Another Conservative Comes Out And The Left Goes Mad

 

That conservative would be political commentator Guy Benson and he is not out of the conservative closet but the gay closet and of course, the gay left goes mad.
From the website Qweerty the reaction was, well less than positive. Of course their position is clear that if anyone is not for same-sex marriage, then of course it's only because of homophobia and the fall back position of bigotry.
As Mr. Benson points out, most of the people that are opposed to same-sex marriage are not bigots. In fact I will make the point that it is on religious grounds (my personal opposition) that most are against it. Another reason is that for the most part, few if any state legislatures have changed marriage laws. That has been done almost entirely by courts.
But that is for another time.
The point is that Qweerty does not mention that Mr. Benson is in fact and indeed in favor of civil marriage for same-sex couples. But he favors broad laws that protect religious contientous objection to participating in any way a same-sex marriage ceremony.
Because according to the headline, being a gay and conservative is not inspirational.
Since I am friends with Mr. Benson on Facebook, long before this revelation, I found the response to be overwhelming support for Mr. Benson and the fact that, as an aside in the upcoming book, "End of Discussion: How the Left’s Outrage Industry Shuts Down Debate, Manipulates Voters, and Makes America Less Free (and Fun)", co-authored with partner in crime, Mary Katherine Ham. The reason Mr. Benson felt he even needed to address the issue is a chapter in the book. "Bake Me A Cake, Bigots!" Mr. Benson, correctly, felt that he should address how such an issue can personally affect him.
And he comes out on the side of liberty and individual rights over group think and group rights. Which is a distinctly conservative position.
And here is an aspect of policy that Mr. Benson readily acknowledges.
That at this point in time, the overall Republican position, at least in regards to same-sex marriage, will not change. And in this from the gay-friendly magazine The Advocate does make the point that some who are gay, even conservative, may be less than welcomed in the current GOP.
So, here is my take.
Until I started blogging, I had no idea there was such a thing as gay and conservative. I mean, I heard of the Log Cabin Republicans, but I looked at them as a liberal GOP group in the way I look at the Ripon Society. And while in college I was told they were gay Republicans. Meh was my reaction. It still is. And to me, they are still to liberal for my taste. Not because they support same-sex marriage and or are gay-friendly.
But back to my finding out about gay conservative Republicans.
So going around the internets, I fall into a site called Gay Patriot. I think, hmm, let me take a look. My reaction was WOW! There are gays, lesbians and others that think the way I do?! That believe in individual liberty and basically leaving people alone. That realize the fundamental threat to the United States are not obscure pastors wanting to kill gays and lesbians and transsexuals. The real threat are radical Islamics. That group think is dangerous. I thought that this is not an anomaly. And we are finding out more and more that it indeed is not an anomaly. The only reaction the left has is to defame.
I have more respect today for Guy Benson because he told his story. He did not have to. But he believed in being honest since he and Mrs. Ham wrote a chapter in their book on a subject that is very much personal to him.
So another conservative that happens to be gay comes out of the closet. He gets overwhelming support on the right. Of course, there are opponents. But all the left can do is get mad.

What's Wrong With CPAC?

Well, it is no so much what's wrong with the Conservative Political Action Committee's recently completed confab in a Washington, D. C. suburb.
Wait?! A Washington, D. C. suburb?!
I just found a huge problem.
That CPAC is held almost every year in Washington, D. C., the belly of the leviathan of the political beast.
This year, one consideration is that many more people wanted to attend the three-day conservative festival.
So, they moved it to Oxon Hill, Maryland. Not exactly all that outside the Beltway considering that this community used Washington D. C. as until 1960, it was considered a part of the District of Columbia.
So, what's the problem?
Well, perception is one.
Why do we as conservatives fall into the same trap as liberals and look to Washington as the end all, be all?
It smacks on insiderism if you ask me. Sure, it is where many politicians are. And after all, this is a political conference. But what strikes me is why this is not taken on the road if you will? Why does it always have to be in Washington and no place else?
Well, there is Western CPAC, but it is nothing like the American Conservative Union. It is a different organization.
But what if CPAC was held mid-January in Washington, and a second one held in a place in mid-June like Los Angeles? Or Boston? Or Chicago? In other words, get many of these same folks outside the rarefied air of Washington and in other parts of the United States that such a conference would garner a great deal of coverage? Is that not one way to get the conservative message out there to a broader audience?
Yes, I know some of those will not be able to get to another location to speak to conservative masses. But this is where one should put their money where there mouth is, so to speak.
There are a lot of conservatives in So Cal, but many just do not have the time or the expense to trek back to Washington. But I sure would make it to all three days of CPAC if it took a similar show on the road. And many other people in other parts of the United States, some I have mentioned and many that I have not, will do the same. CPAC needs to take the message directly to the people. It needs to go on the road.
Now there is not doubt that this CPAC was one of the most successful in the 40 years that it has been put on. But it can expand and do better.
One way it can also do better is to not shut out reasonable conservative voices.
CPAC has to extend invites not only to groups like GOProud, a group within the Republican party of gay and lesbian conservatives, as well as anti-Jihadists like Pamela Geller. The irony is that by not inviting GOProud, they have caved into a sort of conservative political correctness. By not inviting Mrs. Geller, they cave into left-wing and the dominant PC force. Both GOProud and Mrs. Geller go against the grain of what is supposed thought in the United States. That there are gay conservatives. And yes, there are despite what Cliff Kincaid wrote on the Accuracy in Media blog this week. Sorry Cliffy, but I just don't think these people are part of the Commie plot. And Mrs. Geller is not what passes for Jewish today in the United States. A leftist stereotype perpetuated by the Hollywood crowd. She is Jewish and a solid conservative and most important, willing to put herself out there to expose the Jihadist war against the West.
For me conservatives have to hear those that may not be what we think should be conservatives, or even those that are not left-wing PC makes us not one bit better than those we accuse of being intolerant.
We can't be afraid of talking with each other. After all, that was what Reagan was about. We as a movement will draw our own conclusions.
CPAC is needed more than ever. But it needs to expand beyond Washington, D. C. and also be willing to have honest dialogue and critique of each other.