Skip to comments.This is Too Much For Me (Erick Erickson Rips GOProud's "Bigot" Attacks)
Posted on 02/10/2011 9:08:33 AM PST by Pyro7480
I have, for me, shown an amazing amount of restraint in keeping my mouth shut on an issue about which I can stay silent no longer GOProud and CPAC.
RedState’s parent company, Eagle Publishing, Inc., is a long time sponsor of CPAC. RedState itself is helping FreedomWorks sponsor Bloggers Row. We were the sole sponsor of Bloggers Row last year. I will be speaking at CPAC at the Young America’s Foundation luncheon named in honor of Tom Phillips, my friend and also the big boss at Eagle Publishing, Inc.
I have done my best to stay out of this business, keep my mouth shut, and appreciate my friends on both sides of the CPAC divide. Had I not seen this particular attack by GOProud against long time solid conservatives I’d continue keeping my mouth shut. But this is too much. And my guess is that there aren’t many if any willing to call foul, so I will do it.
As someone who spent time trying to give them the benefit of the doubt, I accept this as conclusive proof that, while it is a Republican organization, GOProud is not a conservative organization.
Let me tell you why.
What has my blood pressure up is this particular bit from the article:
Of the Heritage Foundation’s decision, he says, ”They’ve chosen to and it’s a mystery to me why but they’ve chosen to align themselves with the losers.”
Asked to explain, Barron places the blame at the feet of Cleta Mitchell, the big-name Republican D.C. lawyer who was the attorney for the groups trying to keep marriage equality from coming to the District. Mitchell did not respond to multiple requests from Metro Weekly for comment.
”I think there’s a couple people in Heritage who, at the behest of Cleta Mitchell who is just a nasty bigot she got some of the people at Heritage early on fired up about this,” Barron says. ”We tried very, very hard to smooth this over and to avoid any public fight with Heritage and then when Heritage came up with their excuse about how this wasn’t about GOProud first of all, we knew it was, we knew it was six months ago but we were willing to publicly let them.”
You really should read the whole thing. You’ll learn that should you disagree with GOProud, you are a bigot too. In fact there are lots of delightful quotes. GOProud has taken one of the favorite leftist bullet points and brought it straight into CPAC. You oppose affirmative action? You’re a racist. You oppose gay marriage? You’re a bigot.
Wonderful trick. Sadly, it is being used on real heros within the conservative movement, including Cleta Mitchell, a board member of the American Conservative Union.
According to the dictionary, a bigot is a person “obstinately convinced of the superiority or correctness of [their] own opinions and prejudiced against those who hold different opinions.”
Chris Baron might want to look in the mirror.
Cleta Mitchell is not just my friend and lawyer, she is one of the keystones of the conservative movement in Washington, D.C. When Sharron Angle’s campaign seemed off the rails right after the primary, it was Cleta who went in to help right the ship. It was Cleta Mitchell who stepped up to defend Christine O’Donnell when no one else would. It was Cleta Mitchell who exerted pressure on wavering conservatives to get on board Marco Rubio’s campaign. It was Cleta Mitchell who helped organize defense and offense for a host of conservative causes headed to court. It remains Cleta Mitchell who does not hesitate to give advice for new conservative organizations and pick up the phone to raise money for conservative causes and candidates.
In fact, let me now fully disabuse you of the notion that GOProud is a conservative organization.
While Cleta Mitchell was fighting for children, Chris Baron was signing up to work for the champions of child killing.
While Cleta Mitchell was fighting for people’s right to work, GOProud was aligning itself with the AFL-CIO and the SEIU.
While Cleta Mitchell was helping the Senate Conservatives Fund get people like Pat Toomey, Marco Rubio, Ron Johnson, Rand Paul, Mike Lee, and others elected, GOProud was attacking Jim DeMint.
While Cleta Mitchell was in super secret meetings of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy this week, GOProud was attacking Tim Pawlenty for daring to defend conservative positions on don’t ask-don’t tell.
Those groups and people who have sat out CPAC this year have done so not because they hate the gays, as Grover Norquist and GOProud would have you believe, but because GOProud is not a conservative organization and its agenda is not a conservative agenda.
For that, they are called losers and nasty bigots.
These losers and nasty bigots have done a lot more for the conservative movement than GOProud. And I am very happy to call them my friends.
This week, I’d much rather be with them than be at CPAC.
All gay Republican groups are friends of the gay agenda and enemies of conservatism. They seek to do to the conservative movement what they have done to the Episcopalian, ELCA, and Methodist churches. They will die and burn in hell for all eternity, every last one of them.
What GOProud is doing is a lefty tactic: to apply pejorative labels to the enemy.
To compund the matter, they admit that the `enemy’ are conservatives.
I believe in people who stand up for what is right. Jihad, abortion, and homosexuality are wrong. People who make those choices cannot be considered as "the good guys".
They need to leave CPAC.
You know who stayed out of this mess? Yes, that’s right, SARAH.
But Sarah said last night on Hannity that she had no problem with GOProud being at CPAC.
Right on, anyone who thinks GOProud is a conservative group is off their rocker.
“But Sarah said last night on Hannity that she had no problem with GOProud being at CPAC.”
Yes, I heard that, and she said it was simply a scheduling problem since Feb. is their busiest month up there. Further, I believe she’s still a sponsor of this year’s CPAC.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda ping list.
Be sure to click the FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search link for a list of all related articles. We don't ping you to all related articles so be sure to click the previous link to see the latest articles.
Add keywords homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list.
There's a lot going as CPACs liberal bent has stirred a hornets nest and some "Conservatives" are supporting GOProud at CPAC. This is what GOProud set out to do, divide and conquer. GOProud has driven wedges in the Conservative movement and intends to splinter it.
Why can’t they just be conservatives like everybody else? I don’t go around calling myself a straight conservative. Can they be called conservative if they support the same gay agenda as the left?
I appreciate Erik Erickson’s take on this. I think he confirmed what a lot of conservativs feared.
LOL. Not quite.
CPAC had a choice, and CPAC chose to go with the leftist losers. This article is right on the mark, and I hope he doesn’t suffer for having written it.
Unless CPAC kicks GOProud out on their sorry *sses, they have no excuse to continue calling themselves a conservative organization. And that is unlikely, since they resisted all criticism of this business at the last couple of conventions. Indeed, CPAC and GOProud have become virtually synonymous as a result of the extremely high profile GOProud has taken at these meetings. They have, basically, taken over CPAC, lock, stock, and barrel. They own it.
Never lose a chance to attack Sarah, eh? Well, it’s Michelle Bachman who agreed to play the starring role at this year’s CPAC, AFTER all this slime came out.
What’s her excuse?
Attack? How about just the truth. Palin didn’t “just stay out of it”. She supported the notion of GOProud being there. Twice.
Palin sounds like she's almost advocating a truce on social issues while we deal with the much more important fiscal ones...
Are taxation and spending "much more important" than marriage, family and children? I don't believe that for one second. And I have ZERO use for politicians who say so.
Erickson does a service in FINALLY exposing what many REAL Conservatives already knew. CPAC is compromised, and GOProud is merely posing as a “conservative” group to splinter Conservatives, to split Social Conservatives from Economic and Libertarian Conservatives.
When mixed the the corruption of the Keene’s who’ve run the ACU/CPAC for 3 decades, and the new guy who’s taking over (he supported Crist over Rubio in Florida for crying out loud!!!) and there is now PLENTY of legitimate doubt as to whether CPAC is really Conservative AT ALL.
Some Conservatives have (understandably) given CPAC the benefit of the doubt. How long will they continue to do so? How long will they put on the show to appear politically correct to people (like GOProud) who hate them and consider them “bigot’s” anyway? REAL Conservatives eschew identity politics — Liberals play that game, and thats EXACTLY what GOProud is ALL about.
CPAC must get a clue, or go away forever. And it may be too late for them already.
it explains it all here in their manifesto wrote back in 63
infiltrate and divide
these goproud are the old log cabins but had to change their name due to them being busted for being Dems and backed by the left financially
they are there to divide the conservative cause and we still have idiots falling for their crap and agenda
Pissant was right about Palin.
Oh, I was never a fan of GOProud’s presence. I just love the fact that Erickson dropped a bomb on them.
“Sarah Palin sounds like she’s almost”
“Sounds like”? “Almost”?
The question is how do we rid CPAC of these moles and the RINOs who are running CPAC? Do we even need cpac?
It seems that those who go to CPAC are looking for donations from homosexual groups. (ie hollyweird)
What Sarah said is she “doesn’t have a problem with the different, diverse groups that are involved with the political discourse”.
Amazing the clout wielded by 2% of the population. Simply amazing.
Minoritarianism John Derbyshire
"Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil" is not a bad slogan, and as a natural contrarian myself, I'm very ready to cast a suspicious eye on anything that has majority approval. Things can be taken too far, though. As malign and cruel as the will of the majority may occasionally be, we should consider the possibility that an unrestrained fear and loathing of the majority might lead us into a different, equally poisonous, political aberration: the sin of minoritarianism.
Snip...I don't see any danger at all that majorities will ride roughshod over minorities unless restrained by wise, omniscient elites. I do, though, see the opposite danger: That by allowing themselves to be browbeaten by those elites into yielding on every single point of accommodation demanded by every loud minority, the majority will find at last that they have no institutions, no traditions, no moral landmarks, no common understandings left, and will be adrift in a wasteland of moral relativism, naked to the cold, heartless winds of intellectual fashion.
Doesn't sound good to me.