Palin: No 'problem' with gay group at CPAC

The Hill ^ | 10 Feb 2011 | Michael O'Brien

[Notary Sojac]

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R) said Wednesday evening she has no objection to the participation of gay Republicans at this weekend's gathering of conservatives in Washington.

Palin said she didn't see anything wrong with the participation of GOProud, a group of gay Republicans, at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), which runs Thursday through Saturday.

"I don't have a problem with different, diverse groups that are involved in political discourse, and having a convention to talk about what the answers are to their problems that face America," Palin said Wednesday on Fox News when asked about GOProud.

Palin isn't participating in the conference, and she's declined previous invitations, despite CPAC's role as a cattle call for possible Republican presidential candidates.

But other prominent conservatives have said they're skipping the conference. The conservative Heritage Foundation and other socially conservative groups withdrew due to the inclusion of GOProud. And with those groups out, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) followed suit. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) also declined participation, though it's unclear if that decision is linked to GOProud.

Aside from DeMint, though, the other Republicans mulling a run for president are slated to speak or participate at the conference, hoping in part to boost their standing in the closely watched straw poll of attendees.

Palin suggested that conservatives had more important issues to worry about than which groups were attending the conference.

"People are losing their jobs; they're losing homes. We're still engaged in a war," she said. "There are so many life-changing, life-and-death issues out there in front of us. You know, we'd better be concentrating on what is really important here and not going kind of tit-for-tat as people are positioning themselves for 2012."

[DJ MacWoW]

.and I don’t think it’s just me who thinks that.

Don't you love the "Don't libel me!" and then he proceeds to try it himself? LOL

[trisham]

The Constitution already prohibits abortion, we just need to educate the people about what it already says.

*******************************

Exactly right.

[j.argese]

You’re an idiot.

[trisham]

I understand that our right to life comes from GOD and is not subject to a majority vote.

****************************

Well said!

[j.argese]

What’s the truth about me?

[dforest]

I have been called worse things by far better people than you.

[DJ MacWoW]

Wow, aren't you in '24land'. I imagine soon the MB would be taking over the WH with Blackwater's help..... Unless of course you forgot the \sarc tag..

Wow! Are you out of the loop!

Post 54 with links

[DJ MacWoW]

Your question has nothing to do with my post nor the fact that you are trying to derail the discussion.

I won't respond to you again.

[Jim Robinson]

If you dare threaten anyone on FR with any legal action again after your suspension is up, you get the permanent zot!

[EyeGuy]

One thing is certain from the amount of posts ANY Sarah Palin thread gets, she is, at this point in time, the CLEAR Conservative front-runner.

Her supporters know it, but her enemies know it perhaps even better.

[trisham]

Not so. Morality is very much black and white. It is libertarians who see nothing but grey.

[Jim Robinson]

And if you continue supporting/defending/apologizing for the homosexual agenda after you get back, you get the dreaded double zot.

[rob777]

"My issue with her statement is that CPAC should be a debating club with conservatives okay with entering hostile territory. I thought it was to be a likeminded re-affirmation of conservative values."


This is the problem. CPAC and the ACU started out as an expression of "Fusion Conservatism". That is the three legged stool of limited government, family values and national security. The problem is that they are drifting from that original mission statement and many who have supported them over the years are not happy with it.

[Little Pharma]

I’m not certain that the reaction whould have been the same if Romney, or Huckabee or Guliani had made this comment.

[trisham]

Sarah Palin has never attended CPAC. She is not on their Board of Directors. She has no vested interest in CPAC.

Given that she’s declined all of their invitations, and is thereby totally unfamiliar with CPAC, why should she be concerned at all with the organization?

*********************************

Thank you, onyx. I would like to add to your post that I still believe that Sarah may not have had a "scheduling conflict", but rather had no interest in attending but did not want to appear rude or make herself the center of attention.

[trisham]

I would say that would be his primary method of discourse.

[MEGoody]

You said I shouldn’t be so vocal. Just what is that about if not a threat? For what reason should I withhold sharing my views?

[AnalogReigns]

“evangelicals are the least likely to be pro-homo among any protestant faction. “

You are correct for older evangelicals. And I agree, politically, evangelicals should NOT be for “gay rights” if they value religious liberty.

However, many younger people who identify themselves as evangelical, are soft on “gay rights”, unthinkingly buying into the lie that “it doesn’t effect me...” so why not?

That’s been my perception anyhow, that younger evangelicals, like younger people in general, are much more prone to allow for gay rights....to their (and their childrens’) peril.

I suspect Palin is (unthinkingly) influenced by that younger group which tends to buy in to the more libertine strain of libertarian ideology...

[trisham]

I would agree.

[kroll]

Wow! Are you out of the loop!

Admittedly, Yes. I just thought the comment I responded to was rather funny in this very serious discussion...So, I responded with a gag. I am completely against the GOProud in CPAC but hardly think the latter is being taken over by MB of all things....