Hillary’s Preference for Women

Posted: Oct 01, 2007 10:46 AM
Hillary’s Preference for Women

A gay advocacy reporter recently asked Hillary Clinton a rude question about her sexual preferences during an interview. Sean Kennedy, News and Features Editor of The Advocate wanted her response to numerous curiosities surrounding her marriage to Bill - The Wanderer - and specifically if she preferred the sexual company of women.

Hillary Clinton advised that she is "not a lesbian."

Senator Clinton is counting on American citizens to ignore the larger issue – one that is routinely overlooked. Her preference is about gender, not about sex. The issue is not whether Hillary Clinton prefers women in bed. The real issue is whether Hillary Clinton prefers women in power.

The obvious answer is "yes!" In all that she has done in her years in the Senate, while in the White House, and as first lady of the state of Arkansas, there is no denying that she is a radical Feminist. Beginning at Wellesley College, Hillary was focused on women's rights and issues and women's rise to power. There is little evidence she is interested in anything else. All of her agenda items can be traced back to more power for women.

You and I can be curious about the vices of the powerful, but at the same time be smart about those we choose to lead us. I believe it is the media who is truly obsessed with sex when it comes to the off and sometimes on-duty activities of our celebrities and politicians, and I have the proof.

When I was shopping my book about the Clintons around to publishers, it didn’t take long to find a buyer, but he wanted to know, "Are there any sex stories in the material you have written?" I protested that my book was about the breakdown of national security and lack of civility in the White House! Yes, I continued, there are sex incidents I know about, but I don’t care to report those. He replied, "Gary, nobody cares about national security right now so the only way we can get your story out is to reveal some of that seamy side of the Clinton White House."

I thought it was important for as many Americans as possible read my first hand account of life in the Clinton White House, but I was very uncomfortable revealing such explosive information.

Sadly, the publisher was correct. The book rocketed to the top of the New York Times Bestseller’s List on the back of my allegation that Clinton continued to be a reckless womanizer. The media attacked me and my book, while gleefully reporting the allegation. Thus the book stayed on the bestseller’s lists for many weeks. In the end, I had accomplished my mission – to inform as many people as possible about the dysfunctional Clinton White House – but I was forced to use the lure of tawdry sex to keep the media interested in my book. The majority of the text was dedicated to serious revelations about national security, but you would have thought the most important information an FBI Agent learned during his tour at the White House was about same-sex acts in a locker room shower.

Over time, the national security issue that I had hoped to highlight emerged. Our greatest fears came true on September 11, 2001, and as a nation we "discovered" our government had dropped the ball on national security. For years, hundreds, if not thousands of career professionals had been trying to get the attention of the leadership, but warnings were routinely ignored and some, like me, were accused of being over-zealous worrywarts.

Will we fumble again and obsess about a candidate’s sexual preferences instead of understanding their true political allegiances? Asked another way, hasn’t this nation passed the point of obsession about the rights of women or about matters of sexual preference? These issues have been fully explored and settled in favor of fairness and common sense. It’s time to move on, but once again, it is the media that keeps the issues alive.

Will we really allow sex to distract us, or allow gender-based politics to be a deciding factor as international terrorists plot to bomb New York City and Washington into mounds of radioactive dust?

We are not nation of fools, as terrorists hope we are. I believe we can hear about the sometimes seamy, sometimes too personal side of candidates’ lives while at the same time deciding if those candidates have the right stuff to lead this nation. The media is going to report the ugly side of politicians whether we like it or not.