<p>Alwaysamom: s. t. f. u. is exactly what I want to scream when I see McGreevey getting media attention.</p>
<p>Now I’m curious about how many words with that acronym will get edited.<br>
lust ful comes to mind. And trust ful.</p>
<p>Some above have noted nearly everyone (in North NJ?) knew McGreevey was gay for years. Why was this not an issue when he ran for governor against Bret Schundler? Surely, Schundler’s campaign could have leaked it and used it against McGreevey. I’m not trying to challenge anyone’s assertions, I just am looking for clarification. His wife was at his side thorughout the campaign as I remember so it wasn’t obvious to me at the time.</p>
<p>Perhaps because if a Schundler dirty trick had been discovered, it would have done more damage to Shundler than to McGreevey. It’s a very PC issue. You are much more likely to have a successful dirty trick/leak if the leak concerns a right-leaning blemish, than a left-wing blemish. We have an extremely left-wing media in NJ. </p>
<p>Remember “Cuomo vs. the homo” when he ran against Ed Kotch? It really left a black mark on Cuomo’s reputation. Kotch is assumed to be gay (or kind of neuter) and he wasn’t fathering children & dumping them. No lovers appointed to critical security position. He kept his personal life personal & if a politician does that, most voters really don’t care. Ho-hum. Cuomo just came across looking like a bigot. I think Schundler (& Forrester) knew that the media would instantly champion McGreevey as the tortured soul, the “Gay American,” forced to be leading a double life by small-minded rubes. Now if McGreevey had been meeting WOMEN in turnpike reststops for anonymous sex, Schundler could have safely made an issue of that. No PC protection there. But the Golan appointment had not yet happened & Shundler didn’t want to risk the homophobe label. </p>
<p>I personally found Schundler to be an attractive candidate. Forrester was an absolute snore, and he started changing positions as the race narrowed. Considering the “gift” that had been dropped in his lap – McGreevey scandals & impending state financial doom – it is astounding that he was able to lose!</p>
<p>Thanks for your theory on the election. I agree with your analysis and example of Cuomo/Koch in 1977 is a good one. Although, Cuomo did pretty well later as a 3 term Gov of NY so any blackmark didn’t stick with him. </p>
<p>I noticed that the Star Ledger in February 2002 questioned Cipel’s appointment and how often McGreevey and Cipel were seen together. The articles prompted his mother to ask McGreevey if he was gay so I suppose that was really when people started to notice. I missed that whole thing.</p>
<p>For those who believe McGreevey is inarticulate or intelligent, I can assure you that he is very bright and an excellent speaker. My business partner and I met with him on alternate energy for about 20 minutes and he was extremely impressive with his knowledge on this specialized topic. Also he had a call in radio show on 101.5 FM for a couple years and he always handled himself well with live callers. Finally, he graduated Columbia undergrad, Georgetown Law and Harvard- Masters in Education. Not too shabby. But his ability to make good judgments though is certainly questionable.</p>
<p>I think he would have been just fine had he grown up a “humanist”. He would have been out of the closet 20 years earlier, he wouldn’t have gotten married, and, who knows? he might have become Governor in any case. His religion made him ashamed to admit even to himself who he really was, confused him about the value of honesty in relationships, and gave him an unhealthy dose of self-loathing that burdened him for most of his adult life.</p>
<p>I think McGreevy will do just fine, having now put some distance between himself and the Democratic party. </p>
<p>He claims to have rediscovered and reaffirmed his faith in God and men, along with his new–moneyed-Australian–partner living in their 17 room mansion in Plainfield NJ. He apparently hopes to get back into teaching and out on the lecture circuit (…stay off the turnpike, no backsliding…). These days he’s tossing out a “god bless you” with every well intentioned glad-hand.
God Bless you too!</p>
<p>Although, mini may be right: perhaps McGreevy is again being deluded by social forces such that he cannot exert anything like freewill over his actions and intentions: we can simply substitute say, “means of production” for “the opium of the people” and Bingo! It still works. Either one is well covered in the 19th century holy writ of earnest radicals.</p>
<p>If McGreevy stays away from elected office and rest-stops, I wish him–however he finds it-- an ample helping of domestic bliss and romantic contentment.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>His religion did no such thing! He chose dishonesty in a relationship because he wanted a photo-op family to put on his campaign lit. The first one crumbled…no problem. Move on, let first daughter fend for herself. On to the second photo-op family.</p>
<p>Learn something about the Catholic faith before you twist it and offer it as an excuse for McGreevey’s ethical lapses.</p>
<p>It is good to see the Catholic Church encouraging open and honest long-term commitments among gay people, and communicating those values to the young.</p>
<p>scum of the earth.</p>
<p>Mini–I don’t agree with the Catholic Church’s --or my own church’s–view on homosexuality.</p>
<p>But that has nothing to do with McGreevy’s choices, or deluding/using other people for his own gain. I cannot excuse deception on account of society’s views towards who he was. Plenty other gay men and women have the strength to maintain their integrity, including many people who belong to faiths which don’t accept them.</p>
<p>Is that so, NJRes? he might as well kill himself</p>
<p>Well said, Garland.</p>
<p>To accept mini’s dogma is to endorse the lie that people who are gay are somehow morally handicapped. His is a pernicious accusation, a wily worm winding its way into the heart of an apple. Of course mini’s quarry was really the church, not the lifestyle of the libertine and high-steppin’ Gov (any church would do; but the Catholic Church, in volume and longevity, is the big apple for the god-hating epicure).</p>
<p>Mini,
Why use a hand-grenade when an arrow would suffice; you may hit the big-bad boogey-man, but why kill his hostages?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not my idea, but a good one, and if it helps book sales he might even give it a try.</p>
<p>A day’s just not complete without a little Catholic bashing, right mini?</p>
<p>NJres, you are one of the most annoying posters on this board. Every time I read your posts, I’m utterly disgusted</p>
<p>I hope you’re not Catholic</p>
<p>tisthetruth, it is very gratifying to learn that my posts annoy you. Just so you know, I skipped over all of the posts in this thread, so I have no idea what my religion has to do with anything.</p>
<p>“Of course mini’s quarry was really the church, not the lifestyle of the libertine and high-steppin’ Gov (any church would do; but the Catholic Church, in volume and longevity, is the big apple for the god-hating epicure).”</p>
<p>Very well put, FS, and I suspect, very accurate.</p>
<p>So I’m listening: let’s hear what the Church has done for closeted gay folks already, and for the kiddies.</p>
<p>If he wasn’t Governor (and hence given the public’s trust of which he showed himself undeserving), McGreevey’s story wouldn’t seem particular odd, would it? </p>
<p>Perhaps I know too many (MANY too many) gay former Catholics. Gay folks don’t tend to be morally handicapped, but often their religious upbringings turn out not to be too great a help… I don’t hear stories of McGreeveys often scarred by their “humanist” upbringings (and I doubt FS is old enough to know any.) Then again, his Catholic teachings never seemed to get in the way of Pius the Rational (III - and true, he was never made a saint). </p>
<p>But I shouldn’t make assumptions about who is reading this, so here’s something for folks who might be looking for help:</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.dignityusa.org/[/url]”>http://www.dignityusa.org/</a></p>
<p>Well, Mini, I’m not Catholic. I’m Methodist, and my church is wrong about gays, too.</p>
<p>But what does that have to do with McGreevey’s ethical choices? McGreevey is an adult; he is capable of moral choices. He chose to be closeted, which is less common these days, though still his choice to make. His other two choices are more problematical. He also chose to deceive two wives. Not an ethical choice, no matter who makes it, and what their sexual identity is. And he chose to appoint his secret lover to inappropriate government positions. Ditto on ethical choices and sexual identity.</p>
<p>If he weren’t a political figure, he coudn’t have done the second, and we wouldn’t have known about the first. That doesn’t make it any more ethical.</p>
<p>Garland, I agree with you about the immoral behavior of McGreevey. It doesn’t matter to me whether he was gay or straight, he behaved in an unethical manner.</p>
<p>By the way, mini, Catholicism is not the only faith which treats homosexuality as a sin. Many Christian faiths also do so, as do Orthodox Jews, as I understand. Yet, you consistently find a reason to disparage the Catholic Church, almost regardless of the topic of a thread. If I made similar comments about any other faith, I’m sure I’d be taken to task (rightfully so). Your comments might carry more weight if you weren’t so consistently anti-Catholic.</p>