CPAC’s right-wing children

The conservative movement in America is now child’s play.

The kids have taken over the right wing (again) and that’s not sitting too well with the old guard.

Young, fresh-faced right-wingers dominated the crowd of more than 10,000 registrants at this past weekend’s Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Washington.

They pushed the old fuddy-duddies out of the way and turned the conference into a conservative Woodstock.

Notes Politics Daily Contributor Matt Lewis:

“Marco Rubio, Mitt Romney, and Liz (and Dick) Cheney gave big speeches on the opening day of the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) — and Glenn Beck closed it to a rousing ovation, but just as interesting as the speakers on stage was the ages of the people sitting in the seats, congregated around the bars and cafes, and holding court in the lobby of the Marriott Wardman Park Hotel.

“I speak from experience. My first CPAC conference was eleven years ago. Since then, I’ve attended seven or eight of the annual affairs. The most obvious difference this year is that there are more young people in attendance.”

Lots more. CPAC director Lisa De Pasquals told Lewis more than half the 10,000 plus registrants were college students.

As Lewis notes, CPAC used to be a convention of “blue hairs.”

Not any more.

The infusion of youth means trouble for the Democrats. Conservative movements usually gain momentum when the kids get involved.

Most of the GOP “young turks” who helped put Ronald Reagan into office 30 years ago came out of the college “Young Republicans” ranks. Political masterminds like Lee Atwater, Charlie Black and Roger Stone were young, energetic and willing to push the status quo out of the way.

Atwater is dead, felled by a brain tumor at the height of his political power. Black, Stone, et. al, are now the old men of the party. They had nothing to offer the younger, independent voters who flocked to Barack Obama in 2008.

But those same independents now see Obama as a failure who violated their trust and sold out to the lobbyists and the status quo. So the young now look back to the right for salvation.

Some of those young independents fueled the Ron Paul candidacy in 2008. It’s not unusual to see younger political operatives drive the agendas of older politicians. Richard Nixon‘s “dirty tricks” squad was manned by young political operatives who honed their skills during student campaigns in college. Many were called the “USC Mafia” where they coined the phrase “rat-fucking” to define their dirty tricks at the University of Southern California.

You see the same attitude now in radical conservative political operatives like James O’Keefe, the activist who posed as a pimp to help bring down ACORN and now faces charges for trying to wiretap Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu.  Shades of Watergate? You betcha.

Memo to the Democratic Party.

Be afraid.

Be very afraid.

The kids are back in town.

And they serve the right-wing.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

13 Responses to "CPAC’s right-wing children"

  1. bondwooley  February 22, 2010 at 8:25 am

    Time to ship the CPAC kids to Canada – so that the rest of us don’t have to move there!

    http://bit.ly/ahQTbl

    (satire)

  2. lysander spooner  February 22, 2010 at 8:47 am

    The author completely ignores the fact that Ron Paul is not “conservative” or “right wing” in an objective sense. He is to the left of Kucinich on foreign policy, opposes the federal war on drugs, and opposes federal capital punishment. One almost wonders if he is ignoring these facts willingfully. If so, why?

  3. Sandune  February 22, 2010 at 9:53 am

    Mr. Spooner, surely you realize that fiscal conservatives want little action in our foreign policies. Of course he opposes federal war on drugs. Me thinks you should review your own opinions on these very issues. There is nothing in the Bill of Rights that gives the government any action over the people. The Bill of Rights frees the people from government action. I believe I have read this in your papers. Or are you being overly sarcastic? Few here even know who you are! Now blast at me for misunderstand you again…….

  4. Issodhos  February 22, 2010 at 7:17 pm

    You are certainly correct, lysander, that Ron Paul is not a member of the modern conservative movement (which is more national collectivist than ‘conservative’ in the principled sense of the term) nor is he “right wing” — whatever that may mean, today. Instead, he is more an adherent of the classical liberalism that formed the philosophical basis for the founding of the nation.

    An aside, I must admit that I am puzzled by so often reading of favorable comparisons between Ron Paul and Kucinich. Kucinich is basically a collectivist of the standard socialist bent with no real fundamental commonality with Ron Paul.:-)
    Yours in solicitude,
    Issodhos
    P.s. You are aware, are you not, that Spooner considered the Constitution to be a contract and to be valid only so long as those parties who signed or ratified it were alive. In other words, it was not binding to posterity — or even non-signers?;-)

  5. Issodhos  February 22, 2010 at 7:21 pm

    I saw no reference to the Bill of Rights in lysander’s post, Sandy.;-)
    Yours,
    Issodhos

  6. woody188  February 22, 2010 at 8:48 pm

    Don’t worry, the blue hairs will just tell Fox News to not invite him to the Republican “debate” this year, or will be sure to show other candidates snickering and making faces while Ron Paul talks, just like the last “debate.”

  7. Sandune  February 23, 2010 at 5:41 am

    Woody, The Republican debate will again be based on the premise that the party will run on a “higher” form of rules and laws. The interpretation of the Bill of Rights has been changed to reflect the Ten Commandments which gives the higher power more control over the American People. Actually I came into this thread to see if anyone here relates to the big brave actions of the Austin terrrorist who flew into the IRS Building? I fear that his actions came from a Social Conservative who has no problem killing Americans.

    I sincerely hope this movement does not support such actions. The line between right and wrong is blurred when extremists take on each other. The Talibam killed in the name of Allah and America returned its own brand of killing in the same of the American God.

    Paul is the only Republican who wants American troops out of all the nations. What makes me think this might be the “right” thing to do? I see little in the way of right versus wrong in either party. Paul stands alone quietly without support.

    Woody, Paul has stated he will not run for the white house. I believe he realizes that the American voters are too aligned with impossible agendas based on revenge rather than rational objectives. The poor voters are given little to vote for and tons of what they dislike. I had hoped that Doug’s “Campaign for America” might be able to clear the air here at CHB. But the CHB members could not help but to scrap with each other, me included.

    America has far too many extreme voters to ever come back with a workable agenda on either side of the aisle. We have many organizations who tried to stop the RNC and DNC from taking over the debates and very few rose to the occasion.

  8. griff  February 23, 2010 at 9:26 am

    It’s about time true conservatives shed the Grandpa Munster image and once again decided to advocate personal liberty and the limited role of the federal government.

    Note to Glenn Beck – you may fool some people with your slick packaging and your Paul-like rhetoric, but we all know who you work for and what your agenda is. You are the latest in a long line of judas goat frauds.

  9. Sandune  February 23, 2010 at 5:22 pm

    griff, it is not always easy to advocate personal liberty and a limited government.. Let’s see I’ve been trying to sell it for 50 years. I guess I don’t speak the same language as the rest of you. I’m not familiar with Granpa Munster. It must be a generational problem.

    • Zengine  February 24, 2010 at 3:46 pm

      usually when someone says ‘limited government’, they really mean ‘unfettered private enterprise’. Code for ‘no regulations, no responsibilities’.

  10. griff  February 23, 2010 at 6:11 pm

    Sandy, you never saw the Munsters?

  11. Zengine  February 24, 2010 at 3:45 pm

    “But those same independents now see Obama as a failure who violated their trust and sold out to the lobbyists and the status quo. So the young now look back to the right for salvation.”

    Ah, the right wing. Now there’s a crowd of non-sellouts if ever I’ve seen one. Ya. THEY’LL fix the problem. No doubt they’ve completely reformed their amoral ways since losing control in ’08.

    Fun to watch the public bounce like a ball between Democrat and Republican. It’s like watching a game of ‘catch’ between a drunk and a profoundly retarded chihuahua.

    What a great system, what marvellously short memories, what a brilliant lack of accountability.

    But really, who cares. Isn’t some celeb or another getting divorced?

  12. Walter F. Wouk  February 25, 2010 at 12:50 pm

    CPAC’s Right Wing Children: a brand new crop of “chickenhawks.”

Comments are closed.