I don't want to sound harsh, but I can't sum up much sympathy for Ken Mehlman just because he spent most of his life in a closet. Not a literal closet, mind you. The former chair of the Republican National Committee and campaign manager for George W. Bush's 2004 presidential run, Mehlman fought off rumors that he was gay for years.
The ever-astute David Lat of Above The Law foresaw Mehlman's coming-out earlier this year when the one-time Akin Gump partner bought a swanky apartment in New York's Gay Central: "Because Mehlman settled in Chelsea--and took up residence in the Chelsea Mercantile building, home to such A-list gays as Marc Jacobs and Lance Bass--we couldn’t resist a little innuendo."
Just a few days ago, innuendo became fact when Mehlman, now head of public affairs at Kohlberg Kravis Roberts, finally fessed up to Marc Ambinder, politics editor at The Atlantic:
It's taken me 43 years to get comfortable with this part of my life. 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's made me a happier and better person. It's something I wish I had done years ago.
I don't doubt that it's been a long, difficult path for Mehlman to walk, but it was also a career choice. Had he stayed at Akin Gump or some other big firm, my hunch is that he would have come out sooner. But he picked the rough terrain of politics, where private actions always entail public consequences. More critically, he aligned himself with a party where some members regard gays as deviants.
Let's not forget that Mehlman was in charge when Karl Rove deployed antigay initiatives in 2004 and 2006 to help Republicans win office. Mehlman tells The Atlantic that "if he had publicly declared his sexuality sooner, he might have played a role in keeping the party from pushing an antigay agenda."
But he didn't.
Strangely, he also tries to justify his passivity during those years by suggesting that he was siding with protectors of gay rights. "He often wondered why gay voters never formed common cause with Republican opponents of Islamic jihad, which he called 'the greatest antigay force in the world right now,'" reports The Atlantic.
The jihads and the evangelicals probably don't like each other much, but they might actually share similar views on homosexuality. Did Mehlman miss that bit of subtlety?
Mehlman is now a born-again gay activist, who's vowed to spread the gospel of gay marriage rights. He's working hard to fight California's antigay marriage amendment, Proposition 8, becoming "a de facto strategist for the group," says The Atlantic.
"I can't change the fact that I wasn't in this place personally when I was in politics, and I genuinely regret that," Mehlman tells The Atlantic. "It was very hard, personally."
Where Mehlman is now is in the safety and comfort of the private sector--KKR, no less--and living large in Chelsea. Yes, it's safe to be whoever you are.
If you have topics you'd like to discuss, or information to share for The Careerist, e-mail chief blogger Vivia Chen at VChen@alm.com.
Let me guess: you are either a bigot, a third-grader, or an atheistic liberal. Which is it?
I have neither seen, nor heard, nor read anything about Evangelical Christians in this country advocating death to homosexuals in the name of their religion. If you have evidence to the contrary, I would like to see it –and I’m not talking about a picture of some nut on a street corner protesting a military funeral.
However, it is the stated goal of all jihadists to murder homosexuals, not to mention all infidels—like yourself—and anyone else who disagrees with their insanity. Simply not being “okay” with homosexuality is something quite different than murder, wouldn’t you agree? No, you wouldn’t, because you know better don’t you? That’s a little distinction that doesn’t matter to you because that’s what you do right? You conflate jihadists with Christians because religious people are all nuts and they’re all the same because they’re not like you—an atheist or agnostic. You think all Tea Partiers are racist. And you think anyone who lives outside the environs of New York, D.C. or L.A. is basically dumb. Oops wait, I forgot to mention San Francisco.
Because that’s what you do right? You take something you overheard at an upper west side cocktail party and then misattribute it to an entire group of people. And then you go on living your miserable liberal life with that as your philosophy, and agreeing with other stupid liberals because that is their philosophy.
Finally, please do not presume to know what I believe or “pretend” to believe because I want to be politically correct, just because that is something that you would do, being the cowardly liberal that you are.
Posted by: Elbert | August 31, 2010 at 04:26 PM
Elbert, you cannot believe that the end goal for Evangelicals is to simply prevent marriage. That is ridiculous. You know it goes further than that. Be honest about your position rather than trying to cry foul. You can have an argument on the merits of your position, or you can just pretend your position is not something that it really is. Your call.
But there are plenty of Evangelicals who are not okay with the existence of gays. You know this. In fact, we can probably take it as the real position of the group.
The only reason they are unable to impose death or violence upon them, is because we have a secular state that intentionally limits the powers of evangelicals for this very reason.
But do not even pretend that the real position is "we just don't want marriage". That is a compromise you have to make publicly because of power and political climate limitations.
Posted by: Oh, Really | August 31, 2010 at 02:23 PM
Last time I checked, jihadists advocate death to all homosexuals. Whereas Evangelicals simply don't want to elevate sodomy to the status of marriage -- or did you just miss that bit of subtlety?
Posted by: Elbert | August 30, 2010 at 07:40 PM