Some conservative organizations to boycott CPAC over invitation to GOProud

posted at 11:57 am on December 29, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

The more things change, the more they stay the same … as last year.  Once again, the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) has invited a group of gay conservative activists to participate in the most prominent forum for conservative activism of the year.  And once again, at least a few significant conservative organizations will refuse to participate as a result (via Doug Mataconis at OTB):

Two of the nation’s premier moral issues organizations, the Family Research Council and Concerned Women for America, are refusing to attend the Conservative Political Action Conference in February because a homosexual activist group, GOProud, has been invited.

“We’ve been very involved in CPAC for over a decade and have managed a couple of popular sessions. However, we will no longer be involved with CPAC because of the organization’s financial mismanagement and movement away from conservative principles,” said Tom McClusky, senior vice president for FRC Action.

“CWA has decided not to participate in part because of GOProud,” CWA President Penny Nance told WND.

FRC and CWA join the American Principles Project, American Values, Capital Research Center, the Center for Military Readiness, Liberty Counsel, and the National Organization for Marriage in withdrawing from CPAC. In November, APP organized a boycott of CPAC over the participation of GOProud.

WND also mentions an embezzlement “scandal” at the American Conservative Union which reportedly involved the ex-wife of ACU chair David Keene as a contributing factor in the decision by these groups to boycott CPAC. However, in the comments published by WND from the groups in reaction to GOProud’s inclusion (with the exception above from FRC), nothing is mentioned about the missing money, nor did any of these organizations announce their decision to boycott when WND first reported the bookkeeping irregularities two weeks ago. The only issue creating the boycott appears to be the inclusion of gay conservatives by CPAC.

As much as the media like to paint the conservative movement as a monolithic, lock-step aggregation, CPAC itself annually demonstrates the variety and tension between various interests on the Right.  The conference includes social conservatives, Ron Paul groupies, isolationists, interventionists (the dreaded neo-cons), libertarians, religious organizations (including Muslims), atheists, several flavors of fiscal conservatism, and even the John Birch Society.  The point of CPAC isn’t to all come together to agree as much as it is for these organizations to make their pitch to the thousands of activists who attend the conference — in other words, to engage, debate, and either convince or fail to do so.  Half the groups at CPAC probably wouldn’t endorse the other half, with or without GOProud.

It’s also important to note that GOProud isn’t a sponsor for CPAC 2011; they are a participating organization, one of over 70 attending the conference.  Lisa De Pasquale, director of CPAC, pointed out the difference in responding to my request for comment this morning:

GOProud is a participating organization. As of today, we have over 70 participating organizations, 20+ vendors and 8 sponsors. Sponsors come on board on an invite-only basis. List of groups in various levels can be found at www.cpac.org.

We respect that each group will have to weigh the cost benefits of attending CPAC and hope those that can not be there in 2011 will be there at future CPACs.

Other groups participating at the conference therefore don’t have to worry about endorsing a sponsorship of the event by GOProud in attending.  In terms of their stated legislative goals, though, GOProud would have to be considered a fairly mainstream participating group at CPAC.  It’s pretty much the same as last year’s stated priorities, and the most controversial among them has become moot anyway:

1 – TAX REFORM - Death tax repeal; domestic partner tax equity, and other changes to the tax code that will provide equity for gays and lesbians; cut in the capital gains and corporate tax rates to jump start our economy and create jobs; a fairer, flatter and substantially simpler tax code.

2 – HEALTHCARE REFORM – Free market healthcare reform. Legislation that will allow for the purchase of insurance across state lines – expanding access to domestic partner benefits; emphasizing individual ownership of healthcare insurance – such a shift would prevent discriminatory practices by an employer or the government.

3 – SOCIAL SECURITY REFORM - Bringing basic fairness to the Social Security system through the creation of inheritable personal savings accounts.

4 – DON’T ASK, DON’T TELL REPEAL – Repeal of the military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy.

5 – HOLDING THE LINE ON SPENDING – Standing up for all tax payers against wasteful and unneccessary spending to protect future generations from the mounting federal debt.

6 – FIGHTING GLOBAL EXTREMISTS – Standing strong against radical regimes who seek to criminalize gays and lesbians.

7 – DEFENDING OUR CONSTITUTION – Opposing any anti-gay federal marriage amendment.

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

9 – REVITALIZING OUR COMMUNITIES – A package of urban related reforms; expanding historic tax preservation credits; support for school choice.

10 – DEFENDING OUR COMMUNITY – Protecting 2nd amendment rights.

As was the case last year, 80% of this agenda would get roaring approval from most groups at CPAC, although the isolationists and Ron Paul clique would argue about #6, and some of the religious/family values groups would reject #7.  And that’s fine.  In fact, that’s why CPAC exists, at least in part — to have these debates in an open forum with conservatives of differing viewpoints and values. CPAC has never demanded that all attendees adopt the agendas of all other attendees, which would be impossible in any circumstance, or even require that they listen to any particular group’s argument.  It has just made those arguments easily accessible and given the best possible forum for engagement and debate of the competing agendas of these groups.

Until recently, everyone seemed to understand that, and to understand that the key to making conservatism succeed was to convince others of its efficacy, liberty, and diversity.  Instead, the groups that have decided to boycott CPAC this year over the inclusion of a group of gay conservatives give the impression that they don’t even want to debate their position on homosexuality and policy, but instead demand that everyone else adopt it as a prerequisite for entry to the conference.  That runs against the very nature of CPAC, and carries more than a hint of arrogance.  This is a mistake, and one these groups will regret in the future.

I will be at CPAC this year, reporting from Bloggers Row and doing my daily show from XPAC with Kevin McCullough.

Update (AP): Gabe Malor counters that this is a rational, if cynical, move for socially conservative groups looking to attract new members:

Stacy McCain doesn’t understand the “auto-marginalization” of these groups, given the unparalleled opportunity at CPAC to reach out to other conservatives. But I suspect that they don’t believe they are marginalizing themselves. Many conservative identity groups, particularly the … Christian-themed special-interest groups* making the ruckus here– FRC, Liberty Counsel, NOM — already feel isolated in an immoral world. It’s an easy calculation: will they get more by reaching out to other (immoral) conservatives at CPAC or by making a flashy stand in WND and then hold their own Christian conference?

The target constituency for these groups isn’t conservatism as a whole, but a rather more limited group. I think they were genuinely surprised by the general lack of reception to their vocal GOProud opposition last year (remember the Sorba incident?) and this is the response. If they can’t convince conservatives of the evils of GOProud inclusion (we’re not even talking about the “evils” of gays here, we’re talking about merely standing in the same room with them), well, they’re going to take their ball and go home.

Update II: Peter Wehner has more thoughts.


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

Comment pages: 1 9 10 11

You’re one sad little person. Thank you for proving my point!

ladyingray on December 31, 2010 at 6:13 PM

Seeing that instead of acting like a adult who would take the time to non-lazily answer my honest questions, you chose to make an hilariously stupid, childish judgement about me, I say, right back at you, sweetie!

Go get back to your silly defense of hawkdriver – you passive-aggressive weaklings need to stick together! :)

Bizarro No. 1 on December 31, 2010 at 6:27 PM

Go get back to your silly defense of hawkdriver – you passive-aggressive weaklings need to stick together! :)

Bizarro No. 1 on December 31, 2010 at 6:27 PM

I admire and respect hawk, but he and I aren’t really friends and we don’t agree on this particular issue).

I did answer your question, you are just too stupid to see that I did. I see NO passive-aggressive “abuse” in hawk. And I have experience with that kinda thing. I do see it in you, however.

ladyingray on December 31, 2010 at 6:33 PM

ladyingray on December 31, 2010 at 6:33 PM

Whatever you say about me, I’ll say the same about you! Do you like that as much as I do? LOL

“I did answer your question”? Honey, which mental hospital are you typing from? I asked you 6 of them in my post at 6:09 PM; you answered nary a one. I guess you were too stupid to know that you didn’t?

Keep coming after me – I love watching a hypocritical, passive-aggressive bimbo like you at work! :)

Bizarro No. 1 on December 31, 2010 at 6:43 PM

Go get back to your silly defense of hawkdriver – you passive-aggressive weaklings need to stick together! :)

Bizarro No. 1 on December 31, 2010 at 6:27 PM

Hawkdriver and Ladyingray are anything but passive-aggressive, and anything but abusive. You’re way the f**k off, pal.

MadisonConservative on December 31, 2010 at 7:03 PM

MadisonConservative on December 31, 2010 at 7:03 PM

LOL how much have you had to drink since the last time you posted? :)

Bizarro No. 1 on December 31, 2010 at 7:13 PM

LOL how much have you had to drink since the last time you posted? :)

Bizarro No. 1 on December 31, 2010 at 7:13 PM

Very little. I repeat: you are dead wrong about hawk and LiG.

MadisonConservative on December 31, 2010 at 7:52 PM

I love watching a hypocritical, passive-aggressive bimbo like you at work! :)

Bizarro No. 1 on December 31, 2010 at 6:43 PM

you’re actually right about her.

right4life on December 31, 2010 at 7:57 PM

Very little. I repeat: you are dead wrong about hawk and LiG.

MadisonConservative on December 31, 2010 at 7:52 PM

Oh yeah? Prove it then.

Before you try, let me ask you: if I were debating you, and instead of arguing facts, I start bringing in my negative personal opinions of you which I couldn’t/wouldn’t substantiate when asked i.e I start calling you a racist only because you say you don’t like 0bamessiah, if that scenario isn’t an example of passive-aggressiveness, what label would you use to describe it?

Bizarro No. 1 on December 31, 2010 at 8:04 PM

Oh yeah? Prove it then.

don’t hold your breath for madfascist to back up any of the drivel he posts…

right4life on December 31, 2010 at 8:19 PM

Oh yeah? Prove it then.

Why don’t you prove it!

DarkCurrent on December 31, 2010 at 9:20 PM

Sounds like 3rd grade

DarkCurrent on December 31, 2010 at 9:20 PM

Oh yeah? Prove it then.

Bizarro No. 1 on December 31, 2010 at 8:04 PM

We’re talking about how people are. You want proof? My word is the best damned proof you can get, unless you expect a full report of every one of their comments over the last few years. Stop being a dick.

MadisonConservative on December 31, 2010 at 9:47 PM

My word is the best damned proof you can get,

MadisonConservative on December 31, 2010 at 9:47 PM

BWAHAAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHHA

at least you’re good for a few laughs.

right4life on December 31, 2010 at 10:11 PM

Sounds like 3rd grade

DarkCurrent on December 31, 2010 at 9:20 PM

Asking/expecting people to rationally defend their accusations against yourself sounds that childish to you? Thank you for kindly letting me know what level of emotional maturity I should peg you at! :)

Bizarro No. 1 on December 31, 2010 at 10:24 PM

Asking/expecting people to rationally defend their accusations against yourself sounds that childish to you? Thank you for kindly letting me know what level of emotional maturity I should peg you at! :)

Bizarro No. 1 on December 31, 2010 at 10:24 PM

You’re calling people passive-aggressive abusers. Do you even know what the term “rational” means?

MadisonConservative on December 31, 2010 at 10:39 PM

Thank you for kindly letting me know what level of emotional maturity I should peg you at! :)

Bizarro No. 1 on December 31, 2010 at 10:24 PM

You’re welcome :)

DarkCurrent on December 31, 2010 at 10:44 PM

We’re talking about how people are. You want proof? My word is the best damned proof you can get, unless you expect a full report of every one of their comments over the last few years.

You’ve disappointed me with such a limp defense. Great job at evading the point, though! I guess that’s what one should expect when people blindly defend people because they happen to like them?

Yeah, because you tell me they are not passive-aggressive, despite clear and conclusive evidence to the contrary, I’ll just go and ignore the fact that a supermoron like hawkdriver keeps calling me a racist only because I have a problem with Islam, not with Muslims.

‘Islam – mankind’s newest race, according to me, hawkdriver!’ ROFL

Stop being a dick.

MadisonConservative on December 31, 2010 at 9:47 PM

After you, Richard. I need to be led that way by a beta-male like you because I am too foolish to know how to do it on my own! :)

Bizarro No. 1 on December 31, 2010 at 10:57 PM

You’re calling people passive-aggressive abusers. Do you even know what the term “rational” means?

MadisonConservative on December 31, 2010 at 10:39 PM

When you stop being an intellectually lazy coward and tell me what label you’d give to the type of person I described in my post at 8:04, I’ll answer you. But not until then, ok?

I don’t respect people who expect a person to answer their questions after they’ve avoided ones given to them first! :)

Bizarro No. 1 on December 31, 2010 at 11:05 PM

I don’t respect people who expect a person to answer their questions after they’ve avoided ones given to them first! :)

Interesting and unusual use of exclamation point followed immediately by a smiley. Intuitively it seems passive-aggressive. I wish I’d studied more psychology.

DarkCurrent on December 31, 2010 at 11:14 PM

Bizarro No. 1 on December 31, 2010 at 11:05 PM

So that would be a “no”, then. Thanks. You’re a douchepuddle. Thus endeth the dialogue.

MadisonConservative on December 31, 2010 at 11:15 PM

Interesting and unusual use of exclamation point followed immediately by a smiley. Intuitively it seems passive-aggressive. I wish I’d studied more psychology.

DarkCurrent on December 31, 2010 at 11:14 PM

It’s actually quite definitive of passive-aggressive behavior, particularly when communicating through text. That drowning sensation? It’s from the irony flowing from Bizarro’s bizarre behavior.

MadisonConservative on December 31, 2010 at 11:16 PM

Damn.

None of this is worth it. You guys that came back this evening; thanks for what you’ve all said. In the long run, it doesn’t really matter to me what this man goes on about me. Sorry you had to suffer his abuse too.

It’s either that he knows he’s talking out of his 4th point of contact to try and get people’s goats or he really is ignorant to the world.

I wouldn’t want to be him. Truth is, I’d bet he wishes he was anyone but himself. I pity him for that.

Drinking Champaign here with my kids. To all of yours…

Happy and Prosperous New Year.

hawkdriver on December 31, 2010 at 11:27 PM

And Madcon…

hawkdriver on December 31, 2010 at 11:30 PM

Interesting and unusual use of exclamation point followed immediately by a smiley. Intuitively it seems passive-aggressive. I wish I’d studied more psychology.

DarkCurrent on December 31, 2010 at 11:14 PM

“Intuitively”? LOL

How do you know that it’s your intuition, and not emotion? Do you know what a Rorschach test is? Do you know why I ask? Do you care why I ask? :)

Along with you, I wish not only that you had taken more psychology classes, I wish you had taken more interpersonal communications classes, too. Don’t you as well?

Bizarro No. 1 on December 31, 2010 at 11:32 PM

So that would be a “no”, then.

It would? I guess if you aren’t very creative, that could be true, to you. Tell me, what is the value of subjective truth?

Your kind of reasoning is thus: ‘If I tell you to tell me what you’re middle name is, and you don’t tell me, it’s either because you don’t have one, and/or because you don’t know what it is.’

You know, you’re really sophisticated, MC! :)

Thanks. You’re a douchepuddle. Thus endeth the dialogue.

MadisonConservative on December 31, 2010 at 11:15 PM

“douchepuddle” – wow, that was genius, besides being very hurtful!

btw, this dialogue actually ended the moment you decided to ignore my question at 8:04 and make a personal attack against me instead, which you did as a diversion from what you knew would incriminate your “friends.” This isn’t rationally deniable.

I expect you to deny this anyways, because you have already proven that you are an intellectual coward who’s afraid of the ugly truth. :)

Bizarro No. 1 on December 31, 2010 at 11:50 PM

How do you know that it’s your intuition, and not emotion?

It could be emotion I suppose, but it seems more like intuition.

Do you know what a Rorschach test is?

Just a layman’s familiarity.

Do you know why I ask?

No

Do you care why I ask? :)

No

Along with you, I wish not only that you had taken more psychology classes, I wish you had taken more interpersonal communications classes, too. Don’t you as well?

Bizarro No. 1 on December 31, 2010 at 11:32 PM

Not particularly. I have average to good interpersonal communications skills.

DarkCurrent on December 31, 2010 at 11:55 PM

It’s actually quite definitive of passive-aggressive behavior, particularly when communicating through text. That drowning sensation? It’s from the irony flowing from Bizarro’s bizarre behavior.

MadisonConservative on December 31, 2010 at 11:16 PM

Yeah, I’m strange because I understand the danger of unquestioned assumptions, something you are completely clueless about!

Pidgeonholing w/o thought is easy, isn’t it, MC? :)

Bizarro No. 1 on December 31, 2010 at 11:56 PM

Happy and Prosperous New Year.

hawkdriver on December 31, 2010 at 11:27 PM

To you and yours as well Hawk. Thanks for all you do!

DarkCurrent on December 31, 2010 at 11:57 PM

It could be emotion I suppose, but it seems more like intuition.

“seems” – what’s your mechanism for determining when a feeling is intuition, and when it’s just emotion?

Do you know why I ask?

No

Do you care why I ask? :)

No

Of course not! :)

Not particularly. I have average to good interpersonal communications skills.

DarkCurrent on December 31, 2010 at 11:55 PM

You know what? I agree with you. But, I will also add that they are not good enough, and I don’t see you caring enough to do something about that. I could be wrong, and you could pleasantly surprise me, but I doubt it! :)

Bizarro No. 1 on January 1, 2011 at 12:02 AM

You know what? I agree with you. But, I will also add that they are not good enough, and I don’t see you caring enough to do something about that. I could be wrong, and you could pleasantly surprise me, but I doubt it! :)

Bizarro No. 1 on January 1, 2011 at 12:02 AM

Have you accounted for possible cultural differences in your analysis?

DarkCurrent on January 1, 2011 at 12:05 AM

Damn.

None of this is worth it. You guys that came back this evening; thanks for what you’ve all said. In the long run, it doesn’t really matter to me what this man goes on about me. Sorry you had to suffer his abuse too.

It’s either that he knows he’s talking out of his 4th point of contact to try and get people’s goats or he really is ignorant to the world.

I wouldn’t want to be him. Truth is, I’d bet he wishes he was anyone but himself. I pity him for that.

Drinking Champaign here with my kids. To all of yours…

Happy and Prosperous New Year.

hawkdriver on December 31, 2010 at 11:27 PM

I’m the abusive one, but you’re not, even though you’ve slandered me by unapologetically calling me a racist, despite the fact that I’ve never made an issue of anyone’s race here? ROFL!

Whatever it takes to continue your delusion, dude. Remember, you’re perfect! :)

Bizarro No. 1 on January 1, 2011 at 12:08 AM

you’re perfect! :)

Bizarro No. 1 on January 1, 2011 at 12:08 AM

Not quite, but you wish you were me.

hawkdriver on January 1, 2011 at 12:11 AM

DC, do you still fly?

hawkdriver on January 1, 2011 at 12:12 AM

Have you accounted for possible cultural differences in your analysis?

DarkCurrent on January 1, 2011 at 12:05 AM

Yes. And I’ll tell you that isn’t an acceptable excuse for talking about/at me rather than with me.

I mean, you could have spent your time asking me why I’ve done what I’ve done here instead of going by your ‘intuition’, but in order to do that on the up and up, you’d have to take the risk that I’d be honest with you about myself rather than deceitful.

If you’re not willing to do so because of cynicism, that’d explain why you’d choose to go by your ‘intuition’ rather than take the time to ask me questions about my intent directly, wouldn’t it?

Bizarro No. 1 on January 1, 2011 at 12:19 AM

Bizarro No. 1 on January 1, 2011 at 12:02 AM

So far, you’ve got passive-aggressiveness and narcissism down pat, as well as delusions of grandeur. If you’re aiming to be the living representation of the DSM, you’re doing a bang-up job. Kudos.

MadisonConservative on January 1, 2011 at 12:21 AM

I’m the abusive one…

Bizarro No. 1 on January 1, 2011 at 12:08 AM

Yep. You’ve been slandering people, I defended them, and you demanded proof of their not matching your slander, a ludicrous red herring. When I pointed out the fallacy, you started attacking me. Querulous paranoid, as well, it seems.

MadisonConservative on January 1, 2011 at 12:24 AM

Yes. And I’ll tell you that isn’t an acceptable excuse for talking about/at me rather than with me.

Bizarro No. 1 on January 1, 2011 at 12:19 AM

You think you’re special, but you’re not. Your s**t does stink, you are not the center of the universe, and you’ve done nothing to earn the quite mind-boggling self-absorbed attitude you display. I’ll tell you that there is no acceptable excuse for talking to DarkCurrent with the contempt and arrogance that are dishing out.

MadisonConservative on January 1, 2011 at 12:27 AM

DC, do you still fly?

hawkdriver on January 1, 2011 at 12:12 AM

Not in China I’m afraid. I did my biannual last year (09) during a visit home, so still legally but not practically current.

DarkCurrent on January 1, 2011 at 12:30 AM

Yes. And I’ll tell you that isn’t an acceptable excuse for talking about/at me rather than with me.

Bizarro No. 1 on January 1, 2011 at 12:19 AM

It’s acceptable in my culture.

DarkCurrent on January 1, 2011 at 12:40 AM

So far, you’ve got passive-aggressiveness and narcissism down pat, as well as delusions of grandeur. If you’re aiming to be the living representation of the DSM, you’re doing a bang-up job. Kudos.

MadisonConservative on January 1, 2011 at 12:21 AM

Good job of projection, buddy! :)

You think you’re special, but you’re not. Your s**t does stink, you are not the center of the universe, and you’ve done nothing to earn the quite mind-boggling self-absorbed attitude you display. I’ll tell you that there is no acceptable excuse for talking to DarkCurrent with the contempt and arrogance that are dishing out.

MadisonConservative on January 1, 2011 at 12:27 AM

Again, good job of projection!

The fact you’ve interpreted my conversation with DC to be contemptuous and arrogant from my end would be a good indicator of how your overly angry, dieseased mind works, if in fact you’ve read me wrong, correct? Do you believe you’re someone who knows how to express anger in a constructive, healthy manner? If so, what gives you that indication, because I definitely do not see it!

I’ll tell you that you have read me wrong, but you won’t care because you’ll believe I am being dishonest, intentionally or not. As if you could know for sure! How could you be so certain you’ve interpreted me accurately? Are you adept at using the scientific method? Are you psychic? Can you feel my vibes? LOL

PS just think, all of this between us could have been avoided, if only you had answered my question to you at 8:04PM instead of choosing to veer off and go the ad hominem route. You prefer war over peace, don’t you? :)

It’s my fault you attacked me, isn’t it, because my mean question helplessly provoked you to get personal with me, right? ROFL

Thus endeth the dialogue.

MadisonConservative on December 31, 2010 at 11:15 PM

Who was the genius who said that? Oh, I get it – you are only interested in talking at me now, as though you might accomplish something of substance. If it was your goal to make me laugh at you and your inanity, well, you’ve succeeded mightily! :)

Bizarro No. 1 on January 1, 2011 at 4:36 AM

It’s acceptable in my culture.

DarkCurrent on January 1, 2011 at 12:40 AM

Maybe so, but believing that it’s adequate to ‘listen’ to people that way won’t get you an “A” in an interpersonal communications course over here in the States. :)

Bizarro No. 1 on January 1, 2011 at 4:42 AM

My word is the best damned proof you can get,

MadisonConservative on December 31, 2010 at 9:47 PM

BWAHAAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHHA

at least you’re good for a few laughs.

right4life on December 31, 2010 at 10:11 PM

When the resident forced-birther theocrat can rightly laugh at you as a complete fool, MadCon, the best thing to do is quietly slink away.

Seriously, the only way you could fail any worse would be to get pwned in an argument by Drywall.

Dark-Star on January 2, 2011 at 2:09 PM

When the resident forced-birther theocrat

Dark-Star on January 2, 2011 at 2:09 PM

This is what you call pro-lifers?

hawkdriver on January 2, 2011 at 10:27 PM

Comment pages: 1 9 10 11