GayPatriot

Comments

RSS feed for comments on this post.

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://www.gaypatriot.net/2012/05/01/richard-grenell-steps-down-from-romney-campaign/trackback/

  1. I’m not sure the GOP deserves to win this election after this disgrace. ..bruce..

    Comment by bfwebster — May 1, 2012 @ 8:19 pm - May 1, 2012

  2. Well, given that GOP defeat means 4 more years of Obama. . . America can’t afford for Republicans to lose.

    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — May 1, 2012 @ 8:23 pm - May 1, 2012

  3. OK. I read the link to the Family Research council and I found this:

    Grenell, who has been very open about his homosexual lifestyle, publicly condemned the Bush administration (shortly after leaving it) for opposing a U.N. resolution urging the full acceptance of homosexuality.

    Politics ain’t beanball.

    Grenell crossed the line when he put his personal agenda out front after sublimating it while he served in the Bush administration.

    Either he serves one “master” or he doesn’t. Every agenda minority has to gauge and decide when to sublimate his minority influence. Just because your mentor is cool with you does not mean that influential forces have been allayed.

    “Mills of the Gods, grind exceedingly slow, but grind exceedingly fine.” (Attributed to Euripides) Translation: When you fail, examine your failure.

    Comment by heliotrope — May 1, 2012 @ 8:26 pm - May 1, 2012

  4. On first blush, letting Grenell resign strikes me as a really really dumb decision by the Romney team. Acceptance of gays among the young is so strong that bigotry against gays will soon mean political suicide (if it doesn’t already).

    If Romney doesn’t want to seem like a pushover, he needs to appoint another openly gay person soon. Like tomorrow.

    This election needs to be about the economy, not social issues. Any social conservatives who think otherwise (especially the minority who are anti-gay bigots) need to be steamrollered in a New York minute.

    Comment by Straight Dave — May 1, 2012 @ 8:29 pm - May 1, 2012

  5. That people who are supposedly “conservatives” would condemn Romney for hiring a gay man who is adequately qualified for his position is confusing to me. Am I missing something (about their opposition)? It seems like plain bigotry to me. And it is diametrically opposed to one of my core beliefs, which is judging people as individuals. So, who is the real conservative here? Me (and other people who share my beliefs) or them? It seems to me that their brand of social conservatism is really just leftism.

    Comment by Rattlesnake — May 1, 2012 @ 8:31 pm - May 1, 2012

  6. Either he serves one “master” or he doesn’t. Every agenda minority has to gauge and decide when to sublimate his minority influence.

    I still don’t see what one thing (his homosexuality) as to do with the other (his position as Foreign Policy Spokesman). Unless he somehow has influence over things relating to homosexuality given his position, which would be absurd.

    Comment by Rattlesnake — May 1, 2012 @ 8:34 pm - May 1, 2012

  7. If Romney doesn’t want to seem like a pushover, he needs to appoint another openly gay person soon. Like tomorrow.

    I disagree; that would necessitate hiring someone because of their sexual orientation, which would likely be irrelevant to whichever position they would hired for. It would be sending the wrong message, in my opinion.

    Comment by Rattlesnake — May 1, 2012 @ 8:36 pm - May 1, 2012

  8. Aside from one or two people at NRO, I guess I missed the massive social conservative outrage over Grennell. Who else was piling on?

    Comment by V the K — May 1, 2012 @ 8:40 pm - May 1, 2012

  9. I’m a social conservative and I simply do not care about anyone’s sex life but I do prefer everyone including heterosexuals to keep their sex life to themselves. Don’t like blatant public displays by anyone. Nothing more uncomfortable than being in a restuarant and teens in the next booth all over each other in a PDA! That being said, I am not happy that Grennel resigned. National Security has nothing to do with sex (with the possible exception of the secret service, LOL) so I do not care about his other beliefs. They are irrelevant, period.

    Comment by TexasMom2012 — May 1, 2012 @ 8:51 pm - May 1, 2012

  10. After reading this, I am thinking perhaps it is a good thing he resigned.

    Comment by Rattlesnake — May 1, 2012 @ 8:57 pm - May 1, 2012

  11. Since we don’t know what really happened to make Grenell resign I can only say I’m relieved he made the decision now and not in, October. As a social conservative who doesn’t support “gay marriage” and who isn’t an enthusiastic Romey supporter, I was perfectly fine with Grenell in the position he got because it seemed he was qualified for the post.

    Comment by Richard Bell — May 1, 2012 @ 9:07 pm - May 1, 2012

  12. Looks like there were a few others besides Matt Frank who had their panties in a wad, but I still have the feeling the ‘outrage’ part is somewhat melodramatic. Mittens, after all, didn’t ask him to resign, he chose to.

    Comment by V the K — May 1, 2012 @ 9:08 pm - May 1, 2012

  13. …as long as that article (that I linked to) is accurate. I shouldn’t assume that it necessarily is. And this is the part that prompted my comment:

    it’s a little disconcerting to see a man just hired by the Romney campaign write passionately about how “gays are going to win support for their political issues.” Are there really “gay political issues,” and does Richard Grenell believe they are the most important reason he is in politics — as certainly appears to be the case for a man who calls himself an “activist”?

    I’ve also heard he has said unfortunate things on Twitter.

    However, if he is highly qualified for his job, I guess that doesn’t matter.

    Comment by Rattlesnake — May 1, 2012 @ 9:09 pm - May 1, 2012

  14. Looks like there were a few others besides Matt Frank who had their panties in a wad

    It’s funny that I didn’t come to that conclusion.

    Comment by Rattlesnake — May 1, 2012 @ 9:12 pm - May 1, 2012

  15. I blogged about how I was ok with Grenell and tonight blogged my disappointment about Grenell stepping down. I am a social conservative but I don’t see this as a win … at all.

    Comment by Randy — May 1, 2012 @ 9:19 pm - May 1, 2012

  16. Please do not let a vocal minority of the conservative movement dissuade other conservative Americans who happen to be Gay from joining in the battle to save our country for all of US.

    As a Christian, business owner who is fiscally conservative and socially moderate please stand strong with the majority of other conservative Americans who welcome you to join us in unity to save our country before it is too late.

    While I am sadden that Richard stepped down, let’s celebrate his effort to join in for the battle for the overwhelmingly majority of things that we agree on and unite us. There is no perfect world, country, party, group or person. Let’s get over it and focus on the vast majority of things that we agree on and unite us.

    Let’s take our country back for ALL of US.

    Chop

    Comment by Chop — May 1, 2012 @ 10:20 pm - May 1, 2012

  17. I’m a little bit disappointed that the whole story was not told in this blog post.

    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.

    According to this article in the National Review, Grinell had an “unhinged devotion” to gay marriage.

    I don’t care that he is gay, but I DO care if he uses his position to advance a social agenda. And I DO care if he has a history of blatant sexism when we are trying to win the female vote.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/297159/all-means-lets-worry-about-richard-grenell-kevin-d-williamson

    Comment by Kyle Raccio — May 1, 2012 @ 10:37 pm - May 1, 2012

  18. Also, keep in mind that Santorum had an openly gay staffer for years, and not a single conservative trashed him for it.

    In 2005, liberals “outed” Robert Traynham (Santorum’s gay staffer).

    Santorum not only kept him on his team, but issued a statement of public support:

    http://204.2.109.187/gcn_429/topsantorumaide.html

    “He has my full support and confidence as well as my prayers as he navigates this rude and mean spirited invasion of his personal life.”

    Comment by Kyle Raccio — May 1, 2012 @ 10:39 pm - May 1, 2012

  19. I want to get clarification. Who was making his orientation the issue?

    Comment by gwylie — May 1, 2012 @ 11:15 pm - May 1, 2012

  20. Seems like socons were able to bully Grenell into resigning from Romney’s team. . . More to come

    But wait, lets see who comes up first with ‘they weren’t being mean’

    Comment by rusty — May 1, 2012 @ 5:41 pm – May 1, 2012

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/exclusive-richard-grenell-hounded-from-romney-campaign-by-anti-gay-conservatives/2012/05/01/gIQAccGcuT_blog.html

    Ms J Rubins

    Comment by rusty — May 1, 2012 @ 5:45 pm – May 1, 2012

    And again, Rusty dodges the issue of Savage.

    As to his last link.
    per Ace.

    Commenters point out, correctly, that we actually have no evidence of an “uproar” over Grenell.

    We don’t know why he chose to resign; not exactly. Romney wasn’t using him, putting him out there, and perhaps that was over concerns about how he’d be received.

    Apart from the two pieces Rubin links to, we don’t know of any “social conservative uproar.”

    Honestly, I never heard of such an uproar. Can an uproar occur in quiet?

    Comment by The_Livewire — May 1, 2012 @ 6:05 pm – May 1, 2012

    Chris Barron on Grenell

    It’s a sad day in America when the best and brightest are unable to do their jobs because a few on the fringe are fascinated with their personal lives. It seems that Bryan Fischer, Tony Perkins and their crowd are more interested in making sure that gay people can’t work in this country than having the best people work to keep our country safe. It is a great loss for the Romney campaign and for our country, and a truly sad commentary on the depths that the anti-gay for pay industry in this country will go to push their bigoted agenda. For these people, not even national security trumps their anti-gay agenda

    Comment by rusty — May 1, 2012 @ 6:07 pm – May 1, 2012

    From National Journal

    “A source close to the Romney campaign denied that Grenell resigned because of complaints about his sexual orientation. Rather, the source said, Grenell had become a story himself, which a spokesman should never do.”

    It’s ok Rusty, don’t let me get in the way of your narrative.

    Comment by The_Livewire — May 1, 2012 @ 6:13 pm – May 1, 2012

    Yes LW I am secretly writing for both Rubin and Barron.s Yo u didn’t know that. It’

    Comment by rusty — May 1, 2012 @ 6:32 pm – May 1, 2012

    LW if you take the time you wil note similar writing styles when you compare Rubin, Barron and myself. Of course, this is all done with the ‘hands on hips’ style that is signature of both Rubin and Chris, but upon closer inspection, you will also see some of that suburb ghostwriting in those quips Grenell tweeted about Gingrich and Callista. But act fast before they get completely scrubbed.

    Comment by rusty — May 1, 2012 @ 6:38 pm – May 1, 2012

    Superb. Not suburb

    Comment by rusty — May 1, 2012 @ 6:39 pm – May 1, 2012

    Sorry LW, didn’t see your comments at 31. Hmm. Dodging Savage, clearly not. Just pointing out that there is a link between some Socons and there obsessive attacks on the MOs (not mormons – that will come later)

    Bullies are bullies and they come in all sizes. And some use the bible.

    Comment by rusty — May 1, 2012 @ 6:45 pm – May 1, 2012

    Comment by rusty — May 1, 2012 @ 11:18 pm - May 1, 2012

  21. Seems like socons were able to bully Grenell into resigning from Romney’s team.

    Keep in mind that there were only a few social conservatives (like Bryan Fischer) that “bullied” Grenell (and I don’t think that is the right word). (Also, those are the only people to whom I refer in my comment #5, in case that wasn’t clear).

    Comment by Rattlesnake — May 1, 2012 @ 11:25 pm - May 1, 2012

  22. You’re giving too much credit to social conservatives when you say, “Just because you hire a gay man for a job doesn’t mean you support the agenda of the left-wing gay groups.” These people hate one thing: gays. Their politics are immaterial. It’s their sexuality that’s the problem.

    Also, you’re delusional if you think the media had anything to do with this. The religious right is who made a big stink out of this. Of course the media is going to report on this, it’s news. All the blame for the resignation falls on the social conservatives — not just the leaders and operatives, but the rank and file who follow them.

    Comment by giantslor — May 2, 2012 @ 12:59 am - May 2, 2012

  23. On present info, Grenell could be a gay conservative who tweaks the Gay Left. From the NRO link:

    Jonathan Capehart, blogging at the Washington Post, reports that when he (Capehart, that is) was invited last month to dine at the White House, Grenell pestered him with tweets about whether he would upbraid the president over his failure (so far) to advocate the cause of same-sex marriage. In one of his tweets, Grenell said: “im an activist looking to make sure you and i get equal protection from the liberal media. i out hypocrites.” Later he said to Capehart, “you didn’t stand up to power but sipped wine instead.”

    One could choose to read that as Grenell being an unhinged gay marriage activist, but a second interpretation is possible. Grenell might have been ironic. Even in Capeheart’s account, Grenell’s focus was on pointing out Capeheart’s hypocrisy. Grenell could easily have been… one of the gay conservatives on this blog, who demand consistency from the Gay Left with a similar sense of hopeless irony.

    I’m not saying I think that’s what it was, for sure. I’m saying we still need more info. But if Grenell is a gay conservative (who engages in Theater of the Absurd demands for left-wing consistency), then yes: it is possible that he resigned on his own steam, realizing that he “had become a story himself, which a spokesman should never do.”

    And if Grenell is instead a committed gay marriage activist, then again, it is possible that he resigned on his own steam, realizing that he might “become a story himself, which a spokesman should never do.”

    Either way, it reflects well on both Grenell (his sense of propriety and fair play) and on the Romney campaign (no real homophobia there).

    A third possibility is, of course, that the Romney campaign is homophobic or is pandering to some anti-gay people. But I don’t take that as a foregone conclusion, or even as the most likely conclusion; not even if Jennifer Rubin reports it that way. Her account has already been contradicted on its facts.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 2, 2012 @ 2:38 am - May 2, 2012

  24. Rubin’s account suggested that the Romney campaign had kept Grenell “under wraps”. But via HotAir, ABC News provides this update:

    a source familiar with Grenell’s 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 campaign’s 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 wasn’t under wraps; he wasn’t a spokesperson yet,” according to the individual with knowledge of Grenell’s hiring and resignation. “If he had wanted to, he would be a spokesman right now.”

    I don’t automatically believe that… just as, again, I don’t automatically believe Rubin’s account, either.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 2, 2012 @ 2:59 am - May 2, 2012

  25. [...] Related thoughts from Daniel Blatt at Gay Patriot. [...]

    Pingback by Instapundit » Blog Archive » BYRON YORK: The Curious Resignation of Richard Grenell. Related thoughts from Daniel Blatt at Ga… — May 2, 2012 @ 8:22 am - May 2, 2012

  26. Careful ILC, you’re going to get facts in there. It will confuse people like Rusty who have their minds made up.

    Comment by The Livewire — May 2, 2012 @ 8:27 am - May 2, 2012

  27. your right LW, I will often defer to ILC on his comments. He is usually fair, balanced and non-inflamatory in his responses. As far as my time here at GP over the last 4 years, ILC has been a great resource and mentor.

    Comment by rusty — May 2, 2012 @ 8:42 am - May 2, 2012

  28. “Please remember that Grenell had to delete 800 (yes 800) tweets that trashed female conservative women”

    PC Dictate requires we stand by Grenell because he is Gay and blame those icky women because they are not.

    Yeah Grenell is a great man because with the best of the Bill Maher’s he can trash Conservative women during a time when Obama is winning the WAR ON WOMEN campaign.

    Just when Romney is LOSING THE FEMALE VOTE this Grenell guy has to come out screaming about how he is resigning a job he yet hasn’t begun becasue he wants to attack SoCon.

    SO now Romney is at great risk of losing both the female vote and the SoCOn vote becasue the Tent is only conerned about one thing-gay marriage.

    Dan Savage must be laughing his political ass happy.

    Comment by Susan — May 2, 2012 @ 9:08 am - May 2, 2012

  29. To chalk this up to social conservatism generally is probably a mistake, it’s the work of a few activists and this brief blip won’t register nationally, other than for some hyper politically aware people. As a person who is socially conservative in most aspects I found this campaign revolting; it looked a lot like the campaign directed at Prop 8 supporters attempting to get them fired or driven out of business. We may have profound and unsettled disagreements on some important issues, but we have a lot more in common. Attacking each other with malice diminishes all of us and it has a segregating effect. Gays and gay tolerant/friendly conservatives will look at what happened to Grenell and will be discouraged from speaking out on this issue, and a deeper wedge will be driven between right leaning gays and their natural political home among others on the right/libertarian right. Plus it’s one more issue that we won’t be allowed to talk about if we want to have a career in politics or public policy. Just a shameful thing.

    Comment by Joe Blow — May 2, 2012 @ 9:09 am - May 2, 2012

  30. This story has a surreal quality. Jenn Rubin has always had an ax to grind with social conservatives, and I think her own confirmation bias was on full display here. Unfortunately, she served up a narrative that hurts Republicans as badly as anything the usual suspects said — and one that doesn’t really seem to fit the particulars of this story terribly well.

    The Romney team obviously had no problem with the fact that Grenell was openly gay when they hired him, and I see no reason not to believe they really did encourage him to stay on, despite some some pretty unsurprising objections raised in certain quarters.

    It’s hard to credit the idea that they were “keeping him under wraps,” when Grenell hadn’t even showed up at Romney HQ yet, but I do think it’s entirely possible that he was told that he was going to have to put his gay activism on a back burner while he was serving as a Romney’s foreign policy spokesman. I don’t think that’s an unreasonable condition in an ongoing campaign, when the single most important thing a candidate has to do is stay on message. Romney’s primary focus may be the economy, but foreign policy is going to be important in this election, and he can’t afford a spokesman who is a lightning rod for controversy on other unrelated issues. I think that would be true in the case of any political activist, regardless of the personal cause at issue.

    I could be wrong, but it looks to me like there is a lot of unfortunate knee-jerking in the reaction to this story on both left and right.

    Comment by JM Hanes — May 2, 2012 @ 9:45 am - May 2, 2012

  31. Do we or do we not have the right to pursue our own personal happiness?

    Does or does not “happiness” imply at a minimum the ability to arrange the major milestones of your life, such as choice of life partner, to your own satisfaction?

    Do we or do we not have freedom of association? Is that or is that not a broader concept than marriage? Is not marriage a form of association?

    Is sex between like-gendered persons illegal?

    Add the answers to those questions up, and I do not comprehend why conservatives do not immediately endorse “gay marriage” as wholly in keeping with our constitutional framework and set about at once changing those related statutes that archaically refer to man/woman.

    That is especially true–from the perspective of political cunning–at a time when Progressives have instrumentalized race, gender and sexual orientation. Is it just my perception, or are they holding gays in a status similar to how wealthy Arab states conspire to keep Palestinians on refugee camps in order to have a distressful situation to point to? My Progressive friends want to proceed through ballots and initiatives that they presume they will lose. Are they fighting for gay rights or using gays as bait for Republican bashing?

    Marriage is not basically a legal institution. We inherit all that claptrap from the Church of England. But other English settlers who got here first, the presumably more conservative Puritans, thought it an earthly institution and accordingly required simple civil ceremonies for marriage. And if a given marriage was not producing “harmony,” it was dissolved at the say-so of a village elder. If religious folk as devout and conservative as the Puritans can be casual about marriage and see it as having nothing to do with God’s law, that settles that it is not a conservative sacrament.

    I suggest we conservatives seize the initiative right now and quit wasting conservative talent as Grenell promised to be.

    Comment by Charles Tips — May 2, 2012 @ 9:46 am - May 2, 2012

  32. I have strong opinions about some things, I know a great deal about them, I believe I am right and I like to speak my mind. I also don’t think I’d be a good presidential spokesman.

    Is it possible that the same could be said about Grenell?

    Comment by Wellington — May 2, 2012 @ 9:55 am - May 2, 2012

  33. Curious resignation indeed. He had to answer to his own possible hypocrisy. He had no answer so he found a willing columnist to deflect the blame. This is so wrong. Live by gay politics, die by gay politics.

    http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/curious-resignation-richard-grenell/515226

    “If Grenell could be so critical of Capehart, who does not work for the administration, for failing to hold Obama’s opposition to gay marriage against him, then why did Grenell accept a position with Romney, who has expressed his own opposition to gay marriage in far stronger terms than Obama? (When Grenell took the job, Capehart shot back that Grenell had “chosen power over principle on marriage equality.”) The answer isn’t clear, but the circumstances of Grenell’s early departure from Team Romney and his own strongly-expressed opinions suggest that gay politics, perhaps not just the opinions of social conservatives, might have played some role in the whole affair. But if Romney’s aides are to be believed, it wasn’t on their end.”

    Comment by anon23532 — May 2, 2012 @ 10:30 am - May 2, 2012

  34. “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?”

    Well, it’s not like that’s never happened… I’m thinking of Andrew Sullivan’s slow shift from W. to Kerry: pretty much all about gay marriage.

    Comment by Doug — May 2, 2012 @ 10:42 am - May 2, 2012

  35. “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?”

    Didn’t this website announce an internal poll showing approx 22 of 24 writers were voting for John Kerry against Bush over the same sex marriage issue?

    [No, we didn't. Both Bruce and I voted for W and supported him during the 2004 campaign, even criticized Log Cabin that year for its non-endorsement. --Dan.]

    Maybe I have the websites switched, but it was one of the maybe two gay conservative websites operating and the website was very defensive about the issue. They claimed that just because the vast majority of its writers were pulling the Kerry lever was no reason to call it a “gays for gay marriage” website as I suggested.

    Comment by Mike Jackson — May 2, 2012 @ 11:26 am - May 2, 2012

  36. As a teenager, I stuffed envelopes for David Treen, the first Republican governor in Louisiana since reconstruction. I was a baptized and confirmed Catholic educated mostly by pre-Vatican-II Jesuits. I was also gay but not practicing because of my religion. Living in the South and being gay offered me little opportunity. So, I became a mathematician and an engineer. I was at the top mathematics undergrad at my University. The Reagan administration used lie detector tests to screen out gay applicants from government jobs. So, I got a doctorate, and during my post doctorates I did research at an institute founded by refugee scientists from the Third Reich who worked on the Manhattan project. One of them even worked on the Manhattan Project as a teenager. I was at the top of my field and capable of giving a great deal to my country, but bigotry had prevented me from working where I could do the most good.

    Everything the Republicans have done to gay people since 1980 has affected gay people, celibate or not, negatively.

    Lately, in Louisiana, the local Republicans have specifically made discrimination and bullying against perceived gays and lesbians in school legal.
    With the support of the Catholic bishops and the Baptists, the local Republican party has specifically legalized bullying against gay students and discrimination against gay students in public schools. Given the rash of suicides among gay students due to bullying this shows a reckless indifference to human life. Not only can religious extremists target gay students (celibate or not) but going to the school to complain will only get these students expelled.

    The Republican party in Louisiana has forcibly filled a building with children, nailed the doors and windows shut, and set it on fire. The analogy to the Shoah is deliberate.

    Comment by Frank — May 2, 2012 @ 11:59 am - May 2, 2012

  37. [...] Shocker! SoCons Hound Gay Advisor Out of Job! Posted on May 2, 2012 9:10 am by Bill Quick GayPatriot » Richard Grenell steps down from Romney campaign Grenell’s sexual orientation is irrelevant to his ability to serve as Romney’s foreign policy [...]

    Pingback by Bigot Watch: Shocker! SoCons Hound Gay Advisor Out of Job! | Daily Pundit — May 2, 2012 @ 12:10 pm - May 2, 2012

  38. Mr. Blatt

    Are you pleased to have written a post that will be used as a basis on which to promote a false “Romney is anti-homosexual” meme?

    Next time, try learning a little something about an issue before you post on it.

    Comment by SVT — May 2, 2012 @ 12:15 pm - May 2, 2012

  39. It is unfortunate that certain social conservatives made much of Grenell’s sexuality.

    How much is “much”? Until he resigned I’d never heard of this guy. I think I’m at least somewhat socially conservative and I would have thought that if there was a big enough stink about it to make anything happen, I would have heard of him before now.

    If I take him at his word that the campaign held him back, that’s on Romney. It’s easy for the campaign to say they tried to talk him into staying, now that he’s gone. I guess Obma’s campaign bus isn’t the only one whose wheels go THUMP THUMP THUMP.

    Comment by McGehee — May 2, 2012 @ 1:02 pm - May 2, 2012

  40. This strikes me as an unforced error and, as such, a very unfortunate occurrence.

    Comment by njoriole — May 2, 2012 @ 4:13 pm - May 2, 2012

  41. Observing the facts of this situation as they become known will be most interesting. But the fact that the presumptive Republican nominee for President of the US hired an openly gay man, who is in an open relationship with another man, to such a public and significant postion is astounding (and wonderful) to me. Whatever happens after that cannot change the importance of this.

    Comment by JimG — May 2, 2012 @ 4:39 pm - May 2, 2012

  42. Lately, in Louisiana, the local Republicans have specifically made discrimination and bullying against perceived gays and lesbians in school legal.

    With the support of the Catholic bishops and the Baptists, the local Republican party has specifically legalized bullying against gay students and discrimination against gay students in public schools. Given the rash of suicides among gay students due to bullying this shows a reckless indifference to human life. Not only can religious extremists target gay students (celibate or not) but going to the school to complain will only get these students expelled.

    Comment by Frank — May 2, 2012 @ 11:59 am – May 2, 2012

    That’s a lovely story, Frank.

    Meanwhile, in the real world, you and your fellow gay-sex liberals have pushed the HIV rate among children and teenagers to twice that of sub-Saharan Africa.

    Instead of imaginary bullying charges that allow you to play out your revenge fantasies against the Catholic Church, why not speak out against your fellow promiscuous gays like Dan Savage who are ACTUALLY sickening and killing teenagers?

    Or was the point here never the welfare of teens in the first place, but just a chance for you to figuratively (and perhaps literally) burn down churches and kill priests?

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 2, 2012 @ 4:43 pm - May 2, 2012

  43. It’s hard for a progressive supporter of gay rights to read the comments here. To be gay and conservative, to be black and conservative, to be poor and conservative, is a contradiction in terms.

    When you know that you’re despised simply for whom you choose to love, regardless of how “right” your politics are must be awfully humiliating and disappointing. And it must be ever-so-much more painful when you know in your heart how many of those who publicly disown you are themselves closeted or deeply conflicted about the terror lucking within their psyches surrounding sexuality.

    You have my sympathies, but I can’t help but ask: how can you continue to hold the same politics as those who find you revolting?

    Comment by Michael Paul Goldenberg — May 2, 2012 @ 5:48 pm - May 2, 2012

  44. As far as “REAL “conservatives are concerned gays are one law away from wedding their dogs.To be a gay conservative is the equivalant of a black belonging to the KKK.

    Comment by frog in a pot — May 2, 2012 @ 5:56 pm - May 2, 2012

  45. It’s hard for a progressive supporter of gay rights to read the comments here. To be gay and conservative, to be black and conservative, to be poor and conservative, is a contradiction in terms.

    I can imagine. When your worldview requires that people think, act, and believe a certain way because of their skin color or sexual orientation, to see people doing differently strikes at the very pillar of your own identity.

    When you know that you’re despised simply for whom you choose to love, regardless of how “right” your politics are must be awfully humiliating and disappointing.

    I suppose you are an expert in that regard, Michael, given how your Obama Party discriminates against gays in employment, sexually harasses gays, and supports bans on the gay marriages that you claim to want.

    You have my sympathies

    Comment by Michael Paul Goldenberg — May 2, 2012 @ 5:48 pm – May 2, 2012

    Actually, no we don’t; what we have is your hatred, jealousy, and spite directed at those of us who are making their life off the plantation hidden behind a threadbare smokescreen of “sympathy”.

    Again, it’s understandable. Your claim to be “rational” vanishes when you insist black and gay people are mentally incapable of thinking or agreeing with anything other than the Obama Party. You much prefer it when gays and lesbians and black people are helpless slaves, knowing that they need whitey to give them handouts and protect them from all those mean, nasty people who would judge them by who they are and their behavior rather than lowering expectations.

    Comment by North Dallas thirty — May 2, 2012 @ 6:34 pm - May 2, 2012

  46. To be gay and conservative, to be black and conservative, to be poor and conservative, is a contradiction in terms.

    Nice bumper sticker, but no cigar.

    Please take as much time and space as you like to make your case that any one of your named status groups (poor, black, gay) can not be conservative by virtue of being oxymora.

    When you know that you’re despised simply for whom you choose to love, regardless of how “right” your politics are must be awfully humiliating and disappointing.

    Please help me here. Please. You categorically state that (all) conservatives despise(all) gays.

    We know that there is, reportedly, a growing majority of voters who are conservative. Why do we not see Occupy Wall Street size numbers of deranged rednecks out whipping, dragging, mutilating, and hanging gays, blacks and the poor? God help the poor black gay.

    Your language betrays you as a frenetic, victim-consumed, overwrought gay who has wigged out.

    Lower your shrieks and screams, climb down off the table and make a balanced charge that can be discussed in a calm, collected manner.

    Comment by heliotrope — May 2, 2012 @ 6:39 pm - May 2, 2012

  47. .To be a gay conservative is the equivalant of a black belonging to the KKK.

    Woot! Now, all I need is a reference to “magic invisible sky god” and I win Stupid Leftist Cliche Bingo!

    Comment by V the K — May 2, 2012 @ 6:42 pm - May 2, 2012

  48. As far as “REAL “conservatives are concerned gays are one law away from wedding their dogs.To be a gay conservative is the equivalant of a black belonging to the KKK.

    Please see my comment above.

    How is it normal for you to satisfy your sexual orientation with the same sex, but not a dead person of the same sex?

    I am curious as to how I, as a straight conservative, am supposed to separate you from the 26 year old homosexual who trolls for high school boys from the homosexual who follows “protocols.”

    Obviously, you have a “twitch” that is outside of the norm. That is a given. But why is your “twitch” superior to other variants from the norm in sexual drive?

    Got an answer? Bring it on. But leave the KKK back with the Democrats who founded and promoted the friggin” band of bigots.

    Comment by heliotrope — May 2, 2012 @ 6:45 pm - May 2, 2012

  49. NDT and VtheK,

    Is it my imagination or is there a heavy stink of desperation descending on these threads?

    Comment by heliotrope — May 2, 2012 @ 6:49 pm - May 2, 2012

  50. I see Andy Sullivan is following in Dan Savage’s footsteps and calling gay conservatives “faggots”.

    http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2012/05/the-lonely-plight-of-the-gay-republican.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=Cheat%20Sheet&utm_campaign=cheatsheet_afternoon&cid=newsletter%3Bemail%3Bcheatsheet_afternoon

    How 1995.

    What a jackass.

    Comment by Bruce (GayPatriot) — May 2, 2012 @ 6:52 pm - May 2, 2012

  51. I’m giving the Romney campaign a pass on this one, unless I hear more damning details.

    Grenell was not scheduled to start working for the campaign until May 1. But he resigned on April 30th. He was not kept under wraps; he wasn’t even officially working for the campaign.

    Grenell is also an outspoken proponent of gay marriage who has harshly criticized Obama for not supporting gay marriage enough. Romney is even more opposed to gay marriage than Obama is. Many conservatives are. I am, and I’m gay. Perhaps the truth is that Grenell knew he would have to be even harsher towards his own President, and he did not want to take that path while being employed by him for different purposes (foreign policy advising).

    Comment by mike devx — May 2, 2012 @ 7:13 pm - May 2, 2012

  52. All I see are self-loathers who are desperate to be called “legitimate”. Really quite sad you are so willing to crawl and be spat on by the folks you want acceptance from. Tragic really.

    I don’t wish you well at all. Perhaps a stop at Marcus’ pray-the-gay-away federally funded shop of horrors would do you well?

    Comment by Al in SoCal — May 2, 2012 @ 7:19 pm - May 2, 2012

  53. Let’s set gay rights back to the ’50′s. They are so sure Obama will repeal DOMA, but do you really believe he wants gay marriage to be his legacy? If passed, gay marriage will impact the country for decades — in other words — a legal mess.

    Comment by Greg — May 2, 2012 @ 7:51 pm - May 2, 2012

  54. It’s hard for a progressive supporter of gay rights to read the comments here. To be gay and conservative, to be black and conservative, to be poor and conservative, is a contradiction in terms.

    Tell me, please, what on earth one’s sexual orientation (or skin colour) has to do with anything. It has nothing to do with taxes, regulations, national defense, et cetera. It has barely anything to do with most cultural issues. You are a bigot because you view gay people as nothing but gay, and you view black people as nothing but black. It is that simple. Furthermore, you inaccurately believe Christians and conservatives are homophobes. You progressives are always calling conservatives “simple” because they view things in “black and white,” which is hilarious given what you think of blacks, gays, Christians, and conservatives (and your positions seem to be quite common among progressives). You simple, narrow-minded, bigoted progressives have given me much entertainment, so, for that, I thank you from my ice cold, right-wing, fascist, f*ggot, Jewish Nazi, black KKK heart.

    Comment by Rattlesnake — May 2, 2012 @ 8:02 pm - May 2, 2012

  55. What is with all of these ignorant progressives commenting with their “self-hating” slurs? My guess is that they are all either the same person, or that a link to this post was put up at Daily Kos or something.

    Comment by Rattlesnake — May 2, 2012 @ 8:04 pm - May 2, 2012

  56. Rattlesnake, they can’t help themselves. Instead of engaging their ideological adversaries, they prefer to attack them.

    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — May 2, 2012 @ 8:13 pm - May 2, 2012

  57. Folks, coming here from the Daily Kos link is sort of like a trip to another plane of existence: one where gays who call themselves conservatives twist their logic and feelings over this matter into pretzels of justification and defense of a political party that was – to some degree – hijacked quite some time ago by religious fanatics and borderline fascists who happen to know how to drive media eyeballs. This ain’t your grandfather’s GOP anymore – hell, it ain’t your older sibling’s GOP! It is a far-right and white socially conservative movement that cares NOT ONE WHIT about the conservative fiscal values so many of you espouse. You would be MUCH MORE WELCOME in the Libertarian Party where they don’t give a damn about your sexual orientation. As for me and all my straight AND gay friends, we’re all real happy supporting the President and some of us are working hard to make it possible for some of you to get married – that is, if you want to, it should be your choice. And you know, that’s really what it all boils down to: fairness. I agree with you, it’s NOT FAIR that Grenell was forced to resign because his personal life was a distraction; but that doesn’t seem to matter to a lot of your fellow Republicans – they ain’t about being fair, they’re all about winning, no matter who gets hurt or who’s career is destroyed. That’s not the America I love and fight for: fairness, equality, decency and respect. Respectfully, I don’t see a lot of that coming out of Republicans mouths – even when it comes to each other. Perhaps if you “owned” these truths, you MIGHT begin to generate some change from within, but I doubt it.

    Comment by sdtrueman — May 2, 2012 @ 8:33 pm - May 2, 2012

  58. That’s funny, sdtrueman; we don’t see you and your fellow Kos Kidz condemning your Howard Dean for employment discrimination, your Jesse Jackson for sexual harassment, and your Obama Party for endorsing and supporting the Federal Marriage Amendment.

    So what’s pretty obvious is that you and your fellow Kos Kidz are antigay bigots who actually hate gay and lesbian people and lie to them about your “support”.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 2, 2012 @ 10:03 pm - May 2, 2012

  59. That’s not the America I love and fight for: fairness, equality, decency and respect.

    Comment by sdtrueman — May 2, 2012 @ 8:33 pm – May 2, 2012

    LMAO.

    Kos Kidz like you support and endorse tax cheats and welfare frauds as your leaders.

    Kos Kidz like yourself support and endorse outright criminal behavior and fraud in the name of Obama donations.

    Kos Kidz like yourself attack disabled children and call it “decent”.

    Nothing but lies from you Kos Kidz. Nothing but lies. You can continue to try to delude yourself, but you aren’t fooling anyone here.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 2, 2012 @ 10:08 pm - May 2, 2012

  60. So, there is a link at Daily Kos?

    one where gays who call themselves conservatives twist their logic and feelings over this matter into pretzels of justification and defense

    Please cite a specific example of where this happened.

    hijacked quite some time ago by religious fanatics and borderline fascists who happen to know how to drive media eyeballs. This ain’t your grandfather’s GOP anymore – hell, it ain’t your older sibling’s GOP! It is a far-right and white socially conservative movement that cares NOT ONE WHIT about the conservative fiscal values so many of you espouse.

    It never ceases to amaze me how wrong so many peoples’ ideas are about what conservatism is, and what some people think conservatives believe. Conservatives often mock this stereotype that the left has, and it is funny that so many people actually believe the stereotype.

    You would be MUCH MORE WELCOME in the Libertarian Party where they don’t give a damn about your sexual orientation.

    Most conservatives seem not to give a damn either.

    As for me and all my straight AND gay friends, we’re all real happy supporting the President and some of us are working hard to make it possible for some of you to get married

    Yes, because that is all every gay person everywhere cares about; having their relationships recognized as marriage by the government. You must really think all gay people are very dumb; Obama doesn’t even support gay marriage.

    I agree with you, it’s NOT FAIR that Grenell was forced to resign because his personal life was a distraction

    He wasn’t forced to resign, apparently. I am quite disappointed with all the assumptions that are being made here (by many people).

    they ain’t about being fair, they’re all about winning, no matter who gets hurt or who’s career is destroyed.

    Sarah Palin and Herman Cain were unavailable for comment.

    That’s not the America I love and fight for: fairness, equality, decency and respect.

    One of the reasons I respect the USA so much is that equality is neither mentioned nor implied anywhere in the constitution. Unless, that is, you were referring to equality of opportunity, but that’s never what progressives mean by “equality.”

    Comment by Rattlesnake — May 2, 2012 @ 10:11 pm - May 2, 2012

  61. [...] Richard Grenell steps down from Romney campaign [...]

    Pingback by GayPatriot » Andrew Sullivan defines GOP by its most extreme elements — May 3, 2012 @ 3:57 am - May 3, 2012

  62. [...] in the spam filter.  The filter caught other comments as well, smart ones, including fair critiques of my post; perhaps we can attribute those to Glenn Reynolds’s link.  As I decided [...]

    Pingback by GayPatriot » A comment thread which shows the worst — and best — of bloggin — May 3, 2012 @ 4:30 am - May 3, 2012

  63. Is it my imagination or is there a heavy stink of desperation descending on these threads?

    That heavy stink is from Kostards like sdtrueman and Al in SoCal who over-medicate and forget to have the nurse change their adult diapers.

    Is that mean? Let me offer an insincere apology. rusty, be a dear and find Dan Savage’s apology and copy/paste it into here for me.

    Comment by V the K — May 3, 2012 @ 8:34 am - May 3, 2012

  64. I think heliotrope went into detail on the Savage apology
    In the Silence post at #9. There you go V!

    Smooches

    Comment by rusty — May 3, 2012 @ 10:14 am - May 3, 2012

  65. http://www.gaypatriot.net/2012/05/02/silence-in-response-to-anti-christian-rhetoric-is-an-option-for-hrc-the-dnc/

    V so sorry, forgot the link

    Comment by rusty — May 3, 2012 @ 10:18 am - May 3, 2012

  66. That’s not the America I love and fight for: fairness, equality, decency and respect.

    Comment by sdtrueman — May 2, 2012 @ 8:33 pm – May 2, 2012

    Sort of like

    Mr. Trouble never hangs around,
    When he hears this Mighty sound,

    Here I come to save the day!
    That means that Mighty Mouse is on the way!

    Yes sir, when there is a wrong to right,
    Mighty Mouse will join the fight!

    On the sea or on the land,
    He’s got the situation well in hand!

    Let us take sdtrueman at his words:

    Fairness: “free from discrimination, bias, dishonesty, etc; just; impartial”

    Now, just how do you take from one to give to another without discriminating in favor of the recipient and being biased against the one from whom the taking is targeted?

    Equality: the state or quality of being equal; correspondence in quantity, degree, value, rank, or ability.

    Do you value the arsonist equally with the firefighter? Is the drunk on the bench the equal in ability to the sober crossing guard? Is the boy with a hang nail who arrives early to the emergency room ahead of the shooting victim who is rushed in at a later time?

    Decency: The state or quality of being decent; propriety. Conformity to prevailing standards of propriety or modesty.

    Certainly attacking the Judeo-Christian ethic has not a thing to do with “prevailing standards.” Naw. Decency is simply in the mind of the beholder and is relative to the time and circumstances and the fantasies of the actor.

    Respect: esteem for or a sense of the worth or excellence of a person, a personal quality or ability, or something considered as a manifestation of a personal quality or ability. deference to a right, privilege, privileged position, or someone or something considered to have certain rights or privileges; proper acceptance or courtesy.

    This is what TRUE MAN is really after. Forget the Fairness, Equality, Decency babble. TRUE MAN wants Respect. He wants society to be forced to accept him on his terms of “fairness” and his terms of “equality” and his terms of “decency.”

    These words are all slippery, weasel words that look great on the revolutionary banner. They mean different things to different people and their meanings shift in a nano-second under stress or emergency or sudden intrusions of reality.

    People who babble in bumper sticker clichés are equally susceptible to falling in with the audacity of hope and change sheeple and seeing their own private vision of Utopia just around the bend and next to the unicorn grazing by the end of the rainbow.

    Hopefully, (sd)TRUE MAN will return and argue rationally for his cause. It would be interesting to see what measure of mind underlies this salmagundi of bromides.

    Comment by heliotrope — May 3, 2012 @ 10:46 am - May 3, 2012

  67. I would like any gay conservative to answer heliotrope’s questions at comment 48.

    Please address the allusions to necrophilia, pedophilia, sexual norms and protocols. Heliotrope seems to be making offensive false comparisons, but are they offensive to you? How would you address his questions / concerns?

    Also, heliotrope, it’s really not a secret which sort of Democrat created the KKK and what they call themselves now. Just ask JT Ready… oops… he’s dead.

    Comment by Edmund — May 3, 2012 @ 2:30 pm - May 3, 2012

  68. [...] criticizing the appointment. (When the story broke, we learned there were others.)  As one reader put it in the comments to my first post on the matter: Until he resigned I’d never heard of this guy. I think I’m at [...]

    Pingback by GayPatriot » Given that Romney campaign thought Grenell Flap Had “Blown Over,”Directive for foreign policy expert to remain silent makes no sense — May 3, 2012 @ 2:36 pm - May 3, 2012

  69. Edmund,

    I am not making “offensive false comparisons” unless you are offended.

    What is the difference between pedophilia and “normal” heterosexuality?

    What is the difference between necrophilia and “normal” heterosexuality?

    What is the difference between homosexuality and “normal” heterosexuality?

    These are not trick questions. The average person should be able to answer them in just a few words.

    Now, let us talk about how something becomes “tolerated” and considered “normal” and garner “respect” in the public square.

    How and why is homosexuality worthy of more respect, tolerance, normalcy in the public square than action on other sexual orientations?

    Why don’t you take the time and effort to make it clear.

    As to protocols, why shouldn’t the public square accept adult men mentoring teens out of the closet and getting some harmless sexual adventure as a bonus for some sort of community commendation?

    I am fascinated in knowing how the moral relativism of the liberal mind works.

    Comment by heliotrope — May 3, 2012 @ 3:13 pm - May 3, 2012

  70. Actually, heliotrope, I wasn’t offended. I wondered why you’d ask them and make a specific demand of gay people to answer them in your comment at 48, then backpedal now. You do, of course, realize that false comparisons are made by the more frothy right wing conservatives between male gays and pedophiles all the time. It happened just yesterday in the UK.

    The difference between homosexuality and heterosexuality is no more than the sum of its parts. That’s the general conclusion of most mental health professionals, and the reason why homosexual practice is legal in most places, specifically the USA and Western Europe.

    No one said that homosexuality deserves more respect than heterosexuality. Just the same equal protections under the law and legal incentives to form lasting attachments. The question then becomes, why does homosexual practice deserve LESS respect, tolerance, normalcy and legal protection than heterosexual practice?

    The example you cite – adult gay men with teens – is most often called pedophilia. There has been a raft of cases of schoolteachers and other adults having sex with teens of both the same and opposite sex. Most recently, it has been female teachers molesting teen boys. They are arrested when caught because it has been determined that teens cannot give informed consent for this activity with an adult. If you can explain why you think they shouldn’t be, have at it. But I think you might want to register with the Sex Offender Registry first. How do you think you would fare in the public square making and argument for *any* adult to have sex with *any* teen in a “mentoring’ context?

    And that makes applying your question solely to gay men moot.

    I am fascinated with know in how the right deals in false equivalencies to subjugate conservative gay men.

    Comment by Edmund — May 3, 2012 @ 3:44 pm - May 3, 2012

  71. Edmund,

    The difference between homosexuality and heterosexuality is no more than the sum of its parts. That’s the general conclusion of most mental health professionals, and the reason why homosexual practice is legal in most places, specifically the USA and Western Europe.

    Nice try, but no cigar.

    Every gay has the same protection under the law that I have and I would lay down my life to see that that remains true.

    So, let’s assume that you are on that old treadmill about being able to marry who you “want” to marry. You can marry under the exact same rules laid down by the public square many, many years ago that have permitted me to be married for nearly 50 years.

    But, of course, you want to marry some one of the same sex and the law does not permit that. So we are right back to the public square.

    You must convince the public square that the time has come for marriage enlightenment. You must show in an intelligent and convincing manner that the hi-jinx of gay-pride parades and sex fairs and anti-Christian bigotry are not the norm and do not promote the gay agenda.

    It is a little difficult for the public square to be convinced by concerted efforts to have gay marriage forced by the courts when the people at the polls are ignored.

    In 1982, The American Psychiatric Association acted upon various tests, samples and the impressive work of Gonsiorek to conclude that “homosexuality in and of itself is unrelated to psychological disturbance and maladjustment.” That is to say, that homosexuals as a group are not more psychologically disturbed on account of their homosexuality.

    As a result, in 1986 the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, the official work of the American Psychiatric Association, dropped homosexuality as a pathology. This did not waive the possibility of ego-dystonic homosexuality as a trigger for societal related adjustment disorder.

    To that extent, homosexuality was deemed “normal” in terms of mental health. Pedophilia, necrophilia, etc. are still considered “mental health” problems, but aside from chemical castration or a lobotomy, the mental health community has made no inroads into what is still deemed a pathology.

    That is all well and good for chit-chat in the salon. But, the public square is nowhere near the point of accepting homosexuality as a distinction without a difference.

    Granted, the public square is more “tolerant” of what goes on where they do not have to see it, know about it, consider it, respect it, approve of it.

    Homosexual practice is not legal in most places other than in the privacy of one’s home.

    Sure, cruise ships, theme parks, hotels, resorts invite gays to spend their money to be together. For the most part, they are savvy enough to let the non-gays know what is going on so that they can make “other plans” if they like. This is smart business, because the public square is not hostile to gay couples in general, but they are not anxious to be caught up in a gay swarm.

    You are correct that no one said that homosexuality deserves more respect than heterosexuality. That would, of course, include me. So that dog won’t hunt.

    There are many wonderful people on this site who grudgingly put up with my “Neanderthal” battering away at getting your agenda thought out and becoming more intellectually convincing.

    I do not like spewing the issue that I know people are tired of hearing. I do not like making my associates uncomfortable. But the lazy left gays just want to cut to the chase and have government deem the issue settled and then enforce it with the force of law.

    You might even want me to be censored. Or try to shame me into censoring myself. Or bring me up on hate speech charges. Or, as in the Reign of Terror of France, you can unleash a bunch of gay harpies to drag me off to Madame Guillotine on suspicion of crimes against liberty of gays.

    You have an atavistic tone about your post that is always played out in societies who set out to cleanse themselves.

    When you call for a gay conservative on this site to defend my non-gay conservative speech, you are actually forcing a gay to put an important part of his identity aside and to talk up a cause he may not support. Why is that important to you?

    Are we at war? Can you not use words and reason to make a reasonable case for why all of society would benefit from gay marriage? Why the mission of the military is enhanced by gays serving openly. Have you no spirit or soul for your mission? Must church doctrine be destroyed for you to be happy?

    Examine your agenda and examine your world and try to be realistic in how you can make the gains you desire without resorting to demands and tantrums and sleazy innuendo.

    Is that Jerry Sandusky guy in the Penn State mess gay? If so, how do you differentiate him from the good gays? If not, why not? None of these are fun thoughts or questions. But you would be a fool if you do not think they are in common thoughts in the public square.

    You can either convert people missionary style or Islamic jihad style.

    Comment by heliotrope — May 3, 2012 @ 4:54 pm - May 3, 2012

  72. That’s the general conclusion of most mental health professionals

    Didn’t the American Psychological Association a few years back try to promote the idea that paedophilia was normal and healthy, and didn’t they try to reclassify it as “adult-child sex” to remove the stigma?

    IIRC, Congress voted overwhelmingly to condemn the APA’s position, and all of the congressmen that voted against condemning it were Democrats. One was a certain congressman from Ohio whose chief of staff had an arrest for inappropriate contact with minors in his past. Democrats were so scandalized that they… elected him governor of Ohio a few years later.

    Comment by V the K — May 3, 2012 @ 6:23 pm - May 3, 2012

  73. You are correct, VtheK. I didn’t get too deep into the weeds with Edmund, because “(t)hat’s the general conclusion of most mental health professionals….” is a pretty clear tip-off that the we are in shallow waters.

    Nor did I get into the whole political make-up of the APA which goes off on confusing political pressure with an epiphany all the time.

    I loathe getting into discussing things in term of “normal” but that is the arena in which this whole agenda is being played out. My inner dictator is to impose civil unions and slam the door. But, even my cats boss me around.

    Wrestling with one’s own conscious and soul is far heavier lifting than storm trooping around and high-fiving.

    Any bets as to whether Edmund will assume the missionary position? (My bad.)

    Comment by heliotrope — May 3, 2012 @ 6:46 pm - May 3, 2012

  74. Helitrope, your “bad” as you put it, as well as your nasty personal attacks and windy supercilious bloviating, has cost you this debate. (Are you being paid by the word? That seldom produces quality prose or discussion and I’m still not sure which you were striving for.)

    Actually, contrary to your statement that I am not free to marry the person of my choosing, I’m gay and married since 2005, living together with my spouse monogamously since 1999. While that may not equate to your sainted wife tolerating things that would probably make most people mad after 50 bitter years, my marriage is true and it’s legal. We’re part of a lawsuit against DOMA that is temporarily stalled, but it’s sure to move with all due expedience after November.

    You seem to have an ….inordinate… interest in what you call gay hi-jinx: pride parades, sex fairs and anti-Christian bigotry. And you seem to think that it is the responsibility of gay people to show the public square why they don’t apply to gay people in general. Any thoughts on Mardis Gras and what needs to be “shown” in order to have beads thrown at one? (Hint: I don’t have them.) Do heterosexuals need to repudiate this spectacle in order to marry. I’d wager most wouldn’t. How about the drunken mess of St. Patrick’s Day? Do American Irish have to show “we’re not all like that” in order to be treated equally under the law?

    At any rate, my time for this is up. Since you reference being married for 50 years, I can conlude that you must be around 68 years old or perhaps significantly older. So… your time for this is just about up, too. May you find peace sooner rather than later.

    Comment by Edmund — May 3, 2012 @ 8:23 pm - May 3, 2012

  75. ….your nasty personal attacks and windy supercilious bloviating, has cost you this debate.

    ….

    you must be around 68 years old or perhaps significantly older. So… your time for this is just about up, too. May you find peace sooner rather than later.

    Classy.

    Never had anyone wish an early death to me. You must have a very unique sense of principles and an belief system bloated with entitlement.

    For the sake of clarity, your “marriage” cements you to a few venues, because it is not covered under the full faith and credit clause.

    I bear you no ill will. In fact, I wish you a long and prosperous life. I will include you in my prayers. Not out of revenge, but in keeping with my faith and love for all of God’s children.

    You are not an atypical hard case for liberalism. You just don’t want to pay the price of earning respect.

    I do not have an inordinate interest in gay hi-jinx. They are what they are. Dan Savage, after all, fantasizes in public about his penis in Brad Pitt’s mouth or punishing Rick Santorum with anal rape. It is not your responsibility to stop Savage from making the gay agenda into a mockery.

    But, if you are a reasoned and reasonable individual, it is your responsibility to show the public square that Dan Savage is the fringe idiot, not you.

    You will not discuss this, because you are ideologically castrated.

    Comment by heliotrope — May 3, 2012 @ 9:15 pm - May 3, 2012

  76. Not death. Peace. The peace that an older person should have in his soul as he approaches life’s final marker. La paix, Venez vite pour ce vieillard amer fatigué! There’s a lot of smoke and little light coming from your intellectual fire at this point. But I will continue to pray that you – and all who think and act as you do – find the peace that God promises all who believe in him.

    If you were a reasoned and reasonable indivudual who ever got out of the public square so that you could make friends in an actual neighborhood, you would realize that no one has to prove what he is not, only what he is.

    Comment by Edmund — May 3, 2012 @ 9:45 pm - May 3, 2012

  77. <blockquote<You will not discuss this, because you are ideologically castrated.And, right on cue, you did not take up the debate.

    Instead: Not death. Peace…. There’s a lot of smoke and little light coming from your intellectual fire at this point…. If you were a reasoned and reasonable indivudual who ever got out of the public square so that you could make friends in an actual neighborhood, you would realize that no one has to prove what he is not, only what he is.

    You, apparently the grand champion of all pissing contests. Neat. Makes a great entry on your curriculum vitae.

    It is you who came challenging gays to on this site to defend or disavow my statements which I made all by myself alone.

    Now stick to your game and carry it through or admit that you are a typical shift-the-topic, ignore facts and name-calling liberal who is incapable of honest debate.

    Comment by heliotrope — May 3, 2012 @ 10:07 pm - May 3, 2012

  78. And with naught but arglebargle at 77… res ipsa loquitur!

    Comment by Edmund — May 3, 2012 @ 10:09 pm - May 3, 2012

  79. Admission accepted.

    Comment by heliotrope — May 3, 2012 @ 10:27 pm - May 3, 2012

  80. [...] groundwork to start writing my fantasy epic (as well as other unrelated obligations), but then the Grenell story broke.  It was one of those stories that I knew I needed to address for a great variety of [...]

    Pingback by GayPatriot » Blogging may be a little slow this week . . . — May 7, 2012 @ 2:02 pm - May 7, 2012

  81. I applaud the Romney campaign for being open-minded and obviously seeing that Mr. Grenell has the skills and experience for the job. I am sickened that it seems as if the media has won this battle by removing an opponent by using Saul Alinsky tactics, once again.

    Comment by Kelley — May 7, 2012 @ 2:27 pm - May 7, 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.

0.256 Powered by Wordpress