Clinton Takes a Stand

A very brave stand to not take a stand. Wow do I miss the Clintons.

While running for President, Hill answered the question, "Do you agree with General Pace that homosexuality is 'immoral,'" she answered, and I'm not making this up,

Well I’m going to leave that to others to conclude.

Now that's the kind of decisiveness I'm looking for in a President. Never mind that as a sitting US Senator, she's the one deciding these things with her direct vote. Don't Ask, Don't Tell is actually for her to decide.

Which is why this whole episode is a great example of why I can't vote for her. I get that this is a thorny question for any democrat (the GOP has this one all wrapped up, "Yes."), and yes, Obama handled with a dodge, but at least he didn't defer his personal morality code to "others." This is where her political instincts let her down. By not wanting to offend a group of voters (a group, by the way, that she has no chance with), she instead told all voters that her personal morality code is defined by others (insert "Wait, the Clinton's have a morality code?" joke here). What kind of leadership is that? So if others decide its immoral, she'll say it is. What if they change their mind? Actually, for that, see below.

Not everything needs to be politically perfect. Take a stand. HRC spends a lot of time with Gay and Lesbian groups, winning awards, giving speeches, etc. When the time came for her to take a risk and stand up for them, she didn't merely dodge the question, she sold them out. Much like Bill semi-famously did when he told Gore to sell them out during the 2000 election. What's even more peculiar is that HRC supports gay civil unions and homosexual adoption. How can she support these things if she's not even sure about the morality of homosexuality in the first place? HRC is playing the gays like the GOP is playing the social conservatives. Lots of voice when on comfortable ground, little action.

The thing with HRC that's becoming more apparent is that she has no core beliefs. She was pro-gay marriage amendment (in 2006) when it was a real hot issue with the voters, like she was for the war when it was a hot issue. As polling for both of those declined, guess what, so did her support.

Speaking of polling, HRC amended her "my moral code is in the hands of others" reply the next day (sorry this was a two day post). But even here, she lacked the courage to just say, "Homosexuality is not immoral."

“I have heard from many of my friends in the gay community that my response yesterday to a question about homosexuality being immoral sounded evasive (because it was). My intention was to focus the conversation on the failed don’t ask, don’t tell policy (see, I focused attention on it by not mentioning it directly, and instead saying that "others" should decide the morality issues). I should have echoed my colleague Senator John Warner’s (remember, he's a REPUBLICAN - Ahhhhh John Warner, my GOP security blanket) statement forcefully stating that homosexuality is not immoral because that is what I believe (now that "others" have told me so).”

Even on gay rights issues the Democratic Presidential front runner can only act when she has cover from the GOP. How can I trust her to lead America? Why can't any credible Democrat take a stand...on anything?

It's just sooooo frustrating. One party takes lots of stands almost none of them I agree with (gays are evil, the President should be king, citizens have no rights to privacy, everyone should live as we want them to, etc), the other takes almost never takes a stand, which I don't agree with.