conservatism its cause, because I know the agenda of such groups will inevitably be to transform the larger group to bend to its will regarding its primary unifying cause.

Go-Proud exists for one reason: to cause conflict within the conservative caucus and division over its agenda.

 

I am so friggin tired of identity politics. And you're right about go-proud - they were meant to embarrass the pubbies and have ended up splitting the conservatives. F them all. Most people now appear to be on the fast-track to oblivion. They have to make do without me.

[charlesoakwood]

When was the last time CPAC had a significant influence on the choice of presidential candidate.
They are just another sideshow at the circus.

[Dan]

Yeah, isn't this supposed to be a personal issue and nobody else's business?
Stop making it my business.
GOProud is clearly a sheep in wolfs clothing, trying to cause fracture.
And CPAC lost me when they kowtowed to islam.

[warpmine]

... between "factions".  The Libertarian/Fi-Cons heaping opprobrium on the SoCons because GOProud was not invited to speak.

http://pjmedia.com/vodkapundit/2013/03/13/gay-haters-gotta-hate/

That's Stephen Greene targeting Cliff Kincaid for being a "gay hater" because he dares to decry the GOP's pale imitation of identity politics, particularly as regards homosexuality advocacy:

"The term “gay conservative” is being used by some news outlets in connection with the upcoming Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) and whether certain homosexual groups should be invited to appear. There is no such thing as a “gay conservative,” unless the term “conservative” has lost all meaning. But there is a homosexual movement that has its roots in Marxism and is characterized by anti-Americanism and hatred of Christian values."

Tell me where he's wrong because I agree with him.  The most visible, vocal of them are everything he describes them as being, and even from the supposed "right" side of the aisle comes the smear of "hater" because, today, telling the truth is seen as a radical act.

Greene makes references to his good friend, a blogger who calls himself "Gay Patriot", as the best example of big-tent Conservativism via inclusion, totally missing the point made by many of the commenters that there's no good conservative reason for the guy to identify himself first as "gay", second as "patriot".

Thanks in part to Grover, the Troll, Norquist, conservatism has been infiltrated by Arabist so if you look at the movement and what these other are trying to do, one could easily see them both as moles designed to destroy our movement from within.

I may watch Sens Lee and Cruz  at CPAC but I won't go out of m y way to listen to others because of the Norquist problem.

[charlesoakwood]

Ted Cruz Went To The Senate To Chew Bubblegum And Kick Ass. He's Out Of Bubblegum

The Senate Judiciary Committee sent an "assault weapons" ban and an expanded background check bills to the full Senate today. But first, Ted Cruz reminded Diane Feinstein that we have a Constitution and that you can't apply the standard that she does to say the First or Fourth Amendments.

She was not amused.
  

“I'm not a sixth grader,” she told the freshman Tea Party favorite. “I'm not a lawyer, but after 20 years I've been up close and personal to the Constitution. I have great respect for it … it's fine you want to lecture me on the Constitution. I appreciate it. Just know I've been here for a long time. I've passed on a number of bills. I've studied the Constitution myself. I am reasonably well educated, and I thank you for the lecture.”

"Sounds like he tweeked her just a bit."

[Pandora]

Ted Cruz Went To The Senate To Chew Bubblegum And Kick Ass. He's Out Of Bubblegum

The Senate Judiciary Committee sent an "assault weapons" ban and an expanded background check bills to the full Senate today. But first, Ted Cruz reminded Diane Feinstein that we have a Constitution and that you can't apply the standard that she does to say the First or Fourth Amendments.

She was not amused.
  

“I'm not a sixth grader,” she told the freshman Tea Party favorite. “I'm not a lawyer, but after 20 years I've been up close and personal to the Constitution. I have great respect for it … it's fine you want to lecture me on the Constitution. I appreciate it. Just know I've been here for a long time. I've passed on a number of bills. I've studied the Constitution myself. I am reasonably well educated, and I thank you for the lecture.”

"Sounds like he tweeked her just a bit."

The only up close and personal she's been to the Constitution was when she walked by the copy kept in an air-tight showcase, which is to say, not so much.

As for her version of respect and reasonably well-educated, again, not so much.

Ted Cruz took her to school and Feinie don't like 'at.

[ChrstnHsbndFthr]

I do not go out of my way to offend people, even leftists, but if they are offended by him asking a constitutional question, and SHE WAS, then TOUGH cookies.

He is offending the right people at the very least. If the communist left are upset with him, he is by definition MY friend. These new conservatives are giving me HOPE once again. Cruz, Lee, Rand, Scott, Rubio, etc.....not perfect, but BETTER than Feinstein and her ilk. (I am not sure how much better the old GOP, like McCain and Graham are. I suspect I will be contributing to primary challengers this election in SC.)

Ted Cruz Went To The Senate To Chew Bubblegum And Kick Ass. He's Out Of Bubblegum

The Senate Judiciary Committee sent an "assault weapons" ban and an expanded background check bills to the full Senate today. But first, Ted Cruz reminded Diane Feinstein that we have a Constitution and that you can't apply the standard that she does to say the First or Fourth Amendments.

She was not amused.
  

“I'm not a sixth grader,” she told the freshman Tea Party favorite. “I'm not a lawyer, but after 20 years I've been up close and personal to the Constitution. I have great respect for it … it's fine you want to lecture me on the Constitution. I appreciate it. Just know I've been here for a long time. I've passed on a number of bills. I've studied the Constitution myself. I am reasonably well educated, and I thank you for the lecture.”

"Sounds like he tweeked her just a bit."

[AmericanPatriot]

Other than Rubio, I like your list

[Libertas]

Yeah Rubio is becoming the GOP's "identity politics" darling, I'll pass.

The GOP is still at war with conservatives, the kind of conservatism that Reagan promoted...he showed you can be prioncipled and if your words match your deeds people will see that those principles are everyones principles, those principles do not require any litmus test to pass that is dependent upon race or creed or any of that, the only litmus test is the spirit of the Declaration and the Founding principles enshrined in the Constitution and defined by original intent.  And it worked, Reagan had Democrats switching parties in droves, he attracted women and minorities, he had a grand coalition of the willing and able.  And then the Ruling Class asshats that tried so long to prevent Reagan from rising had their chance again once he left, and it has been a mad dash downhill ever since.

CPAC being infiltrated and co-opted?  Yeah, shocked I am not.

The GOP is dying, best thing to do is stay out of the way and not get sucked down with them.

[charlesoakwood]

The GOP and the NFL are making the same mistake, passification.

[charlesoakwood]

http://www.nextgeneration.tv/?cmd=mpg&load=8158&mpid=581

Thank you for watching NextGeneration.TV. As a "visitor" you have 13 more videos you can watch. After that you will need to register (free) and login to see more videos.
Allen West Kicks Off CPAC 2013: The Next Generation of Conservative Leadership (Mar. 14, 2013)

[IronDioPriest]

I'm not ready to throw Rubio under the bus yet just because of how the GOP mistakenly believes he is some inoculation against charges of racism from the Leftists. That mistake has already been proved in how the Left attacks him and his heritage.

He does disappoint me on illegal immigration, but not because I disagree with him 100%. He disappoints me because on that issue, he panders, and you can tell how hard he is trying to fulfill the GOP's perceived need to pander. He's accepted the role of immigration poster boy, and the reason I don't like it is partly because it taints this otherwise astonishingly capable conservative politician. Otherwise, on illegal immigration, there is NO solution short of deportation and a wall that I would be in 100% agreement with. His solutions seem less offensive to me than the rest.

Aside from that issue, on matters of government's role; its size and scope; constitutional government; economy - I find very little not to like. And that is all before the fact that he is a good and naturally charismatic orator, and seemingly a very nice man.

On another note: it is VERY nice to see conservatives like Rick Perry and Rand Paul willing to call out the GOP establishment by all but specific name; drawing a line between the old and the new. It may well be far too late for such an attempt to take the brand away from the likes of John McCain, but it's nice to see prominent people trying.