“Better Late Than Never”…

Jim Burroway

July 14th, 2009

…is a cliché that’s rarely spoken of with any real sense of satisfaction. More often, it’s said in exasperation over the fact that the late is just barely better at all than the never. And there are times when you don’t even want to acknowledge that much, like when former President Bill Clinton says this:

Asked if he would commit his support for same-sex marriage, Clinton responded, “I’m basically in support.”

This spring, same-sex marriage was legalized in Iowa, Vermont, Connecticut, Maine and New Hampshire. In his most recent remarks on the subject, Clinton said, “I think all these states that do it should do it.” The former president, however, added that he does not believe that same-sex marriage is “a federal question.”

Now he says he’s “basically in support.” He’s out of office, his political career is over, and what he says and thinks carries all the weight of the latest Elizabeth Hasselbeck outburst on The View. This president, who now believes that same-sex marriage is not “a federal question” is the very president who made it a federal question when he signed the Defense of Marriage Act into law — and then he used that to brag about how “pro-family” he was in campaign commercials on Christian radio.

But now he’s “basically in support” and does not believe that it should be “a federal question.” The president who hasn’t held power in almost nine years is now better on the issue than the one who does. Thanks. Better late than never, I suppose.


July 15th, 2009

Old Klingon proverb:

Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice, shame on me.
Fool me three times, prepare to die.


July 15th, 2009

What the..??? “What does basically in support mean” ??????


July 15th, 2009

I’m not a Clinton fan, but it has been 13 years since DOMA and it is possible Clinton has learned a few things in the meantime (hey, Senator Robert Byrd has gotten a 100% rating from the NAACP in recent sessions, so learning is possible). And while Clinton is no longer in power his views carry a lot of weight in many Democratic circles. (Or maybe I’m just on a leftover high from the Episcopal House of Bishops vote).

Andrew Conte

July 15th, 2009

Yes it has been 13 years. However, for Clinton to say that he “basically supports us ” is like being “basically pregnant. And “this should not be a federal question” ???? That is a real slap to the face. It is a federal question because it is a federal question….thanks to Bill (and Hillary who only feels that only HALF of DOMA should be eliminated. The Clintons are not and NEVER have been friends of the gay community. Anything short of a heartfelt apology is totally useless.

Bruce Garrett

July 15th, 2009

“I have a vision for America, and you are part of it…” Just not while I’m president…

Ben in Oakland

July 15th, 2009

“What the..??? “What does basically in support mean”

It all depends…

on what the definition of “is” is.


July 15th, 2009

Yeah well I’m “basically in support” of half-assed supporters like Clinton, but this should not be a question of me VOTING for them.


July 15th, 2009

For the sake of argument, it’s very possible, even likely, Bill changed his mind. Think of how many other politicians have changed their mind in the past 13 years.

And “basically” means he has some minor objections that he doesn’t care to share.


July 15th, 2009

Oh, come on. I hate the constant revisionism applied to the Clintons.

The argument in favor of DOMA in 1996 was that if we didn’t pass a federal statute, the Republicans and Religious Right would be able to get an amendment to the Constitution to bar gay marriage entirely. The animus of the RR and the math was correct, judging by all the mini-DOMAs that were later passed by over 3/4 of all the states. One could even imagine that DOMA was written in such a way that the courts could be expected to find it bad law.

Clinton couldn’t exactly walk away from DOMA after “championing” it. He’s a smart guy, he knows how to slip away slowly.


July 16th, 2009

I am a big Clinton fan and if DOMA wasn’t insulting enough, he now says it’s not a “federal” issue? Last I looked. DOMA is a federal mandate made into law.

But he’s right (reading between the lines of what he is trying to say). Marrage is a states rights issue. The federal government ought only to step in when 2/3 of the states passes new marriage law. However, Mr. Obama has cold feet when it comes to removing DOMA and DADT. He’s the one needing punished and not Clinton’s bend-over-and-hold-you-ankles-so-that-the-religious-right-infected-congressional-Republicans-can-f**k-you misstep.

Tom in Lazybrook

July 16th, 2009

Nah..I’m tired of politicians saying they support us after they leave office.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.


Latest Posts

The Things You Learn from the Internet

"The Intel On This Wasn't 100 Percent"

From Fake News To Real Bullets: This Is The New Normal

NC Gov McCrory Throws In The Towel

Colorado Store Manager Verbally Attacks "Faggot That Voted For Hillary" In Front of 4-Year-Old Son

Associated Press Updates "Alt-Right" Usage Guide

A Challenge for Blue Bubble Democrats

Baptist Churches in Dallas, Austin Expelled Over LGBT-Affirming Stance

Featured Reports

What Are Little Boys Made Of?

In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.

Slouching Towards Kampala: Uganda’s Deadly Embrace of Hate

When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.

Paul Cameron’s World

In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.

From the Inside: Focus on the Family’s “Love Won Out”

On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.

Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"

The Heterosexual Agenda: Exposing The Myths

At last, the truth can now be told.

Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!

And don‘t miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.

Testing The Premise: Are Gays A Threat To Our Children?

Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.

Straight From The Source: What the “Dutch Study” Really Says About Gay Couples

Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.

The FRC’s Briefs Are Showing

Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.

Daniel Fetty Doesn’t Count

Daniel FettyThe FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.