And if anyone’s wondering why this is coming now, it could be to counter this: A PPP poll shows that Charlie Crist, running as a Democrat instead of a Republican, would crush Rick Scott in the next election.

“Breaking news — allegations of homosexual affairs, one man trying to kiss another”

So, has the time machine dropped us off in 1992, 1952, or 1702?

So he’s what the Democrats think is a good candidate? No wonder people think the party’s doomed.

A guy like Charlie Crist needs to hook up with a guy like John Travolta so that they’d both have a strong interest in keeping it on the down low.

Surprise! (not)

As far as I’d understood it, Crist had announced public support for many gay rights issues, stopping short of marriage equality. If so, and it’s and IF on my part, why is this our business?

I understand when a politician is publicly anti-LGBT that it may become fair game to call him on his/her closeted gender identity. But otherwise, isn’t this sort of thing voyeuristic schadenfreude?

So you’d just let his opposition to marriage equality slide? Yikes.

Crist was a very moderate Republican governor. If he had been a moderate Democrat, rather than a moderate Republican, he might have come out as a gay man before now. Crist did some very progressive things for Florida, including changing the rules to make it easier for convicted felons to restore their voting rights (even though doing so would only help Democrats), and he sure looks good in comparison to the Tea Party doofus “governing” Florida today.

He should come out now, as gay or bisexual, and be done with the hiding. I would like to see what happens with this Greer trial, and if the facts show that Greer tried to blackmail Crist and Crist refused him, knowing his secret would be revealed, then I would forgive the guy and be happy to welcome him to the family.

I would be surprised if his views on marriage equality haven’t “evolved” along with President Obama’s. If they have, then I would forgive and move on.

You really don’t get it, do you

I’m not sure what you mean by ‘let it slide’, Laurel. I think it’s wrong to oppose marriage equality, and am heartened that one day in the not-too-distant future it will be legal. My point was attempting to ask if you think by opposing it (and again, he may not still hold that position; I’m operating on my understanding from a year ago) Crist has ceded his right to privacy.

I consider many Christianist preachers ‘political figures’ since many of the churches have enormous political arms, and when a Ted Haggard preaches gay hate, in my reckoning, his hypocrisy opens him up to exposing his secret life, and I confess I was glad that he was unmasked, and I’d hoped that his followers and other fundies might learn from it.

My shorter question is, I guess: what’s might morally/ethically be the standard for his hypocrisy to earn him this much exposure? I’m still battling with the entire John Edwards story, and trying to reckon which things the voting public have a right to know, and which not.

Given that the Gen X-ers and Millenials could care less about gay-straight identifications, things are changing fast, thank goodness. But somewhere inside me I’d like there to be moral considerations brought to our politics; it seems sometimes that too much private-life scrutiny causes some of the best potential candidates to abjure seeking office. And saying that, I believe that politicians should serve a term or two, then go back into private life, considering governing a public service, not a revolving door career.

Anyhoo, not trying to rile you, but to find out what the author, first, then any of you think. Apparently I have my answer.

Best,
wd

But we don’t need Chain Gang Charlie running as a Democrat. We need a real progressive, well articulated alternative in Florida, as everywhere. People are desperate for a clear explanation of what gives economically in this country and ways to fix it; they’re not getting it from Dems and they won’t get if from Charlie Crist, who could only look good next to an outright psychopath like Scott. (If the Dems can’t put forth a candidate against the miserably unpopular Scott they are worthless anyway.) And election bread and circuses–which they work to keep our eyes trained on, and which people are awfully obsessed with here–are only a small part of the solution anyway.

I’m just as happy if this news does torpedo any fledgling Crist candidacy; he is not in any way an ally of working or poor people.

After thinking it through a bit more, I became fairly certain that it was Americablog who set that standard; I used to read there a lot, and was even e-friends with John for a time (mainly his and his sister’s bad ass Greek recipes, etc.), though I faded after Margaret explained that he and his co-authors pretty much abandoned the transgendered in their political activist push.

@ Matthew Detroit: rec your comment. ;o)

Just re-read my post, and I’m not sure that I should be inferring that it’s okay if bigotry torpedoes a possible Crist candidacy. On the other hand, a lot of closeted gay men exploit young men just as they do women; if it’s that kind of ugly that brings him down, so be it. I live in Florida, in the capital, and Charlie’s gayness was pretty much understood to be a fact of life; my Republican inlaws also took it as a matter of course and hated him for his poll-driven “evolution” on the issues rather than his gayness. This is a guy who helped bring back prisoners in stripes toiling in the Florida heat along roadsides to cultivate the right-wing vote–that anyone here could suggest he would be an appropriated opponent for Scott is scary. That men in power sometimes want to f*ck young men is in many ways a long-accepted fact of life in the corridors of American power. So are many other kinds of abuse.

Awwwwwwww C’mon what the uniparty needs is a bipartisan-y person and it doesn’t get much more bipartisan-y than being able to shed that letter and the principles it espouses in order to get a chance to collect taxpayer moola.

Just ask all the very serious people. Totally winning!

Although more of an intra-party (repug again, of course) outing of a gay family member, would the anti-civil union efforts of this state rep meet your standard for a journalistic outing?

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_20821674/state-lawmakers-gay-son-outed-during-battle-over

I find it hard to believe that anyone would hit on Jim Greer.

Indeed we don’t. I was just noting the interesting timing, which could after all be a coincidence.