Despite promises from Obama and a strongly-supported measure in the House, the new version of the health care bill funds abortions. Americans United for Life Action have a new ad urging Congress and Obama to prohibit any federal funding from going to abortions.

Susan B. Anthony List also has more information about abortion and the Health Care Summit last week. This is a major problem. Americans should not be required to fund abortions with tax dollars.

During CPAC, I had the privilege of meeting Patricia Sullivan, a strong conservative woman running for Alan Grayson’s seat in Florida.

Yes, that Alan Grayson.

Mrs. Sullivan is exactly the type of woman that I’m always hoping will run for office. She’s a staunch conservative, a Christian and a homeschooling mother of four.

Calling herself a “defending mother,” Mrs. Sullivan said, “We need conservative women in congress who can multitask with common sense. We need watchmen to say no. Moms are good at saying no.”

If the treatment of Jim Bunning is any sign, we definitely need more men and women who can say no in Congress.

Going into 2010, it’s exciting to see a groundswell of grassroots candidates running. They’re distinctly different than the typical people who run for office. After working in DC for a number of years now, it is almost strange to encounter them. While talking with Mrs. Sullivan, I asked how fundraising was going. She replied that, “DC people always ask about fundraising, but is that the most important thing?”

I had to admit that I was taken aback. As hard as I try to stay un-Beltway, it creeps into your soul. That’s another reason why we need more candidates like Mrs. Sullivan. Even people who purposely try to avoid becoming part of the system end up doing so.

As we chatted, Mrs. Sullivan shared that she had made the decision to run only dif her entire family was on board. After discussing it, her 14-year-old son was reluctant. They decided to take additional time for consideration, and the son went on a missions trip. When he returned, he started reading a book that a friend had recommended. By that time, the family was once again sitting down to decide if an election was in their future.

Mrs. Sullivan shared that the book completely changed her son’s outlook. After praying about it, he knew that it wasn’t right for his mom to miss this opportunity if God was opening the door. She started to tear up while telling me this.

As I sat on Blogger’s Row typing, Mrs. Sullivan’s story took on a personal turn. I asked what the book was. I’ve worked with teen boys. Not many books change their lives.

“In a Pit with a Lion on a Snowy Day,” she replied.

My jaw dropped, and I stopped talking. In shock, I looked up and said, “My pastor wrote that book!”

Surprised, she asked a few details about it. I told her that I attend National Community Church and Pastor Mark Batterson wrote that book several years ago.

The interview went from talking about her race to sharing how much this book had influenced her son. I told her a little about NCC and promised to share the story with Pastor Mark. She was excited and said something that only Believers can understand, “It wasn’t a coincidence that God brought us here to talk about the race.”

That evening, I excitedly got to church. As a hospitality co-leader, it is my job to make sure that everyone is welcome and has bulletins, chairs set up, information available and tithe collected. I serve on the team that makes sure that the service goes smoothly, and I love it. Working in the background to make sure that everything gets done has always been my major gift.

Normally, the evening flies by, and I’m running like crazy. (Church also doubles as a cardio session for me.) Normally, I don’t get a chance to talk to Pastor Mark except to wave and say hi. That Saturday, he walked up while I was discussing something with Pastor Ross, the campus pastor at Ebenezer’s. I seized the opportunity to share the afternoon’s experiences with him and saw him light up with the story that his book had helped a 14-year-old boy. He asked for the family’s information so that he could follow up.

To be perfectly clear, NCC stays apolitical. As a church that meets on Capitol Hill, you have to. I may be a staunch conservative, but I do believe that Democrats can be godly Christians. I know Democrats who are better Christians than many Republicans.*  Pastor Mark and the church leadership do an amazing job staying above the fray on political issues. NCC is a refreshing escape from the polarizing and often depressing issues we deal with each day. (I’m not sure what I would do if my church were political. I need a break from it all.) He was excited to hear that his book had helped a 14-year-old boy, not that In a Pit is influencing conservative politics (although both sides could probably benefit from reading his books).

I write this to 1) highlight an awesome candidate like Mrs. Sullivan. 2) encourage other women to run for office and 3) share how God orchestrates strange meetings. Out of the 10,000 people at CPAC, what are the odds that Mrs. Sullivan would meet someone who knew the author of the book that helped her decide to run for public office?

Take a few minutes to learn more about Patricia Sullivan. We need more people like her in Congress. Moe Lane at Red State did an interview with her during CPAC.

Also Smart Girl Nation interviewed Mrs. Sullivan last year.

*Sometimes I wonder what the New Testament would have looked like if Jesus had come to DC and not Israel. Hypocrisy and evil exist on both sides of the political aisle. Political systems are designed by humans and are therefore imperfect, but I do believe capitalism and democracy are the best systems that help the most people at once.)

The Network of enlightened Women, a group that I wish had been around when I was a student, asked me to write a guest post. It’s up over at their blog.

Go over and read it and discover why I’m a proud conservative woman.

All over the web and media, people are making a big deal out of the Ron Paul victory in the CPAC Straw Poll. As soon as I saw the results Saturday night, I really wasn’t surprised. I’m also going to disagree with some friends on this one.

It wasn’t because Ron Paul will be the nominee in 2012. The odds are overwhelmingly against him.

It’s not because the majority of attendees were supporters. They weren’t. It was fairly split among a lot of different candidates or undecideds.

Ron Paul won the straw poll because two organizations manipulated it.

Dr. Paul is successful because he appeals to a fanatical base of supporters. They are sizable, but they aren’t the majority of conservatives, nor are they a majority of Tea Partiers. They have two extremely well-organized and motivated organizations, Campaign for Liberty (C4L) and Young Americans for Liberty (YAL). Having worked with a number of YAL chapters, the individuals drawn to those organizations will walk through fire for Dr. Paul.

I’ve witnessed first-hand what these groups will go through. Think about the Paul moneybombs and countless activism events. Do those reflect the majority of conservatives out there? Absolutely not. It should not surprise anyone that there was likely a concerted, organized effort to manipulate the outcome of the poll.

To understand CPAC, you have to understand the set up. The Marriott is huge with multiple levels. At every single escalator and staircase, Ron Paul supporters were bombarding you with information. By day three, it was obnoxious, especially for people like me who were busy running around and working.

You also need to understand how the straw poll is collected. CPAC places poll locations throughout the conference on Day 1 and Day 2. The actual instrument is lengthy and can take 10 minutes or so to complete. Note that the poll is completely self-selective. The people who take it are the ones who are either eager to share their opinion on the 2012 race or have the time to take it.

As I’ve written numerous times, I have no idea who I will support in 2012. I also didn’t have much free time on Day 1 and 2, when the surveys were collected. When I went to take the poll on Day 3, it had closed. How many people were like me and simply forgot to take it? We’ll never know.

What you’ve not seen reported in the media is the actual number of participants in the poll. There were around 10,000 registered attendees, yet only 2,395 people volunteered to participate in the poll. Barely 25% of attendees participated in the poll! Of those 2,395 people, only 31% supported Dr. Paul. That breaks down to around 743 votes. 743 people out of 10,000 is hardly worth mentioning.

While I agree with Patrick Ruffini that this is a good sign that younger people are motivated for conservative/libertarian causes and that the model of C4L and YAL should be replicated throughout the movement, it does not show that Dr. Paul is the leader of the conservative movement.

The media is obsessed with declaring that someone is the leader in order to fixate on that person and destroy his/her credibility. They want it to be Rush or Palin because those are already polarizing figures. Dr. Paul would be nearly as good because of the fringe movement that surrounds him. It’s easier to silence the uprising of Americans when they are painted as far-right loonies.

Please understand that I respect Dr. Paul. I agree with him on most subjects. The issues of foreign policy and the military are my two biggest objections. This post is not to tear down the efforts of C4L or YAL. I know many people involved with those campaigns, and they have my respect and admiration. However, take the Paul victory with a grain of salt. When you combine low participation with a group of highly-mobilized, highly-connected volunteers, it is possible to manipulate the results.

Feminists are up in arms that CPAC attracts…WOMEN!

Via Feministing and Broadsheet, I watched this video that the Daily Caller put together. Not only did it feature several of my former co-workers, but it was also silly. The premise was dumb, yet the women interviewed tried to explain why they were there.

No where in the video did the women say that their reason for attending was “boys, boys, boys” as Tracy Clarke-Flory alludes. Actually, if you listen to the video, the majority of the women are attending for work. The college students articulate that they are attending to learn about the issues and support candidates.

Even in the twisted world of feminism, I thought learning about issues and supporting candidates was supported. Oh, silly me. I forgot that different rules apply to conservatives. We’re supposed to shut up and pretend we don’t exist.

Oh crazy feminists, get over yourselves and do the math. CPAC proactively reaches out to college students with steep discounts on ticket prices. Traditionally 50% or more of the attendees  are college students. Since more women are now matriculating than men…connect the dots. Also, attendance was up 20% overall this year with at least 10,000 people registering.

I realize that this this is difficult to swallow since it proves:

1. CPAC, the representation of all that is evil to the universe of liberals, is growing. 10,000 is a lot for any conference on any subject or political ideology.

2. Women are actually conservative, including college-aged women.

3. Conservative women aren’t ashamed of being attractive.

4. With more and more conservative organizations targeting women and inviting them to attend events like CPAC, it’s hardly surprising that they would show up.

It really is amusing to read through liberal blogs and newspapers and see what the left pulls out of CPAC. It’s like they attended a completely different conference than the one that I saw.

I think I make it pretty clear that I have zero respect for both Jessica Valenti and Meghan McCain here, but Jessica really out did herself with saying “just when you think CPAC can’t get any creepier.” Really? Just Really? This video freaked you out that much? With all the actual evil in the world done to women, those women at CPAC are the worst?

CPAC this year is decidedly different than 2009. Last year, I sat down, absorbed knowledge and was motivated to re-launch my blog with a focus on women’s issues. This year, I worked the conference although I had today off. I spent the last two days running around from event to event, meeting with bloggers and working our booth. I think I met every conservative blogger and tweep out there.

Working the conference gives you a much different perspective. I met and saw lots of famous people. The most surreal moment was watching PJTV interview Ann Coulter and looking up to see Michael Steele crash the interview. You could feel the nervous tension of the surrounding crowd wondering exactly what she would say to him. (She likes him and thinks he’s doing a good job.). For the record, Coulter is extremely nice and down-to-earth. (If you watch the interview with John Hawkins, I came up with the question about what the Republican Party can learn from the Tea Parties. The interview hasn’t been posted yet.)

I also ran into Evan Maloney, who directed Indoctrinate U, and it was nice to catch up. I’m happy to hear that he’s writing for Andrew Breitbart at Big Government.

Other highlights include meeting Phyllis Schafly. She’s so dignified…and tiny. When I shook her hand, I marveled that this small, older lady could drive such fear into the hearts of liberals. (Seriously, walk up to a liberal and say that Phyllis Schafly is awesome. You can watch their brain cells explode in anger.)

I also met Steven Crowder, who did an fantastic job emceeing this morning. I hope they bring him back. (Attention @CPACNews, please bring him back. We need more Millenials in the lineup.) That kid has talent. Unlike most conservative “comedians,” he’s genuinely funny.

Due to church, I missed the last half of today and the straw poll results. Actually, I forgot to vote in the straw poll. I wouldn’t pay attention to the news that Ron Paul won. He had a massive following there, and Paul supporters are so connected that they can manipulate events such as CPAC.  In fact, swaying the results of the poll is the type of thing that drives Ron Paul supporters. They had volunteers distributing flyers at every single entrance, and this hotel was huge. I respect their dedication and hard work, but I disagree with Dr. Paul on a few issues.

Blogger Row at CPAC 2010

Overall, CPAC2010 was fantastic. The new venue at the Marriott is much better.  Aside from a few hiccups in getting blogger credentials, the conference catered to bloggers. My credentials almost get me into more areas than my co-sponsor status.

After so many years of battling the right to be more engaged online, it’s incredibly refreshing to see how quickly establishment organizations like CPAC have opened up to technology and are doing better than the left. I shudder to think what the Obama administration would get away with if it weren’t for new media.

I’m looking forward to getting some sleep tonight, emptying out my inbox and catching up on what those sneaky feminists have been doing. While CPAC is going on, it’s easy for conservatives to forget that liberals are hard at work while we’re distracted.

Update: In my earlier version, I wrote that I met Professor Reynolds. Apparently, I made a huge mistake. I honestly thought I met Professor Reynolds. I apologize. The mistake is mine and admittedly, I’m rather embarrassed. My apologies. There’s no conspiracy. Relax. Just a mistake from an over-worked blogger.

Jenny Sanford, soon-to-be ex-wife of Governor Mark Sanford, is a person to watch. She’s an interesting character, emerging from the shadows as a traditional political wife only after her husband publicly destroyed their marriage.

Politico covered an event where Sanford urged conservative women in South Carolina to run for office:

“Women understand the conservative issues as well as any man. We run our households and our families, and we don’t live beyond our means,” Sanford said to a room full of the state’s most powerful Republican women, according to the first lady’s notes of the speech, which were obtained by POLITICO.

“We balance our checkbooks as we seek balance in our lives. We care about our security, health and well-being, quality education for our children and hope for their future,” she added. “We need more women and more true conservatives involved in all levels of government to bring common sense and efficiency to our big, bureaucratic government.”

Update: Due to the snow, the event has been postponed. I’ll watch for Joe Lance and Chattarati to announce the new date and post and update.

With Zach Wamp running for governor this year, the race for the TN-03 Congressional seat is heating up.

Tomorrow, all of the GOP candidates will face-off at the LiberTea Debate at Woodland Park Baptist Church at 2 p.m. A candidate forum will immediately follow from 4-5 p.m.

My friends over at Chattarati will be covering the event live, so if you’re stuck in the snow, tune into Chattarati.com to watch the debate with all of the GOP candidates.

The district has gotten more conservative since Wamp took office, so the primary victor is likely to win the general election in November. Local debates like this are critical.

With a six-way race, victory will boil down to name recognition and get out the vote efforts. Since turnout is generally low for primaries, the candidate with the strongest grassroots effort will probably win.

Robin Smith has the best name ID through her work with the TN GOP. Active Republicans, the most likely primary voters, are used to getting emails from her.

The other day, I noticed Van Irion’s Facebook page. I think he’s made the critical mistake of running with “Vote for Van” as a slogan. In East Tennessee, “Van” generally refers to Van Hilleary, who caused a nasty three-way primary in the 2006 Senate race and keeps losing whenever he runs. If you’re an emerging politician, it’s best not to be associated with the guy who always loses.

To be honest, I’m not that familiar with the other candidates–Art Rhodes, Tommy Crangle, Tim Gobble, and Chuck Fleischmann. Of all the candidates, Robin Smith’s campaign has been the only one to proactively reach out to me as a blogger. I’m more familiar with her since I’m on her email list and met her at the Hamilton County Tea Party last April 15. I believe that I also met Tommy Crangle at an event that I spoke at last year.

The GOP has the upper-hand in this election even without the current national anger directed towards Democrats. Since the seat is solidly R, TN-03 voters need to make sure that we elect a strong conservative.

I’m about to write words that I never thought would remotely cross my mind: someone at Daily Kos wrote a post that makes sense.

Angry Mouse writes in Feminism Fail:

No, not that kind of feminism. Not the theory of women’s equality or the history of suffrage or the First Wave or the Third Wave or 18 million tiny cracks in the glass ceiling.

I’m talking about Feminism^TM, as in the largest feminist advocacy organizations in the country raising millions of dollars to fight on behalf of women.

And I’m wondering if Feminism^TM is really such a good investment.

You got that right. After initial successes in getting media attention and making inroads at the workplace in the 70s, feminists realized that they had a good thing going. What’s better than being an activist for a movement? Being a paid activist for a movement. How do you sustain the movement? You create cushy academic programs to ensure that your belief system is passed onto younger generations. Despite all of their gains in certain sectors, like the media and academia, these women are always in a crisis! of some type. Why? Crises are extremely profitable:

And it’s always a crisis. Even under a Democratic president, with a Democratic supermajority in Congress, the nation’s biggest feminist organizations are in crisis mode, raising money but unable to deliver results. They’re just as effective as they were under Bush. Which is to say, Not. At. All.

Could it be that women are catching on that this philosophy is superficial and doesn’t work outside of a hippie commune? This week, the National Journal examined how the Susan B. Anthony List has tripled the amount of PAC money spent compared to NOW, that old stalwart of the feminist movement. However, when all pro-life PAC money is compared to anti-life PAC money, the anti-lifers outspent us. Just what did they do with all that money? Since a majority of Americans are now opposed to abortion, it doesn’t appear that the angry ladies have been very successful. Angry Mouse isn’t too happy about it:

In the last decade, we’ve seen more restrictions on women’s reproductive health, more government-funded sex (mis)education, and budget cuts everywhere — for after school and early education programs, for employment and training programs, for programs to fight domestic violence — all of which directly and disproportionately impact women.

And at every step backwards, the major feminist organizations have been powerless to stop it. Or just plain absent.

Both the Daily Kos piece and the National Journal article discuss how feminist groups were silent on the health care debate until the Stupak Amendment passed in the House. National Journal writes:

The Susan B. Anthony List has been educating its audience on health care reform since early spring, while NOW was getting ready to change its leadership. Yet NOW is well-situated to fire up public pressure because it has 450 regional chapters — some of which have their own paid staff.

And Angry Mouse:

In other words, Emily’s List didn’t bother to raise awareness of the threat to reproductive rights when it might have mattered. You know, before Congress voted on the Stupak Amendment.

Over the summer, while members of Congress were speaking with their constituents about what should and shouldn’t be included in the health care bill, where were the feminist organizations? They weren’t mobilizing the millions of women across the country who would have been only too glad to raise their voices in opposition. Guess it just wasn’t a good time.

No, they were busy sitting on their hands, apparently waiting for the eleventh hour, waiting for it to be a crisis.

Meanwhile, the nation watched wall-to-wall coverage of teabaggers screaming nonsense about socialist death panels. And that tiny fringe of teabaggers, with their signs and their slogans and their stunts, was so effective that they actually succeeded in killing the part of the bill they found objectionable. Score? Teabaggers: 1, Feminists: Big, fat zero.

We’re seeing an overwhelming malaise on the left, particularly among women. Feminists were successful when they had major donors and the media in their pockets. When the news was controlled by only a few, they could make it look like all women supported these efforts. However, now that alternative media and the Web have grown, and conservative female leaders have emerged, feminists can no longer keep up the charade.

Perhaps the biggest change this year is the freedom to be female and conservative. For most of my life, I felt like the lone voice in the wilderness. It’s as though the feminist shackles are removed, and women can be articulate, educated, professional and conservative. While I’m gleeful to see organizations that I’m ethically opposed to struggle, this ultimately gives women more choices. Women no longer have to doggedly follow one set ideology. They have the freedom to decide which side they publicly support. Ironically, the decline of Big Feminism means that the equality goals of feminism could actually be achieved.

This week, I joined Tabitha Hale and Emily Zanotti for Tabitha’s Raisin’ Hale podcast. We discussed my favorite topic–feminism and some rather silly posts at Feministing and Amplify Your Voice. I’m sure liberals will be scared to know that there are at least two other twentysomething female bloggers out who don’t buy into the feminist propaganda.

I also learned that my always dependable Verizon cell phone likes to drop calls while recording podcasts. If I ever decide to take up podcasting, I need to invest in the right equipment (i.e. a Mac). It was fun though! There aren’t many voices out there countering liberal women and exposing their hypocrisies, which has quickly become my favorite issue to discuss. Plus, Tabitha and Emily are both smart, funny women to converse with.

Enjoy!