Skip

October 1, 2000
8:15 PM   Subscribe

Television stations in New York are refusing to run ads questioning Hillary Clinton's sexuality: "The ads were prepared by the Virginia based Christian Action Network. The 30-second TV ad features pictures of Hillary Rodham Clinton with the following narration: "It is rumored that Hillary Clinton is a lesbian. It is rumored that Hillary Clinton supports homosexual marriage. It is rumored that Hillary Clinton will leave her husband upon taking office. It was rumored that Bill Clinton had an affair with Monica Lewinsky. Sometimes rumors are true." The narrator then says to contact CAN for 'more information on traditional family values.'" whoa, that is so classy! way to go, christian action network!
posted by palegirl (19 comments total)

 
Sheesh! Like Right-Wing'ers, Fundamentalists, and Republicans in general don't have a bad enough image for intolerance already. Like any of that would have any bearing on her performance in office.

Kudos to the TV stations for showing they can make a good decision every once in a while!
posted by EricBrooksDotCom at 9:02 PM on October 1, 2000


I'd imagine that the Lazio camp is quite pleased that the advertisements aren't being broadcast - it would have served only to align him with extreme right wing radicals.

posted by aladfar at 9:15 PM on October 1, 2000


Those right wing'ers, fundametalists and republicans don't seem too bright. NYC is a liberal town, geniuses. Maybe you'll suck in some of those pickup driving upstate people, but us couple million voters down here are a different story. A) These people are probably just throwing rumors out there. B) When New Yorkers don't vote for Hillary, it'll be because she's this out of town fame seeking carpetbagger who wants to make a name for herself and keep a foot in office now that hubby has to step down. Go Lazio.
posted by tomorama at 9:17 PM on October 1, 2000


My first reaction was to question the validity of this article, but then after doing a little research I found this transcript filed May 5, 1997. It contains:
In the underlying litigation, the Federal Election Commission advanced the position that the Christian Action Network violated section 441b(a) through corporate expenditures for a commercial in which the following text was read by a narrator:
Bill Clinton's vision for America includes job quotas for homosexuals, giving homosexuals special civil rights, allowing homosexuals in the armed forces. Al Gore supports homosexual couples' adopting children and becoming foster parents. Is this your vision for a better America? For more information on traditional family values, contact the Christian Action Network.

It didn't work then and I don't see it working now. This group isn't very creative, I think they could use the advice of a few gay ad execs.
posted by brian at 9:42 PM on October 1, 2000


Looks like a consulting opportunity for Richard Hatch.
posted by daddyray at 10:48 PM on October 1, 2000


There is no such thing as bad publicity.
posted by sylloge at 12:12 AM on October 2, 2000


I don't know Stewart. I think Bridgestone/Firestone may argue with you on that one.
posted by brian at 1:18 AM on October 2, 2000


Heh. You're absolutely right.

And yet, now that it's been brought to your attention, don't you sort of think that Hillary Clinton might just support homosexual marriage after all ... ? (Talk about a "j'accuse".)
posted by sylloge at 2:31 AM on October 2, 2000


> There is no such thing as bad publicity.

Oh, look! smoke... your pants are on fire.

I'm sure you'd let Hitler, or a KKK member, or a baby killer to watch your kids.

No, wait, forget all that.
posted by holloway at 2:40 AM on October 2, 2000


"It is rumoured that members of the Christian Action Network have sex with baby goats. Sometimes rumours are true."

Even if they're ones I start.
posted by holgate at 2:42 AM on October 2, 2000


I try to cover my emotions with intellectual discussion but they always get through somehow. Every time I see something like this it makes me think "if they only knew someone who was." Even though I know it shouldn't, it hurts deep down inside me to know that what I am is what some people consider the ultimate insult. That I can't change that. I'm 21 and I have a lot to learn (like what the hell Stewart means by "j'accuse" I think it means "I accuse you" in French which probably has something to do with it, heh), but why some people insist on hating someone they don't know I will never understand.

There is so much that could be done by an organization with a name such as the Christian Action Network. It's truly unfortunate that they have to waist all this effort and money on such silly things. This isn't a Christian Action Network, this is a Conservative Action Network. I guess I've come to the point where I'm just waiting for them all to die off and hoping that my generation will be a little more "christian."
posted by brian at 3:16 AM on October 2, 2000


Let he who is without quotas cast the first acronym.

I hope Hillary is gay. I think that would be the piece of the puzzle that would help everyone understand everything that's been going on in the last eight years, so we can collectively go, "oh I get it no wonder" and then accumulatively get on with our lives. It would somehow tie everything in a nice white bow. Perhaps if we stretched the premise, it could explain everything from WhiteWater to IranContra to WaterGate, and even Kennedy's affair with Marilyn Monroe. Maybe Jackie O was gay. Wow the world suddenly starts making sense when you come to think of it.

Maybe family values were an illusion, instead of the other way around. Maybe Leave It To Beaver and The Waltons and Little House on the Prairie were the lies. Maybe there never was a true american cultural ethic, where the Good Old Days were the Happy Days and Anytown USA was pleasant despite the racism and child labor and general ignorance.

I for one never understood how families could have 2.5 children on average anyway. We can't get BACK to traditional family values if we never were there in the first place.


posted by ZachsMind at 3:28 AM on October 2, 2000


Here is a link to the actual Roanoke Times article about the ad. The Roanoke times is the local paper to the area in Virginia where CAN is based. This just also happens to be the area where this mass shooting just occurred days ago. Something's in the water down in them there parts and needless to say I won't be stopping down to see what it is.
posted by brian at 4:04 AM on October 2, 2000


This isn't a Christian Action Network, this is a Conservative Action Network

No, it is (at least) a homophobic action network (though probably thoroughly misanthropic in the end — perhaps a "Hatemongering Action Network"?) Conservativism isn't (necessarily) evil.

And Brian, baby, we've come a long way. The baby boomers were more "tolerant" (as if there is something to "tolerate") than their parents were, and this generation will be more so. There will still be hateful, evil people in the world and the status quo is far from perfect, but people don't get put in jail for buggery anymore (well, outside of Malaysia anyway) — Homosexuality has been decriminalized, the medical community no long sees it as "aberrant" or "pathological", most religions no longer condemn it, civil laws and businesses are coming around, many people feel comfortable enough to be open about their sexuality ...

That may be cold comfort to you most of the time, but it is progress. And it's not finished yet.
posted by sylloge at 4:22 AM on October 2, 2000


ok, amazingly enough, I'm a Christian. I don't, however give a flying #@% about which way Hillary leans as far as her sexual preference is concerned. for the most part, I feel almost embarrassed to admit my beliefs because people will think that I'm this ultra-conservative rightwing hatemonger. I was just telling a friend the other day how I'd almost rather spend my time with sinners than self-righteous, empty and depressed people who feel the need to criticize others for their choices.


damn. mudslinging (or whatever you want to call it) like this infuriates me!
posted by SentientAI at 7:24 AM on October 2, 2000



I've actually heard rumors that Rick Lazio isn't a little pip-squeek, Newt Gingrich blowing weasel. But, they're probably unfounded.
posted by Doug at 9:00 AM on October 2, 2000


brian, et al. here is a quick overview of the Dreyfuss affair, which is where the term 'j'accuse' originates...[of course, the funny thing about this story is rosenblatt's mangled grammar - esp. this phrase 'there was a ceremony of degradation for those who remember the movie']
posted by judith at 12:52 PM on October 2, 2000


re: rick lazio. he went to vassar. he must be gay.
posted by palegirl at 4:03 PM on October 2, 2000


My favorite quote on this issue:

"Making fun of people because of their religion? That's pretty gay."

The best part is that the person I saw say this didn't realize that what they were saying was hypocritical.
----------------------------
On topic, though, I personally will never vote for a Republican until the party as a whole decides that a person remains human regardless of who they fall in love with.
posted by Ptrin at 10:36 AM on October 8, 2000


« Older My God! Brits actually have rights!   |   Democrat election site spamming search engines? Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post