For a couple of weeks Mr Richard Grenell was the Foreign Policy and National Security Spokesman for Candidate Mitt Romney. Per this item at the Althouse blog, he was dropped for being openly "gay". The Althouse post links to a piece in The Washington Post by Ms Jennifer Rubin.
Certainly the optics are bad, and if this was a personnel action forced by certain factions based upon sexual "orientation", it was a weak choice. Is there anyone who thinks that homosexuals only became part of political campaigns after "Stonewall"?
This is not about approving or disapproving a lifestyle, but about having competent people in the campaign. On the other hand, people who don't show some discretion in their sex lives don't belong on the campaign trail—just ask former Senator John Edwards. His activities, unlike those of Gary Hartpence, were ignored for a long time, but eventually caught up with him.
I hope there is a good explanation for this, but, as Professor Althouse says, "if the headline accurately describes the situation, it's pathetic."♠
And it is time for Republicans to say so.
Regards — Cliff
♠ On the other hand, if Mr Grenell was indiscrete in some manner (but not criminal in some way) and the campaign is protecting him, then that is to be commended, but protection means we never hear about it and there is no commendation and Mr Romney takes a hit for someone who works for him. That, to me, is plausible.
10 months ago