GayPatriot

Comments

RSS feed for comments on this post.

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://www.gaypatriot.net/2012/04/21/romney-appoints-qualified-man-as-foreign-policy-spokesman-who-happens-to-be-gay/trackback/

  1. I don’t care about identity politics.

    Comment by Sebastian Shaw — April 21, 2012 @ 4:52 pm - April 21, 2012

  2. “…extreme social conservatives…” So now you’re playing the “extremist” card against social conservatives. Dan, your social leftism just keeps revealing itself. Now I really know you’re a foe of traditionalists, including me.

    Comment by Seane-Anna — April 21, 2012 @ 5:00 pm - April 21, 2012

  3. So you admit you are in agreement with Bryan Fischer then Seane-Anna. Good to know.

    Comment by David in N.O. — April 21, 2012 @ 5:14 pm - April 21, 2012

  4. Seane-Anna, it seemed to me that Dan was speaking of “extreme social conservatives,” not social conservatives in general. I must admit, this overreaction on the part of people like Bryan Fischer is getting tiring. I mean, what does one’s sexuality have to do with anything? And somehow giving an openly gay man this position is equivalent to telling the “pro-family” community to “drop dead,” which I can’t see how it possibly is. His sexuality has nothing to do with his post, nor does his post have anything to do with families. Perhaps you can explain it to me, Seane-Anna. Fischer’s emotional rhetoric belongs on the left.

    Comment by Rattlesnake — April 21, 2012 @ 5:27 pm - April 21, 2012

  5. Seane – I consider my self a social conservative but I certainly don’t think Romney’s selection is a message to “drop dead”. It is a reality that one can be gay and still value marriage as necessary institution for our civilization.

    Fischer’s silly and overheated rhetoric causes most people to tune out – missing anything useful he might happen to say.

    Now if only a Pres. Romney nominates John Bolton as Sec. State…

    Comment by SoCalRobert — April 21, 2012 @ 5:45 pm - April 21, 2012

  6. “So you admit you are in agreement with Bryan Fischer then Seane-Anna.” No, David, I admitted no such thing. In my comment I simply pointed out that Dan reveals his oft denied social liberalism and enmity toward social conservatives by using the term “extreme” in reference to Fischer in particular and social conservatives generally. Since I’m a social conservative I feel that Dan’s animosity toward such people necessarily includes me, but that doesn’t mean I agree with Fischer. Bryan Fischer used a poor choice of words to express his disapproval of Romney’s appointment of Mr. Grenell, but neither his words nor the disapproval behind them are extreme. And neither do they reflect my opinion. Got it, David?

    Comment by Seane-Anna — April 21, 2012 @ 5:46 pm - April 21, 2012

  7. “Seane-Anna, it seemed to me that Dan was speaking of ‘extreme social conservatives,’ not social conservatives in general.” Rattlesnake, I understand your distinction but I don’t see it in Dan’s post. Dan wrote, “Seems extreme social conservatives oftentimes mimic leftists.” He didn’t write something like, “Seems EXTREMISTS AMONG social conservatives oftentimes mimic leftists.” See the difference? The latter sentence clearly makes a distinction between social conservatives who are extremists and those who are not; Dan’s sentence doesn’t and I don’t think it was intended to.

    Based on this post and others I’ve read, I firmly believe that Dan is a social leftist who thinks that “good” social conservatives, like “good” Christians, are those who keep the trappings of social conservatism or Christianity while believing the socially progressive view of homosexuality, marriage, and family. Social conservatives and Christian who adhere to the actual socially conservative view of homosexuality, marriage, and family are “extremists” in Dan’s socially liberal book. Yes, it’s Orwellian, but the Left usually is.

    Comment by Seane-Anna — April 21, 2012 @ 6:15 pm - April 21, 2012

  8. “It is a reality that one can be gay and still value marriage as necessary institution for our civilization.” SoCalRobert, do you mean traditional marriage or gay marriage? I don’t believe that gay marriage is a “necessary institution for our civilization”, that’s the socially conservative view.

    Comment by Seane-Anna — April 21, 2012 @ 6:19 pm - April 21, 2012

  9. Yes, Seane-Anna, Rattlesnake was right. Have added “some” to modify “extreme,” though I had thought by modifying “social conservatives” with “extreme”, I had already indicated that I wasn’t referencing the entire universe of social conservatives, just an extreme subset.

    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — April 21, 2012 @ 6:24 pm - April 21, 2012

  10. Yes, I hope Romney does appoint Bolton, I also hope he uses Thomas Sowell to save ALL of us financially because Obama has continued and worsened the trouble our country is in!!!!

    Comment by jann — April 21, 2012 @ 6:27 pm - April 21, 2012

  11. Seane-Anna you seem to contradict yourself; the implication of your words @2 appears to indicate tacit approval of Fischer’s remarks. But in post 6 you say that he used a poor choice of words and but you go on to defend him. But you say that is not your opinion. Got it.

    Comment by David in N.O. — April 21, 2012 @ 9:26 pm - April 21, 2012

  12. Seems some extreme social conservatives oftentimes mimic leftists.

    Bingo!

    In any group you can finally get down to the “my way or the highway” few who would cut their noses off to spite their faces.

    Goldwater’s “I would remind you that extremism in defense of liberty is no vice” bumper sticker quote always rankled me. Liberty in a representative democracy and liberty in a “perfect” libertarian world is hardly the same thing. The libertarian extremist is not the friend of representative democracy so much as he is espousing near anarchy. Therefore, I want to know the parameters of “liberty” before I buy into some extremist “give me liberty or give me death” call to arms.

    As an avowed social conservative who fervently believes in the soundness of the concept of representative democracy, I do not fear gays nor do I wish to prevent gays from being valued and recognized citizens. In my opinion, shunning gays per se from the public square is pure bigotry.

    Good on Romney for recognizing talent and appointing the man he thought was the best fit for the job. I suspect that their “partnership” involves a clear understanding between them that Romney may well hold different views concerning “gay marriage.” I would image that two, patriotic adults can handle a bit of difference of opinion in one or two areas of social pressure.

    My grandchildren need not worry about “identity” politics if the minority is equal to the job. I understand the minority wanting “their” guy to succeed and to be a “positive” representative of said minority. But, I would hope that neither the minority or anyone else would want the person to be given some sort of “affirmative action” advantage as a tribute to “social justice.”

    I will pray for those who would place this man’s sexual orientation ahead of his useful contribution to helping solve incredibly important problems in a world beset by deadly forces of hatred and aggression.

    Mark Twain wrote these words for Huck Finn’s father:

    “Oh, yes, this is a wonderful govment, wonderful. Why, looky here. There was a free nigger there from Ohio — a mulatter, most as white as a white man. He had the whitest shirt on you ever see, too, and the shiniest hat; and there ain’t a man in that town that’s got as fine clothes as what he had; and he had a gold watch and chain, and a silver-headed cane — the awfulest old gray-headed nabob in the State. And what do you think? They said he was a p’fessor in a college, and could talk all kinds of languages, and knowed everything. And that ain’t the wust. They said he could VOTE when he was at home. Well, that let me out. Thinks I, what is the country a-coming to? It was ‘lection day, and I was just about to go and vote myself if I warn’t too drunk to get there; but when they told me there was a State in this country where they’d let that nigger vote, I drawed out. I says I’ll never vote agin. Them’s the very words I said; they all heard me; and the country may rot for all me — I’ll never vote agin as long as I live. And to see the cool way of that nigger — why, he wouldn’t a give me the road if I hadn’t shoved him out o’ the way. I says to the people, why ain’t this nigger put up at auction and sold? — that’s what I want to know. And what do you reckon they said? Why, they said he couldn’t be sold till he’d been in the State six months, and he hadn’t been there that long yet. There, now — that’s a specimen. They call that a govment that can’t sell a free nigger till he’s been in the State six months. Here’s a govment that calls itself a govment, and lets on to be a govment, and thinks it is a govment, and yet’s got to set stock-still for six whole months before it can take a hold of a prowling, thieving, infernal, white-shirted free nigger, and –”

    Pure bigotry.

    Jesus wept.

    Comment by heliotrope — April 21, 2012 @ 9:29 pm - April 21, 2012

  13. So he’s qualified, and gay… who cares about the later to be honest?

    Comment by The_Livewire — April 21, 2012 @ 10:41 pm - April 21, 2012

  14. As a social conservative, I totally think it’s fair to call Bryan Fischer an “extreme” social conservative. That’s actually probably nicer language than what I would have chosen. I think that there are legitimate points to make questioning whether certain pro-GLBT measures are appropriate, and I think people of goodwill can oppose certain pro-GLBT measures I might disagree with. But I find the AFA rather embarrassing. It would be one think to pick, say, Perez Hilton as a spokesman on social issues, but picking a well-qualified person who happens to be gay to be a spokesman on issues that really have nothing to do with sexuality is certainly nothing to go Chicken Little over. This sort of stupidity is the sort of thing that makes me reluctant to call myself a “Christian conservative” even though I am both a Christian and a conservative. Sometimes I wonder if the AFA is maybe really a front group set up by the HRC to make social conservatives look stupid. I’m kidding, but still, I’ve got to wonder whose side the AFA is really on.

    Comment by chad — April 21, 2012 @ 11:36 pm - April 21, 2012

  15. Actually, I’m surprised that anyone, be it social conservative, subset social conservative, extreme social conservative, establishment republican, would be surprised or unexpectant that the “father of gay marriage” would appoint Richard Grenell to a post in his campaign.

    Comment by Richard Bell — April 21, 2012 @ 11:50 pm - April 21, 2012

  16. #8: Seane – my definition of social conservatism is to value responsibility, self-reliance, stability, loyalty, monogamy, duty to family and country… and a recognition that fiscal conservatism isn’t an option without social conservatism. Traditional marriage is, indeed, under a lot of pressure due to hookup culture, delayed adulthood, economic issues, demographics. – you name it. I just don’t think that the notion that some percentage of a small population wanting to marry causes the vast majority to no longer value marriage as an institution. If gays disappeared tomorrow, the problems in the traditional family wouldn’t go away.

    I do recognize that there are legitimate objections to same-sex marriage made in good faith. But the point here is that sexual orientation in this case is not relevant.

    Comment by SoCalRobert — April 22, 2012 @ 1:03 am - April 22, 2012

  17. I think that there are legitimate points to make questioning whether certain pro-GLBT measures are appropriate, and I think people of goodwill can oppose certain pro-GLBT measures I might disagree with.

    In a similar line of thought as this, not all gay people support all “gay rights” measures. I certainly don’t think many of them are appropriate, and I’m pretty sure there are other readers of this blog (who are gay) who don’t either. So, unless someone knows that Mr. Grenell supports them, it should not be assumed that he does (especially if his post has nothing to do with them, which it doesn’t). However, I suppose it is safe to assume that a random gay person probably supports most gay rights issues, but it is not a given (especially among gay Republicans/conservatives).

    Comment by Rattlesnake — April 22, 2012 @ 1:31 am - April 22, 2012

  18. “As most of you have heard by now, Romney tapped Grenell to be his campaign’s “national security and foreign policy spokesman”. Grenell, as Roger Simon reminds us, is “openly gay.” He appears to be well-qualified for the job, having been . . .”

    That sounds about right for the “Father of Homosexual Marriage” and Condoleeza Rice’s name being bantered about as VP. Romney will always be known as the “Father of Homosexual Marriage” unless his actions dictate otherwise. Looks like the professional homosexual/bisexual community is working behind the scenes after being bitchslapped by the European Court of Human Rights.

    From the Republican Party…………………..

    Republicans Quietly Retreat on Gay Marriage
    http://littlegreenfootballs.com/page/273209_Republicans_Quietly_Retreat_on
    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/74661.html

    Should we be surprised by the minority liberal Republican Party and the push for the “Father of Homosexual Marriage”?

    From the Obama administration………………..

    Obama says in the memo:
    “I declared before heads of state gathered at the United nations, ‘no country should deny people their rights because of who they love’ . . . Under my Administration, agencies engaged abroad have already begun taking action . . . as we in the United States bring our tools to bear to vigorously advance this goal.”

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/12/06/presidential-memorandum-international-initiatives-advance-human-rights-l

    Comment by rjligier — April 22, 2012 @ 1:35 am - April 22, 2012

  19. Fischer didn’t say the same about John Bolton who was already quite “out” about his support of gay Americans — and if Fischer scooted through his roster of Republican possibilities,he’d see that nearly all of them had high level,plugged-in,highly competent gay and lesbian staff.

    It’s Fischer who is the odd man out in American politics; probably irritated that Mitt Romney punched through Fischer’s incorrect political analysis of last year. One hopes that Romney stands strong — and stand by the competence and capacity of people like Grenell — and that we spend our time battling each other over issues that really matter to the nation.

    I have many differences with Romney,as well as Obama — but today,Romney gets a salute from me for hiring Grenell.

    Steve Clemons is Washington Editor at Large at The Atlantic.

    Comment by rusty — April 22, 2012 @ 8:15 am - April 22, 2012

  20. And please do tell me, rjligier, why you call Mitt Romney the “Father of Homosexual Marriage.” Gay activists in Massachusetts excoriated the then-Governor for his expressed opposition to the state’s Supreme Judicial Court mandating that the state recognize same-sex marriage.

    Do you harbor as much animus against the presumptive Republican nominee as do the Obama Democrats?

    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — April 22, 2012 @ 11:02 am - April 22, 2012

  21. To me, a social conservative, the only reason to point out a foreign policy man is homosexual is that it tells the Muslim countries to stop killing their citizens because they contribute to the society as a whole.

    Comment by Louise B — April 22, 2012 @ 11:05 am - April 22, 2012

  22. No, David, I admitted no such thing.

    Yeah you did. Anybody with an IQ higher than cow flop knows what Dan actually said.

    Comment by TGC — April 22, 2012 @ 1:14 pm - April 22, 2012

  23. Since Granett is gay, I am glad that he is openly gay. Too may times the gays are blackmailed in our country and overseas. Back during the 60s, the Soviet KGB arranged for one of their most handsome boys to spend a night with one of our young men from the American embrassy. It must have been a good night because the KGB had some interesting pictures which they had secertly taken, They informed the young American that if he did not corporate with them that they would show them to his ambassator. The young man laughed and said, “Give them to me. I will take them and show them to the ambassator myself”. He was very lucky to have an ambassator that he could trust.

    Comment by John R — April 22, 2012 @ 2:11 pm - April 22, 2012

  24. Helotrope…. My Friend… That is one of the absolute BEST post comments I ever read in the history of gay Patriot! Well done my friend. :-)

    Comment by sonicfrog — April 22, 2012 @ 7:25 pm - April 22, 2012

  25. Well, it’s a good thing he might have hired someone qualified, cause the comments Romney and his wife made in the last few days sure doesn’t make him qualified to be president.

    Comment by Kevin — April 22, 2012 @ 7:48 pm - April 22, 2012

  26. Just curious….is Marriott offering this at all their hotels or just this specific one?

    Comment by Kevin — April 22, 2012 @ 7:52 pm - April 22, 2012

  27. And, Kevin, what comments were those?

    And do they make Romney less qualified than the incumbent who regularly misrepresents his opponent’s position while engaging in name-calling (e.g., “Flat Earth Society” and “Social Darwininism”)?

    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — April 22, 2012 @ 7:55 pm - April 22, 2012

  28. I was going to say, in reference to comment #25, than all Romney needs to do is appear more qualified than Obama (a very easy task). But you beat me to it (sort of), Dan. I guess that hasn’t stopped me before, though.

    Comment by Rattlesnake — April 22, 2012 @ 8:24 pm - April 22, 2012

  29. “Yes, Seane-Anna, Rattlesnake was right. Have added “some” to modify “extreme,” though I had thought by modifying “social conservatives” with “extreme”, I had already indicated that I wasn’t referencing the entire universe of social conservatives, just an extreme subset.

    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt”

    Oh.

    Comment by Seane-Anna — April 22, 2012 @ 11:57 pm - April 22, 2012

  30. 27: The ones about how Romney is going “restore” women in society and Anne Romney lack of understanding about why women would want to make as much as men. You know, the comment that garnered her a tepid response from the gathering of her husband’s stunned female supporters?

    No problem with President Obama calling them those names…Republicans don’t want to admit that things are slowly getting better in this country.

    Finally, Mr. Romney (like about every other politician, regardless of affiliation) has engaged in name-calling, so get off your little high horse on that topic.

    Comment by Kevin — April 23, 2012 @ 12:12 am - April 23, 2012

  31. TGC @ 22, no I didn’t, smarta$$. Anyone with an IQ higher than cow flop knows that my comment was about Dan’s statement, not Bryan Fischer’s retort.

    Comment by Seane-Anna — April 23, 2012 @ 12:12 am - April 23, 2012

  32. I loved your post caption, because it completely sums up the fact that people should be viewed as individuals — capable or incapable, smart or dumb, good or bad, etc. — first. You’ve cleverly captured the core meaning in King’s “I have a dream speech.”

    Comment by Bookworm — April 23, 2012 @ 12:20 am - April 23, 2012

  33. “…things are slowly getting better in this country.” Even if that were true, Kevin, Obama’s “better” is still worse than anything we had under Bush. Unemployment is worse. The national debt is worse. Gas prices are worse. Only an irrational Obamabot would claim, and expect thinking people to believe, otherwise.

    Comment by Seane-Anna — April 23, 2012 @ 12:20 am - April 23, 2012

  34. Thanks much, Bookworm, such was my intent. :-)

    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — April 23, 2012 @ 12:47 am - April 23, 2012

  35. The ones about how Romney is going “restore” women in society and Anne Romney lack of understanding about why women would want to make as much as men. You know, the comment that garnered her a tepid response from the gathering of her husband’s stunned female supporters?

    Kevin, Ann Romney never made the comments to which you refer. It was a ludicrous Onion-esque satire piece, obviously so, that Kos and others picked up and ran with as if it were a real article.

    Joke’s on them, and you.

    Comment by FormerDeminTX — April 23, 2012 @ 1:11 am - April 23, 2012

  36. Why is anyone even talking about women’s place in society? What the heck does that have to do with anything? (Note: My first question was rhetorical; I know exactly why people are talking about it.)

    Comment by Rattlesnake — April 23, 2012 @ 4:52 am - April 23, 2012

  37. “FROM THE COMMENTS: Louise B offers a good case for pointing out that Mr. Grenell is gay: “To me, a social conservative, the only reason to point out a foreign policy man is homosexual is that it tells the Muslim countries to stop killing their citizens because they contribute to the society as a whole.”

    ANOTHER FROM THE COMMENTS: Bookworm love my “post caption, because it completely sums up the fact that people should be viewed as individuals — capable or incapable, smart or dumb, good or bad, etc. — first. You’ve cleverly captured the core meaning in King’s ‘I have a dream speech.”” Aw shucks, Thanks.”

    Dan, your passive-aggression is overwhelming. You would no more select a social conservative to serve with you than any other social liberal when evaluating an individual solely on merit.

    Comment by rjligier — April 23, 2012 @ 9:49 am - April 23, 2012

  38. Kevin wasn’t the only idiot who fell for the phony Ann Romney story; Charles “Ponytail” Johnson did too:

    http://diaryofdaedalus.com/2012/04/23/the-phony-ann-romney-story-that-charles-fell-for/

    Comment by V the K — April 23, 2012 @ 10:05 am - April 23, 2012

  39. Seane Anna- as per comment #33

    The term “cow flop” has been used in threads on the blog a number of times.
    Why is it when I read you comment #33 {Even if that were true, Kevin, Obama’s “better” is still worse than anything we had under Bush. Unemployment is worse. The national debt is worse. Gas prices are worse. Only an irrational Obamabot would claim, and expect thinking people to believe, otherwise.} “Cow flop” describes your post exactly. Analogy= At some point in time you manage to qualify for an American Express card with an unlimited balance. You take the card and start charging with it with out any thought as to how your going to pay for it. This goes on month after month with out ceasing until you have a problem of epic per-portions. This insane lack of personal regulation is now effecting all of the major points in your life. You are going to lose your home(s) cars, investments and every asset you have. Someone now is appointed to get your personal economy restored, but the damage that has been done is immense. It’s worse than many have ever seen. The person appointed to do the work is doing everything that can be done, but persons close to you continue to throw wrenches in the gears of effort slowing his results down. Despite their best effort to obstruct progress, he makes continues to make progress but is is slow. Someone close to you approaches you and says, “gosh this is terrible. Things sure were a lot better when you were handling your own affairs” Gee Sean Anna of course they were. You were buying 2 wars you never budgeted for, you bought a trillion dollar prescription drug deal for all of your elderly friends un budgeted, you supplemented your high roller friends income tax for them and you never vetoed a single purchase your friends wanted you to buy.
    This behavior resulted in one catastrophe after another. Now your blaming the guy that is trying to clean up the mess. Yes things were allot better when you were running your own affairs, they were great. But that was before the bill for this mess was due. Just sayin

    Comment by John S — April 23, 2012 @ 11:38 am - April 23, 2012

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

**Note: Your first comment is held for moderation. Avoid profanity, avoid personal attacks on fellow commenters, and avoid complaining about personal attacks (even on you). Feel free to disagree with anyone, but focus on their ideas; give us the information that you think they overlooked.**


Live preview of comment

Close this window.

0.213 Powered by Wordpress