Posted on | February 17, 2013 | 18 Comments
How long have I been covering the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC)? Forever, it seems, and every year the liberal media find some reason to denounce CPAC as extreme, fringe, controversial.
From my perspective, the biggest CPAC controversy this year is that they moved it from the Marriott Wardman Park Hotel in northwest D.C. — near the Adams-Morgan district and a short taxi ride from downtown — to the new Gaylord National Harbor resort, eight miles south of town in Prince George’s County, Md.
I could think of a dozen arguments against this move, and have heard only one argument in favor of it: They got a great rate.
Well, so much for my CPAC controversy. The really big controversy according to liberal Sarah Reese Jones is this:
Students of propaganda techniques should ponder how Jones manages to suggest that Wayne LaPierre of the National Rifle Association is somehow as controversial as “white supremacists.”
But wait a minute: Who are these “white supremacists” being welcomed at CPAC? Looking over the announced schedule, I don’t see any, unless Sarah Reese Jones is using the liberal definition of “white supremacist” as “someone who didn’t vote for Obama.”
What the headline seems to refer to is a panel at last year’s CPAC that included Peter Brimelow of VDare.com and John Derbyshire, formerly of National Review. While I didn’t attend that panel, I did run into Peter Brimelow between sessions at CPAC and he was, as always, entirely civil. To describe Brimelow as a “white supremacist” requires a distortion of the term that very nearly strips it of all useful meaning, but when a liberal propagandist wants to portray a CPAC controvery, truth is the first casualty. Readers will also note that Sarah Reese Jones labels Breitbart.com editor Ben Shapiro a “conspiracy theorist.”
So . . . yeah. Shapiro is Willis Carto, Peter Brimelow is Julius Streicher and you have yourself Another Controversial CPAC Scandal!™
The real motivating purpose of Sarah Reese Jones’s article, as far as I can tell, is to air the grievance of GOProud that they were not invited or, as I’m sure Jimmy LaSalvia would say, GOProud quite specifically un-invited, as in not welcome, persona non grata.
Could I comment on that dispute? Yes, I could.
Do I want to have that argument in public? No, I do not.
Meanwhile — since it’s apparently now the annual season for Another Controversial CPAC Scandal™ — let me point out that the CPAC agenda includes M. Stanton Evans, author of Blacklisted by History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and His Fight Against America’s Enemies. Here is a guy who did years of research to prove that Joe McCarthy was right, and liberals don’t think that’s controversial?
You commie pinko stooges dissapoint me . . .