September 22nd, 2007
01:03 PM ET
3 years ago

Clinton: I am not a lesbian

WASHINGTON (CNN) – Sen. Hillary Clinton's sexuality is not the most pressing issue on the presidential campaign trail, but it is likely to get a fair amount of attention on a lazy Friday in the nation’s capital.

The Advocate asked Clinton about past rumors that she is gay.

The New York Democrat tells “The Advocate” that she is not a lesbian, according to a story in Friday’s edition of The New York Daily News.

"It's not true, but it is something that I have no control over," Clinton tells the magazine in a story set for publication next week.

“People will say what they want to say," she added.

The comments came in response to a question posed by Sean Kennedy, an editor of the Advocate: "How do you respond to the occasional rumor that you're a lesbian?"

Kennedy tells CNN he asked Clinton about the rumors because "they are a point of solidarity between her and the LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender) community."

"Because her political opponents, and others, have used the word 'lesbian' to hurt her personally and politically, she knows first hand the stigma associated with homosexuality just as gay people do," Kennedy said. "She did not seem surprised by the question in the least and responded like the experienced politician she is."

The interview was conducted immediately after last month's Human Rights Campaign presidential forum.

UPDATE: The Advocate has published the full article on its Web site


Filed under: Hillary Clinton
soundoff (575 Responses)
  1. Chris, Santa Monica, CA

    I don't like it when comedians like Bill Maher or George Carlin claim that "Americans are idiots" and that's why politicians are so awful. I like the humor, but it's such a cynical thought that there are so many poorly educated and slow-witted people in this country– that they are the majority and that's why a George W. Bush will succeed. But the wonderful innovation of blogs has me leaning toward their opinion. I've just recently started to seriously read comments to news stories and it's like opening the front door of the idiot house.

    If you're inspired to barf out a hate-tainted comment on a news blog, I can only imagine what B.S. you're teaching your kids.

    Gay people are people. Who cares if they get married? Really. Who REALLY thinks that's a bad idea? What hateful, ignorant, selfish clod thinks that concept is going to hurt America? Are you afraid of being gay? Don't be afraid. You can be okay with it, or without it– that's the point that both Hillary and The Advocate are making.

    Go away fear, you're okay no matter what. Teach your kids that– teach them how to love, not hate.

    Hillary is demonstrating poor decision making by being against gay marriage. It's a transparent political choice she's making to stay within favor of a certain voting percentage of the population who are uncomfortable with the thought of gay marriage. And that shows one place where she's willing to defer principle in exchange for success. It also shows that the shift of politics toward the social conservative right (there are other rights) is alive and well.

    "This FOX news story just breaking: Hillary's tolerant!!! Millions decry her position." Nope, couldn't have that.

    The ultimate issue here is that a decent, liberal politician feels like she can't make a stand on an issue of civil rights because there are, indeed, too many idiots in the American voting population who would let such a selfish, unfair idea as– OMG! Gay lovers with matching rings and civil privileges! Egad! We can't have that!!!– sway their opinion about who should get us out of Iraq, repair our shambled economy, stem the tide of foreclosures, bring justice to New Orleans, reduce the greed in our tax system, end government spying and introduce something called intelligence into the Presidency.

    I'm going to stick with my hope that the comedians aren't actually right. But this blogging has revealed to me that there are a lot of players on the Social Conservative Idiot Team. (Coach: Bill O'Reilly) I'm just hoping they'll go on a losing streak.

    September 22, 2007 01:15 pm at 1:15 pm |
  2. Tom Dedham, Mass

    Posted By dawn — Gaithersburg, MD. : September 22, 2007 10:36 am

    As usual Dawn, you can't read or choose to not "see" the truth.

    Don't care if she is gay but if she is, good for her, how right-wing of me.

    Dick Morris is still a huge supporter of Bill Clinton, he however does not share the same respect for Hillary and the reason being that he spent many years in the Clinton WH and he knows her better than just about everyone.

    He goes on other shows besides Fox and unlike a closed minded "person" like you, I watch CNN, MSNBC and oh my god, Fox amongst other forms of media.

    That way you get a differing viewpoint on a subject, unlike you obviously.

    I know people like you bash Hannitty, but I will write this slow so you can comprehend it, HE SLAMMED the Advocate for even asking the QUESTION.

    To the rest of you Clinton sheep, who do you think puts out those rumors of Condi Rice being gay that we here about from time to time?

    This is a non-story based on a question out of the blue by a gay magazine that NEVER should have been asked and somehow it is part of the "vast right-wing conspiracy".

    Dawn, the next time I post support for Obama and his wife, Bill Richardson or Joe Biden, I will apologize to you for saying something nice about them.

    September 22, 2007 01:19 pm at 1:19 pm |
  3. Bill W, Coatesville, PA

    "As for her denial, remember that Hillary, like her husband, lies with incredible ease."

    Yes, she certainly does. And that's why I won't vote for her under any circumstances, regardless of who the other candidate is. Not because of her sexual orientation or any of that. But on issues, past history, and personality. The Clintons had their 8 years, they squandered it, and now its time for change. The Clintons are as bad as the Bushes in most respects, and in fact, are affiliated with the Bushes in many ways. She could have run against Bush in the last election insteasd of Kerry. But she was biding her time, meeting with the Bushes and waiting – a deal maybe? Or she was just looking for a better opportunity.

    The Clintons don't care about people – they just want power. And they both will say whatever they have to in order to get people vote for them. And they both do lie with incredible ease.

    I will vote against her in the primaries, and I will vote against her in the general election, no matter what.

    September 22, 2007 01:22 pm at 1:22 pm |
  4. Robert, Arlington, VA

    Not a lesbian?
    Yeah........right.

    September 22, 2007 01:27 pm at 1:27 pm |
  5. Tyrese Williams Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

    Hillary's say she's not gay? If that's the case the pope is not Catholic, Bill Clinton is not a philanderer, and the sky is not blue. Women know she is. She should not try and hide it like Larry Craig tried to do.

    September 22, 2007 02:03 pm at 2:03 pm |
  6. Tom Dedham, Mass

    "Hillary is demonstrating poor decision making by being against gay marriage. It's a transparent political choice she's making to stay within favor of a certain voting percentage of the population who are uncomfortable with the thought of gay marriage. And that shows one place where she's willing to defer principle in exchange for success. It also shows that the shift of politics toward the social conservative right (there are other rights) is alive and well.

    The ultimate issue here is that a decent, liberal politician feels like she can't make a stand on an issue of civil rights because there are, indeed, too many idiots in the American voting population who would let such a selfish, unfair idea as– OMG! Gay lovers with matching rings and civil privileges! Egad! We can't have that!!!– sway their opinion about who should get us out of Iraq, repair our shambled economy, stem the tide of foreclosures, bring justice to New Orleans, reduce the greed in our tax system, end government spying and introduce something called intelligence into the Presidency.

    I'm going to stick with my hope that the comedians aren't actually right. But this blogging has revealed to me that there are a lot of players on the Social Conservative Idiot Team. (Coach: Bill O'Reilly) I'm just hoping they'll go on a losing streak."

    Add this to the book of how to apologize for a Clinton position by blaming the usual suspects.

    That has to be the dumbest thing I have ever seen in print on this site.

    She is against gay marriage because of conservatives.

    So Chris from "Cali", are conservatives to blame for her husbands and her co-presidency's "Don't ask, don't tell" policy as well?

    I thought she has been fighting the "vast right-wing conspiracy for 15 years" (her words)?

    That shows leadership and strength????

    September 22, 2007 02:24 pm at 2:24 pm |
  7. JD, Butte, MT

    Her sexual orientation has nothing to do with her qualifications to be president. Instead we should be discussing her complete lack of leadership experience. She has never held any executive office (appointed or elected), never owned a business, never run any organization where she was responsible for leading other people.

    September 22, 2007 02:31 pm at 2:31 pm |
  8. JB Boston MA

    QUESTUION:

    For the homosexual poster voting for Hillary:

    Hillary is against gay marriage. In effect she is saying you are not equal to a heterosexual constituent. How can you vote for someone who believes that?

    I asked this before, but no one has answered. I am not being obnoxious or trying to do anything other than get an answer. I am curious. Especially when there are candidates that are for gay marriage. I would think this issue would trump all others.

    Thanks in advance for your response.

    September 22, 2007 03:17 pm at 3:17 pm |
  9. Bob, Las Vegas, NV

    The levels to which Democratic Party leaders have sunk: Her husband said, "I did not have sex with that woman". Hillary said,' "I am not a lesbian."

    I, for one, do not want this family to have any more power than they have already abused.

    September 22, 2007 03:59 pm at 3:59 pm |
  10. Crane, LA, CA

    This is just a cruel ploy by the Republicans to get attention away from their own pathetic ethical lapses a.k.a Craig, Vitter, Haggard, Foley.....etc. Its a foolish issue and the media is complicit in this corruption. Shame on Republicans and shame on these bought out garbage journalists.

    September 22, 2007 04:37 pm at 4:37 pm |
  11. Biff Tannen, Hill Valley, California

    If she were at a GLAAD sponsored event she'd say she was. Then she'd flip flop the next day.

    September 22, 2007 04:54 pm at 4:54 pm |
  12. Maria, Houston

    No, but I'm sure she'll become one if it helps her to get elected :-)

    September 22, 2007 06:00 pm at 6:00 pm |
  13. dawn -- Gaithersburg, MD.

    Truth Teller:

    The point of my Dick Morris analysis was not that he should have been fired or that Bill Clinton should have remained in office. For the purposes of that comment, you decide. My point was that his firing has so disaffected him that one can no longer call him a Bill Clinton "supporter." If you don't want the Clintons in the White House, voting is your remedy. If you want to refute my analysis, an argument on-point is what you need.

    JB:

    I don't believe I made any comparison of how the two PARTIES are run. However, if you have specific examples of how left-wing media, which is different from the Democratic Party,(baselessly) smears Republican politicians in the same way that right-wing media smears Democrats, I'd be delighted to hear it.

    Tom:

    I note that you don't challenge the thrust of my comment detailing how right-wing smears lead to MSM chatter and an electoral advantage for Republicans.

    Please give some evidence for the "huge support" Dick Morris evinces for Bill Clinton. (Is it, just for instance, that he has said so? Because I don't think repeating unfounded rumors about President Clinton's wife's sexuality is hugely supportive.) I don't believe I claimed that he didn't ever go on other media, just that he makes most of his appearances on Fox and other right-wing friendly media, where he spends most of his time bashing the Clintons. (The rest he spends bashing other Democrats.)
    Hannity's condemnation of the Advocate doesn't change the fact that he participated in spreading rumors about Sen. Clinton's supposed homosexuality in the first place. It smacks of his brand of hypocrisy to spread the rumor on the one hand and condemn the person who then asks about it on the other. He's a delightful individual just reeking of personal integrity.

    As for the rest of your comment: my comment refuted your claim that, because the Advocate asked the question about Sen. Clinton's sexual orientation, the right-wing had nothing to do with the "Hillary is a lesbian" smear.
    I don't know or care and have never made any claim whatsoever that YOU "care" about Sen. Clinton's sexual orientation. (How would that contribute to my point? And for the record, I'm so pleased that you're not homophobic.) It's good to know that you watch outlets other than Fox: the next step is to allow the information you pick up there to help you organize relevant facts into coherent, and even convincing arguments. As for complimenting Obama et al. - no apologies necessary! I've always assumed that a person's political allegiance is no bar to recognizing merit in a person with different committments. Nice to know this is true.
    And please don't always type so slowly: you'll give yourself hand cramp.

    September 22, 2007 08:01 pm at 8:01 pm |
  14. Albi; Bethesda, MD

    Wake up and smell the coffee? Our source is someone who used to work within the Clinton administration with a Top Secret Security Clearance...

    Ask Hillary why she liked to travel with "a particular woman," and why she shared adjacent rooms with her.

    It only takes someone with an IQ of a houseplant to figure it out, a little "Crime Scene Investigation."

    One bed isn't slept on, while the other in the adjacent room is...

    How is her sexuality important? It tells you what type of character she is and whether she is willing to be truthful to her belief/views.

    You can NOT slam gays and lesbians to gain the mainstream support, while living the secret life of a closet lesbian!

    Pick a position, Hillary! And stop lying to the general public.

    September 22, 2007 09:53 pm at 9:53 pm |
  15. Terry, El Paso, TX

    I have no need to learn about the sexual desires and activities of political candidates. Maybe Hillary has slept with women and men or perhaps not. It doesn't matter. I can't see that loving a woman should disqualify anybody from any office. I love women myself.

    I suspect, with no evidence except for a knowledge of human nature, that of all the candidates running, only Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney have been faithful to their partners. That doesn't matter to me because some pretty good presidents have slept around.

    Heterosexuals have no special reason to be proud of themselves or to hold themselves up as an example to follow. In large numbers, they beat their wives, abuse their children, fail to vote responsibly, speed on the freeways, rob banks, rape women, lie, and cheat. In all measures, they are very much like homosexuals. They have slightly different bedroom habits, but other than that they appear to be the ordinariest of citizens.

    September 23, 2007 08:53 am at 8:53 am |
  16. Pam A Summerside PEI

    Albi; Bethesda, MD

    If Hillary is or isn't what difference does it make? I don't believe she is for one minute. This story is yet another spin by a Republican Spin Machine.

    As far as pick a side and stick to it.
    Why should Hillary bother to do that as regardless of what side she choose you wing nuts would say she was lying.
    She might as well just ignore Republican unproven attacks and roll with the punches. And I must say she's doing a good job of that! Apparently she has you and alot more in a frenzy.

    Fear not, it will all come out in the wash when the time is right..

    September 23, 2007 10:07 am at 10:07 am |
  17. Max, Austin, TX

    This is a brilliant move by Carville and Begala. Dems, please note that Carville, Begala, and Rove all work on the same plane.

    September 23, 2007 10:23 am at 10:23 am |
  18. Albi; Bethesda, MD

    What is this "faithful to their partners" BS? Hillary Clinton is not faithful to Bill. Give the rest of us a break with your dim-wit observation.

    Women as well as men stay with their partners for various reasons, many do it for "convenience". Many women/men would leave if they didn't feel trapped in their relationship. Many stay for their children. Many stay because they refuse to place themselves in a position of financial burden. Many stay because it's seen as "proper" amonst their community, family, friends, and even political arena. Some even stay because there's a mutual agreement amongst each other that it's cheaper than getting a divorce...And that's why many partners sleep around.

    And there is "evidence" that Hillary Clinton is a lesbian. We (the ones who hold or have held a TS Security Clearance) can't exactly give you names and dates.

    Re-read the following statement:

    Wake up and smell the coffee? Our source is someone who used to work within the Clinton administration with a Top Secret Security Clearance…

    Ask Hillary why she liked to travel with "a particular woman," and why she shared adjacent rooms with her.

    It only takes someone with an IQ of a houseplant to figure it out, a little "Crime Scene Investigation."

    One bed isn't slept on, while the other in the adjacent room is…

    How is her sexuality important? It tells you what type of person she really is and whether she is willing to be truthful to her belief and views.

    You can NOT slam gays and lesbians to gain the mainstream support, while living the secret life of a closet lesbian! You can NOT side with the mainstream public and turn down gay marriages and live the life of a closet lesbian...That's called deceiving the public to gain mainstream votes.

    Pick a position, Hillary! And stop lying to the general public!!!

    September 23, 2007 10:49 am at 10:49 am |
  19. Albi; Bethesda, MD

    And by the way, I am neither Republican nor am I Democrat, nor am I "liberal"...just someone "small" who holds a TS Security Clearance.

    September 23, 2007 11:23 am at 11:23 am |
  20. JB Boston MA

    Out of Bounds?
    The Advocate asks Hillary if she's a lesbian. Is that appropriate?

    This is a headline on Fox News right now. Just thought you progressive fox bashers should know, since I am confident you never look.

    September 23, 2007 11:29 am at 11:29 am |
  21. c.j. larose atlanta GA

    CNN-when did you get this pathetic???You have sunk to new lows putting this as a story on the main page of CNN.com.
    Why don't you try harder to seek out stories that constitute REAL news-there are REAL tragedies, REAL heros, REAL issues going on in our nation and the world right now? Instead you went for a cheap and easy way to fill up space. Whomever made the decision to put this up on the web...maybe you should start looking for a job-I suggest you call Perez or TMZ...if you'd rather switch to print, how about In Touch or Life and Style tabloid rags. Your decision making skills and overall judgement leave much to be desired.

    September 23, 2007 12:18 pm at 12:18 pm |
  22. Mrs. America

    I'm a little slow in getting to the ticker, and even with 581 posts already made, I feel compelled to add a profound statement on whether Clinton is a lesbian. If she is, so what.

    September 23, 2007 01:33 pm at 1:33 pm |
  23. Steve Wittlake Blaine Washington

    How can anyone ignore reports both from the people that guarded the Clintons in Arkansas and Washington D.C. regarding allegations. Hillary has done herself in by the way she responded to allegations.

    September 23, 2007 01:40 pm at 1:40 pm |
  24. Nataly,New York City

    So many people are involved in this trivial matter forgetting big issues, e.g. after 9/11 New York Senator Clinton was invisible for us, New Yorkers.
    And yet she dared to tell Iowians that they will be visible for her.
    How can we trust her lines?

    September 23, 2007 04:15 pm at 4:15 pm |
  25. Brianna Webb, McEwen, TN

    Obviously those who say these ridiculous rumors have no platform of their own on which to stand. One thing I know for a fact is that she is not afriad to get involved in order to help our troops and our country. It is because of her that a young man abused in boot camp was returned back to his family that he could reveive the therapy he so desperately needed. Thank you Senator Clinton..

    September 23, 2007 11:14 pm at 11:14 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23