Gay Patriot Header Image

Did Richard Grenell choose to resign post in Romney campaign
simply because he wanted to keep his private life private?

In most, but fortunately not all coverage of what John Podhoretz dubbed L’Affaire Grenell, various pundits and pontificators have attempted to discern some anti-gay prejudice or crass pusillanimity within the Republican Party in general and the Romney campaign in particular.

In doing so, most lose sight of the basic facts of the situation which, Jennifer Rubin who first broke the story, reported in her last update to her post on the matter:

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.

Despite social conservatives’ criticism of the appointment, the Romney team wanted to keep Grenell on board.

It seems that the real reason Grenell stepped down was the one he articulated in his statement:

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.

Emphasis added.  As Podhoretz put it, the former John Bolton aide “was evidently rattled by attacks from the Right on his fitness for his post.”  And not just the right.  Scanning the Facebook comments of my liberal friends who posted on the matter, it seems he experienced attacks from the left as well for his choice words mocking leading liberals.

Grenell, Podhoretz suggests, “decided he didn’t need the grief”.  One wonders if he, used to flacking for others, was just not comfortable — or not prepared — to become the story himself.

And that rather than being a story with large implications, this may simply be the story of a man who wants his private life to remain private.

More on this anon.

FROM THE COMMENTS:  Replying to this comment, “Romney WANTED / NEEDED a token gay person in his campaign”, Rattlesnake quips, “Or, maybe he just hired him for his qualifications.”

Thank You, Dan Savage!

Due to the bigoted, bullying, anti-Christian tirade of the Obama Administration’s partner in “anti-bullying”….

…this blog has had its highest traffic in 2 years.


-Bruce (GayPatriot)

HRC & DNC choose silence in response to anti-Christian rhetoric

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 4:53 am - May 2, 2012.
Filed under: Liberal Hypocrisy,Mean-spirited leftists

In the wake of Richard Grenell’s departure, a number of conservative bloggers have faulted the Romney campaign for not defending Grenell when he was under attack from social conservatives, with Paul Mirengoff of Powerline, for example, writing that “the campaign should have stood strongly behind him.

McKay Coppins of BuzzFeed echoed that theory and expanded upon it, writing that “as the Romney camp furiously spins his departure, it seems clear that, politically, silence in response to anti-gay rhetoric may no longer be an option for either party.

But, did they need do as much?  Perhaps, campaign officials thought that by not rescinding the appointment, they indicated they were unfazed by the handful of social conservatives’ objections.  Grenell acknowledged as much thanking “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.”  Indeed, all reports indicate that numerous campaign officials and top Republicans contacted Grenell, urging him to stay on with the campaign.

Actions do speak louder than words.

Romney aides perhaps should have made public what they had said in private to Grenell, but, were under no obligation to condemn the anti-gay statements of those opposed to the appointment.  Simply put, if you don’t follow someone’s advice, that person doesn’t speak for you.

That didn’t stop the folks from the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), a group which has long since endorsed Barack Obama, for attempting to hold Romney to account for the anti-gay statements of those opposed to the pick, with its President Joe Solmonese taking Obama’s opponent to task:

Not once did the Romney campaign condemn these attacks and support Grennell.

Mitt Romney capitulating to the demands of extremist anti-gay groups is nothing new.

Um, Joe, perhaps you should have checked the facts before issuing your statement. (more…)

Watcher’s Council Nominations – May Day Edition

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 4:51 am - May 2, 2012.
Filed under: Blogging,Conservative Ideas

Council Submissions

Honorable Mentions (more…)

Did Grenell’s failure to mince words earn him social conservatives’ enmity?

One of the great gifts of blogging is the civil feedback and criticism I receive in e-mails from our readers.  On numerous occasions, they have alerted me to flaws in my arguments or pointed out a wrinkle in an issue I cover in a post.  Such was the case yesterday when a gay reader somewhat sympathetic to social conservatives sent me a message, linking an article about l’affiare Grenell and indicating, among his concerns about the erstwhile almost Romney foreign policy spokesman, objections to his tweets attacking conservative women:

Please remember that Grenell had to delete 800 (yes 800) tweets that trashed female conservative women. Many of those tweets are publicized online in a simple google search. He claimed they were tongue and cheek, but the sheer number in a short period of time alarmed me, and many of these tweets were directed at conservatives such as Newt & Callista Gingrich.

Indeed, I had heard these criticisms before. But, Grenell did, as McKay Coppins BuzzFeed reports, apologize for those tweets. Coppins mused that “If the campaign was slow to come to Grenell’s public defense over his sexuality, his embarrassing Tweets may have had something to do with it.”

Do wonder if the criticism of Grenell would have gained any traction had he chosen to mince his words about his fellow Republicans.

His outspoken advocacy of gay marriage may also have hurt him.  Byron York reports that he criticized. . .

Jonathan Capehart, an opinion writer for the Washington Post who is gay, for attending a state dinner at the Obama White House but not using the opportunity to confront President Obama over Obama’s opposition to gay marriage. (more…)

Did Ike fault Stevenson for failing to spearhead D-day?

Can you imagine“, a 101st Airborne Vietnam vet writes to the Weekly Standard‘s Geoffrey Norman . . .

. . . Ike saying, “I pulled the trigger on D-Day but Stevenson never would have had the guts to do that”?  Or Truman saying, “I dropped the bomb, and Dewey wouldn’t have”?  The response from men in that day and age would have been “Shut up and act like a man.”  And there is the irony: What Obama and his campaigners are doing to bolster the public’s perception of him as a strong president is something that would have had the exact opposite effect 50 years ago.

Read the whole thing.  Via Powerline Picks.