It is with mixed feelings that I announce my resignation this morning from the gay conservative group GOProud that I helped found in 2009.  I was recently elected Vice Chairman of the organization in order to concentrate on expanding GOProud’s chapters and grassroots strength nationwide.

Last week, speculation grew in South Carolina and on social media outlets about my interest in challenging incumbent US Senator Lindsey Graham who has been in Congress for 18 years.

In the spirit of transparency and honesty, I informed my fellow GOProud board members that I could not dedicate the time to the organization while I seriously considered the effort it will take to challenge Senator Graham in the 2014 Primary.  

I felt it best to resign from GOProud in advance of the CPAC conference this week so that my position in GOProud would not be a distraction from my serious deliberations regarding my potential future plans in South Carolina public service.

I wish only the best to my colleagues and fellow supporters of GOProud moving forward and I’ll always do what I can to be helpful from the crowd.

Over the next few weeks, I will be studying the resources, time and effort it would take to do my part in holding Lindsey Graham accountable for his voting record and his attitude toward the voters in South Carolina.  

This is important: I do not make major decisions hastily; I will take adequate time to realistically look at all of the evidence (pro and con) and consult with a diverse group of people that I trust and that also have the best interests of South Carolina at heart as I do.

If I believe I could provide a serious alternative to Senator Graham for the voters of South Carolina, and I can find the financial and moral support to join me in that effort, then I will take those next formal steps needed to do so.

Someone needs to be the Conscience of South Carolina’s Voters during the 2014 Primary.  I hope I can accept that challenge.

Sincerely,

Bruce M. Carroll Jr.
York, South Carolina

Busy with a number of projects today, including entertaining Bruce with whom I just had a nice lunch and to whom I just showed a gas station selling a gallon of regular for over $5, but did want to remind our readers despite the CPAC dustup, many conservative institutions favor the inclusion of gay conservatives.

Shortly, after returning home (from spending my early afternoon with Bruce where CPAC came up), I caught this headline on the National Review’s homepage:

On Sunday, Bruce reported that “nothing has changed [since] The CPAC Board voted before CPAC 2012 to remove GOProud as a sponsoring organization.” Today, the flagship conservative magazine offered “Five reasons CPAC should embrace the gay conservative group.”

CPAC’s decision to exclude this gay conservative group is not sitting well with all movement conservatives. Daniel Foster, the National Review’s news editor, makes a strong case for inclusion:

GOProud is consistently big-C “movement” conservative on the important issues — especially on fiscal policy and the size of government, but also on social issues such as abortion. After all, GOProud was founded by a couple of Log Cabin Republicans dissatisfied with that group’s Main-Street-partnership-style centrism. This alone is a pretty good reason for their inclusion at CPAC. But arguably more interesting, and more important for a powwow that’s ostensibly about making conservative advocacy more effective, is GOProud’s lower-case conservatism.

Read the whole thing.  Foster holds that “the move against GOProud does seem to be all downside.” Indeed.

Just another reminder about the broad-based conservative movement.  The current organizers of CPAC don’t speak for all conservatives.

I have been getting some emails and commenters have written about the situation regarding GOProud & CPAC this year.

Actually, nothing has changed.  The CPAC Board voted before CPAC 2012 to remove GOProud as a sponsoring organization.  There has been no news since then.

The recent Twitter fury about the issue resulted from a blogger noting that Chris Hayes, MSNBC host, was invited to be on a panel by CPAC.  She noted how odd it was to have a liberal commentator included, but GOProud still excluded.

That’s it.  But I thought it was worth a mention.

-Bruce (@GayPatriot)

Full Disclosure:  I am now Vice Chair of GOProud.

Two events in the past few days have gotten me thinking, again, about the arguments for gay marriage.  On the one hand, there was the statement by GOProud on its support of gay marriage as an issue nationwide. And on the other, there was a recent article in The Atlantic on “The High Price of Being Single in America.”  The Atlantic article intrigues me because, in my reading of the article, it indirectly undermines some arguments for gay marriage by making the case that, for single people, at least, policy makers and other institutions haven’t necessarily been “fair” in granting special status to heterosexual marriage.  The “marriage isn’t fair to singles” argument, however, if fully unleashed, could have the potential to derail the case for gay marriage: after all, there are more singles (both straight and gay) than there are gays and lesbians in committed partnerships.

The Atlantic article is seriously flawed in both its methodology and its conclusions, but that is not why it interests me.  It interests me because, by making the “marriage isn’t fair to singles” argument, it unintentionally illustrates how far the “mainstream” case for gay marriage has deviated in recent years from the more thoughtful and high-minded case that was made for the issue at the time the first serious arguments for gay marriage began to appear widely in the popular press.  And the evolution (though perhaps devolution is the more apt term) of the argument in this way is completely apparent from the way in which those on the gay left greeted the GOProud announcement.

I believe that the push for gay marriage comes partly from two different places philosophically: one is the desire by gay couples to have the same sorts of legal and financial privileges as straight, married couples, which is a consequence of having written laws and policies designed to provide special status to married couples; but the second place it comes from is what has been called “the politics of recognition,” i.e., the desire of gay people to have their worth recognized or validated in some sense  through public policy. The second push comes more from a psychological need which might be emotionally appealing, but which doesn’t  necessarily qualify it as good policy. The first comes from a more legitimate grievance against a government with an interest in deciding which sorts of relationships are “more equal than others.” (The first motive–and kind of argument–is also, incidentally, key to winning over more  conservative and libertarian kinds of voters.)  The two different strands of the argument can exist together in a kind of symbiosis, but separated, they are potentially at odds with each other.

(more…)

FYI.

Statement of the GOProud Board of Directors

(Washington, D.C.) – On Saturday January 12th, the GOProud Board of Directors met in Washington, D.C. At the conclusion of this meeting, the Board of Directors issued the following release:

“This weekend, the GOProud Board of Directors elected new officers for 2013. Lisa De Pasquale was elected to a full-term as the Chair of GOProud’s Board of Directors, Bruce Carroll was elected Vice-Chair and Jessica Lee was elected Secretary.

“The GOProud Board of Directors also voted unanimously to expand the organization’s mission to now include state work. Over the next few months, GOProud will be chartering state affiliates to help carry out the important work of the organization on the state and local level.

“GOProud has seen significant growth in the three and a half years since our founding. The GOProud Board has 100% confidence in the management team – led by Executive Director Jimmy LaSalvia, and we look forward to continuing to work with our conservative and libertarian partners to improve the lives of all Americans – including gays and lesbians.”

I am thrilled to expand my role with GOProud and am looking forward to helping grow our grassroots capabilities all across the United States.

-Bruce (@GayPatriot)

From GOProud today:

(Washington, D.C.) – “Words fail to describe the horror of the massacre at Sandy Hook. Our hearts and prayers go out to the family and friends of the victims of this incomprehensible attack.

“As policy makers begin to look at how we can prevent further tragedies like this, we felt that it was important for us to weigh in as an organization. GOProud is an organization of constitutional conservatives – gay and straight alike. We believe that our Constitution is a sacred document and that the rights it grants should be protected and defended.

“In the weeks and months ahead, policy makers in Washington and in state capitols around the country will look to find ways to prevent another Sandy Hook from happening – these will be important and necessary debates. We hope that as they debate issues like preventing gun deaths, the impact of violent video games, and the role of our mental health system in this country that they will also remember our 1st Amendment right to free speech, our 2nd Amendment right to bear arms, and our 5th Amendment right to due process.

“We urge lawmakers to heed the words of Benjamin Franklin, who cautioned: Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

-Bruce (@GayPatriot)

Dan wrote a post the other day reminding our readers that while he is the mainstay of content here at the blog, I have become “the Twitter guy.” He also underscored and that we are two different people though we agree a lot.

Today, we disagree!

I appreciate Dan’s enthusiasm with the Mitt Romney “qualified” endorsement by Log Cabin Republicans, but I’d like to throw some very cold water onto the parade and express my own views.

First, as always, I fully disclose that I am a founding board member of GOProud — a national organization of gay and straight Americans seeking to promote freedom by supporting free markets, limited government, and a respect for individual rights.

I supported the creation of GOProud specifically because Log Cabin Republicans had become a spokestool of the Gay Left. I’m glad that some are excited by their more recent move to embrace Republican candidates, but that hardly makes LCR a “conservative group.”

To the contrary, from the moment this blog was founded in 2004, I have documented the close ties that Log Cabin Republicans had, and still maintains, with Tim Gill — an ultra-left wing progressive activists whose Gill Foundation is a documented recipient of grants from George Soros.

So while I appreciate Dan’s nostalgia for the ideal of wanting Log Cabin Republicans to be what he and I hoped it would be — the fact remains it is not.

This endorsement of Mitt Romney is about as useful as handleless screwdriver. Sure looks like it will do the job, but you will never get anything done. That’s what Log Cabin promised in their “endorsement” — nothing. No action. Nada. Zip. Sitting on hands. Kaput. Zero.

In fact, the truth is at least one Log Cabin Board Member was threatening to quit if Log Cabin even brought the Romney vote to the board. Further, two local Log Cabin chapters urged their national board NOT to endorse Romney.

So while Dan has an affinity with Clarke Cooper that I don’t understand, the Log Cabin board are still bought and paid for shills of Tim Gill.

This is how Log Cabin’s “qualified endorsement” is being reported by the Associated Press.

A lengthy explanation released by Log Cabin Republicans under the banner “We Are Americans First” was part endorsement, part rebuke to a Republican Party whose standard-bearers the group said “appear to be caught up in an outdated culture war.” The group argued that Americans of all sexual orientations have suffered financially under President Barack Obama, and while Romney may not share all of their views, he could be worse.

“Mitt Romney is not Rick Santorum, and Paul Ryan is not Michele Bachmann. Otherwise, our decision would have been different,” the group said.

Damn. With friends like this, who needs enemies? Also, Log Cabin went out of its way to say it will not lift a finger to assist electing Mitt Romney. So what’s the point?

Far from reaching across differences to align with the conservative movement to defeat Barack Obama, Log Cabin has merely re-ignited the culture war meme that they claim they abhor. Hypocrites.

Let’s cut to the chase, the Log Cabin endorsement of Romney might as well be three words: I Love Lamp.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

On the abstraction notion of “gay rights” (turning to the government to craft gay-specific policies), the Democratic Party has long been superior to the GOP, but  it terms of supporting a broad spectrum of policies which benefit gay individuals, the Republican Party is head and shoulders above the president’s party.  Simply put, small government policies favor all Americans, including gay Americans.

We don’t need gay-specific legislation.  We just need the government to stay out of our lives.

Less government intrusion in our lives means we have more freedom to direct our own lives.  It means entrepreneurs, including gay and lesbian business owners, will find it easier to establish, maintain and build their enterprises.  Individuals will have greater choices.

And not just gay- and lesbian-owned enterprises.  We have seen how quickly private corporations have responded to social change, offering benefits to the same-sex partners of employees and adopting policies banning discrimination in their workplaces.

Today, our friend Jimmy LaSalvia, the Executive Director of GOProud, takes up that theme in a piece at the Daily Caller, arguing that gay Americans should vote for Mitt Romney:

Governor Romney supports cutting taxes for middle-income Americans and simplifying our overly complex tax code. Unlike President Obama, Governor Romney understands that the last thing we need in this troubled economic environment is higher taxes.

Romney has a plan to make American companies more competitive by lowering corporate tax rates, opening new markets to U.S. goods through new free trade agreements and reducing bureaucratic red tape by eliminating unnecessary and unworkable federal regulations.

Gay Americans, like all Americans, are suffering under Obama’s big government policies.  Drive along Santa Monica Boulevard in West Hollywood and note the number of storefronts with “For Rent” or “Available” signs decorating their otherwise empty display windows.

How many gay-owned businesses have gone under because the cost to comply with federal regulations was too great for hard-working entrepreneurs?  Mitt Romney knows what it’s like to build and sustain and enterprise.  His policies will help remove the barriers to entry that now make it difficult for creative individuals with a good idea and a little bit of capital to turn that idea into a business — allowing them to realize their dream while creating jobs for others.

* (more…)

Back in the 1990s, nearly a full year lapsed between Republican Congressman and candidates signing the Contract with America and Log Cabin endorsing that document promising government reform.  The prominence Republicans gave to the Contract returning its focus to real reform and fiscal responsibility.  Having gained such prominence from attacking the GOP in 1992, the then-leadership of the ostensibly Republican organization was wary of embracing the GOP, even when it was not focusing on social issues.

How thing have changed.  Two days after presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney announced his selection of Congressman Paul Ryan as his running mate, the current Executive Director of Log Cabin, wrote in the Daily Caller that

Congressman Paul Ryan is a strong choice for vice president, and his addition to the GOP ticket will help Republican candidates up and down the ballot. As chairman of the House Budget Committee and author of the Republican “Path to Prosperity,” nobody is more qualified to articulate a conservative economic vision to restore the American economy and stimulate job creation.

Unfortunately, Cooper used his opinion piece to make the case for statist legislation, but the fact remains that he has openly embraced the “conservative economic vision” that Ryan has promoted.  He even indicated on Facebook that he “liked” Paul Ryan for VP:

Clarke’s willingness to champion Republican politicians like Ryan and real conservative reforms has served to distinguish him from some of his predecessors. And Clarke is not the only right-of-center gay leader to herald Romney’s pick. Shortly after the Republican announced his choice, GOProud’s Executive Director Jimmy LaSalvia called Ryan “a bold and inspired pick“: (more…)

“As a mother,” said HRC Vice President of Communications Fred Sainz, Sarah Palin “should know to speak up when a child makes hateful remarks, particularly in this cyber age. Anti-LGBT bullying needs to stop and Sarah Palin should be a part of making that happen.”

The “hateful remarks” to which Mr. Sainz referred involved Mrs. Palin’s daughter using the word, “faggot” as a slur on Facebook. Mrs. Palin’s daughter has since pulled the insulting post.  Last month, Mr. Dan Savage used the same slur to slam gay people who supported a presidential candidate he opposed.  He has yet to apologize or rescind the offending tweet.

Today, we learn that instead of calling on Mr. Savage to apologize, a nation gay organization has partnered with the mean-spirited sex columnist.  According to GOProud, “The Victory Fund – an ostensibly ‘bipartisan’ organization – that works to elect openly LGBT candidates announced a partnership with the controversial founder of the It Gets Better Project, Dan Savage. Savage previously called gay Republicans “house faggots” and wrote a column where he compared gay Republicans to meth addicts.”

GOProud’s Executive Director Jimmy LaSalvia wonders how the Victory Fund can . . .

. . . claim to work to elect openly gay Republicans while at the same time partnering with a man who called gay Republicans ‘house faggots’ and compared us to meth addicts? What kind of message does this partnership send to the openly LGBT Republican candidates across the country? What kind of message does it send to Republicans in general about the type of organization that the Victory Fund actually is?

What kind of message indeed.

Will only gay conservatives — and a handful of gay left bloggers — speak up against Mr. Savage’s hateful remarks?

I expect to have more to say later in the day about HotAir’s interview with our friend Jimmy LaSalvia, but want to keep this post brief to focus on one thing Jimmy said in response to the question about the mean-spirited attacks on GOProud coming from the left:

It seems that it’s OK to use racist, masochistic, anti-Semitic, and homophobic words and phrases when attacking gay conservatives. Nobody in the mainstream media condemns it or comes to our defense. We are fortunate to have a lot of friends in the conservative blogosphere who regularly stand up for us. That means a lot to us, and it gives us the resolve to continue to stand up to the left wing bullies.

Read the whole thing. Emphasis added.  Once again (and this reaffirmed in my conversation with Richard Grenell last night), the overwhelming (as in over 90%) of the vicious attacks on gay conservatives come from the gay left, many of which, to borrow an expression from Alan Jay Lerner, “would make a sailor blush“.

Do wonder when our friends in the legacy media will get around to reporting the story of this liberal intolerance.

This is not the first time left-wing bullies have expressed their animus against gay conservatives in hateful terms.  Nor will it (alas!) be the last.

It’s not just Dan Savage.  Another left-of-center Obama supporter has offered a prejudiced view of gay conservatives.

In response to GOProud’s endorsement of Mitt Romney, Joe Behar wondered if “the GOProud guys are just attracted to Mitt Romney’s sons Matt, Mutt, Tag, Tip, Tack, and Bashful“. “Does Joy“, asks our reader Greg who alerted me to this story. . .

. . . really believe that gay men only think with their penises? And the stereotyping of gay men as mincing enthusiasts of Broadway musicals is pretty “out there” as well. Such claims from a conservative would be equally offensive — and would be the basis for the same sort of outrage that a Dan Savage type comment from a conservative would be.

Will gay groups take Mrs. Behar to task for her prejudiced assumption about the attitudes of this subset of the gay community?  So far I can’t find anything on the web-pages of HRC or NGLTF.  Nor do they have anything about Mr. Savage’s “hateful remarks” (borrowing the term HRC used when Sarah Palin’s daughter called some a “f***ot”.)

Does it even occur to Behar that gay people, like most Americans consider a great variety of factors when choosing a political candidate to support?

It’s been a crazy week for me here in Los Angeles which I will explain in a subsequent post. So, perhaps it’s serendipitous that Bruce is (finally) returning to blogging.

Barely logged on when I got this on Yahoo!’s homepage: Gay conservative group endorses Mitt Romney:

A national group of gay conservatives has endorsed presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney, the organization announced Wednesday.

The executive board for GOProud, a group founded by two former members of the Log Cabin Republicans, Christopher Barron and Jimmy LaSalvia, voted Tuesday to make an official endorsement.

Founded in 2009 with both gay and straight members, GOProud ran ads against Democrats in the midterm elections and is preparing another ad campaign on behalf of Romney this cycle.

“GOProud is prepared to commit significant resources to help make Mitt Romney the next president of the United States,” said Lisa De Pasquale, interim chair of the GOProud board of directors and the former director of the Conservative Political Action Conference.

. . . .

“We don’t agree with Gov. Romney on every single issue—indeed, we disagree strongly with him on his support for a federal marriage amendment and we have urged Romney publicly to take bolder and more conservative stances on tax reform, entitlement reform and spending,” LaSalvia said. “Given the vote on our board, obviously not everyone in our organization will agree with this endorsement, and we respect that.”

More on this if I get a chance.

What Log Cabin Executive Director R. Clarke Cooper giveth in one release on Thursday, with his strong statement on Obama’s fundraising pitch to the gay community, he taketh (partially) away in another that very day with a threatening language  directed against his own party’s presidential nominee:

Marriage equality has captured the nation’s attention, and the response to President Obama’s announcement is evidence of the tide turning in favor of equality for all. . . .

Governor Mitt Romney’s statement in opposition to not just marriage but civil unions jeopardizes his ability to win moderates, women and younger voters, especially as a large majority of Americans favor some form of relationship recognition for their LGBT friends and neighbors.

Equality for all?  What’s that mean?  It’s certainly not a conservative slogan, but one more familiar to a Mr. W. Smith.

Clarke is right to criticize Romney for his “opposition to not just marriage but civil unions”, but his tone is counterproductive.  Moderates, women and younger voters won’t vote against him because of his stand on gay marriage.  They will, however, vote against him if he makes that stand central to his campaign.  They’re not going to decide their vote exclusively on gay marriage.  He would have served himself (and the cause of his organization) better had he merely expressed disappointment with Romney’s position.

Clarke is not the only non-left gay leader to offer intemperate remarks about Romney this week.  Our pal JimmyLaSalvia, Executive Director and Co-Founder of GOProud, “With his speech at Falwell’s Liberty University, it is clear that Governor Romney’s message to Goldwater conservatives is: drop dead.”  Earlier today, Governor Romney delivered the commencement address there.

While we would rather the Republican nominee not have to make a courtesy call at Jerry Falwell U (as have all Republican candidates “in recent years“), Romney’s speech hardly amounted to a repudiation of Goldwater’s small government ideals.  Indeed, his talk barely touched upon government’s role in society, save to remind the graduating students that “Religious liberty is the first freedom in our Constitution“. He focused instead on the importance of family and faith.

And he did say, what we already know him to believe, “Marriage is a relationship between one man and one woman.” He offered nothing new on social issues — and didn’t attack gay people or advocate policies anathema to libertarians. (more…)

In talking to pjmedia, GOProud Executive Director Jimmy LaSalvia focused on the group’s efforts to communicate “why conservative principles are good for different constituencies.”  Nice to see this movie away from the identity politics practiced by other gay groups.  The issue is not legislation specifying sexual orientation, but adopting policies which don’t single out any group.

“The issue,” Jimmy said “is why do gay people let the left determine what’s important to gay people?”   Indeed.  “What we talk about every single day is conservative policies that are good for everybody are good for gay Americans, too.”

Do gay small businessmen who bemoan the red tape they faces in opening up a new shop — or expanding their current enterprise — realize that the party who benefits from the donations they make to HRC has, to a large extent, placed those burdens on job creators?   These entrepreneurs would benefit from Republican policies reducing regulation.  The less government intrusion there is, the greater freedom we have to express ourselves.

Yeah, the president provides lip service to regulatory reform, but his record — and that of his fellow partisans — stands in stark contrast to that rhetoric.  Obama may say the right things on gay issues, but his policies hurt gay businessmen and women — as they hurt entrepreneurs of all backgrounds.

So, kudos to Jimmy and Chris Barron for taking up the benefits of conservative policies.  Perhaps, at some later date, when they raise more money, they could commission a study to show how federal, state and local mandates impact specific gay entrepreneurs.  And maybe then those folks would realize that although they attend the various HRC functions to network within the community, their participation in such events provides support to policies which increase the cost of doing business.

Our friends at GOProud get the nature of Ron Paul’s appeal. In his critique of the president’s State of the Union address, Christopher R. Barron, Co-Founder and Chief Strategist for the group offered a nice synopsis of what kind of leader libertarian Republicans want:

The American people – gay and straight – deserve a President who will encourage free enterprise to grow the American economy and create jobs. We need a President who understands that government doesn’t have all the answers – indeed often government is the problem. We need a President who will defend individual liberty and keep Americans safe, at home and abroad. In short, we need a new President.

Nice to see the leader of a gay group commend free enterprise and the ideal which allows it to flourish — individual liberty. And to make clear that we need replace a failed incumbent.

In congratulating Newt Gingrich on his victory last night, our friend Chris Barron, Co-Founder and Chief Strategist of GOProud, noted something significant about the former Speaker’s South Carolina success:

Tonight, we congratulate Speaker Gingrich on his victory in South Carolina. We are hopeful that in the contests ahead that Speaker Gingrich will run the type of positive campaign he promised earlier in the primary process.

It is clear that Speaker Gingrich’s poll numbers improved dramatically once he ended his unnecessary and unproductive attacks on Governor Mitt Romney’s record at Bain Capital. As conservatives we should make it clear that we are the champions of free enterprise.

Emphasis added.  He’s right.  Newt surged not because of his attacks on Mitt Romney’s work in the private sector but instead because of his attacks on the media’s flacking for those who favor a larger public sector.

Our friends at GOProud were enthusiastic about Mitt Romney’s remarks on gay people in this morning’s debate.  In a release, they cited something the presidential candidate said beyond the commentary he offered on marriage last night:

After pointing out that while Massachusetts’s governor, a member of his cabinet was gay and he appointed judges regardless of sexual orientation, he said,

“If people are looking for someone who will discriminate against gays or will in any way try and suggest that people — that have different sexual orientation don’t have full rights in this country, they won’t find that in me.”

This led the group’s Executive Director, Jimmy LaSalvia (who has himself endorsed Romney) to comment:

We thank Governor Romney for having the political courage to speak up for gay Americans. He made it crystal clear this morning that he will be the type of President that gay people, and those who care about gays and lesbians in this country, can trust and be proud of.

On issue after issue – whether it’s the economy, jobs, taxes, energy, healthcare or retirement security – Mitt Romney is offering common-sense conservative plans that will improve the lives of all Americans – gay or straight.

Smart strategy to praise the candidate for what he has said.  Should help them gain influence since the candidate win election to the White House.

If I had to choose among the four leading contenders (at least according to the latest polls) for the Republican nomination, I would settle on former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney not so much because of his strengths, but because of the weaknesses of the other three.

Although Rick Santorum is not the extremist portrayed in the legacy (and gay) media, the former Pennsylvania Senator is more of a George W. Bush Republican than any of the other contenders and, over the years, has made some pretty bizarre statements about homosexuality.  Excellent on domestic issues (and asking important questions on money and banking), Ron Paul favors an isolationist policy at a time of growing unrest abroad — and he has himself made some strange statements.  And there were those, as Ace puts it, “old-line racist/neoconfederate ravings in Paul’s newsletters“.

And then there’s Newt, often eloquent on the stump, brimming with ideas, but also a man who responds in a manner similar to the Democratic incumbent when political rivals criticize him and his record.  And he does have a lot of baggage.

That said, although I prefer Romney to his three leading competitors, I’m not yet ready to sign up for his campaign or signal my support for him.  I have expressed my concerns about his candidacy on several occasions, notably here and here.

My friend Jimmy LaSalvia, Executive Director of GOProud, however, has expressed no such hesitation:

Ann Coulter, the honorary chair of GOProud’s Advisory Council, is rarely wrong — and when it comes to the 2012 Republican nomination, she is spot on: If conservatives want to defeat Barack Obama, then it is time to rally around former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney.

. . . .

Let me be very clear, this is a personal — not an organizational — endorsement. GOProud represents a wide swath of right-of-center individuals and our members support a wide range of candidates for president. I believe there are many good candidates in this field and I respect the decisions of those who support other candidates. For me, however, this decision is an easy one: Only Mitt Romney can beat Barack Obama in November.

Taking on those who “conservatives who have had and who continue to have misgivings about Mitt Romney”, Jimmy reminds us “that plenty of our greatest conservative leaders have had similar evolutions. (more…)

As a member of the GOProud Board, I’m publishing this statement:

On behalf of the GOProud Board and its members and supporters, we want to make it very clear that “outing” a gay or lesbian individual is wrong and should never be used as a political weapon.

Private lives should remain just that — private. The right to disclose one’s sexual orientation belongs solely to each individual. We will continue to oppose “outing” as it has never advanced a political cause but only hurts individuals and their families.

We strongly regret the events of this week.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)