Conservative speakers and organizers will flock to Washington, DC next week for the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). But GOProud, an extreme right-wing gay organization, won’t be invited this year after outcry from anti-gay groups that spearhead the conference. The decision to exclude GOProud for the second year in a row has triggered a schism between conservatives who plan to boycott the conference until GOProud is invited and those who believe the group goes against social conservative values.

S.E. Cupp, a conservative commentator on MSNBC, is refusing to attend CPAC without GOProud. Other well-known conservatives have backed up her decision and condemned CPAC’s intolerance. The National Review published an editorial today noting that the exclusion of GOProud has had “a greater downside for CPAC than its past of GOProud ever did”:

Conservative opinion on the intersection of homosexuality and politics is not monolithic, especially among the college-aged set that makes up the better part of CPAC attendees. And a gathering that hopes to speak for the conservative movement will be better equipped to do so if it represents the overlapping gamut of views included in it.

CPAC Chairman Al Cardenas denies that GOProud was uninvited because gay people are unwelcome at CPAC, but rather because they “did not act properly as guests” last time. Cardenas said the group held press conferences attacking CPAC board members, which led to board members voting against them. Though Cardenas now insists that gay conservatives are welcome, his own wife said in 2011 that GOProud was banned because homosexuality “is a threat to society” and “not nature’s way.”

This year, according to notoriously right-wing columnist Jennifer Rubin, a CPAC sponsor employee blamed CPAC’s reluctance to “cross groups that are big sponsors that have said they’d leave if GOProud is ‘in the building.’” Indeed, several major sponsors including the Family Research Council refused to attend CPAC in 2011 when GOProud was participating.

This latest clash over conservative exclusion reflects the Republican Party’s new anxiety over outreach to minorities, women, young people and gay voters, all demographics that voted overwhelmingly for Democrats in the 2012 election. Still, even GOProud’s defenders have avoided opening debate on real policy shifts. Rubin argued, “No one is asking CPAC to endorse gay marriage or any other policy … merely to let gays into the room.” The National Review also reassured CPAC that including GOProud would “not now…imply its endorsement of any particular policies regarding gays.”

After the Log Cabin Republicans’ disappointing endorsement of Mitt Romney yesterday, media outlets speculated as to what would inspire them to abandon their principles in such a way. Ben Adler at The Nation noticed that LCR claimed it could “work with a Romney administration to achieve a desirable outcome” on workplace nondiscrimination, so he followed up with executive director R. Clarke Cooper. Cooper claimed that he was confident that Romney would support anti-discrimination legislation, because he “has been adamant” in opposing discrimination. Adler concluded that Romney must have secretly promised LCR support for the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) in exchange for its endorsement. (Demonstrating conservatives’ distrust for Romney’s integrity, Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association reacted quite negatively to the news.)

But BuzzFeed’s Chris Geidner double checked, and suddenly Cooper was not as enthusiastic about these claims, clarifying, “I did not say Romney would sign the current form of ENDA,” but that the group is confident that they could “achieve desirable tangible outcomes on workplace discrimination.” Herein lies the obvious flaw with LCR’s endorsement: completely false hope. Mitt Romney certainly proved in the debates that he’s capable of sounding moderate despite how conservative his principles — or at least his campaign platform — remain. Even if there was no ENDA promise, any hope conveyed to LCR by the Romney campaign in regards to federal employment protections was surely a ruse.

There is absolutely nothing in Romney’s history to warrant optimism that he has any concern for LGBT people. In May, he flat-out said that he would not support ENDA because he believes states should get to decide whether it’s okay to fire people just for being LGBT. As governor, he ostensibly fired two of his employees for just that reason, in addition to demonstrating galling insensitivity to LGBT families. Ryan’s record is no better; though at one point he did cast a vote in favor of ENDA, he then said he could no longer support it if included protections based on gender identity, and he has refused to answer questions on the matter since Romney tapped him as a running mate. Arguably, LCR only claims to support equality for “gay and lesbian Americans,” so perhaps they are prepared to abandon the transgender community to achieve “tangible outcomes” that include only protections based on sexual orientation.

What’s most telling is how incessant LCR has been about spinning the endorsement since it was announced yesterday, including this ENDA confusion. It is clearly a departure from its past integrity and the days when endorsements were withheld from candidates that did not adequately support LGBT (or at least LG) equality. In fact, GOProud splintered off from LCR specifically to be a group for gay conservatives whose priorities are unapologetically not concerned with LGBT rights at all. Perhaps LCR is jealous of the media attention GOProud has received from making waves at the Conservative Political Action Conference, but it’s clear that what lines once existed between the groups are quickly diminishing.

The Log Cabin Republicans claim that they are making a difference within the GOP by being present and swaying conservatives to better understand LGBT rights, and this may well be true on the individual level. However, the group accomplishes nothing — and abandons what principles its work is built upon — when it praises candidates like Romney who have nothing genuinely supportive to say at all. In fact, LCR’s effectiveness was very much drawn into question when it was revealed that party leaders developed a particularly anti-LGBT platform specifically to rebuke the group’s efforts to participate in the Republican National Convention. If a group no longer stands by its founding values and is creating a backlash anathema to its stated goals, it’s hard to understand what relevance it has at all.

Gay Republicans have had their own dim spotlight at the Republican National Convention as they peddle apologetics for their party while trying to advance LGBT equality from within. Log Cabin Republicans were proud to have been part of the platform drafting committee, but the GOP ended up approving one of the most anti-gay platforms ever. One member of LCR, Casey Pick, admitted to NPR that the platform might very well have been a “hostile” retaliation to their presence:

PICK: When you back someone into a corner, they fight back twice as hard. The platform is ugly and harmful. We lost, and you could say the social conservatives in our party dropped the hammer harder because we were there.

Former Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-AZ), who is openly gay, believes 2012 will be the last year for such vitriol, but Pick’s comments suggest otherwise. The Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins had a prominent leadership role on the drafting committee and personally drafted much of its social policy. Though LCR has achieved visibility at this year’s convention, their contributions seem particularly unwelcome in contrast. Though the group admitted the platform was “bad with a capital ‘B,’” it continues to defend the Romney/Ryan ticket, compromising its supposed commitment to LGBT equality in favor of party politics.

GOProud has also taken advantage of the convention’s publicity, but unlike LCR and despite being a gay Republican group, they never purport to support any aspect of LGBT rights.

The Log Cabin Republicans were quick to defend Paul Ryan on Saturday when Mitt Romney picked him as his vice presidential running mate, despite Ryan’s abysmal voting record on LGBT issues. Now, LCR’s R. Clarke Cooper is again defending the GOP ticket by clinging to Ryan’s one pro-LGBT vote — a vote for the Employment Non-Discrimination Act that was preceded immediately by a vote to kill it — with the absurd belief that Romney might change his position and give gay voters a reason to vote Republican.

Here’s Cooper writing today for the Daily Caller:

Romney is not ready or willing to support same-sex marriage, but there are still concrete steps that his campaign can take to counter the liberal strategy of painting the GOP as anti-gay that would also provide tangible benefits for LGBT Americans… By vowing to sign an executive order preventing federal contractors from firing people for being LGBT, and joining Paul Ryan in support for ENDA, Romney can draw a favorable contrast between himself and the president.

By supporting ENDA and the federal contractor executive order, Romney and Ryan can turn the conversation about LGBT equality back to the economy. It’s a message that unites Americans, provides real benefits for millions of LGBT people and plays to the strengths of the Romney-Ryan ticket. Romney and Ryan both have records of supporting these protections, and for practicing nondiscrimination in their own leadership roles, so this step is entirely in line with the Romney-Ryan campaign’s “promise of equal opportunity, not equal outcomes.” Even for gay voters, the 2012 election is about restoring economic prosperity, growth and jobs.

The distortion Cooper attempts is nothing short of delusional. There is no liberal strategy to paint Republicans as anti-gay — they proudly own that in all of their position statements, much as it may chagrin the Log Cabin Republicans to admit it. Romney openly opposes ENDA, and given Ryan’s refusal to offer a nondiscrimination statement for his own Congressional office, it seems that neither has truly demonstrated “leadership” on the matter. Despite the fact that President Obama has not signed the executive order Cooper mentions, it would take a whole lot more than that for Romney to “draw a favorable contrast”;  his opposition to ENDA, marriage equality, and all other LGBT issues would easily maintain a significant imbalance. Cooper’s clinging to a position that neither Romney nor Ryan actually holds.

Cooper’s motives are clear: he’s a Republican, he identifies with other Republicans, and he wants Republicans in power for economic reasons, even if LGBT equality has to take a backseat. The lines seem to be blurring between the Log Cabin Republicans, which used to prioritize “representing the interests of gay and lesbian Americans and their allies,” and GOProud, which splintered off because there were some gay Republicans who couldn’t be bothered with defending their own community. Maybe Cooper is just speaking on behalf of the wrong group.

Both the Log Cabin Republicans and GOProud have responded negatively to today’s Supreme Court ruling upholding the Affordable Care Act. GOProud claimed that Obamacare “hurts gay and lesbian families” — despite the fact none of their own position statements actually support LGBT rights. LCR went a step further, with its Deputy Executive Director Christian Berle blaming Democrats for stripping LGBT-specific protections from the legislation:

BERLE: Log Cabin Republicans also have not forgotten that Democrats in Congress stripped provisions protecting LGBT families out of healthcare reform when it was passed. We remain committed to ending the Internal Revenue Service’s discriminatory treatment of employer-provided healthcare for domestic partners. While the Court may have found Obamacare to be constitutional, that does not mean it has been carved in stone. Now is the time to go back to the drawing board and institute reforms that work for all Americans.

National Stonewall Democrats Executive Director Jerame Davis told ThinkProgress that LCR has lost touch with “both reality and history”:

DAVIS: The Log Cabin Republicans must have lost their minds today. They are ignoring both reality and history in their attempt to convince LGBT Americans that the Affordable Care Act is bad for them. The LGBT provisions they claim were removed from the ACA by Democrats were done at the demands of the GOP. Throughout the healthcare debate the GOP demanded concession after concession and dug in their heels threatening to filibuster the bill in the Senate if they didn’t get their way. Log Cabin Republicans are doing a disservice to LGBT Americans by intentionally mischaracterizing the history of the Congressional debate on the ACA for partisan gain.

Indeed, even without the explicit LGBT provisions, the ACA still benefits the LGBT community in many important ways, such as improved data collection and protections for people who affected by HIV. For the Log Cabin Republicans to attack this law and the Democrats who advocated for it is to abandon support for the LGBT community just to make a disingenuous partisan cheapshot.

Gay Republican group GOProud said today that “Speaker Gingrich said absolutely nothing wrong” when he told a gay voter he’d be better off supporting President Obama’s reelection. Both GOProud and the Log Cabin Republicans insist that the liberal press is misrepresenting Gingrich’s comments, but in doing so they’ve conceded that supporting LGBT equality is not among their top priorities:

GOPROUD: The liberal press is at it again, attempting to mischaracterize the words of a Republican Presidential candidate. Speaker Gingrich said absolutely nothing wrong in his exchange with the gay Iowa voter… Speaker Gingrich handled himself with class and dignity in this discussion with the gay voter and the press reports that have reported otherwise have done a real disservice to the truth.

LOG CABIN REPUBLICANS: In this political climate, the door is wide open for a strong Republican candidate to win the support of conservatives, independents and disillusioned Democrats – and there are those who are working hard to paint any and all Republicans as bigoted in a fear-mongering effort to shore up the president’s base. That is unfair and highly unfortunate for our community.

Gingrich’s point was that it’s “perfectly legitimate” that voters who are primarily concerned with LGBT equality should support Obama, not Gingrich or one of the other Republican candidates. By rushing to defend his positions on “job creation, national security and a better future,” these groups are admitting that the dignity of LGBT people is not their primary concern. If it were, they might have made at least one reference to Gingrich’s numerous anti-gay positions, proposals, and statements that should more than justify concern from all voters, conservative or otherwise. Apparently, voters who care about their own ability to live, love, and work without fear of discrimination do “a real disservice to the truth” by refusing to “judge each character fairly.”

Watch the exchange between Gingrich and the voter:

Last night, Stephen Hill, who is serving in the Army in Iraq, had the courage to come out as gay to a national audience and ask the Republican presidential candidates about how they’d handle troops like him. The audience responded to his question with boos, and Rick Santorum said he’s reinstate Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (a promise he doubled down on later in the evening).

The big question today, even among conservatives, is: Why did none of the candidates stand up for the soldier? Here are some of today’s reactions to the offensive moment:

- Former White House spokesman Ari Fleischer: “Booing a soldier serving our nation is uncalled for. If I were on stage, I would make that point.”

- The Hill’s Ballot Box: “None of the Republican candidates responded to the audience’s reaction.”

- CBS News: “Some audience members audibly booed the soldier — a moment the GOP candidates on stage chose to ignore.”

- The New Yorker: “His reply was breathtakingly bad: he talked about dangerous social experiments and what a mistake the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell had been; he didn’t even thank Hill, in a rote way, for his service. But none of the candidates did, and any one of them could have.”

- Christian Post: “Santorum, who has never served in the armed forces, did not address the boos, but explained his position by saying ‘sexual activity has absolutely no place in the military.’”

- National Review: “Whatever you think of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” or homosexuality, Hill is risking his life on behalf of his country. It is troubling, and revealing, that Santorum’s answer entirely defined Hill as a gay man first and as a soldier second, if at all.”

- GOProud: “Tonight, Rick Santorum disrespected our brave men and women in uniform, and he owes Stephen Hill, the gay soldier who asked him the question about Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell repeal, an immediate apology. That brave gay soldier is doing something Rick Santorum has never done – put his life on the line to defend our freedoms and our way of life.  It is telling that Rick Santorum is so blinded by his anti-gay bigotry that he couldn’t even bring himself to thank that gay soldier for his service.”

- Log Cabin Republicans: “Unfortunately, for many Americans the take-away from last night’s debate was not that Republicans have the solutions our country needs, but that too many in our party are clinging so strongly to a failed and discriminatory law that they are willing to disrespect a man in uniform. As a current Army Reserve officer and an Iraq combat veteran, I found it appalling that a soldier serving down range would be disrespected in such a fashion.”

A petition is already underway on Change.org calling on Rick Santorum to apologize to gay soldiers. If Republicans are going to tolerate the shunning of gay troops, they will cause the very problems of unit cohesion they claimed would be the result of DADT repeal.

Tim Pawlenty took a shot at the American Conservative Union (ACU) for barring the gay Republican group GOProud from participating in next year’s Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). ACU announced the decision last month in an effort to appease social conservatives who boycotted the conference last year in protest of GOProud’s presence. In an interview with the Miami Herald, Pawlenty stressed that Republicans shouldn’t be afraid of more debate:

Q: A gay conservative group (GOProud) won’t be allowed to participate in the Conservative Political Action Committee conference. What do you think of that?

PAWLENTY: “I’m not familiar with that particular controversy. But I don’t think Republicans or conservatives should be afraid of debating the issues. We can agree or disagree on the merits of it. I’m for more debate, not less debate.”

Some prominent conservatives — including Andrew Breitbart who sits on GOProud’s board — have also denounced CPAC’s decision, arguing that “barring GOProud from a huge political event in a Presidential election year will only serve to fracture the conservative movement.” “What the American Conservative Union did with CPAC has nothing to do with true conservative values, because GOProud supports those,” conservative blogger Jeff Dunetz explained.