Former Republican Party Chairman Ken Mehlman is a Homosexual, Now out of the Closet

[Infohawk]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_mehlman_gay

WASHINGTON – Former Republican Party Chairman Ken Mehlman says in a magazine interview that he is gay.
Mehlman, who was campaign manager for President George W. Bush in 2004 and then RNC chairman after Bush's re-election, told The Atlantic in an interview published online Wednesday that he came to the conclusion he is gay recently and wanted to talk about it publicly because he wants to become an advocate for gay marriage. He also thought questions would arise when he participates in an upcoming fundraiser for the group challenging California's ballot measure opposing those marriages.
"It's taken me 43 years to get comfortable with that part of my life," said Mehlman, now an executive vice president with KKR, a New York City-based private equity firm. "Everybody has their own path to travel, their own journey, and for me, over the past few months, I've told my family, friends, former colleagues and current colleagues and they've been wonderful and supportive. The process has been something that has made me a happier and better person. It's something I wish I had done years ago."
Mehlman's leadership positions with the Republican Party came at a time when some in the party were working to put anti-gay ballot measures before the public in several states. He has said he tried to convince Republican officials privately not to attack gay marriage, The Atlantic reported. He also said that, as a solitary Republican, he could not go against the party consensus.
Mehlman, who has never married, said he wishes he had tried to expand the GOP's outreach to the gay community and worked openly against political initiatives opposing gay marriage.

Too bad he had to lie to himself and everyone about it before. It would be good for the Republicans if they stopped worrying about gay people so much.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

Sounds like a good guy;

I'm sure in 30 years the concept of homosexual unions being legal will be passe' and we'll have to figure out if there is a constitutional right for the government to restrict civil unions at all.

Personally: I don't think there should by ANY limit to civil unions outside of age-of-contractual-consent.

 

[nageov3t]

on the one hand, he was just doing his job... otoh, so were the nazis. /goodwin'd

I think the systematic push to use gay marriage bans as a platform to get GWB reelected is a gigantic stain against the Republican party that isn't going away any time soon.

 

[her209]

It would be good for the Republicans if they stopped worrying about gay people so much.

But how will they get the base to the polls then?

 

[OCGuy]

Why are people still pretending that Republicans are the sole party for people who are anti-gay?

CA is a solidly BLUE state.

 

[Craig234]

Why are people still pretending that Republicans are the sole party for people who are anti-gay?

CA is a solidly BLUE state.

Because most Democrats are anti-discrimination, and most Republicans are pro-discrimination.

On Prop 8, most Democrats voted against it, so if it were up to Democrats, gay marriage would have been voter-approved today.

Not to mention the Democratic legislature has repeatedly voted for gay marriage, including against popular opinion in the past, against Republicans and their veto.

Most Republicans voted for Prop 8, and this with the minority of Democrats who did were enough to form a small majority for discrimination.

So, most of the 'blue' in 'blue' CA was against Discrimination.

Republicans are the sole party with a majority for discrimination.

The one thing on your side is that President Obama is pro-discrimination, when it comes to the word marriage. But most of his party disagrees.

Nationally, a majority of Democrats favor gay marriage. A majority of Republicans oppose it; a third say there should be NO legal recognition, including civil unions.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/08/13/fox-news-poll-gay-marriage-immigration-wikileaks/

Democrats have led the push for ending discrimination; leading to the near doubling of support nationally, to 37 percent from only 20 percent in 2004.

You don't need every member of a party agreeing on something to not say that parties with very different percentages of support are the same.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

"duh" was my reply when I read the "news". Were people really that blind to it?

I don't see what the big deal is, but I do find it interesting how people want to frame the issue as a "ban" when it's not. Words have meaning and people are trying to redefine what a certain word means. Standing up for it's meaning is not a "ban" you twits.
However, it shouldn't be an issue for the right or the left to use(and they both do) as the Feds should have exactly ZERO say in the matter of marriage.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Because most Democrats are anti-discrimination, and most Republicans are pro-discrimination.

On Prop 8, most Democrats voted against it, so if it were up to Democrats, gay marriage would have been voter-approved today.

Not to mention the Democratic legislature has repeatedly voted for gay marriage, including against popular opinion in the past, against Republicans and their veto.

Most Republicans voted for Prop 8, and this with the minority of Democrats who did were enough to form a small majority for discrimination.

So, most of the 'blue' in 'blue' CA was against Discrimination.

Republicans are the sole party with a majority for discrimination.

The one thing on your side is that President Obama is pro-discrimination, when it comes to the word marriage. But most of his party disagrees.

Nationally, a majority of Democrats favor gay marriage. A majority of Republicans oppose it; a third say there should be NO legal recognition, including civil unions.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/08/13/fox-news-poll-gay-marriage-immigration-wikileaks/

Democrats have led the push for ending discrimination; leading to the near doubling of support nationally, to 37 percent from only 20 percent in 2004.

You don't need every member of a party agreeing on something to not say that parties with very different percentages of support are the same.

you are a moron. "anti" and "pro" are you really that ignorant? oh wait... it seems you are.

 

[nageov3t]

Why are people still pretending that Republicans are the sole party for people who are anti-gay?

CA is a solidly BLUE state.

I'm pretty vocal about criticizing Democrats over gay rights issues, but they never organized an effort to deny gays civil rights just to get voters to the polls so they could win an election.

 

[Infohawk]

But how will they get the base to the polls then?

Mexicans and Muslims.

 

[hal2kilo]

Mexicans and Muslims.

Ding! Ding! You win the daily double!

 

[Lemon law]

The homosexual within enemy has plagued mankind since biblical times, subversives that should be killed on sight so a greater paradise on earth can be found with even more spit and vitriol. As the sins of Eve can be redeemed and we can all re find the garden of Eden.

But But But wait, should we not stamp out the cause of homosexuality that doubtless comes from outer space. It certainly can not come from us, so it must come from some external conspiracy, that group of them the us's of us must identify and exterminate.

But sadly, the only damn thing us human's have found is that Homosexuality is hereditary, we get it from our children. About 96% turn out non homosexual and the other 4% are homosexual. Be they gay males or Lesbian females. Human societies have tried the kill on sight strategy, but next generation, them homosexuals come back in the same proportions even as Darwin points out they can't reproduce and pass their genes down as an adaptive genetic survival of the fittest.

Given those facts, is it really smart to kill gays and Lesbians on sight? Or given the fact that 4% of gays and Lesbians in the USA are exactly like us except in sexual origination, is it not smarter to utilize the talents of 12 million people instead?

As a democrat I may not like Ken Melman's ideas, but I still can't deny his talent.

 

[dammitgibs]

Republicans want to roundup gays in gas chambers and kill them all, everyone knows this.

 

[ShawnD1]

you are a moron. "anti" and "pro" are you really that ignorant? oh wait... it seems you are.

This. The democrats seem to be a bunch of racist assholes just like republicans. Today I applied for a job with an engineering firm and one of the things to fill out said that for UK and US applicants you had to state what race you are and it was for the sake of enforced equality. What kind of fucked up racist bullshit is that? It's none of your business what race I am or what race anyone else is.

While the republicans are out burning witches and hunting for gays, the democrats will pass some bullshit where your employer also asks your sexual orientation. How about leave people alone already. If you want to know what race I am, bring me in for an interview and you'll see for yourself. If you want to know my sexual orientation, offer to suck my dick.

 

[hal2kilo]

You'd have to have no gaydar not realize it and I have an gay friend who is a retired Navy Chief who'd of fooled me if I didn't know him. Also, rumors were rampant about his "status". Too bad he's a gutless F! who had no qualms speading the typical Rowe inspired hate and fear mongering campaign tactics to get the big loser idiot elected.

As they say the masses is asses.

 

[sportage]

WHAT! Not another Gay republican thread?
Are there no straight republicans left anymore?
And notice how you never see GW and Laura together...
Hmmmmm....

 

[nageov3t]

WHAT! Not another Gay republican thread?
Are there no straight republicans left anymore?
And notice how you never see GW and Laura together...
Hmmmmm....

it's inspiring to think that republicans have elected more gays and put more gays into positions of power than democrats

 

[ShawnD1]

WHAT! Not another Gay republican thread?
Are there no straight republicans left anymore?
And notice how you never see GW and Laura together...
Hmmmmm....

If GW was a refurbished coke fiend, maybe he's also a refurbished homosexual.

 

[Jhhnn]

You'd have to have no gaydar not realize it and I have an gay friend who is a retired Navy Chief who'd of fooled me if I didn't know him. Also, rumors were rampant about his "status". Too bad he's a gutless F! who had no qualms speading the typical Rowe inspired hate and fear mongering campaign tactics to get the big loser idiot elected.

As they say the masses is asses.

Well, you're talking about the Navy, after all. "It's not Gay if you're under way", right?

 

[ShawnD1]

Well, you're talking about the Navy, after all. "It's not Gay if you're under way", right?

But I was pretending you were a woman. How could that be gay?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2LpeA3jcEU

 

[Lanyap]

that he came to the conclusion he is gay recently

wut?

 

[Tristicus]

Because most Democrats are anti-discrimination, and most Republicans are pro-discrimination.

REALLY?


Take a look at past history and tell me Dems are not the party of discrimination. Does the KKK ring a bell? Perhaps the Jim Crow laws. Perhaps keeping segregation legal or rallying against equality. Perhaps even slavery in general.

Just a thought.

 

[Turin39789]

REALLY?


Take a look at past history and tell me Dems are not the party of discrimination. Does the KKK ring a bell? Perhaps the Jim Crow laws. Perhaps keeping segregation legal or rallying against equality. Perhaps even slavery in general.

Just a thought.

lol

 

[Phokus]

I kinda like Mehlman, he apologized to African Americans for the GOP turning to winning elections by appealing to southern racist white conservatives for the past several decades after the Democrats abandoned them:

Few African Americans voted for George W. Bush and other Republicans in the 2004 election, although it was a higher percentage than any GOP candidate since President Ronald Reagan. Following Bush's re-election, Ken Mehlman, Bush's campaign manager and Chairman of the RNC, held several large meetings with African-American business, community, and religious leaders. In his speeches, he apologized for his party's use of the Southern Strategy in the past. When asked about the strategy of using race as an issue to build GOP dominance in the once-Democratic South, Mehlman replied, "Republican candidates often have prospered by ignoring black voters and even by exploiting racial tensions," and, "by the '70s and into the '80s and '90s, the Democratic Party solidified its gains in the African-American community, and we Republicans did not effectively reach out. Some Republicans gave up on winning the African-American vote, looking the other way or trying to benefit politically from racial polarization. I am here today as the Republican chairman to tell you we were wrong."[30]

 

[OCGuy]

I kinda like Mehlman, he apologized to African Americans for the GOP turning to winning elections by appealing to southern racist white conservatives for the past several decades after the Democrats abandoned them:

As opposed to appealing to the inner city uneducated minorities?

Obama's gunna pay my gas and mortgage!