May speak to Romney's ability to woo the Independent

[John Adams]

Strange turn here. A month ago, the Romney team hires an openly gay man to be its foreign policy spokesman, knowing that it will raise the hackles of the party. This is a move that intelligent people could care less about. If the guy is qualified (seems to be, served as UN under press secretary of some sort under Bush), he gets the job.

 

Then of course, the extreme right erupts in a furor because this guy supports gay marriage (the horror). Maybe the Romney campaign begins to marginalize him (some stories). Bowing to the pressure, he resigns. By most accounts, the Romney campaign wanted him to stay, although this could be self-serving BS.

 

Not sure what the truth is but in any event, it does not bode well for Romney's reach for the Independents that a qualified gay man got run out of his campaign by the extreme elements of his party. As an Independent, I am wary of what role that element of the party will play in Romney's message and ability to govern.

[Jauronimo]

I can't believe people are still pushing for gay marriage. Haven't they been through enough already?

[Doc]

Strange turn here. A month ago, the Romney team hires an openly gay man to be its foreign policy spokesman, knowing that it will raise the hackles of the party. This is a move that intelligent people could care less about. If the guy is qualified (seems to be, served as UN under press secretary of some sort under Bush), he gets the job.

 

Then of course, the extreme right erupts in a furor because this guy supports gay marriage (the horror). Maybe the Romney campaign begins to marginalize him (some stories). Bowing to the pressure, he resigns. By most accounts, the Romney campaign wanted him to stay, although this could be self-serving BS.

 

Not sure what the truth is but in any event, it does not bode well for Romney's reach for the Independents that a qualified gay man got run out of his campaign by the extreme elements of his party. As an Independent, I am wary of what role that element of the party will play in Romney's message and ability to govern.

I don't see how Rommey seemingly being a gay rights supporter, when it's common knowledge that his party doesn't support gay rights, would make you change your mind about voting for him? If anything, it should make you want to vote for him more.

[John Adams]

I don't see how Rommey seemingly being a gay rights supporter, when it's common knowledge that his party doesn't support gay rights, would make you change your mind about voting for him? If anything, it should make you want to vote for him more.

 

Gay rights is down the list of issues that matter to me, despite how much fun I have debating it since the people against gay marriage are retarded. My concern is that this guy caved to pressure from the extremes--not on the gay marriage issue (Mitt is against gay marriage and civil unions)--but on having a gay guy who supports gay marriage in his circle of advisers.

 

Why should it matter that the spokesperson for foreign affairs, on one issue that he does not give advice on (gay marriage), has a contrary view? Big whup. But here he is getting pressure to resign from his own party. What that says to me is that the extremes will have a lot more say in the Romney campaign than I want. As an Independent who wants Romney to woo him, it's concerning.

[IDBillzFan]

I don't see how Rommey seemingly being a gay rights supporter, when it's common knowledge that his party doesn't support gay rights, would make you change your mind about voting for him? If anything, it should make you want to vote for him more.

I didn't read where he said he'd change his mind about voting for him. But let's be honest: Barack Obama thrives off extremist elements in his party. From the Purple People Beaters to the New Black Panthers to the skunk-scented anarchists of the OWS movement, Obama lives for these extreme elements in his party.

 

Any "independent" who would vote for four more years of Barack Obama because they are concerned Romney gives an ear to a small, extreme group of righties is a lot of things, but an "independent" isn't one of them.

[dayman]

Pathetic story. This SHOULD be something the entire party is ashamed about. Literally losing (allegedly) talented people over nonsense.

Edited May 2, 2012 by TheNewBills

[IDBillzFan]

Pathetic story. This SHOULD be something the entire party is ashamed about. Literally losing (allegedly) talented people over nonsense.

I guess the next war the left has to create is the War on Gays since the War on Women went so swimmingly.

[dayman]

I guess the next war the left has to create is the War on Gays since the War on Women went so swimmingly.

 

The left has to create the war on gays? The war on gays is pretty well established.

[John Adams]

I didn't read where he said he'd change his mind about voting for him. But let's be honest: Barack Obama thrives off extremist elements in his party. From the Purple People Beaters to the New Black Panthers to the skunk-scented anarchists of the OWS movement, Obama lives for these extreme elements in his party.

 

Any "independent" who would vote for four more years of Barack Obama because they are concerned Romney gives an ear to a small, extreme group of righties is a lot of things, but an "independent" isn't one of them.

 

Depends on what the extremists get.

 

I can't vote for Obama. That's a certainty. Whether I will vote for Romney remains to be seen. What I'm saying is that idiocy like this doesn't bode well for his campaign. Hopefully he can nip this stupidity in the bud. What Mitt might have done, if he had balls, is to intercede publicly and say, "This is my guy. We don't agree on everything, including gay marriage, but he knows his sh-- on foreign policy. I am capable of taking his advice on foreign policy while disagreeing with him on another less important topic. So, dear extreme: STFU."

 

Obama is maybe more of a pu**y on gay marriage (his "My view is evolving" sounds like Clinton's "Depends on the definition of "is"") but at least he supports civil unions.

[RkFast]

The left has to create the war on gays? The war on gays is pretty well established.

 

If not wanting "fisting kits" given to my 14 year old daugher constitutes a "War on Gays", then call me "Animal Mother", B word.

[ieatcrayonz]

Romney has a gay foreign policy? Is it like the Honda Fit of foreign policies?

Edited May 2, 2012 by ieatcrayonz

[dayman]

If not wanting "fisting kits" given to my 14 year old daugher constitutes a "War on Gays", then call me "Animal Mother", B word.

 

Look at how mad you are.

[Doc]

Depends on what the extremists get.

 

I can't vote for Obama. That's a certainty. Whether I will vote for Romney remains to be seen. What I'm saying is that idiocy like this doesn't bode well for his campaign. Hopefully he can nip this stupidity in the bud. What Mitt might have done, if he had balls, is to intercede publicly and say, "This is my guy. We don't agree on everything, including gay marriage, but he knows his sh-- on foreign policy. I am capable of taking his advice on foreign policy while disagreeing with him on another less important topic. So, dear extreme: STFU."

 

Obama is maybe more of a pu**y on gay marriage (his "My view is evolving" sounds like Clinton's "Depends on the definition of "is"") but at least he supports civil unions.

Why can't you vote for Barry?

[Jauronimo]

The left has to create the war on gays? The war on gays is pretty well established.

Good thing Obama has got their backs. Oh, wait...nevermind.

[IDBillzFan]

What Mitt might have done, if he had balls, is to intercede publicly and say, "This is my guy. We don't agree on everything, including gay marriage, but he knows his sh-- on foreign policy. I am capable of taking his advice on foreign policy while disagreeing with him on another less important topic. So, dear extreme: STFU."

I actually agree with this. The problem is that if he DID do this, the election dialogue would change dramatically because a few right crazies would do something stupid and then the left media machine would turn all the cameras on these idiots 24/7 (or what we on the right refer to as "giving them the Tea Party treatment"). When you stop to consider that on the list of 100 things important to Americans right now, gay rights is # 241, it's not the time to alter the narrative.

 

This is our media reality, whether we like it or not: you can take a few people who hate gays or one conservative calling a woman a slut, and the media is in hyperdrive, but a bunch of black dudes put a million dollar death bounty on the head of a white hispanic, and it's simply nothing worth reporting. Romney has no choice but to let it go because if the goal is to win the WH, it's not a battle worth fighting right now.

[Jauronimo]

If not wanting "fisting kits" given to my 14 year old daugher constitutes a "War on Gays", then call me "Animal Mother", B word.

Appalling! I don't want my kids learning about fisting from some low rent 4th grade teacher. Everyone knows its the parents' repsonsiblity to teach thier children about fisting, in the privacy of their own home! I remember when my dad sat me down for the fisting talk. Have you talked to your children about fisting, yet?

[dayman]

I actually agree with this. The problem is that if he DID do this, the election dialogue would change dramatically because a few right crazies would do something stupid and then the left media machine would turn all the cameras on these idiots 24/7 (or what we on the right refer to as "giving them the Tea Party treatment"). When you stop to consider that on the list of 100 things important to Americans right now, gay rights is # 241, it's not the time to alter the narrative.

 

This is our media reality, whether we like it or not: you can take a few people who hate gays or one conservative calling a woman a slut, and the media is in hyperdrive, but a bunch of black dudes put a million dollar death bounty on the head of a white hispanic, and it's simply nothing worth reporting. Romney has no choice but to let it go because if the goal is to win the WH, it's not a battle worth fighting right now.

 

It must be wonderful living in your little bubble thinking that it's merely the right wing crazies that are focused on. The crazies are focused on period. I do agree w/ your first paragraph though. I also think honestly that if he did stand up in spite of the storm it could create...it could rehab his image as a slimy politician just trying to morph to whatever will get him elected...it's not like he's going to lose "the heartland" anyway. I'm not so sure politically it wouldn't have been a better move for him to do that.

[IDBillzFan]

It must be wonderful living in your little bubble thinking that it's merely the right wing crazies that are focused on.

I never said it was merely the right wing crazies, but like every other predictable liberal, don't let it keep you from standing in judgement of your own hypothetical.

 

What I said was that the left media machine would turn this story into 24/7 Homophobic Romney Watch 2012 with Live Doppler Reporting, and suddenly we'd continue to talk about everything EXCEPT what matters to Americans right now. You need only watch the coverage of the "extreme" Tea Party protests relative to the coverage of the mainstream OWS protests to understand this truth. Or maybe we should compare the coverage of a newly-described "white Hispanic" for killing a 17-year-old black boy versus the amount of coverage given to countless 17-year-old black boys who are murdered every week by someone other than a "white" person.

Edited May 2, 2012 by LABillzFan

[dayman]

I never said it was merely the right wing crazies, but like every other predictable liberal, don't let it keep you from standing in judgement of your own hypothetical.

 

What I said was that the left media machine would turn this story into 24/7 Homophobic Romney Watch 2012 with Live Doppler Reporting, and suddenly we'd continue to talk about everything EXCEPT what matters to Americans right now. You need only watch the coverage of the "extreme" Tea Party protests relative to the coverage of the mainstream OWS protests to understand this truth. Or maybe we should compare the coverage of a newly-described "white Hispanic" for killing a 17-year-old black boy versus the amount of coverage given to countless 17-year-old black boys who are murdered every week by someone other than a "white" person.

 

I'm liking your avatar more and more.

[B-Man]

Strange turn here. A month ago, the Romney team hires an openly gay man to be its foreign policy spokesman, knowing that it will raise the hackles of the party. This is a move that intelligent people could care less about. If the guy is qualified (seems to be, served as UN under press secretary of some sort under Bush), he gets the job.

 

Then of course, the extreme right erupts in a furor because this guy supports gay marriage (the horror). Maybe the Romney campaign begins to marginalize him (some stories). Bowing to the pressure, he resigns. By most accounts, the Romney campaign wanted him to stay, although this could be self-serving BS.

 

Not sure what the truth is but in any event, it does not bode well for Romney's reach for the Independents that a qualified gay man got run out of his campaign by the extreme elements of his party. As an Independent, I am wary of what role that element of the party will play in Romney's message and ability to govern.

 

 

 

Well, no offense to the poster, but after 18 posts about "how horrible" this is, without a link or even the gentleman's name, I decided to look behind the "accepted" story.

 

First of all, I frequent most all the major Conservative (read right-wing)sites and I never saw or read of any backlash or uproar (certainly not by the party)as the OP writes.

 

Hot Air

 

When you search for it, all the liberal sites come up first, all with the exact same take on this; a openly hostile GOP forced this man out.

 

It is, of course true that Mr.Grenell did resign after catching some inapropriate tweets, but there is much exaggeration being added here to fit a familiar meme of the left.

 

The folks at the Family Research Council and the Media Research Center did raise many objections to the appointment, but they are GOP supporters, not the GOP.

 

Another minor problem with the going theory: Grenells been working for conservatives for years. According to WaPo, Grenell is perhaps best known for being George W. Bushs top spokesman at the United Nations, serving under Ambassadors John Negroponte, John Danforth, John Bolton and Zalmay Khalilzad. Bolton, in fact, reportedly phoned Grenell to try to talk him out of quitting.

 

But, in an interview with ABC News, a source familiar with Grenells departure from the Romney campaign disputed the under wraps suggestion.

This source said Grenell, whose hiring was first reported on April 19, had not yet started his duties as the campaigns top national security spokesman and was in the process of moving from Los Angeles to Boston.

Tuesday would have been his first actual day on the job.

He wasnt under wraps; he wasnt a spokesperson yet, according to the individual with knowledge of Grenells hiring and resignation. If he had wanted to, he would be a spokesman right now.

 

ABC

 

"I want to thank Governor Romney for his belief in me and my abilities and his clear message to me that being openly gay was a non-issue for him and his team.

Richard Grenell

Edited May 2, 2012 by B-Man