Jesus loves strippers.
Don’t blame (or bomb) me. Just ask these girls.
Archive for February, 2006
"Contract of Wifely Expectations"
This is truly disturbing. Not for the faint of heart. Not for anyone, really.
(via The Bitch Girls)
Georgia lawmakers want kids to be forced to report to their parents every single club they join at school. The purpose is to prevent gay kids from joining "gay-straight alliance" type clubs, which the lawmakers think are trying to "recruit" teens to the "homosexual lifestyle."
Lovely.
And yet one more example of how the religious right in this country has gone from resisting government interference with the family to demanding interference in the everyday lives of citizens.
Really, try not to.
Here’s my latest column for TCS Daily (note their fancy new name).
Essentially, everyone at CPAC wants to be Reagan’s heir — not G.W.B.’s:
That the Republican Party has arrived, to paraphrase Reagan, at
another time for choosing, has become undeniable. While all candidates
for the GOP nomination in 2008 will be positioning themselves as the
heirs to Bush’s leadership in the War on Terror (though, perhaps, with
some refinements), it is difficult to imagine any candidate declaring
himself or herself Bush’s domestic heir.In looking for a way forward, then, many — as they did over and
over again at CPAC — reach back to Reagan. There was a conservatism
that was sunny, optimistic, resolute in its pursuit of American
security and wedded to conservative principle.Republicans may recall, as Pence quoted Reagan saying in a 1975
address to CPAC: "A political party cannot be all things to all people.
It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be
compromised to political expediency, simply to swell its ranks."Republicans have had quite enough of political expediency from 1999
to now. The question is whether conservatives can any longer agree on
their fundamental beliefs. They’ve got roughly two years to figure it
out.
It’s gonna be a fun two years.
Public education: where even the idealists are in it for the wrong reasons.
From Eduwonk guest blogger Alice in Eduland:
"I don’t teach because I love
to do it or because I think I am especially good at it. I teach because
I believe in social justice and I believe that education is the most
effective form of social justice work that there is."
God help us all.
First Aaron Burr, now Dick Cheney.
Amtrak conductor 5 seconds ago: “You look beat down, you look tired.”
Three days of wall-to-wall conservatism will do that to you.
This will probably be the last of the blogging live from CPAC today. Checking out a few last panels, then Newt’s speech, then running for the train.
Will post something more comprehensive about the mood/state of the party when I get time. It’s been a pretty interesting three days, as far as the various tensions in the conservative movement.
Rep. Mike Pence’s full speech from this morning is here.
Here’s the intro:
Two years ago, when I presented
the keynote address here at CPAC 2004, I likened the state of the
Republican movement to a tall ship at sea – a ship that had drifted
off-course from essential conservative principles.I said we had lost our way. But I believed we could get back on course — would
get back on course. We could make the corrections. We needed only to
keep our eye on True North — our core principles of limited government
and traditional moral values.I
believed that we were off course not because we’d abandoned these
principles, or forgotten the shining city on the hill. We’d simply
made honest, but flawed calculations on how to get there.I no longer believe that.
It’s one thing to drift off course…
It’s
quite another thing to continue that course when half the crew and
passengers are pointing out that nothing looks familiar … not to
mention the tens of millions of Americans lining the shoreline
screaming, “You’re going the wrong way!”In short, we’re no longer adrift. We might’ve been when we started but now “off course” is the accepted course.
This is all quite an escalation for him. Guess he doesn’t think the leadership election in the House represented much in the way of real reform.
He’s right.
There are not a lot of places left in America — or any other country — where Tom DeLay can still get a standing ovation.
I was at one of those places last night.
(That would be the CPAC Friday night dinner. Guest of honor: Robert Novak. Introduced by, oddly: Sam Donaldson.)
At one point, a girl came by dressed as a hamburger.
There was a reason. I forget it.
Fashion icon.
Michelle Malkin was here signing books.
There’s the line.
And there’s a somewhat lonely fella with bad timing.
This is Alan Chambers of Exodus International at a panel on gay marriage (all participants… against).
He’s an ex-gay. Otherwise known as… a gay.
These are young people upset about Social Security. Supposedly.
The people who support Israel just so it can be blowed-up someday are represented here at CPAC.
My feelings about these people: Let’s say, "leery."
Ann Coulter proposes a new "post-9/11 rule":
“Rag-head talks tough, rag-head faces consequences.”
That will be all on her.
UPDATE: I should say I’m about 95 percent sure on that "thunderous" in the quote above. But I wrote it down quickly. People have audio of the speech, but no one’s posted it yet (that I know of). Doesn’t affect the gist of things much, though, does it?
UPDATE 2: People who have reviewed the audio tell me the word "thunderous" was not there. Quote amended at the top. My apologies. The beauty of the blogosphere…
Ann Coulter’s up next. Sooooooo… exciting.
Like last year, I’ve been taking the temperature at CPAC on gay issues (particularly marriage).
And, as last year, I’m finding CPACers just not that concerned by the issue and pretty comfortable with something along the lines of civil unions.
Even the people against gay marriage just ain’t that against. Such as: Joe and Amanda (pictured above). Not a couple — I don’t think — despite the pose.
Anyway, I asked their general views on gay marriage, and here’s what I got:
Joe:
“I’m against gay marriage. I see somewhere along the lines of where President Bush is, where you can work out a civil union type of thing, which I think would make sense.”
"Something where they do have some sort of recognition.”
“I’m a little more left-wing on that point.”
Amanda:
“You need to have a male and female for development’s sake for a child.”
“But it’s not as important an issue to me — I guess because no one in my family is really dealing with that right now.”
“Of all the causes that I would go out and incite for, for or against gay marriage isn’t one.”
“I’ll let everybody else work on that.”
Joe:
“The generation before us, obviously they’re going to be a little bit more traditional.”
“They’ve never grown up with that idea [legal recognition for gay couples], and we’re going to be the generation introducing it.”
“It’s really not a big issue for most people unless it directly involves you.”
“Do what you want, just don’t advertise it.”
Perhaps there’s hope yet.
"Not a big issue for most people unless it directly involves you."
That’s conservatism.
And now, appropriately, I’m off to the marriage panel.
UPDATE: Turns out Joe and Amanda are a couple. Thanks to Joe for the email.
Cheney warmed up the crowd for Allen in the usual fashion.
I’ve heard a lot of hype about Sen. George Allen. The words "heir to Reagan" have come up more than once.
If Allen is Reagan’s heir, I demand a paternity test. This guy is a void.
As the keynote speaker of last night’s CPAC dinner, he couldn’t command a room. The beginning of his speech was lost below the din of the dinner.
And it’s just as well.
The speech itself was remarkably banal.
His "three key missions" for the U.S.:
1) Security (War on Terror, etc.)
2) Competitiveness (education, taxes, etc.)
3) Values (for some odd reason, reducing pork was included under this header)
He used a lot of football metaphors, calling his speech before CPACers a kind of "team meeting." He kept calling the crowd "team."
Put a fork in this guy. He’s not going anywhere.
(This post can be held against me and used to mock me mercilessly if/when he wins the Republican nomination in 2008.)
Sorry to be wrapping up a few things from yesterday this morning, but my Internet access at night … doesn’t exist on the couch I’m sleeping on.
Basically, Santorum gave his usual lot of fire and brimstone on abortion. So, you either like that or you don’t.
More aggravating, from my point of view, was his reiteration of the idea that the federal government is responsible for ensuring a healthy civil society — families, community groups, etc. These, apparently, are all things government needs to stick its nose into.
This is the EXACT OPPOSITE of traditional conservative position. Conservatives once considered the federal government the greatest threat to family and community. Just because they’re in power (right) now (at this exact second) doesn’t mean the federal government is no longer a threat.
Rudy and the Right
Published by February 10th, 2006 in Misc. Self Promotion and Misc. CPAC. 0 CommentsHere’s my latest column for The Post. In it, I ask whether a thaw is underway between Rudy Giuliani and the religious right — and whether things were ever so chilly in the first place:
Rudy Giuliani
isn’t speaking this week at CPAC — the Conservative Political Action
Conference, which draws thousands of conservative activists every year
from around the country. But it’s not for lack of an invitation.If CPAC is the conservative movement’s family reunion, last year
Rudy was the black sheep: He asked to speak — even offered to waive his
speaking fee — but got rebuffed."I would assume he wanted to come here to boost his
conservative credentials, but we didn’t think that would be useful,"
David Keene, the head of the American Conservative Union (which runs
CPAC), said at the time.But this year Keene softened his stance — slightly. "A lot of
people wanted to hear him on the terror question, so we invited him,"
Keene tells me — but taking care to add, "If you ask me if he’s a
viable candidate for anything: no."But they didn’t make the invitation until just a little over
two weeks ago. "Rudy was very flattered to be invited," says his
spokeswoman, Sunny Mindel, but had a prior commitment. Keene says
Giuliani has a standing invitation for 2007
The most interesting thing is the polling data toward the middle of the column.
…just sang a song about the pledge of allegiance.
Oh… My… God.
UPDATE: John Tabin has audio.
I should really get an MP3 recorder, but I have been using traditional tape for the book — just too worried about losing an important interview to a technical glitch.
Why haven’t papers been running the Danish cartoons?
Pretty simple really: "This was expressed to
us directly: ‘I’m not putting lives in danger. We’re not getting things
blown up.’"
That’s Harry Siegel’s report of why his former paper’s owners wouldn’t print the cartoons.
He’s a former colleague, and I don’t doubt for a second he’s telling the truth. Fearful editors who refuse to print these cartoons, on the other hand, are lying.
Recent Comments