Before Hillary, there was Joan Crawford? Good post.

I was thinking "Queen" or "Dowager", but Diva's close enough!

Never done anything for the gay community?

"In her speech, she called the Federal Marriage Amendment that failed the Senate last year to strictly define marriage as an act between a man and a woman “wedge politics at its worst.”

“It [FMA] was mean-spirited,” she told activists. “It was against the entire forward movement of American history.”

Hillary vowed to promote what many consider to be the most radical component of the gay agenda: adoption rights for same-sex couples.

"I have long supported civil unions," she said. "We're going to make sure that nothing stands in the way of loving couples, gay or straight, to adopt children.”

She also said she would work to secure employer benefits for same-sex couples.

"We're going to reach out and work with our allies in Congress both to change laws and change hearts,” she said. “We want to make sure that all Americans in committed relationships have equal benefits from health insurance and life insurance and Social Security and property rights and more."

"These are fundamental rights," she emphasized.

She said this would come through passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act that would “criminalize discrimination in employment on the basis of sexual orientation.”

“It is inconceivable to me that in the year 2007 people can still be fired because of who they love. It is unfair, it is un-American and we are going to put a stop to it once and for all.”

She also called for an end to the military’s “failed policy” of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” that was created by her husband President Bill Clinton.

“This policy just doesn’t hurt gays and lesbians. It hurts all of our troops and this, to me, is a matter of national security and we’re going to fix it because we know our nation is stronger when our nation’s men and women are permitted to serve if that is the choice they want to make.”

Finally, Hillary pledged to expand federal hate crime legislation. She said, “Hate crimes are an affront to the core values that bind us to one another and we should marshal our best resources to prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law.

Twice in her address, Hillary noted that she shared the same initials as the Human Rights Campaign.

“Did you ever notice that?” she joked. At the end of her speech she said coyly, “We can accomplish these goals because we have the same determination, the same can-do attitude and the same initials."

While introducing the senator, HRC President Joe Solmonese mentioned at least three strategy meetings in which Clinton had convened with the Human Rights Campaign on Capitol Hill to defeat FMA.

He said that he and Hillary had a “storied past” that began when he was working with Emily’s List, the pro-abortion group that raises money for Democrat candidates.

“It was Senator Clinton who first summoned me to the Hill to talk about our strategy for defeating the federal marriage amendment,” he said.

He said she asked him: “How are we going to make sure the messaging is united, the Senate is united, the community is united and we are going to kill it [the federal marriage amendment] dead?”

“She brought us the Senate to brief people on how to get this done,” Solmonese recalled. “She convened the meeting and she made sure everyone was in line.”

Hillary thanked Solmonese for remembering these meetings and assured listeners, “I want you to know this is exactly the kind of partnership we will have when I am President."

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=19682

Think you fouled this one off billy. keep swinging. Are you somehow trying to project the "cult" of Obama off onto Hillary?

Some us have our "gaydar" out in the way only gays can, and true, we see the connection. Not enough to abandon Obama though.

She's a VICTIM. She reminds us every time she opens her mouth how unfair life is to her, how mean the press is, her meany opponent, and that horrible Chris Matthews. Boo hoo for Hillary. Even NPR is so unfair with unfair questions that are clearly unfair. (Let's put aside the easy coattails from herex-president husband, the party machinery, the press pre-Iowa coronation ,and the $100 mill in the bank)

I think people who feel victimized or who wallow in self-pity about being victims probably like that.

billysumday: Great post. You have guts, and skill. That was a tough point to make, and you made it well. Elton John = tipping point.

Whoever said that it's disdainful of gays to put forth such a theory must simply have been stung by the truth.

Amongst those who worship Hillary as Judy Garland, there are few, if any, who ever find her responsible for anything that happens to her.

I might also add that the theory presented here is largely absent among gay men of color and most self-respecting people of any background.

Clinton has never done a thing for gay people except march in a parade. And if she continues in that right-wing dominionist cult called The Fellowship, complete with their sex-segregated "cells", expect her anti-gay politics to extend far beyond DOMA and "Don't Ask Don't Tell."

She's the most duplicitous politician since Richard Nixon. She calls herself a feminist but she's far from it. She lies, she cheats, she whines, she projects, she covers-up, she tricks, she hides, she misleads. And did I mention how much she lies and cheats? All without batting an eyelash. And she demands that her supporters stand by her by preying upon fear and working the guilt factor. People don't hate Hillary because she's a woman, they hate her because she's Machiavelli.

Stumping for NAFTA, signing DOMA, caving in to DADT, authorizing wars, welfare "reform"... those make her mind "to the left" of Obama (whatever that means) how exactly?

This whole thing checks out intuitively for me, as when I saw her "I found my voice!" speech after New Hampshire [when she was dressed in that upholstery fabric getup and the dark lipstick] I thought I was looking at middle period Joan Crawford, circa Sudden Fear. Totally the same vibe.

In partial (if ironic and hilarious) confirmation of the theory, this impersonation of Hillary's voice was posted today on a gay Web site, in reaction to the TIME article about Obama's mother:

"Obama was not at his mother's bedside when she died. BUT I WAS!

"She was a lovely woman, though bitterly disappointed by her son's hatred of America.

"Her last words were to me. I'll never forget it. I was changing her bedpan and she whispered, "oh, my shining angel" -- she always called me that -- "I hope you will be our First Woman President® one day."

"And then she was gone..."

Great post, I was thinking something along this line a few weeks ago, thank you for putting it into words.

I think I get it billy. I'm not gay, I can't claim to know one way or another how any gay person feels about this or any other issue.

I can speak to the femi-nazi aspect to this idea tho, perhaps a corollary to the theory of her Diva appeal.

More than the perceived fracture of the democratic party in this race I think we are seeing a fracture of the 60's feminism movement and how feminism is perceived today.

My mom is in her late 50's, a white woman that grew up in Detroit (my grandparents were foster parents) and went to college at Western Michigan U. in 1968. She can't stand Hillary Clinton, she firmly believes that Hillary has played the victim card vs. the triumph-over-adversity one. To be sure my mom isn't a fan of any politician, none of them should be trusted - they require constant supervision just like small children. I'm only guessing here but I get the feeling my mom perceives the Gloria Steinem types as spoiled rich bitches who had the luxury of bra burnings because they didn't have to live in the real world and work at diners to buy those bras in the first place. I think she lumps Hillary in with this crowd. Feminism the way I perceive it shouldn't be 'you owe me', but should be 'let me prove myself'.

I know I get personally sick of politicians claiming what they do is 'public service', it is not. Public servants are teachers, police, fire personnel and our military.

Politicians - (and the Clintons as of late) have spring boarded their so-called public service into a multi-million dollar enterprise.

I think its disturbing - people wrapping so many emotions into one person's campaign... I'm old school - hope for the best, prepare for the worst. Like a told a pollster about 18 mos ago... I'm a republican, but if Obama can win the democratic nomination I'll vote for him - now get to work!

This all seems like a non-issue to me. Do any of us actually think either of them will work hard to pass any major pro-gay initiatives? Best I can see 1) is getting rid of the "don't ask don't tell" policy, and 2) defensive actions, like blocking future FMA's. Both of these are very important, as far as I'm concerned, but I don't see a big difference between either candidate on it.

As for adoption rights, marriage rights, civil unions, etc--all of these are state issues, aren't they? (I don't really know re: adoption, but I assume it's state law that regulates this, not federal. Maybe international adoptions bring federal in...). Anyway, point being that in terms of gay rights that they'll have any power over, I don't see much difference between them at all.

So, just be sure to vote for the Dem (Diva or not) in November. :)

What you described here, billi, is histrionic type of personality, the essence of it is pervasive attention seeking behavior. It also can be described as Diva personality.
Individuals with Histrionic Personality Disorder may initially charm new acquaintances by their enthusiasm and openness, they commandeer the role of "the life of the party". If they are not the center of attention, they may do something dramatic (e.g., make up some stories, create a scene). HPD may include sexually seductive behavior, shallow and rapidly shifting expressions of emotions, and being easily influenced by others or circumstances. In the case of real Diva, sexual seductiveness often overshadows other criteria.
There were many political leaders with this personality traits, they were mostly disastrous for their country, but nevertheless, very electable.

Neither Clinton nor Obama support equal marriage rights (for obvious political reasons.) Are they BOTH throwing gays under the bus?