Andrew Sullivan unfairly rips Hillary Clinton over her doublespeak on same-sex marriage. When asked if she is for it in America, she ultimately waffled, though she made it clear she supports states creating domestic partnership legislation. Sullivan concludes his smear with an outright lie: “So there you have it. The Senator from New York State is opposed to equal rights for gays and lesbians. ”

Even more than abortion, this is probably the most politically charged topic in America. Bill Clinton tried (semi-successfully) to end the ban on gays in the military and was always publicly sympathetic to their cause. Then the Republicans, for no other reason but to embarrass him, created a ridiculous act, something like “the sanctity of marriage act” (I forget and don’t want to remember). The meaningless legislation simply stated that marriage was an act intended for men and women, and Clinton had no choice but to sign it to avoid major politicization of the issue with no point except to paint the Democrats as radically to the left.

This is the (ugly) world of politics. Politicians know that their critics hang on their every word and, wishy-washy as it seems, they have to measure what they say carefully, especially when it comes to super-charged issues — and Sullivan knows it. Would he apply the same litmus test to George W. on gay marriages? Because if he did, I suspect he would be mighty disappointed.

Sullivan goes way, way out of his way to make Hillary C. look bad, when she was obviously struggling to say she was supportive, without falling into the political booby trap. I think she should be commended. And if you really want to criticize pols for ducking tough questions, go look up George W.’s answers in 2000 to questions about his use of cocaine.