CPAC: Conservative Poltical Action Circus

Another CPAC. This was my fourth year in a row attending CPAC, and third year in a row while working for ISI. Each year, ISI is a co-sponsor of CPAC. Yes, we are part of what has become a "circus" of conservative activits and a number of looney toons mixed in. Very few intellectuals are represented at CPAC these days.

The ACU touted this CPAC as the "most successful ever" based mostly on the numbers. Over 6,000 people attended this year's conference. But as I remind students, numbers aren't everything. In fact, David Keene reminded us that at the first CPAC in the 1970s, when Ronald Reagan spoke, only 125 people were there. I bet the discussion was much more elevated.

This year, the high turnout is likely the result of all the GOP Presidential hopefuls speaking - all but John McCain. He claimed he didn't need to be there, that his conservative credentials are unquestionable. Meanwhile, Mitt Romney made it known that he needed to be there - to try to persuade the conservative movement that he is conservative. Well, some people are drinking the kool-aid. And Rudy Giuliani basically stated he didn't agree with many conservatives on some of the core issues (life, family, marriage, guns), but that they should elect him because he knows that it takes to defend this country against Islamic fascists.

I have to give a shout out to some real conservatives that showed up: Sam Brownback, who made a very impressive showing in the CPAC Straw Poll and now appears to be gaining some steam. There were also Duncan Hunter, Tom Tancredo, Ron Paul, James Gilmore, and Mike Huckabee. As far as I can tell, these are mostly men of principle and their conservative credentials, unlike some of the "top tier" candidates are unquestionable. But we'll see if the activist base will go back to the base or keep drinking the "I am so scared of Hillary I'll vote for anyone that will win" kool-aid.

And then, there is Ann Coulter. Why does she still get standing-room, line-out the door crowds? She's a nut. And she blew it again. Late last year she said that certain widows of 9/11 were "enjoying" their husbands deaths too much, this time she called a former Senator and current Presidential candidate a "faggot." Yes, this movement has stooped to name-calling.

Where are the Kirk's, Hayek's, Weaver's, Meyer's, or even Reagan? This movement needs to return to a more elevated level of dialogue and still be able to communicate with the average American. Well, ISI tried to elevate some discussion at CPAC and one student told me afterwards, "ISI seems to be the only group that cares about the intellectual (and not just political) life of the movement."

On Friday at 4pm, at the precise time Ann Coulter was speaking in the Regency Ballroom at the Omni Shoreham, ISI held a "State of Campus Conservatism" lecture by the Senior Editor of ISI Books, Dan McCarthy. While the "barbarians" outside the gates (or rather door) were screaming at the top of their lungs, "We Love Mitt! We Love Mitt," McCarthy's point about being more concerned with the intellectual rather than the political side of the movement was hitting home with the 70 students that attended.

On Saturday morning at 10am, about 50 students came to a session of "Conservatism 101" with Mark Henrie, in which he described the history of the intellectual conservatism. He broke down the differences between traditionalists, libertarians, anti-communists, and neo-conservatives and talked about how "anti-communism" was the "glue" that held the different factions of the conservative movement together. He also talked about how different it is to fight against communism than it is to fight against a terrorism fueled by Islamic fascism. Communism is of the Left, Islam is of the Right.

On Saturday at 1pm, I was on a CPAC panel called "Storming the Last Bastion of Liberalism." I'll blog about that on its own in my next entry. And the last act of the day was Newt Gingrich. He was incredible and the crowd was so electric during his speech. Despite his personal flaws, this man could and should be President. He's a intellectual conservative that can communicate ideas effectively.

While there were some hopeful things at this year's CPAC, it all just seemed to be one big circus that housed self-described conservatives inside. If the movement doesn't get itself together, it will either cease to be or cease to be of any relevance.