Clinton Fails to Rewrite History of DOMA
No, Bill Clinton wasn’t politically forced to sign it.
As Hillary Clinton now describes it, the Defense of Marriage Act that her husband signed while in office was not a defense for traditional marriage. Instead, in Hillary-land, it was “a defensive action,” a way to prevent the forces fighting for traditional marriage from gaining any more political ground, allowing LGBT activists to fight another day. Clinton told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow, “On Defense of Marriage, I think what my husband believed … is that there was enough political momentum to amend the Constitution of the United States of America, and that there had to be some way to stop that. … And so, in — in a lot of ways — DOMA was a line that was drawn that was to prevent going further.”
This statement has been questioned by LGBT activists, and The Washington Post’s Fact Checker blog gave this statement its infamous four Pinocchios.
But more damning, former Clinton adviser Dick Morris, who was in the room during these kinds of discussions, said Bill Clinton signed DOMA to appeal to social conservatives ahead of his re-election. “President Clinton signed DOMA on September 21, 1996, just as the fall campaign was heating up,” Morris wrote. “To say that it was to prevent a constitutional amendment on the subject is a blatant revision of history.”
Clinton realizes that her former stance on same-sex marriage is a weakness in her campaign if she wants to convince bleeding-heart liberals that she has the experience as a skilled politician and the true heart of a principled progressive. Unfortunately for her, she has neither.
Start a conversation using these share links: