Former President Clinton Caught in Attempt to Punish Hotel Owner Opposed to Homosexual “Marriage”
By John-Henry Westen
WASHINGTON, February 17, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - During all his political campaigns former President Bill Clinton claimed to be in favor of true marriage and opposed to homosexual "marriage." During his presidency Clinton even made good on his opposition by signing the Defense of Marriage Act, which specified that the federal government may not treat same-sex relationships as "marriages" for any purpose. However, a letter from his chief of staff shows that he has now attempted to punish a hotel owner for his opposition to homosexual "marriage."
A letter from Clinton’s office, signed by Laura Graham, his chief of staff, indicates that Clinton attempted to have a function at which he was speaking transferred to another hotel, because the owner of the hotel had supported California’s Proposition 8 with a donation. Proposition 8 was the California ballot proposition which passed on November 4, 2008, which added to the state Constitution a new section, reading: "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." (To read the letter from Clinton’s staff, see: www.lifesite.net/ldn/2009_docs/Clintonletter.pdf)
Should Clinton’s bid to move the event been successful it would have cost the hotel tens of thousands of dollars in lost revenue.
Addressed to homosexual activist and Union President Brigette Browning, the February 13 letter states: "We made several attempts to change the venue," referring to the San Diego Manchester Grand Hyatt. Homosexual activists had called for a boycott of the hotel ever since it was revealed that owner Doug Manchester donated $125,000 to the campaign to protect true marriage in California.
Speaking of the former President, the letter states: "He (Clinton) was in no way involved in choosing the venue nor was he aware of the controversy related to it until we received your letter last week. As you know, President Clinton shares many of your concerns and wishes this event could have taken place elsewhere. Upon receiving your letter, we made several attempts to change the venue. Unfortunately, the hosting organization responded that they were unable to do so."
Clinton’s work to financially penalize the hotel owner has drawn charges of hypocrisy, as Clinton’s public record while in office was consistent in opposing same-sex "marriage." Wendy Wright of Concerned Women for America told LifeSiteNews.com that Clinton’s "latest action reveals the depth of his hypocrisy."
In 1996, during his re-election campaign, Clinton signed into law the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Moreover, in a now famous 1996 interview with the homosexual magazine, The Advocate, Clinton said: "I remain opposed to same-sex marriage. I believe marriage is an institution for the union of a man and a woman. This has been my long-standing position, and it is not being reviewed or reconsidered." (see the interview here: http://web.archive.org/web/20050208184130/http://www.advocate.com/html/stories/824/824_clinton_710.asp)
The charge of hypocrisy seems to hold even more water given that the hotel owner has apologized for making his donation to the Prop 8 campaign. Ted Kanatas, General Manager of San Diego Manchester Grand Hyatt, told LifeSiteNews.com: "Mr. Manchester and his wife made that decision together and he has since apologized, he has refused to give any more, he has apologized to the hotel."
Clinton did in fact speak at the hotel Sunday for the International Franchise Association (IFA), but according to Kanatas there was little choice. "We’re a 1625 room hotel," he explained, and "IFA consumes virtually all of it." He added that there are very few hotels in North America that could accommodate a group of that size, and the homosexual activist group petitioned for the venue change only a week prior to the event.
CWA’s Wright says she sees a lesson for pro-family activists in the controversy. "The problem with ‘evolving’ standards," she said, "is that they evolve according to the pressure put on unprincipled people." The reason why Clinton signed DOMA, she explained, was the election. "It was the pressure of the public," and now that that pressure is off, it’s no surprise that he’s changed his tune, she said.
"But this is a lesson for many of us," concluded Wright, "that some leaders political and business will buckle under pressure. Homosexual groups will never let up their pressure so we have to be just as active in convincing leaders to do the right thing."