I woke up this morning and decided to catch-up with local and national affairs via television and the world wide web. I read many stories this morning but nothing as funny as the business with Richard Grenell. Above are three of like five or six articles I read from the Google news feed involving Richard Grenell under the tab of ‘Politics’. Anyway to sum up (feel free to check it out yourself) Richard Grenell is an adept foreign policy expert hired by the Romney campaign as their foreign policy spokesman. He’s also gay…openly gay……I know…how did “Romney” and “openly gay” get mentioned in the the same breath. Here’s how : while the Romney campaign may have *quotefingers* broke ground*endqoutefingers* in hiring a openly gay spokesman but his constituents repaved it in driving the man to resign…not that he had done very much on the official (aka TV, reports, press, etc) side anyway. Many laugh at the situation as the Romney campaign’s half-hearted ploy to win support from the LGBT community. I’m laughing at Richard Grenell…..for being a duck (think of your favorite Aflac commercial).
I’m not laughing at the Romney/Republican’s because, frankly, I already knew how they felt about gay rights and gay marriage. If anything, this kind of insincerity is expected during the election and it wouldn’t surprise me to see more. The only thing that’s funny is the proud gay man who, for all his intelligence, allowed himself to be a pawn just to be removed by his own team! Okay so the man had issues with President Obama’s foreign policy and representation in the global community. I’m not up to speed on the current foreign policy so for all I know, Grenell may have some valid points. My question is why did he decide to work for the Romney campaign? Let’s say that I hypothetically give Romney the benefit of the doubt and imagine that Romney himself and his team had no issues with the LGBT. Romney still represents/advocates the interests of a group that does NOT support gay rights, gay marriage etc. Why would Grenell use his energy and intelligence to further the interests of a group that ARE in favor of subverting his own?
In defense of Grenell’s choices the articles reference President Obama’s “reticence” or flat non-support of gay marriage. Having done my own research on President Obama/gay rights, I find the claims to be a dung beetles favorite food…..poop. I don’t see anything wrong in President Obama’s stance on gay marriage except what may bother people semantically. And if that doesn’t do it consider this: President Obama has made moves in creating and ensuring gay rights, he may not be the one to legalize gay marriage but he’s definitely one that got the ball rolling. Which is more than can be said for the other side. Leave it to the Republicans and you will have the right to keep your sexuality and all expressions thereof to yourself therefore ensuring and protecting yourself your rights as a citizen. Note: not all Republicans are this way but as a group they are.
All I could do is laugh. LOL at Richard Grenell.