« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

On GOProud and CPAC

By: Neil Stevens (Diary)  |  July 29th, 2011 at 11:30 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

I’d like to put something out there about GOProud, conservatives, and the Republican party. I’m seeing some people having very strong reactions to the ACU’s decision to disallow future Conservative Political Action Conference sponsorship by GOProud. Some of these reactions are coming from people I respect in the greater Republican coalition of right-wing politics.

Make no mistake: I have no desire to kick anybody out of the GOP. I routinely cooperate with libertarians, some of whom I have sharp disagreement with on vital issues, because there are a great many issues we do agree on, and can do good things with to move the ball forward. That’s coalition politics 101, and why Ronald Reagan was a proponent of the big tent Republican Party.

But what is good for the GOP is not necessarily what’s good for CPAC. And that’s why I’m also happy to see the ACU make it stand, as reported by the Daily Caller today.

As we all know, CPAC is an old conference that, much like Red State Gathering, started off as a small meeting of like-minded individuals. It may be hard for some people to fathom, though, but in 1973 conservatism was not the mantle that every Republican rushed to claim. This was before the fall of the Soviet Union, before Abortion and the Conscience of a Nation, before we both cut taxes and broke the back of inflation, and created the greatest peacetime expansion of the economy in 100 years. This was before Ronald Reagan’s success made it impossible for the Republican Party to reject conservatism entirely.

This was a time when the Republican left wing would often make open war with conservatives. If you think it’s bad now, look back to what they used to say about Reagan and conservatives before he beat Governor Brown the Elder in 1966:

The previous year, Kuchel had blasted the conservative Republican movement in California as “A fanatical, neo-Fascist, political cult, overcome by a strange mixture of corrosive hatred and sickening fear.”

These skeptics were joined by Republican State Assemblyman Howard J. Thelin, who endorsed Gov. Brown shortly before election day. Thelin called the Reagan campaign “a conspiracy of powerful, well financed forces dominated by extreme views,” and so Reagan’s defeat was “vital to the future of the Republican Party.” (Wash. Post, 10/28/66).

It was also considered an attack to tie Reagan to Human Events (owned by Eagle Publishing, which owns RedState.com), today one of the major sponsors of CPAC. Reagan would go on to speak at CPAC himself 12 times.

Reagan supported a GOP Big Tent because he knew full well what it was to be in the minority in the Republican party. He suffered every attack imaginable, and just kept on working. He didn’t lash out and call left-wing Republicans any names like nasty bigot. He’s the one who got called a fascist and a cultist, in fact. But there was one place he could go to be among friends, and that was CPAC. It’s no wonder he spoke there so much.

That’s why I support the ACU in its decision. Not because I want to run anyone out of the party, or because I don’t want to be able to work with GOProud and other groups to achieve good things for the country under the GOP Big Tent. But because CPAC is supposed to be one place where conservatives get a break from what we get called every other week of the year.

Politics ain’t beanbag, but our side has many venues for fighting out our differences. We’ve got party offices and platform committees, we’ve got numerous primary elections, and we even have Twitter these days. With all of these avenues for hashing it out, I don’t need to be hectored at CPAC. I just don’t.

If Reason Magazine and GOProud decided to get together and create their own conference, like Human Events and the ACU do today with CPAC, I would not feel hurt one bit if they decided to exclude groups fighting for traditional values from sponsoring the event. Go ahead, tell Rick Santorum he’s not welcome at your shindig. That’s fine with me.

When it comes to the Republican Party, we’re all on the same team. But it doesn’t mean we don’t need space for ourselves sometimes. That’s why I value RedState, and why I value the ACU’s decisions for CPAC.

Tags: , , , , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • Aaron Gardner

    You nailed it.

  • Getting_Back_to_Basics

    I think there is a difference between a Reason sponsored conference and CPAC. Reason is very clearly a libertarian-oriented magazine with a narrow band-width of theories on the role of the state. CPAC (from a participant’s perspective) is for the broad cast of ideas which make up American conservatism — among that cast are neocons, paleocons, theocons, libertarians, and probably a few others. I find the ascendency of the 2nd generation neocons to be one of the worst developments in the GOP of the past 11 years, but I wouldn’t want Commentary magazine banned from CPAC just because I strongly disagree with their foreign policy views. I am not a big tent kind of person as to who I vote for, but in the exchange of ideas on the right, I think there needs to be a lot of dialogue and engagement of ideas. CPAC has spend decades exploring what conservatism means; now is not the time to stop the discussion. Once the discussion stops, then CPAC is just a party pep rally.

  • Aaron Gardner

    Seriously…

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    It’s not a party pep talk. It’s a conservative movement pep talk.

  • Finrod

    Never once have I seen you admit that GOProud was responding to being attacked, pretty viciously, by said ‘nasty bigot’. Banning groups because of some harsh words directed back at the thin-skinned is a quick way to shrink the Big Tent.

    Ronald Reagan never would have used the kind of vocabulary leveled at GOProud either.

  • Aaron Gardner

    …….

  • Bill S

    They were simply not accepted as sponsors. Members of the groups (both they and the Birchers) are welcome to register, attend, etc.

  • dajeeps

    He welcomed everyone who supported the cause of defeating the march of big government and socialism. Of course, that is only a slight difference to some, but a rather large one in that he had a goal in mind and did not have a big tent attitude for the sake of expanding ranks. That means if one likes big government and socialism, the conservative movement tent isn’t the place to be.

    With that in mind, I don’t have that much of a problem with GOProud as long as they are respectful of the sensitivties of others. We need them as much as anyone else who is interested in the same goal Reagan had. We have yet to win any major battle of late, and so it would seem to me that it isn’t time for judgement of others and petty infighting. That only plays to the advantage of the left.

  • Bill S

    Like Redstate, CPAC is not intended to be a big debate society. It is for bringing together conservatives and “rallying the troops”. Introducing the kind of controversy that happened last year was the absolute wrong way to accomplish that.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    See my second paragraph.

  • http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

    In 2010 GOProud made headlines by attacking Liberty University and making an unsubstantiated claim that Liberty was leading a boycott of CPAC because of GOProud. This past year they attack several solid conservative organization including the Heritage Foundation. As Erick pointed out in a post at the time, GOProud does not hold conservative values across the board. Nor have they been on the front lines in most of the battles against the left. In fact they applauded Reid when he crammed through the repeal of DODT without serious consideration of its impact on the military. GOProud seems more intent on grabbing headlines and fundraising than actually stopping the left.

    I have no problem with them attending. I have a big problem with them as a sponsor.

  • EMT907

    “But because CPAC is supposed to be one place where conservatives get a break from what we get called every other week of the year.”

    I should think folks would be more concerned with the garbage some Ronulans pop off with.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    .

  • Getting_Back_to_Basics

    What is a conservative? What is the conservative movement?

    That is a question which I have been asking for 30 years and it’s a question the movement has been asking for 60 years, I like that conservatism is not an ideology which has a set of litmus tests which box people in (and do not accommodate changing circumstances). Conservativism is a grouping of ideas which take up a lot of space on the right. I remember going to Philadelphia Society meetings and being enthralled with discussions and debates between libertarians and Burkeans; and some raucus days of YAF struggling with foreign policy differences. Those are the dialogues which helped form my views and philosophy; I greatly value the people at those meetings who disagreed with me and engaged in wonderful discussions.

  • acat

    who act as rude and boorish as they do on conservative web sites (you can take the troll out of the basement…) for the purpose of winning the straw poll.

    That this destroys the value of the straw poll is completely ignored.

    I’m very glad Ron Paul is retiring.

    Mew

  • acat

    “What is Conservatism” has been answered, and the answers have been in print for 40 years.

    Mew

  • Adjoran

    whoever they wish. They don’t operate with government funding.

    Once you begin the excluding, you lose the claim to be broad-based, or at least dilute it substantially. But that’s a choice for the owners or officers in a private enterprise.

    We should note that the CPAC confab is a for-profit business venture, and the attendees are paying for the privilege of being there. Nothing wrong with that, of course – but it should not be confused with a Party function.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    It might *raise* the question, but only if you haven’t followed the history of the ACU.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    ..only we don’t charge for accounts.

  • EMT907

    As long as folks aren’t sponsors, they can be as nasty as they want?

    I thought perhaps by you writing your reason for agreeing with the ACU, as I quoted above, that you believe it has no place at CPAC whatever.

  • chamberD

    In reading your comments it occurred to me that you might find the writing at amnation.com/vfr useful in fine-tuning your understanding of what a conservative is. In the past several days that blog has discussed Gov. Perry’s comments regarding the NY state homosexual marriage law, a topic that is relevant to conservative voters on a number of levels. You might also wander through the archives to glean something of the overall tenor of issues presented there that are important to conservatives.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    But that’s a tougher line for CPAC to cross.

    Kicking out inappropriate sponsors is one thing, but denying ticket sales is another. I’m not sure how they could really implement that.

  • http://Blackberrybear.etsy.com knitwit

    over whether men’s clubs have the right to exist and by their very nature, exclude women. I happen to believe that, fancy that, men and women are different and men need a place to hang out with other men and not have to filter everything they say or do so as not to offend some woman; or include her just to make her feel better, or not….

    I do, as a woman, understand that a lot of business and networking happens between men in a males only setting that excludes participation of women, and can be a real handicap for women owned and run businesses when it comes to competing in the marketplace. The same goes for women who network and then give preference to those with whom they have a congenial relationship and network contacts, though women are often dealing with a certain glass ceiling effect in that regard. However, I do believe that a great business and a great product will overcome blind loyalty eventually to the betterment of the free market.

    In this way, the group CPAC has the right to control to whom it loans its keys and demand a certain level of congeniality in return, and not to be abused by others in its own home or be forced to lend the jeering teenagers the car while being called old fuddy-duddies! They are, and serve, a bandwidth of truely conservative people and organizations, and deserve the right to do so without being terminally harrassed for it.

  • streiff

    you’ll understand why I dismiss your opinion out of hand. Thanks.

  • BigRedConservative

    Wonder what he’ll do now he’s retired from politics? Do volunteer work for Hezbollah?

  • streiff

    throughout 2010. Here’s what happened.

  • streiff

    try reading the story again

  • Derek V. Baker

    Very well said, Erick. So many sadly miss the distinction between what’s good for a particular political conference (CPAC) and what’s good for the GOP. CPAC can associate with whomever it wishes… it’s called liberty. The fact is, as those that attend CPAC (particularly last year) witnessed, Many GOProud supporters attended not to enjoy the event and hear the speakers like everybody else, but to generally walk around and heckle pro-family groups and their supporters. I saw several making a spectacle of themselves. It just wasn’t civil, and made the event much less enjoyable.

  • BigRedConservative

    But it wasn’t Erick who said it. Check the “posted by” line first.

  • throwback59

    a “Big Tent.” I re-registered as a NYS Conservative.
    “Big Tents” are much more likely to be blown away in storms.

  • http://practicalgopvoter.blogspot.com/ texasproud

    government intrusion in our lives. I have been an active conservative and this is an unfortunate decision. With strong liberal progressive policies destroying the fabric of our nation, we need to unify ALL opposition to this agenda. By removing the ability of GOProud from being able to contribute to the conservative movement, you are choosing the social conservatives who threw a hissy fit last year instead of welcoming a discussion of what unites conservatives. Conservatism welcomes individuals to make our decisions and form our own opinions, not to fall into a group think mentality. Conservatism is a principle not one litmus test by one group of people trying to define what the rest of the movement must meet. That isn’t libertarian, that’s what conservative in its essence. If people just want to take their ball and go home, then, to be quite honest, forget them. if you can’t stomach any debate with someone who has a slightly different view on why they are a conservative, then you need to look at yourself in the mirror

  • runner12

    The problem is with GoProud’s sponsorship is the villification and name-calling they engaged in with those who disagreed with them. They repeated progressive attack lines against social conservatives in the party.

    Added to that, (as you pointed out kipling), they have been rather squishy when it comes to taking on the Left. They have definitely not been on the front lines. In a sense, many are similar to pro-life statists; only they are GoProud statists. Big government is wrong, unless used to advance their agenda. This is the sticking point with me when it comes to GoProud.

    Excellent diary, Neil. One of the besr I have read on this issue.

  • Aaron Gardner

    You can still attend, so your crying is a bit silly. Also, if conservatism doesn’t require falling in line into a group think mentality, then you should respect the opinion of the ACU in this matter.

    So what is more important, forcing them to keep you as a sponsor or allowing for them to choose who they want as sponsors?

    Seems to me that you are quite the hypocrite to demand acceptance under the guise of diversity while you are also outraged at SoCons for having a difference in opinion.

  • votegaryjohnson

    Gary Johnson is a breath of fresh air compared to the other republican candidates. He is honest and smart! Its so nice not to be pandered to by slick talking sound bite politicians. Gary Johnson speaks slowly and eloquently, which does not lend itself to debates.

    I believe Governor Gary Johnson is Obamas biggest threat. Its really hard for Obummers re-election team to paint a pro-choice, pro-gay rights, anti war GOP candidate who wants to legalize marijuana as a right wing extremist. His socially liberal stances will be attractive to democrat and independent voters. Not to mention he was a very successful two term(that’s one more term than mitt romney) republican Governor in new mexico a state that is 2 to 1 democrat. He left office with a billion dollar surplus and was arguably the most fiscally conservative governor ever. He is a true Statesman and practices good stewardship of your tax dollars.

    He also will not engage in mud slinging or name calling. He ran two campaigns in NM where he never mentioned his opponent. He will stick to the issues and not try to blame obama. I met Gary Johnson twice last year in my state of MO.. Once when he spoke at UMKC and another event he spoke at Missouri Southern State University. in Joplin Mo. He took the time to answer all my questions and sincerely listened to my concerns.. He is obviously working harder than the other candidates! For this he has earned my vote and support!

  • Scope

    During the 2011 CPAC event, Cardenas, the new Chair of the ACU, acknowledged that he is a Regan, three legged stool conservative during an interview. He all but said at that time that GOProud would not be a sponsor at any future CPAC events. He said that they were loudly critical of some ACU board members, I’m sure meaning Cleta Mitchell, who GOProud director Barron called a “nasty biggot.” He said he was disappointed with their website, which did nothing to promote fiscal conservatism, and that they were critical in the press of some of the other former sponsors who decided to boycott CPAC because of their inclusion. He also talked about the anti-conservative principles GOProud was behind such as the push for the repeal of DADT. Grover Norquist, an ACU board member, and a major event organizer, joined the board of GOProud in June 2010. Norquist said of those that were boycotting CPAC because of GOProud being a major sponsor, that they were “loser people” and “loser organizations.”

    He indicated that those chosen as CPAC sponsors must be at least in the sandbox of the ACU’s conservative principles. He did not believe that promoting a gay lifestyle, or the gay marriage agenda was in that sandbox. Thankfully he brought the issue of who to allow as sponsors up for a vote with the board, and obviously they agreed with him.

    The board vote, which allowed David Horowitz to remain was critical. Horowitz has been an activist against Islamic radicalism. He apparently spoke out about the inclusion of Suhail Khan, and his ballroom two hour event on promoting Islam as a peaceful religion. Kahn has been tied to the Muslim Brotherhood, and he was a supporter of the Ground Zero Mosque. If I am not mistaken he invited the GZM Imam to speak at his event, but the Imam declined. Kahn’s father Maboob is the first to bring the Muslim Brotherhood to the US, from what I’ve read. At the same time a long time CPAC supporter, Pam Geller, another activist against radical Islam, was relegated to giving a speech in a hotel room down the street.

    I’ll know the ACU is seriously getting back to it’s Reagan roots when they boot Kahn from the board. They also need to boot Norquist who recently said that allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire would not be a tax increase, yet not long ago he claimed that stopping the ethanol subsidies was a tax increase.

  • mikeymike143

    and both johnson and paul are a cancer to the conservative movement. i say NO WAY to either one.

  • Scope

    and so are their supporters a cancer to the conservative movement. There is a spray that you can get to make all of the cockroaches come out into the open. For Paul and Johnson, just yell legal pot, and it has the same effect.

  • mikeymike143

    CPAC would really be rocking.

    and i want to second what streiff said about libertarians not being conservative. libertarians are simply another form of liberalism. kind of like a ”democrat light”.

    and true conservatives like jim demint and the heritage foundation chose not to attend last years event because of the inclusion of goproud as a sponsor. sorry, but jim demint represents my conservative values a whole lot more than goproud does.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    ..

  • http://practicalgopvoter.blogspot.com/ texasproud

    but I don’t think whiners should be rewarded for throwing a hissy fit. It might surprise you but I want ALL conservative groups there, I just think it defeats the purpose of a conservative gathering to let one group hold their breathe until they get their way. Both sides should be represented, but if CPAC is backing down to the people who blew it off last year, then I think it sets a bad precedent. We need all conservative principled individuals. If one part of our movement can’t accept that, they shouldn’t be rewarded. I personally would associate more with the Social Conservative group, since I personally am one, but I don’t need to be surrounded by people who think exactly like for their voice to be heard

  • Aaron Gardner

    Why should they be rewarded? Should they be able to call Cleta Mitchell a “nasty bigot” and not suffer any consequence?

    Seems to me that you are asking people to do what you yourself refuse to do.

    Simply put, you are a hypocrite of the highest order.

  • http://practicalgopvoter.blogspot.com/ texasproud

    are being hypocrites. If GOProud is trying to ban social conservative groups from sponsoring they should be called out too. My point is that all conservative aligned groups should be welcomed and have a full conservative discussion. I don’t have any personal connection to GOProud, which I think you are insinuating, but I do have a problem with groups who can’t tolerate to be around other conservative groups who don’t obey their commands. I personally have a problem rewarding a group who took their ball and went home last year. I oppose people who are my way or the highway. If the ACU feels it is better for the overall conservative movement to do this, than they have the right to do this, I just don’t like the appearance if you throw a tantrum like they did during the event last year, being rewarded. If GOProud or any other conservative group do something like this, I don’t want them rewarded either

  • Aaron Gardner

    But then, you don’t seem to care about that fact. You seem to only care about the outrage that can be generated over this.

  • http://practicalgopvoter.blogspot.com/ texasproud

    If the ACU makes the decision they want their money an support, then more power to them.. They were sponsors last year, a couple groups took their ball and went home, and they are giving into them? I guess you and I just agree to disagree on this. I am sure we agree 98% of the time politically, so there is no reason to let one issue divide us. I just want all conservative groups to function as the foot soldiers to fight liberal encroachment and not a circular firing squad

  • Aaron Gardner

    Should they be allowed back too?

  • http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

    Conservatism is much more than freedom, liberty, and less government intrusion. Conservatism is conserving the governmental structure, the values and virtues, and the society that make freedom, liberty, and limited government possible.

  • http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

    In fact, I don’t remember the Heritage Foundation saying anything at all regarding GOProud as the reason they did not attend.

    I do remember GOProud and its executive leadership beating their chests and calling those who failed to bow to their agenda names. I remember Chris Barrons going to far with the nasty bigot comment.

    Perhaps you have some links to those hissy fits by social conservatives.

  • http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

    In their official press release, GOProud made the following claim:

    “We are deeply disappointed at the decision of the American Conservative Union to bar GOProud from participating in CPAC. They are well within their right to do so, but a decision like this will have consequences.”

    The American Conservative Union did not bar GOProud from participating in CPAC. The letter sent by the ACU to GOProud said the following:

    “GOProud will not be invited to participate in a formal role for CPAC events scheduled during the 2012 election cycle.”

    The letter then went on to state: “As always, GOProud members are welcome and encouraged to attend as individual registrants.”

  • http://www.gmsplace.com/ civil truth

    Sponsorship means a statement affiliating the program of the sponsor with ACU. Attendance does not.

    While GOProud’s advocacy of certain gay-related positions certainly is a source of controversy, if we lay that to the side, there would seem to be ample grounds for rejecting their sponsorship in terms of their advocacy of positions in opposition to fiscal conservatism and enabling of increased size and coercive power of the Federal government, as various past articles have pointed out.

    Particularly noteworthy is the alliances GOProud has formed with anti-conservative groups to advance their gay-related issues. This indicates that they are social issues first and conservative second, as they sacrifice the latter to advance the former. This behavior offers grounds to reject their sponsorship regardless of whether one agrees with or disagrees with their positions on gay-related issues.

    I don’t see an anti-gay jihad in process here. As you note, nobody is trying to exclude the members of GOProud from attending CPAC as individuals or even as members of GOProud. It’s just that GOProud is no longer one of the leaders, which puts them in the same boat as various other conservative groups.

  • devereaux

    I have no doubt if Ron Paul (he won’t) got the Republican nomination he would beat Obama handily. He’s the only candidate that understands why we got into this mess. He’s a cultural conservative with a perfect pro-life record. Norma McCorvey endorsed him in 2008. He would be able to hit Obama on the head for continuing Bush’s foreign policy. Over 70 percent of the American people want out of Iraq and Afghanistan. Yes people like William Kristol would probably editorialize in the Weekly Standard that the only safe vote is for Obama. But like in 2008 in 2011 he is getting more campaign cash from active duty military.

    I think the nominee will either be Romney or Perry. I don’t think Bachmann will stand up over the long run.

  • http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

    http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/07/30/roger-l-simon-backs-breitbart-on-goproud-v-cpac/

    Andrew Breitbart also says he will skip CPAC due to the decision over GOProud.

    http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/07/30/breitbart-to-skip-cpac/

    Last year these two derided those who skipped CPAC due to the inclusion of GOProud. Now they adopt the same tactic they previously criticized.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Last year it was ‘bigoted’ to skip CPAC. This year… suddenly it’s OK.

    This is precisely why the ACU’s decision was correct.

  • Bill S

    Shoving a stick into the eye of social conservatives: A-OK
    Refusing sponsorship of a gay org: SACRILEGE!

    #libertarianfail

  • Scope

    and their inclusion as a sponsor of CPAC, he stuck an even bigger stick in the eye of the social conservatives by very publicly announcing that he was holding a big party at CPAC in their honor. Andrew Breitbart is also a board member of GOProud, along with Grover Norquist. That was the day I removed the Big Government website from my bookmark list. Haven’t checked it out since, and have not been behind on any news because of it. Breitbart is a libertarian, and I believe in the Ron Paul mold.

    The only thing I can say is that CPAC will only be better off with getting rid of the faux conservatives. Maybe they can now go back to the days of Reagan conservatism which made them great to begin with. Let the purge continue.

  • runner12

    or even a faux conservative. He is more Libertarian in my mind.

    While I appreciate what Breitbart does and I like how he takes on the liberal lies, I would like for him to acknowledge the absolute hatred the Left has of social conservatives. I would also like to see his eyes opened that a similar hatred exists among many members of GoProud.

    It amazes me how those who claim to stand for freedom are trying to control how other people view and think about their lifestyle choices. That is a tactic of the Left, not of conservatives.

  • mikeymike143

    and neither kahn nor norquist is anything other than a ”trojan horse” that will cause damage to the conservative movement. i dont see why any group that calls itself conservative would have either one of these two involved in it.

  • http://www.theprecinctproject.wordpress.com ColdWarrior

    You can’t kick people out of the GOP unless they are first “in” the GOP. The only people “in” the GOP are the approximately 200,000 or so Republicans who have voting privileges “inside” the Republican Party. Only about 400,000 such positions exist nationwide.

    Constitutional conservatives can “take over” the Republican Party by filling up these vacancies.

    If anyone stood at the podium of a CPAC conference (or the upcoming Redstate Gathering) and said, “Please raise your hand if you cast a vote for your Republican Party local and county committee officers,” my guess is that less than five per cent of the people in the audience would raise their hands.

    Therein lies the problem.

    Thank you.

    ColdWarrior

    P.S. Want to fix things? See the links below. Then DO something.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    …

  • mikeymike143

    voters rejected ron paul last election. he is not a viable candidate for anything but the nuthouse.