Regardless of which label one chooses for Richard Grenell’s departure from the Romney campaign ranks, the result is the same. And can anyone tell me why in the world a self-respecting gay person or a woman would ever support the Republican candidate in the first place?
Politico Arena Asks:
Mitt Romney’s foreign policy spokesman Richard Grenell announced he was resigning from the campaign this week. Grenell, (an occasional Arena contributor), was the first openly gay spokesman for the Romney campaign.
However, Grenell’s hiring became a source of tension for the campaign after conservatives expressed concern over Grenell’s sexual orientation as well as his endorsement of same sex marriage. Grenell’s voice was also absent during a week of key foreign policy news – the anniversary of Osama bin Ladin’s death.
Does Grenell’s exit reflect poorly on the Romney campaign? And does it indicate that openly gay individuals still have a hard time climbing the ladder in politics?
My Response:
Grenell’s departure not only reflects the homophobic truth of the Romney campaign and its supporters, it also reflects the inconvenient truth gay Republicans must face. Their party denies their basic humanity.
Grenell should have stayed and fought for his job, and his Log Cabin Republican allies should have fought with him. This episode makes them complicit with injustices against their own. So I hold them equally culpable.
Latest posts by Gloria Feldt (Posts)
- The Young Politica: Guns on Campus - April 26, 2013
- Women’s Campaign Fund Won’t Settle for Less Than Half - April 24, 2013
- Women’s History Month: Why Sally Jewell as Secretary of the Interior Could be a Historic Win - March 29, 2013
The only choices you give are “Homophobia or Hypocrisy”. Do you think that equals an open discussion?