Senator Hillary Clinton's sexuality is not the most pressing issue in the Democratic campaign for the presidency, but it is likely to get a lot more attention in the weeks ahead.
"It is not true, " Clinton said in a magazine interview. "But it's something that I have no control over. People will say what they want to say."
Clinton's comments came in response to a question posed by a reporter for the gay newspaper "The Advocate", who asked, "How do you respond to the occasional rumor that you're a lesbian?"
The Advocate reporter, Sean Kennedy, when asked what he thought about Senator Clinton's response, said, "I 100% believe she's a straight, heterosexual woman. I asked Hillary the question because nobody ever has the balls to ask it to her face."
This news item bothers me for a several reasons. First of all, I think Sean Kennedy was very rude and offensive in asking such a question in the first place. Hillary's "orientation" is none of his or our business. Secondly, the subject of the question has nothing whatsoever to do with Hillary's qualifications as a presidential candidate and it totally detracts from the idea of her being a woman who is running for the office of President. Thirdly, it was an obvious loaded question, specificly designed to raise controversy and place Hillary Clinton in an awkward and uncomfortable position before American vioters. It was a manipulative question which was used by the reporter for no other reason than to make a personal point. It was like one of those "Have you stopped beating your wife" questions that damn a person no matter how they respond.
In the end, the reporter accomplished nothing worthwhile by asking the question. Because, to both people for Hillary, and people against Hillary, it won't make any difference. It won't make the people for her any more against her, and it won't make people against her any more for her. It tells us nothing about what Hillary is, it merely tells us what she is not. There are far greater and more important issues concerning Hillary Clinton's candidacy for president than whether or not she likes women more than men.
Sean Kennedy had a unique opportunity to ask Senator Clinton a question that would tell the American people (including The Advocate, GLAAD, and anybody else) where Clinton stood on gay rights, gay marriage, sexual discrimmination, and hate crime. But instead he squandered his opportunity by taking a cheap shot at Clinton to prove some arrogant point.
Who really gives a rat's hindquarters whether or not Hillary Clinton is gay?? I want to know something slightly more important. Like when are the troops coming home from Iraq, when is the economy going to improve, how much higher are oil prices going to go up, when are housing costs going to come down, and a plethora of far more significant issues that have absolutely nothing to do with Hillary Clinton's sexual orientation.