To the LGBT community here at DU.

[AtomicKitten]

I understand you want Senator Obama to bounce McClurkin from the concert, and to this point he has let you down.

I understand about deal-breakers and I respect that this may be yours. I feel the same way about the war.

Peace.

"We are all full of weakness and errors; let us mutually pardon each other our follies - it is the first law of nature."

* Voltaire

[Sandaasu]

1. Thanks for understanding.

I really don't like this situation, because I really did think that he'd be an excellent president. I'm afraid that this is, indeed, a deal-breaker though.

He still has until Sunday to correct this error, and perhaps get a chance to win some of us back.

[zulchzulu]

10. Some guy shares a gig with three other groups at a small town concert...

...singing gospel music on one night and has absolutely no affiliation with the Obama campaign, who disagree with his politics...and that becomes a "deal-breaker" for Barack Obama as a candidate?

Here's where Obama stands on LGBT issues:

Expand Hate Crimes Statutes:
In 2004, crimes against homosexuals constituted the third-highest category of hate crime reported and made up more than 15 percent of such crimes. Barack Obama cosponsored legislation that would expand federal jurisdiction to reach violent hate crimes perpetrated because of race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, or physical disability. As a state senator, Obama passed tough legislation that made hate crimes and conspiracy to commit them against the law.

Fight Workplace Discrimination:
Barack Obama believes the Employment Non-Discrimination Act should be expanded to include sexual orientation. While an increasing number of employers have extended benefits to their employees’ domestic partners, discrimination based on sexual orientation in the workplace occurs with no federal legal remedy. Obama also sponsored and passed legislation in the Illinois State Senate that would ban employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

Promote Gay and Lesbian Rights:
Barack Obama supported legislation in the Illinois State Senate to prevent discrimination based on sexual orientation in housing and public accommodations.

Support Full Civil Unions:
Barack Obama supports civil unions that give gay couples full rights, including the right to assist their loved ones in times of emergency, the right to equal health insurance and other employment benefits currently extended to traditional married couples, and the same property rights as anyone
else.

Oppose a Constitutional Ban on Gay Marriage:
Barack Obama voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment in 2006 which would have defined marriage as between a man and a woman and prevented judicial extension of marriage-like rights to same-sex or other unmarried couples. “We are better than this. And we certainly owe the American people more than this. I know that this amendment will fail, and when it does, I hope we can start discussing issues and offering proposals that will actually improve the lives of most Americans.” (Barack Obama on the Senate floor regarding the Federal Marriage Amendment, June 5, 2006)

Repeal Don’t Ask-Don’t Tell:
Barack Obama agrees with former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff John Shalikashvili and other military experts that we need to repeal the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy in consultation with military commanders. The key test for military service should be patriotism, a sense of duty, and a willingness to serve. Discrimination should be prohibited. The U.S. government has spent millions of dollars replacing troops kicked out of the military because of their sexual orientation. Additionally, more than 300 language experts have been fired under this policy, including more than 50 who are fluent in Arabic. Obama will work with military leaders to repeal the current policy and ensure it helps accomplish our national defense
goals.

Expand Adoption Rights:
Barack Obama believes that homosexuals should have the same adoption rights as heterosexuals.

Fight AIDS Worldwide:
There are 40 million people across the planet infected with HIV/AIDS. Every day, AIDS kills 8,000 and HIV infects 6,000 more people. The disease is set to become the third-leading cause of death worldwide in the coming years. Barack Obama has been a global leader in the fight against AIDS. He
traveled to Kenya and took a public HIV test to encourage testing and reduce the stigma of the disease.

Promote AIDS Prevention:
Barack Obama believes that we cannot ignore that abstinence and fidelity may too often be the ideal and not the reality. Obama went to a large evangelical conference in 2006 to promote greater investment in the global AIDS battle. At this conservative Christian event, Obama pushed for a balanced approach to fighting the disease that includes condom distribution. In late 2006, Barack Obama worked to reauthorize the Ryan White CARE Act, which is one of the largest sources of federal funds for primary health care and support services for patients with HIV/AIDS. The bill was named after Ryan White, an Indiana teenager whose courageous struggle with HIV/AIDS helped educate the nation.

Empower Women to Prevent HIV/AIDS:
In the United States, the percentage of women diagnosed with AIDS has quadrupled over the last 20 years. Today, women account for more than one quarter of all new HIV/AIDS diagnoses. Barack Obama introduced the Microbicide Development Act, which will accelerate the development of products that empower women in the battle against AIDS. Microbicides are a class of products currently under development that women apply topically to prevent transmission of HIV and other infections.

http://www.outfordemocracy.org/obama.htm
http://www.sovo.com/2007/5-25/Obama.pdf

[JackBeck]

13. Your should edit out the last three .

But anyway...

If Obama is so in tune to LGBT issues, than he should have known the fruit that this alignment might grow.

[Sandaasu]

15. I'm afraid that he is now invovled with the campaign.

I see here on DU a lot of people who don't seen to understand how the kinds of things McWidestance says about homosexuality are offensive to us. I don't think these people are all homophobes, because the "ex-gay" issue hasn't gotten as much attention as it should, so I can see how it might be confusing. It might have been confusing to Obama too, and he didn't understand that this would be offensive to us until it ended up flying right at him.

In any case, as long as Donnie is still scheduled for that concert, that is a signal to me that Obama is concerned more about the fundies than he is about homosexuals. I'm not saying that he doesn't care about us, just that he needs to be more careful about what he does in his efforts to woo those voters if he wants us to take his stated LGBT stances seriously.

[queenbdem87]

2. Unless he rectifies it, I will not vote for him.

I had given some thought to voting for him before, but unless he takes this guy out of the event, my vote goes to either Edwards or Hillary. So long Obama! You weren't going to win anyway!

[LittleClarkie]

3. What a civil post

I have to say I'm a bit concerned, but at the moment I still lean Obama.

I haven't educated myself properly on any of the candidates though, so I'll not make a final decision for a while now.

[AtomicKitten]

30. cheers

[Colobo]

4. Not gay, but your post makes me feel ashamed

of not being as understanding as you are. Thanks, Kitten.

[jaysunb]

5. what's going on ?

did I miss something ? What's happening re Obama and the G/L community ?

[TheWraith]

11. Obama is campaigning on a gospel tour.

One of the other people on the tour is some kind of fundie who made nasty remarks to the effect that being gay was a curse and unnatural.

[iaviate1]

16. Obama is against full equality for gays...

So this is no surprise. I would expect people of the same ilk involved with most religious tours.

[FlaxieB]

50. Show me where Obama said that. Link Please

[madfloridian]

6. Nice post.

This is what I mean about our Democrats wanting to reach out too much. I mean all of them.

There has to be a line drawn somewhere.

[AtomicKitten]

29. You too.

I think this nicely illustrates what overreaching is all about.

[AZBlue]

7. What a fantastic post!

And, again, I'm reminded why I admire AK so much!

[AtomicKitten]

20. back at ya

:hi:

[Forkboy]

8. You're a class act.

And it never hurts to add some Voltaire into the mix.

:applause:

[AtomicKitten]

27. back at ya

:)

[ProSense]

9. This place would be great if

there was a 12-month moratorium on hypocrisy!

[Dhalgren]

12. Yours is a thoughtful post and much appreciated, I'm sure.

Many of us, gay and straight, view the complete equality of all citizens as a non-debatable issue. "Civil unions"? What is wrong with simply "marriage"? When Jim Crow ruled the south, it took people giving up their blood and bodies to tell the appeasers, "NO". And over the years there have been many, many gay brothers and sisters who have likewise given body and blood to this simple proposition - full equality, period. There can be no going back and no slowing down - this is the new reality and everyone is going to have to deal with it. I hope Obama does the right thing...

[AtomicKitten]

31. I hope this ultimately turns out to everyone's satisfaction.

[CyberPieHole]

14. I find intolerance of sexual orientation to be unacceptable.

I don't know if it's a deal breaker, but it does not make me see Obama in a positive light.

[iaviate1]

17. What if another Dem candidate started touring with racists...

Would that be a deal-breaker? Welcome to DU, btw. Peace.

[CyberPieHole]

42. Yes, it would be a deal-breaker.

Now that I think of it, touring with a homophobe is a deal-breaker as well.

Thanks for the kind greeting. :hi:

[AtomicKitten]

19. we shall see how this plays out.

It's a lifetime until the first primary ballot is cast. Anything could happen between now and then.

Welcome to DU.

[CyberPieHole]

43. There is still time for him to address this issue.

I hope he dumps him from the tour. If he doesn't, I won't be able to cast a vote for Obama in the primary, although I don't know if it would keep me from voting for him in the GE. There is too much at stake, worldwide, to keep me from voting for him because of a mistake in associating with a self-hating closeted homophobe like Donnie McCloset. Still, the best thing to do is to take Donnie off the tour.

[AtomicKitten]

47. I agree with your analysis.

Great job fleshing it out thoughtfully.

[eridani]

18. Obama is making the same mistake that Kerry did

Not smart to be on the wrong side of history.

The following is from the Laura Flanders book Blue Grit

The next Democratic candidate considering running for president would do well to talk to activists like Justin Turner of Cincinnati Citizens to Restore Fairness, fighting to overturn the anti-gay Article XII.

From a skimpy minority of 32 percent who voted in favor of repeal in February 2004, the Restore Fairness campaign won over 53 percent of the vote on November 2. The campaign set a goal of turning out 60,000 supporive votes; the repeal proposition won with over 65,000. The gains came disproportionately from the most conservative parts of town.

"The key was to put a human face on the message and to address it head on," Turner told me on the phone from his home after the proposition passed.

Kerry campaigned in Cincinnati with the losing, instead of the winning, side. he brought onto the stage with him the one group of African American leaders that was not part of the Cincinnati for Fairness Coalition.

[Totally Committed]

21. Great post, AK!

Awesome, in fact.

TC

[AtomicKitten]

25. best regards

to you :)

[Adelante]

22. I love you, AK

:loveya:

[AtomicKitten]

26. back at ya

:)

[CreekDog]

23. If you are deciding to support/not support Obama based on this

Your decision making is seriously flawed.

All the candidates are going to have some association you don't like, some you don't like a lot.

All things being equal, this could affect your decision, but the candidates are not equal, they don't have all the same positions, voting records, etc., although they have much more in common than they differ on.

So if you are getting down to associations like this one, which is a pretty thin reed --it would be one thing if McClurkin was advising him, or writing policy speeches, or on the stump --although frankly, if Obama has his vote, that could be useful to the LGBT'ers truth be told.

But to decide on this, when there are other issues that define a candidate like their positions and how they will implement them --that's what you decide on --not this crapola.

[AtomicKitten]

28. you make excellent points

I guess the bottom line is the examination of the deal-breaker issues for each individual person. The hard part is getting people to allow you the space to have your own.

Cheers.

[CreekDog]

38. Thank you and this thread is about what is a good/bad deal-breaker

We should all feel free to say that we think this is a good or bad deal breaker, but this is a discussion, so we should do it as follows:

1) we should not let a "deal breaker" eliminate the best candidate with the best policies -ever. politicians are not saints and I think most of them cannot avoid mortal sins and get elected because of the nature of elections --our favorite will do things we hate. keep the first sentence in mind.

2) we should say why it's a deal breaker or why it's not

3) we should provide consistency and context for our statements (are we holding Obama to a higher standard than another candidate)

4) our standard should be reasonable (the old Ralph Nader quip about anybody who could get elected should automatically be disqualified seems appropo)
--is our standard impossible or totally impractical for most candidates to meet. Is it likely that Obama didn't even know McClurkin was a guest? Is it likely that Obama didn't know what McClurkin was about on LGBT stuff until after and thinks that to invite someone and then later excoriate them is well, gauche?

5) if a deal breaker is an association it should be significant.

6) poor vetting on the part of a staffer doesn't make the candidate complicit in a poor selection

7) in general, if a campaign is hiring musicians for a concert rally, the quality of the musician rather than the specific nature of their politics or beliefs should be primary, the latter being secondary (thus, you bring a musician to play music, but they aren't there to wax philosophical, then I don't think everything they ever said (rather than sung) should be a deal breaker for your support of the candidate.

[Bluebear]

33. 'Your decision making is seriously flawed.' ...'not this crapola.'

Well that's helpful.

[CreekDog]

35. Thanks for ignoring everything in between

No wonder you don't appreciate the point.

[Bluebear]

36. I am supposed to be happy that McClurkin might vote for Obama?

I will bet you dimes to donuts he won't even do that.

[CreekDog]

39. Again, the point is not who McClurkin will vote for

The point is: if you are letting this decide to vote for or against Obama, when you have policy positions, votes in Congress, a record as a legislator in Illinois, his career as an organizer, his approach to solving problems...

To decide to vote for or against Obama based on a person that performed at a rally for the candidate, that probably was selected by a high level staffer and not by Obama himself...to decide that even though Obama may have had no idea that McClurkin made those statements...

To decide to vote for or against Obama based on that makes no sense.

It's like deciding to put on your seat belt because you are going to drive off a cliff. The first decision is folly because the greater decision is so much more important.

[Mellowtone]

41. SO well stated!

Thanks!

[fightindonkey]

24. The Icing On the Cake Was Restating That He Would Not Push Him Out

Obama, you're done. Time to get back to the senate! Hang your head in shame!

[CreekDog]

40. Well, his campaign invited the guy to perform

So, he's supposed to invite him and then excoriate him afterwards?

I love Bill Clinton, but Obama is not the type of person who would ever do a Sistah Soujah moment. As far as I know, Obama doesn't single out and repudiate people unless they are in high elected or influential positions, and even then, rarely because it seems like he doesn't think that accomplishes much --in fact I think he thinks it works against his "message".

[jefferson_dem]

32. Nicely stated.

Thanks. :bounce:

[AtomicKitten]

46. cheers ;)

[bigwillq]

34. Thank you for this post.

:hug:

[AtomicKitten]

45. cheers ;)

[Bluebear]

37. A wonderful post, AK, thank you.

[AtomicKitten]

44. hey

Thanks. :)

Just so you know, I would have drop-kicked Obama's ass to the curb had he voted yes on Kyl-Lieberman. He's been on the right side of the war all along (except for some funding bills :-( ), and that's important to me. Plus he appears to have the only real shot of kicking Hillary's butt.

The glove has been thrown down, and my most fervent hope is that this turns out to everyone's satisfaction. Of course, I fully understand the consequences if it does not, and I accept that.

Cheers.

[terrya]

48. Thank you for your post, AtomicKitten

I think we GLBT people around here are more frustrated than anything that our anger about this issue is not respected.

I appreciate your respect for this.

Thanks.

[Totally Committed]

49. kick

TC

[closeupready]

51. Thank you, AK - just thank you.

That is all. :hug:

[Baby Snooks]

52. What if it were Phyllis Schlafly?

I have to wonder if the reaction would be different if it were Phyllis Schlafly joining Barack Obama on a stage. Would that upset nice straight Democratic women?

There really seems to be this "our agenda matters, yours doesn't, but maybe later it will" attitude on the part of many straight Democrats towards gay and lesbian Democrats.

Anyone who openly endorses discrimination against one group will later openly endorse discrimination against other groups. The way it works. Take a look at what happened in Nazi Germany. First it was the Jews. Then it was someone else. And then someone else after that.

Pandering to evangelists is pandering to the evangelical agenda and that agenda would take away women's rights as well.

You want to see chattel law restored? Evangelicals do. Women belong to men. And for most of the past 231 years, chattel law was the law of the land.

And many of these same evangelicals believe in the Curse of Ham. So the African-American evangelicals may wake up one day and find that once again, in the eyes of the Lord, they are somehow "less than." Because the Bible says they are. Separate and unequal. Once again.