According to The New York Times, it’s official: Former Secretary of State and presumptive 2016 Democratic Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has flip-flopped on support for same-sex marriage. In the annals of staged campaign events disguising a lack of principle, Clinton’s policy reversal is no President Barack Obama debt ceiling turnaround (it’s “unpatriotic”); but it’s certainly a hall-of-fame pandering effort. To be honest, I had no idea Clinton was ever against same-sex marriage. She clearly had no issues with a no-sex marriage. (Not that I can blame her for that; her husband was having enough for both of them.)
Let’s be honest with each other, kiddies. Clinton’s announcing she is now for something that most Americans already assumed she supported is about as Earth-shattering as Michelle Obama coming out publicly in favor of junk food and the taxpayers’ American Express card. Clinton’s statement didn’t — couldn’t — deliver her any wavering support. And it’s difficult to imagine all that many conservatives saying: “I was pretty mad about that whole Benghazi nightmare. And I remember what a Lady MacBeth she played as a first lady. But if she thinks Steve and Frank can tie the knot, I guess I’m good.”
There is no doubt that same-sex marriage is one of the more bitterly contested issues in the country. While it doesn’t rise to the level of the debate over the government-subsidized genocide of abortion, it’s difficult to imagine many issues on which Americans disagree more sharply. My own attitude is based on my own experience: I’ve been divorced. I’m as useful in marital politics as I would be in outer space. Nonetheless, if Hillary feels a need to goose her base three years before the green flag, she’s welcome to it.
But, in watching her weirdly fireside-style address, I couldn’t keep the following thoughts at bay:
- This is a campaign speech. Of all the issues pressing down on us as a Nation and a world, you’re yammering about same-sex marriage. Your former boss has shoveled so many IOU’s onto the national debt that it’s the size of a Martian volcano. Any thoughts, Madame Secretary?
- Your tenure as the Nation’s chief diplomat has coincided with everything from a nuclear-ambitious Iran to a nuclear-accomplished North Korea. The Mideast is tearing at the seams. How will you steer the ship of state off the foreign rocks upon which Barack Obama has foundered it?
- How about the resurgence of al-Qaida and the islamofascist terrorists who think Obama is about as scary as Winnie the Pooh?
- Europe’s economy is plunging faster than Ashley Judd’s neckline. Our own is staggering like a punch-drunk prizefighter. Will your Presidency be as filled with monetary hijinks?
- With apologies to Senator Howard Baker, what did you know about the events of Sept. 11 in Benghazi, Libya; and when did you know it? Your former boss’s Administration concocted no fewer than four different versions of the story, each radically different from the others. While the corporate media has covered up the cover-up and the liberal rank and file have swallowed each tale whole without complaint; you’re now running for President. How can we trust you, since we clearly can’t trust Obama?
There are other questions Clinton will need to answer — unless she plans to continue the Obama policy of obfuscation and outright dishonesty. As I mentioned in the wake of her staged policy reversal on same-sex marriage:
Whatever your opinion on the issue in question, have no doubt: Hillary Clinton’s… every move is dictated by raw ambition. For those who oppose it: This is just another example of the soullessness which has defined her career. For those who support it: She is no ally of yours. As always, she will reverse course again the moment she thinks it’s politically expedient to do so.
Reminds me of, well, pretty much every Democrat out there — although none of them can match Clinton’s look in a pantsuit.