Hillary Thinks The Gays Are Doing A Terrific Job, They Really Are
 

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/...tough_qu_1.php
I'm not sure exactly what Clinton thinks she's the leader of, as it's certainly not the Gay Rights Movement. More to the point, it seems to me like her attempts at empathy seem to come across more condescending.

"I think you guys are doing a great job and I understand where you're coming from, I just don't support you."

The most unanswered question from the gay community regards why the Democrats are so reluctant to support gay marriage and emphatic about civil unions. The only candidate at this point to actually answer the question is Edwards, who takes issue by virtue of his religion.

The gay community isn't great - its faaaaaaabuloooooooooous!

Anyone who can't answer that question isn't gay, they're retarded. "Marriage" is a divisive topic, and god knows the Democrats can't take a stand on a divisive issue or they might alienate someone.

gays do the jobs Mexicans don't want to do.

Maybe they should unionize.

the fuck do you think the gay agenda is?

*rimshot*

Pander, pander, pander. It's really kind of frustrating how even still, there is so much tiptoeing around this issue.

I'm not too impressed if Hilary's biggest LGBT issue is to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell. I do agree that it's wrong to discharge homosexuals from the military, but I feel like the issue has a bigger military sway than it does a civil rights sway. "We're losing good troops and consequently losing the war because we're discharging 9000 people a year..." Perhaps it's just a graceful tactic to appease war enthusiasts.

I have to applaud Edwards for being the most vocally supportive of LGBT issues, even if I don't necessarily like that he ultimately shirks responsibility off to states governments to decide if they want to legalize civil unions or not. I think it needs some national support to really make any substantive progress. But something is better than nothing, I guess...and I suppose it is unrealistic to expect anything major for at least another generation shift or two (die all you old conservative religious people, will you?)

Also, Bill Richardson thinks that being gay is a choice. I don't think I could vote for someone that stupid and feel good about it.

I hope Don't Ask, Don't Tell sticks around. If there's ever a draft, I'm so showing up in high heels.

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y27...l/poorgays.png

Poor gays just can't catch a break. :(

Always topical, those Google ads.

Obama didn't seem to get it either. As I understand it, he accused gays that are campaigning for gay marriage of fighting over semantics.

A reasonable person would say that the people pushing for civil unions are the ones worried over semantics.

This sort of shit is why the 2008 Presidential Election is the most underwhelming, disheartening race since the last one.

I was flipping through channels the other day and wound up on MSNBC where they were talking to one of the dudes from LOGO that was on the panel. He was talking about how Richardson (I guess that's his name since they were blasting him for saying it's a choice) missed the easiest question they could have offered him by saying he believes it's a choice and how he should have said it's not a choice.

Am I the only person that think it's fucked up we actually want our politicians to lie to us about their stances on issues and then we proceed to complain about it when they don't follow through with their stated stances?

It also takes huge cajones to stand up in front of an interest group and declare that you fundamentally disagree with the very basis of their reasoning.

He could plug the gaps in the fence with those balls.

It's hard to hold it against him for making a principled stand, no matter how wrong it is. It's better than being pandered to.

I haven't looked up everyone, but I'd be willing to bet there are no atheists or agnostics who are getting a serious look at the Democratic nom. Which would lead me to believe there is certainly more than one person who holds those views, especially since none of these people are under 45 years old.

Which means we either have a statistical anomaly or someone is lying.

My money's on Kucinich.

It's frustrating to see the frontrunners--Hilary and Obama--"pussyfooting" around the issue, if you will. Homosexuals are no less entitled than anyone else to the economic benefits of marriage. The other problem presented through the civil union concept is that, by implementing this method, gays are still ostracized by those who refuse to deem the union of two men or women who love each other as "marriage".

I think that liberal-minded people such as myself would be more impressed with someone who is concerned less about who they might alienate by announcing a position and more about actually taking a stand on an issue in the first place.