The Human Rights Campaign sponsored a presidential discussion focusing on gay and lesbian issues last night in which all but two of the major Democratic candidates attended. Each candidate appeared by themselves, with questions coming from a panel of three. Unfortunately I only saw the last two segments with Bill Richardson and Hillary Clinton (my cable guide listed the forum as airing at 9pm California time when Logo actually aired it live starting at 6pm; I just happened upon it as Richardson was being questioned).
My heart sank as I listened to the New Mexico governor. When asked by Melissa Etheridge if he thought homosexuality was biological or a choice, Richardson insisted (three times!) that it was a choice. That's the line the fascist right-wingers like to use when trying to write discrimination into the Constitution or insist that therapy will turn us straight. I like Bill Richardson and have been hoping he'd start to do better in the primary election polling. America needs someone with his foreign policy expertise (UN ambassador, energy secretary, international diplomat) in the next government to help clean up George's mess.
But, last night, when he insisted I chose to be this way...well...the only thing I could do was sink down in my seat...keep my dinner down...and mutter, "Oh, Bill."
And speaking of Bill...Hillary Clinton actually impressed me. She seems to be getting much more comfortable in her campaign style, sitting there comfortably and confidently as the panel asked her questions. Granted, she was there as the offically endorsed candidate of the Human Rights Campaign, but she answered questions intelligently without coming across as cold and calculating; and she defended her husband's record on LGBT issues during his presidency.
As Etheridge said, when Mr. Clinton campaigned for the presidency the gay community was full of hope that his administration would step up to the plate and right a long list of wrongs. By the time he was to win re-election in 1996 we had "been thrown under the bus" (as Etheridge put it). (Don't Ask, Don't Tell and the Defense of Marriage Act were both signed by Clinton.)
I understand that argument. Really, I do. I was just as disappointed as everyone else. But last night Hillary explained things in much the way I understood them to be at the time: Political realities prevented President Clinton from moving too far forward on the gay front.
Had Clinton signed an executive order - without any military or congressional involvement - that allowed gays to serve in the military, the 1994 Republican congressional takeover would have been much bigger than it already was. And had he vetoed the Defense of Marriage Act, the presidential election of 1996 would have gone to Bob Dole; and after a two-term Dole presidency we'd be sitting right now in the first term of either a President Kemp or President Jeb Bush. America, and the Democratic Party, couldn't afford that.
Do I wish Bill Clinton had had the cajones to do what was right? Of course. But at the time, he did what he felt he had to do for political considerations. But America's conservative bent is just as much to blame as Clinton's desire to remain in power.
