« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »
09/20/2007
Hillary says she's not stealth; we wonder if her fingers were crossed
In the forthcoming issue of The Advocate, Hillary Clinton will reportedly squash gay hopes that her civil unions-only support is really code wording for, "I'm ready to dance the horah at your full and equal wedding, just let me move back into my former home (with the deed in my name this time)." New York magazine's Daily Intelligencer quotes Hill-Rod as saying of her position:
"I would tell you [if it was]," ... "This is an issue that I’ve had very few years of my life to think about when you really look at it, when you compare it to a whole life span. I am where I am right now, and it is a position that I come to authentically."
Hmm...that's unfortunate. But then again, doesn't the very definition of a stealth political maneuver preclude the politician from revealing their hand? So could it be that this "I am where I am right now" statement is just further code-wording, with the operative take-away message being the "right now" part? And might it be that her whole "I need to time to think about it" schtick means that she needs only until inauguration day to wrap her head around the concept?
We remain hopeful. After all, did the candidate version of George Bush admit he was going to drive us to unjust war, ruin our world reputation, and thoroughly bumblef**k anything he touched if he were elected?
Hillary Makes Sure ‘The Advocate’ Understands How Much She Does Not Support Marriage Equality [NY Mag --Daily Intelligencer]
**UPDATE, 9/21: The full Advocate story is now online
Your thoughts
Please... Have we not gone down this path with these people before? Were we not promised the Bill would open up the military for gays & lesbians? Were we not screwed after the election? We ended up with "Don't Ask. Don't Tell"; except in war time, then sure... we can overlook the fact your a fag or a dyke. I say to hell with these wind bags! They have been in office for years and what have they given us? Hope, only to crushed buy disappointment! Whyb is ENDA (protections for gays in the work place) only now being debated on the House floor? Why were we not worthy to be included in the many prior versions? It must be an election year. I remember the last time I fell for these hypocrits. Well I'm still here with no legal protections, no right to marry, and can only die for my Country in military service if I lie! No more I say! Stop supporting those who only want our votes, but wouldn't make the effort to throw their coffee on us if we were on fire in the streets!
Posted by: Edward H | Sep 20, 2007 5:12:11 PM
Edward: The above should not be taken as support or endorsement for Ms. Clinton. It's just to say that she will certainly be on the scene for the near future, so we hope that no matter what role she plays in American politics, it will be the one that finds itself at full marriage acceptance. And the same goes for every other Dem candidate as well.
Posted by: G-A-Y | Sep 20, 2007 5:15:27 PM
If Hillary Clinton gets in we’ll see a curdled rerun of Bill Clinton sans the sax and sex. Get set for a long war; she supports Bush’s plans to nuke Iran, voted for and votes to sustain the unlawful genocidal invasion of Iraq and insists that the ‘surge’ is working. The opposite is true; it’s led to more GI’s getting mauled and more Iraqis getting murdered. She avoids discussing full equality for gays and lesbians because she’s against it. The best you can expect from her is a modest coat of cosmetics to conceal real problems.
She isn’t the most qualified candidate but she’s home schooled by Bill Clinton, who thinks same sex marriage is ‘the kiss of death’ for Democrats. (It will be, just not the way he thinks.) Hillary blames Gore, not the Bill and Monica Show for their heartbreak in 2000. She blames everybody BUT Bill Clinton and his DOMA for their fiasco in 2004. His wholehearted support for DOMA was manna from heaven for the Republicans who used it to scapegoat us and get reelected in 2004. The other reason Democrats lost is because they could scarcely make an issue of the war; it’s their war as much as Bushes, and that’s never been truer than now.
Now here’s a puzzle. How did Bill Clinton, a hustling Little Rock lawyer always on the side of big business and the obscenely rich, still manage, as if by accident, ending up a gazillionaire. He and the Democrats helped ram DOMA and DADT into law. When he did stand tall it was on the backs of working people. He fought hard for NAFTA, an agreement calculated to erode the standard of living of union and non-union workers in Canada, Mexico and the US. He pardoned rich criminals like fugitive financier Marc Rich, while abandoning political prisoners to their fate.
Hillary Clinton’s one big chance to show off her political cleverness, aside from being the midwife of DOMA, was her botched health care bill. It was crafted by the very insurance companies that would have profited from it. But, as luck would have it, it was so byzantine and tortuous that no one with an average Congressional IQ could get make heads or tails of it. It died of mortification.
For the last year or so she’s crossed the country, Bible pressed to bosom, ‘dialoging’ with christian bigots, misogynists and anti abortion fanatics. It’s paid off. Robert Murdoch, the obscenely rich owner of Faux News and several right wing rags that would make the editors of Der Angriff blush with envy graciously hosted a private tête-à-tête for her at the Fox News building in 2006 where she no doubt made her deal(s) with the Devil. Unlike some poor deluded suckers, the obscene rich don’t give a rat’s ass who’s in power. They’re serenely confident that if they find a democrat or Republican in the Oval Office they’re for sale. They haven’t been disappointed since U.S. Grant took office in 1868.
Posted by: Bill Perdue | Sep 20, 2007 9:45:03 PM
Hillary couldn't possibly say or do anything that would convince me she wouldn't happily sign a same-sex marriage bill if it fell on her desk at the WH. Everything she says on the issue is so... ... ...wink wink, nudge nudge, elbow elbow. I'm willing to play along, though. ;)
Posted by: Mara | Sep 21, 2007 12:27:39 AM
Agreed, Mara. I've heard from far too many friends and confidantes that Hillary supports same-sex marriage in private. And again -- if it's strategy, she's never going to admit it.
While we should all push every single Democrat to be 100%, outwardly supportive of gay marriage, it's actually better to me at this point think that she (or anyone) is being coy for the sake of electability, rather than simply unable to grasp the concept of same-sex marriage. Because let's face it -- it's really not that difficult of a notion! I would have a hard time trusting anyone who honestly "struggled" with this "issue."
Posted by: G-A-Y | Sep 21, 2007 9:06:37 AM
comments powered by Disqus













