Could be worse, she could be an official sponsor like SarahPAC.
Sarah Palin recently declined an opportunity to speak at CPAC for the fourth year in a row. Obviously, that doesn't count for those unalterably opposed to the former Alaska governor and gleefully seeking reasons to pronounce her as anathema for conservatives, no matter what she says or does. SarahPac is sponsoring a reception at CPAC. I suspect it's Palin's way of making a gesture to the group, which, despite it's recent inclusion of GOProud, still commands some influential guests and large audiences. I'm not crazed aboutGOProud being affiliated with CPAC.
I'm one of those who view GOProud as a Trojan Horse inside the conservative gates...incongruous and illogical. Even so, I understand a conservative politician such as Michele Bachmann wanting to speak to such a large gathering of conservatives so, as I stated, I'll wait to learn what she says to the convention before making any judgments. Even then, I'm not obdurate to the point of abandoning any and all support for Representative Bachmann based on her one appearance at a huge convention of political conservatives, some quite influential, because the group organizing the conclave allows a 'gay' group that claim to be conservative to be a co-sponsor.
That would be short-sighted and, frankly, if we follow that line of reasoning we could have disavowed Ronald Reagan because he signed the 1986 immigration amnesty bill into law and did so quite enthusiastically, as I recall. Of course conservatives were upset with Reagan for signing the bill but they did not abruptly yank their support for him in the '84 election based on this single act. In fact, unsurprisingly, I read only sparse mentions of this incident during the Reagan 100th birthday celebrations. I can see why. It was a (well-intentioned) mistake but it doesn't cancel out Reagan's achievements and his standing as, not only a great president, but a great conservative.
No, I don't equate Sarah Palin (or Michele Bachmann) to Ronald Reagan but I believe that either woman can make an error in judgment without being reflexively labeled as a persona non grata to conservatives. Then again, I try to take a reasoned view of any possible candidate for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination and although a lot of names are floated, only a very few are of real interest to conservatives and I refuse to reject any of those on specious grounds. The next election is too important to decide the GOP candidate based on petty arguments over trivialities, overblown gossip and alleged missteps that foolishly trigger unwarranted and instant rejection. That way lies failure and loss.