And not because he is a homosexual. Rather, Mehlman is not a real man because he stood by while members of the Party he led not merely bashed homosexuals. No, the Party he led compared homosexuals to alcoholics, pedophiles, bestiality and an array of other very bad things. A real man would have stood up and shouted, “this is not right!”, regardless of the professional consequences. And regardless of his own sexuality.
Ken Mehlman is not a real man, he is just a coward.
Heterodox Thoughts 
Why would it be “not right?” Really, that’s an honest question. Can you answer it based upon fact, not emotion?
It’s really a value judgment, which is not so much about fact as it is feeling. But I could make a factual argument about why demonizing gays now, while providing a near term electoral boost, could result in long run political costs. I make a similar point below in the culture war piece.
OK, then unless he has previously stated that he didn’t agree with such comparisons, how is being less than a “real man.”
In fact, wouldn’t speaking out against them for the purpose of avoiding long run political costs be considered being less than a “real man?” Of course, making such comparisons, if solely for near term political gain, is fairly vile too.
I’ll avoid addressing the comparisons themselves unless you really want to get into a nasty logic vs feeling debate, especially since my feelings aren’t aligned with the logic.
You might want to check out my posting on Ken Mehlman, which I think you might find interesting. Mehlman says gays should join GOP because they are “against Muslims”: http://queerfaithnews.wordpress.com/2010/09/09/gays-and-lesbians-called-to-protest-islamphobia/
Given the Muslims view of- and reaction to gays, that would make a certain amount of sense. It is much like my allying with Christians against Islam; I chose to side with the lesser threat.