President Bill Clinton may play nice with the nancies, but democratic political consultant Bob Shrum’s new book, No Excuses: Concessions of a Serial Campaigner suggests that Clinton may just be playing politics.
As Newsweek wrote back in 2004, Clinton may have urged then Presidential Candidate John Kerry to endorse local bans on gay marriage, but Shrum, who organized Kerry’s campaign, maintains that Clinton actually meant a national amendment.
Clinton, Kerry reported at the time, did suggest blunting Bush’s appeal to cultural conservatives with a reprise of Clinton’s Sister Souljah moment in 1992 when he’d denounced her call for violence against whites – and done it as conspicuously as possible in front of Jesse Jackson’s Rainbow Coalition.
“Kerry, Clinton ventured, should consider defying Democratic interest groups by endorsing the Bush proposal for a federal constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.”
Shrum reports that “this was a flip-flop too far for Kerry.”
It’s also worse in Shrum’s version – the federal amendment, versus state amendments – than in Newsweek’s telling. And Bill Clinton does, reportedly, continue to play a small role in Hillary’s campaign.
Not surprisingly, some are wondering whether Hillary will follow in her husband’s false footsteps. The kids over at Bloggernista write:
Edwards has come out strongly for LGBT equality as has Barack Obama. Neither supports marriage equality, but they are far and away better than the other major candidates on gay issues. Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, has spoken a fair game, but when the campaign gets tougher can we expect her to follow advice similar to what her husband gave to Kerry in 2004?
We wish we could say “no”, but we honestly can’t. We love Hillary, we really do, but she’s certainly an opportunist. Not that the others aren’t, of course…