Thursday, August 09, 2007
Way To Go Melissa Etheridge
Listening to Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) tonight on the Visible Vote 08 Presidential Forum focused on GLBT issues reinvent the history of her husband's presidential legacy on GLBT rights was so Clintonesque. The federal DOMA, as Sen. Clinton explained, was all part of a grand scheme to head off a federal marriage amendment, and it worked she declared. That's utter BS, and she knows it. And Melissa Etheridge wasn't about to let her get by with it. True to form, a visibly bristling Clinton couldn't help but condescendingly suggest that Melissa Etheridge's battle with breast cancer made her particularly anxious to obtain full equality sooner than is realistically possible. The federal DOMA statute was the brainchild of the religious right, and she and Bill bought into on the advice of Dick Morris, just like they went along with "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" when the heat got turned up on them. It was quite refreshing when Melissa Etheridge called her out and expressed the opinion that the Clinton years were a major disappointment. "You threw us under the bus," Etheridge opined. The Clinton legacy is unmistakable. The first president in the history of the U.S to sign into law a bill specifically singling out gays for discrimination--not once, but twice he did it. That's the Clinton legacy. Thanks, Melissa Etheridge for not letting folks forget about it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
Sound Off Poll Results After the Forum:
Obama 37%
Kucinich 24%
Clinton 20%
Edwards 9%
Gravel 6%
Richardson 5%
Yes, Melissa was right when she expressed disappointment with Clinton....but let's try to compare him to George Bush. Hmm....where to begin?
When all is said and done, LGBT's would have been A LOT better off if Gore or Kerry had won (let's not argue now about whether Gore won....that is off topic), and Karl Rove had never been allowed within 1,000 feet of the Oval Office.
Electoral politics is usually about the lesser of two evils, and I find it hard to understand how a gay Republican can criticize a Democratic administration for not being gay friendly enough. Any one of the Democratic candidates last night would be better for gay people than any one of the Republicans - ALL OF WHOM refused to even appear on the stage with a bunch of queers.
anon 7:10, lets talks about the 2008 candidates. Rudy Guiliani has a better record in public office on GLBT rights than any of those candidates who appeared at last night's forum. While the Clintons were enshrining discrmination into federal law against gays and lesbians, he was signing into law some of the best laws in the nation extending rights to GLBT New Yorkers. Chew on that.
Rudi had a Democratic-dominated council passing the laws. Was he going to veto them? Clinton had a Republican-led Congress passing him the bad laws with veto-proof majorities.
So when will the H.R.C. forum for the GOP Presidential candidates be held? Would any appear? Even Saint Rudi?
They're running for president of the United States. I don't think there should be any presidential forums devoted to any particular special interest or subset of America. These forums should include all Americans.
It makes me proud to say I'm an Independent voter when I hear that Melissa "I love to eat pie" Ethridge is a recognized leader within the Democrat party.
Dems are hurting for heros... but then they have Bartman and Bling Bling Anderson. Dohp!
First of all, Wilson...there were NOT "veto proof [Republican] majorities" in the Clinton years. I can't believe you are defending Clinton on DADT and DOMA. Actually, yes I can, sadly.
Accounts from sources as diverse as David Mixner and Dick Morris make it clear that the Clintons did, indeed, throw the GLBT community under the bus after fawning over us for our money and our votes. The Repbublicans are clearly awful, but they are at least up-front about it and don't hold our hands while stealing our wallets.
And, AI, did you hear Hillary's response to the Don't Ask, Don't Tell question: "It was improperly implemented" !!!!!!!! If the GLBT community falls for them again, we get what we deserve.
Her response on DADT came first, and I missed most of her answer on it in between doing other things. I saw it in some of the follow up accounts. Clinton could have vetoed both bills on principal. He chose not to because he was more interested in getting re-elected. Hillary was all for that. The Clintons are first. Everyone else is second. For the life of me, I don't understand people's desire to continue their suffering. The path they've left behind is strewn with casualties from being a FOB or a FOH.
Gary is right, about Rudy. He did sign ground-breaking legislation favorable to our community.
But other than that, he's a flaming a--hole. Ask anyone.
A former IU student body president, Jeff Richardson, actually went to NYC to work as AIDS czar, or whatever they call it there. His horror stories about Rudy's tricks are mind-boggling. First-person accounts are always more appealing than random observations or speculation.
And now, he claims, as of last night, that he was at Ground Zero as much as any fire-fighter, and that he might suffer from some lung damage as a result. Huh?
I want a president who understands our community, but not at all costs. The real gut-wretching display last night was from Gov. Richardson. Wow. I had been impressed with him, but his debate answers have been consistently rambling, and last night's was just, well, pathetic.
I'm not pleased with Bill Clinton's dallayances, Gary, most notably turning an intern into a humidor. What a disgusting display for the party who had championed workpalce rights.
But apart from his personal nonsense, please illuminate me on the state of the nation during his presidency. Best economy ever. Balanced budget. He turned over a surplus to W.
Yeah, the Clintons are selfish. But we've had eight years of stupid, and I'll take selfish any day over stupid.
But apart from his personal nonsense, please illuminate me on the state of the nation during his presidency. Best economy ever. Balanced budget. He turned over a surplus to W.
Are you kidding me? You honestly think Clinton was responsible for our "great" economy. Well, he likely was. He was all about himself, so were various CEOs. If the president can lie under oath and to the people, then it is morally ok to lie about income, spending, etc.. Clinton was all about himself and these CEOs, CFOs, and major shareholders were all about themselves. Yet liberals claim that Clinton is a great person, yet all those business people are devils for their lies.
I honestly think the Dems have a better chance if they run Obama than Clinton. See seems so hated, that everything about her is fake. She is supposed to be a strong woman, yet does not care about a husband who likes to stray. He admitted to one stray, wonder how many really exist.
They are all smart people, but Clinton and Edwards seem to have a very smug (elite vs. everyone else/us vs. them) attitude. Obama may have that, but I just don't see it as much with the others.
Clinton was almost conservative in some aspects. With welfare, he gave it back to the states, knowing cuts were going to have to be made. So instead of him taking the heat, blame 50 governors. With gay rights, he obviously cared more about the votes of moderates who, for whatever reason, had a serious dislike for gays. Oh, can we forget NAFTA?
10:23, feel free to pick up any 100-level economics textbook...read, and get back to us.
I'm no huge Clinton fan, mostly because of the damage his personal life did to the institution of the presidency.
But his economic policies, some of which I detested, largely worked. I don't know if it's entirely to his credit, but he gets the credit, just like Bush gets the blame for this lousy economy. That's the way the ball bounces.
Balanced budgets work in government. Clinton did that--four successive years. He turned over a surplus to W's idiotic bunch.
Yeah, he's smug. And his staff removed all the Ws from the White House keyboards as a prank. The whole damned bunch was smug.
But ask worldwide leaders, and they'll tell ya: Clinton was a better president comatose, than W is on all cylinders. Worldwide economies did quite well. Coincidentally, so did most of us.
NAFTA was a mistake. But Clinton was not afraid to burn a great deal of poltical capital becauase he beleived in it. On paper, it should've worked. But it hasn't.
2:54, lousy economy? The Dow jumped 20% last year and has beaten it's historical average for the past 4 years. And you can't blame him for the sub-prime mortgage problem. And China was buying up our debt long before he got into office.
I don't know much about the gay political thing (no offense,) but I can tell you the economy has been quite good the past few years.
Post a Comment