Atlas Shrugs

CPAC Musings: Atlas's Perch

Hating leaving CPAC yesterday but real life insists.

As for the CPAC experience there is nothing like being in a well established hotel, bar right, with thousands of like minded souls. The conservative movement is very much in sync. The palpable excitement and headiness of the convergence were quickly dashed when Romney exited stage right. He was almost too perfect - and the one thing that was less than perfect in the eyes of the evangelicals undid him. Mormon. The fact that Obama Hussein is half Muslim and has embraced the idea of capitulating to Islam is little mentioned. But Romney was a Mormon and well, you can't have that. Eh? I should also note that the media did not want Romney, gave him little coverage and what there was was poor. Even FOX bascially ignored him.

Romney left the race for the good of the party. "Evangelical" Huckabee could learn a thing or two.

Even so, on a personal note, it was wonderful to see bloggers, writers, politicians (in that order) that I admire. I met long time Atlas readers and new ones (thanks to Steyn and Michelle) - I actually signed some autographs - which was sort of inexplicable. Moving, all of it. These folks  are extraordinarily good people. Passionate and grounded in their love of America. I was in awe.

Met up with Fausta (who has great pics of the blog world here), Skye from  Midnight Blue, Robert Stacy McCain (the most enthusiastic blogger I have yet to meet), Joy  over at Little Miss Attila, Wendy our Girl on the Right, Matt Sanchez, Kevin over at Musclehead Revolution, Eric over at Red State, Dan (whose stuff I love) over at  Riehl World View , John over at Right Wing News (always ahead of the curve).

Erik  Svane (Paris, France) who blogs much less frequently now at  No Pasaran (he writes books instead) was my wing man and best bud securing front row seats and acting as liason between myself and various European conservative party members. Much arguing, all of it interesting. Even those Europeans who love the idea of America and conservative values still see our self confidence as "arrogance" and buy into many of the media memes (abu ghraib!) that the left use to club people  into submission. The Euro brain, even Conservative ones,  is soaked in that toxic media soup. 

Svane, OTOH, flanked my arguments with Euro wisdom and was really dear, urging me to "write a book!" - something he appears to be very good at. He writes on subjects near and dear to me - particularly the double standard the media, the UN etc have for America and Israel vs the barbaric world.

The good news is his books (French) are currently being translated into English. His website here;

Pearl Harbor Day saw the publication of La Bannière Étalée. A book (in French) describing the anti-Americanism prevalent in France, it comes with a plethora of examples that demonstrate irrefutably that, contrary to what the French think, it is not "only" Bush and American foreign policy they are against, it is not only visionary tolerance and boundless lucidity that runs their motivations, and their actions towards (and thoughts regarding) their "amis américains" are often far from friendly.       

Double standards abound in French life, policies, and conversations. From World War II and the Cold War to the Iraqi crisis, from McDonald's to the Kyoto protocol, from "poverty" in America to "savage" capitalism, from Latin America to the United Nations, I conduct a minute examination of French claims regarding the United States and those who oppose its policies. Here is an excerpt…

He loves the American idea, really gets it.  He came to America for his first CPAC, a trend I noticed this year among many Europeans. And while many Americans may have given up on Europe, I, for one, have not. We need Europe. It will be much tougher to beat the global Islamic jihad without it.

This was  my first CPAC were I found a strong European presence. Rich Davis, great American and long time Atlas reader, discovered the gentlemen in the video below, just in from Spain. The man on the left, Eduardo was  studying medicine , the other law.  They  came to America, just for CPAC - to, and I quote,  "to breathe this air". To breath this "conservative air".

They lament their country is being overrun by Muslim immigrants. The immigrants arrive from Morocco (a 30 minute ferry) to Spain and immediately receive social security, welfare and medical. Thye don't work but traffic heavilyin drugs.  The video quality is poor so you may not want to watch it but it's all I got and it tells their story.

I was fortunate Thursday night to run into Heather Smith who  grabbed me (Heather is a film, radio, television producer and Richard Miniter's sexier half) and invited me to join her, Richard  and their group of DC insiders for dinner at Mortons. So I skipped CPAC Novak dinner (I dislike Novak intensively, and I loved that I saw no one come up to him for his "book signing"). I  jumped in their  cab and joined them. The scene at Mortons, it seems, is old time (and modern) DC., it gave me a real first hand look  at behind the scenes machinations. Lots of fat cats, fat cigars and fat steaks and chatter, chatter, chatter. Whoa, a lotta chatter. But frankly - all of it interesting, if that's your thing. And yeah, that's my thing. Folks that know me, know I don't engage in the tiny talk, have few friends. If I am not engaged, then I can't see the point in wasting time. But this was good, all of it.

It was all interesting. Miniter is thoroughly engaging. Always up for anything. Refusing to give in to the general malaise that had set in after the Romney blow, Miniter said we ought to forget the Presidential race and focus on the House. There are a large number of seats up for grabs (28 retiring) and we had to win them. Miniter contended that a House with a strong Republican presence would do well to battle any leftist program or legislation generated by a McCain or dhimmi President.

If the activists are looking for something to do and they really can’t work for the McCain campaign, they can pick a contested House race and volunteer there. In the thumbin’ of 2006, the GOP lost 30 seats in the House of Representatives. Eighteen of those were lost by less than 5,000 votes each. Another six or so seats, were lost to scandal (Foley, DeLay et al). If the GOP won back all of those—a big “if”—it would be within six seats of majority control. Of course, the math above does not account the 28 GOP retirements, which mean costly defenses even in supposed “safe” seats.

So the House is an uphill battle with every single probability against the conservative activists. Just the kind of struggle the Right used to relish. More here

As I dug into my lobster tail , who should walk in but my MIA bud from The NY Sun, Eli Lake. Lake and I have the kind of relationship where we argue about everything and love it. You know, like family. He pulled me aside and we ate at a table to close by to discuss his latest book (which is why he has been a recluse), the NIE,the cut cables, moderate Muslims, McCain's approach to the war and the Middle East etc -- you know Atlas's idea of sexy conversation :)

Lake wrote an important piece: U.S. Spy Chief Retreats on Iran Estimate, which we discussed at length. It was enormously important (despite big media's big yawn)  that the director of national intelligence has backed away from his agency's assessment late last year that Iran has halted its nuclear program, "saying he wished he had written the unclassified version of the document in a different manner".

At a hearing yesterday of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, the intelligence director, Michael McConnell, said, "If I had 'til now to think about it, I probably would change a few things." He later added, "I would change the way we describe the Iranian nuclear program. I would have included that there are the component parts, that the portion of it, maybe the least significant, had halted."

Mr. McConnell was referring to the specific Iranian program to design potential nuclear warheads, which the December estimate said had halted in 2003. But in his opening testimony, Mr. McConnell noted that two other components of the nuclear program were moving ahead — the enrichment of uranium, which he said was the most difficult part of making a bomb, and the development of long-range missiles capable of hitting North Africa and Europe.

McConnell's testimony (which I am watching on CSPAN as we speak) is hard to believe Could McConnell not have read it before it was released? (I think Bolton said that) No one document was so singularly responsible for a dangerous change of direction in American foreign policy.  It was, in fact,  a de facto coup against the White House, and has effectively rendered the Bush administration impotent in advancing the option of military intervention in defense of Iran's nuclear weaponry.

The timing of Mr. McConnell's pivot is also significant. On January 22 in Berlin, all five permanent veto-wielding members of the U.N. Security Council plus the Germans agreed on a draft third resolution against Iran. Mr. McConnell predicted that it would pass the council this month. At the same time, other members of the Security Council, such as South Africa have recently warned against a third resolution. The Russians last month completed a deal to provide Iran with nuclear fuel for a separate reactor in Bushehr.

Lake thinks McCain will be strong on foreign policy. I am not so sure but  I do concede that Bolton is right.  What a jagged little pill to swallow. AmSpec said here;

John Bolton used his speech at CPAC to pursaude restive conservatives that the stakes in the world (the Iranian and North Korean nuclear threats, the prospect of nuclear weapons in the hands of Islamic terrorists) were too great to sit this election out because of their disagreements with John McCain, and allow the Democrats to gain control of foreign policy.

Bolton said it was now clear that he would be the nominee, and specifically addressed those who argue that conservatives would be better off in the long run if Democrats win and mess things up than if mistakes are associated with a Republican. He compared this logic to Vladimir Lenin's declaration that "worse is better" and said that "tactical domestic considerations" shouldn't be allowed to harm our national security.

Clearly, McCain would make a difference in SCOTUS picks, though he thought Alito too conservative but OTOH another Ginsburg we don't need.

I headed back to the Omni to get to Robert's party (I promised) and encountered Erik and a cadre of Danes. Hence, more arguing :)

More later..... gotta go.

Atlas Interview Alan West!

The Colonel' from Kandahar is running for Congress in Florida. Get out the vote!

Alan West for Congress

I thought Ann was great

Watch her video here. But she's wrong. We can't vote for Obama (and it's going to be Obama). We've got to vote for the Republican. That's a fact.

We are still mopping up after  Dhimmi Carter - actually it's worse now because the fruit from his poison tree is in full flower. Four bad Presidential years can wreak untold horror - ask the beheaded and the dead in Iran.

But Ann makes salient points and I love her moxie.

UPDATE: Four bad Presidential years under a Democrat president does incalculable damage. We are still in mop up mode for dhimmi Carter's abandonment of the Shah. Carter ushered in the era of the Islamic Republic headed by Ayatollah Khomeini. It was the kick off of the world war in are currently engaged in.

Do not underestimate the damage a Democrat President can do on our nation and its future. Don't get me started on Clinton.

I despise McCain but you've got to go with what you've got.

They like it!

Robert liked it over at Jihadwatch :)

.... so did she.

Love it. Totally.

CPAC: Liveblogging Bolton

Bolton is on. Welcomed by enormous applause. Expressing reservations over some of McCain's positions and hoping McCain will have a change of heart over his remarks on the international court.

But Bolton tells us McCain strongly lobbied for Bolton's nominations

Lenin said "Worse is better"  "Not a position the conservatives should take especially  at a time when our country is at war. WORSE IS NOT BETTER"

"We cannot have a President  that needs on-the-job training or one that has problems dealing with a little bit of stress".

"I'll be supporting John McCain in this election and I hope you will be as well"

UPDATE: Video hat tip Allah

Bolton thinks McCain took a stronger position yesterday regarding Iran were than Bush.

"Iran is now freer to pursue nuclear weapons than ever before".

Correcting the CIA - February 7, 2008

On December 3, when the director of national intelligence released an estimate of Iran's nuclear program that said the Mullahs had suspended its bomb making in 2003, the left could barely contain its glee. The New York Times featured a front page analysis that said, "Rarely, if ever, has a single intelligence report so completely, so suddenly, and so surprisingly altered a foreign policy debate here." The Majority Leader, Senator Reid took the opportunity of its release to call again for a "surge of diplomacy with Iran." Senator Obama said, "The juxtaposition of this NIE with the president's suggestion of World War III serves as an important reminder of what we learned with the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq: members of Congress must carefully read the intelligence before giving the President any justification to use military force."

Careful, indeed. It turns out that on Tuesday, as our Eli Lake reported on page one of yesterday's Sun, the director of national intelligence, Mr. McConnell says he now regrets the phrasing of the unclassified estimate that so stirred America's enthusiasts of diplomacy. In testimony before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Mr. McConnell went further. He noted that Iran is developing both the long range ballistic missiles and the nuclear fuel for a potential weapon. What had halted, it turns out, was work to design the actual warhead and secret enrichment activity. The Iranians continued to enrich uranium in the open in Natanz in defiance of two Security Council resolutions.

As for the secret enrichment and weapons design, Mr. McConnell is not even sure as of mid-2007 whether the Iranians have restarted this work. "We assess with moderate confidence that Tehran had not restarted these activities as of mid-2007, but since they comprised an unannounced secret effort which Iran attempted to hide, we do not know if these activities have been restarted," he told the assembled senators. So why then did the opening sentence of the December 3 assessment state with no equivocation, "We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program"? Mr. McConnell said that it was because he had to assemble quickly a declassified estimate in late November and that it did not occur to him that this kind of declarative statement would confuse the issue.

For the unelected intelligence bureaucrats who pushed through December's distortion and the newspapers that cheered them on, the walk back from the director is a serious blow. It's hard to recall a situation quite like it. Only a few lines about Mr. McConnell's testimony on this point appeared in yesterday's New York Times, and that was buried in a story that focused on the improvements Al Qaeda has been making in its ability to strike the home front. Yet for a brief moment the unclassified assessment about which Mr. McConnell now has regrets ended political debate about the urgency of stopping the world's leading sponsor of Islamic terror from obtaining an apocalyptic arsenal.

UPDATE: Iran starts up advanced centrifuges hat tip Larwyn 

McCain's 500 tickets

To Mark Steyn's point in his post, Packing CPAC (here,) and as I previously mentioned here- let me say unequivocally that those "cheers" were staged. Someone who would know in the CPAC organization has told me that McCain took 500 tickets for his speech. 500 tickets ......... and he filled them.

And anecdotally, I know that people were literally thrown out of there seats, asked to move. to accommodate McCain's manufactured cheerleaders.

CPAC attendees were not cheering, they were booing but they were relegated to the sides of the ballroom, no the middle where the mics and the plants were. And no one was wearing McCain pins or stickers except folks that worked for him.

Just the facts, ma-am.

CPAC: Mc....ugh

UPDATED: The thing is no one is happy. The air has been sucked out of this conference. Those applauding during his speech were McCain's people. Brought in, positioned in the middle of the room.

The din in the crowd as I walk around  is folks don't want to vote for McCain. The only saving grace, I hear, is that he'll be tough on Isalmothugs. On this , I vehemently disagree. McCain does what's politically expedient. If it's politically expedient to talk to Assad, he will. If it's politically expedient to talk to Ahmadinejad , he will. If he could make a deal with "Splash" Kennedy on immigration, he could make a deal devil.

Brian Faughnan blogging for the Weekly Standard is on my right. Lovely fellow. Great coverage of all things McCain. His speech was an attempt to "reach out" ......I am unmoved. McCain's selling point here is Obama ... he will be the Democratic nominee.

McCain the Humble Conservative Weekly Standard

John McCain's speech seems to be going over pretty well with the portion of the audience that's open to being swayed. There's at least one McCain opponent here at Blogger's Corner who confessed that the speech didn't matter; he just hates McCain. Among the rest, the response seems pretty positive.

Jim Geraghty says it seemed to get a warm reception.  Kathryn Jean Lopez says he did what he needed to do.  Erick Erickson calls it the 'best speech' that McCain has given this season and Ed Morrissey says it was an excellent speech that reached out to conservatives 'in a heartfelt manner.'

I tend to agree. Overall, I think he came across as somewhat humble and respectful of his conservative critics -- which represents an important change. A key passage (as far as I'm concerned) is this:

Surely, I have held other positions that have not met with widespread agreement from conservatives. I won't pretend otherwise nor would you permit me to forget it. On the issue of illegal immigration, a position which provoked the outspoken opposition of many conservatives, I stood my ground aware that my position would imperil my campaign. I respect your opposition for I know that the vast majority of critics to the bill based their opposition in a principled defense of the rule of law. And while I and other Republican supporters of the bill were genuine in our intention to restore control of our borders, we failed, for various and understandable reasons, to convince Americans that we were. I accept that, and have pledged that it would be among my highest priorities to secure our borders first, and only after we achieved widespread consensus that our borders are secure, would we address other aspects of the problem in a way that defends the rule of law and does not encourage another wave of illegal immigration.

McCain's biggest problem with conservatives so far seems to have been his style -- the way he flaunted his differences with them, and impugned their motives. The tack he took today will serve him well. Over time, it might be sufficient to quiet the doubts and fears that he has provoked to date.

I think the speech overall showed why McCain can be a very strong candidate in the general election. When the mood strikes him, he can mount a strong appeal to conservatives -- on national security, spending, taxes, judges, and other issues. On spending in particular, he and Ron Paul are probably the only elected officials who come across as even remotely credible in promising to reduce federal spending.

McCain the Conservative Brian Faughnan

He just delivered his speech at CPAC...early consensus is that it was effective. McCain took great strides to emphasize his conservative record, including this bit where he highlighted his more controversial stands on issues that led some of his fellow candidates to pander:

I campaigned in New Hampshire against big government mandated health care and for a free market solution to the problem of unavailable and unaffordable health care. I campaigned in Michigan for the tax incentives and trade policies that will create new and better jobs in that economically troubled state. I campaigned in Florida against the national catastrophic insurance fund bill that passed the House of Representatives and defended my opposition to the prescription drug benefit bill that saddled Americans with yet another hugely expensive entitlement program. I have argued to make the Bush tax cuts permanent, to reduce the corporate tax rate and abolish the AMT. I have defended my position on protecting our Second Amendment rights, including my votes against waiting periods, bans on the so-called "assault weapons," and illegitimate lawsuits targeting gun manufacturers. I have proudly defended my twenty-four year pro-life record. Throughout this campaign, I have defended the President's brave decision to increase troop levels in Iraq to execute a long overdue counterinsurgency that has spared us the terrible calamity of losing that war. I held these positions because I believed they were in the best interests of my party and country."

He actually made air quotes when he spoke of assault weapons--a mild rebuke to Romney's recent waffling on the issue. Giuliani, of course, campaigned in Florida on providing federal insurance for catastrophic disasters, and Romney was also a proponent of mandated health insurance. It was all a very polite way of pointing out that he has often been the most conservative candidate in the field.

McCain is out of step with many of the folks attending CPAC on immigration, but while there were a smattering of boos when the topic came up, McCain seemed to handle the topic deftly. He nodded to their "principled defense of the rule of law" and his own failure to convince critics of that last year's reform would effectively address their concerns. He closed that bit by reiterating his commitment to securing the borders first--it felt like he pulled it off.

He then drew contrasts between himself and the Democratic candidates for president on the size of government, taxes, health care, judges, and most of all national security.

Senator Clinton and Senator Obama will withdraw our forces from Iraq based on an arbitrary timetable designed for the sake of political expediency, and which recklessly ignores the profound human calamity and dire threats to our security that would ensue.

I intend to win the war...

This will be defining issue of the 2008 election, and it seems like the CPAC crowd understands that.

Raining on the Parade  Brian Faughnan

 

Did Congressional Quarterly time this piece so that conservatives would be reading it the day that John McCain effectively became the nominee of the Republican party? They consider what President McCain's domestic agenda might look like next year, if there's a Democratic Congress:

But when he is with the Democrats, he is really with them. McCain is not someone who simply reaches across the aisle to form coalitions with the other side. He walks across the aisle, puts on the other team’s uniform and sings the other team’s fight song...

This will be a full partnership of the president and the Congress, who just happen to be of different parties.

'A full partnership' is clearly an exaggeration; John McCain disagrees with Democrats on too many domestic policy issues -- from judge, to taxes, to spending -- to enter into any kind of partnership with Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. Furthermore, Congressional Democrats will spend the next 8 months savaging John McCain, and trying to convince the American people that McCain is more conservative and out of touch than George Bush. And if he is sworn in, from day one they'll be working to ensure that he's a one-term president.

So there's not going to be any partnership.

That said, there are clearly plenty of conservatives that think CQ has it exactly right.  A major task for McCain over the next 8 months is to convince them that Congressional Quarterly has got it exactly wrong.

I am one of those conservatives.

CPAC: MIGHTY MARK STEYN AND ME

If I didn't impress upon you how honored I was to have been invited to introduce Mark Steyn, forgive me.  He is illuminating and unabashedly clear. Of all that I heard and saw, Mark Steyn was  the most brilliant. He so gets it and articulates it with such force and passion.

I kicked off my intro with a little limerick:

There once was a kafir named Steyn
Muslims said wrote an offending line
Twas an imam he quoted
Now he's being swiftboated
But his battle is yours and its mine.

Steyn's speech ought to be reproduced and be mandatory reading for every . American that cares about what's happening to this  country. He excoriates the Republicans for moving to the left and abandoning the very tenets of our political philosophy.

Speaking with him prior to the event he expressed my concerns and distress over Romney's withdrawal. He, too, thought Romney was a great candidate.

Random points he made but watch the video:

He wouldn't use the word "small  government" because it buys into the liberal narrative - that big government is the norm.

He took out the Republicans for refusing to enforce the border.  Here we cop out to the impossibility of securing our own borders. We claim to be unable to keep people from sneaking over our sovereign borders but we will attempt (at least McCain will) to "change the heavens". We will expend untold treausure to address "global warming"  to cool things down a degree but we can't control . He also pointed out that the greatest increase in illegal immigration has come post 9/11.

The default mode of the culture is liberal; the key levers of society are liberal.  The defects of that approach seem increasingly apparent.

I can't write all my thoughts, I really hope Steyn runs his speech in full on his site.

Great American Rich Davis, Skye from Midnight Blue, Sharon Hyland whose husband is a Maine in Afghanistan and gave  up a six figure job to start "A Hero's Welcome"   and STEYN.

UPDATE: Here's a really clean copy (why townhall cut me out I'll never know)

Must See Video: Mark Steyn at CPAC

CPAC: Morning with Cheney

Before I comment on Cheney's remarks let me say what I found most notable was his silence on the Presidential election. Not one word. Spoke volumes.

No mention borders either. But  he was magnificent. Look he would have been my candidate.

The crowd roared when he said it's no accident that there are no terror attacks since 9/11, it is an achievement.

The Captain liveblogged these remarks:

11:20 - On the war policy of the Bush administration: "Would I support those same decisions today? You're damned right I would." The war won't be on the defensive, Cheney says.

11:18 - Iraq will remain a tough job, as Petraeus has said. He is highlighting the gains from the surge, nothing terribly surprising.

11:14 - Defends the interrogation of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, which gets a rousing cheer from the audience. "They are in full compliance with the nation's laws and our treaty obligations." It has saved thousands of lives, Cheney tells the audience. "We do not torture," but do not shrink from aggressively working to protect the nation.

11:12 - Emphasizing that terrorism is not a law-enforcement issue, but a national-defense and intelligence issue. The US needs to ensure that the front line of our defenses has the tools it needs to protect us. Cheney wants to make sure that the FISA laws passed last year get extended for a lengthy period, and "those who helped secure this nation do not get harassed with lawsuits".

11:10 - "The absence of another 9/11 is not an accident -- it is an achievement." That gets by far the biggest response. Everyone is on their feet.

11:08 - A better reaction on Bush's work on pro-life and judicial nominations.  Will McCain take a cue from that?

11:06 - Repeats Bush's pledge to veto budgets that don't reduce earmarks by 50%. He also talks about the EO on non-legislative earmarks. That gets a bigger cheer, but I suspect that many may wonder why the number can't be 90% or better, and why the EO couldn't have applied to this year's budget. I'm not hearing a huge reaction to this.

11:04 - Demands permanence for the Bush tax cuts and outlines the impact of them. He also calls for lower spending, and explains how that works in a $3.1 trillion budget. Well, that doesn't get much more than golf claps.

11:03 - Cheney is emphasizing economics, and the need to keep taxes low. "Put more tax money back into the hands of those who earned it." He promises no new regulations for "meddling" with the economy.

11:00 am ET - He's underscoring the support that he has for the candidates who will speak here. That may carry some weight with the conservatives, although it was somewhat subtle.

Stephen Hayes on the dais

BTW, the panel discussion that was thankfully interrupted by Cheney's early arrival was more of an attempt to soften us for more moves to the left.
Bob Novak (ugh) lead a discussion on a new book about Bush arguing that Reagen would not have gone into Iraq (nor, according to them would Woodrow (League of Nations) Wilson (as if Reagen and Wilson could be interchangeable.)The book, Reagen's Disciple: George W. Bush's Troubled Quest for a Presidential Legacy, was presented by father and son author, Lou and Carl cannon.
Like I said, thankfully it was interrupted. I can't imagine many stayed for it  after Cheney's remarks. 

THE CPAC WILL BREAZEALE INTERVIEW

Will Breazeale (pronounced Brazil) is running for District 7 North Carolina. He is a three tour Iraq war veteran and the kind of leadership this country needs. Check out my quickie interview. He's a good man. If you;ve got friends, family, ex-lovers in the 7th district, send them the vid :)

CPAC blogging from the Bar

Backed away from the keyboard to go grab a bite .... and Eric, No Pasaran is here! Imagine we immediately gravitate towards each other only to discover we are blog buds from way baclk It's old home week.  Excellent.

Little Miss Attila and Wendy for Girl on the Rightl were there. Very cool. We'll be on bloggers row together. Cheney in the morning. So we are hobnobbing

Robett Stacey McCain, like a true veteran blogger  is blogging from the bar. We love that. Here's an excerpt of Robert's post.

Go here;

Blogging from the lobby bar, where I've just been greeted by the lovely Pamela of Atlas Shrugs.

Clockwise from top left (click pic to enlarge): The Other McCain (note clever product placement); Matthew Vadum of Capital Research Center; the lovely Pamela; Eric of No Pasaran.

Ill update my with photos as soon as I get back to my room.

Rob has set up a blog feed of CPAC posts here. What a great thing.

CPAC BOUND

Enroute to DC. Hanging at the airport with (/not!) Cyntohis Mckinney Sheila Jackson Lee (forgive me , it was the braids and the politics that threw me - thanks Geoff!) who is yelling on her phone about universal healthcare. I kid you not. You can't make this stuff up.

CPAC! Romney! McCain! Bush! Cheney! Bolton! Check all the conservative giants to be at CPAC here. I am introducing the Steynmeister! Yeah ...... baby. Posting will be sporadic until I hit bloggers row.
.  


Robert Stacy McCain has the list of all the bloggers on bloggers row here.

Ace O'Spades
Alarming News
Atlas Shrugs
Bluey Blog
Captain's Quarters
Conservatives with an Attitude!
Fausta's Blog
FreedomWorks
Gay Patriot
Girl on the Right
HotAir.com
Hugh Hewitt
Human Events
Little Miss Attila
Mary Katherine Ham
Matt Sanchez
Musclehead Revolution
My Man Mitt
Newsbusters
Outside the Beltway
Politico
Reasoned Audacity
Red State
Riehl World View
Right Wing News
Sam Adams Alliance
Save the GOP
The American Mind
The Autonomist
Truth Laid Bear

UPDATE: Ann is coming! (hat tip Jeremayakovka)

CPAC: Bush, Cheney ....... and Atlas?

Bush and Cheney will be at CPAC. And Atlas will be introducing Mark Steyn. Hot, or what?.


Robert Stacy McCain has the list of all the bloggers on bloggers row here.

*CPAC 2008 BLOGGERS ROW*

The raging epidemic of CPAC Fever continues spreading across the blogophere. If you haven't caught it, it's not too late to sign up now.

Every conservative voice will be there. Check out the speakers here: CPAC 2008 on 2/7/08

New panel:

“A New Generation of Valor:

Decorated Heroes of Iraq and Afghanistan”

 

The American Veterans Center is proud to present a panel of true American heroes this year at CPAC. On Thursday February 7^th at 2 PM in the Ambassador Ballroom The American Veterans Center will be presenting “A New Generation of Valor: Decorated Veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan”. This panel is the only one of it’s kind at CPAC and will prove to be a truly incredible experience for anyone in attendance.

This historic panel includes three men who’s stories have been immortalized in three riveting books.  Each of these men have exemplified courage and heroism under fire, and the American Veterans Center is honored to present these men at CPAC.   The men featured in this Panel are: Staff Sergeant David Bellavia, author of “House to House: An Epic Memoir of War” and recipient of the Silver Star who has been recommended for the Medal of Honor; Leading Petty Officer Marcus Luttrell, author of the NY Times Bestseller “Lone Survivor: The Eyewitness Account of Operation Redwing and the Lost Heroes of SEAL Team 10” and recipient of the Navy Cross; and Marco Martinez, author of “Hard Corps: From Gangster to Marine Hero” and recipient of the Navy Cross. 

CPAC: COULTER UNINVITED?

You guys remember the Coulter Vlog (march 2007). I defended her. So why am I being invited to introduce Mark Steyn at CPAC (Thursday the 8th 1pm) while Coulter was uninvited. Are they nookin futz?  Thank G-d for the YAF, You can guarantee I'll be at the YAF lunch. Join me! SIGN UP HERE!

Ann Coulter, in CPAC's Back Door US NEWS

She's always been outrageous, but when conservative Ann Coulter talked of 9/11 "rag heads" at the 2006 Conservative Political Action Conference and linked the slur "faggot" to Sen. John Edwards in a 2007 speech, CPAC's organizers decided to cut her from the list of speakers at the February 7-9 conference expected to draw 6,000. But that doesn't mean she won't speak there. "It's unfortunate that Ann Coulter is not speaking at CPAC," says Ron Robinson, president of Young America's Foundation. "She's a powerhouse for young people," he adds, and "one major reason that CPAC is so successful." So guess what? YAF and its supporters also attending CPAC will host Coulter at the same hotel as CPAC. "This way," says one host, "CPAC isn't technically having Coulter speak."