Obama in 2004 on anti-gay supporters

[obamian]

His message is the same as his campaign's recent letter.

Obama Seeks U.S. Senate seat
by TRACY BAIM
2004-02-04

WCT: One of the things that supporters of the state gay-rights bill have been saying is that some of the supporters of certain Senate candidates, yourself included, were not coming out full force for the Senate bill this time. Do you feel there's a litmus test for people whose supporters aren't fully 100%?

Obama: You raise an important point. Although your initial question was whether there's been a backlash against me, I see none of that within the Democratic Party. I think there are still geographical differences in terms of attitude toward gay and lesbian issues. I think downstate, there is a difference. On the Southwest Side, the Northwest Side of Chicago, where the Catholic Church is still a significant institution, there is a difference. And, to a certain extent, within the African-American community, because of the strong affiliation with the church, there is still some resistance.

My attitude is that candidates for office, persons in elected office, are ultimately responsible for what they say and what they do. I think the question is, are they forceful, clear, strong advocates on behalf of these issues. Are they doing everything that they can to lobby on behalf of these issues. They're not always going to be successful, even within the Democratic Party. And there are going to be people in this U.S. Senate race who support me who may not feel the same way I do on gay and lesbian issues. That's going to be true of the other candidates as well. The important thing is, what do people see me saying publicly, how am I acting publicly, how am I voting publicly. Because what I do think is unacceptable is saying one thing in one forum, and saying something else in another. What you do have to expect is consistency, and not playing to a particular audience.

http://outlineschicago.com/gay/lesbian/news/ARTICLE.php?AID=3931

[sniffa]

1. desperate DUers

i'm gLad he says one thing, and does another.

teLL me something are aLL these threads intended to win back the GLBT and their aLLies? i know the answer, but i'd Like to see what you have to say, and if you're gonna be truthfuL.

[William769]

6. Isn't that called talking out of both sides of your mouth?

[terrya]

2. And his campaign did something that went directly against that message.

And it was wrong. And the campaign (and by extension, Senator Obama himself) needs to do the right thing and jettison that bigot from the event.

Hiring this bigot is offensive to GLBT people and GLBT supporters of Senator Obama. I wish people would simply acknowledge that fact, without attributing it to other candidates or making excuses for it.

[Maven]

3. Consistency?

Really?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2138551&mesg_id=2138551

[sniffa]

4. and amazingLy that thread is mainLy untouched

apparentLy his apoLogists remain in GDP or something. :shrug:

[NMMNG]

5. Actions speak louder than words

And his actions are screaming right now.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

7. I assume you mean that this action

to let somebody sing is a lot more important then all his former actions in sponsoring, co-sponsoring, voting for or against(if bad) legislation?

[BeyondGeography]

9. Yep, that's what they're saying

:crazy:

[jefferson_dem]

11. Consistent?

Sure.

In 2004, Obama readily conceded that not everyone who supports him will agree with everything he stands for. What's important is what he says and what he does. His principled promotion of GLBT rights, through his public statements and policy positions, remains true. That's the reality.

[DeSwiss]

17. Nice try....

...but obviously its more than just "letting somebody sing." This isn't just somebody. And I wish the Obamaites would be consistent. First it was stunned silence from the Obama camp at the reaction, then its was a staff "vetting error," later it was "look at all I've done in the past for gays," and now McClurkin is just a "somebody." Ho-hum.

This was a blatant attempt to use the http://www.pamshouseblend.com/showDiary.do;jsessionid=7BB71C418FD3F681861342ED7A387E3B?diaryId=3418">allegedly "ex-gay" McClurkin's name (along with his well-known homophobia), specifically to draw in all those other nice homophobic church-going folks in SC for their votes -- and to keep them away from Hillary (whose got her own problems with the gay community for her homophobic endorsers). And that's the bottom line.

This "singing somebody" stands directly against all the things Obama purportedly stands for. Knowing this, why would he purposely associate himself with him? And there is no one whose believing that this was an attempt to "engage" the homophobia in the black church. What this is, is pandering gone amok.

I like Obama for the most part. I think he makes a great Senator. And a lousy Presidential candidate....

[NMMNG]

20. Somebody?

Four "somebodies" who fly in the face of everything he claims to stand for. Four "somebodies" who are specially selected to draw in a bunch of homophobic bigots.

Is David Duke just a "somebody"?

[bigwillq]

8. Yup

:thumbsup:

[frazzled]

10. I have made a decision about this issue

My very gay (very activist gay ) nephew was visiting me the other day, and in the course of conversation he mentioned that he was an Obama supporter all the way. I said "even after this latest incident?" "What indcident?" he asked, having been very busy with his work all last week and not having heard it. So I explained in detail the unvarnished story. He stopped and considered a moment (he considers well, being a very intelligent professor) and said, "I couldn't care less; it doesn't change my opinion. Doesn't bother me."

This issue was sticking in my craw a bit, but if this committed and intelligent gay person I respect doesn't care about it, I don't either. Story over, for me. I look at a person's actions and history, not at some fleeting singer. It's a issue for people who didn't care for Obama in the first place, something that gives them another reason to support someone else. But it's not a real issue.

I'm moving on now.

[sniffa]

15. i was taLking to my very gay super activist friend

and he said thanks for the crumbs, i was starving.

[NMMNG]

21. Hey, even the Republicans have gays among them

:shrug:

[sniffa]

27. but are they mega gay activists?

they have more cred that way.

[alteredstate]

22. My gay office-mate agrees with your nephew. n/r

[terrya]

24. That's nice about your nephew.

But a lot of other GLBT people feel otherwise.

Don't make a sweeping judgement about the GLBT community based on the opinion of your nephew.

[sniffa]

28. but terry, he's a gigantic gay activist

it's gotta count for more than anyone here.

[geek tragedy]

12. No sense in Obama supporters talking about this any more.

Quite honestly, people who are single issue on LGBT have written him off completely.

[jefferson_dem]

13. I'm afraid you might be correct.

It's become a hot-button issue for some on DU, and there's no way to communicate through any differences.

I plan on avoiding the topic altogether...save an occasional "correct the record" post.

[frazzled]

14. Completely untrue that LGBT people have written him off

As you can see from my post above, this is not a given. It is what people would like to believe, but there are many different views out there.

[geek tragedy]

19. They sure haven't spoken up. n/t

[Bluebear]

16. Not true! No McClurkin on the concert, no problem.

The ball is in the Senator's court. I told that to Obama New Hampshire HQ and I am telling it to you.

[geek tragedy]

18. He's not going to pull McClurkin.

So, my point stands.

[trotsky]

23. Wait a minute... aren't you supposed to be on Obama's side?

What you do have to expect is consistency, and not playing to a particular audience.

If Obama is all about consistently supporting GLBT rights, and not playing to a particular audience, then why did his campaign hire an anti-gay singer specifically for a particular audience (Southern black Christians who supposedly are by and large homophobic)?

Seems to me you've just knocked your candidate down more than any of us who are upset with him. You've exposed him as a hypocrite to the extreme.

[geek tragedy]

25. Vetting mistake.

The damage has already been done, so he has no reason to pull the guy now.

[obamian]

29. People aren't coming to hear an anti-gay singer. They're coming to hear a gospel singer.

I doubt most of McClurkin's fans even know his position on homosexuality. If he was having McClurkin speak out against gays on his behalf, that would be inconsistent. He is not. He is singing gospel.

[goodgd_yall]

26. Well, there you go

He isn't living up to his own values.

[obamian]

30. How?