CPAC denies Log Cabin Republicans again; 80 percent friends now 20 percent enemies

The Conservative Political Action Conference will be held Feb. 25th – 28th, and once again the Log Cabin Republicans have been given the cold shoulder. In the world of CPAC organizers, someone who is 80 percent your friend is 20 percent your enemy.

The Huffington Post reported Thursday:

WASHINGTON — The wave of progress on LGBT rights has yet to reach the halls of the unsuitably named Gaylord National Resort and Convention Center in National Harbor, Maryland.

For yet another year, the Conservative Political Action Conference will exclude from its list of sponsors the Log Cabin Republicans, a conservative group that advocates for gay rights. The conference has increasingly become an exhibition for the movement’s more bombastic characters, but it remains one of the more high-profile conservative events each year, providing a window into the id of the Republican Party at a given moment. Several potential presidential candidates, including former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), are slated to attend this year’s conference, which will be held next week.

Pro-gay rights conservatives who hoped they’d get to participate in CPAC in a more formal way this year were disappointed when the answer came back from the event’s sponsor, the American Conservative Union.

This blog has been consistent for years when it comes to shutting down debate — it’s a loser. It’s a loser when NPR and other media outlets shut down the comments section of controversial topics, and it’s a loser when conservatives at the ACU find weasel ways to deny the Log Cabin Republicans a voice at CPAC.

If an organization of gay men agrees with me on national defense, fiscal policy, education, and a wide range of social issues — but it disagrees with me on the definition of marriage — it would be incredibly strange for of me to make that group feel unwelcome in my company. Denying the Log Cabin Republicans a sponsorship at CPAC is just as tone deaf as Mitt Romney saying his ideal immigration policy would force Hispanic families to “self deport” (i.e., Maybe if we make your life miserable enough, then you’ll just go back to where you came from).

Note: Jesus didn’t walk away from troubled souls — he walked towards them. Social conservatives shouldn’t fight to exclude a group that agrees with 80 percent of the conservative platform — they should fight to have the booth directly next to them.

It’s a sad day when CPAC will welcome Ron Paul fans who push nightmarish foreign policy ideas into its annual conference, but then kick the Log Cabin Republicans to the curb.

Johnathan Krohn, like SNL’s ‘Pat,’ is still finding his identity

Like the infamous “Pat,” Jonathan Krohn is confused. Is he conservative? Is he liberal? He just wants to be “Jonathan.” The only thing that remains constant is his shameless self-promotion and smug self-assurance. Is it really any wonder he’s finding a home on the left side of the political spectrum?

Politico has a “where are they now?” story on “CPAC’s wonder boy,” Jonathan Krohn, author of Defining Conservatism: The Principles That Will Bring Our Country Back. He also was the kid who was allotted time for a short speech at CPAC in 2009, which got the attention of Fox and Friends, etc. There’s only one problem with Politico’s piece: He was never a wonderboy. Why, you ask?

  1. Everyone knows Jack Black is Wonderboy.
  2. He was a know-it-all 14 year old kid who was talking about taxes and medicaid. That doesn’t make someone a wonderboy — it usually just makes them weird.

I was at CPAC in 2009 working for The Heritage Foundation. I took a picture of Jonathan and sent it to my sister because I knew it would make her cringe. We had a good laugh over it. The reason is because the Steve Doocy wing of the Republican Party might latch onto 14 year old pundits, but that’s about it.

When I was a 13, my friends and I played baseball all summer from sunrise to sundown. We blew things up with firecrackers when our parents weren’t around. We talked about Cindy Crawford and how it would be the be the greatest day ever if she fell from the sky and started making out with us. We climbed trees to see who had the courage to go the highest, and we argued over which band was the greatest. What we didn’t do was go around trying to convince people we knew how to make Social Security solvent for future generations.

Maybe we did what we did and Jonathan did what he did because he’s just smarter than the rest of us. Or, maybe he’s just a confused individual who always thinks he has all the answers. Like SNL’s “Pat,” he might be one thing, or he might be the other.

The only constant with Jonathan seems to be his shameless self-promotion and his arrogance:

I think I’ve changed a lot, and it’s not because I’ve become a liberal from being a conservative — it’s just that I thought about it more. …

“I started reflecting on a lot of what I wrote, just thinking about what I had said and what I had done and started reading a lot of other stuff, and not just political stuff,” Krohn said. “I started getting into philosophy — Nietzsche, Wittgenstein, Kant and lots of other German philosophers.

Got that? His leftward shift is because he’s thinking more. The more you “think” the more liberal you become (i.e., he “evolved” like a certain president, unlike us conservative knuckle-draggers).

Jonathan, did it ever dawn on you that some of us real conservatives have read the best and brightest across the board and came to the conclusion that conservative principles maximize security and freedom? No, it didn’t, because you’re a younger version of that annoying guy from Good Will Hunting, who Matt Damon (ironically) shoots down in a bar.

Yes Jonathan, conservatives are familiar with the German philosophers and masterminds of yesteryear, mainly because we must deal with the public policy that springs up from their thought-manure. Every generation guys like you roll around in their brain-droppings, and then you track it into the public square and try and pass the stench off as something else. I’ll tell you what — keep Nietzsche. We’ll stick with living legends like economist Thomas Sowell.

Have fun studying at NYU, Jonathan. I wish you well with your philosophy and film making studies. Personally, I wouldn’t be spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on a degree in philosophy, but good luck with that. And besides, if you take out student loans and can’t pay them back, maybe another wise liberal like yourself will coerce taxpayers to cough up the dough. A small price to pay for “philosopher kings” like yourself, right Mr. Krohn?


How you like them apples?

Going “Clubber Lang” on Christopher Buckley, Meghan McCain

Christopher Buckley needs to stop this Rocky Balboa vs. Apollo Creed bout with Megan McCain for liberal cocktail party circuit, pet conservative, undisputed champion of the world.

Buckley plays the quick and nimble Apollo, albeit a bizzaro Apollo without the charisma or goodwill (you know it would be cool to see Buckley thrown into the ring with Ivan Drago, provided someone threw in the towel a few seconds earlier…)

Meghan plays uncoordinated upstart without much of an education but a heart of gold, albeit without the hard-knocks upbringing or Balboa work ethic (somehow I don’t see her going to Russia to train anytime soon).

Either way, here’s the million dollar question: Why do these two seem to exist primarily to air the conservative movement’s disagreements and dirty laundry? The liberals who love them on camera and in print loath them in reality. Hacks like Arianna Huffington need all the help they can get, which is why they jump at the opportunity to leverage Meghan’s insecurities manifested in weird claims about Twitter followers or Buckley’s desire to keep attending parties where people say “Harvard” while thinking Haaaarvard.

Sure, Meghan’s intellectual circles include Whoopie “It wasn’t rape-rape” Goldberg, while Buckley’s includes men and women of NRO prerequisite educations, but their blathering is equally deleterious to the conservative movement.

If Buckley had an issue with leading conservatives and his cousin, Brent Bozell, signing The Mount Vernon Statement, he has the resources to take issue with them privately. If Meghan McCain is concerned about the future of conservatism, there are plenty of venues available to her to have discussions with tomorrow’s leaders today.

If they want to continue currying favor with liberal media clowns and “intellectuals” that’s their prerogative, but bloggers have every right to rhetorically go Clubber Lang on them.

Does this post scare Arianna? I hope not. I’m really one big cuddly Thunderlips.

Jason Mattera Hates White People

Apparently,  Jason Mattera is a racist. At least he is according to The New York Times, whose editors have been listening to Keith Olbermann’s mom. Or was it Janeane Garofalo, self-proclaimed “intellectual”? Or pretty much any liberal with regular air time on MSNBC?

Regardless, we might as well examine the claims. I’m tired from a long, fun day at CPAC and need to decompress.

It turns out that reminding people of the President’s past with powdery white substances (which he readily admits), is proof positive Mattera hates black people like Kanye West believes George Bush hates black people.

Let’s look at Mattera’s past, shall we? He did go after Dolla’ Dolla’ Bill Y’all Jefferson. ( I saw the “black power” fist-raise, Jason!) And he did go after the guy who writes tax law who tells you to shove it when you point out he’s a corrupt buffoon. And he did try to steal ACORN’s thunder with their sister organization, WALNUT (and then where would underage El Salvadorian prostitutes go if he had succeeded?)

With all those disreputable black men being brought to task by Jason I can’t help but think he’s racist…against corrupt white people! As it currently stands, Jason hasn’t fulfilled his quota for sad-sack white men. Sure, he took John Kerry to task, but how can able-bodied caucasian men with pigmentation problems have their reputations destroyed when citizen-journalists like Jason aren’t under a federal mandate to make it happen? If I don’t see Jason shed more light on the ignorant, pampered, liberal hippy white chicks and the pot smoking Phish fans who love them I’m going to have to side with New York Times: Racist. As. Charged.

(Now go read his book.)