Scenes From the CPAC Soap Opera, and Notes for Conference Attendees in Future Years

Here's yet another topic I'd been hoping to blog about during the last week but didn't find the time.

From what I've been reading among CPAC attendees, this year's event was decidedly more raucous than years past, either that, or some of the more veteran bloggers on the scene are feeling pushed out and over the hill, forced to issue cultural fatwas against the hip crowd of younger participants, many of whom were apparently looking for a good time beyond the conference panels on politics and new media. This morning's lengthy essay by Robert Stacy McCain is perhaps a symptom of that, although few people are quite so skillful in expressing the angst: "Notes on an Unfinished Letter of Apology (Or, Does Ed Morrissey Torture Cats?)." (Via Memeorandum.)

That's a term paper-length discussion, but linked there are some of the earlier commentaries that I'd hoped to write about previously. Of special importance is Robert's own piece from last weekend, responding to the reportedly scandalous social mores and reality-series behavior on display among the young hotties prowling around the place. See: "Who Wants to See Tina Korbe’s Thighs?"

That's Tina Korbe at the video above, along with Ed Morrissey she is interviewing Rick Santorum. I've never met Ms. Korbe, but I've tweeted a few things to her and have yet to get a tweet back in response. Sometime last year she became the third full-time blogger at Hot Air. I don't read over there that much anymore, so I can't give a real detailed review of her commentary and analysis. She's good and has an excellent sense for the breaking topics, and if I recall she's got a cultural conservative orientation that's right up my alley. But like I said, I don't read Hot Air all that much. Basically, back when Hot Air was a Michelle Malkin joint, Ed Morrissey was brought on board as a marquee blogger, and I used to read over there regularly. But in 2008, when I had backed John McCain before just about anyone else in the conservative 'sphere, I recall "Captain Ed" tip-toeing around about supporting a candidate in the primaries, before coming out basically like a weasel for Mitt Romney. At that time in 2008, Romney had gotten the choice National Review endorsement and he seemed, for some reason, like a grassroots alternative to McCain, who was hammered as RINO (quite deservedly, but I didn't acknowledge that 'till later). I didn't care so much at the time about evincing a go-along-get-along approach to my fellow conservative bloggers across the 'sphere. I thus proceeded to savage Ed's endorsement and ridiculed others who'd jumped on the Romney bandwagon. I have no idea if Ed actually read my stuff or not, although I have a hunch that Allahpundit may have seen some of it and later, when I was aggressively promoting my blog posts by email, I received a personal note from him informing me that he didn't want anything to do with me. To this day, I don't think Allah's ever linked me at Hot Air (although Jazz Shaw linked me just the other day). He's a something of a self-appointed gatekeeper of the upper-establishment blogosphere, and in my opinion he's an overrated analyst, prone to verbose conspiracies and milquetoast ideological commitments. When Michelle announced the sale of Hot Air to Salem Communications I had even less reason to visit the site, as it seemed that any remnants of conservative activist sensibilities went out the window with the sale.

In any case, when I visited CPAC in 2011 I made it a point not to say hello to Ed Morrissey. The Hot Air people set up the big booth not far from the main lobby of the hotel, and the swag giveaways there make for a circus atmosphere as you're maneuvering through the conference to get to your panel presentations. Ed looks like a nice guy, and he's reasonable and doesn't bother with flame wars and all that. But I felt no need to pile on and substantiate with a personal introduction whatever other praise and ululations Ed was no doubt getting from the college-age blog wannabes slumming around the conference filling their tote bags with Hot Air yo-yos. The hierarchy in the conservative 'sphere is obviously unfair, but life is unfair and you go with the advantages that you have. Ed's good, but he's not that good. He probably ought not blog about politics in California's Central Valley, for example, as I indicated in a post some time back offering the Captain a corrective on Golden State water politics: "California's Central Valley Economy in Perspective."

But enough about Hot Air. Captain Ed and the others are certainly a good entry to this larger topic that's been vexing Robert Stacy McCain and some of the others who ventured opinions on the Jersey Shore-ification of CPAC. One bit of news from this year's conference that comes as absolutely no shock to me is that the CPAC bloggers' lounge is now segregated. I traded emails with The Lonely Conservative before the conference, and she mentioned she'd just put in her application for her blogger's credentials. I then recounted my story with her, whereby I had been denied credentials in 2011, but that when I got to the convention I spoke directly with Tabitha Hale to issue my outrage at the exclusion. "Do you know who I am?" I asked Tabitha without the slightest bit of hubris. I told her that I'd long paid my dues in the conservative 'sphere. (I dare anyone to walk five miles with me to put out citizen journalism like my exclusive and widely-cited 2010 report, "Immigrants and Socialists March Against SB 1070 in Phoenix.") And I explained to Tabitha that I was going to be reporting from CPAC for John Hawkins' Right Wing News and David Horowtiz's News Real Blog. So with that Tabitha threw up her hands, waved over to Kristina Ribali, and relented with some exasperation, saying: "Oh, let him have his credentials." I'm not accustomed to begging for attention, much less special treatment, so I can guarantee you that the moment didn't sit well with me. And while I fully expect to attend CPAC in the future, I will assuredly be taking a different approach next time, and in fact I doubt I'll even bother with scoring credentials unless something changes in the interim. As The Lonely Conservative reports, even acquiring credentials now is no guarantee of access to the bloggers' lounge. See: "Random Ramblings: CPAC Loose Ends,..":

There’s a lot from CPAC that I haven’t had time to get to. As usual, I had a wonderful time. The first day I was hoping maybe I could get into the bloggers lounge, but had no such luck. I had my heavy laptop with me, which I ended up carrying around all day. I shouldn’t have worn heels, by the time Susan Robbins and I got to BlogBash I was exhausted and my dogs were barking up a storm.

Lonely Con was "hoping to get into the bloggers' lounge"? What's up with that? She was credentialed. It turns out that CPAC's now using a two-tiered credentialing system for bloggers, which is another way of saying that non-establishment and non-inside schmooze-bloggers need not apply. Jerry Wilson has more on that at Goldfish and Clowns (where he picks up on some comments offered by Joy McCann):

I got quite the unintended chuckle from Joy McCann’s comments about the lack of room for bloggers:

As I understand it, this was the first year that we had two tiers of blogging, and in a way that’s really unfortunate. Perhaps next year there should be a sort of “media overflow lounge” where we can meet with some of the boutique bloggers and the up-and-comers. (I’m very small-time, myself, but I’m connected enough that barely I made it in [and, no, not by showing skin or flirting].)


Ed Morrissey and I talked a bit at BlogBash about how odd it is that New Media at CPAC has grown as big as it has, and although I know that this makes some people wistful, all-in-all it’s likely a good thing: information is good, and avenues for its dissemination are to be desired in the conservative movement (and in a democratic republic at large).


But I’m not crazy about it forcing a tiered system on us, wherein there are two classes of bloggers. With 500 bloggers, however, and fire codes preventing us all cramming ourselves into that one room, I’m not sure what can be done . . . unless we get a different room that doesn’t feature access to the main ballroom. It could be that that is the next step.

Ed Morrissey, concerned about a tiered caste bloggers society? Actually, as I read Joy’s post it says nothing about Morrissey being concerned about the situation. But of course. What else can one expect from Mr. I’m Only Here To Pick Up My Award (And Don’t You Dare Ask Me To Answer My Email)?

While I know Joy means well — she expands on the idea here — I’m not crazy about the idea of a media overflow lounge where those of us on the bottom rung can be stuffed into with the hope that maybe, just maybe one of the bloggers from on high will wander by to possibly acknowledge our presence with a royal wave before being escorted back to the bloggers lounge we dare not besmirch with our loathsome lowly putrid persons. Blogging is supposed to be about citizen journalists, no one above anyone else and all with something worth considering.

This leads to the question as to whether professional bloggers, which I define as bloggers paid by a corporation to write, are bloggers at all. I don’t believe they are. Case in point would be Hot Air, which is now owned by Salem Communications. Its writers write on behalf of Salem. Their primary function is creating content that entices readers to the site, thus enabling Salem to sell advertising on it at a maximum profit. That’s not blogging. That’s paid column writing that should be judged – and treated – accordingly. Go hang out with the regular media, for that is precisely what you are — conservative (sometimes) Maureen Dowds.

As to BlogBash… still waiting for an invitation. Maybe it became lost in the email. I’m sure it will arrive right after my invitation to BlogCon in Charlotte this May. (File that under “Never.”) Speaking of which, I confess to a perverse hope that CPAC will announce a regional event in California to be held the same weekend as BlogCon.

There's still much more at Jerry's post, but I want to stay with the two-tiered outrage for a minute. I didn't attend this year, of course, so I don't even know who decided on credentialing and segregating at the bloggers' lounge. Obviously there are too many bloggers who'd like access to the lounge, and I'll admit, it's a pretty sweet set up. While the WiFi sucks, you'll enjoy breakfast served and an eagle's nest access to the main convention hall, and you'll meet all of your favorite bloggers --- and not to mention some of the political rock stars of the convention, who often swing up to the lounge for a meet-and-greet with the selected few bloggers lucky enough to gain entrée. Jeez Donald Rumsfeld, I might have missed you had I not gotten down and groveled like a hungry beggar so as not to miss out on privileged access to the CPAC sky-box of the blogosphere:

Anyways, I think I'll send readers back over to Robert's post, which is still longer than this one and that ought to be enough anti-establishment ranting for one day.

CPAC is a once-in-a-lifetime experience for any conservative. I doubt I'll have any less a good time if I'm un-credentialed next time. Indeed, events like this are as fun as you make them, and I'll be planning my own bashes among like-minded friends for the next go-'round. Jason at The Western Experience did without credentials this year and he reported having a great time --- and he suggested we get together to plan for future conferences. So, up-and-coming bloggers take note: The conservative blogosphere is your oyster. Have at it and pursue your happiness, which is your God-given right. Don't let the false blogging gods of CPAC segregate you out of having a good time. You don't need them. Write with a passion, get involved and network among those with similar goals, and understand that all of these hierarchies don't mean a lot in the end --- frankly, the Ed Morrisseys of this world are media celebrities more than they are bloggers. Keeping things in perspective will help you avoid burnout and disgust. Just keep pluggin' and see where things take you. Onwards and upward you blogging proletarians!

'The Mystery Shit-Talker is Dana Loesch'

Ha!

That's Amanda Marcotte taking "umberage" at Dana Loesch. I was there, by the way, and it was the freakin' best, "CPAC’s Brightest Shining Stars":

Dana Loesch, Editor in Chief of Big Journalism and radio talk show host, gave a wonderful speech about the new media and truth-telling. The greatest moment of her speech was when she went off topic and officially earned herself a target on the dart-wall of the femisogynists by declaring how hypocritical they are by declaring they are for women’s independence while at the same time demanding that Uncle Sam act like a sugar daddy and pay for their abortions and their birth control and any other goodie they “need.” This immediately sent Amanda Marcotte (the feminist messiah in question) into hateful diatribe further proving that all progressive feminists are out of their minds.)

The mystery shit-talker is Dana Loesch. I had to look her up. Unsurprisingly, she works for the Big Lie factory. It is true that we at Pandagon are not friendly to professional liars.

Don’t think the Republicans’ move to get America’s vaginas back to cherished 50s-era restrictions will end with banning abortion and restricting contraception. After that’s done, the next step is moving us back to the god-fearing age when women wore thick pads and belts. Proper ladies know that menstruation is god’s reminder that we’re evil, and should be dealt with in a way that maximizes discomfort and humiliation.

And they wonder why we think leftism is a mental disorder?

RTWT at the link.

And visit Dana Loesch at Big Journalism.

How Did Richard Dreyfuss End Up Not Being Involved in This?

Asks Doug Powers, "Bill Clinton and George HW Bush Chair New ‘National Institute for Civil Discourse’."

Folks'll have read the whole thing at the link above. The "Jaws" star was at CPAC promoting his new civic engagement gig, "The Dreyfuss Initiative." He's seen here being interviewed by Duane Lester of All American Blogger: "All American Interviews: Richard Dreyfuss, Actor and Activist."

CPAC Boots GOProud

Specifically, new ACU President Al Cardenas has announced that CPAC will screen sponsoring groups for next year's event. See David Weigel, "CPAC Will Prohibit Pro-Gay Marriage, Anti-DADT Sponsors in 2012." Also, at Towleroad, "CPAC Chair Al Cardenas: GOProud Can Come to CPAC, But They Must Drop Support for All Gay Rights Measures":

Says Cardenas:

"It's got nothing to do with your orientation. It's got to do with the principles that you advocate. There are a number of gays in America who don't advocate gays in the military issue or gay marriage. And so they'll fit within the tent of what we stand for...It's not that easy. It's complicated. But we'll do our best to be inclusive while at the same time adhering to the principles that Ronald Reagan dreamed about and we've been following."

Personally, I'm glad. And perhaps they'll screen pro-pedophile conservatives as well. A number of folks were practically tongue-bathing Alex Knepper, but hey, lots of political correctness is raging on the right these days, so what the heck. Wouldn't want to offend supporters of CHILF-lusting Bieber fans.

Race Minstrels? My Reply to Chauncey DeVega

I read Chauncey DeVega's sick racist screed earlier: "Black History Month is Herman Cain Playing the Race Minstrel for CPAC." The piece is puerile yet vicious, and while it's tempting to ignore such rants as typical race-baiting of the progressive left, there was something that went above and beyond in this case. Disparaging Herman Cain as a "monkey in the window" is the kind of language one might expect from KKK members in the 1960s. But here this is coming from an author who's bio shows a body of publications in some of the left's most prominent progressive outlets. Thus, DeVega's racism is a perfect window into the deep disturbing psychologies of the Obama-Democrat cult of racial exploitation. It's a spectacle, and the critical reaction has been quite forceful. See David Weigel, for example, "Herman Cain Shall Overcome."

What's especially noteworthy to me is how DeVega's attacks form a broadside against the entire black conservative establishment. Herman Cain was the immediate target, but he served as the initial race "mascot" for DeVega's slurs against the whole GOP infrastructure. The piece was so provocative even Alternet thought a disclaimer was warranted in introducing DeVega's follow up, "On Chauncey DeVega's Herman Cain Post." I doubt this was the editors' intentions, but I appreciate the acknowledgment that a racist screed of this magnitude has nevertheless evinced little outrage on the left:

We understand that some are offended by DeVega's choice of words. We note, however, that most of the consternation generated by DeVega's post has come from right-wing supporters of Cain who have focused on the language of his post and not the substance of his claim that Cain lends cover to reactionary right-wing forces.

One of most widely understood aspects of Obama-era poltics is the left's endless resort to the race card as the last hope of any kind of political viability. Perhaps it serves as a dog whistle to racial victimologists on the left, but progressive racism hasn't served Democrats well over the last couple years. So you'd think Alternet would repudiate its own author. Instead they've doubled-down, as Confederate Yankee snarks: "Alternet Doubles Down on Bigoted Accusation that Black Conservatives are Race Traitors."

The entire concept of a group owing fealty to a specific political party due to their genetic makeup is entirely offensive to any thinking person, but that is precisely the argument Chauncey DeVega made earlier this week, and one that leftist web site AlterNet and its writer continue to support.

In my original post, I referred to Herman Cain and other black conservatives as "race minstrels" and "mascots" for the White conservative imagination. I stand by this observation.

DeVega's vivid bigotry is his own cross to bear. what is less clear is why Alternet is tolerant of such myopic rhetoric.

Confederate Yankee block quotes the precise passage that convinced me to respond to DeVega. I'm not only one of those "other black conservatives," but I stood with both Hermain Cain and Allen West at CPAC. The opportunity to do so was the high point of the conference.

At this point I'm simply in contempt. No doubt DeVega speaks volumes for progressives, given the left's silence in light of these allegations. And the reason is obvious: People like Herman Cain, Allen West and myself stand for conservative principles. We demand both equal opportunity and equal respect. We want a country that values individual initiative and guarantees that people of all backgrounds can pursue their dreams of happiness to the best of their abilities. The nation's founders laid the vision. Herman Cain, Allen West and others are living it. The question for me is how any confident, intelligent and morally upstanding black American could possibly endorse that kind of outrageous racist sentiment in this day and age. Perhaps it's just retail race-card politics. But when folks like DeVega demonstrate an encyclopedic knowledge of Jim Crow stereotypes and attack rhetoric, it's quite revealing of the extent that America has not yet overcome. Progressives are holding this country back. It's the color of your skin that matters, whether you identify with and belong to group consciousness organizations, rather than identify with American individualism and liberty. It's pretty easy for me to choose up sides. The patriotic thing is to stand with those who fight to destroy racial classes and hierarchies. Indeed, the pathologies espoused by the likes of DeVega are beyond revolting, but un-American. I reject the poltics of the progressive plantation, and I join in might with other upstanding blacks working for a better future.

More from Matt Welch, "Onward and Upward with Racial Tolerance" (via Mememorandum).

Dana Loesch Speaks on New Media at CPAC

I'm pleased to find the video. Dana was passionate. At the conclusion, I stood to ask a question of the panel, but the event was out of time. Tabitha Hale and others spoke first, and there were some mixed messages that could have been clarified. But as a stand alone speech, this was very effective:

Committee to Draft Donald Trump in 2012

Draft Trump 2012 sent me the press release, and it's also at Daily Caller, "Will the Donald trade Mar-a-Lago for the White House? New ‘Draft Trump’ committee launches for 2012."

Trump's appearance at CPAC was amazing, as I reported at the time, "Donald Trump Disses Ron Paul!" But he made some foreign policy comments the other day that were disturbing. See Gateway Pundit, "You’re Fired!… Donald Trump Says America’s “Longest War” Was a Mistake (Video)."

He should run, though. He might shake up the race and entrepreneurial background could have a beneficial influence some of the other candidates.

David Horowitz Outs Jihadist Suhail Khan at CPAC

From Robert Spencer, at FrontPage Magazine:

[Editor’s note: Below is Robert Spencer's analysis of the recent debate between David Horowitz and Suhail Khan on Hannity -- which Spencer shows successfully smoked out Khan as an Islamic supremacist. See also Frank Gaffney's memorandum for members of the board of directors of the American Conservative Union about Khan. Gaffney has also written previous pieces on Frontpagemag.com exposing Grover Norquist's and Suhail Khan's troubling connections. Paul Sperry has produced a recent Frontpage piece as well: Who is Suhail Khan?]

A sidelight, but a momentous one, of this year’s Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) was the ongoing controversy over the connections of CPAC Board members Grover Norquist and Suhail Khan to the Muslim Brotherhood. David Horowitz detailed many of the troubling connections between Khan and the Brotherhood during his CPAC address; when challenged directly about this, Khan declared flatly: “There is no Muslim Brotherhood in the United States.” Sean Hannity had both Horowitz and Khan on his radio show Monday for a contentious half-hour of charge and counter-charge that often generated more heat than light; however, when the dust settled it was clear that Khan had not answered many of Horowitz’s most serious charges – and that CPAC, and the conservative movement in general, have a formidable problem in the Islamic supremacists and Islamic supremacist enablers in their midst.

RTWT at the link.

The GOP Shakeout After CPAC

I think CPAC encouraged a bit more speculation on the shape of the GOP primaries than is warranted at this point. No major prospective candidate has announced yet, although Herman Cain is making some headway among grassroots activists. There's a new poll out of the Granite State, and the subtitle's most telling: "Romney Holds Big Lead In Primary Poll: Survey Shows Most Likely Voters Still Undecided" (via Memeorandum). But don't tell that to the conservative base, according to Jennifer Rubin, for example: "Romney was big CPAC loser." And there's also this, from Frank Gaffney, "Conservative Crossroads: Return to Reagan Coalition Roots or Lose in 2012":

To all outward appearances, the just-concluded Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) was a huge success. It was attended by a large, boisterous crowd, a substantial part of which was student-age – a promising indicator of the movement’s appeal to the coming generation. A number of luminaries, including several prospective presidential candidates, addressed enthusiastic audiences clearly invigorated by last November’s successes at the polls.

CPAC’s apparent vigor, however, obscured the fact that the conservative movement is at a crossroads: Will it continue to be comprised of, and appeal to, all three elements of Ronald Reagan’s winning coalition – fiscal discipline, traditional family and other social values and a national security approach rooted in the philosophy of “peace through strength”? Or will it be reduced to a libertarian-dominated, small-government agenda which ignores or repudiates Reagan’s conservative values and robust defense platforms?

Upon the answer rests not only the future of this vital movement, but of America. For, if conservatives get this strategic question wrong, they not only are unlikely to enjoy the support of the electorate come 2012. They will not deserve that support.

Unfortunately, the evidence that libertarian impulses were ascendant at CPAC was not only to be found in the straw poll victory of their exemplar, Rep. Ron Paul of Texas. It was also apparent in who was, and who was not, participating as sponsors of the conference and/or some of its events.

The former included GOProud, Muslims for America and the so-called “Conservative Inclusion Coalition” – organizations that, in the name of “inclusiveness,” are insinuating into the conservative movement individuals and initiatives that are divisive and anathema to many who hew to Ronald Reagan’s beliefs and policies. Such sponsors include: aggressive promoters of the anti-family and pro-homosexual agenda; advocates for gambling, open borders, amnesty for illegal aliens and legalization of addictive drugs; champions of gutting the defense budget and immediately withdrawing from Afghanistan and Iraq; and people associated with Muslim Brotherhood front organizations and agendas. For example, at a panel sponsored by said Conservative Inclusion Coalition, a panelist even expressed enthusiasm for reaching out to the Nation of Islam, Louis Farakhan’s notoriously anti-semitic and increasingly radical Islamist organization.

I'd bet folks can see where Gaffney's going with this, but RTWT in any case. It's not likely Ron Paul will do any better this time around than he did in 2008, but if the larger libertarian isolationist agenda gains traction in the primaries Mitt Romney's support could tail off. So too for Sarah Palin. She's definitely in the Reagan mold, and she's destined to win a few primary contests, although not necessarily Iowa or New Hampshire. More on that at Politico, "Key 2012 early states cool to Palin."

And after that, who knows? Mitch Daniels or Haley Barbour --- or Chris Christie? Maybe Ann Coulter's got some inside game, but I'm not betting on Christie either. It's like I said above: It's way early still. Let's see some candidates throw their hats in the ring. Stuff will start to sort out a bit more by then.

Robert Stacy McCain Video Ambushed at CPAC!

This is pretty freaky, actually. It's been what, almost three months since Robert's "You buy the ticket, you take the ride" comment regarding the Julian Assange rape allegations. And Tommy Christopher's been waiting up late at night, every night, for this very moment! See, "Conservative Blogger RS ‘The Other’ McCain Apologizes for Rape Remarks."

And here's Robert's post, "I Didn’t Rape Tommy Christopher":

You wouldn’t know that, given the way he has obsessively hounded me over a single blog post I wrote in December when Julian Assange was arrested. Recognizing that my attempts to clarify were a violation of the First Law of Holes, I posted my mea culpa, dropped the subject and moved on, but Tommy remains fixated. He even brought his Mediaite camera into the smoking area at CPAC to do an “ambush” interview.

More at the link.

Strange fixation. But then, CPAC had a lot of strangeness, come to think of it.

Alex Knepper Creepy-Crawls CPAC

Some folks might recall last year's epic Alex Knepper takedown at NewsReal Blog: "David Frum and His Pro-Pedophile Protege Alex Knepper." I wasn't involved in the investigation, although knowing Alex Knepper, I did write about it at the time. And recall a couple of weeks ago I had a Facebook exchange with Knepper. The pro-pedophile faux-conservative lashed out, calling me a "malicious cunt." He deleted the thread, but by then I'd saved it. Months later, Knepper's still blaming others for an alleged smear campaign that destroyed his reputation. No doubt he's got psychiatric issues, but that's for medical professionals to sort out. Be that as it may, I can report that Knepper is one creepy dude in person. David Swindle, Editor of NewsReal Blog, informed me that Knepper was making the rounds at CPAC. I didn't think much of it, but on Saturday night I saw the pro-pedo man-boy monster up in the bloggers' lounge, and I called him out: "Hey Knepper, are you going to call me a mendacious asshole, or something?" I was actually looking for "malicious cunt" but it escaped me temporarily. But no matter. Knepper erupted into a genuine fit of horror upon seeing me. He screamed, "No ... no way!" And I said to him, "Shake my hand, Alex." But he pulled back, waving me off, "No ... no way. Get away from me. NOOOOO!! Just get away from me." And I said once more, "C'mon, shake my hand, Knepper." And then I looked at his face. He seemed, well, in that moment, a victim, which is disturbing, considering his imminent predations. I wanted to spit on him, at the least. But I walked back out of the lounge to get some refreshments. It all seemed strange, even funny; and then outside the lounge, a fellow pulled me aside and thanked me for confronting Knepper, saying "That guy is a sh*thole."

That said, I wasn't thrilled that Knepper'd parked himself in the bloggers' lounge. He's a creepy crawler, and I didn't care to be around him. My camera settings were screwed up the whole conference (my bad), but here's a blurry shot of Knepper scowling at me not long after our confrontation. And shortly after that he sat down right in front of me. I couldn't believe it, actually. And I wasn't comfortable. My camera was sitting on the table. I tilted it up a bit a clicked a picture. He was with a group of friends who had sat down near the bloggers seated next to me. Notice my laptop at the picture below, at left. Sitting there is Steven Ertelt of LifeNews.com. Next to Steven, partially obscured is Dana Loesch. And sitting next to her, talking on a cell phone, is Regis Giles, of "Girls Just Want to Have Guns" and younger sister to Hannah Giles. (Regis Giles' CPAC interview is here). Chris Loesch, husband to Dana, is seated at the end of the table. Jeff Dunetz of Yid With Lid is standing at right, with his left arm raised. Alex Knepper's back is to me in the foreground. Out of view is Tania Gail, who was seated next to me.

By this time I wasn't feeling well --- and it was time to go, in any case. No need to say anything more. If folks had known of Alex Knepper, I doubt they'd have wanted to hang with a guy who's publically declared his lust for "chilfs" ("children I'd like to f**k").

I'd have preferred to wind things down on a lighter note, but I suppose something like this was bound to happen sooner or later.

RELATED: "Axis of Pedophilia: Former Conservative David Frum Protests 'Vicious, Invasive and Outrageous' Bullying While Cutting Loose Pervy Protégé Alex Knepper."

Think Progress Fails Video Ambush of Fox News Reporter Jesse Watters

I saw Jesse Watters a couple of times during the conference, but didn't have a chance to speak to him. And I'm just seeing this now, at any rate. From Red State, "Fox reporter embarrasses Think Progress dolt at CPAC." It's really too good:

Rosaleen Tallon at CPAC Ground Zero Mosque Premiere

Okay, some of those in attendance were devastated at the emotional power of the presentations . Folks were weeping. It was quite an event. I'm going to be posting each of the videos individually, so check back later. Here's Rosaleen Tallon, the first speaker after Pamella Geller's introduction. Do yourself a favor and grab a cup of coffee. Powerful stuff:

RELATED: From last night, "CPAC and the Muslim Brotherhood."

Robert Stacy McCain at CPAC!

What would CPAC blogging be without Robert Stacy McCain, the epic schmoozer of the conference?

Democrats Spin Victory Out of CPAC

That's Haley Barbour below, during his speech at the Marriott Ballroom. I wasn't really listening all that closely, since it was hard to hear the speeches from the bloggers' lounge. I'm personally not betting on him to be a force in the GOP primaries. Barbour can raise the dough but his attractivness as a national candidate remains to be seen. We could say that about a lot of the Republican presidential hopefuls, and progressives are banking on that.

RELATED: At The Hill, "Democrats Claim Political Victory From CPAC" (via Memeorandum):

Democrats and President Obama gathered the most momentum from this past weekend's gathering of conservative activists, the party claimed Monday.

The Democratic National Committee (DNC) sought to spin the now-concluded Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in their own favor, releasing a web video framing the Republicans who spoke at CPAC -- including a number of possible presidential candidates -- as focused on issues from the past.

"The biggest winners coming out of CPAC were Democrats and the president, as it is clear, based on the presentations there, that Republicans have no message and nothing to offer the public accept re-fighting the political and legislative battles - battles they have already lost," DNC communications director Brad Woodhouse wrote in an email about the new video.

More at the link and CNN:

Ann Coulter on GOProud

Background here, from Rick Moran, "CPAC Boycott by Social Cons Uncovers the Right’s ‘Gay Problem’."

Now, I read this in the hard-copy of Human Events, "In honor of the gays who have come out of the closet as Republicans to be one of the 140 sponsors of CPAC 2011, I thought I'd run one of the interviews I gave before speaking to GOProud last September ..."

Can you lay out your stance on marriage equality (Prop 8, DOMA) and DADT?

I'm against gay marriage, but that's no offense to gays. It is just in defense of a crucial linchpin of civilization that's already hanging by a thread.

Are gay rights part and parcel with basic conservatism? If so, why are so many elected Republicans so skittish/unsupportive about the subject? If not, tell me why.

No, we don't generally care for identity politics of any sort, much less hearing about people's sex lives, even Nino Scalia's. (And judging by the number of children he has, it's pretty active.) Conservatives believe in individual rights, low tax rates, fighting terrorism and punishing criminals -- so do gays! They also happen to believe Judy Garland was the most underappreciated and misunderstood person in the history of show business. I don't think most gays care about gay marriage; they like going to the gay marriage meeting because it's a good way to meet other gays.

Hey, what gay problem? Coulter's the best!

More at the link.

RELATED: At Marooned in Marin, "CPAC 2011 - Wrap Up."

Congressman Allen West Visits CPAC Bloggers

From Midnight Blue:

CPAC and the Muslim Brotherhood

Okay, following up from this morning's entry, check the link for full video: "David Horowitz Gives Barnburner at CPAC!" And the transcript is here: "The Muslim Brotherhood Inside the Conservative Movement."

Now it turns out the Muslim Brotherhood debate is becoming one of the bigger stories to emerge from CPAC. Politico covers it from the MFM angle, "Right Fractures Over Islam" (at Memeorandum).

While a gay rights controversy drew headlines at this year’s Conservative Political Action Conference, another — and even more bitter — dispute rippled as views varied widely on how to reconcile the conservative movement with Islam in the United States.

At the 38th annual conservative gathering, there was no shortage of accusations of Islamist sympathies, Muslim Brotherhood infiltration and charges of fear-mongering. Republican presidential hopefuls, including Newt Gingrich and John Thune, also drew applause with suggestions that the Obama administration has taken a politically correct blind eye to the connection between radical Islam and terrorism.

Freshman Rep. Allen West also drew thunderous applause in his keynote speech about the threat to America posed by Islam and other security threats. And as Republican candidates define their national security stands in the 2012 elections, conservative discomfort with Islam in America will be a feature of the debate.

“We are also faced at home and abroad with a mortal threat in political Islam,” conservative activist David Horowitz said in his address to the conference. “Political Islam is a totalitarian movement that seeks to impose Islamic law on the entire world through the seizure of states by stealth and electoral means where possible and by terror where necessary and sometimes by a combination of the two. There are hundreds of millions of believers in political Islam.”

CPAC organizers held an official panel on the threat of sharia law, with several other affiliated, but unofficial, events on inclusion, religious liberty and the so-called ground zero mosque controversy, featuring the controversial blogger Pam Geller and Jihad Watch’s Robert Spencer.

“Sometimes when you hear snide comments about Jews in the ’50s or Muslims today — we’ve been through this. The Republican party chased away the Catholic vote for over a hundred years,” said Grover Norquist, an ACU board member and a tax activist who has tried to bring Muslim voters in to the GOP for more than a decade. “You chase away people politically. The thing about the political effects of bigotry — it can last generations. It’s tough to fix.”

Be sure to RTWT.

When I was a young man, the name Grover Norquist was awe-inspiring. Now it's just pathetic. The dude married Kuwaiti-born Samaah Alrayyes, an Muslim outreach specialist at USAID. Gee, no wonder Grover wants to tamp down criticism of jihad as "Islamophobic." And no wonder the Soros-funded Islamo-appeasing Think Progress is on the case, "Frank Gaffney Braves Muslim Brotherhood Infiltration To Warn CPAC About Grover Norquist."

And that's not all, Horowitz has an update at NewsReal, a response to the left's hysterics, "The Muslim Brotherhood and the Fellow Traveling Left at Slate":

Yesterday morning I gave a speech at CPAC warning of the dangers posed by the infiltration of the conservative movement by the Muslim Brotherhood in the person of Suhail Khan and his sponsor Grover Norquist. Both Khan and Norquist are board members of the American Conservative Union, and both spoke at CPAC. The facts about Norquist and Khan which I discussed in my speech were taken from an elaborate dossier presented to the board of the American Conservative Union and posted on Frontpagemag.com. This morning SLATE, which is published by the Washington Post, rose to the defense of Khan. This was reminiscent of the past when liberals defended the Soviet spy Alger Hiss and attacked conservatives like Richard Nixon who were attempting to expose Hiss — a parallel I mentioned in my speech ...

In my speech I made the specific charge that Suhail Khan was a protege of his father and of the convicted terrorist Abdurahman Alamoudi ... I also charged tht Suhail Khan, along with his patron Grover Norquist, was instrumental in getting President Bush to agree to ban the use of secret evidence in trials of terrorists. This was a campaign launched by the terrorist Sami al-Arian (whose brother, also a member of Palestine Islamic Jihad, was deported on the strength of secret evidence.) Grover Norquist and Suhail used their influence to get al-Arian a face-to-face with George W. Bush who then attacked the use of secret evidence in his campaign and was about to implement al-Arian’s proposed ban when 9/11 took place. Al-Arian who, as the head of PIJ in North America, and its chief financier was responsible for the suicide murders of over 100 people in the Middle East,was also supported in this campaign by the ACLU, The Nation magazine and the American Left. (The ACLU was also one of his chief defenders when he was indicted for terrorist activities and eventually deported.) Suhail Khan has no response to these (or any other) facts because they are true.

For the record, Palestine Islamic Jihad is an umbrella group of Muslim organizations committed to the destruction of Israel. And again, duh, it's no surprise why progressives want to bury the details of the Muslim Brotherhood in America. CPAC basically had its own Green-Red alliance working the wings. Seriously. Here's the video of Suhail Khan's bald-face lie at CPAC, "There is no Muslim Brotherhood in America":

God, can he get any worse. David Horowitz outlined all the evidence during his speech. But see Andy McCarthy for good measure, "Unindicted Coconspirators."

And check Politico one more time. Suhail Khan has a standard line attempted to defuse the criticism: "Pam Geller, Robert Spencer — they’re not part of the conservative movement." Project much, Mr. Kahn?

And here's Pamela, during the Q & A on Friday, "There are 12,000 people that come to this event that don't know they've been completely sold out by CPAC leadership":

I'll have more later ...

David Horowitz Gives Barnburner at CPAC!

I should be flying back home when this post goes live. I've got a lot more reporting and stories to tell from CPAC. Anyway, I moved out from the lounge to the balcony to listen to Horowitz's speech. You won't be hearing much of this in the mainstream press (MFM):

Also at Pamela's, "'Pamela Geller Versus CPAC'."

And check David Weigel's report, "CPAC 2011: Suhail Khan Responds to David Horowitz."

Lots more later, pictures, commentary, gossip ... the whole bang!

Until then!

VIDEO: Congressman Allen West Keynote Speech at CPAC

At Marathon Pundit, "Allen West closes out CPAC, calls for "The dawn of a New America."

And previously, a photo opportunity with Congressman West. A very nice man, and a privilege to meet him.