Skip to comments.Top Santorum Aide Outed As Gay
Posted on 07/16/2005 12:12:46 PM PDT by gopgen
Gay-rights opponent Santorum stands by outed aide
BY STEVE GOLDSTEIN
Knight Ridder Newspapers
WASHINGTON - (KRT) - The senior spokesman for Sen. Rick Santorum, R- Pa., Friday confirmed to a web log that he is gay.
According to PageOneQ, an online gay and lesbian publication, director of communications Robert L. Traynham, said that he was an "out gay man who completely supports the senator."
Santorum, the third-ranking Republican in the Senate leadership has been an outspoken opponent of homosexual rights and a leading proponent of a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.
Santorum, who was traveling in Pittsburgh, released the following statement:
"Robert Traynham ... is widely respected and admired on Capitol Hill, both among the press corps and among the congressional staff, as a communications professional. Not only is Mr. Traynham an exemplary staffer, but he is also a trusted friend confidente to me and my family. Mr. Traynham is a valued member of my staff and I regret that this effort on behalf of people who oppose me has made him a target of bigotry in their eyes.
"It is entirely unacceptable that my staffs' personal lives are considered fair game by partisans looking for arguments to bolster my opponent's campaign. Mr. Traynham continues to have my full support and confidence as well as my prayers as he navigates this rude and mean spirited invasion of his personal life."
Mark Rodgers, chief of staff at the Republican conference, which Santorum chairs, said, "Robert is a tremendous employee and we're all for standing by him." Traynham's homosexuality was not news to the senator or his staff, he added.
In the online interview, Traynham defended his decision to work with the senator. "Sen. Santorum is a man of principle, he is a man who sticks up for what he believes in. I strongly do support Sen. Santorum.
Asked whether he supported Santorum's views on lesbian and gay issues, Traynham told PageOneQ, "Sen. Santorum is a family man. I have been with him for eight years and I am very proud to be with him."
The two-term senator is up for reelection next year. His expected Democratic opponent is State Treasurer Robert P. Casey, Jr.
Traynham began working for Santorum since 1997 as a press assistant and then deputy press secretary. He was press secretary for the senator's 2000 reelection campaign in Pennsylvania. Just prior to becoming communications director in the Senate office, Traynham served as director of communications for the Senate Republican Conference.
Traynham holds a bachelor of arts degree in political science from Cheyney University of Pennsylvania, where he currently serves on the Council of Trustees.
In supporting the Federal Marriage Amendment, which would prohibit gay marriage, Santorum has equated homeland security with the sanctity of traditional marriage. He has referred to gay marriage as "messing with the basic family unit."
During an interview with The Associated Press two years ago about a challenge to the constitutionality of Texas's sodomy law, Santorum said that if the Supreme Court allows gay sex at home (which it ultimately did), "you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything."
On the marriage issue, Santorum also said: "In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. That's not to pick on homosexuality. It's not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be."
© 2005, The Philadelphia Inquirer.
Visit Philadelphia Online, the Inquirer's World Wide Web site, at http://www.philly.com
Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Information Services.
"Further, IMHO, Sexuality and abortion have no place on a politcal platform."
He/she also uses the word "homophobes" in a serious mannter.
Maybe you aren't really a Republican? You sure aren't a conservative. Part of the Republican platform is respect for life; the pro-abortion party is the Democrats. You didn't know this?
Good, glad to know those tactics won't work across the board. I know we saw it with Mary Cheyney, but glad to be reminded of it!
Do we have to agree with every plank to vote Republican? Or should I stay home in 2008?
Yours is the best post on this thread.
Invasive personal questions are not proper on a forum like this.
If someone steals, I can call the ACT of theft despicable. That doesn't mean I hate the person. Similarly, I can call the ACT of same sex sodomy despicable, especially if performed in a public place such as a park, beach or parade, or if described to children, without hating those who perform it.
What do you think of teaching children in grade school that homosexuality is natural and normal, and tell kids as young as 11 and 12 how homosexuals achieve sexual gratification? This is not a rhetorical question; I think people reading this thread would like to know your answers.
I'm just wondering what other planks you disagree with.
Conservatives don't want the government in ANYBODY'S bedroom.
Thanks for the outburst.
From the tone of it, I'm fairly certain this will be lost on you, but here goes: Santorum is one of those hate-the-sin, love-the-sinner types on this issue.
You call him a "hypocrite" for standing by a loyal staffer. He can well stand by his belief of "disapproving" of a "lifestyle"--yet still be friends and colleagues with those who live that lifestyle.
While we're at it, I completely disagree that Traynham's personal life is fair game, because he's in a "public position." That's crap. You and I never heard of him before this. Are you saying anyone connected to Santorum, in any way--since HE'S a public figure--gives up their right to privacy?
Santorum didn't engage in "defending a homosexual" because it would "benefit" him. He spoke out against the Dem ops who would drag someone's name throught the dirt in order to smear him. I look on it as standing up for a friend.
I usually read all the posts before responding, but yours was so over the top and off the mark, I had to pop back immediately. I'm going to read the rest now, and I fully expect to take pleasure in all the posts that will no doubt kick you in your unreasonable butt.
If homosexuals kept their private life in the bedroom, no one would know or care. What we don't want is their sex life in schools K-12, all over TV, in the marriage license bureau, in the military, in sensitivity training sessions in public institutions including schools and universities, on public streets, on beaches, in parks, and on and on and on.
But you know this.
That's where the platform planks come in.
If you "doubt Sen. Santorum's conservative credentials," then you know nothing about him whatsoever--which you should, since he's the third-ranker. And not to put too fine a point on it...but Santorum has never said he "supports" homosexuality. And he certainly didn't say it here. If you're saying a gay person should be fired from his job because his sexual preference is discovered (not that this is the case here, as everybody in these circles knew about it), then you may be on the wrong forum altogether.
I think Santorum has been quite clear on which side of laws like that he's been coming down on.
And you know that this guy doesn't? Leave him alone.
But, some people would say that opposing "civil rights" laws for homosexuals, or same-sex "marriage" is "government getting into the bedroom."
I would disagree.
"But I supposed for an atheist or a libertine or someone hip and with the times, this would really mean nothing."
Yeah, you really got Santorum down. A hip and with-the-times atheist libertine. That's why we voted him in twice in Pennsylvania. Lay off the saki.
Do the Senator and the aide gaze meaningfully into each others eyes? Do they watch Gladiator movies together? Do they share a passion for show tunes and Judy Garland?
"That said, Santorum should have known better than to hire the guy. It just causes trouble. This poor judgment doesn't speak well of his re-election chances."
Huh? HUH?!? Yeah, back when he first hired him, in '97 ("Traynham began working for Santorum since 1997 as a press assistant and then deputy press secretary"), he should have asked, Are you gay? Then refused to hire him. THAT would have really made him look great--THAT would have stuck with him forever. One of the dumbest things I ever heard hear (and after four years, that's saying something).
NOT hiring him because of it (if he even knew, or cared to know) would have been really poor judgment, because he would be rejecting a solid pro for reasons off the resume.
As for not speaking well for his re-election chances, Santorum actually is in trouble, for '06, but that's got nothing to do with this.
I don't want anyone to have sex in public. I don't agree with teaching about homosexual sex in school. I also feel that all sex ed is better taught at home. But many parents are too uptight to talk about any kind of sex with their kids. Except of course to use my mother's sex talk: "Don't."
Not all gay people act like that. Most are normal neighbors, co workers, friends and family members. Their sexuality is as open as yours or mine. Those that are flaming and out of bounds, need to go away.
Listen close: Santorum is NOT a "libertarian Republican." This is not open to debate, or an urgent problem that needs your input or analysis. This one's already been settled, okay? Now relax, and focus on the next really big issue you need to tackle.
Why? I'm happy voting Republican. Do you want me to vote otherwise?
"claining that a pervert is "a trusted friend confidente to me and my family." bothers me."
Claiming that you live in the real world--where everyone knows and/or is related to someone who's gay--and spitting out the word "pervert" like it's a racial epithet, bothers me.
We conservatives can well disapprove of this so-called lifestyle; we can condemn its sexual practices (count me in on both of those). But to attempt to diminish and dehumanize people with your ignorance only dehumanizes you. Further than is already the case, I mean.
"This is such vile garbage. Standing in defense of the union of one man and one woman is NOT standing against 'homosexual rights'.
I commend Santorum and denounce the BIGOTS on the Left that claim to not only practice tolerance, but fully accept the lifestyle in every capacity, then "out" people at will because they think people will draw back in horror for what they believe will result in political benefit."
Bravo, brilliant, bravo!
"I'm saying that to be someone's top aide they'd have to know your background, and that a traditional conservative would tend to choose a traditional conservative as a top aide....not a top aide that would cause media attention for a lifestyle that is totally the opposite of traditional conservative."
Okay, now you're backpedaling, because you didn't realize how much heat your crude remarks would pull. Stop it. We'd really like to respect you, but we can only do it if you do one of two things:
STAND by your original remarks, and even reinforce them with further ignorance, and tell us all you believe what you believe, and you're not backing down.
Or CAPITULATE completely, admitting you were a jerk, and thanking us for showing you the way out of the tangle of your tortured thinking.
Either way, you'll get more respect than you will by "parsing" what you "meant."
The typical gutless politician would have booted the guy.
I've had more than one homosexual in my employ but that never had any bearing on my views on special rights for gays.
Okay. I'm sorry. I can't help asking this. I tried to make it go away, but it just keeps coming back.
Why would someone so rabidly intolerant and condemnatory of homosexuals create a user name like...Delphinium?
I mean, it's a fabulous flower, who could EVER deny that?
But the question lingers like an unanswered suspicion.
I know that....DUH. I agree with the Republican Platform--I have respect for life. I am pro-life. I believe abortion is wrong, it is the taking of an innocent life.
The abortion issue is a wedge issue for dems, that's all. I believe the way to fight this issue is on a different front, and because I do, I am not a conservative?
Because I refuse to condemn gays and those that hire gays, I am not a conservative?
No wonder we are not seen as a big tent party.
And I am a "she" by the way
Not all gay people act like that. Most are normal neighbors, co workers, friends and family members. Their sexuality is as open as yours or mine. Those that are flaming and out of bounds, need to go away
Uh, but the flaming ones and ones out of bounds you wish to go "away", IMO, are the mainstream of homosexuals and their "lifestyle"(more like deathstyle) is considered the epitomie of homosexual "life".
If they weren't there would be no gay "pride" parades.
Have you ever seen a group called "gays against gay pride parades".
I'm assuming it's a she, but that may be sexist of me. I can barely grow them here. My cute and cuddly (die!) deer eat them all.
I guess you don't know too many gay folks. It's like any other "group". What you see in public screaming their heads off may not be the heart and soul of the group. Kind of like Americans.
I know too many gays you couldn't pick out on the street. I also lived and worked in Greenwich Village for a while. I know all about flaming homosexuals.
You're really fighting with shadows here. I have never on this thread said anything whatsoever about Santorum's aide. Nothing. As far as I know, as he is quoted as saying, he supports the conservative goals. Fine. I never said he should be fired or anything else. What do mean "leave him alone"?
Santorum follows his principles, as I would expect all to do. You don't, therefor you are the hypocrite.
"Hate the sin, but love the sinner."
'' In the online interview, Traynham defended his decision to work with the senator. "Sen. Santorum is a man of principle, he is a man who sticks up for what he believes in. I strongly do support Sen. Santorum. ''
I know too many gays you couldn't pick out on the street. I also lived and worked in Greenwich Village for a while. I know all about flaming homosexuals
Huh, I notice that you don't mention that the driving force for the homosexual agenda comes from such places as Greenwich Village and they vote overwhelmingly for politicians who promote the homosexual agenda.
Get back to me when san francisco boots out nancy pelosi.
About the same time nmh and a significant portion of the right realize it I guess.
The reason I mentioned abortion was that you stated that sexuality and abortion should have no place on a party platform. Now you say you are pro-life. I never heard of someone who was pro-life who thought that it should not be part of the platform.
Second, it is not conservatives who have brought up "gay" marriage. To avoid the topic and say nothing about it guarantees that judges will mandate it. Is that what you recommend?
Is there or is there not a political movement to promote a homosexual agenda in modern America.
You should really read the links I posted.
If most homosexuals do not espouse the radical "gay" agenda, it sure would be nice if they'd say something opposing it, since their silence is deafening.
Meanwhile, the small fraction of homosexuals who are radical are the ones pushing the agenda in schools, in the courts, pushing for open homosexuals in the military, "gay" marriage, and so on.
What's your trip?
Kick him to the curb!
Put him on the dole!
Ooops. That didn't turn out right.
"Ooops. That didn't turn out right."
The left doesn't really care about homosexuals any more than they care about blacks, or any other "special interest" group. The left wants to destroy America's Judeo-Christian culture and marriage is a big part of that. In the 60's and 70's the left through the "sexual revolution" tried to destroy the institution of marriage, but they failed. Now, they want to push homosexual marriage on us; however, it's not about "equal rights" for homosexuals, it's about devaluing the meaning of marriage for everyone else.
The reason that Santorum's spokesman was "outed" is because Santorum is tied or trailing Casey in the polls. He is vulnerable.
This stunt is being done by the media/DNC to try to pry off support from Santorum from conservatives because they assume that the right believes that gays should be burned at the stake.
Meanwhile, to lose Santorum in the Senate would be a tremendous blow to the right and those who support family values because he is THE MOST VOCAL SUPPORTER OF FAMILY VALUES in the Senate.
Yes, he supported Spector and that was a mistake but to lose him in the Senate would be terrible for the traditional values crowd.
Think about it. Who is as outspoken about traditional family values as Senatorum?
One can love the sinner but hate the sin. One can also respect other individual's choices but refuse to condone his/her actions.
Seven Deadly Sins: pride, avarice, lust, envy, gluttony, anger, and sloth.
Pride is regarded as the sin that most surely separates a sinner from the grace of God.
You are correct. The Roman Catholic Church condemns the sin of engaging in homosexual behavior and calls on homosexuals to be celibate. Aside from the homosexual act being sinful, it is also adultery, because adultery is having sex with any person out of wedlock.
No, I haven't, just like I don't see anybody standing in the park supporting Bush as I do once week from anti-Bush protesters. Using the margins to characterize the whole is one of the left's favorite weapons.
Then you won't be supporting Santorum's nomination to the Supreme Court?
Uh all I'm doing is using common sense.
First of all I will ask you the same question as I did to pa mom.
Is there or is there not a political movement to promote a homosexual agenda.
And second where does that political movement get it's backing(pardon the pun) and where is this political movement concentrated.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.