CNN source: Openly gay Romney spokesman quit after being told not to speak on conference calls

posted at 9:05 pm on May 2, 2012 by Allahpundit

That jibes with what Jen Rubin heard yesterday. She claimed that Grenell was being kept “under wraps” by the campaign; the campaign countered that Grenell hadn’t even moved to Boston to officially start work for them yet. What about conference calls, though? Lots of those lately thanks to the Bin Laden anniversary. Was Grenell in on them or not?

According to CNN, yep:

A foreign policy spokesman for the presidential campaign of Mitt Romney left his job in part because he was restricted from speaking publicly, a source with direct knowledge of the situation told CNN on Wednesday.

The source said Richard Grenell, who was hired to the Romney camp less than two weeks before his departure, was told on several occasions not to speak on the campaign’s conference calls with reporters…

In a Wednesday interview on CNN’s “The Situation Room,” Romney senior adviser Dan Senor said that Grenell had apologized for the tweets, and “he certainly wasn’t speaking for the campaign.”

“Richard Grenell was an extremely talented public servant who worked for four US ambassadors to the United Nations,” Senor told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer. “I worked with him in the early part of the 2000s and [he] is an extremely talented guy and we were lucky to have him.”

I still can’t figure out why, if this is some sort of anti-gay purge, Team Romney continues to praise Grenell publicly. Here’s Senor saying the campaign was lucky to have him and yesterday campaign manager Matt Rhoades issued a statement insisting that “We wanted him to stay because he had superior qualifications for the position he was hired to fill.” If you’re trying to placate social conservatives who object to Grenell’s hiring, that’s an odd way to do it.

Maybe keeping him on and muzzling him was their way of kinda sorta standing by Grenell while bowing to social cons anyway? Andrew Sullivan has also heard that Grenell was told to keep quiet on conference calls — even though he allegedly helped organize them:

Some actual reporting from yours truly. It seems clear from sources close to Grenell and reporters on the foreign policy beat that his turning point came last week. He’d been part of organizing a conference call to respond to Vice President Biden’s foreign policy speech, now known best for the “big stick” remark. So some reporters were puzzled as to why Grenell, a week into his job as Romney’s national security spokesman, was not introduced by name as part of the Romney team at the beginning of the call, and his voice completely absent from the conversation. Some even called and questioned him afterwards as to why he was absent. He wasn’t absent. He was simply muzzled. For a job where you are supposed to maintain good relations with reporters, being silenced on a key conference call on your area of expertise is pretty damaging. Especially when you helped set it up.

Sources close to Grenell say that he was specifically told by those high up in the Romney campaign to stay silent on the call, even while he was on it. And this was not the only time he had been instructed to shut up. Their response to the far right fooferaw was simply to go silent, to keep Grenell off-stage and mute, and to wait till the storm passed. But the storm was not likely to pass if no one in the Romney camp was prepared to back Grenell up. Hence his dilemma. The obvious solution was simply to get Grenell out there doling out the neocon red meat – which would have immediately changed the subject and helped dispel base skepticism. Instead the terrified Romneyites shut him up without any actual plan for when he might subsequently be able to do his job. To my mind, it’s a mark of his integrity that he decided to quit rather than be put in this absurd situation. And it’s a mark of Romney’s fundamental weakness within his own party that he could not back his spokesman against the Bryan Fischers and Matthew Francks.

I wondered about that too. Why try to turn down the heat over Grenell’s hiring by making him lie low when you could have turned him loose as an attack dog against Obama and won conservatives over that way? Unless I’m missing something, there have been no surprises about Grenell since he joined the campaign: He’s openly gay and was well known for being confrontational and sometimes snotty with his political opponents on Twitter. The backlash from some social cons and lefties was thus entirely foreseeable. Why didn’t Team Mitt foresee it and plan accordingly?

On the other hand, I keep seeing liberals reach for Fischer as an example of social conservative pressure on Romney to cut ties with Grenell. That’s insane. As Byron York pointed out last night, it was Fischer to whom Romney alluded at the Values Voter Summit last year when he criticized certain speakers at the event for betraying the values of decency and civility by using “poisonous language.” Fischer, meanwhile, went on to say, “The next president needs to be a man of sincere, authentic, genuine Christian faith.” This is not a guy who’s getting Romneyworld to jump through hoops. But maybe Tony Perkins or Gary Bauer might? They’ve also criticized the Grenell hiring publicly, which was to be expected; the question is, have they or some other prominent social con criticized it privately and vehemently enough that Team Mitt thought better of bringing Grenell on after they hired him. That’s the only explanation I can come up with for why they’d muzzle him — that they simply underestimated the degree of opposition from the right, because of his orientation, or from the left, because of the fake-outrage ginned up over his snotty tweets. The thing is, Mitt’s organization usually doesn’t underestimate anything; that’s why he’s the nominee despite the base’s general “Anyone But Romney” sentiment. Mystifying.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Stupid.

Bmore on May 2, 2012 at 9:08 PM

OK…So?

KOOLAID2 on May 2, 2012 at 9:08 PM

OK…So Stupid.

Bmore on May 2, 2012 at 9:10 PM

Stupid.

Bmore on May 2, 2012 at 9:08 PM

…you back yet?…it’s been like the lonely heart club for some of these folks…some may swoon!

KOOLAID2 on May 2, 2012 at 9:10 PM

I thought Romney wasn’t antigay.

MeatHeadinCA on May 2, 2012 at 9:10 PM

This is all so confusing.

Cindy Munford on May 2, 2012 at 9:12 PM

KOOLAID2 on May 2, 2012 at 9:10 PM

No. Just sneaking in for a quicky. ; )

Bmore on May 2, 2012 at 9:12 PM

I thought Romney wasn’t antigay.

MeatHeadinCA on May 2, 2012 at 9:10 PM

I thought Romney was honest.

/Rombots

gryphon202 on May 2, 2012 at 9:12 PM

No, the values Socons went to Santorum. They have no sway at all over Romney. My take is that Grenell is a loose cannon, and no, there’s no pun intended.

John the Libertarian on May 2, 2012 at 9:13 PM

And we needed to know this guy is gay because why? Was he working for Romney, or too busy waving the rainbow flag. I bet Ron Paul could use a super-sensitive gay activist posing as a grown-up campaign team member.

Hening on May 2, 2012 at 9:13 PM

Creates a bad image. This will hurt Romney unless he addresses it.

a capella on May 2, 2012 at 9:13 PM

I thought Romney was honest.
/Rombots
gryphon202 on May 2, 2012 at 9:12 PM

Where are they to defend him?

MeatHeadinCA on May 2, 2012 at 9:15 PM

What the ****’s a conference call?
 
- Vice President Joe Biden

rogerb on May 2, 2012 at 9:15 PM

…OK…So Stupid.

Bmore on May 2, 2012 at 9:10 PM

…you said it …not me! ….had to be the first one on what will probably be another geh thread…(nothing wrong with that…but Bmore usually doesn’t lead the way)…way to go!

KOOLAID2 on May 2, 2012 at 9:15 PM

There is something more to this story than what is being told otherwise this makes no sense at all.

That being said – on the scale of 1 to 10 on the who gives a crap meter – this rates about a -5.

gophergirl on May 2, 2012 at 9:15 PM

dammit Romney

thirtyandseven on May 2, 2012 at 9:15 PM

Allah,

Maybe there’s a private scandal he’s involved in (say,has a really wide stance when using the toilet) that Team Romney knows about but nobody else does and they decided to just jettison him while keeping it under wraps and hoping it goes away? Might explain Grenell’s comment about his private life.

Darth Executor on May 2, 2012 at 9:15 PM

Is this something important?

Curtiss on May 2, 2012 at 9:15 PM

Creates a bad image. This will hurt Romney unless he addresses it.

a capella on May 2, 2012 at 9:13 PM

If Romney breathes it hurts him in the media. he should say nothing…

sandee on May 2, 2012 at 9:16 PM

Andrew Sullivan has also heard that Grenell was told to keep quiet on conference calls — even though he allegedly helped organize them…

Andrew “just asking questions” Sullivan

Well that’s certainly a reliable source…

The Ugly American on May 2, 2012 at 9:16 PM

Pretty ninnyish behavior from Team Romney. Hire the right people. Period. And stand by your decision. It doesn’t matter to the job what sex preference anyone has.

beatcanvas on May 2, 2012 at 9:17 PM

Darth Executor on May 2, 2012 at 9:15 PM

I have to think you are on to something in thinking there is some other disqualifer, this doesn’t make any sense.

Cindy Munford on May 2, 2012 at 9:18 PM

gryphon202 on May 2, 2012 at 9:12 PM

Where are they to defend him?

MeatHeadinCA on May 2, 2012 at 9:15 PM

I’m tempted to assert that you can’t defend the indefensible, but given Rombots’ irrational defense of Romneycare as “conservative,” that doesn’t seem to apply to the Romney campaign.

gryphon202 on May 2, 2012 at 9:19 PM

Makes perfect sense to me. If he hasn’t officially started yet for the campaign, you allow him to listen in on the conference calls to get a feel for things but he doesn’t actively participate until he is officially on board.

crosspatch on May 2, 2012 at 9:20 PM

I thought Romney was honest.
/Rombots
gryphon202 on May 2, 2012 at 9:12 PM

Where are they to defend him?

MeatHeadinCA on May 2, 2012 at 9:15 PM

Paul was my first choice, but as a guy who was for Romney over Santorum and Gingrich, I think I can say not many people look at Romney and say, “now there’s a guy I have no qualms about trusting”, not even his supporters.

But it was bad field, and Romney was the best choice since people don’t want to consider Paul.

my two cents worth anyway…

thirtyandseven on May 2, 2012 at 9:20 PM

maybe he was just too fabulous for the job. did any of you think of that?

GhoulAid on May 2, 2012 at 9:21 PM

This anti-gay garbage is going to make things much tougher.

WHO CARES if he is gay or not????

Is he a good foreign policy person or a good economist or a good………….

smorrow66 on May 2, 2012 at 9:22 PM

That jibes with what Jen Rubin heard yesterday.

FFS! Of course it “jibes” with what Jen Rubin “heard” yesterday (also from anonymous sources and also without bothering to quote Grendel himself who made it clear that Mitt Romney gave him his full support). Ever heard of JournoList? They are coordinating the whisper campaign & I, for one, am not giving it any credence by implying that because CNN & The Washington Post’s vague, anonymously sourced stories “match” so it must be true.

Dark Star on May 2, 2012 at 9:22 PM

Mitt Romney likes to fire people, but doesn’t eat dogs.

Curtiss on May 2, 2012 at 9:23 PM

Pretty ninnyish behavior from Team Romney. Hire the right people. Period. And stand by your decision. It doesn’t matter to the job what sex preference anyone has.

beatcanvas on May 2, 2012 at 9:17 PM

+1

bazil9 on May 2, 2012 at 9:23 PM

A couple other thoughts. How many gay conservatives oppose marriage equality – now, apparently, a litmus test (though it wasn’t for Cheney)? I cannot think of any.

Yours truly for one.

And I personally know of many others…

The Ugly American on May 2, 2012 at 9:23 PM

They told him not to speak, maybe he sounds like Elmer Fudd or speaks like Yosemite Sam.
/

So news day, eh?

batterup on May 2, 2012 at 9:23 PM

Darth Executor on May 2, 2012 at 9:15 PM

I have to think you are on to something in thinking there is some other disqualifer, this doesn’t make any sense.

Cindy Munford on May 2, 2012 at 9:18 PM

The fact that we have to filter and double check every thing in the news these days to get to any grain of truth makes me think that you two are on to something..

Seven Percent Solution on May 2, 2012 at 9:24 PM

I’m guessing…oh…18 minutes before someone comes in and says “good, we don’t need any flamers running things”.

It was said last thread about this.

MadisonConservative on May 2, 2012 at 9:24 PM

So Romney told Grenell to keep his mouth shut because he is …..gay ?
This doesn’t make any sense, and whatever the reasonhe was told to keep his mouth shut, I’m sure it has nothing to do with his being gay.
But then he is gay, and that is all the that matters to the fluffers in kneepads media. Everything that happens to this person must be because of homophobia because he has no other identity and achievements other than his sexual orientation

burrata on May 2, 2012 at 9:25 PM

He’s openly gay and was well known for being confrontational and sometimes snotty with his political opponents on Twitter.

Weren’t a lot of those tweets directed against opponents’ wives, though? If he was unable to dial that back, he could have become a huge detriment to the campaign. We couldn’t very well tell lefties to lay off of Ann if a campaign official was going after Michelle.

malclave on May 2, 2012 at 9:26 PM

I’m tempted to assert that you can’t defend the indefensible, but given Rombots’ irrational defense of Romneycare as “conservative,” that doesn’t seem to apply to the Romney campaign.

gryphon202 on May 2, 2012 at 9:19 PM

Ah, the guy who claims he’s doing everything humanly possible to ensure Obama doesn’t get another 4 years is here! Good too see you! Keeping up the good (?) work I see to make sure that Obama doesn’t get another 4 years by insulting Romney, his supporters and making sure to disrupt any thoughts of uniting behind the only candidate we have left.

Dark Star on May 2, 2012 at 9:27 PM

Base to Romney: Take a deep cleansing breath. Exhale. Repeat. Be who you are. A regular American. Fire a few consultants. Move on.

minnesoter on May 2, 2012 at 9:28 PM

I don’t think Romney did right by Grenell. Keeping a media silence on this was not a smart move.

Mister Mets on May 2, 2012 at 9:29 PM

Three people have criticized hiring a gay guy and that is supposed to equate to all Republicans being bigots. That’s kinda a stretch, no?

Also, why does the media act like only Republicans are against same sex marriage? Isn’t the President and VP also against gay marriage. And what about California, a very, very blue state that went overwhelmingly for Obama in 08, but yet passed Prop 8, banning gay marriage.

Why the double standard?

ramrants on May 2, 2012 at 9:29 PM

Sorry but OT but MM and Juan Williams were on Hannity and she ripped him up on the OWS narrative promoted by the lsm. He also started in on the unfounded Tea Party racism. No one does righteous indignation like MM and she did not disappoint. It was great. Juan was left as a quivering pile of talking points.

FLconservative on May 2, 2012 at 9:30 PM

MadisonConservative on May 2, 2012 at 9:24 PM

That’s a fantastic winning message.

That guy should be proud.

thirtyandseven on May 2, 2012 at 9:30 PM

Which campaign will end up throwing the most people under the bus this cycle? I think it will be pretty close.

McDuck on May 2, 2012 at 9:31 PM

MadisonConservative on May 2, 2012 at 9:24 PM

He was to have been the foreign policy spokesman. I don’t see how whom he was banging would’ve entered into the discussion on non-social issues.

annoyinglittletwerp on May 2, 2012 at 9:31 PM

this is an issue? really? all we can do is get the vapors about somebody who wasn’t yet on the payroll not talking, yet when obamas hand picked consumer protection agency head, elizabeth warren, is a laughable liar about her 1 millionth yet unprovable cherokee heritage gets nothing? the left loses in a landslide, as even real demoncrats won’t vote for a marxist! the progressives are not yet a majority. ABO, learn it, love it, live it!!!!!!!!!!

tm11999 on May 2, 2012 at 9:32 PM

If Grenell organized the conference calls, and then shut down…

1. Who was also on the line?

2. What is the hierarchy?

IMO, it’s possible someone took it upon themselves to shut him down as he was being re-vetted. When they didn’t give him clearance before moving and during Barry’s big UBL moment, he said “WTF am I here for?”

I still believe the pressure to bail came from the gay left. The SocCons mentioned don’t have that much juice with Mitt, unless they were using Santo as a wedge.

budfox on May 2, 2012 at 9:32 PM

72 hours. The truth always seems to come out after 72 hours.

He looks like a respectable guy.

Key West Reader on May 2, 2012 at 9:32 PM

on May 2, 2012 at 9:31 PM

Don’t focus on the Distractions.

Key West Reader on May 2, 2012 at 9:34 PM

I don’t think Romney did right by Grenell. Keeping a media silence on this was not a smart move.

Mister Mets on May 2, 2012 at 9:29 PM

Are you stupid? I’m asking in all seriousness. What part of this equals media silence?

Team Romney continues to praise Grenell publicly. Here’s Senor saying the campaign was lucky to have him and yesterday campaign manager Matt Rhoades issued a statement insisting that “We wanted him to stay because he had superior qualifications for the position he was hired to fill.” If you’re trying to placate social conservatives who object to Grenell’s hiring, that’s an odd way to do it.

Furthermore, what part of Grendell’s quote on his resignation — particularly the part where he stated emphatically that Mitt Romney had always given him his full support leads you to believe that Romney didn’t “do right” by Grendell?

BTW, I’m not going to wait to see what B.S. illogical spin you come up with. These are what are called rhetorical questions.

Dark Star on May 2, 2012 at 9:35 PM

nothing good can come out of this…. I thought that team was supposed to be smart and competent? Was this call made by Romney personally?

Can.I.be.in.the.middle on May 2, 2012 at 9:35 PM

He was to have been the foreign policy spokesman. I don’t see how whom he was banging would’ve entered into the discussion on non-social issues.

annoyinglittletwerp on May 2, 2012 at 9:31 PM

Because he’s GAYYYYYYYYYY and conservatives don’t want to hear about it but if they do hear about it then he’s GAYYYYYYYYYYYY and we just can’t stand people who throw their sexuality in our faces. Also he was backed by John Bolton as a brilliant foreign policy GAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY.

Santorum 2016.

MadisonConservative on May 2, 2012 at 9:36 PM

Is anyone else tired of this Allahpundit drivel? Night after night we get juvenile nonsense.

Is there some reason why, instead of stirring up anti-Romney piffle, AP can’t get off his butt and give us what we want. When did it become known to the Obama Administration that bin Laden was in Abbottobad? How long was it between the time we found out bin Laden was there and when the order to kill was given?

Basilsbest on May 2, 2012 at 9:36 PM

WHO CARES if he is gay or not????

smorrow66 on May 2, 2012 at 9:22 PM

Easy, Flicka, easy. Notice that this is an AP post. The objective is to excite you into a frenzy of despair, so that you will keep returning to Hot Air for your fix.

“Face piles of trials with smiles. It riles them to believe that you perceive the plot they weave.”

minnesoter on May 2, 2012 at 9:37 PM

– Moody Blues

minnesoter on May 2, 2012 at 9:38 PM

DERP!

/I’ve stumbled into comments on an Ezra Klein blog.

……….BTW. What evah happened to Ezra Klein?

Key West Reader on May 2, 2012 at 9:38 PM

Yeah, let’s wait for the punch line- this is a little too unfinished to pass judgement.

BettyRuth on May 2, 2012 at 9:39 PM

It was great. Juan was left as a quivering pile of talking points.

FLconservative on May 2, 2012 at 9:30 PM

Someday, ZO will slap around Juan on live TV :O……..
and that will be Juan’s last day on FOX

He’ll crawl back to NPR !!!

burrata on May 2, 2012 at 9:40 PM

Is anyone else tired of this Allahpundit drivel?

Nope.

Night after night we get juvenile nonsense.

Basilsbest on May 2, 2012 at 9:36 PM

Don’t be so harsh. Some of your comments are tolerable.

MadisonConservative on May 2, 2012 at 9:40 PM

So much for the economy.

JPeterman on May 2, 2012 at 9:40 PM

At least we know Basilsbeast Is sincere in her devotion.

MeatHeadinCA on May 2, 2012 at 9:42 PM

I still can’t figure out why, if this is some sort of anti-gay purge, Team Romney continues to praise Grenell publicly. Here’s Senor saying the campaign was lucky to have him and yesterday campaign manager Matt Rhoades issued a statement insisting that “We wanted him to stay because he had superior qualifications for the position he was hired to fill.” If you’re trying to placate social conservatives who object to Grenell’s hiring, that’s an odd way to do it.

Because many people rely on what a person says and ignores what they do when making up their minds on a person. Obviously this is something that Democrats do every day. They say one thing while at the same time doing completely opposite things. Romney is counting on conservatives that are anti-gay to see what he did and praise him for it, and counting on his progressive liberal left of center base to see what he said and praise him for it.
I have no clue what went on. If the guy is as qualified and capable as many have said he is I only have two things to say about it. He should have been a better negotiator and gotten himself back into Romney’s good graces, and he should be evaluated on his accomplishments and not pushed out based on his sexual orientation.

astonerii on May 2, 2012 at 9:42 PM

Unlike basilsbest, I appreciate what allahpundit brings to HA. Keep up the good work.

McDuck on May 2, 2012 at 9:43 PM

So much for the economy.

JPeterman on May 2, 2012 at 9:40 PM

This will blow over whatever “this” is. Better it happen now than 5 months from now.

gophergirl on May 2, 2012 at 9:43 PM

Look out, AP, the Mittwitts don’t like stories that could possibly be construed that Gov. Romney made an error.

Cindy Munford on May 2, 2012 at 9:44 PM

Can a social con here explain to me what the problem might be? I don’t see how any biases regarding sexual orientation would affect his role in the foreign policy department.

Client Number Nine on May 2, 2012 at 9:45 PM

Look out, AP, the Mittwitts don’t like stories that could possibly be construed that Gov. Romney made an error.

Cindy Munford on May 2, 2012 at 9:44 PM

Like Obama, they will never admit error. If an error has to be proclaimed, it was someone else that made it. Fall man, meet bus tire!

astonerii on May 2, 2012 at 9:46 PM

The anti-gay Media Research Center employees like Dan Gainor were all over Romney, too.

It's Vintage, Duh on May 2, 2012 at 9:46 PM

He did not get fired, he quit. I there’s evidence he was asked to resign, please share it. All I’ve seen so far is him say Romney supported him and Romney’s people say they true to get him to stay.

If he quit because he was asked to stay silent on conference calls it seems silly unless he was hired to speak on calls. They were using him to organize and prepare for the calls so they obviously weren’t giving him the impression that his ideas didn’t matter.

Personally I think he realized that he had signed on to a job that required him to relocate to Boston and he wanted out. It would be bad enough to be a conservative there, but a conservative that escaped from one of the liberals pet victim plantations…well, it would be hell.

JadeNYU on May 2, 2012 at 9:47 PM

Can a social con here explain to me what the problem might be? I don’t see how any biases regarding sexual orientation would affect his role in the foreign policy department.

Client Number Nine on May 2, 2012 at 9:45 PM

Depends on where he is placed, some nation states are very anti-gay. More so than me anyways. But, there are plenty that are gay friendly and gay neutral. Unless he is advocating for special gay rights, I see no problem hiring someone who can do the job.

astonerii on May 2, 2012 at 9:47 PM

If it weren’t so very flip floppy… then it would surprise me.

kringeesmom on May 2, 2012 at 9:47 PM

“several occasions not to speak”

Over not even 2 weeks? And he was setting up the calls? Not buying it. Was he magically on page 1 with Team Romney the moment he was hired? I love how its a source “a source with direct knowledge of the situation”, which means “friend of Grenell” and not someone in the Romney camp. This of course means they’re just retelling what Grenell has said. Guess Grenell is the gay Colin Powell.

Zaggs on May 2, 2012 at 9:47 PM

Basils Eight Ball Answer of the Day:

http://www.beatcanvas.com/pics/basil_allahpundit.jpg

beatcanvas on May 2, 2012 at 9:48 PM

Night, night.

Don’t let the bed bugs bite :o)

……..

Remembering Ezra Klein…. that lil bedbug!

/Column within 72 hours

Key West Reader on May 2, 2012 at 9:48 PM

Depends on where he is placed, some nation states are very anti-gay.

astonerii on May 2, 2012 at 9:47 PM

We’ve had Hillary f**king Clinton as our Secretary of State. There’s no way this guy could be as bad.

MadisonConservative on May 2, 2012 at 9:49 PM

So the narrative for Romney at this moment is :
Romney is a rich white dude who has 2 houses, likes to fire people and transports his dog on top of his car, doesn’t know a famous small town cookie, would not have ordered to kill Osama and now he fired a gay guy ?
If this is all that Obama can come up with , his fluffers have failed him miserably

burrata on May 2, 2012 at 9:49 PM

I still can’t figure out why, if this is some sort of anti-gay purge, Team Romney continues to praise Grenell publicly.

Really? It’s simple. It’s a symptom of Romney’s biggest weakness, flip-floppiness. Wanting to have it both ways: He’ll make sure he fires the gay employee to satisfy one segment while praising the gay employee to the skies to satisfy another segment. He should’ve stick with Grennell if he truly did feel he was the best person for the job, sexual orientation and ruffled feathers notwithstanding. Romney’s a tower of Jell-o. It’s been known for a long long time.

ddrintn on May 2, 2012 at 9:51 PM

I still can’t figure out why, if this is some sort of anti-gay purge, Team Romney continues to praise Grenell publicly.

Even if it has nothing to do with homosexuality, it would make no sense to anyone with half a brain that you kick someone out and then lavish praise upon them. Dumb da-dumb-dumb.

Stoic Patriot on May 2, 2012 at 9:53 PM

We’ve had Hillary f**king Clinton as our Secretary of State. There’s no way this guy could be as bad.

MadisonConservative on May 2, 2012 at 9:49 PM

He asked a question, I answered. It is a legitimate argument. Cultures are different, and presenting them with something they might see as an insult will cause additional problems. Whether or not the added problems are worth the qualifications is a judgement call. Speaking as a pure social con…

astonerii on May 2, 2012 at 9:54 PM

* stuck, not stick.

ddrintn on May 2, 2012 at 9:55 PM

astonerii on May 2, 2012 at 9:54 PM

I wasn’t meaning to sound confrontational. It was more a disbelief that any country would refuse to talk with a foreign policy expert that they may(or may not) know to be gay after dealing with good ol’ “Reset Button” Rodham. Additionally, maybe if conservatives didn’t go apes**t over this guy being gay and just left it alone, it wouldn’t be a problem. Supposedly social cons tolerate homosexuality as long as it’s left in the closet. How is it supposed to be even remotely in the closet if we’re making it a headline?

MadisonConservative on May 2, 2012 at 9:58 PM

attention self-loathing republican gays: YOUR PARTY HATES YOU! come over to the good guys!

DBear on May 2, 2012 at 9:59 PM

Just remember, Romney likes to fire people.

MeatHeadinCA on May 2, 2012 at 10:00 PM

Additionally, maybe if conservatives didn’t go apes**t over this guy being gay and just left it alone, it wouldn’t be a problem. Supposedly social cons tolerate homosexuality as long as it’s left in the closet. How is it supposed to be even remotely in the closet if we’re making it a headline?

MadisonConservative on May 2, 2012 at 9:58 PM

Well, I tried to keep it low. Like I originally said, having a gay guy that is qualified to do his job that is not activist does not make Romney a bad guy in my book. I do not even think Romney is a bad guy for him resigning. I think there was some lost opportunities here between Romney and Grenell.
While I did argue that Romney might push him out and praise him for the being on both sides of an issue benefit, I do not think he did that. You know I detest Romney, I just do not think this is something he would do.

astonerii on May 2, 2012 at 10:02 PM

attention self-loathing republican gays: YOUR PARTY HATES YOU! come over to the good guys!

DBear

The guys who attack you if you don’t say the right thing?

Zaggs on May 2, 2012 at 10:02 PM

I still believe the pressure to bail came from the gay left. The SocCons mentioned don’t have that much juice with Mitt, unless they were using Santo as a wedge.

budfox on May 2, 2012 at 9:32 PM

I don’t post much anymore at HotAir, but this kind of post is just a bunch of garbage that cannot be ignored. Yeah, sure, Santorum was pressuring Romney threatening him with the social conservative vote. LOL. You do know that Santorum had an openly gay senate aide working for him for 10 years right? That being the case, I just don’t think Santorum would have a problem with Romney hiring a gay foreign policy expert.

This whole story is missing some very large pieces because none of it makes sense. Lets just wait for the facts before we jump to the kind of delusional conclusions Budfox latched onto.

KickandSwimMom on May 2, 2012 at 10:03 PM

Additionally, maybe if conservatives didn’t go apes**t over this guy being gay and just left it alone, it wouldn’t be a problem.

MadisonConservative on May 2, 2012 at 9:58 PM

Oh, I’ll bet 90% of conservatives had never even heard of Grennell, and most who had didn’t care. This is panic from Team Romney. Unseemly. It shows how weak they themselves think they are.

ddrintn on May 2, 2012 at 10:04 PM

astonerii, that’s sort of what I was thinking. Normally, I’d give someone the benefit of the doubt, but given his Twitter history, I’m not certain he’d be able to stifle his opinions in the name of professionalism.

Client Number Nine on May 2, 2012 at 10:04 PM

Makes perfect sense to me. If he hasn’t officially started yet for the campaign, you allow him to listen in on the conference calls to get a feel for things but he doesn’t actively participate until he is officially on board.

crosspatch on May 2, 2012 at 9:20 PM

He was hired because he was a highly qualified foreign policy SPOKESMAN. Yet he is not to speak untl he gets a “feel” for things? Did they, or you, think he would start singing show tunes?

katy the mean old lady on May 2, 2012 at 10:07 PM

Seriously, why should it be surprising that the gay issue, (which generates nothing but derision and personal strife between two distinct moral ideologies), is something any Presidential candidate would attempt to avoid at all cost? Where’s “the gain” politically when we are talking about only 1.7 percent of the 18-and-over population? One would think arguing about if an atheist eats with utensils would be more relevant to the entire voting populace.

Rovin on May 2, 2012 at 10:10 PM

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.

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?

Somehow we must have missed all the countless posts across the conservative blogsphere calling for Grenell’s resignation.

We must do something about this immediately! immediately! immediately! Harrumph! Harrumph! Harrumph!…

The Ugly American on May 2, 2012 at 10:10 PM

While I did argue that Romney might push him out and praise him for the being on both sides of an issue benefit, I do not think he did that. You know I detest Romney, I just do not think this is something he would do.

astonerii on May 2, 2012 at 10:02 PM

What he should have done from the beginning was not take on this guy. If he didn’t have the spine to defend him, if he truly thought he was a solid foreign policy advisor, then he shouldn’t have taken him on. Big question: if he can’t defend this guy, how is he going to defend a SCOTUS appointment? Or any of his decisions, for that matter? He has no backbone. He’s an empty suit. This will not go well, whoever wins this November.

MadisonConservative on May 2, 2012 at 10:11 PM

astonerii, that’s sort of what I was thinking. Normally, I’d give someone the benefit of the doubt, but given his Twitter history, I’m not certain he’d be able to stifle his opinions in the name of professionalism.

Client Number Nine on May 2, 2012 at 10:04 PM

Oh, that’s rationalization b.s. He spoke out because his qualifications for the job were being questioned solely on the basis of his sexual orientation.

ddrintn on May 2, 2012 at 10:12 PM

Are you stupid? I’m asking in all seriousness. What part of this equals media silence?

Team Romney continues to praise Grenell publicly. Here’s Senor saying the campaign was lucky to have him and yesterday campaign manager Matt Rhoades issued a statement insisting that “We wanted him to stay because he had superior qualifications for the position he was hired to fill.” If you’re trying to placate social conservatives who object to Grenell’s hiring, that’s an odd way to do it.

Furthermore, what part of Grendell’s quote on his resignation — particularly the part where he stated emphatically that Mitt Romney had always given him his full support leads you to believe that Romney didn’t “do right” by Grendell?

BTW, I’m not going to wait to see what B.S. illogical spin you come up with. These are what are called rhetorical questions.

Dark Star on May 2, 2012 at 9:35 PM

By “media silence” I meant the decision to put Grenell out of the spotlight, and not involve him in his capacity as a foreign policy spokesman.

If you didn’t notice, that was what the blog post we’re commenting on was about.

That jibes with what Jen Rubin heard yesterday. She claimed that Grenell was being kept “under wraps” by the campaign; the campaign countered that Grenell hadn’t even moved to Boston to officially start work for them yet. What about conference calls, though? Lots of those lately thanks to the Bin Laden anniversary. Was Grenell in on them or not?

A foreign policy spokesman for the presidential campaign of Mitt Romney left his job in part because he was restricted from speaking publicly, a source with direct knowledge of the situation told CNN on Wednesday.

The source said Richard Grenell, who was hired to the Romney camp less than two weeks before his departure, was told on several occasions not to speak on the campaign’s conference calls with reporters…

Mister Mets on May 2, 2012 at 10:12 PM

I still can’t figure out why, if this is some sort of anti-gay purge, Team Romney continues to praise Grenell publicly. Here’s Senor saying the campaign was lucky to have him and yesterday campaign manager Matt Rhoades issued a statement insisting that “We wanted him to stay because he had superior qualifications for the position he was hired to fill.” If you’re trying to placate social conservatives who object to Grenell’s hiring, that’s an odd way to do it.

If it is an anti gay purge, why hire him in the first place?

I think he got the job because of his connections with people like John Bolton.

He was hired because he was a highly qualified foreign policy SPOKESMAN. Yet he is not to speak untl he gets a “feel” for things? Did they, or you, think he would start singing show tunes?

katy the mean old lady on May 2, 2012 at 10:07 PM

He had just gotten the job and from what I hear he was not actually working yet. It was just a few days ago that he was brought in. So, no I do not think they expected him to sing show tunes, but I do think he was still in the process of settling in. It might be that he saw that there were social conservatives who would not ever accept him and so he decided that the sooner he left the better.

But I would not trust a source to CNN on this, from what I hear Romney tried to talk him out of leaving.

Terrye on May 2, 2012 at 10:12 PM

attention self-loathing republican gays: YOUR PARTY HATES YOU! come over to the good guys!
 
DBear on May 2, 2012 at 9:59 PM

 
From earlier today:
 

You seem to have had a lot of personal experience with homosexual Republicans. Tell us more.
 
lester on May 2, 2012 at 7:46 AM

 

More for outlander’s “personal” experience with said homosexual Republicans… did you share any of that experience? Would you care to explain.
 
lester on May 2, 2012 at 9:04 AM

 
Huh. Only one political side in this thread chose sexual preferences as a direct personal slur and attack.
 
Please take note, lurkers/voters.
 
rogerb on May 2, 2012 at 9:27 AM

rogerb on May 2, 2012 at 10:12 PM

Is this really because he’s gay? If this guy worked for the Bush Admin for 7 years, why didn’t Soc Con groups have an issue with him then? Is it more a matter of Romney being risk averse? The guy became an issue for the left and So Cons for different reasons and that’s why they let him go maybe? To avoid ANY controvery?

The left is going to say it’s because Romney folded to anti-gay crowd but that just doesn’t make sense.

dforston on May 2, 2012 at 10:12 PM

This will not go well, whoever wins this November.

MadisonConservative on May 2, 2012 at 10:11 PM

Same bad feeling. I am taking it worse than most. I always believed the Republican party was really going to become the conservative party it is supposed to be.

astonerii on May 2, 2012 at 10:13 PM

I thought Romney was honest.

/Rombots

gryphon202 on May 2, 2012 at 9:12 PM

Did Grenell say that Romney had been dishonest with him?

Terrye on May 2, 2012 at 10:16 PM

Somehow I don’t see Romney caving to fiscal conservatives like this.

besser tot als rot on May 2, 2012 at 10:16 PM

Look out, AP, the Mittwitts don’t like stories that could possibly be construed that Gov. Romney made an error.

Cindy Munford on May 2, 2012 at 9:44 PM

Especially ones based on pure speculation and hearsay.

Harrumph! Harrumph! Harrumph!…

The Ugly American on May 2, 2012 at 10:17 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3