HRC/Logo Presidential Forum: Bill Richardson: Sexuality a "Choice"

Gov. Bill Richardson has an incredible résumé but consistently fails to hit the mark in these debates. Tonight he crashed and burned. (MORE)

Richardson was asked did he believe sexuality was a choice. "Yes."

Melissa Etheridge—who has been doing most of the questioning tonight—does her best to ask the candidate to qualify his response. "I'm not a scientist," he explains. "But I don’t see this as science or a definition, I see this as people but I don’t like to categorize people..." He lost us. (MORE)

Richardson attempts to explain his record—New Mexico is only one of five or six states that does not have a statewide Defense of Marriage Act or constitutional amendment barring same-sex marriage, he called his legislation into special session to expand domestic partnerships—which is actually very good but he continues to stumble on the "choice" question. "I've been outspoken on these issues and supportive," the governor says.

Richardson also calls sexuality a "lifestyle."

We've said this several times before: Richardson has impeccable credentials but suffers from a certain lack of strategic thinking. It's not that he isn't strong on the issues—he is very strong but consistently has foot-in-mouth. Good luck on the campaign trail.

Comments

[Cadence]

I wish the panel would have asked the candidates how they plan on accomplishing their goals. For example, how do they plan on fighting job discrimination based on race, or implementing civil unions, or making sure that domestic partners are covered by their spouses insurance. It's nice that they all say they are for civil unions or against DADT, but how, if elected, will they act to make these changes take effect.

Frankly, it just seems like their words are pretty empty. As Obama said, we should look at the candidates actions, and not just judge them by what they say.

[Michael]

Yeah I really think Bill Richardson bombed at this forum. Another problem I see with Bill Richardson is everytime I hear him speak it's VERY boring. Like I have a hard time watching him cause he does remind me of Ejore from Winnie the Pooch just absolutely no enthusiam when he speaks and just very dry.

And I'm wondering if he thinks so much that homosexuality is a choice why is he attempting to end discrimination? I mean that was a bad move on his part, because at that moment in some ways he sounded no different than General Peter Pace. Granted he didn't say it was immoral but I mean hell.

[Mark]

Most "straight" people's sexual orientation is a choice. Most "gay" people's is not. Until we get that through our heads, we will not communicate on this issue. For straight people, homosexuality is an option that they choose not to indulge in. Bill Richardson's answer on that question was probably simply an honest description of what he feels inside about his "heterosexual" orientation. Cut him some slack for being honest about his own internal perception, rather than giving a PC answer.

[Caleb Rexter]

Mark, you're calling Rod "pc"?
That would be a first.

I think Richardson has been given plenty of slack on these pages. He also consistently screws up in the debates and on the trail. Not only did he call sexuality a choice, most scientists say no, but he defended it and later aid lifestyle.

No one said Richardson is homophobic and Rod always says he has a good record on gay issues. He just constantly makes these mistakes.

[Luther]

Well, I guess I'm the odd one out here. I still like Richardson and he will get my vote in my primary. He is human, and his flaws are on exhibit, and unlike the others with their rote sentences and quips and lies when they are in front of a certain crowd, I prefer a honest answer. I could never vote for Clinton, who is GOP as they come, taking money from Rupert Murdoch and having him do a fund raiser for her? I'd sit home before I would vote for her. Obama? He's not telling how he really feels about the glbt community, so, what makes him worth a vote?

Take them all with a grain of salt of gay issues just like you take them with a grain of salt on black issues.

[Andy in Seattle]

Sit home, Luther, if Hillary is on the ticket, and watch while... a jackbooted thug like Giuliani or a religious theocrat like Romney coasts to victory? Yeah, that would really help.

Yes, Richardson is human, and he said he misunderstood the question. Dodge? possibly. Honest mistake? maybe. Hillary and Obama had their mistake with their tardy Peter Pace rebuke.

Whomever ends up on the Democratic ticket is likely to be much more progressive on issues important to LGBT people and Americans of all colors concerned about the current mess our country and world are in. And it would be irresponsible to not act to do our most to prevent more years of GOP-sponsored wreckage.

[phil_in_ny]

He just seemd so uncomfortable. I wasn't buying his view points.

[Luther]

LOL, thanks Andy,I'll vote as my people are still denied it in many places in this country and its my right and duty to vote for all the blood spilled and humilation they endured and many still endure to vote in the good old US of A, just not for her and only on local issues on the 2008 ballot.

Sorry, she is no better than Bush IMO and thats the only one that counts when I push the lever. And if she she is the ticket in any capacity, enjoy 4 more years of the GOP and the gay bashing, no way is this country going to vote for her, no matter what you or the political pundits say. The GOP wants her to run more than any of the others as they know she will be beat in a lopsided general election.

[Bill]

richardson was a meltdown
capehart was the only one asking the tough questions.
most regurgitated their GLBT talking points.
Government should get out of the marraige business and give civil unions for all or all we are talking about is Plessy vs. Ferguson. Obama, Clinton and Edwards seem to be on the PvsF bus at this point, if you'll pardon the pun. The only ones that seemed sincere was Gravel and Kucinich.