Romney's openly-gay foreign policy spokesman resigns amid conservative backlash

Party Rooster

Unleash The Beast
#1
Posted at 03:00 PM ET, 05/01/2012
EXCLUSIVE: Richard Grenell hounded from Romney campaign by anti-gay conservatives
By Jennifer Rubin



Richard Grenell, the openly gay spokesman recently hired to sharpen the foreign policy message of Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign, has resigned in the wake of a full-court press by anti-gay conservatives.

In a statement obtained by Right Turn, Grenell says:

I have decided to resign from the Romney campaign as the Foreign Policy and National Security Spokesman. While I welcomed the challenge to confront President Obama’s foreign policy failures and weak leadership on the world stage, my ability to speak clearly and forcefully on the issues has been greatly diminished by the hyper-partisan discussion of personal issues that sometimes comes from a presidential campaign. 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.

According to sources familiar with the situation, Grenell decided to resign after being kept under wraps during a time when national security issues, including the president’s ad concerning Osama bin Laden, had emerged front and center in the campaign.

Pieces in two conservative publications, the National Review and Daily Caller, reflected the uproar by some social conservatives over the appointment. [UPDATE, 4:30 p.m.: Although Grenell also raised the ire of liberal commentators with now-deleted tweets about certain prominent women, none of the sources I spoke with mentioned the tweets as a factor in his resignation decision.]

In the National Review, Matthew J. Franck wrote late last week: “Suppose Barack Obama comes out — as Grenell wishes he would — in favor of same-sex marriage in his acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention. How fast and how publicly will Richard Grenell decamp from Romney to Obama?”

The argument that Grenell could essentially not be openly gay and serve on a GOP presidential campaign was belied by the fact that Grenell has been a loyal Republican for many years, working for esteemed foreign policy figures including former Ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton.

The ongoing pressure from social conservatives over his appointment and the reluctance of the Romney campaign to send Grenell out as a spokesman while controversy swirled left Grenell essentially with no job. The Romney camp has not responded to my request for comment.

UPDATE (3:10 p.m.): The Romney camp has now responded via campaign manager Matt Rhoades: “We are disappointed that Ric decided to resign from the campaign for his own personal reasons. We wanted him to stay because he had superior qualifications for the position he was hired to fill.”

That is a perhaps too subtle retort to those calling for Grenell’s head, that he was not hired to advise on gay issues but on foreign policy matters.

UPDATE (3:50 p.m.): Right Turn has learned from multiple sources that the senior officials from the Romney campaign and respected Republicans not on the campaign contacted Ric Grenell over the weekend in an attempt to persuade him not to leave the campaign. Those were unsuccessful. During the two weeks after Grenell’s hiring was announced the Romney campaign did not put Grenell out to comment on national security matters and did not use him on a press foreign policy conference call. Despite the controversy in new media and in conservative circles, there was no public statement of support for Grenell by the campaign and no supportive social conservatives were enlisted to calm the waters. Beyond his statement, Grenell has declined further comment today.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...conservatives/2012/05/01/gIQAccGcuT_blog.html
Props to Romney for hiring him in the first place I guess...
 

Floyd1977

Registered User
#2
So you have a rare case of a homosexual working for the republicans and they force him out. Good move:clap::clap:
 

MayrMeninoCrash

Liberal Psycopath
#4
Pretty lousy timing to lose your foreign affairs expert when Obama is in the middle of his World Osama-Killing-Grandstanding Tour 2012
 

Party Rooster

Unleash The Beast
#5
Pretty lousy timing to lose your foreign affairs expert when Obama is in the middle of his World Osama-Killing-Grandstanding Tour 2012
Don't think it's so much "timing." Sounds like he felt like he was hired as just a political stunt when they never bothered letting the guy do his job and weigh in on that whole thing.
 

KRSOne

Registered User
#6
Ban guns and support carbon taxes but don't you have any of those queers working for you. Continue a failed foreign policy that creates enemies for the US and puts us further into debt but I better not see any moes walking around. I hope this causes Romney to lose some votes.
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
#7
What does his sexual orientation have to do with his foreign policy skills? Enough with your OBSESSION with cock, Republicans. Enough.
 
#8
Romney hired him and wanted him to stay. There goes the theocrat argument from the left. Mission accomplished.
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
#9
Romney hired him and wanted him to stay. There goes the theocrat argument from the left. Mission accomplished.
I'm still annoyed that they are so bothered by this. I mean, look - if we were talking about something like Romney's adviser on family affairs being gay I still wouldn't mind, but I could at least see why an uber conservative would have a problem with that. But foreign policy? Are these people seriously suggesting that nobody who is gay should be associated with Romney's campaign and/or presidency in any way? That's just unrealistic, not to mention straight retarded. What decade is this?

That's why a part of me is pretty happy with Romney as the nominee. With all of Mayr and partycock's snide remarks about him being similar to Obama, I don't think a far right candidate would be a good thing right now. We gotta stop the pendulum swing, not increase it (get out of MYYY way).
 

Party Rooster

Unleash The Beast
#10
Romney hired him and wanted him to stay. There goes the theocrat argument from the left. Mission accomplished.
See what I wrote before. It looks like to me he wasn't all too happy they were trying to keep him under the radar instead of telling the theocrats to go fuck themselves.

That's why a part of me is pretty happy with Romney as the nominee. With all of Mayr and partycock's snide remarks about him being similar to Obama, I don't think a far right candidate would be a good thing right now. We gotta stop the pendulum swing, not increase it (get out of MYYY way).
I find it totally baffling that the Republicans couldn't come up with a better alternative. I think a lot of Democrats and independents are going to stay home on election day because they don't really see Romney as that much different than Obama. They see all his flip-flopping and realize there's really no bark to his bite.
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
#11
I find it totally baffling that the Republicans couldn't come up with a better alternative. I think a lot of Democrats and independents are going to stay home on election day because they don't really see Romney as that much different than Obama. They see all his flip-flopping and realize there's really no bark to his bite.
This feels stopgap-y to me. The farm system looks pretty good with its Rubios and Ryans and shit, but the vast majority of them are still too young. I'm not sure who they could come up with that would be able to a) somehow satisfy the more conservative religious elements and b) appeal to middle-of-the-road voters that were disappointed by Obama.
 

Stig

Making America So Great You Won't Believe It.
#12
I have a gay Republican friend. I think the main reason most of them don't come out is not so much pressure from other Republicans. Most people my age and under really don't care. It's the unwanted attention from the left; being called out as a traitor and a hypocrite and being used for their political gain.
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
#13
I have a gay Republican friend. I think the main reason most of them don't come out is not so much pressure from other Republicans. Most people my age and under really don't care. It's the unwanted attention from the left; being called out as a traitor and a hypocrite and being used for their political gain.
I've heard this too. Log Cabin Republicans don't get any heat from the religious right wing. All their grief comes from the likes of GLAAD. They aren't banned from CPAC or the RNC, but they are banned from Gay Pride parades.
 

BIV

I'm Biv Dick Black, the Over Poster.
#14
Hey, what if this guy is talking politics and suddenly starts suckin' cocks. We can't have that.
 

Stig

Making America So Great You Won't Believe It.
#15
Hey, what if this guy is talking politics and suddenly starts suckin' cocks. We can't have that.
Awww shit. Hadn't thought of that.
 
#16
I've heard this too. Log Cabin Republicans don't get any heat from the religious right wing. All their grief comes from the likes of GLAAD. They aren't banned from CPAC or the RNC, but they are banned from Gay Pride parades.
Don't be silly. That fact would make this whole thread worthless! Must misrepresent Republicans!
 

Party Rooster

Unleash The Beast
#17
I've heard this too. Log Cabin Republicans don't get any heat from the religious right wing. All their grief comes from the likes of GLAAD. They aren't banned from CPAC or the RNC, but they are banned from Gay Pride parades.
Don't be silly. That fact would make this whole thread worthless! Must misrepresent Republicans!
Except if it wasn't exactly a "fact." The Heritage Foundation and a few other conservative groups boycotted last year's CPAC in protest of gay groups being invited to CPAC.
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jan/08/nation/la-na-cpac-20110108
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
#18

whiskeyguy

PR representative for Drunk Whiskeyguy.
Donator
#19
In other words, they did the morally appropriate thing - not attending themselves as opposed to just banning the people they don't agree with.
Exactly, and the fact that gay groups were invited is showing a change in the Republican party. It's not happening nearly fast enough, but most of the Republicans I know don't have anything against gays, and the strongest argument is that they should have every right heterosexual couples have, but the definition of marriage should not be changed (I realize there's the separate-but-equal counter-argument... just stating an example).

There are 3 or 4 people I know who are adamantly anti-gay, and all of them are pretty liberal. I really think the left just gives much more attention than deserved to the groups on the right that are adamantly against homosexuality.
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
#21
Exactly, and the fact that gay groups were invited is showing a change in the Republican party. It's not happening nearly fast enough, but most of the Republicans I know don't have anything against gays, and the strongest argument is that they should have every right heterosexual couples have, but the definition of marriage should not be changed (I realize there's the separate-but-equal counter-argument... just stating an example).

There are 3 or 4 people I know who are adamantly anti-gay, and all of them are pretty liberal. I really think the left just gives much more attention than deserved to the groups on the right that are adamantly against homosexuality.
Yup. Apparently this slow shift is being noticed elsewhere as well. I read an interesting piece on it recently. You can check it out here: "GOP Shift On Gay Marriage Opposition."

I honestly think that many conservatives feel like a) There are more important issues right now and b) They are slowly giving less of a fuck about what other people do privately. At least that is what I see a lot in my life.

Misrepresenters gonna misrepresent.
Well, it was also not only about Log Cabin. Heritage were mad because of various disagreements with CPAC. Just read their comment in the article partycock posted.
 
#22
Gay issues are a generational thing. Old people don't like the gays, younger people do. Party affiliation has little to do with it.
 

whiskeyguy

PR representative for Drunk Whiskeyguy.
Donator
#23
I honestly think that many conservatives feel like a) There are more important issues right now and b) They are slowly giving less of a fuck about what other people do privately. At least that is what I see a lot in my life.
I think Republicans see that more government intervention is never a good thing, and it has such a massive impact on their fiscal values that they're willing to take another look at their morality and how much they want to force on others. Many more Republicans I know are shifting more and more libertarian, and really the only thing holding the party back from making the shift are the 45 year old & up Republicans.
 

Party Rooster

Unleash The Beast
#24
In other words, they did the morally appropriate thing - not attending themselves as opposed to just banning the people they don't agree with.
They have no control over who gets invited to CPAC, so they thought they would strong arm those that are in charge into it. Props to the organizers for telling them to go screw.

Besides, don't say gay Republicans don't get any heat from the religious right wing. It was Heritage, the Family Research Council, and the American Family Association that boycotted. Couple of pretty big religious right wingers there. :action-sm

Misrepresenters gonna misrepresent.
I didn't misrepresent shit.
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
#25
They have no control over who gets invited to CPAC, so they thought they would strong arm those that are in charge into it. Props to the organizers for telling them to go screw.

Besides, don't say gay Republicans don't get any heat from the religious right wing. It was Heritage, the Family Research Council, and the American Family Association that boycotted. Couple of pretty big religious right wingers there. :action-sm
Well, maybe not the smartest phrasing, but if you are upset about that, you should be doubly upset with the gay community at large for scorning them in an even more active an heinous fashion (as they do to the Israeli gay community, despite homosexuality being illegal in the Palestinian territories, for example). Just sayin'.
 
Top