Posted on 12/21/2009 12:14:29 PM PST by icwhatudo
The founder of the website "Free Republic", Jim Robinson, has joined a growing boycott of the CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference) due to a homosexual activist group sponsoring the event.
GOProud, a group that advocates same-sex "marriage," a repeal of the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy, and "expanding access to domestic partner benefits" for homosexuals, is listed as a sponsor of the event at CPAC's website.
Mr. Robinson has joined a number of conservative activists including Liberty University Chancellor Jerry Falwell, Jr., Liberty Counsel founder and chairman Mat Staver, and Gary Glenn, president of the American Family Association of Michigan in their efforts.
On a reply to an article about the boycott, Mr. Robinson stated "I’ll join that boycott. If CPAC is no longer for conservative family values then I want nothing to do with them. They’ll have to change their name to HOMOPAC."
Anyone can say the words. Klansman David Duke followed basically the same politics that the Bircher's embrace. Nutzie Murray Rothbard was the founder of the modern libertarian movement, a good friend of a Bircher backer named Ron Paul and someone who had a political kinship with the JBS. Rothbard seemed not to have a problem with David Duke.
"It is fascinating that there was nothing in Duke's current program or campaign that could not also be embraced by paleoconservatives or paleolibertarians; lower taxes, dismantling the bureaucracy, slashing the welfare system, attacking affirmative action and racial set-asides, calling for equal rights for all Americans, including whites, what's wrong with any of that?".
Just words.
Frankly, the overwhelming majority of Americans have a problem with the habits of David Duke, Murray Rothbard and the Birchers. Especially us traditional mainstream conservatives.
...also Sun writing this:
And despite the fact that GOProud was founded by a former member of the Log Cabin Republicans — a pro-homosexual group — De Pasquale describes GOProud as a group that “promotes our traditional conservative agenda” — i.e., an emphasis on limited government, individual liberty, free markets, and a confident foreign policy. For that reason, she concludes, GOProud should not be turned away as a CPAC sponsor.”
I apologize in advance for confusing you with the facts, but GOProud was specifically formed to OPPOSE the Log Cabin Republicans as NOT representing conservative principles. Here are some of the things one of the founders of GOProud said on his blog, Gay Patriot, at the time GOProud was organized:
As long-time readers know I have been very critical of the national Log Cabin Republicans for many years.Their left-of-center positions on important issues have bothered me as LCR has continually sucked the teet of the Gay Leftist agenda. LCR’s silence and unwillingness to stand up and be vocal on true gay conservative issues (outing of Republican staffers, increasing threat of gays being selectively aborted, peril gays face by Islamic extremists) has been mind-boggling. And LCR’s continued obsession in trashing Republicans, yet letting Democrats get a pass on their gay-related hypocrisies, has been infruriating.
Many of you, friends and critics alike, have told me if I wasn’t happy with LCR to do something about it. I have tried shining light on the organization from GayPatriot.org. But many of us felt more had to be done.
So I’m proud to announce my involvement as a board member of this new organization.
So here's a group trying to expose the leftism of phony gay conservatives, and trying to provide a genuinely conservative org for gay Republicans, and also trying to contribute their little bit to CPAC.
And what reception do they get here on FR, a site which one would think is supposed to stand for the advancement of conservatism on all fronts?
They get loathsome -- and, I must say, c r e e p i l y enthusiastic -- feces related name calling.
This has been a thoroughly disgusting display.
I am further ashamed to recall that the only other place, in memory, that I've encountered the bigoted curse f****-p***er was from leftist Air-America radio host Randi Rhodes.
Rhodes used, and likely still uses, the term, and many similar, in frequent diatribes against the one time "Talon News" reporter Jeff Ganon, as well as other gay conservatives. I discussed that here.
BTW, anyone remember that our own kristinn, and the FreeRepublic DC Chapter, defended Gannon against the outrageous and hypocritical, selectively anti-conservative, homophobia which descended on him from all quarters of the left?
I do. I remember that. That I was proud of. (This present instance notwhithstanding, I have often been proud of FR.)
As another aside, after googling up that page from the GayPatriot blog, and only just glancing at a few comments on only a couple entries, I've already noticed multiple cases where site regulars DEFEND their fellow conservatives in the EVANGELICAL CHRISTIAN community against comments by posters hostile to the site.
That won't shame the bigots here on FR either, but it should.
Now you got me crying real crocodile tears. Not! Tell you what, pal. I don’t believe you and I don’t believe them. If they weren’t pushing homosexualism they wouldn’t be “proud” to be gay.
By the way, I clicked on your link and the very first headline I see on the GOProud site is:
“GOProud Urges Senate Committee to Pass the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations bill”
As I said, HOMOPAC!
Pound sand, pal.
Assuming you plan to attend CPAC, who do you expect will "force" you to stop at GOProud's booth, and/or attend any functions and speeches they may organize?
Well then, HOMOPAC it is!
CPAC's agenda is always confirmed only a few days before the start of the conference. Last year, Rush Limbaugh’s appearance was confirmed only a few days prior. It is my understanding that Sarah Palin was invited, but pulled out at the last minute. The CPAC organizers were VERY excited to announce that Sarah Palin had (supposedly) accepted their invitation to speak at CPAC 2009. Once Sarah dropped out, CPAC scrambled and delivered Rush Limbaugh, who, IMHO, was an excellent substitute for Sarah.
We sat near the front row center last year for Rush's fabulous speech... I wouldn't have missed it for the world.
My husband and I have attended CPAC every year since 2003, and it is a bedrock of conservatism overall. Sorry, I don't get this boycott.
The CPAC organizers work hard to include wounded troops who have just returned from Iraq and Afghanistan. They are given free tickets to the conference, plus they are included at the “high-rent” cocktail parties and banquets (that feature conservative speakers). My husband and I have had the privilege of meeting these heroes, along with inspirational young college students who are fighting back against the extreme liberal agenda - at their own peril - in universities across this country. We always meet solid conservative families attending CPAC with their children – MANY of them home-schooled. We have made life-long conservative friends at CPAC, some are FReepers, some aren’t. I wouldn’t have missed my CPAC experiences of the past 7 years for anything.
My husband and I can barely afford this trip to CPAC every year (especially since they jacked up the Diamond Package price over 60%), but I am proud that our Diamond Package donation helps to bring in wounded warriors and conservative college students who could not otherwise afford to make the trip to DC and attend CPAC.
Unless CPAC becomes a full-blown RINO-fest or lib-fest, we have no plans to boycott it because of one obscure sponsor. For the past couple of years, the ACLU has had a booth in the exhibit area of CPAC. I'm not sure if it's intentional, but CPAC puts the ACLU booth in the worst possible place... the furthest from the main entrance in a deep, dark corner. CPAC attendees who can even find the booth stroll by and laugh and mock the dweeb sitting at the booth: "The ACLU? What the heck are YOU doing here?!"
It is RARE, but every once in awhile, there will be some RINO on one of the many panels that run during CPAC. These RINOs are soundly BOOed by the conservative crowd when they espouse their RINO ideas.
At CPAC 2008, they brought in ALL the GOP candidates for president including Duncan Hunter, Sam Brownback, Ron Paul and Fred Thompson. And each candidate brought in their "people" who appeared to invade the ballroom, handing out signs for "Fred", "Huck", Romney, McCain, etc. It wasn't just the RINO candidates whose people "invaded" the ballroom as some have posted on this thread.
At CPAC 2006, Sen. George "Macaca" Allen was a speaker and had his "people" there, handing out Allen signs. It goes on at CPAC every year, whether the candidates are conservative or RINO. Actually, the majority of the signs I saw at CPAC 2008 were Sam Brownback's.
To name a FEW speakers we have seen (and met some of ‘em) at CPAC over the years: President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney (numerous times), John Bolton (numerous times), TONY SNOW, Sen. Sam Brownback, Sen. Mitch McConnell, Sen. Jim DeMint, Sen. Tom Coburn, Sen. John Barrasso, Sen. Rick Santorum, Rep. Marsh Blackburn, Newt Gingrich, Tom DeLay, Karl Rove, Rep. Mike Pence, Rep. Michelle Bachmann, Rep. Jeb Hensarling, Rep. Paul Ryan, G. Gordon Liddy, Andrew Breitbart (numerous times), Wayne LaPierre, president of the NRA (he gives a fire-and-brimstone speech every year). Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter (every year), Joe the Plumber, Michelle Malkin (just about every year), Mark Levin (numerous times), Sean Hannity, Star Parker, Mark Steyn, Laura Ingraham, Fred Barnes, Ward Connerly, S.E. Cupp, Frank Gaffney, Michael Barone, Steve Moore, Phyllis Schlafly of the Eagle Forum, Roy and Niger Innis of the Congress of Racial Equality, David Horowitz, Frances Rice of the National Black Republican Association, Niles Gardiner of the Heritage Foundation….
Grover Norquist is always there, but he does NOT run CPAC, as many on this thread have stated. I have never gone to any of his side-sessions at CPAC, btw.
There are ALWAYS many speakers representing pro-life groups, the Heritage Foundation, the Clare Boothe Luce Policy Institute, College Republicans, FairTax.org, Young America’s Foundation, Americans United for Life, Catholic Families for America, Citizens United, Liberty University, National Organization for Marriage, National Rifle Association. The list goes on…
Here's a full list of CPAC 2010 cosponsors:
http://www.cpac.org/sponsors.html
Marco Rubio will be CPAC 2010’s keynote speaker. Sarah Palin and Doug Hoffman have been invited, but not confirmed yet.
I don't like the inclusion of this GOProud group, and I will express my displeasure when I get to CPAC. I am no big fan of David Keene, but he was always easily available to speak with during the early years we attended CPAC, especially for Diamond Package attendees. The "problem" now is that CPAC has grown to be so huge, it is tough to seek Keene out to talk to him. The hotel venues for CPAC keep getting bigger. In 2010 CPAC will be moving to one of the largest venues in DC: The Marriott Wardman Park Hotel.
So as it stands right now, I'm sorry, Jim, but I respectfully disagree. I don't support any full-blown boycott of CPAC 2010. When I get there and find that CPAC is indeed tilting way to the left, then my husband and I and other conservatives will certainly express our displeasure to the organizers and consider a boycott of CPAC in 2011 and beyond if the majority of sponsors are like GOProud. I highly doubt, however, that CPAC will indeed be “taken over” by the likes of GOProud and other fringe groups.
Thanks for the correction, I thought it was a couple of weeks. The way I see it CPAC is like a mall of ideas for Conservatives. Some of the shops in the mall represent traditional family values, other shops represent more libertarian leanings, some represent specific issues (like the NRA). Just because you don’t like one shop in the mall doesn’t mean you don’t shop at other stores. At that, shopping at the stores that has the product you like is a good way to boost your values. At this event, if this particular group’s booth doesn’t get any draw but booths that represent traditional family values do, then it will send a message that is the values Conservatives want. However, if everyone who opposes this group just doesn’t show up at the mall, those who are left will be who does support this group, thus sending the Conservative establishment a message that the libertarian view of this issue is predominate.
You make a good case - but the beauty of a boycott - by some - is it reminds everyone conservatives are part of the team - and need to be considered.
OTOH, the first blog post link (along the right side of the page) applauds Senate Republicans for blocking the Democrats' attempted Death Tax extension.
Domestic Partnership Benefits extended by the Fed? Don't support it myself at this time. Haven't read it, but I can easily imagine how the left must have loaded a bill like that. RINO Susan Collins is the sole Republican sponsor in the Senate, which tells me all I need to know.
But fact is it'll probably happen eventually and, right or wrong, it is a more or less predictable consequence of the strategy of opposing gay marriage.
The problem is, even though your mileage in this case probably varies, and your position would therefore be more consistent, many conservatives do support "domestic partnerships" as part in parcel of opposing gay marriage. It's a way of saying, "we don't wish to deny anybody equal rights, we just want to keep marriage unique and special, and therefore gays don't need marriage because they have domestic partnership."
Well, those who use this argument need to consider that, if domestic partnership is put forward as a comparably viable alternative to marriage, then people are going to ask, "so where are the comparable benefits?" Seems to me like the strategy needs to be rethought. On that much, at least, maybe we agree?
As I said, HOMOPAC!
Well, yeah. Leaving the derogatory sense of the term "homo" aside, they are an organize for homosexual conservatives. They focus first on issues that most concern gay conservatives. I'm not sure what's supposed to be odd about that. For instance they also favor full repeal of the "Death Tax" (Estate Tax) most notably because it discriminates against gays, who have no marriage exemption, but the site also notes that it is a jobs killer and destructive of small business generally. They are also pro-life, even if you may dismiss their fear that gays will be selectively aborted when and if homosexuality becomes genetically forecastable.
Well, I really can't boycott CPAC 2010 at this point... I paid for it back in early November in order to get the early discount. I had no idea who the sponsors were/are.
I have no more "clout" than the next attendee when I go to CPAC this February, but I will definitely demand to know why a group such as GOProud is one of their sponsors. This group certainly doesn't fit in with organizations like the Heritage Foundation, Young America's Foundation, the Eagle Forum, etc.
It’s not just about “fundamentalist Christian doctrine”.
Homosexuality is a MENTAL DISORDER, a treatable mental disorder. It would be like paranoid schizophrenics lobbying not to take any medicine and that we should accept them as equal and forgive them the occasional murder.
Normalizing a mental disorder like homosexuality means they’re equally entitled to every benefit ascribed to normal marriage. Traditional marriage is good for a society and encouraged in many ways. Treated mentally damaged, often abused and neglected people who become homosexuals is a denial of reality. It would be if you had a kid cutting themselves, you don’t pat them on the head and say, “that’s fine honey, I respect your right to cut up your body”. Should that particular group have a CARVERPAC?
There’s a million reasons not to normalize homosexuality even before you bring religion into it, then it opens another can of worms. Force Churches to perform gay weddings or be sued?
What about lesbians?? What about chicks who experiment? What about some hetero frat boys getting married for medical benefits.
Politically, we must be opposed to normalizing homosexuality, for practical AND religious reasons.
There is no such thing as a homosexual conservative. The homosexual agenda is anti-God, anti-family and anti-freedom. Just like any other so-called conservative RINO, they’ll screw you in the end every time.
Yes!!! You write the truth. And, I stand with you in support of these moral, and public policy, positions. We will prevail if we stand together and resist the evil (yes, evil) that our opposition represents.
How about exchanging that word "displeasure" for "outrage"?
Oh, and bring a sign or make a T-shirt that expresses your position.
Do that for those of us who have supported CPAC in the past, OK?
Do that for those of us who have supported CPAC in the past, OK?
OK, "outrage" it is! I'll think about the sign and T-shirt... ;-)
thanks nutmeg. It is all the more powerful when someone like you gives them the “what for.”
Merry Christmas to you.
Well... I'll do my best.
Merry Christmas to you.
Merry Christmas to you as well! :o)
Way to go, Jim!
Excellent analogy and great post in #248, mnehring.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.