Friday, January 04, 2008

LGBT blogger slams Barack Obama

There are many pieces floating around blogs right now about Barack Obama’s relationship with the LGBT community. Below are exerts from InterstateQ (North Carolina based LGBT blogger). Thoughts?

President Barack Obama? Could it really happen? If so, the LGBT community should be worried. While many may applaud the junior senator from Illinois’ “big tent” approach to his campaign, it is also a strategy that has left the LGBT community standing at odds with forces from the religious right and rabidly anti-gay “ex-gay” movement.

In South Carolina, Obama’s “big tent” campaign strategy coalesced in the form of gospel concerts attracting huge numbers of African-American voters and featuring a “respected leader” in the “ex-gay” movement.

From New Hampshire state Rep. Mo Baxley:
Obama lost the support of many in the LGBT community when he featured [anti-gay] entertainer Donnie McClurking at campaign events in South Carolina and then went ahead with the events even after being personally informed of the entertainers’ very public and virulently anti-gay remarks - making him the only Democratic candidate to be protested by members of our community. While Obama certainly has a pro-LGBT platform, in this circumstance, his actions speak louder than his well-intentioned words and we can not support a candidate that harmed the LGBT community in South Carolina in his quest to become president.

If Obama wins the U.S. presidency the LGBT community is in for four years of being subjected to a dangerously employed “big tent” strategy that places an oppressed group of citizens at the same table as their oppressors. Obama’s presidency would see James Dobson, Pat Robertson, Donnie McClurkin and other anti-gay leaders sitting down with LGBT community leaders telling them how much they are evil while Obama sits back and says, “We should work together and hope for change.”

Obama may not have the courage to stand up to the right-wing bullies if he becomes president, just like he wasn’t able to stand up against them and say, “I’m sorry Donnie, but your views do not match my view of America. My campaign is about one of equality and that isn’t something you stand for. I’ll have to ask that you not perform. I can’t give you a platform for hate.”


Anonymous said...

Don't count Ms. Clinton out yet. The Iowa vote was deceiving. The Democratic race is a long way from being over.

Anonymous said...

thanks for sharing but I think the guy at interstateq is being overly dramatic.
From the looks of the interstateq blog he is going to say something negative about anyone who is NOT John Edwards i mean is this guy being paid to endorse him or what?

Adam said...

There is no way Obama will win because Alabama, Mississippi, South Carolina, and others will not accept a black man running the central government. Will they accept a woman, I do not know. I think Edwards is the best choice.

Anonymous said...

Well, in all retrospect We need to consider that whoever the president elect will be in November 2008 rather the sex or race it really doesn't matter instead of conflict we need to stick by each other to create a solution ., " Like the country song says ," if you don't stand for something then you'll fall for anything.For our work is stil far from over. Much more work to be done. anonymous

MHC said...

"This guy" is not being paid to endorse Edwards. I truly believe he is the best option for the presidency and hold firm to my position that both Obama and Clinton have major flaws in their leadership ability and how they will be able to bring this country back to being one for all people.

Again... not being paid... I've got something called principle - something worth more than any amount of money could ever be.

Matt Comer
Charlotte, N.C.

shelby said...

I totally agreed with this post so thank you for sharing it I wish more bloggers would share important posts from other bloggers.

James said...

Although as of this writing, Obama appears to be headed toward a second pre-primary victory in New Hampshire, I feel like the race is far from decided.

I will support whoever the Democrats nominate, because it is obvious the Republicans will do nothing on behalf of gay rights. As for Obama, Clinton and Edwards, they all stop short of what I would like to see, in terms of a Democratic candidate's stance on gay marriage and other related issues.

If either Dennis Kucinich or Mike Gravel last until Kentucky's late primary, I will probably cast my vote for either of them, even though I know neither will win the nomination. But at least I will be voting for a candidate who understands that sexual orientation should not prevent a person from having equal status to his or her straight counterparts.

Obama or Clinton or Edwards will be the Democrats' nominee. We may think all of them are wishy-washy on gay rights issues, but we have to live with it. I think we should focus on which one we think has the best chance of defeating any Republican nominee, so we don't have another eight years like the past two presidential terms.

On the subject of gay rights, Obama and Clinton and Edwards are all pretty much alike, which effectively marginalizes the most important issues to most gay people. I think the best we can do is hold our nose and vote for (1) either whoever appeals to us most on non-sexual orientation issues, or (2) whoever looks like the most likely to defeat the Republicans and hope that their cautious statements of gay-friendliness are merely campaign ploys so they will not seem TOO gay-friendly to the voters.

It sucks, I know, but I believe it's realistic.

Hargrove said...


Barack Obama's African grandmother was interviewed by CNN on the day before the New Hampshire Primary. One would think that the primary would be the focus of CNN's interview. One would expect questions about Barack’s campaign, and that his grandmother would be asked about her expectations respecting the New Hampshire Primary. But there were no such questions. As I watched, I came to understand that the viewer wasn't suppose to learn anything from Obama's grandmother, the point was to for us to see Obama's grandmother. We were to see how black she is, and how poor she is, and impute that to him . . .

James said...

Obama is black? I hadn't noticed. But then I haven't paid much attention to the fact that Clinton is a woman, either. I've been paying more attention to what they're saying --- and not saying --- about gay rights issues.

If there IS a conspiracy by certain parties in the media (and I think Fox News is much worse than CNN)to try and make something out of Obama's ethnic/racial background and Clinton's gender (Such a to-do was made about her eyes welling up with tears in that cafe!), I don't think it's working very well. He won the Iowa caucuses and she got the primary votes in New Hampshire.

I suspect that such efforts to make a big deal out of these non-issues are a generational thing, one that matters more to older voters (sadly, my own generation is included there) and less to younger ones. But even that statement is a generalization.

I think we who support gay rights need to keep our eyes on our own prize --- trying to find a candidate who will help us achieve our goal of equality and ignore these side issues.

How can we get Clinton-Edwards-Obama to see the light on TGT (The Gay Thing) and move closer to a position like Dennis Kucinich or Mike Gravel have on TMT (The Marriage Thing)?

Deep Fried said...

Don't Ask Don't Tell
Both served up to us by the Clinton Administration. Both have had a more detrimental effect on LGBT Americans than anyone who Obama has ever stood beside or taken a picture with. Get real folks -- Since Clinton is taking credit for everything that happened during her husband's administration, maybe she can answer for these two horrendous policies as well.

Anonymous said...

Where in the world did you think a black man would be supportive of GLBT issues??? The black community, particularly the churches, has been one of our worst enemies! It's fine for gay black men to sing in the choir or play the piano but the origin of "don't ask, don't tell" is the black church.

James said...

It's my understanding that Sen. Obama is a member of the United Church of Christ, which is not "a black church" by any means and also was the first church in America to ordain an openly gay minister. Just as it is unfair to assume all gay men are limp-wristed hairdressers and all lesbians are masculine-looking and heavy-set women, it is inappropriate and simply not true that all black people and all black churches are homophobic.

Ted Tucker said...

In response to Anonymous... "Don't ask Don't tell" originated in the hmmmmm what was it?? Oh yeah the Clinton administration. As first lady Hillary had her staff wear gloves when gay rights groups or AIDS groups visited the whitehouse. Make no mistake no one has done less for the GLBT community than the Clintons!!! Also, if you wanna see where her political views lie...check out her OWN website where she lists President Reagan and President Bush as TWO OF HER FAVORITE PRESIDENTS!!!! Here's the address:

Vote for Obama!!!!

Anonymous said...

buy xanax without a prescription
Buy Meridia Without a Prescription
xenical prescription online
order oxycontin
ordering cialis from canada

Post a Comment

We value your feedback, ideas, and comments!

If possible, please leave a link to your website (Facebook, MySpace, or other) by selecting "Other" when leaving your comment.