Mitt Hires His First Out Gay Staff Executive.

Things are moving fast in U. S. politics–today Romney signaled he heard it when Catholic and evangelical leaderships said they would do whatever it takes to defeat Obama.  The message Obama took from that is they have no where else to go but him.  He can now be himself and return to the formula he used as Governor of Massachusetts, a social liberal.

The out gay man Romney chose for his campaign is Richard Grenell, 45, who has worked in the United Nations and on several Republican campaigns.  He seems to have great credentials.

Obama did something like this when he invited a conservative evangelical minister, Rick Warren,  to do the prayer at his inauguration.  Liberal people were annoyed.

But, Romney’s gay hire seems more bold than Obama’s preacher.  It sends a signal he intends to go after moderate voters and he doesn’t care what evangelicals, Catholics or other Mormons think.

It is a much different tack than that used by “W” Bush.  Bush did some overtures to the middle but he did not hire an out gay.  Neither did the  McCain/Palin ticket.  But, the latter lost their election.

While we don’t know how the election will turn out nor what will follow it, one thing seems clear.  The Christian right’s candidates did not win the Republican endorsement and the man who did win it is not following the right’s playbook.

The Republican Party remains more a party of Wall Street than of the pathway to eternity.  I’m pleased with that.

18 Responses

  1. Henry

    Mitt, winning the hearts and minds. Deja vu all over again. If I didn’t know better, it was McCain eating his own and embracing his opposition.

    Hope and ☭hange, here we come! Lame duck session, commence.

    1. Henry 1:12 “Defa vu..” During the primaries, Mitt was going to let student interest rates double like the banks wanted. Tonight I saw him say he would support Obama’s continuation of low rates. He’s doing great.

      1. Henry

        Jon: “He’s doing great.”

        I would agree. (sarc)

        His support from the media and democrats is withering as expected. Now, he is ensuring his support from the right is withering as well. Where do we get these political geniuses (Romney’s advisors) from? A second grader could have predicted this outcome. And it has only started.

    1. entech

      As a know nothing foreigner with no voice I would like to make an observation that seems to reverberate with politics everywhere: If you can’t beat’em join’em.

      They have a campaign called “Honesty in advertising”, title is self explanatory. How about honesty in politics – or would that be a miracle, too much to pray for?

      1. entech 4:42 “honesty in politics..would that be a miracle, too much to pray for?”

        Wouldn’t candidates and office holders need to be rewarded for honesty? Mostly, they are not.

        The thing is, most people don’t consider politics to be what is really is, theater. That is, its about illusion, creating someone that is not necessarily there. We tend to vote for the best actor–all the time telling ourselves we are voting for the best leader.

        One of the things I enjoy watching in U. S. politics, (maybe its there in other domocracies as well) is how the candidates align themselves with the Jesus character. In every opening speech, like the ones given at the close of the political conventions, is a few minutes devoted to a story about how, “I was destined from my childhood to be your leader.” Both Dems and Reps do it. Bill Clinton came from Hope, Arkansas, and rose above it. The first Bush told of how his wealthy aristicratic upbring with backyard grilling told him he would be president.

        1. entech

          That is either a strange concept Jon or badly phrased, I would think that while they should be severely punished for dishonesty, honesty should be the norm and I can’t see the need for reward for simply doing your job properly. Do you think they are bankers or CEOs??

          I don’t think the alignment with Jesus is particularly important in most other countries (western Democracies, would be a definite negative in many others), America seems to be unique in the advanced industrial nations with the amount and importance of overt religiosity.
          Australia, for instance, has a female leader who is a declared atheist and in a heterosexual unmarried relationship, and where the partner is resident in the equivalent of your whitehouse. One of the senior cabinet members is in a stable homosexual relationship, and her partner has just had a child.

          Although this is all acceptable there is still something there because the Prime Minister still disagrees with same sex marriage, although in an upcoming parliamentary vote she has declared a conscious vote the conservative opposition will vote no on party lines, an open vote representing the voters would most likely result in a pass.

          There is something of a “born to rule” mentality, more on the conservative side.

          1. Henry

            I am not sure we should follow Iceland’s lead. What did they do recently? I believe they told their creditors to go to hell (figuratively speaking). I do not think that would be a wise thing for us to tell China and our senior citizen “savings” bond holders. And of course the federal reserve, although I am not too concerned about them. I do not think Iceland sets a good example.

          2. Henry 10:10 “..follow Iceland’s lead…I believe the told their creditors to go to hell (figuratively speaking)…”

            You got my curiousity up enough to look up Iceland’s Financial Crisis on Wikipedia. It turns out the crisis developed under a straight white guy’s leadership as Prime Minister. He is now under some kind of inditment. The lesbian lady, Johanna (impossible last name) was not the choice of either of the two major parties but was elected PM three or so years ago.

            As a result of her measures, and everyone else involved of course, the crisis stablized about a year ago and is good enough now so Iceland was able to issue bonds and other countries were willing buyers. Not exactly a happy story, but one with a better future apparently.

    2. Henry 3:35 “He’s talking the talk.”

      Thanks for posting that–hadn’t seen it. Oh, man. “Dark to the light”, “Amen”.

      The only good thing about that would be if religious conservatives saw it and concluded, “Look at that, he’s doing church talk. Wait, if he can do church talk without meaning it, maybe our guys/gals (Bachmann) are doing it too.”

      1. Henry

        If Obamba creates an impetus to verify our candidate’s words due to his meanilessness, I would say fine. From what I heard and seen, you won’t find many surprises.

  2. Bob

    “…It only looks impossible because a truly free and peaceful society has yet to be achieved. But once we get there, and we will, people will look back at governments as ridiculous, bloody, and evil hangovers from the primitive and drunken adolescence of our species. Your government cannot protect your property by stealing half of it first. It cannot protect your life by threatening you with endless violent edicts. It cannot protect your currency by forcing you to use a currency that it counterfeits at will. It cannot protect your children by sealing them up in 18th century mental prisons for years, while selling their futures off to the highest bidder.” ~ Stefan Molyneux

  3. Bob

    Voting for your freedom is like playing the lottery for your retirement. It could work, but I wouldn’t bet on it.

  4. pk

    Bob, anarchy will never work and it always leads to the people wanting any type of government to protect their property and persons, which the tyrants seize the day on and set up a command and control system. Not buying into the central bank owned, corporate media puppet candidates that say they’re going to fix the problems created by the previous puppet, but once in office follow the wishes of big banks who own wall street, and actually vote someone real in like Ron Paul would be a good start in returning to our founding document. That short, simple, common sense piece of paper that gets government out of the way while protecting personal property and people from the government itself. We’re a long ways away from how our government is supposed to operate.

Comments are closed.