Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

"Scandal:" One of Mitt Romney's Spokesmen is Gay
Townhall.com ^ | April 24, 2012 | Guy Benson

Posted on 04/24/2012 3:02:54 PM PDT by Kaslin

Outrage!  Or something!  Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney has "stepped on a landmine" by having the temerity to appoint -- I hope you're sitting down -- an openly gay national security spokesman, according to one leader of a social conservative group.  Once you've pried yourself from the floor, feel free to persuse some choice excerpts from this person's incensed column:
 

Gov. Mitt Romney stepped on a landmine by appointing Richard Grenell, an out, loud and proud homosexual, to be his spokesman on national security and foreign policy issues. Grenell has for years been an outspoken advocate for homosexual marriage. In fact, word is that he left the Bush administration because President Bush would not formally acknowledge his homosexual partner.


"Word is" that unattributed rumors can be passed off as facts in certain quarters.
 

Since, as the saying goes in D.C., personnel is policy, this means Gov. Romney has some ‘splaining to do. This clearly is a deliberate and intentional act on his part, since he was well aware of Mr. Grenell’s sexual proclivities and knew it would be problematic for social conservatives. It’s certainly not possible that there are no other potential spokesmen available, men who are experts in foreign policy and who at the same time honor the institution of natural marriage in their personal lives.


So the mere employment of a gay or lesbian person -- regardless of his or her political leanings, or level of expertise -- is "problematic" for "social conservatives?"  Is heterosexuality now a prerequisite to work on behalf of a Republican presidential candidate?  Quite a standard, I must say.  And the kicker:
 

Given the propensity for members of the homosexual community to engage in frequent and anonymous sexual encounters, the risk to national security of having a homosexual in a high-ranking position with access to secret information is obvious.


What's the "obvious" conclusion here, again?  It sounds like this gentleman is suggesting that because some homosexuals engage in "frequent and anonymous" sexual encounters -- as do some straight people -- all gay people with access to sensitive information are ipso facto national security risks.  Okay then.  Rather than punch holes in this, er, logic, I'll just encourage you to read Jen Rubin's take down of this nonsense here.  It seems Romney has repudiated this particular individual in the past over some previous inflammatory rhetoric, so perhaps the whole spat is personal.  In any case, here's an actual gay rights-related threat to the American ideal, upon which conservatives of all stripes should agree:
 

Religious liberty groups are blasting a proposed ordinance that would force churches in Hutchinson, Kan. to rent their facilities for gay weddings and gay parties. The Hutchinson City Council will consider adding sexual orientation and gender identity to the protected classes in the city’s human relations code. They are expected to vote on the changes next month. According to the Hutchinson Human Relations Commission, churches that rent out their buildings to the general public would not be allowed to discriminate “against a gay couple who want to rent the building for a party.”

Matthew Staver, chairman of the Liberty Counsel Action, told Fox News the proposed law is “un-American.” “It is a collision course between religious freedom and the LGBT agenda,” Staver said. “This proposed legislation will ultimately override the religious freedom that is protected under the First Amendment.” He argued that churches cannot be forced by the government to set aside their religious convictions and their mission. And, he warned, some churches could even be forced to rent their buildings for drag parties. “What we are ultimately going to see is churches forced to confront this law, forced to do things and allow their facilities to be used by people and for events that diametrically undercut the mission of the church,” he said.


Unlike the "controversy" discussed above, this story truly is outrageous.  According to the Constitution -- and recently reaffirmed 9-0 by SCOTUS -- churches and other religious institutions have the right to adhere to the tenets of their faith, especially within the walls of their own places of worship.  This proposal (in Kansas, of all places) would sacrifice Americans' sacred religious liberties on the altar of political correctness.  It's both flagrantly unconstitutional and totally wrong-headed.  Sadly, it's not unprecedented.  We've seen pastors persecuted by Canadian "human rights" tribunals for public criticisms of homosexuality, and an EU court ruled last month that churches that decline to carry out gay weddings in member states that have legalized the practice are guilty of discrimination.  Oh, but that sort of thing could never happen here, we're told, because we have a First Amendment.  Indeed we do, but we've just gotten through witnessing a presidential administration stomp all over said amendment, in furtherance of a tawdry political end.  So forgive me for questioning the hard Left's fealty to the United States Constitution. 


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS: gayvote; homosexualagenda; romney
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-84 last
To: Ballygrl
I guess Log Cabin Republicans are horrible too?

Well they are a group who feels the need to identify themselves as gay and use it to promote their own agenda.
51 posted on 04/24/2012 4:21:43 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

This should make Ann very proud, me it just affirms that I will not vote for Myth Romney for POTUS in 2012, screw the GOP.

And Sarah, you should have run, not teased us, our country is gone.


52 posted on 04/24/2012 4:33:00 PM PDT by stockpirate (Romney, Ann Coulter & our ruling republican SOCIALISTelites, are Big Government socialists,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Psalm 144
It is amazing that those who cannot see this are so debauched they cannot even grasp why we refuse to join them.

They don't care -- they only come on these threads to try to intimidate and demoralize us. "We are everywhere, we are victorious!" The jubilant victory-grunt of the 2% over the majority.

The thing we never get around to discussing is that, the way the Dems are stitching their minoritarian coalition together will ultimately become violent and rights-denying, because minoritarian regimes are inherently weak and metastable, and so they repress the majority with threats and violence.

Worse, the Marxist-Leninist core of the Democratic Party is inherently criminal in its worldview and encourages the worst impulses, in their "organizing", among the rabble they work with. (Alinsky said so. Always agitating, rousing the anger of the mob against the Main Enemy.)

Therefore bloodshed is guaranteed, even blinking Bill Ayers's forecast that they would have to murder 25,000,000 American patriots to make Marxism-Leninism stick in the U.S.

Syria is a case in point.

53 posted on 04/24/2012 4:33:09 PM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: stockpirate
And Sarah, you should have run, not teased us, our country is gone.

Maybe someone paid her a visit and showed her the shape of things to come, if she did run, and detailed the practical consequences for her and her family.

We're talking the major leagues, now, and people who are determined, very determined, to have their way.

54 posted on 04/24/2012 4:38:16 PM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Romney, making his move left of center to shake off the folks who really believe Romney is running for president. Very timely now that there is little time left for anyone else to get the republican nomination. Hey, you don't need a third party candidate to split the ticket when you have a front-runner who plans to split himself at the right moment.

Now all we need is a proper label to call the perp.

55 posted on 04/24/2012 5:03:01 PM PDT by Eastbound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lentulusgracchus

George Washington, Alexander Hamilton and others had some very determined people against them, they still did what was right for the country.

We deserve the leaders we get, the GOP is no different then the DNC, both are communist front groups.

They get none of my support or money.


56 posted on 04/24/2012 6:04:45 PM PDT by stockpirate (Romney, Ann Coulter & our ruling republican elites, are Big Government socialists, Grand Ole Sociali)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
The article does three things

1. Carry water for and promote Romney as THE GOP ONE; regardless, his principles and policies (Like Obama was promoted by the left) -here we see hero worship; the cult of personality; blind following sheep.

2. Disparage True Conservatives.

3. Promote the normalization of homosexual sex and as a consequence promote the homosexual agenda.

57 posted on 04/24/2012 7:37:08 PM PDT by DBeers (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Parmenio
While I oppose gay marriage, there are some things that are more important, like protecting this nation from its foreign enemies and saving it from socialism. Gay marriage is far down the list.

Sure, 'cause stuff like undermining the very bedrock foundation of the country's social structure isn't going to do any harm at all or anything.

58 posted on 04/24/2012 7:38:29 PM PDT by Yashcheritsiy (Anybody but Obama and Romney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Ballygrl
I guess Log Cabin Republicans are horrible too? not every gay person is a radical leftist, there are many that love this Country and believe in Capitalism just like you and me.

Hint - the very fact that the whole point to their group's existence is to self-identify as "gay" shows that they are every bit as much "progressive" and destructive to the country with their preferred tribalism as Jesse Jackson and La Raza are.

59 posted on 04/24/2012 7:43:24 PM PDT by Yashcheritsiy (Anybody but Obama and Romney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Ballygrl
I guess Log Cabin Republicans are horrible too? not every gay person is a radical leftist, there are many that love this Country and believe in Capitalism just like you and me.

Log Cabin Republicans are NOT conservative. They are progressives like Romney the RINO. They wish to impose homosexual sex normalcy upon the people by using government to do it -they want to GROW the government JUST LIKE Obama though they may disagree with Obama on some areas of government tyranny and growth -they agree on mainstreaming homosexual sex normalcy.

What worked for Reagan was promoting an understanding, a position, that our primary goal as patriots is to defend the people against the encroachments of the state.

If the advocates of the homosexual agenda want to use and expand the power of the government to impose the normalcy of homosexual sex upon the people and we proclaim we represent those that defend against this, WE WILL WIN at the polls!

60 posted on 04/24/2012 8:06:01 PM PDT by DBeers (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Parmenio; max americana

Bolton is pro-fags in the military and pro-fag marriage. So he’s dead wrong about the homo agenda.


61 posted on 04/24/2012 8:06:42 PM PDT by little jeremiah (We will have to go through hell to get out of hell. Signed, a fanatic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: lentulusgracchus

Exactly.


62 posted on 04/24/2012 8:09:53 PM PDT by little jeremiah (We will have to go through hell to get out of hell. Signed, a fanatic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Planet Kolob has ass pirates- who knew?


63 posted on 04/24/2012 8:12:13 PM PDT by Pelham (Marco Rubio, la raza trojan horse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lentulusgracchus; donna

Townhall.com, the Musical.

Featuring Guy Benson in the role of...


64 posted on 04/24/2012 8:18:20 PM PDT by Pelham (Marco Rubio, la raza trojan horse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Ballygrl
Oh Oh Oh, the inhumanity of it all, an openly gay man? now this is horrible why?

Because the gay men in question is militant homosexual activist?

There is a big problem with that as it tells us Romney is bed in the homosexual agenda as he has been for years, going to back to when he sought to discriminate against the Boy Scouts as CEO of the 2002 Winter Olympics.

If you think social conservatives are going to tolerate Romney pushing a homosexual, you're mistaken.

65 posted on 04/24/2012 9:26:46 PM PDT by Kazan (Mitt Romney: The greater of two evils)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Parmenio
FYI, Richard Grenell was a former aide to John Bolton.

I don't care if he has seances with Ronald Reagan. He is an outspoken homosexual activist. Romney is and always has been a proponent of the homosexual agenda and this further proof he is going to continue to be.

66 posted on 04/24/2012 9:30:10 PM PDT by Kazan (Mitt Romney: The greater of two evils)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Ballygrl
I guess Log Cabin Republicans are horrible too?

Um, that is correct.

The LCR has but one objective -- promoting the homosexual agenda within the Republican party.

67 posted on 04/24/2012 9:36:34 PM PDT by Kazan (Mitt Romney: The greater of two evils)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
 
=====================
 
KASLIN: What happens now?
Scott Toomey: Well, now, uh, Ken Mehlman, R. Clarke Cooper, Meghan McCain, Mary Cheney and I wait until nightfall, and then leap out of the Fithcally Conthervative log cabin, taking The Party(tm) by surprise -- not only by surprise, but totally unarmed!
KASLIN: Who leaps out?
Scott Toomey: Uh, Ken Mehlman,  R. Clarke Cooper, Meghan McCain, Mary Cheney and I. Uh, leap out of the log cabin, uh and uh....
KASLIN: Oh....
Scott Toomey: Oh.... Um, l-look, if we built this large wooden Rhinocerous -- [twong]
ALL:  Run away!  Run away!  Run away!  Run away!
      [splat]

 
"The [my] only connection [to the Republican Party]is I'm registered as a Republican"
---Mitt RRRRRomney---
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNbXdOCQQMs
 

68 posted on 04/24/2012 10:26:02 PM PDT by LomanBill (Animals! The DemocRats blew up the windmill with an Acorn!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ballygrl

What part of PostGenderist/Transhumanist doctrine is Conservative?

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&gs_nf=1&cp=29&gs_id=7&xhr=t&q=+PostGenderist/Transhumanist


69 posted on 04/24/2012 10:29:05 PM PDT by LomanBill (Animals! The DemocRats blew up the windmill with an Acorn!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Ballygrl

What does “Due Penalty for their perversions” mean?


70 posted on 04/24/2012 10:31:57 PM PDT by LomanBill (Animals! The DemocRats blew up the windmill with an Acorn!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Pelham
Townhall.com, the Musical.

;)

Think Nathan Lane would be available? Can he sing?

71 posted on 04/25/2012 1:09:37 AM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Kazan
The LCR has but one objective -- promoting the homosexual agenda within the Republican party.

And depriving social conservatives of a voice and a party, and consigning us to total defeat, and to police actions by their Rat allies. Giving us "the treatment", like Hoover and the Kennedys gave the KKK. Imagine every big-name preacher you can think of, sitting in Leavenworth for his faith. Something like that.

72 posted on 04/25/2012 1:13:25 AM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
[Article]
It sounds like this gentleman is suggesting that because some homosexuals engage in "frequent and anonymous" sexual encounters -- as do some straight people -- all gay people with access to sensitive information are ipso facto national security risks. Okay then. Rather than punch holes in this, er, logic, I'll just encourage you to read Jen Rubin's take down of this nonsense here. [Link in original.]

Cleanup on aisle 3 ..... Jennifer Rubin, quoted by the author, is a neocon. No love lost between neocons and social or Southern conservatives: in fact, neocons have been busy for almost 20 years, trying to push Southerners out of any positions of influence in the GOP.

Note in this long article about her at the Progressive Policy Institute's "Che Guevara Files" on prominent conservatives and neocons, that she is not quoted at all on social issues, although she supports certain conservative evangelical groups, such as Rev. Hagee's, that support Israel.

Cold link here:
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/rubin_jennifer

The PPI's silence on her social values is thunderous, and speaks eloquently of her Eastern urban social values, as opposed to the family-values agenda of "guns, God, the unborn, and DOMA".

73 posted on 04/25/2012 1:49:00 AM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lentulusgracchus; Kaslin
Uyup, Jennifer Rubin is a neocon and a social liberal on some key issues, which is why she got cited.

This article explains in part:

But Rubin, who has never shied from a fight, says that her role is different from conservative bloggers: She’s commenting on the right, not defending it.

And she is not, by many measures, a conservative stalwart. While she rarely writes on social issues, for instance, she breaks with her party on some of the most deeply politicized ones. While she thinks Roe v. Wade should be “repealed” as legal folly, her own view on abortion “is Bill Clinton’s line” — “safe, legal and rare,” she said, though she said she could support banning some late-term abortions. She says of same-sex marriage, “each state should be able to decide and people should be able to marry who they wish.”

“I have never understood the argument that gay marriage diminishes heterosexual marriage,” she said, adding that it’s not high on her list of priorities.

She said she doesn’t view her heterodox views as a handicap.
Source: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/66854.html

And for the record, she now holds the WaPo blogging job covering "the Right" that was outed as a fraud in 2010 by Tucker Carlson in the Dave Weigel meltdown. She at least seems to be more honest, or at least forthcoming, about her job than Weigel and his masters were. She writes that she covers conservatism, and de-emphasizes the Post's original idea that the job was covering the movement from the inside -- a good idea considering she's no defender of DOMA.

74 posted on 04/25/2012 3:33:56 AM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Ballygrl

“Oh Oh Oh, the inhumanity of it all, an openly gay man?
now this is horrible why?”

Obviously you want to take away my guns and destroy this country. Satan is the father of lies!


75 posted on 04/25/2012 4:51:26 AM PDT by Skylab
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Parmenio

“While I oppose gay marriage, there are some things that are more important, like protecting this nation from its foreign enemies and saving it from socialism. Gay marriage is far down the list.”

Parmenio was Alexander’s most important general, no? Interesting connection there, regarding the whole gay thing.

I wonder if being kind to and tolerant of others who do you no harm is also far down the list.


76 posted on 04/25/2012 4:54:15 AM PDT by Skylab
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: LomanBill

“What does “Due Penalty for their perversions” mean?”

It depends on what perversion means. Do you look at women who wear pants with the same disgusts you use for gay people? And how do you know if you hadn’t accidentally sat on the same chair as a woman on her period? All important issues in these times.


77 posted on 04/25/2012 5:02:28 AM PDT by Skylab
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Psalm 144
Willard is not hypocritical, nor schizophrenic, nor empty. He is a malefactor, and works to as certain a purpose as did his moral and intellectual equivalent, Margaret Sanger.

And your view of his purpose is . . . ? I am honestly asking. I could see your theory going in several directions. And I know some, but not that much about Mormonism. I am staunch conservative Presbyterian.

78 posted on 04/25/2012 6:13:01 AM PDT by RatRipper (I'll ride a turtle to work every day before I buy anything from Government Motors.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: RatRipper

Suppress the population of non-Mormon “gentiles” via abortion and condoning of open homosexuality while simultaneously promoting heterosexual marriage and live births within his religious group. Rinse and repeat a few generations and this is a game changer. This is Margaret Sanger’s approach to ‘undesirables’, and I believe it is Romney’s as well.

This answers the appearance of a contradiction in his public policy as Governor and his internal policy as Mormon clergy.


79 posted on 04/25/2012 7:27:24 AM PDT by Psalm 144 ("I'm not willing to light my hair on fire to try and get support. I am who I am." - Willard M Romney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Psalm 144

Could be. I would not disagree. Muslims practice this now. From the beginning, the chosen people were instructed by God to be “fruitful and multiply”. And we Christians are the “salt of the earth” and should feel an obligation to have children. It would be poetic justice for the leftists to dilute their influence because of the fruits of their licentious ways.

Thank you.


80 posted on 04/25/2012 8:35:46 AM PDT by RatRipper (I'll ride a turtle to work every day before I buy anything from Government Motors.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: central_va
So do you make a swishing sound when you walk. Do you have lisp? Just askin’.

Ad hominem attacks are employed by the ignorant and the stupid.

I'll give you the benefit of not knowing you and assume you are ignorant.

81 posted on 04/25/2012 12:11:17 PM PDT by Mikey_1962 (Obama: The Affirmative Action President.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Skylab

Do you eat rotten food even though common sense tells you it’s poisonous?

Most people don’t.


82 posted on 04/25/2012 6:44:13 PM PDT by LomanBill (Animals! The DemocRats blew up the windmill with an Acorn!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Skylab

>>Do you look at women who wear pants with
>>the same disgusts you use for gay people?

Does the CDC document the increased incidence of disease for women who wear pants that it does for homosexuals? No.

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&sclient=psy-ab&q=cdc+homosexuality+statistics


83 posted on 04/25/2012 6:55:30 PM PDT by LomanBill (Animals! The DemocRats blew up the windmill with an Acorn!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: huldah1776

Romney has become very polarizing and is creating divisions between the base. He is as bad if not worse than Obama. This is the same divide and conquer tactics Obama used to win in 2008.


84 posted on 04/30/2012 8:44:12 AM PDT by Mozilla (Constitution Party 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-84 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson