When I first posted on Richard Grenell’s stepping down from the Romney campaign, I wrote that it was
. . . absurd to think that, as one social conservative quoted in Rubin’s piece suggests, that Grenell might “decamp from Romney to Obama” should that latter come out in favor of federal recognition of same-sex marriage. Does he really think gay people are so shallow that we’d back a candidate just because he has a better record on gay issues even when we disagree with him on nearly every other issue?
That social conservative, a Mr. Matthew J. Franck, reports Jennifer Rubin, had written:
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?
Well, Mr. Obama didn’t wait until the Democratic National Convention. And in his appeal earlier this month for gay campaign cash, the Democrat did just what Mr. Franck imagined he might do.
And Mr. Grenell? Well, the headline for CNN’s report on his editorial yesterday in the Wall Street Journal says it all, Former Romney spox Grenell: Don’t vote on gay marriage:
He said that Romney’s position on same-sex marriage – which Grenell disagrees with – was not enough to write him off as a candidate.
“Like many voters, I rarely agree with a candidate’s every position,” Grenell wrote. “I can support Mr. Romney for president but not agree with all of his stated policies. I can be proud of President Obama’s personal support for gay marriage and still take exception to his dismal national-security and economic records.”
He continued, “Millions of American voters will also evaluate both candidates’ policies in total and come to the same conclusion: Mr. Obama doesn’t deserve to be re-elected and Mr. Romney does.”
Well, we’ll have to agree to disagree about expressing pride in the president’s patently political statement (more on that anon). I do wonder though if Mr. Franck intends to apologize to Mr. Grenell for assuming him to be a single-issue voter.
Just because a gay conservative champions gay marriage doesn’t mean he’ll warm to a partisan adversary (with whom he disagrees on nearly every other issue) the moment said adversary changes his mind about gay marriage.