CPAC 2010: Final thoughts

posted at 2:15 pm on February 21, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

I’ve been to four CPACs, attending every one since 2007, and each one has had a different vibe.  In the first, the primary campaign had just gotten underway, and the silliness of the campaigning for the straw poll got out of hand.  John McCain snubbed conservatives that year, preferring to appear on Jay Leno’s show than at the Omni Shoreham.  Few of us thought twice about Barack Obama except as a possibility as running mate for Hillary Clinton.  In 2008, the capitulation of Mitt Romney to McCain — who showed up and apologized for his snub the previous year — deflated the conference.  Last year was introspective after the November 2008 drubbing at all levels, and that CPAC was spent wondering how to reconnect to voters — and whether we could make conservatism relevant in the near future.

Obviously, this 2010 CPAC was much, much different.  Gone are the self-doubts, washed away by the tremendous overreach of Democrats once they seized all of the reins of power.  Suddenly, conservatism and small government are not only relevant, but fiscal conservatism especially has become transcendent.  Grassroots power has challenged the establishment of both parties, and while CPAC is somewhat more establishment than the Tea Parties, it took a decidedly bottom-up view this year rather than the top-down impulse that we’ve seen before.

This year’s convention had new digs; it outgrew the stately Omni Shoreham, and instead moved to the massive Marriott Wardman Park.  That was a good move, probably a little overdue by CPAC organizers.  Access to the main room was much improved, and the extra space meant better navigation and easier walking to the various side events and breakout sessions.  Bloggers Row was simply amazing, with direct access to the main stage via a balcony and room for more than 200 participants — a far cry from the parking-garage environment that handled at best 30 bloggers.

Even better, it seemed that this year conservatives and candidates finally understand the centrality of fiscal conservatism, economic liberty, and strong national defense to building the kind of coalition that will challenge statists and big-spending incumbents of both parties.  Glenn Beck hit a perfect note when he said that the GOP needed to admit it had an addiction to big spending and pork-barrel politics.  The attendees underscored that lesson when they reacted angrily to an attack on gay conservatives on Friday, sending the speaker packing for his remarks (Students for Liberty has two videos that show the incident in its full context).  The crisis in America has arisen in the massive expansion of government control of American lives, or at least the Democrats’ attempts to make it happen, and we need as many allies as we can get to stop it.

The straw poll results were interesting, but not for the fact that Ron Paul’s Campaign for Liberty crowd managed to manipulate it, something we saw throughout 2007 and early 2008, too.   Putting aside the C4L push, I was surprised to see Mitt Romney come in second at CPAC with 22%, despite not having much organization at this event — or perhaps just one somewhat more subtle than Paul’s.  Sarah Palin only got 7%, perhaps a reflection of her decision to snub the event rather publicly and deliberately.  Tim Pawlenty, who gave a good speech, came in a surprising fourth just behind Palin at 6%.   Mike Huckabee tied for sixth place on the poll, behind Rep. Mike Pence and even with Newt Gingrich, who also gave a good speech.  I would have predicted a win for Palin here, especially with the momentum of the Tea Parties behind her.

The presidential straw poll is at best a sideshow.  Most people here weren’t thinking about 2012; they were working on 2010.  Expect that focus to sharpen even more as the fired-up activists return home with a renewed sense of mission and an explosion of energy.  The CPAC attendees think they may make history in November, and it’s hard not to agree with that assessment.  This looks to be the most successful CPAC I’ve attended.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Congrats Ed on your achievement! Love watching all the speakers and I can’t remember when I’ve seen this much enthusiasm at CPAC.

Conservalicious on February 21, 2010 at 2:29 PM

It’s the economy, stupid. Tattoo it on your foreheads. The bums lost.

Now, will the GOP continue to be hypocritical bums and lose to the class/race/gender bums, or will they get their act together and bring sanity back to DC?

I don’t think they’re capable. We know the Dems won’t stop with their statist lunacy, and there’s no real indication the GOP will either.

Metro on February 21, 2010 at 2:30 PM

Your thoughts and dispatches from CPAC have been very inspiring Ed. Great job! I hope you get some vacation time after this week but selfishly I’d rather you continue to be chained to your keyboard.

Monica on February 21, 2010 at 2:30 PM

Ron Paul 2012!!

****SRLC has not yet invited Ron Paul to their convention*****

If they do, he will win of course.

Spathi on February 21, 2010 at 2:31 PM

They invited pro-choice arnold schwarzenegger as a speaker and Greasy Rick Perry as well.

Spathi on February 21, 2010 at 2:33 PM

The straw poll results were interesting, but not for the fact that Ron Paul’s Campaign for Liberty crowd managed to manipulate it, something we saw throughout 2007 and early 2008, too. Putting aside the C4L push, I was surprised to see Mitt Romney come in second at CPAC with 22%, despite not having much organization at this event — or perhaps just one somewhat more subtle than Paul’s.

When Romney packs the house his guys it’s not manipulating of course though right?

Hey will be Romney be able to defeat Paul next year?

I doubt it.

Spathi on February 21, 2010 at 2:35 PM

Ed, thanks for all the hard work and great reporting/blogging.

OmahaConservative on February 21, 2010 at 2:36 PM

We know the Dems won’t stop with their statist lunacy, and there’s no real indication the GOP will either.

Metro on February 21, 2010 at 2:30 PM

They’re acting like Chinamen in Korea?

abobo on February 21, 2010 at 2:41 PM

We know the Dems won’t stop with their statist lunacy, and there’s no real indication the GOP will either.

Metro on February 21, 2010 at 2:30 PM

Take your pick then . With the pubs you get the prescription plan with the Dems Obamacare. If those are the choices the choice is easy.

CWforFreedom on February 21, 2010 at 2:43 PM

We know the Dems won’t stop with their statist lunacy, and there’s no real indication the GOP will either.

Metro on February 21, 2010 at 2:30 PM

So true! Us moderates are desperately looking for someone who isn’t a party hack or who’ll pull another Obama about-face once elected. The list is pretty short.

Dark-Star on February 21, 2010 at 2:44 PM

Does anyone think it is odd that the media totally ignores Rep. Paul? Pretty interesting considering that they are turning over every stone for a “leader” that they can “cover” which actually means destroy. But Rep. Paul continues to get the cold shoulder. Why is that? Rhetorical? Yes, but answers would be interesting especially from his supporters.

Cindy Munford on February 21, 2010 at 2:46 PM

Is there any Republican out there besides that nut Ron Paul who doesn’t care who someone sleeps with? One who isn’t an isolationist “Blame America First” idiot?

NathanG on February 21, 2010 at 2:55 PM

Wrong, wrong, and wrong, Ed. When you guys sent the SFL speaker packing, you sent with him millions of voters in order to have a few thousand voters out of an interest group (one that self identifies on the basis of a sexual perversion) of a few million.

What that shows me more clearly and definitively than I’ve ever seen or thought possible is that CPAC and other groups of insiders and self-appointed popular kids are every bit as out of touch with actual Americans as the elites in Washington are. And the fact that you tolerate Paultards both at your convention and on your website shows that you care far less about actual conservative principles than you do about money and power.

In short, you’re trying to feed us a shit sandwich and convince us it’s liverwurst.

Ed Snyder on February 21, 2010 at 2:57 PM

One of the most important things that happend at CPAC, from watching the videos and not being an attendee, was Andrew Briebart. Going on the offseive against the statists media is sweet and a welcome change of events.

WashJeff on February 21, 2010 at 2:57 PM

Ryan Sorba’s a prick. Nuff said.

NathanG on February 21, 2010 at 3:01 PM

Is there any Republican out there besides that nut Ron Paul who doesn’t care who someone sleeps with? One who isn’t an isolationist “Blame America First” idiot?

NathanG on February 21, 2010 at 2:55 PM

Most social liberals will be found with the leftists and they tend to be self-hating ideologues. The more socially liberal you get, the more leftist you get is a general rule.

sharrukin on February 21, 2010 at 3:02 PM

Seems to me CPAC has been hijacked by fringe elements, and is no longer useful as a venue for conservative political action.

Rebar on February 21, 2010 at 3:03 PM

Seems to me CPAC has been hijacked by fringe elements, and is no longer useful as a venue for conservative political action.

Rebar on February 21, 2010 at 3:03 PM

Word.

Ed Snyder on February 21, 2010 at 3:05 PM

Does anyone think it is odd that the media totally ignores Rep. Paul? Pretty interesting considering that they are turning over every stone for a “leader” that they can “cover” which actually means destroy. But Rep. Paul continues to get the cold shoulder. Why is that? Rhetorical? Yes, but answers would be interesting especially from his supporters.

Cindy Munford on February 21, 2010 at 2:46 PM

I’ve been making that point for yrs, the fact he got 3times more Pork that ultra-leftist Sheila Jackson-Lee last yr shows how important an operative he is for Pelosi/Obama/Soros

jp on February 21, 2010 at 3:06 PM

FYI – time for those capable, to quit ignoring the paultards and engage his lies and idiocies for what they are. He is influencing clueless youth

jp on February 21, 2010 at 3:08 PM

Most social liberals will be found with the leftists and they tend to be self-hating ideologues. The more socially liberal you get, the more leftist you get is a general rule.

sharrukin on February 21, 2010 at 3:02 PM

Hmm. I see nothing wrong with what I consider to be the compromise approach of letting the states decide on gay marriage and the like. Like many have said, the Republican Party and conservatives need to focus on fiscally sound policies and a strong national defense. We need to fight socialist healthcare boondoggle, not the people who want gay marriage as a “right.” There is a middle ground between Corba and GOProud, you know. Again, we can let each state vote on the measure and not force gay marriage on people from the federal level. That’s not what Corba is saying though. He’s saying his Conservative/Republican Party must be about ranting about people’s person relationships, which is none of his business. The guy’s got problems.

NathanG on February 21, 2010 at 3:09 PM

the straw poll took over the headlines of the convention by the lamestream media; either make the poll representative of ALL attendees or DO AWAY WITH IT.

Everyone should have a magnetic card to attend the convention, they vote once by swiping a mag card reader and entering one through 6 for the top 6 names and that’s it.

Get it together amateur hour conservatives..do it right or don’t do it.

The straw poll was easily manipulated by the Ron Paul bots and only 25% of the attendees voted, thus making it completely invalid.

daytrader on February 21, 2010 at 3:11 PM

Seems to me CPAC has been hijacked by fringe elements, and is no longer useful as a venue for conservative political action.

Rebar on February 21, 2010 at 3:03 PM

Word.

Ed Snyder on February 21, 2010 at 3:05 PM

Agreed.

I suppose the conservative/libertarian divide has already become “part of the conversation” at CPAC, but I’m just about done hearing from a LIBERTARIAN why I’m not a “real” conservative because I happen to think we have a real enemy worth meeting in their own territory, or that marriage really is an institution worth defending.

I think I’ll take back the “real” adjective, thank you, and encourage other conservatives to be clear with members of the sibling movement that being a stronger Conservative is not a simply matter of becoming more libertarian.

Alexander on February 21, 2010 at 3:11 PM

Thanks for your hard work Ed.

GnuBreed on February 21, 2010 at 3:13 PM

The presidential straw poll is at best a sideshow. Most people here weren’t thinking about 2012; they were working on 2010.

I may be incorrect, (first time for everything :)) But I see the outcome of the straw poll as an indication of the merger of large chunks libertarian and conservative movements. Not necessarily a bad thing. I mean, we all know that there is no way Ron Paul could get the nomination. But I think it is a healthy thing to turn the conservative movement back toward it’s libertarian roots.

conservnut on February 21, 2010 at 3:15 PM

FYI – time for those capable, to quit ignoring the paultards and engage his lies and idiocies for what they are. He is influencing clueless youth

jp on February 21, 2010 at 3:08 PM

As it’s past time (as if there ever was a time) for those social misfits to be excluded from even attending CPAC and banhammered from this site. Then again, what should anyone expect from a site now associated with Townhall, which hosts Holocaust-denire and revisionist (PTUUUUU!!!) Pat Buchanan as a “conservative” columnist.

Here’s what I respect about WFB, and something that’s apparently lost on both Ed and Allah: He played the long game. I mean, he concentrated first on purging the cranks and dead-enders to make conservatism a morally and intellectually viable political alternative. The CPAC crowd wants the votes, and the money and power that go with them. We conservatives need to review each candidate carefully, and regard with suspicion any of them associated with or endorsed by CPAC.

Ed Snyder on February 21, 2010 at 3:15 PM

Is there any Republican out there besides that nut Ron Paul who doesn’t care who someone sleeps with? One who isn’t an isolationist “Blame America First” idiot?

NathanG on February 21, 2010 at 2:55 PM

Dick Cheney.

Monica on February 21, 2010 at 3:15 PM

So what are you saying Ed… A Romney/Pawlenty ticket in 2012?

chicagojedi on February 21, 2010 at 3:16 PM

Alexander on February 21, 2010 at 3:11 PM

I’d be careful about accepting the Ronbot’s definition of “libertarian”, when Ron Paul is neither libertarian or conservative.

Rebar on February 21, 2010 at 3:16 PM

In 2008, the capitulation of Mitt Romney to McCain — who showed up and apologized for his snub the previous year — deflated the conference.

Yep, gawd forbid we see the writing on the wall, and unite behind the inevitable candidate (who for his numerous faults was far better than the Marxist-In-Chief) and try to defeat the Democrats. It’s so much better to continue our squabbles and fight endless internecine warfare./

Tim Pawlenty, who gave a good speech, came in a surprising fourth just behind Palin at 6%.

That was a good speech? Seriously? Sheesh.

Buy Danish on February 21, 2010 at 3:16 PM

NathanG on February 21, 2010 at 3:09 PM

I think his name is Sorba IIRC. We do need to fight people who want gay marriage as a “right.” because that is what grows government.

Single-mothers need a husband and it is usually Uncle Sam who fills that spot. Gay activists need a government to tell everyone else what they should think, say, and do with regards to gays. The educational system is in trouble because those same social values are pushed at the expense of an actual education.

When society collapses the government tends to step in and guess who gets to pay for it?

sharrukin on February 21, 2010 at 3:19 PM

I’ve been making that point for yrs, the fact he got 3times more Pork that ultra-leftist Sheila Jackson-Lee last yr shows how important an operative he is for Pelosi/Obama/Soros

jp on February 21, 2010 at 3:06 PM

ahahahahaha.

nazo311 on February 21, 2010 at 3:20 PM

Dick Cheney.

Monica on February 21, 2010 at 3:15 PM

Yes, but he’s not running.

NathanG on February 21, 2010 at 3:21 PM

Romney attempted to stack CPAC again, but he was easily defeated by Ron Paul’s grassroots network.

Spathi on February 21, 2010 at 3:22 PM

Does anyone have a Voight-Kampff machine to clean up the bots?

daesleeper on February 21, 2010 at 3:25 PM

jp on February 21, 2010 at 3:06 PM

And if the media thought he was a serious candidate, i.e. threat to The Won, they would be all over the place with that and other negative press. Instead it’s “Who is Ron Paul?”. Speaks volumes.

Cindy Munford on February 21, 2010 at 3:28 PM

How is one a Conservative when advocating one group get economic preference over another?

From GoProud website:

8 – ENCOURAGING COMMUNITY ENTREPRENEURSHIP – Package of free market reforms to encourage and support small businesses and entrepreneurship in the gay community.

__
And as mentioned up thread, why is Ron Paul considered to be a Conservative when he is addicted to pork?

Branch Rickey on February 21, 2010 at 3:30 PM

>>sharrukin on February 21, 2010 at 3:19 PM<<

Homosexual activists are picketing churches in CA and using campaign finance disclosure laws to find out who donated to the Prop 8 campaign so they can be boycotted, picketed and blacklisted. That needs to be mentioned every time they claim the mantle of liberty.

Chris_Balsz on February 21, 2010 at 3:31 PM

Seems to me CPAC has been hijacked by fringe elements, and is no longer useful as a venue for conservative political action.

Rebar on February 21, 2010 at 3:03 PM

Because manipulative supporters of Paul managed to get 30% in a poll in which less than a fifth of attendees voted?

Hardly.

Nichevo on February 21, 2010 at 3:32 PM

I love that hotel and spent many happy April weekends there at National Conventions for the Children of the American Revolution (NSCAR) in my youth. I recall the changes from when it was the Wardman Park and Towers through the many years of expansion as the Sheraton Washington but haven’t been there since Marriott took it over.

Maybe the patriotic spirit of our many years (and mostly dyed in the wool conservative membership) is still haunting the halls. :)

Thanks, Ed, for all the great coverage. It’s greatly appreciated!

Greyledge Gal on February 21, 2010 at 3:32 PM

I suppose the conservative/libertarian divide has already become “part of the conversation” at CPAC, but I’m just about done hearing from a LIBERTARIAN why I’m not a “real” conservative because I happen to think we have a real enemy worth meeting in their own territory, or that marriage really is an institution worth defending.Alexander on February 21, 2010 at 3:11 PM

I’m very in touch with this!

Branch Rickey on February 21, 2010 at 3:33 PM

Homosexual activists are picketing churches in CA and using campaign finance disclosure laws to find out who donated to the Prop 8 campaign so they can be boycotted, picketed and blacklisted. That needs to be mentioned every time they claim the mantle of liberty.

Chris_Balsz on February 21, 2010 at 3:31 PM

And this is what Ed and Allah are all about. This is a conservative website? God help us all!

Ed Snyder on February 21, 2010 at 3:34 PM

OMG the Paultards are STILL at it today!

You people are idiots. You job the poll then actually think it means something. How insane is THAT?

Ron Paul needs to go away and take you idiots with him!

gary4205 on February 21, 2010 at 3:35 PM

Hey Barry! Watch Beck’s keynote speech. Now that is an example of a great speaker!

tbear44 on February 21, 2010 at 3:36 PM

Hey Barry! Watch Beck’s keynote speech. Now that is an example of a great speaker!

tbear44 on February 21, 2010 at 3:36 PM

+100,000,000,000,000 !!

gary4205 on February 21, 2010 at 3:37 PM

Homosexual activists are picketing churches in CA and using campaign finance disclosure laws to find out who donated to the Prop 8 campaign so they can be boycotted, picketed and blacklisted. That needs to be mentioned every time they claim the mantle of liberty.

Chris_Balsz on February 21, 2010 at 3:31 PM

There are homosexual conservatives, but I have doubts there are conservative homosexual advocacy groups.

An advocacy group for red-haired Americans would only make sense if they wanted government action on some issue involving red-haired Americans, otherwise what is the point?

These things always tend to be leftist and big government entities and that tends not to be a conservative approach.

I am afraid that CPAC and the GOP have gone sour!

sharrukin on February 21, 2010 at 3:41 PM

Ron Paul needs to go away and take you idiots with him!

gary4205 on February 21, 2010 at 3:35 PM

He needs to DIAF. Ron Paul is what the KIWF meme was made for.

Ed Snyder on February 21, 2010 at 3:41 PM

Ed Snyder on February 21, 2010 at 3:05 PM

Alexander on February 21, 2010 at 3:11 PM

+100

PrincipledPilgrim on February 21, 2010 at 3:43 PM

Ed Snyder on February 21, 2010 at 3:34 PM

Yes, more and more I am starting to feel “not welcome” here.

PrincipledPilgrim on February 21, 2010 at 3:44 PM

sharrukin on February 21, 2010 at 3:41 PM

PrincipledPilgrim on February 21, 2010 at 3:44 PM

sharrukin on February 21, 2010 at 3:41 PM

Oops. Hit submit too quickly.

Yes, I agree. And this is what I have been saying for the last couple of days on the similar threads. The very fact they need a group to classify themselves tells you all you need to know.

The “conservatives” will be hi-jacked again but they will fail to see it until it is too late.

Do we really have to repeat history over and over and over again?

PrincipledPilgrim on February 21, 2010 at 3:46 PM

There are homosexual conservatives, but I have doubts there are conservative homosexual advocacy groups.

An advocacy group for red-haired Americans would only make sense if they wanted government action on some issue involving red-haired Americans, otherwise what is the point?

These things always tend to be leftist and big government entities and that tends not to be a conservative approach.

I am afraid that CPAC and the GOP have gone sour!

sharrukin on February 21, 2010 at 3:41 PM

I agree with that, sharrukin. I just don’t like the point of view that Sorba took. It looks to me like he’s coming at it from the point of view of the “religious right,” and a point of view when that is one of his biggest priorities. Nothing wrong with having different opinions, like the woman said, but he doesn’t have to come at it from a a combative point of view. He could have said something more intelligent such as, “The GOProud group is another symptom of the activist groups we don’t need to be synonymous with conservatism/libertarianism. We are not about picketing for gay marriage for all.”

NathanG on February 21, 2010 at 3:49 PM

The “conservatives” will be hi-jacked again but they will fail to see it until it is too late.

Do we really have to repeat history over and over and over again?

PrincipledPilgrim on February 21, 2010 at 3:46 PM

Maybe it could be called a hijacking if the innocence were still there. But it’s not. Ed and Allah are going into this with eyes wide open, and fixed on the bucks and torque they’ll get out of a 2010 GOP win.

Why else are they aligning themselves with perverts and a Holocaust-denier hosting website, and allowing Paulbots to post here without restraint?

Ed Snyder on February 21, 2010 at 3:53 PM

Sarah Palin only got 7%, perhaps a reflection of her decision to snub the event rather publicly and deliberately.

Good for her. Maybe she is our last and only hope.

Ed Snyder on February 21, 2010 at 3:58 PM

He could have said something more intelligent such as, “The GOProud group is another symptom of the activist groups we don’t need to be synonymous with conservatism/libertarianism. We are not about picketing for gay marriage for all.”

NathanG on February 21, 2010 at 3:49 PM

Wouldn’t have made any difference if he had. They are big government activists, and I haven’t noticed gay activists being reasonable at any point. Have you?

sharrukin on February 21, 2010 at 4:00 PM

Is there any Republican out there besides that nut Ron Paul who doesn’t care who someone sleeps with? One who isn’t an isolationist “Blame America First” idiot?

NathanG on February 21, 2010 at 2:55 PM

Sarah Palin. Next!

alwaysfiredup on February 21, 2010 at 4:05 PM

Wouldn’t have made any difference if he had. They are big government activists, and I haven’t noticed gay activists being reasonable at any point. Have you?

sharrukin on February 21, 2010 at 4:00 PM

Nope. Did I miss something? Is GOProud known to have harassed Prop 8 supporters and the groups who supported it?

NathanG on February 21, 2010 at 4:06 PM

NathanG on February 21, 2010 at 4:06 PM

I have no idea, but they were founded when? Last year, the year before?

Tell me what they want that they can’t get from any number of other organizations?

sharrukin on February 21, 2010 at 4:18 PM

Cindy Munford on February 21, 2010 at 2:46 PM

Like McCain and Perot, media darlings until the liberal press was through with them. It’s not hard to imagine day 1 of the general election campaigning, they pull the neatly organized folders out.

hawkdriver on February 21, 2010 at 4:19 PM

The attendees underscored that lesson when they reacted angrily to an attack on gay conservatives on Friday, sending the speaker packing for his remarks (Students for Liberty has two videos that show the incident in its full context).

Thanks for the context– Sorba was preceded by another student leader who said that he was glad GOProud was there because CPAC, especially students, agreed with their message. Sorba was apparently supposed to give silent assent. How arrogantly condescending to preemptively presume agreement without discussion! And you’re glad he got thrown out for rebutting that strongarm?

Chris_Balsz on February 21, 2010 at 4:28 PM

Nope. Did I miss something? Is GOProud known to have harassed Prop 8 supporters and the groups who supported it?

NathanG on February 21, 2010 at 4:06 PM

Good question, I wonder where they stand on that.

Chris_Balsz on February 21, 2010 at 4:30 PM

Hmm. I see nothing wrong with what I consider to be the compromise approach of letting the states decide on gay marriage and the like. Like many have said, the Republican Party and conservatives need to focus on fiscally sound policies and a strong national defense. We need to fight socialist healthcare boondoggle, not the people who want gay marriage as a “right.” There is a middle ground between Corba and GOProud, you know. Again, we can let each state vote on the measure and not force gay marriage on people from the federal level. That’s not what Corba is saying though. He’s saying his Conservative/Republican Party must be about ranting about people’s person relationships, which is none of his business. The guy’s got problems.

NathanG on February 21, 2010 at 3:09 PM

I don’t agree with you at all. Why make your sexual orientation the issue to begin with? GOP PROUD…It’s because you have an agenda you need and want to push. We do have to fight that agenda. I live in CA and 3 times we have stated unequivocally we don’t want gay marriage. But because the Liberals think we are ignorant bumpkins they take us to court over and over and over again (remember prop 187 too)So to us it becomes a matter of our vote and the will of the people counting. This gay thing is just the start… they will come after our other core beiefs… Look at what Obama is saying now…After VA, NJ and MA…pretty clear mandates the people don’t want what the Dems are selling… Obama is going to write a heathcare bill that won’t be anything Americans want but… darn it he’s going to shove it down our throats because he and the Dems think we are too stupid to know better and we keep voting “incorrectly”…it’s going to get real nasty in this country real soon!

CCRWM on February 21, 2010 at 4:35 PM

Tim Pawlenty, who gave a good speech, came in a surprising fourth just behind Palin at 6%.

If you really think about it Sarah Palin won…we know the Paultards and Rombots coordinate to influence the vote so that Palin came in third without showing up or trying says a lot…

Sarah Palin snubbed the event because of the organizers…that is consistent with her stated values and political beliefs…

CCRWM on February 21, 2010 at 4:42 PM

Thanks for the context– Sorba was preceded by another student leader who said that he was glad GOProud was there because CPAC, especially students, agreed with their message. Sorba was apparently supposed to give silent assent. How arrogantly condescending to preemptively presume agreement without discussion! And you’re glad he got thrown out for rebutting that strongarm?

Chris_Balsz on February 21, 2010 at 4:28 PM

I agree and it was obvious that Sorba was angry at that assumption and that anger tripped him in in the delivery of his opposition remarks…

CCRWM on February 21, 2010 at 4:45 PM

hawkdriver on February 21, 2010 at 4:19 PM

I don’t doubt that for a minute but they are trying to destroy Gov. Palin and others who aren’t presently elected politicians just on the chance they might be the nominee. They neither encourage Rep. Paul like they did Sen. McCain or Mr. Perot, they pretend he doesn’t exist. I think it is fascinating and would love to know from Paulbots why that is.

Cindy Munford on February 21, 2010 at 4:46 PM

I agree with that, sharrukin. I just don’t like the point of view that Sorba took. It looks to me like he’s coming at it from the point of view of the “religious right,” and a point of view when that is one of his biggest priorities. Nothing wrong with having different opinions, like the woman said, but he doesn’t have to come at it from a a combative point of view. He could have said something more intelligent such as, “The GOProud group is another symptom of the activist groups we don’t need to be synonymous with conservatism/libertarianism. We are not about picketing for gay marriage for all.”

NathanG on February 21, 2010 at 3:49 PM

Well he’s entitled to his opinion and to express it how he likes…

CCRWM on February 21, 2010 at 4:51 PM

Huckabee says he skipped CPAC because of the growing Libertarian bent at the convention.

Spathi on February 21, 2010 at 2:36 PM

Stay with Fox News Huck, your time has passed.

Dread Pirate Roberts VI on February 21, 2010 at 5:33 PM

Cindy Munford on February 21, 2010 at 4:46 PM

If you were asked to write a story about him, what could you say? No, with Paul, they understand his voting block is fixed, and they wouldn’t have to do anything until, God forbid, he won the primaries. Then like at least McCain the knives would come out. Perot was a draw from Bush, they supported him for that.

hawkdriver on February 21, 2010 at 5:52 PM

Uhhhh people, it is 2010 and the States are in play. CPAC was good in most ways and all the important ones. Thanks Ed for the coverage.

Now get out and get busy for your local conservative(s).

Constitution, small government, low taxes. In 2015 we can discuss more.

Caststeel on February 21, 2010 at 6:29 PM

I don’t understand the assumption that because a candidate does or does not support gay marriage, that they intend to make a federal mandate one way or the other. If we are truly trending toward a conservative-libertarian government takeover, which I hope we are, then issues like this that only serve to divide the right from center will be left to states’ rights. It makes more sense politically and socially, nevermind that pesky constitutionality argument.

Ron Paul is not going to win the support of the Tea Party. Even with national security placing lower than other issues, it’s still a significant issue and conservatives of most stripes reject the notion that our candidate would be one who thinks 9/11 is an inside job and that thinks small government should include less military.

RachDubya on February 21, 2010 at 6:45 PM

RachDubya on February 21, 2010 at 6:45 PM

The only way you can get people to accept the abnormal as normal is by force. That means more government. You have to teach it in schools, you have to enforce laws, etc.

sharrukin on February 21, 2010 at 6:51 PM

“Our institutions are designed for a moral and religious people, and are utterly unsuited to the government of any other.” — John Adams

To read more on this train of thought (and the organizers of CPAC 2010, not to mention some of the “big tent” junkies in this venue, desperately need to), click here.

manwithblackhat on February 21, 2010 at 7:27 PM

The straw poll results were interesting, but not for the fact that Ron Paul’s Campaign for Liberty crowd managed to manipulate vote in it

That’s more like it.

JohnGalt23 on February 21, 2010 at 7:38 PM

And this is what Ed and Allah are all about. This is a conservative website? God help us all!

Ed Snyder on February 21, 2010 at 3:34 PM

Having trouble finding the door, are you?

JohnGalt23 on February 21, 2010 at 7:47 PM

I don’t agree with you at all. Why make your sexual orientation the issue to begin with? GOP PROUD…It’s because you have an agenda you need and want to push. We do have to fight that agenda. I live in CA and 3 times we have stated unequivocally we don’t want gay marriage. But because the Liberals think we are ignorant bumpkins they take us to court over and over and over again (remember prop 187 too)So to us it becomes a matter of our vote and the will of the people counting. This gay thing is just the start… they will come after our other core beiefs… Look at what Obama is saying now…After VA, NJ and MA…pretty clear mandates the people don’t want what the Dems are selling… Obama is going to write a heathcare bill that won’t be anything Americans want but… darn it he’s going to shove it down our throats because he and the Dems think we are too stupid to know better and we keep voting “incorrectly”…it’s going to get real nasty in this country real soon!

CCRWM on February 21, 2010 at 4:35 PM

You hit the nail on the head. For the naysayers, why is it that Barry Soetoro has appointed gay advocates as Czars and appointees.Don’t you think he has an agenda by doing so.

One of the illegal Czars he appointed is Kevin Jennings in charge of “Safe Schools”.Here is an excerpt from Gateway Pundit;

“Out of curiosity to see exactly what kind of books Kevin Jennings and his organization think American students should be reading in school, our team chose a handful at random from the over 100 titles on GLSEN’s grades 7-12 list, and began reading through.

What we discovered shocked us. We were flabbergasted. Rendered speechless.

We were unprepared for what we encountered. Book after book after book contained stories and anecdotes that weren’t merely X-rated and pornographic, but which featured explicit descriptions of sex acts between pre-schoolers; stories that seemed to promote and recommend child-adult sexual relationships; stories of public masturbation, anal sex in restrooms, affairs between students and teachers, five-year-olds playing sex games, semen flying through the air. One memoir even praised becoming a prostitute as a way to increase one’s self-esteem. Above all, the books seemed to have less to do with promoting tolerance than with an unabashed attempt to indoctrinate students into a hyper-sexualized worldview.”

Is this the kind of thing we conservatives should be welcoming into our midst with open arms?

ScottyDog on February 21, 2010 at 10:28 PM