In a New York Times Magazine interview over the weekend Homeland Security chief Janet Napolitano fielded a few questions about the lesbian rumors that have followed her and other women in politics.

Men don’t know what to make of women who choose to be single. Rumors of lesbianism have dogged women in politics like you,Condoleezza Rice and Ann Richards.
Right. I think the more people get to know a person, the less that becomes an issue. It’s interesting. In Arizona when I first ran for public office, that’s when the rumors were going around, and of course I’m sure they go around now.

In 2002, during your gubernatorial campaign, you publicly denied rumors that you were a lesbian.
I just happen not to be married.

Are you seeing anybody now?
Yes, my staff.

Some food for thought…

Back in 2006, Napolitano was asked why she opposed Prop 107, an amendment which would have banned same-sex marriage in Arizona. The governor responded “Marriage is between a man and a woman. That is the law, and I believe that’s our tradition. I think Prop 107 goes way beyond that.”

When asked if her view was hypocritical because most people believed she was a closeted lesbian.

“No. No, and I’m offended by that question.”

The Department of Justice has filed a new DOMA brief in Federal Court today that softens the anti-gay rhetoric but still defends the law while it remains on the books.

Justice Department lawyers are seeking to dismiss a suit brought by a gay California couple challenging the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act. The administration’s response to the case has angered gay activists who see it as backtracking on campaign promises made by Barack Obama last year.

In court papers, the administration said it supports repeal of the law.

Yet the same filing says the Justice Department will defend the statute in this case because a reasonable argument can be made that the law is constitutional.

…

“The administration believes the Defense of Marriage Act is discriminatory and should be repealed,” said Justice Department spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler, because it prevents equal rights and benefits.

The department is obligated “to defend federal statutes when they are challenged in court. The Justice Department cannot pick and choose which federal laws it will defend based on any one administration’s policy preferences,” Schmaler added.

A previous filing in June sparked outrage in the LGBT community for citing incest and underage marriage in defense of DOMA.

At the Netroots Nation conference yesterday Bill Clinton responded forcefully when heckled by gay activist and blogger Lane Hudson on the topics of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT), and the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Watch.

Full transcript available at Blabbeando.

On the same day Harvey Milk was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom, SaveCalifornia.com president Randy Thomasson held a press conference outside San Francisco City Hall denouncing Harvey Milk and the honor he was bestowed.

Thomasson and SaveCalifornia.com has also been very vocal in opposing a bill that would proclaim May 22 as Harvey Milk Day. From the SaveCalifornia.com website:

Please veto SB 572, “Harvey Milk Day,” due to major problems with this bill:

NO PARENTAL PERMISSION: While schools and school districts get to choose whether to hold “Harvey Milk Day,” SB 572 does not let parents choose whether their children will participate. The bill has no opt-in or opt-out. Yet polls show most parents oppose their children participating in “Harvey Milk Day.” Fathers and mothers deserve your respect and your veto.

INDOCTRINATES CHILDREN AS YOUNG AS 5 YEARS OLD: Harvey Milk Day would promote the “lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender” agenda of Harvey Milk to up to six million children in public schools, including kindergarteners. These kids aren’t old enough to be taught about sex, but now they’ll be taught about same-sex “marriages,” cross-dressing and same-sex desires? This is highly inappropriate.

OVERLY BROAD: SB 572 is written so broadly, the pro-Harvey Milk “exercises” could include gay-pride parades on campus. The “exercises” are not defined, so the sky is the limit. Under SB 572, what will children in public schools be taught and how will children’s minds be “exercised?” The answer is whatever Milk believed or is said to have believed about religion, sexual experimentation, marriage, politics, etc.

OPPOSED BY A STRONG MAJORITY OF CALIFORNIANS: In March 2009, San Francisco TV station KPIX commissioned a poll, which found that a majority of Democrats, independents, Republicans, liberals, moderates and conservatives all opposed a statewide “day of significance” honoring Harvey Milk in schools or in any other state observance. Only 19 percent supported an official “Harvey Milk Day.”

Just a toybox full of hate… isn’t it?