Romney advisor Eric Fehrnstrom on hiring Grenell: Mitt has a record of taking on “voices of intolerance”

posted at 5:39 pm on May 4, 2012 by Allahpundit

To repeat a point I made last night, if they muzzled Grenell to show social conservatives that they disapprove of gays, they’re going about the aftermath in an awfully funny way. Not only did Mitt himself turn up on “Fox & Friends” this morning and personally reiterate that he wanted Grenell to stay (skip to 3:55 of the clip below for that) but his right-hand man Eric Fehrnstrom singled out “voices of intolerance” whom Romney has confronted before — a thinly veiled reference to Bryan Fischer — in his own hit this a.m. on MSNBC. Conservative talk radio host Steve Deace hit back on Twitter:

“So at the same [time] the Romney campaign is demanding loyalty pledges from its base, it calls its base ‘voices of intolerance,’ ” he wrote in one. “What Romney’s spokesman did tonight was bring aid and comfort to the enemy, which is the act of a traitor,” he said in another.

Also:

“Ask your Christian leader trying to get you to vote for Romney if he agrees with Romney campaign that Christians are ‘voices of intolerance,’” tweeted conservative Iowa radio host Steve Deace — one of 17 missives on the subject.

I don’t understand the Romney campaign’s schizophrenia on this issue. On the one hand, they were willing to hire Grenell, made a determined effort to convince him to stay, and are dogged enough in his defense to risk irritating social cons by slamming the “intolerance” of his critics. On the other hand, Romney himself is a longstanding opponent of gay marriage and, according to multiple media outlets, the campaign did ask Grenell to lie low for awhile shortly after he was hired until the “controversy” finally fizzled. I assume that rising support for gay marriage has now forced Romney to play both sides of this issue in kinda sorta the same way that Obama does. Mitt won’t/can’t support gay marriage but he will take a stand for meritocracy by hiring employees regardless of orientation and repudiating anti-gay “intolerance.” Will that gain him more socially liberal swing voters than it’ll lose him among his base? Guess we’ll see.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy



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

crosspatch on May 4, 2012 at 5:57 PM

So much for that big tent.

chemman on May 4, 2012 at 6:47 PM

This is turning into the Stupid Column at Hot Air — the Daily Whine about some Hurt Feelings Homosexual.

Haven’t you figured out that THIS Grinnell BS is exactly what the DNC wants people talking about? Go look at Twitchy if you want documentation.

DaMav on May 4, 2012 at 6:44 PM

…and it’s Mittens’ fault. . .so what’s your point? DEAL WITH IT!

Palin/West 2012

Pragmatic on May 4, 2012 at 6:47 PM

Sir or madam, you need help. Just because some of us don’t want trojan pony mittens, doesn’t mean we WANT Obama . . .you truly have the mind of a infant if you believe that.

Palin/West 2012

Pragmatic on May 4, 2012 at 6:44 Pm

So since that’s not happening it’s Obama for you…

sandee on May 4, 2012 at 6:47 PM

Haven’t you figured out that THIS Grinnell BS is exactly what the DNC wants people talking about?

DaMav on May 4, 2012 at 6:44 PM

Allah has to throw the trolls a bone every now and again…

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on May 4, 2012 at 6:48 PM

Many of the so-called “conservatives” here don’t impress me as real conservatives, they impress me as Democrats pretending to be conservatives in order to get what are effectively more votes for Obama by suppressing votes by Republicans.

crosspatch on May 4, 2012 at 6:43 PM

I know it happens, but I also think there is something more to it. Everyone is hardcore conservative right up until their entitlement is touched. They it’s “I worked in kitchens/ice flows/volcanoes shining shoes and deserve it.”

Can we just crush Obama please?

antisense on May 4, 2012 at 6:48 PM

I know it happens, but I also think there is something more to it. Everyone is hardcore conservative right up until their entitlement is touched. They it’s “I worked in kitchens/ice flows/volcanoes shining shoes and deserve it.”

Can we just crush Obama please?

antisense on May 4, 2012 at 6:48 PM

If your candidate is Romney, I doubt it. But give it the ol’ college try!

Stoic Patriot on May 4, 2012 at 6:49 PM

Sir or madam, you need help. Just because some of us don’t want trojan pony mittens, doesn’t mean we WANT Obama . . .you truly have the mind of a infant if you believe that.

Palin/West 2012

Pragmatic on May 4, 2012 at 6:44 PM

AngryEd has literally said it wants Obama to win.

Ouch, you look silly.

antisense on May 4, 2012 at 6:49 PM

Anywho, young people are much more pro-gay anything than TruAmericans. It is only a matter of time before they are the majority on this issue.

antisense on May 4, 2012 at 6:24 PM

Well, when those who are morally opposed to homosexuality make statements like

Mitt Romney: because America needs someone who believes in giving men who like sticking their dicks in the rectums of other men a voice.

Is that the basic jist of it?

Stoic Patriot on May 4, 2012 at 5:52 PM

that’s not hard to understand. Even someone who might be on the fence would be put off by such statements. Besides being classless and disgusting, the antagonistic tone of statements like that are counter-persuasive.

If you want to get more people on board with your position, you have to at least attempt to persuade them, not just try to offend people. “Oh, you’re the party of insulting douchebags? Yeah, I think I’m fine over here, a-hole”.

As someone who is 26 years old,

Oh. Gotcha.

I’m not concerned about losing sway over the GOP.

With maturity, that might change.

Give me social conservatism and populism over fiscal conservatism and social liberalism any day.

Stoic Patriot on May 4, 2012 at 6:32 PM

Oh, I see. Mirror image of a big govt democrat. Wonderful. Grow up.

underemployed on May 4, 2012 at 6:51 PM

If your candidate is Romney, I doubt it. But give it the ol’ college try!

Stoic Patriot on May 4, 2012 at 6:49 PM

College try? Nope, I actually want to win with the only candidate going up against Obammer.

antisense on May 4, 2012 at 6:51 PM

I am just pointing out the obvious. If talk radio failed to prevent Romney from getting the nomination, and that was their implied goal, are they not weakened? Or show weakness?

Are you nuts? Did you see some vast right wing conspiracy that was pushing against or for any one candidate? Shall we call you Hillary?

The same goes for the social wing of the Reps.

You push progressive social agenda issues as much as any Conservative commenter here pushes Conservative Social issues. This BS tactic or implying you have the right and they don’t doesn’t work anymore.

Not sure why being gay means you have an extreme agenda… maybe an extreme home makeover agenda.

antisense on May 4, 2012 at 6:39 PM

It’s a joke to you I guess. A joke makes it funny and anyone with a concern, their point is irrelevant? Two female officers just destroyed a good friend and his SGMs careers because they were pushing the limits of how they were allowed to comport themselves in regards to public displays of affection. An on the spot correction at a formal which would have been acceptable and expected for a hetro couple evidently does not apply to them. This is what you all pushed for.

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 6:51 PM

Best man for standing on both sides of an issue is Mitt.

kringeesmom on May 4, 2012 at 6:52 PM

Yeah, I would gladly ecstatically take Palin/West over Romney/Anyone.

And I’d love to be able to fly, too.

But you don’t see me standing on my roof flapping my arms.

Get sensible. Come down off your roof and help us vote out Obama.

:-)

DaMav on May 4, 2012 at 6:52 PM

crosspatch, that charge can go the other way, too. There is no way that any sane person would think that what some of the extreme Romney supporters have said will do anything but drive people away from voting GOP, so why shouldn’t they be suspect as well?

Note: I supported Romney once Hunstman left.

McDuck on May 4, 2012 at 6:52 PM

I wish Eric Fehrnstrom would get lost.

anotherJoe on May 4, 2012 at 6:53 PM

Oh, I’m soooo hurt. A progressive republican here thinks we act like Democrats.

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 6:53 PM

Mitt Romney’s Liberal Paradigm Shift: a Republican FOR Homosexual ‘Special Rights’ http://republicansforfamilyvalues.com/category/boy-scouts/

Romney believes sexual perversion is not just for the bedroom anymore http://bit.ly/uUui4G

Mitt and Gay Marriage http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/286813/mitt-and-gay-marriage-deroy-murdock

“There’s something to be said for having a Republican who supports civil rights in this broader context, including sexual orientation. When Ted Kennedy speaks on gay rights, he’s seen as an extremist. When Mitt Romney speaks on gay rights he’s seen as a centrist and a moderate. It’s a little like if Eugene McCarthy was arguing in favor of recognizing China, people would have called him a nut. But when Richard Nixon does it, it becomes reasonable. When Ted says it, it’s extreme; when I say it, it’s mainstream.” – Willard ‘Mittens’ Romney

Winghunter on May 4, 2012 at 6:55 PM

Two female officers just destroyed a good friend and his SGMs careers because they were pushing the limits of how they were allowed to comport themselves in regards to public displays of affection. An on the spot correction at a formal which would have been acceptable and expected for a hetro couple evidently does not apply to them. This is what you all pushed for.

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 6:51 PM

I am not sure what this means, but I am not for career destructin’ of any kind.

antisense on May 4, 2012 at 6:57 PM

Since when does Christianity say you can’t hire a gay person to be an adviser or spokesperson on topics that have nothing to do with homosexuality?

nitzsche on May 4, 2012 at 5:44 PM

That was never the point of those who criticize him.

He is a Gay Marriage Advocate and very critical of Christians and others with religious oppositions to this. He has shown over and over that he will viciously attack those he disagrees with. He continued to do that and it is a foreign issue so you are lying it had nothing to do with that.

Since Romney does not want the votes of the intolerant people in America that oppose Gay Marriage fine we will not vote for him.

Happy not with Mitt?

Gay Marriage is opposed by a Majority of Americans. Mitt will definitively lose without them.

Man why not rename the party the Grand New Democratic Party.

Steveangell on May 4, 2012 at 7:01 PM

I wish Eric Fehrnstrom would get lost.

anotherJoe on May 4, 2012 at 6:53 PM

Don’t worry, if it blows up in Romney’s face I’m sure Eric will help him etch-a-sketch it away. =P

Stoic Patriot on May 4, 2012 at 7:01 PM

Allah has to throw the trolls a bone every now and again…

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on May 4, 2012 at 6:48 PM

Allah is himself a troll.

The Notorious G.O.P on May 4, 2012 at 7:03 PM

Palin/West 2012
America must be saved.

Pragmatic on May 4, 2012 at 6:35 PM
I could think if a lot of names more descriptive of that post but “Pragmatic” isn’t one of them.

I am curious why you would continue posting that since there is no possible way that can even happen. I suspect you are simply trying to annoy people as that can be the only possible logical explanation.

crosspatch on May 4, 2012 at 6:39 PM

Annoyance is Romney as the Republican nominee . . . THAT will be annoyance!
Palin/West 2012
America must be saved.

Pragmatic on May 4, 2012 at 7:04 PM

I imagine Anderson and Shep meeting at the Russian Tea Room to argue all of this out in the coat closet.

:P

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on May 4, 2012 at 7:05 PM

Palin/West 2012
America must be saved.

Pragmatic on May 4, 2012 at 6:35 PM
I could think if a lot of names more descriptive of that post but “Pragmatic” isn’t one of them.

I am curious why you would continue posting that since there is no possible way that can even happen. I suspect you are simply trying to annoy people as that can be the only possible logical explanation.

crosspatch on May 4, 2012 at 6:39 PM

There is NO logical explanation for a conservative to support Romney . . .in my humble opinion. Say what you want but Mittens is still a loser and not worthy of support. Palin/West 2012 America must be saved.

Pragmatic on May 4, 2012 at 7:06 PM

Does anybody really care if someone is gay or not? I don’t get this story it just doesn’t make sense to me why this is even an issue. Help me out here, do conservatives really think like this?

steel guy on May 4, 2012 at 7:07 PM

antisense on May 4, 2012 at 6:24 PM

Do the math and you will know that isn’t viable. So-cons make up about 17% of the voting electorate. The Dims will draw 40% no matter what. If the so-cons stay home them Romney needs 42 of the remaining 43 to win. You really think he can draw that much?

chemman on May 4, 2012 at 7:07 PM

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 6:51 PM
I am not sure what this means, but I am not for career destructin’ of any kind.

antisense on May 4, 2012 at 6:57 PM

A career officer, a LTC in charge of a Task Force, and his Command Sergeant Major are having a 15-6 investigation conducted against them because two female officer at an Army formal. The lesbian couple were wearing Class A uniforms and leg hugging each other on a dance floor and the LTC and his Senior NCO thought they had some responsibility to do an on the spot correction. The lesbian couple were being filmed and the LTC asked the filmer to stop. The SGM asked the couple to stop. The only people in trouble are these two task force leaders who tried to control the inappropriate behavior of personnel within their command. This is what you all wanted, no?

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 7:08 PM

Yeah, I would gladly ecstatically take Palin/West over Romney/Anyone.

And I’d love to be able to fly, too.

But you don’t see me standing on my roof flapping my arms.

Get sensible. Come down off your roof and help us vote out Obama.

:-)

DaMav on May 4, 2012 at 6:52 PM

Gladly, but I will not vote for another Democrat . . a pox on the the houses of mittens and obambi

Palin/West 2012 if not, then Gary Johnson it will be for me!
America Must Be Saved!

Pragmatic on May 4, 2012 at 7:09 PM

All’s I want to know is, when do we start blaming Sarah Palin?

HerneTheHunter on May 4, 2012 at 7:09 PM

On the other hand, Romney himself is a longstanding opponent of gay marriage and, according to multiple media outlets, the campaign did ask Grenell to lie low for awhile shortly after he was hired until the “controversy” finally fizzled. I assume that rising support for gay marriage has now forced Romney to play both sides of this issue in kinda sorta the same way that Obama does.

Actually, Romney has been carefully threading the needle and trying to play both sides for years.

What Romney could have done as governor to stop those who wanted to redefine marriage, but did not: The Missing Governor

Which makes sense when you read about Romney’s prior promises: Romney’s Tone on Gay Rights Is Seen as Shift

INC on May 4, 2012 at 7:10 PM

I imagine Anderson and Shep meeting at the Russian Tea Room to argue all of this out in the coat closet.
Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on May 4, 2012 at 7:05 PM

Hey, I’m glad to see the Russian Tea Room reopened! I loved the RTR when I lived in NYC many moons shots of vodka ago;)

Buy Danish on May 4, 2012 at 7:10 PM

that’s not hard to understand. Even someone who might be on the fence would be put off by such statements. Besides being classless and disgusting, the antagonistic tone of statements like that are counter-persuasive.

If you want to get more people on board with your position, you have to at least attempt to persuade them, not just try to offend people. “Oh, you’re the party of insulting douchebags? Yeah, I think I’m fine over here, a-hole”.

underemployed on May 4, 2012 at 6:51 PM

Actually, I’m rather disgusted by playing identity politics. And when it comes to insulting douchebags, you’ll find none better than the pro-gay lobby at HotAir who insist that everyone who disagrees with them is a bigot. It’s the same tactic the left plays on objections to catering to minorities. Don’t like it? Raaaacciiiissst!

Let’s be honest: this is about making people who like putting their penises into other men’s rectums a group to pander to. A great party campaigns on higher ideals. Social conservatives at least can talk about marriage, how it has a purpose in child-rearing, and that to change the nature of the arrangement involved subverts the purpose. The religious can at least talk about how homosexuality is in conflict with a combination of the philosophy of functionalism and idea of serving a divine purpose.

What can the gay lobby talk about? How they want what they want, and they ought to get what they want by virtue of wanting it?

Stoic Patriot on May 4, 2012 at 7:13 PM

Just as with DADT, gay marriage bans will eventually end up in history’s rubbish bin. Thank goodness.

BTW, I still don’t understand the third party idea. If it can’t win and would just split the vote on the right and hand everything over to the Dems, then what is the point? SoCons have much more power right now than they would if they left.

McDuck on May 4, 2012 at 7:13 PM

Mitt and Gay Marriage

Read this and if you still support Mitt you are NOT a Republican.

Republicans do NOT support Gay Marriage.

Mitt will even break the constitution to give Gays the right to Marry.

I warned you idiots. Now you see I was right.

Palin/West 2012
America must be saved.

Pragmatic on May 4, 2012 at 6:35 PM
I could think if a lot of names more descriptive of that post but “Pragmatic” isn’t one of them.

I am curious why you would continue posting that since there is no possible way that can even happen. I suspect you are simply trying to annoy people as that can be the only possible logical explanation.

crosspatch on May 4, 2012 at 6:39 PM

There is NO logical explanation for a conservative to support Romney . . .in my humble opinion. Say what you want but Mittens is still a loser and not worthy of support. Palin/West 2012 America must be saved.

Pragmatic on May 4, 2012 at 7:06 PM

I promise this will be the only post I call Mittbots idiots. One is enough. But this really upsets me. We are about to nominate a Gay Marriage Advocate. I mean this is not a Democratic Party there is no Republican Party. Mitt destroyed it as I warned he would.

Steveangell on May 4, 2012 at 7:13 PM

BTW, I still don’t understand the third party idea. If it can’t win and would just split the vote on the right and hand everything over to the Dems, then what is the point? SoCons have much more power right now than they would if they left.

McDuck on May 4, 2012 at 7:13 PM

The point is not pragmatic, but ideological. The point is to not cooperate with those who seek to undermine your political agenda.

Stoic Patriot on May 4, 2012 at 7:15 PM

I don’t understand the Romney campaign’s schizophrenia on this issue. On the one hand, they were willing to hire Grenell, made a determined effort to convince him to stay, and are dogged enough in his defense to risk irritating social cons by slamming the “intolerance” of his critics. On the other hand, Romney himself is a longstanding opponent of gay marriage and, according to multiple media outlets, the campaign did ask Grenell to lie low for awhile

And we can always trust the media now can’t we?

Jennifer Rubin had another post on this today:

What I know from talking to many players involved is that Grenell was getting flak principally from the far right, but also from the left challenging how a gay man in favor of gay marriage could work for a conservative (on foreign policy, mind you) whose position is the same as the president’s (neither is in favor of gay marriage). He perceived the Romney camp was keeping him out of sight. The Romney camp thought it was successfully calming the waters, and senior officials may have been only dimly aware of the angst Grenell was going through. Grenell quit. It’s not inconceivable that in a large, bureaucratic campaign discrete actions (e.g. not having Grenell talk on a conference call) can be perceived as deliberate, calculated tactics. I have to think that if they were all in the same room and not on opposite coasts there would have been better coordination between Grenell and senior Romney officials as to what, if anything, to say to the haters lobbing potshots at Grenell.

Grenell felt he had no choice but to quit. The Romney team reacted (“What the heck?” is the best way to describe it) and tried to get him to stay.

But Grenell was right. He had become the story. If Romney or Fehrnstrom had said what they did today before Grenell quit, he might have been understandably reassured. But the firestorm wouldn’t have ended, as we see from a new round of speculation and stories.

It is the sad fact of politics that those who make the loudest noise often do win. Decent people who care about the work they do are noble and retreat rather than let the swarm overtake the mission. And rather than blaming the victim or the guy who hired Grenell, maybe the finger really should be pointed at those on the right and left who made Grenell’s resignation a self-fulfilling prophesy. As for Romney, he’s got no excuse for not being prepared the next time the horde descends.

I think that people need to just let this go. It is not that big a deal in the scheme of things.

Terrye on May 4, 2012 at 7:15 PM

Steveangell on May 4, 2012 at 7:13 PM

Then leave it Steve. Leave the republican party and join The Conservative Party like my family did.

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 7:15 PM

Oh, he’s just trying to have it both ways. Typical RINO disease.

tom on May 4, 2012 at 7:16 PM

Sir or madam, you need help. Just because some of us don’t want trojan pony mittens, doesn’t mean we WANT Obama . . .you truly have the mind of a infant if you believe that.

Palin/West 2012

Pragmatic on May 4, 2012 at 6:44 Pm

So since that’s not happening it’s Obama for you…

sandee on May 4, 2012 at 6:47 PM

It will be obama for you too if you don’t get off your a$$ and work to dump mittens and then get a GOP candidate who will help save america. . . . mitten ain’t it! Meanwhile….
Palin/West 2012
If not, then Gary Johnson it will be for me!
America Must Be Saved!!

Pragmatic on May 4, 2012 at 7:18 PM

Agreed. But … maybe he’s just confident at this point. I can see why he has reason to be. By rights Romney should be 15 to 25 points behind Obama at this point. A candidate coming out of a nasty primary fight against an unopposed incumbent is traditionally behind by double digits at this point in the campaign. Romney isn’t. That has to be extremely worrying to the Obama camp. Carter wasn’t even tied with Reagan at this point in 1980. So far this looks like it could be an *epic* loss for Obama and maybe Eric is just being a little cocky.

crosspatch on May 4, 2012 at 6:21 PM

Sorry, but that’s one of the funniest comments I’ve read in a long long time. Romney by all rights should be down by 15 to 25 points right now? I guess it’s all that sliming in the media over the past 3 years, with the public being assured what an unelectable joke Romney is, right? Or maybe it’s the booming economy we have right now. Reagan wasn’t touted as being some great moderate ultra-electable faux-Rainbow Coalition unifier. He was painted as a far-right polarizing unelectable kook.

ddrintn on May 4, 2012 at 7:20 PM

This is turning into the Stupid Column at Hot Air — the Daily Whine about some Hurt Feelings Homosexual.

Haven’t you figured out that THIS Grinnell BS is exactly what the DNC wants people talking about? Go look at Twitchy if you want documentation.

DaMav on May 4, 2012 at 6:44 PM

Because it is sooo much easier to demonize the boogeyman voting bloc of so-cons than it is to admit that your new employee acted like a douche on twitter(a much more onerous violation than “being gay”)…

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 7:08 PM

Sorry to hear that about your friends. We knew that there would be a new victim group as soon as DADT ended…one of the reasons my husband and several of his friends retired this year.

melle1228 on May 4, 2012 at 7:21 PM

Hey, I’m glad to see the Russian Tea Room reopened! I loved the RTR when I lived in NYC many moons shots of vodka ago;)

Buy Danish on May 4, 2012 at 7:10 PM

On my only trip to NYC, I asked the driver to take us to the RTR. When he told me I’d have to get my drink on elswhere, I wanted to turn and slap my husband!///

;D

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on May 4, 2012 at 7:23 PM

BTW, I still don’t understand the third party idea. If it can’t win and would just split the vote on the right and hand everything over to the Dems, then what is the point? SoCons have much more power right now than they would if they left.

McDuck on May 4, 2012 at 7:13 PM

“Socons” aren’t monolithic. I’m fairly socially conservative but I have no problem with a Ric Grenell if he’s good at his job. The fact is that it’s moderates who wold have little power at all if it weren’t for the conservative vote buoying them along every election cycle, usually with the same “fall in line and shut up” tactics. If there an actual national Conservative Party were to rise, the remnant left of the GOP would be about as relevant as the Libertarian Party.

ddrintn on May 4, 2012 at 7:25 PM

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 7:08 PM
Sorry to hear that about your friends. We knew that there would be a new victim group as soon as DADT ended…one of the reasons my husband and several of his friends retired this year.

melle1228 on May 4, 2012 at 7:21 PM

Both he and his Sergeant Major are combat vets and highly decorated. As a TF Commander, my friend conducted CAS missions for FOBs in RC East killing insurgents attacking them in his Kiowa Warrior. He was the man everyone wanted to do a mission with. It counts for nothing. He will leave the military in all probability in disgrace becasue of two shave tails who have not even deployed yet. This is what they wanted.

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 7:27 PM

Are the So-Cons really saying that it is not only OK, but their policy to fire a someone for sexual orientation?

Hmm… sounds pretty intolerant.

Even if you are opposed to same sex marriage, you should at least respect people enough to allow them to have the same right to employment, the same right not to be bullied or harassed, the same right to death benefits as you have.

(All of which can and have been accomplished without the need of same sex marriage.)

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on May 4, 2012 at 6:30 PM

Nice straw man. Should make a great flame.

tom on May 4, 2012 at 7:27 PM

I promise this will be the only post I call Mittbots idiots. One is enough. But this really upsets me. We are about to nominate a Gay Marriage Advocate. I mean this is not a Democratic Party there is no Republican Party. Mitt destroyed it as I warned he would.

Steveangell on May 4, 2012 at 7:13 PM

Why do you even care about gay marriage? Thats what I dont understand. Who cares what people do? We want government out of our lives c’mon justice and liberty for all

steel guy on May 4, 2012 at 7:31 PM

Oh, I’m soooo hurt. A progressive republican here thinks we act like Democrats.

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 6:53 PM

…ok…so what kind of penance do we have to do?
…anyway…why is this a topic for discussion again?
.
.
.
…it’s the ECONOMY stupid…!!!

KOOLAID2 on May 4, 2012 at 7:32 PM

Why do you even care about gay marriage? Thats what I dont understand. Who cares what people do? We want government out of our lives c’mon justice and liberty for all

steel guy on May 4, 2012 at 7:31 PM

I never understand that either. Federally mandated gay marriage certainly isn’t conservative.

1. Federally you are forcing a state to change it legislation.

2. And when did a state recognize your union become small government?

melle1228 on May 4, 2012 at 7:34 PM

The qualities that helped Romney as an industry executive worked against him as a presidential candidate; he had difficulty being articulate, often speaking at length and too forthrightly on a topic and [then later correcting himself while maintaining he was not. Reporter Jack Germond joked that he was going to add a single key on his typewriter that would print, “Romney later explained….”

The above is from Wikipedia’s page on Williard’s father George Romney.

…then later correcting himself while maintaining he was not.

Sounds like a predilecton for al-Taqqiyya runs in the family.

sartana on May 4, 2012 at 7:35 PM

melle1228 on May 4, 2012 at 7:34 PM

Exactly !!! why is government even involved?

steel guy on May 4, 2012 at 7:46 PM

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 7:27 PM

Precisely why my son left the Army.
Sigh.

pambi on May 4, 2012 at 7:51 PM

Sounds like a predilecton for al-Taqqiyya runs in the family.

sartana on May 4, 2012 at 7:35 PM

Sounds like a predilection for al-jackasserie runs in your family. Seriously, to suggest that George Romney was intentionally deceptive (because of religious zealotry!?) is beneath contempt.

Buy Danish on May 4, 2012 at 7:52 PM

I promise this will be the only post I call Mittbots idiots. One is enough. But this really upsets me. We are about to nominate a Gay Marriage Advocate. I mean this is not a Democratic Party there is no Republican Party. Mitt destroyed it as I warned he would.

Steveangell on May 4, 2012 at 7:13 PM

Why do you even care about gay marriage? Thats what I dont understand. Who cares what people do? We want government out of our lives c’mon justice and liberty for all

steel guy on May 4, 2012 at 7:31 PM

Mitt was not getting 40% of the vote and that was before we understood he was on the side of people like you.

GOD.

10,000 years of history.

Gay Marriage has destroyed every country that tried it.

This Country is overwhelming Christian/Jewish. Marriage is the cornerstone of America. You destroy it and there is no America. Everything that made America great is gone.

We become a Satan centered hedonistic society with out the possibility of happiness or lawful society. Where there is no basis for law there is no society. GOD is that basis. Take GOD out there is no society.

Steveangell on May 4, 2012 at 7:52 PM

Why do you even care about gay marriage? Thats what I dont understand. Who cares what people do? We want government out of our lives c’mon justice and liberty for all

steel guy on May 4, 2012 at 7:31 PM

You’re deluded if you think that instituting same-sex marriage would make it all go away. There would just be another demand. Unfortunately, the homosexual agenda is on a collision course with the Christian faith, and will not accept anything less than surrender. As long as a Christian pastor is able to stand in the pulpit and call homosexuality a sin without facing jail time, the issue will not be over.

And just to make it very clear, THIS IS A FIGHT BEING PICKED BY THE HOMOSEXUAL ACTIVISTS. The only way the Christian side can have peace is by surrender, because the other side is not going to stop.

And this seems to be a big part of why this guy is no longer in the Romney campaign. He wasn’t going to let go of his agenda for something as trivial as helping elect a president.

tom on May 4, 2012 at 7:52 PM

Does anybody really care if someone is gay or not? I don’t get this story it just doesn’t make sense to me why this is even an issue. Help me out here, do conservatives really think like this?

steel guy on May 4, 2012 at 7:07 PM

There is a segment of Republicans generally referred to as Social Conservatives who think homosexuality is an abomination. They tend to be Santorum supporters. My impression is they really do care about this. There are several theories about this resignation. One theory is that some high profile SoCons leaned on Romney to get rid of this guy. The truth will probably never be known. I doubt Romney cares about the guy’s sexual orientation. The snarky tweets would be more difficult for him to overcome while trying to unite the Republican party.

talkingpoints on May 4, 2012 at 7:53 PM

“What Romney’s spokesman did tonight was bring aid and comfort to the enemy, which is the act of a traitor,” he said in another.

Really? The guy’s off his rocker. There are voices of intolerance…in no way, shape, or form did the spokesman say Christians were voices of such, however.

Whatevs. The guy resigned…move on already.

changer1701 on May 4, 2012 at 7:55 PM

You’re deluded if you think that instituting same-sex marriage would make it all go away. There would just be another demand. Unfortunately, the homosexual agenda is on a collision course with the Christian faith, and will not accept anything less than surrender. As long as a Christian pastor is able to stand in the pulpit and call homosexuality a sin without facing jail time, the issue will not be over.

And just to make it very clear, THIS IS A FIGHT BEING PICKED BY THE HOMOSEXUAL ACTIVISTS. The only way the Christian side can have peace is by surrender, because the other side is not going to stop.

And this seems to be a big part of why this guy is no longer in the Romney campaign. He wasn’t going to let go of his agenda for something as trivial as helping elect a president.

tom on May 4, 2012 at 7:52 PM

I’m not for or against gay marraige. I’m against the government telling me what is or isn’t a marrage. Get it? It’s called liberty

steel guy on May 4, 2012 at 7:57 PM

Hey Allah, I think you’re twisting yourself into a pretzle trying to turn this into some kind of conspiricy theory. I think they hired the guy because they liked his foriegn policy chops. Didn’t give a rats patoot about his sexual preference. The social cons came out firing, his immoderate tweets and the guy himself decided to throw in the towel.
I don’t think it’s resonable for christian conservatives to get their feelings hurt over this. (I am one)

bluealice on May 4, 2012 at 7:59 PM

I doubt Mittens personally hired Grenell, but I wonder if Nicolle Wallace’s husband had a hand in it.

SouthernGent on May 4, 2012 at 8:05 PM

I love this shit. Romney’s team hired Grenell. Grenell is the guy who posted the disgusting tweets. Social Conservatives are the people the Mittbotts are carping about because, what?

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 8:08 PM

I love this shit. Romney’s team hired Grenell. Grenell is the guy who posted the disgusting tweets. Social Conservatives are the people the Mittbotts are carping about because, what?

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 8:08 PM

Good, it was ALL ObamaWillard Mitt Romney.
Bad, It was ALL someone else’ fault!

astonerii on May 4, 2012 at 8:12 PM

I’m not for or against gay marraige. I’m against the government telling me what is or isn’t a marrage. Get it? It’s called liberty

steel guy on May 4, 2012 at 7:57 PM

So you’re totally against this push to have the federal government redefine marriage? You believe the government should stay out of it?

tom on May 4, 2012 at 8:12 PM

I love this shit. Romney’s team hired Grenell. Grenell is the guy who posted the disgusting tweets. Social Conservatives are the people the Mittbotts are carping about because, what?

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 8:08 PM

So what were the contents of the tweets?

Kjeil on May 4, 2012 at 8:18 PM

I love this shit. Romney’s team hired Grenell. Grenell is the guy who posted the disgusting tweets. Social Conservatives are the people the Mittbotts are carping about because, what?

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 8:08 PM

You know that so-cons are the boogeyman and an easy scapegoat. That is something the left and the liberal right can both agree on. They both use leftist talking points to go after us.

melle1228 on May 4, 2012 at 8:19 PM

astonerii on May 4, 2012 at 8:12 PM

Apparently.

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 8:19 PM

So you’re totally against this push to have the federal government redefine marriage? You believe the government should stay out of it?

tom on May 4, 2012 at 8:12 PM

Yes I’m totally against the federal government defining or redefining marraige. I think the government has no right to keep people from the pusuit of happiness and I believe that all men are created equal. And I am positive that Thomas Jefferson would agree with me.

steel guy on May 4, 2012 at 8:21 PM

So what were the contents of the tweets?

Kjeil on May 4, 2012 at 8:18 PM

There were 800 of them.. Many of which were scrubbed for a reason.. Now go to mediate et. al. and find the archived articles that showed outrage over the hiring and his tweets.

melle1228 on May 4, 2012 at 8:22 PM

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 8:08 PM
You know that so-cons are the boogeyman and an easy scapegoat. That is something the left and the liberal right can both agree on. They both use leftist talking points to go after us.

melle1228 on May 4, 2012 at 8:19 PM

And I’m tired of it. My last election giving a dime to a republican. The only one worthy of receiving a dime right now is Walker. I’ll vote foir and pray Romney beats President Obama. Then in four years I’ll pray we have a Conservative Party Candidate to primary him.

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 8:22 PM

I love this shit. Romney’s team hired Grenell. Grenell is the guy who posted the disgusting tweets. Social Conservatives are the people the Mittbotts are carping about because, what?
hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 8:08 PM

This?

“So at the same [time] the Romney campaign is demanding loyalty pledges from its base, it calls its base ‘voices of intolerance,’ ” he wrote in one. “What Romney’s spokesman did tonight was bring aid and comfort to the enemy, which is the act of a traitor,” he said in another.

Also:

“Ask your Christian leader trying to get you to vote for Romney if he agrees with Romney campaign that Christians are ‘voices of intolerance,’” tweeted conservative Iowa radio host Steve Deace — one of 17 missives on the subject.

Now, can you provide details of his “disgusting tweets”? Are you referring to his jokes about Hilary and Calista or was there something else I’m not in the loop about?

Buy Danish on May 4, 2012 at 8:24 PM

steel guy on May 4, 2012 at 8:21 PM

Are you totally against lawsuits telling people who they have to provide services for or who they’re required to recognize as an appropriate couple to provide lodging for?

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 8:25 PM

Buy Danish on May 4, 2012 at 8:24 PM

Don’t quote my comments. Don’t even address them. I’ll do the same for you.

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 8:26 PM

Now, can you provide details of his “disgusting tweets”? Are you referring to his jokes about Hilary and Calista or was there something else I’m not in the loop about?

Buy Danish on May 4, 2012 at 8:24 PM

Yeah the Tweets I just looked at didn’t look bad at all.

Kjeil on May 4, 2012 at 8:30 PM

Are you totally against lawsuits telling people who they have to provide services for or who they’re required to recognize as an appropriate couple to provide lodging for?

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 8:25 PM

Yes I am. The less goverment the better. If someone dosn’t want to rent to a gay couple because of a religious objection fine. They lose business and someone else gets it. I want less government not more.

steel guy on May 4, 2012 at 8:33 PM

Don’t quote my comments. Don’t even address them. I’ll do the same for you.

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 8:26 PM

Is that an order? This isn’t the military and I don’t give a flip if you quote my comments. Why can’t you answer the question? Oh well, I’ll have to assume this is what you deem “disgusting”:

In one entry removed from his Twitter account, Grenell wrote of Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton: “Hillary is starting to look liek Madeline Albright.”

Of MSNBC’s liberal-leaning Rachel Maddow, he wrote that she should “take a breath and put on a necklace.”

The snark was not limited to the political opposition. Grenell, a former spokesman for Newt Gingrich, said of Gingrich’s third wife, Callista, that he wondered whether her “hair snaps on” and that she “stands there like she is wife #1” at political events.

I assume that because I haven’t heard that he posted anything lewd about his personal life on Twitter AND because you were outraged because I once joked with another commenter at the possibility SNL would parody Newt and Calista. Get a freaking grip. How can you even comment at Hot Air with writers like Allah holding court if one can’t make a lighthearted joke?

FTR, I’m totally with you on the DADT fiasco but you need to choose your battles.

Buy Danish on May 4, 2012 at 8:37 PM

steel guy on May 4, 2012 at 8:33 PM

Then you should spend as much time harping on gay activists as you do Social Conservatives.

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 8:38 PM

Is that an order? This isn’t the military and I don’t give a flip if you quote my comments. Why can’t you answer the question? Oh well, I’ll have to assume this is what you deem “disgusting”:

Buy Danish on May 4, 2012 at 8:37 PM

No. It’s not an order. But you should know I consider you a shill and a hack and not worth any reasonable persons time to answer. Ignore my posts and I’ll ignore yours.

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 8:40 PM

Then you should spend as much time harping on gay activists as you do Social Conservatives.

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 8:38 PM

I don’t particularly care for gay activist. I just think that everyone should be treated equally. Just as our founding fathers invisioned. Thomas Jefferson said “If it niether picks my pocket nor breaks my bones what difference is it to me?” Liberty includes those with whome you disagree with.

steel guy on May 4, 2012 at 8:47 PM

No. It’s not an order. But you should know I consider you a shill and a hack and not worth any reasonable persons time to answer. Ignore my posts and I’ll ignore yours.
hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 8:40 PM

You sound unhinged. It’s rather ironic that after being called a “hater” and all sorts of crap by a certain commenter you think is the cat’s meow, I declined to accept your terms for “detente” so now you’ve calling me a “shill” and a “hack”? I don’t know what you do to chill but you may want to try it.

Buy Danish on May 4, 2012 at 8:48 PM

I’m still waiting for someone to explain how the “social conservative uproar” that nobody knew about was to blame, but the media going after him for his tweets as part of the war on women nonsense wasn’t to blame. I get that there’s a lot of “moderates” who want to oust the so-cons, but making up things like this isn’t doing your effort any good.

clearbluesky on May 4, 2012 at 8:50 PM

Buy Danish on May 4, 2012 at 8:48 PM

It has nothing to do with that and everything to do with the fact that you’re a shill and totally biased in your every opinion. Please, I mean no additional disrespect, but I’d rather not exchange with you. If you address my comments I’d feel compelled out of courtesy to answer and I’d rather not. Just ignore what I post.

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 8:53 PM

clearbluesky on May 4, 2012 at 8:50 PM

The fix is in. If he loses, blame Social Conservatives. If he wins, they did it, (somehow) without Social Conservatives.

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 8:58 PM

Damnit Team Romney will you let him go already? You already said you liked the guy.

Eric Fernstrom is a fool and an incompetent. Between this and his little Etch-A-Sketch visualization this idiot should be sent packing.

BKennedy on May 4, 2012 at 9:01 PM

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 8:53 PM

First, I’m not a “shill”. I don’t get paid a dime to comment here. Are you a “shill” because you supported Santorum and can’t take any criticism of him? Like expressing the (widely held it turns out) opinion he’s a “whiner“? You’re just as “biased” as anyone. We’re all “biased” to some degree or another.

I think I do a damn fine job of articulating my opinions and my positions for or in opposition to candidates or ideas. You seem to be having difficulty doing the same, using the word “disgusting” to describe tweets, yet you’re unable or unwilling to provide one example to substantiate this.

Please, address it to “To whom it may concern” if you must, but it’s beyond the pale for you to allege Grenell said disgusting things without backing it up.

Buy Danish on May 4, 2012 at 9:08 PM

The fix is in. If he loses, blame Social Conservatives. If he wins, they did it, (somehow) without Social Conservatives.

Just what is a social conservative? To me a true social conservative believes in live and let live. Why is your version of the truth any better than mine? People can make ther own choices without the goverment telling us what is right or wrong. I consider myself a social conservative because I adhere to the principals defined in the declaration of independence and the constitution. While you consider yourself so morally superior as to tell others how they ought to live their lives.

steel guy on May 4, 2012 at 9:13 PM

Buy Danish on May 4, 2012 at 9:08 PM

I didn’t support Santorum, I defended him.

Our comment interaction, is over. Done. You are a shill and not worth the time.

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 9:13 PM

steel guy on May 4, 2012 at 9:13 PM

Your imagination made me morally superior. Because really, I’m not claiming to be morally superior to anyone. I’m just not such a hypocrite as to ignore that I have a belief set. You mask yourself in your progressive issues trying to assert we should live and let live as you impose your morality on me.

I consider you a progressive because you crusade for progressive issues. You’re no more a social conservative than I am a Socialist.

Thanks for playing though. Johnny, tell him what he’s won.

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 9:21 PM

I didn’t support Santorum, I defended him.

Our comment interaction, is over. Done. You are a shill and not worth the time.

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 9:13 PM

Buy Danish is one of those posters whose posts I won’t even read.

Aitch748 on May 4, 2012 at 9:21 PM

If Romney is going to have a chance at winning everyone in the Romney campaign needs to be pulling the Romney boat oars in the same direction. It looks like people inside the campaign got into a pissing contest, and didn’t want to give up pecking order. I can see why Grenell quit, he needed to be able to do what he was hired to do, he assessed the situation, and didn’t see a clear path forward. Grenell -a professional has experience and credentials, he was hired for a purpose.

Is someone inside Romney’s camp big footing the campaign?

Dr Evil on May 4, 2012 at 9:24 PM

Really? The guy’s off his rocker. There are voices of intolerance…in no way, shape, or form did the spokesman say Christians were voices of such, however.

Whatevs. The guy resigned…move on already.

changer1701 on May 4, 2012 at 7:55 PM

You are just wrong.

It is well known that Christian Conservatives complained about this Gay Marriage Advocate being appointed to a position where it would matter Foreign Affairs.

Thus all Christian Conservatives are now Intolerant per Mitt Romney 2012.

Steveangell on May 4, 2012 at 9:26 PM

Enough, enough, enough! Chattering about some campaign underling’s sexual preference is not going to save us from the historic disaster of an administration that’s currently in the White House! For Heaven’s sake, the economy is going down the toilet, and the presence or lack thereof of a gay dude no one’s ever heard of in Romney’s campaign is not what’s going to fix it! Wake up: IT’S THE ECONOMY, STUPID!!!!

n0doz on May 4, 2012 at 9:28 PM

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 9:13 PM
Buy Danish is one of those posters whose posts I won’t even read.

Aitch748 on May 4, 2012 at 9:21 PM

I really don’t either. But my manners always get the better of me. To my detriment.

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 9:31 PM

Your imagination made me morally superior. Because really, I’m not claiming to be morally superior to anyone. I’m just not such a hypocrite as to ignore that I have a belief set. You mask yourself in your progressive issues trying to assert we should live and let live as you impose your morality on me.

I consider you a progressive because you crusade for progressive issues. You’re no more a social conservative than I am a Socialist.

Thanks for playing though. Johnny, tell him what he’s won.

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 9:21 PM

Just how is live and let live imposing morality on you? If you have a belief set that is fine and good, I’m proud or you. But I don’t get people trying to impose their belief set onto someone who doesn’t share that belief set. I live my life to certain principals; basically treat others the way I wish to be treated.
Before you try to remove a splinter from someone elses eye remove the board from your own eye. Let those without sin throw the first stone.

steel guy on May 4, 2012 at 9:34 PM

steel guy on May 4, 2012 at 9:34 PM

I don’t understand your comment.

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 9:37 PM

I don’t understand your comment.

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 9:37 PM

What is confusing you?

steel guy on May 4, 2012 at 9:42 PM

I don’t understand your comment.

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 9:37 PM
What is confusing you?

steel guy on May 4, 2012 at 9:42 PM

Geez, really? Any, all of it? What are yoyu trying to say?

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 9:46 PM

I really don’t either. But my manners always get the better of me. To my detriment.

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 9:31 PM

Pffft.

I laugh at a mild joke about Calista Gingrich: Bad

You say Grenell tweets were “disgusting”: Good

But yeah, your “manners” are impeccable.

Buy Danish on May 4, 2012 at 9:48 PM

Geez, really? Any, all of it? What are yoyu trying to say?

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 9:46 PM

That it is none of your business or the governments how others choose to live there lives just as it is none of anyones business how you choose to live your life. As long as you don’t hurt anyone. Pretty simple

steel guy on May 4, 2012 at 9:54 PM

Actually, I’m rather disgusted by playing identity politics. And when it comes to insulting douchebags, you’ll find none better than the pro-gay lobby at HotAir who insist that everyone who disagrees with them is a bigot. It’s the same tactic the left plays on objections to catering to minorities. Don’t like it? Raaaacciiiissst!

Let’s be honest: this is about making people who like putting their penises into other men’s rectums a group to pander to. A great party campaigns on higher ideals. Social conservatives at least can talk about marriage, how it has a purpose in child-rearing, and that to change the nature of the arrangement involved subverts the purpose. The religious can at least talk about how homosexuality is in conflict with a combination of the philosophy of functionalism and idea of serving a divine purpose.

What can the gay lobby talk about? How they want what they want, and they ought to get what they want by virtue of wanting it?

Stoic Patriot on May 4, 2012 at 7:13 PM

No. Identity politics? You just mentioned a group that you define as “men who like to put their dicks in other men’s rectums”. THAT is identity politics. Whatever you think of great parties, you have engaged in identity politics. Poorly, I might add. Rather than talk of the negative effects of gay anything, you resorted to identity politics. Rather than point out why homosexuality is misguided, you engaged in identity politics. Rather than persuade anybody that homosexuality is wrong, you called names and insulted both homosexuals and their peers/friends. Rather than win anybody to your cause, you alienated others.

You’re a loser. You waste opportunities to win fence sitters, you alienate those who are sympathetic to our cause, and you make us all look like bigot douchebags. You are a hindrance, not a help. You suck. Grow up, you 26 yr old douchebag (from a 30 yr old grown up).

underemployed on May 4, 2012 at 9:56 PM

That it is none of your business or the governments how others choose to live there lives just as it is none of anyones business how you choose to live your life. As long as you don’t hurt anyone. Pretty simple

steel guy on May 4, 2012 at 9:54 PM

I don’t care how you live your life. Just don’t impose your progressive lifestyle on me.

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 9:59 PM

I don’t care how you live your life. Just don’t impose your progressive lifestyle on me.

hawkdriver on May 4, 2012 at 9:59 PM

My progresive lifestyle? Who is imposing their lifestyle on you? Trust me I don’t want anyone imposing on anyone.

steel guy on May 4, 2012 at 10:04 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3