on the other hand, Bob Shrum is hardly unbiased OR known for being a good source of (how to say this without getting sued?) uhmmm, "verifiable" information.
and he and Edwards did have a bit of an ugly falling out.
Good points. And, just as in my own family in having to ignore what my family says and instead focus on what they do, it's important to note that Edwards, in responding to an HRC questionnaire, had the most pro-gay marriage stance of the top Dem tier (via Pam):
Edwards was the only candidate among the three to address marriage equality in his document.
"Gay marriage is an issue I feel internal conflict about and I continue to struggle with it," he said in his questionnaire. "However, I believe the right president could lead the country toward consensus around equal rights and benefits for all couples in committed, long-term relationships."
Edwards also noted he supports "the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act provision that prevents the federal government from recognizing same-sex relationships.
In their documents, neither Clinton nor Obama addressed the federal Defense of Marriage Act.
You know, even we gays go through a time when we're uncomfortable about our sexuality (Hmmm, do you think....no, probably don't want to go there...) so we shouldn't be too harsh that allies struggle a bit with it.
I frankly don't like Edwards for a number of reasons but have to say he seems more pro-gay marriage than Hillary or Obama, and that's more than the gay establishment will admit.
1 comment:
I personally don't take the HRC that seriously. Traditionally, they have been more interested in pandering to wealthy donors (especially wealthy Republican donors) than fighting for lgbt equality.
Post a Comment