"The sad truth is that gay rights has always been the disposable card of liberal politics. The very fact of our existence is still "controversial" even to those who make a noise about being our friends. We're still the fly in the ointment, the "divisive issue" that can lose an election. Just look at the weak-kneed response from the Clinton and Obama camps when the California supreme court made its landmark decision overthrowing the ban on same-sex marriage.
"Both candidates hid behind a campaign spokesperson and both reaffirmed their 'separate but equal' policies of civil unions, thereby assuming a stance that would keep them in comfy solidarity with John McCain come November. The problem, of course, was that California court had just ruled that separate was NOT equal and never would be, so Clinton and Obama both ended up looking like -- there's no other way to put this -- pussies."
-- Author Armistead Maupin writing in the The Advocate
« 3 Simple Rules for Politicians | Home | DADT question for Nancy Pelosi »







...Ouch. And these are "our" publications? We can't pull "Context doesn't matter, the use of 'that's so gay' indicates and teaches a systemic disrespect for queer people" and then call Clinton and Obama "pussies." They may be "pussy-footing" around the issue, but that's a whole different etymology and impact.
DDog | June 28, 2008 8:18 PM
Reply to this comment