Slog
News & ArtsThursday, March 7, 2013
Gay Marriage / Politics / LGBTQITSLFA The President Who Signed the Defense of Marriage Act Into Law...
Posted by Dan Savage on Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 7:29 PM
...and bragged about doing so on rightwing Christian radio during his reelection campaign? That same guy—Bill Clinton—is now calling for the repeal of DOMA.
1
He really is a slimeball, isn't he? And he's the second best president we've had in the last 30 years. The first best likes to use flying robots to kill people.
6
Newt gets his panties in a twist and shuts down the Government. Bill has to order out for pizza because Newt's government shut down included the White House kitchen staff. An intern brings the pizza to the Oval Office, Bill ends up getting a phone call from Newt while said intern was busy under Bill's desk.
Newt is overthrown by his own party. Bill goes on to a second term.
Truth is stranger then fiction.
Defense of Marriage? Oh was that what we were talking about? Sorry.
Newt is overthrown by his own party. Bill goes on to a second term.
Truth is stranger then fiction.
Defense of Marriage? Oh was that what we were talking about? Sorry.
7
As someone whose first vote for a president was for Bill Clinton, I remember being disappointed when he signed DOMA into law.
That said, I do believe that he thought it was a compromise at the time. If he had not pushed Congress in that direction and if he had not signed DOMA, the Congress may have done something far worse -- such as a Constitutional Amendment outlawing same sex marriage FOREVER.
We can all be pissed at Clinton in retrospect, but let's remember how popular DOMA was at the time. If he had vetoed it, the veto would have surly been overturned.
Remember, DOMA passed with overwhelming support from both parties. The House voted 342 to 67, with Democrats voting almost 2 to 1 for the bill. The vote was 85 to 14 in the Senate, with Democrats voting 31 to 14 for the bill. All Republicans voted for it, with the exception of one recently outed gay Republican, Rep. Steve Gunderson, who had decided not to seek reelection.
That said, I do believe that he thought it was a compromise at the time. If he had not pushed Congress in that direction and if he had not signed DOMA, the Congress may have done something far worse -- such as a Constitutional Amendment outlawing same sex marriage FOREVER.
We can all be pissed at Clinton in retrospect, but let's remember how popular DOMA was at the time. If he had vetoed it, the veto would have surly been overturned.
Remember, DOMA passed with overwhelming support from both parties. The House voted 342 to 67, with Democrats voting almost 2 to 1 for the bill. The vote was 85 to 14 in the Senate, with Democrats voting 31 to 14 for the bill. All Republicans voted for it, with the exception of one recently outed gay Republican, Rep. Steve Gunderson, who had decided not to seek reelection.
8
I'm probably missing something, but isn't it a good thing that he, like millions of other Americans, changed his mind about gay rights issues during the past 17 years? I don't understand why folks are so angry about this.
9
This is wonderful news, Danny!
We're Winning!!
Does this mean Terry will finally be able to knock you up?
We can't wait to see the look on Pat Robertson's face when you start showing.....
We're Winning!!
Does this mean Terry will finally be able to knock you up?
We can't wait to see the look on Pat Robertson's face when you start showing.....
10
@9: Anything is possible through God. We'll keep inseminating and praying, praying and inseminating.
12
@ no. 1: Don't forget our other great, but forgotten president, Jimmeh Carter. But that was more than 30 years ago.
13
Being pro-gay is so trendy.
I bet there are kids out there right now who are actively going against their own real sexual proclivities to be gay, only because its cool.
How can that be good?
I bet there are kids out there right now who are actively going against their own real sexual proclivities to be gay, only because its cool.
How can that be good?
15
Ya know, I was angry as fuck when DOMA passed, & felt betrayed by Clinton when it happened. I've come to understand political compromise & such a little better as I get older. Although this is clearly a machination to further either his legacy or Hillary's future, I'm just gonna be glad he's come around to the right side of the issue. Guy is a gifted orator.
Obama might not have become such a supporter if Crazy Uncle Joe Biden hadn't beaten him to the punch.
Obama might not have become such a supporter if Crazy Uncle Joe Biden hadn't beaten him to the punch.
17
Lets be fair folks: A lot of folks were "evolving" on the idea of gay marriage and there simply wasn't much support for S.S.M at that time either. Times change and enough people eventually change their minds. It was true for African-Americans ; it was true for women and now, its true for gay folks.
18
@passionate_jus - He could have vetoed it, and made Congress override that veto. He chose instead to sign it.
He does not deserve a pass on this.
He does not deserve a pass on this.
21
What the fuck is wrong with you people?
Are you so locked up inside your own bubbles that you don't realize you're in the minority of minorities?
I cannot believe the amazing progress LGBT rights have made in just a few short years.
But you'd rather shit on the whole thing because you don't get 100% of your demands met immediately.
Fuck you.
I'm not gay and even I recognize how much progress has been made. But you'd rather lose the whole war in order to win one meaningless, pointless, worthless battle for your fragile pride.
What kind of fucking world do you think we live in? Relish your fucking victories, don't shit on them.
Are you so locked up inside your own bubbles that you don't realize you're in the minority of minorities?
I cannot believe the amazing progress LGBT rights have made in just a few short years.
But you'd rather shit on the whole thing because you don't get 100% of your demands met immediately.
Fuck you.
I'm not gay and even I recognize how much progress has been made. But you'd rather lose the whole war in order to win one meaningless, pointless, worthless battle for your fragile pride.
What kind of fucking world do you think we live in? Relish your fucking victories, don't shit on them.
22
This is nothing but good. The Supreme Court is days away from hearing arguments about DOMA and prop 8. This "evolution" is welcomed and very important.
23
@21. Exactly. Those people (just like the Negroes, and the Feminists and the Mexicans) should be happy that they have almost as much as we do.
24
@ 5 That is some BS there nothing Republican about Clinton or Obama. Both are solid Democrats. You sound like a Green Party Member.
25
@ 12 Carter was great cmon, his entire Presidency was a trainwreck. Oh well he did great things after he left the WH.
26
Remember how Clinton kept pissing off the Republicans by stealing their agenda and presenting it as his own? This was part of that. He had to get on that bus or it would have run him over. (Nobody ever really thought he had principles for which he would sacrifice any part of his career, did they? Even back in 1992 nobody thought that.)
27
He should have vetoed. Even if overturned, he would have been principled.
Now, too little, too late.
Remember he signed DADT as well. At least with Shrub JR you know where you stood. With friends like these...
Now, too little, too late.
Remember he signed DADT as well. At least with Shrub JR you know where you stood. With friends like these...
28
@21 Have you ever considered the possibility that actual gay people, who have been jerked around on this issue for many years by their own alleged political allies, might have *slightly* more nuanced feelings about this subject, which you only understand in an intellectual capacity at best? If you haven't you should try it because you sound like an ass right now.
29
Well if the man responsible for signing it into law can change his mind about it, then why can't everyone? People seem to value steadfastness and stubbornness over reevaluation and evolution. Bill Clinton speaking out against DOMA should be held up as a noble act. If he's shot down for it, how are any of the true anti-gay nutjobs ever going to come around?
30
Ditto @21. I'm an old enough queer to remember what the '90's were like, and resent all the crap spewed over DADT and DOMA by our side. DADT was AN IMPROVEMENT over the policy before it, where you were dishonorably discharged, no questions asked. DOMA was an improvement over a fucking constitutional amendment, fer chrissake. Both were compromises made to avoid something much worse. Does anyone really believe that Bush senior or any other Rethug POTUS would have done anything about the military's policy on gays, or not cheered on an amendment to the constitution?
We do what we can in the times we live in to preserve or advance what rights we can get. Civil unions and domestic partnerships are not marriage by any means, but they were better than nothing, and I was glad to have mine before I was able to get married.
We now live in a time where public sentiment will be on our side if the SCOTUS makes some insane decision reversing these lower court decisions. Now THAT is real progress, but baby steps were needed to get here.
We do what we can in the times we live in to preserve or advance what rights we can get. Civil unions and domestic partnerships are not marriage by any means, but they were better than nothing, and I was glad to have mine before I was able to get married.
We now live in a time where public sentiment will be on our side if the SCOTUS makes some insane decision reversing these lower court decisions. Now THAT is real progress, but baby steps were needed to get here.
31
@21, yeah! As long as we are on the bus, does it matter where we have to sit? Even though we can be kicked off the thing, at least we aren't walking. Thanks boss, we're grateful for small mercies. *doffs cap*
32
@15: "Crazy Uncle Joe" is some of the cleverest political strategizing I've seen from this administration (and like him or loathe him, Obama knows how to play politics). Here's how it goes:
1. Obama wants to support/oppose a policy but isn't sure how the general public will respond.
2. Joe Biden talks to the press and puts forward the desired position, with a good deal more bombastic enthusiasm than Obama would.
3. Based on the response, Obama then either comes out in favor of the position or publicly laughs it off as "Crazy Uncle Joe" shooting his mouth off and comes away smelling like roses either way.
The character Biden's built up around himself is political theatre at its finest.
1. Obama wants to support/oppose a policy but isn't sure how the general public will respond.
2. Joe Biden talks to the press and puts forward the desired position, with a good deal more bombastic enthusiasm than Obama would.
3. Based on the response, Obama then either comes out in favor of the position or publicly laughs it off as "Crazy Uncle Joe" shooting his mouth off and comes away smelling like roses either way.
The character Biden's built up around himself is political theatre at its finest.
33
I try to take offense to what matters. It was a fucked-up thing for Clinton to sign DOMA into law- it was (and still is) worthy of contempt. His "turnaround" on the issue is about as convincing as Obama's; both were pro-gay in private, and both became pro-gay publicly because of the need to realign their legacy to the right side of history and their lovably impatient VP respectively. That said, I don't really give a fuck what kind of cynicism or opportunism is behind their actions as long as we continue to move towards making equality the law of the land. Yes, Clinton's law-signing is categorically worse than Obama's early 1st term "God is in the mix" bullshit. But in the face of the repeal of DOMA, the hypocrisy of Clinton's new public politics seem like small potatoes when you consider the CONTENT of those new public politics. I won't forget the past but- bullshit or not- this is good news for the country.
34
@23/31: Acknowledging and appreciating the small victories while still fighting for the big ones (or more accurately, using the small ones as motivation and momentum to fuel the fight for the big ones) is not only possible, it is the only way to engage in long-term struggles for social justice without getting horribly burnt-out and jaded. A lot more would get accomplished in this country if more people recognized that, since "all or nothing" usually gets you...nothing.
Clinton's reversal of course, regardless of the reasons behind it, is one of those small victories. Perhaps nothing more than a hearty "about damn time" is warranted, but getting the support of the very people who once screwed you over is how you win.
Clinton's reversal of course, regardless of the reasons behind it, is one of those small victories. Perhaps nothing more than a hearty "about damn time" is warranted, but getting the support of the very people who once screwed you over is how you win.
35
As I become older, I've come to understand you have to BE older to appreciate the very real and constant "evolution" one's beliefs and understandings goes through. It's the absence of life experience over significant time that makes this difficult to understand in concept, as if all truths become self-evident once one reaches their twenties and that's the end of that. It isn't. I wouldn't want to be held to everything I believed twenty years ago, just as a 30 year old wouldn't want to judged for what they believed when they were ten. It never ends - one of the fascinating facts of life. We'd be better off to learn from and emulate those who keep themselves in this constant state of evolution instead of insisting the more righteous behavior is intellectual and emotional stagnation. Because no matter how convinced you are your current beliefs will never change, they absolutely will.
36
...having said all that; Clinton, Obama and Biden are politicians and this is about achieving significant change through its exercise. It's overtly simplistic and naive, frankly, to insist they should have gone to the mat with their current positions when DOMA or DADT were clearly incremental steps to what we're realizing today. Both were improvements over what would have been - a constitutional amendment prohibiting same-sex marriage and the military's previous status quo on gay soldiers - just as domestic partnerships were a stepping stone to full marriage equality. utInBumF says it perfectly in comment #30.
37
For the record, Biden voted for DOMA in 1996. Bill Clinton came out for gay marriage in 2011, almost exactly one year before Biden and Obama did.
@35 These politicians weren't evolving their views; they molded their views to the time they lived in.
@35 These politicians weren't evolving their views; they molded their views to the time they lived in.
38
Ms Hopkins - Please, no. Not that she didn't merit it, but Back to the 90s would be just like Back to the 50s, only without Barbara Billingsley's vacuuming in high heels and pearls.
As for the pragmatists, compromise is one thing. Bragging about it in a way that made it appear that his earlier stance was just something into which he'd been forced by pushy people whom he'd safely managed to stow away in Fifth Class rankled just a little. That Mrs C, who seemed more sound on policy if not such an expert at schmoozing, succeeded Mr Moynihan (the weightiest of the No votes, as I recall), rankled a bit more.
As for the pragmatists, compromise is one thing. Bragging about it in a way that made it appear that his earlier stance was just something into which he'd been forced by pushy people whom he'd safely managed to stow away in Fifth Class rankled just a little. That Mrs C, who seemed more sound on policy if not such an expert at schmoozing, succeeded Mr Moynihan (the weightiest of the No votes, as I recall), rankled a bit more.
39
I'd be happy if this actually represented an evolving opinion of Mr. Clinton's. As it is, it represents an evolving opinion of everyone else that Mr. Clinton is trying to stay on the right side of.
I'm glad that another influential person has come out against DOMA. I just wish his support had been there when it was actually challenging and meaningful, and that people would stop using political exigencies to excuse him for his previous heterosexist bullshit. If you want to play the game, that's fine, but don't expect my gratitude for it.
I'm glad that another influential person has come out against DOMA. I just wish his support had been there when it was actually challenging and meaningful, and that people would stop using political exigencies to excuse him for his previous heterosexist bullshit. If you want to play the game, that's fine, but don't expect my gratitude for it.
40
This from #34 is worth repeating "getting the support of the very people who once screwed you over is how you win."
There's lots of 'score keeping' going on in this thread. 'Score keeping' does not win political battles and winning IS the point. Clinton could have and should have done more to help us in the 90s, but he's with us TODAY and as far as winning TODAY is concerned I'm glad he's on our side.
There's lots of 'score keeping' going on in this thread. 'Score keeping' does not win political battles and winning IS the point. Clinton could have and should have done more to help us in the 90s, but he's with us TODAY and as far as winning TODAY is concerned I'm glad he's on our side.
41
Nora Ephron accurately described him years ago.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nora-ephro…
"Anyway, I fell out of love with Bill early in the game - over gays in the military. That was in 1993, after he was inaugurated, and at that moment my heart turned to stone. People use that expression and mean it metaphorically, but if your heart can turn to stone and not have it be metaphorical, that's how stony my heart was where Bill was concerned. I'd had faith in him. I'd been positive he'd never back down. How could he? But then he did, he backed down just like that. He turned out to be just like the others. So that was it. Goodbye, big guy. I'm out of here. Don't even think about calling. And by the way, if your phone rings and your wife answers and the caller hangs up, don't think it's me because it's not."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nora-ephro…
"Anyway, I fell out of love with Bill early in the game - over gays in the military. That was in 1993, after he was inaugurated, and at that moment my heart turned to stone. People use that expression and mean it metaphorically, but if your heart can turn to stone and not have it be metaphorical, that's how stony my heart was where Bill was concerned. I'd had faith in him. I'd been positive he'd never back down. How could he? But then he did, he backed down just like that. He turned out to be just like the others. So that was it. Goodbye, big guy. I'm out of here. Don't even think about calling. And by the way, if your phone rings and your wife answers and the caller hangs up, don't think it's me because it's not."
42
I voted for Clinton the first time he ran. He promised to overturn the ban on gays in the military and it was my intention to join the military so I voted for him. Then instead of overturning the ban on gays in the military he signed DADT. And then he signed DOMA. And then I said "fuck you Bill" and voted against him the second time he ran (I didn't vote for Dole or Perot of course, I picked one of the other candidates who had no chance, but I wasn't going to vote for the guy who threw me under the bus).
I'm very glad he is changing his views, but his support of DADA and DOOM wasn't some kind of lack of perspective or lack of evolution. He said he was against banning gays from the military. He said he supported gay rights. Then he supported legislation that set us further back than we were and that directly broke one of the promises he made to the gay community.
I don't regret voting against him. I'm happy he is finally, all these years later, changing his mind now that it is politically safe for him to do so.
But still, fuck you Bill Clinton.
I'm very glad he is changing his views, but his support of DADA and DOOM wasn't some kind of lack of perspective or lack of evolution. He said he was against banning gays from the military. He said he supported gay rights. Then he supported legislation that set us further back than we were and that directly broke one of the promises he made to the gay community.
I don't regret voting against him. I'm happy he is finally, all these years later, changing his mind now that it is politically safe for him to do so.
But still, fuck you Bill Clinton.
43
As it has been proven many times, ch-ch-change can be good. What do you expect? Clinton to oppose gay marriage today? No way.
44
Okay. Nobodies opinions and politics are allowed to evolve or change, ever! Got it.
So. Remember when Dan Savage was overtly FOR the invasion and occupation of Iraq? That useless expensive immoral WAR that cost over 200 thousand innocent lives? Remember that shit?
Fuck you, Savage. You fucking war mongering hypocritical ass. And that war is a lot more recent that DOMA.
OR is it only YOUR opinions that are allowed to change and evolve?
So. Remember when Dan Savage was overtly FOR the invasion and occupation of Iraq? That useless expensive immoral WAR that cost over 200 thousand innocent lives? Remember that shit?
Fuck you, Savage. You fucking war mongering hypocritical ass. And that war is a lot more recent that DOMA.
OR is it only YOUR opinions that are allowed to change and evolve?
45
Also I recall Dan Savage "bragging" on NPR AND right here on the pages of the Stranger how awesome the war in Iraq was gonna be. And then a couple years later his half-assed apologies for that idiotic opinion. Which could be seen as every bit the cynical opportunistic politicking you imply Clinton's "conversion" is. If one read it as uncharitably as you do Clinton's change of heart.
So when do you get forgiveness for that, Dan?
I tell you when. When you stop this petty "perfect is the enemy of good" bullshit.
So when do you get forgiveness for that, Dan?
I tell you when. When you stop this petty "perfect is the enemy of good" bullshit.
48
@47 the point is Savage is holding Clinton to some absurd purist ideological standard that he wouldn't dream of holding himself to.
In fact Dan would rather we all just forget he stumped non-stop for that immoral travesty of a war. Which I'm willing to do. Until he pulls bullshit like this.
In fact Dan would rather we all just forget he stumped non-stop for that immoral travesty of a war. Which I'm willing to do. Until he pulls bullshit like this.
49
The perfect is the enemy of the good.
It's good that Clinton, who for better or worse has some authority on the issue of DOMA, writes an appeal to the Supreme Court on the eve of trial, taking as strong a position against DOMA as anyone could take.
So, he's not perfect. So what?
It's good that Clinton, who for better or worse has some authority on the issue of DOMA, writes an appeal to the Supreme Court on the eve of trial, taking as strong a position against DOMA as anyone could take.
So, he's not perfect. So what?
50
@ 45, Dan is someone who is absolutely right on when the subject is sex/relationship advice, and absolutely right on when the subject is LGBT equality. But he has demonstrated over and over that he doesn't understand most other political issues.
I've forgiven him for pulling for the Iraq War, though, and you should too. (It helps that his opinion there only generated controversy, not support, meaning that he didn't really cause any damage. Taking a stand against it wouldn't have changed anything, either.) But I've cast a strongly skeptical eye on all his other non-LGBT political views. (I still see red when I recall his rant that "either you support density or you're not a true environmentalist," written as it was by a man who lives in a single family house. He could get a nice penthouse condo if he wanted it.)
In short, stay skeptical, but move on.
I've forgiven him for pulling for the Iraq War, though, and you should too. (It helps that his opinion there only generated controversy, not support, meaning that he didn't really cause any damage. Taking a stand against it wouldn't have changed anything, either.) But I've cast a strongly skeptical eye on all his other non-LGBT political views. (I still see red when I recall his rant that "either you support density or you're not a true environmentalist," written as it was by a man who lives in a single family house. He could get a nice penthouse condo if he wanted it.)
In short, stay skeptical, but move on.
52
To everyone who says that Clinton has waited too long, you should know that this is not the first time Clinton has said that DOMA should be overturned. He has been saying it for years now. And he has supported the passage of the Respect of Marriage Act, which would overturn DOMA in Congress, since its inception in 2009.
http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/ny08_nadler/DOMA20090915.html">http://web.archive.org/web/2011062920164…
He wrote the op-ed in the Washington Post because this issue is coming up in a few weeks in the Supreme Court and he wants people in Washington DC to know where he stands. He is trying to help and get the dialogue going.
http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/ny08_nadler/DOMA20090915.html">http://web.archive.org/web/2011062920164…
He wrote the op-ed in the Washington Post because this issue is coming up in a few weeks in the Supreme Court and he wants people in Washington DC to know where he stands. He is trying to help and get the dialogue going.
53
@50 Savage only get's a pass on Iraq as long as he extends others the same respect. People can be wrong. And people change. But Savage routinely is petty in this regard. Oh how short is his memory.
Here Savage has dredged up something Clinton did over a decade ago and implies some other motive for his change of views.
It is then only fair that Savage's insane cheer leading for murder of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi's a decade ago be likewise re-examined with same amount of charity.
He can't have it both ways.
Here Savage has dredged up something Clinton did over a decade ago and implies some other motive for his change of views.
It is then only fair that Savage's insane cheer leading for murder of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi's a decade ago be likewise re-examined with same amount of charity.
He can't have it both ways.
55
@53: You may not know this, but Clinton's responsibility for enacting DOMA is a lot greater than Savage's for invading Iraq.
56
@ 53, I don't perceive the same intent as you. Placed in the context of most of his writings, which just yesterday included a post where he marveled at how far LGBT people have come in a short period, I see perhaps a bit of snark in this post, perhaps a bit of cynicism, but nothing to indicate that he thinks Clinton should be shunned for his past actions, or left unforgiven - damaging as they were, to him personally as well as millions of LGBT people in the USA.
57
@55 that is completely irrelevant to the matter of principle at stake. You either have principles or you don't. Excepting that people can change their views and deserve to be forgiven is not a one way street.
58
@56 Alright. Then likewise Savage also deserves a bit of snark and cynicism. Dan needs to be reminded that he too was once tragically wrong. Or is this just the Dan Savage fan club where we only blow smoke up his ass?
61
I heard a speech by Chris Hedges the other night on Alternative Radio via KUOW where he spoke about Clinton in part. The fact that any liberal or progressive has any respect for him show how blinded they are by propaganda. This guy gutted welfare, allowed banks into the investment realm thus setting the stage for the 2008 bubble, helped big corporate media consolidate their power and swallow up any local voices left in radio and print.. and finally DOMA, the cherry on top. And I loved his democratic convention speech, the guy is a great con artist. Always has been, always will be. He was a great republican president, just like the current president. The 1992 election had 2 republicans (Clinton, Bush) running against a whackjob (Perrot). It's been awhile since the democrats had a true democrat candidate on the ballot. I don't give a shit what he did under the desk with the intern. His policies are why he deserved to be impeached. But that's been true for the last 4 presidents.
62
@57: "that is completely irrelevant to the matter of principle at stake. You either have principles or you don't."
That's a childishly simplistic statement, akin to "you're with us or you're against us".
President Clinton is allowed to change his mind, but he brought forth DOMA. Savage was a cheerleader for war, but while he's responsible for his stupid past statements, but he didn't order the war.
That's a childishly simplistic statement, akin to "you're with us or you're against us".
President Clinton is allowed to change his mind, but he brought forth DOMA. Savage was a cheerleader for war, but while he's responsible for his stupid past statements, but he didn't order the war.
63
@ 58, you read my comment @ 50? It should be clear that I'm no Dan Fan. I respect him in his areas of strength, and I forgive him when he's wrong because forgiveness isn't quid pro quo.
I'll repeat: Outside of relationship and sex advice, and LGBT issues, he frequently shoots his mouth off and can be a real hypocrite. (Again, see @ 50). But he did own up to his Iraq War position. I see no reason to keep holding that against him.
I'll repeat: Outside of relationship and sex advice, and LGBT issues, he frequently shoots his mouth off and can be a real hypocrite. (Again, see @ 50). But he did own up to his Iraq War position. I see no reason to keep holding that against him.
65
@62 President Clinton brought forth DOMA? So I guess the 68% of Senate Democrats and 59% of House Democrats who voted for it had nothing to do with it? And it was also President Clinton who masterminded the antigay constitutional amendments that passed in 2004?
66
@65: You'll have to provide a cite for Dan Savage signing the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq.
68
@67, yes, but it would have passed without his consent and without him throwing people he claimed to support under the bus.
It's like a thief stealing from you and giving your neighbor a cut. Even if your neighbor didn't do the robbing he participated and wronged you. The fact that you were getting robbed either way doesn't make your neighbor justified or innocent.
That Clinton couldn't stop it doesn't excuse him participating in it and profiting off of it.
It's like a thief stealing from you and giving your neighbor a cut. Even if your neighbor didn't do the robbing he participated and wronged you. The fact that you were getting robbed either way doesn't make your neighbor justified or innocent.
That Clinton couldn't stop it doesn't excuse him participating in it and profiting off of it.
69
@68 There were no people under the bus. The only person that bus was aiming for was Clinton and the Democrats. People didn't get under that bus until 2004, when Massachusetts got marriage equality, and surprise, surprise, that's when Ken Mehlman and W and the Republicans revved up the bus and did it all over again.
70
Of course there were people under the bus. All the people that Clinton made promises to and who he lied to. He was supposed to protect our rights, stand for us, and treat us as equals. He then signed legislation that cemented our status as second class citizens.
It makes no difference if there were same sex marriages anywhere yet at that time. It wasn't legislation that effected a spot in time. It was legislation that would go on for years.
My marriage isn't recognized by the federal government because of that legislation that Clinton signed. It makes no difference how many years passed between the passing of that legislation and the time I got married. He helped cement it into place and it has since effected me and people like me negatively. I voted for him because he convinced me that he wouldn't do crap like that.
Clinton used us by lying to us to get our votes, and then betrayed us. He threw us under the bus for his own political gain.
It makes no difference if there were same sex marriages anywhere yet at that time. It wasn't legislation that effected a spot in time. It was legislation that would go on for years.
My marriage isn't recognized by the federal government because of that legislation that Clinton signed. It makes no difference how many years passed between the passing of that legislation and the time I got married. He helped cement it into place and it has since effected me and people like me negatively. I voted for him because he convinced me that he wouldn't do crap like that.
Clinton used us by lying to us to get our votes, and then betrayed us. He threw us under the bus for his own political gain.
71
@70 Clinton never promised equality, because no viable Presidential candidate could and be elected in the 1990s, and sadly, none has yet.
72
He didn't promise full equality. He did claim to support our rights. He did promise to lift the ban on gays in the military.
You can't claim to support the rights of gay people and then sign DOMA. You can't promise to lift the ban on gays in the military and then sign DADT. At least not without being a liar who throws people under the bus.
You can't claim to support the rights of gay people and then sign DOMA. You can't promise to lift the ban on gays in the military and then sign DADT. At least not without being a liar who throws people under the bus.
73
@7- So would the veto have been overridden or not? You contradict yourself.
In either case, Bill Clinton did the wrong thing because it was politically expedient, as is his nature.
In either case, Bill Clinton did the wrong thing because it was politically expedient, as is his nature.
74
@71: "Clinton never promised equality, because no viable Presidential candidate could and be elected in the 1990s"
And much the populace after 9/11 was filled with a bloodlust. It doesn't fucking matter what Dan thought because nobody deserves to be a "moral authority". People can say things you agree with, and that hold up to scrutiny, but waiting for one to appear is asking for disappointment.
And much the populace after 9/11 was filled with a bloodlust. It doesn't fucking matter what Dan thought because nobody deserves to be a "moral authority". People can say things you agree with, and that hold up to scrutiny, but waiting for one to appear is asking for disappointment.
75
@9 - You get the response you deserve.
Then again, it seems to me that you'd have to account for the fact that less than half of marriages at any given time involve progeny. Even controlling for new marriages where there aren't children yet, or marriages where children had been hoped for but never arrived for, say, medical reasons, we have to assume that a plurality of those are between people who were knowingly functionally infertile to begin with (making their unions functionally indistinguishable from same-sex unions) or between individuals who actually never intended to have children for a variety of reasons that are probably none of our business.
More...
Does this mean Terry will finally be able to knock you up?My first thought is that, if we were to pretend that you have ever known/know now/will ever know the love of woman (somewhere between doubtful and impossible, but you may have found some poor mouse so shellshocked by centuries of institutionalized misogyny that she would marry the first troglodyte to knock her over the head; just be careful, because so timid a creature will kill your whelps at the first sign of danger like a spooked gerbil), the only benefit of a "fruitful" marriage would be a child sired by you. No children at all--indeed, the extinction of the whole sorry species, being little more than an ever expanding colony of flatworms with thumbs--would be preferable.
We can't wait to see the look on Pat Robertson's face when you start showing.....
Posted by You Get the "Marriage" You Deserve
Then again, it seems to me that you'd have to account for the fact that less than half of marriages at any given time involve progeny. Even controlling for new marriages where there aren't children yet, or marriages where children had been hoped for but never arrived for, say, medical reasons, we have to assume that a plurality of those are between people who were knowingly functionally infertile to begin with (making their unions functionally indistinguishable from same-sex unions) or between individuals who actually never intended to have children for a variety of reasons that are probably none of our business.
Who are you praying to?Even if there was so much as a stroke of evidence that there was anyone or anything to whom/to which to pray, I (and I'd venture to say Dan, as well) would not likely look to a sexually deprived, intellectual deficient peckerwood spouting ill-conceived truisms from his mom's basement.
That may be the problem.....
76
My G-d! None of the first 15 Presidents did anything to end slavery or promote marriage equality! What beasts!!
77
Also Bill created "don't ask, don't tell" which would have worked if the first cases where "they asked", "they" were court martialed. But that would have required some courage and we're talking about Bill Clinton and courage in the same sentence.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
GOP Congressman: We Have to Ban Abortion Because Fetuses Are Masturbating In There by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: The Tell-Tale Handjob by Dan Savage
-
Cap Hill Is Becoming a Little Like What? by Charles Mudede
-
SL Letter of the Day: Let Me Think... by Dan Savage
-
President Obama Says NSA Spying Is "Transparent" by Paul Constant
-
The Wednesday Morning News by Goldy
-
So I've Got This Baby Bird... by Brendan Kiley
-
Jobs-Killing Socialism Drives Seattle's Unemployment Rate Down to 4.7 Percent by Goldy
-
Less Than a Quarter of Americans Have Confidence in Newspapers by Eli Sanders
-
War Reporter Michael Hastings, Dead at 33 by Ansel Herz
Stranger Personals
The Stranger
RSSSeattle Art & Performance Quarterly
A complete guide to Seattle's current art, film, dance, and theater season.
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (77) RSS