Yes, it’s true ladies and germs. And like her or no, she’s the only major candidate so far to openly address a purported gay rights group. If you wonder why I say “purported, then you surely haven’t been reading the Malcontent of late. OR Citizen Crain. Shame on you.
In Clinton’s favor are her opposition to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” which her husband established at the beginning of his presidency, (and which was a positive step for gays in the military at that time,) and that bright red pantsuit she’s so fond of. It does make her look Fabulous!
Against her are such things as, oh, when she opens her mouth:
In the speech, Clinton joked that she shares the same initials as the group, and pledged to maintain the same close working relationship that last year helped defeat the federal amendment which would have banned same-sex marriage.*
I’ll give her credit for voting against it, but come on. Claiming that her “close working relationship” with the HRC is what defeated the amendment is like Al Gore saying he invented the internet. A grain of truth in a loaf of crap. You’d have to search far and wide to find a zealot so disillusioned that he or she thought that amendment would actually pass. Meh.
I’ll admit that I’m having a hard time finding a better candidate to vote for at this point in time. Perhaps Guliani. Certainly not that septegenarian McCain, who seems to be “finding God” only now in his golden years.
And, actually, I do not hold it against her that her husband instituted DODT, as I indicated above. At the time, you could be asked if you were gay and summarily thrown out of the military without ceremony. DODT was a necessary first step in allowing the animosity towards gays to begin to cool, and in that light it was indeed a positive step. But Bill gets credit for that, not Hillary.
However, it seems to me that presidential candidates should be examples of Fine Character and Integrity. Hillary lost any semblance of integrity for me years ago, when she changed her name to Clinton after years of keeping her maiden name, solely for political clout. It may seem like a small issue to some, but I find it indicative of her manner in regard to several issues. Such as taking credit for defeating the FMA.
I guess time will tell. Here’s some video of her HRC speech (it’s 18 minutes long and is sure to be played a LOT, so bear with it):
Seriously, my fellow gays, what are we going to do? Even the regular commenters on Pam’s House Blend are tired of the ineffectiveness of the HRC, and its shilling for the Democratic Party. And while the Dem’s largely take us for granted, the Repub’s in general (and the Party specifically) are certainly worse. Guliani, however, is definitely more palatable than many Democrats–and comfortable in drag, no less!–so again we’re left in a conundrum.
It’s like going to the store looking for a steak, and all they have is pork or chicken.