Shameful does not begin to describe the Reagans’ record on AIDS. However, although it was much too late and clearly only came when AIDS’s reach extended beyond the gay community, they did take a public stance on AIDS acceptance while the disease was still very stigmatized. Google Ronald Reagan’s obit in the Washington…

Oh, was it Fox News who said that about Nancy Reagan? Hillary didn’t say it?

Uh-huh. As a queer person who is reluctantly supporting Hillary, at least from my perspective, you’re not helping your cause by ridiculing us here. You’re actually helping feed the narrative — which has enough evidence going for it on its own — that Hillary doesn’t like LGBT people or care about our issues.

1) “Too? “ I didn’t say Clinton is evil, so don’t put words in my mouth.

Okay. But she could have avoided calling attention to one of the most profoundly evil legacies of the Reagans and claiming it as one of their good points.

“...unflinching support for LGBT rights...”

Hilbot version 2016.2 is now available for download. The latest release addresses previous bugs related to teh gays.

You’re really just absolutely terrible at this.

Get the fuck out. Their health isn’t hurt, their lives aren’t hurt, their family isn’t hurt, and they aren’t hurting anyone or anything. Who cares if they stand out in a crowd of a million and live in a way many find is weird or annoying. It has no relevance to drug addicts.

It’s almost like a freudian slip. She wanted to say anything but AIDS but AIDS came out. She had it on the brain :-P

He most certainly did not get a pass. People pointed out how he shouldn’t use that word. And while the wrong word was used, I do believe there’s a certain truth to the fact that even if you’re a poor, white person, you still don’t have it as bad as a poor, black person. And probably a lot of people would agree to…

So full of shit. I replaced HIV/AIDS with Alzheimer’s Disease in her statement, and it makes NO FUCKING SENSE.

You don't understand how telling a blatant lie to woo voters is dishonest? Are you being serious?

How convenient the retraction is on twitter where all the young people will see it, and older voters will miss it. Call me when she does an apology tour on the major cable news networks.

No, it’s because she thinks she can scoop up some moderate Republican voters in the general election if Trump is the nominee. This is nothing more than dishonest, cynical pandering. Wait, that’s not true. It is something more. It's a flat-out, bald-faced lie.

There have gotta be about 978974654654654 ways to avoid “speaking ill of the dead” that don’t also posit the motherfucking Reagans as thought leaders on the AIDS epidemic. Gimme a break.

She literally could have talked about anything else though. Even D.A.R.E., which was an epic joke, certainly started the conversation about drugs much younger and made it a community issue not just a parental issue. Or you know, just being a nice lady or whatever. People can still pick apart that but at least it has…

Wow. You are seriously defending this? There are a MILLION things she could have said about Reagan that are true. ‘Strong first lady, amazing courage during her husband’s assassination attempt’ and she went for this. How do you think you are progressive and spout this kind of stuff?

Has HRC ever done anything wrong in…