More

For Younger Class Of Political Operatives, Gay Rights Issues Often Pit Them Against Their Candidates


First Posted: 03/14/11 06:57 PM ET Updated: 05/25/11 07:40 PM ET

WASHINGTON -- It's become a political truism to say that there is a generational divide with respect to gay rights, as polling data bears out the fact that younger voters, even conservatives, are far more in favor of same-sex marriage than their elders.

But as the 2012 election, particularly the Republican presidential primary, takes shape, that divide -- even between some presumptive candidates and their younger staffers -- has been drawn more sharply into focus.

Over the course of the past week or so, James Richardson, who served as online communications manager for the Republican National Committee in the 2008 cycle, was signed up by Gov. Haley Barbour (R-Miss.) to serve as a communications adviser for his Political Action Committee and, likely, his presidential campaign. A well-respected operative within GOP circles, Richardson had run a personal blog in between those two stints. And at some point in time -- more than two years ago -- he argued that the Republican Party should embrace the philosophical concepts (and political benefits) of gay adoption and gay marriage.

“[T]he Republican Party is at a defining crossroads,” Richardson wrote on his site. “Now is not the time for an echo chamber. And homosexual demagoguery is not the answer to the Party’s woes, particularly when gay men and women represent the only demographic in which John McCain bested President Bush (27% to 19% based on exit polling).”

Such musings are increasingly common among younger conservatives. But, a Democratic source pointed out, after Richardson signed up with Barbour -- who has long opposed gay marriage -- his post was removed, replaced with a “no results found” message.

Richardson declined to comment for this report, but stressed that he took the site down of his own volition, not at the behest of anyone in Barbour's orbit. He could have kept it up, but that would have produced the awkward specter for a candidate and a top staffer arguing opposing sides of a prominent social issue. Communications aides, after all, are supposed to be the messengers, not the message.

Of course, it's not groundbreaking that a campaign hand has a policy disagreement with the boss. But the removal of Richardson’s post underscores a far more telling feature of the modern Republican Party: A large chunk of the GOP operative class has no problem with expanding gay rights, but those staffers nonetheless work for candidates who are principally opposed to such moves.

Steve Schmidt, who managed John McCain’s presidential campaign in 2008, waited until after the election to announce that he not only supports gay marriage but also believed the Republican Party would be better off supporting it in its platform. Ken Mehlman, who served as the campaign manager for the 2004 presidential reelection campaign of George W. Bush -- in which the prospect of gay marriage served as a key, divisive social issue -- came out of the closet only after removing himself thoroughly from politics.

Below campaigns' top tiers, such ideological differences are even more common. Liz Mair, who worked alongside Richardson at the Republican National Committee and helped the McCain campaign, joined the firm Hynes Communications after the 2008 election. While at that post, she shifted between the worlds of commentary, campaign consulting and issue advocacy -- the latter of which landed her a gig on the advisory board of the Republican group GOProud, which supports expanding gay rights.

For Mair and other operatives, such juggling has its benefits, not least of which is the sense of ideological liberation that comes from being off the trail. But it also has a self-censoring effect -- essentially discouraging so-called “campaign gypsies” from divulging personal political beliefs lest they be used to haunt their next candidate employer.

“I'd love to live in a world where my political views corresponded 100 percent with those of any given candidate out there, but the reality is, the best-case scenario is that as an operative, you agree with your candidate on 90 to 99 percent of the issues, and 100 percent on those that matter most to you,” Mair told The Huffington Post. “I don't think there's ever a situation where someone agrees 100 percent on everything, though. Certainly, I've never been lucky enough to identify a candidate with whom I do agree 100 percent.”

Indeed, so far only a few candidates in the prospective Republican presidential field have even hinted an openness toward gay marriage. Former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman endorsed civil unions in his state, and more recently, former Louisiana Gov. Buddy Roemer said he was fine with states legalizing gay marriage, though he still supports the federal policy that defines marriage as between a man and a woman.

To a lesser extent, the same dynamic that Mair and Richardson face is true on the Democratic side of the aisle. Chris Kofinis, a longtime operative who helped encourage the retail giant Walmart to embrace policies of equality towards gay employees, now serves as the chief of staff to Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), the only Democrat vote against a repeal of the army’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.

A number of White House staffers, meanwhile, admit in private that they support gay marriage -- a position that President Barack Obama has kept at arm’s length. Steve Hildebrand, Obama's openly gay former deputy campaign chairman, has walked a fine line with respect to urging the administration to be bolder in its gay rights agenda and openly criticizing its meekness.

“[T]his is a bipartisan issue,” Mair said, “but it's also an issue that has arisen because of the kinds of functions that must be performed in campaigns these days, and the fact that for various reasons, operatives are more in the public eye as personalities in their own right than perhaps they once were.”

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON -- It's become a political truism to say that there is a generational divide with respect to gay rights, as polling data bears out the fact that younger voters, even conservatives, are far ...
WASHINGTON -- It's become a political truism to say that there is a generational divide with respect to gay rights, as polling data bears out the fact that younger voters, even conservatives, are far ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 825
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (13 total)
  1 of 4  
COMMUNITY PUNDITS
wyldthings 01:39 AM on 03/15/2011
It is neither a human right or a civil right to get married! But it is correct that you as a citizen have the right to equal treatment. Which means that once the government gets involved and gives special rights to one class then it becomes your right to participate in those benefits. Myself I realize that marriage for society is supposed to build a civil society. So to me any two people as a couple can  Read More...
07:40 PM on 03/15/2011
Dear Plasma003,

Many states, like Massachusetts, issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. However, that does not grant those legally married same-sex couples certain federal marriage rights. For Example, the right to file jointly with the IRS on their tax returns, the rights of immigration and naturalization for one’s spouse (e.g. someone marries a foreign national), and spousal Social Security benefits, to name but a few.

You have made a compelling case for the repeal of DOMA. Since, DOMA violates the sovereignty of states by infringing on a state’s right to grant Civil Marriage licenses to same-sex couples. This is true because DOMA restricts the rights and obligations of state recognized Civil Marriages at the federal level.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ioan Lightoller
Proud Married Gay Pagan Man
06:10 PM on 03/20/2011
Fanned and faved. Excellent statement of the issues. This is why we need nationwide marriage euqality with the same rights and protections given to same-sex as opposite sex couples.
photo
phoebequeen
I blame the dog
05:44 PM on 03/15/2011
My comment is that it is disturbing to see two pictures of Haley Barbour right next to each other.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Angie Tyne 1
I want my disagree button!!
03:12 PM on 03/15/2011
So much for focusing on jobs. Allowing gay marriage would create thousands of jobs. it would be a huge boost to the economy and with all the 'staycations' the US would benefit not just from the ceremonies but also from the honeymoons!
02:04 PM on 03/15/2011
Just watched blustering barbour give a speech yesterday where he said we need to cut corporate taxes even more. Last I read, many corps. are not paying taxes, and you think those corps paying taxes aren't manipulating the books to where they actually pay a fraction of what they owe? It appears the repubs won't be happy until we, the American workers, pay our taxes directly to the corporations, & shrink government to zero.
absolument
Debate the policy. But first, LEARN the science.
02:38 PM on 03/15/2011
That would be f###sism, and that is their plan. I think it's deliberate, and I think that makes it treason.
04:59 PM on 03/15/2011
Who told this guy? It was supposed to be a secret.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Mike Costanza
01:31 PM on 03/15/2011
These are more than just issues to be bandied about in the abstract. Mehlman, who is gay, helped reelect a man who strove to prevent gays from achieving full equality, thereby acting against his own kind in the furthereance of his own goals. The rest of these "operatives" are quite willing to do the same as long as they can personally gain from the actions of their bosses.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
talkstocoyotes
10:08 AM on 03/16/2011
***Mehlman, who is gay, helped reelect a man who strove to prevent gays from achieving full equality, thereby acting against his own kind in the furtheran­ce of his own goals.***

Not surprising considering the existence of LCR and GoProud.
ItsGettingWeird
(or is it just me?)
12:19 PM on 03/15/2011
Haley Barbour is going to blow this one.
02:08 PM on 03/15/2011
haley barbour needs to loose weight before he blows his top. Can the blustering big mouth pass a physical? Can't see him pass a cardiac treadmill test. I wish him good health, but not the presidency.
absolument
Debate the policy. But first, LEARN the science.
03:21 PM on 03/15/2011
Meh. Haley Barbour doesn't wish you or me anything good and I see no reason to respond with anything better than reciprocity.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
talkstocoyotes
12:12 PM on 03/15/2011
Whatever the solution to marriage equality might be, abolishing everyone's marriage and converting them all to civil unions, often touted as The Next Bright Idea, would increase hostility toward gays a hundredfold. It would be the perfect moment for civil rights opponents to get people who are ambivalent -- and even a few allies -- on board: "SEE? SEE? We TOLD you they were trying to destroy marriage!" If I were affiliated with FRC or any other anti-gay hate group, I'd be an enthusiastic cheerleader for it.

It would also feed right in to the current exploitation of paranoia about deficits: we just can't afford those bennies and protections that married couples currently get, and same-sex couples should have full access to. Filing your Federal income taxes as "married filing jointly"? You could kiss that goodbye.
Rock Biologist
My micro-bio is molecular.
05:38 PM on 03/15/2011
Agreed! It would be a disaster. Like a lot of libertarian ideas, it *sounds* good at first, until you consider the real-world implications.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
talkstocoyotes
10:10 AM on 03/16/2011
Libertarianism is sort of a RFZ (Reality Free Zone).
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
talkstocoyotes
11:53 AM on 03/15/2011
A moderator earlier in this thread suggested that the perfect solution would be to abolish everyone's marriage and convert them all to "civil unions." Anyone interested in reading this response, do it quick before it gets censored:

If anything would increase hostility to gays a hundredfold, it would be for this harebrained idea to be considered seriously. If I were a homophobe affiliated with the FRC or any other anti-gay hate group, I'd be all for it. It would give civil rights opponents all the ammunition they need to say "SEE? SEE? We were right -- those evil homosexual activists are attacking marriage."

But it would serve two purposes: 1) send clear message to theocrats that people are willing let them define social issues and 2) serve the conservative "destroy by cost-cutting" agenda by abolishing legal benefits and protections that that married couples currently enjoy and that same-sex couples should have full access to. Filing your taxes as "married filing jointly"? Kiss that goodbye.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
talkstocoyotes
12:33 PM on 03/15/2011
Sorry y'all, posted twice.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Darcy Farce
09:23 AM on 03/15/2011
Equal rights for all. In Wyoming, where the state could not be any redder, there is gay marriage, abortion without hassles and personal freedoms that would make the Christian Republicans cringe. Small government should be about government not telling people who to love and when to give birth. It, instead, is always about less government aide to poor, more tax cuts for the rich and a cross in everyone's hand.
02:11 PM on 03/15/2011
Agree! FnF :-)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ioan Lightoller
Proud Married Gay Pagan Man
05:53 PM on 03/20/2011
Since WHEN Is there marriage in Wyoming? Not the last that I heard.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wikwox
So there I was, playing the piano....
09:14 AM on 03/15/2011
Anyone who works for Haley Barbour has to take what he gets and that means old style "southern strategy" politics based on fear and more than a little hatred.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
talkstocoyotes
12:10 PM on 03/15/2011
Right. When you lie down with dogs, you get up with lots of dog hair on your clothes.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Rahm11219
09:14 AM on 03/15/2011
The homosexual agenda is threatening to marriage.

If you don't believe me, just ask Newt or Rudy, Mark Foley or Larry Craig. We need to stand up for them!!!!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Darcy Farce
09:26 AM on 03/15/2011
Heterosexual divorce is threatening to marriage as a large percentage of them end in divorce and infidelity. Just ask Newt Gingrich.
absolument
Debate the policy. But first, LEARN the science.
02:43 PM on 03/15/2011
He gets that, dear. All those folks are famous for being Republican "family values" candidates, and adulterers.
10:23 AM on 03/15/2011
Then why do states that have legalized gay marriage have low divorce rates?
absolument
Debate the policy. But first, LEARN the science.
02:44 PM on 03/15/2011
Please re-read, with attention to irony.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Rahm11219
04:13 PM on 03/15/2011
Dude read the second line. It's sarcasm.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
bryanzth
Honest to Goodness USA Patriot!
09:06 AM on 03/15/2011
As the country becomes more top-heavy (read: GOP/TPer), the rights of minorities, including blacks, latinos, GLBTIQ people, muslims, jews, asians, south asians, and indigenous peoples will decline. In addition, the accumulation of money in the top 2% will create a minority of wealth that disparages the majority of poverty. The politics of the current GOP/TP coalition suggests that they will deny economic, social, religous (or non-religious), educational, health and safety rights of anyone who does not match their demographics. If you wish to argue with this, please provide citations and references.

However, as the country returns to a more _d_emocratic, representational politic, the rights for one minority will align with and/or uphold the rights of other minorities (in a synergistic way). The politics of Progressive, true Green and even Libertarian Conservatives (yes!) suggests that they will uphold the economic, social, religous (or non-religious), educational, health and safety rights of anyone in this country (visiting, resident, citizen). Got it? In a more _d_emocratic society EVEN SOCIAL CONSERVATIVES can have what they want, so long as they don't impose their views on others.

There.

BZ.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
bradenton
09:00 AM on 03/15/2011
Why would anyone support a candidate that doesn't support their own views? This is exactly the reason we have 2 messed up political parties.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Lesperado
glad I wasn't born conservative
08:52 AM on 03/15/2011
One of my most powerful memories of Gay Pride in SF was when the Log Cabin Republican contingency marched passed the grandstands, hundreds of people turned their backs on them.
10:14 AM on 03/15/2011
Don't you hate people who are judgemental and exclusionary? I am so glad it's only the OTHER side who marginalizes or ignores people with whom they disagree, or enforces the "correct" political affiliations.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Lesperado
glad I wasn't born conservative
10:45 AM on 03/15/2011
And what I hate more are people who fight against their communities own best interest. They weren't excluded at all. They were there marching their little conservative hearts out.

I'm an Inclusionist but that doesn't mean I have to like the people who are included.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jason N
Proud Firebagger Lefty
11:39 AM on 03/15/2011
You should show more respect to LCR. If it weren't for LCR, DADT would likely still be in effect (even though it is, but different story). Without the lawsuit they successfully brought forward, Congress and the President would not have been forced into moving on DADT when they did. The judge was telling the military to change, she wasn't going to stay her ruling. It forced Congress to act in order to slow walk the change in policy. So you should thank LCR, the biggest piece of gay rights legislation passed this year is largely thanks to them.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
talkstocoyotes
11:57 AM on 03/15/2011
***You should show more respect to LCR**

How about you do it for us?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Lesperado
glad I wasn't born conservative
12:50 PM on 03/15/2011
Good point. We'll see. With or without LCR, DADT was on it's deathbed.
Bellla
Trans & Proud
08:38 AM on 03/15/2011
The Republicans hate anybodies freedom but their own freedom to marginalize others.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
bryanzth
Honest to Goodness USA Patriot!
09:15 AM on 03/15/2011
Yep, that is what we have to change. GOP/TPers think they can run the lives of the majority. The majority are going to wake up realizimg that they ARE THE MAJORITY if they band together against the Koch Broz and their minions (Murdoch, Ailes, Beck, Palin, Limbaugh, Walker, Scott, TP, etc.)

What the Koch Broz and their program has done is broken up the Majority into tiny constituencies that seem to contradict each other. Rather, when GLBTIQ people have their rights, everybody has their rights. When the disadvantaged can catch their breaths by having education, health, safety and better wages, everyone can breath better knowing that all of us are able to do better as a nation.

I don't disparage the freedom of social conservatives to live as they want to in their own homes, but I'll be da__ed they are going to curtail my freedom to increase theirs. ;0)

BZ.