If Obama Is So Anti-Gay

[THUNDER HANDS]

Then how come the chairman of his election campaign on Long Island (population - 7.5 million) is the only openly-gay Long Island elected official - Jon Cooper?

An elected official who was an open supporter of Hillary Clinton before not too long ago, then switched to support Obama, and still does.

I know John Cooper. I marched with him at gay pride parades on Long Island. He's the head Democrat in the Suffolk County legislature. He's no pushover, or softie, or get-along-to-go-along type. He's a fighter and he's a winner.

And he supports Obama.

---

Suffolk Legis. Jon Cooper, already leader of the Democrat-controlled legislature, has taken a leap into national politics as the Long Island campaign chairman for Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama.

Cooper (D-Lloyd Harbor) said he used to be a supporter of Barack's opponent, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), and even raised $50,000 for her senatorial campaign until she voted for President George W. Bush's Iraq war authorization.

That move, Cooper said, was a sign that he should "look to other candidates" to support.

"The main thing is Barack's message of hope and transformational change is really beginning to sink in," said Cooper, who added that he has received dozens of phone calls from supporters since Obama's win in the Iowa caucuses Thursday.

Cooper, who serves as a consultant on gay and lesbian issues for the Obama campaign and who is national co-chairman of the campaign's lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgender task force, said he will still be able to balance the rigors of being a Suffolk legislator while campaigning and fundraising for Obama.

---

http://www.newsday.com/services/newspaper/printedition/saturday/longisland/ny-liobam055526523jan05,0,7933992.story

[TheWraith]

1. K&R for the people who don't know better. NT

[mitchtv]

2. It's called Politics. they are free to choose

I have no "hope" for Obama

[Windy]

3. shh... you are stating fact.... don't get in the way of their spin....

I wouldn't want you to turn their little narrow world all topsy turvy!

[jackpan1260]

4. He isn't anti-gay. Edwards and Clinton supporters are anti-Obama

and will use anything they can to tear him down. It isn't going to work though.

[readmoreoften]

29. Welcome to DU.

I'd like to see some meatier posts from you. Your posts are all one line: I SUPPORT BARACK OBAMA with a rainbow flag avatar. I imagine as a gay man, you must have a rich opinion on this matter. Did the McClurkin incident effect you? Do you have any experience with the ex-gay movement? What moves you about Obama?

I think this would be educational for many folks. Including other gay DUers.

[alteredstate]

35. Thanks for pointing this out!

:thumbsup:

[Stop Cornyn]

5. I feel the same way about Cheney! Cheney's campaign efforts were coordinated by his gay daughter so

he can't be anti-gay.

[THUNDER HANDS]

7. is Jon Cooper Obama's son?

or related to him in any way? Or have any reason to go against one of the most, if not THE most powerful Democrat in his state by supporting Obama?

When you add up all the facts, it's pretty obvious that Obama is not anti-gay and, in fact, will probably be the most gay-friendly president ever.

[mitchtv]

9. I'll stick with Edwards for now, thanks

I don't believe Barak is anti gay, I just believe that he behaves like a typical politician and he was quick to jettison his Gay supporters in trade for a win in SC. Unusual , actually, because usually we are not thrown overboard until the convention.

[Stop Cornyn]

15. I believe in my heart that Obama wouldn't embrace Donnie McC is Obama had a gay child, don't you?

[Cha]

41. Oh yeah, comparing fucking

dick of death to Obama's chairman of his election campaign on Long Island is really disingenous bullshit.

[Baconfoot]

6. If Bush doesn't support pro-black policies, why is Condi and why was Powel in his admin.... oh wait.

Innocence by association doesn't hold any water.
Some of the fiercest opposition to women getting the right to vote came from women.

Guilt by association gets more mileage in politics for darn good reasons.

[silverweb]

8. He's not and everyone knows it.

Only some anti-Obama people are pushing that gross distortion.

He "allowed" one poor soul, who has his own demons to deal with, to express his point of view in a limited venue.

Some have claimed that Obama therefore endorses that other person's opinion and have pushed that story to absurd lengths, even while they know full well it's a complete lie.

And that's to their shame, not Obama's.

[mitchtv]

10. you people can tell me all you want how to think

Obama is No friend to Gays, Kucinich is our only friend among the candidates

[2rth2pwr]

11. Thanks, but no thanks.

[FredScuttle]

12. So a gay chairman cancels out hiring an "ex-gay" bigot to clown it up for a bigot crowd?

Huh?

[hulklogan]

13. I suppose "Hillary did it too!" applies especially well in this case. LOL n/t

[Lex]

14. Pandering to anti-gay voters with McClurkin

was bad. I don't know if Obama himself is anti-gay, but his willingness to pander to anti-gay voters was BAD.

Regardless of his staffing decisions or how he feels personally.

[THUNDER HANDS]

17. it's not staffing decisions

it's that an openly gay politician chose him over Hillary, who is from his own state.

I think if he was offended by the McClurkin thing he would have dropped his support.

[Lex]

18. We can only guess how he feels

but I find it impossible to believe he was happy with McClurkin appearing on behalf of the Obama campaign.

However he came to make peace with it, I do not know.

Mary Cheney campaigned for her dad.

[Bjorn Against]

16. Well it is good to know he has a gay friend...

You know now that I think about it the Republicans must be pretty good on gay rights too because if they weren't why would all those log cabin Republicans campaign for them?

We can just ignore the McClurkin rally as long as we know that the person who held it has some gay friends right?

[bettyellen]

19. so embarrassing- some of his best supporters are gay..... is your take on things?

they must be some of the best if they are willing to sit in the back of the bus for him.
OPs like this make the situation worse, not better. Clueless.

[THUNDER HANDS]

21. heh

nice. back of the bus.

carry on with your mock outrage.

[bettyellen]

22. "mock outrage" ? i wish i thought you were joking casue now I find you offensive.

and there's nothing "mock" about it. Ick.

[Cha]

42. :You're just

insulting.

[maxanne]

20. if Obama is so pro-gay

Why isn't he in favor of full marriage equality?

[Cronus Protagonist]

23. It's not that he's anti-gay, he's trying to win an election in a country full of bigots

None of the candidates feel they can outright support gay people due to the, perhaps mythological "Southern" religiously bigoted, racist voters who have so much power in this country.

[maxanne]

24. sorry

No excuses. Either you are in favor of equality and you'll take a stand for civil rights - or you're pandering to the lowest common denominator.

[Cronus Protagonist]

25. So you're saying Obama is pandering

I don't disagree with that.

[DrFunkenstein]

26. And How Come He Has Such Good Fashion Sense?

Obviously, someone gave him the queer eye for the straight guy treatment.

[PurityOfEssence]

27. this issue is not whether he's "anti-gay", but why he's willing to trample them for tactical gain

Sift through the many long threads on the McClurkin affair and you'll find a shocking truth that defies the primitive human need to see everything in black and white. In all my endless and quite unpleasant posts against his actions, I don't think I've ever accused or even intimated that he is personally guilty of homophobia; my issue is that he was so willing to jettison them to appease atavistic mega-christians in an appeal to race and religion to specifically pull religious black voters in South Carolina from Clinton.

The sheer fact that he's so blithely willing to enlist the aid of obvious and extreme gay-haters to appease a largely homophobic bloc of voters is breathtaking. As one who touts being the great uniter and hopeful Mr. Positiveguy, to give the repeated cold-shoulder to the many entreaties to get rid of this creep and the almost equally creepy Mary-Mary women is a clear show of Machiavellian expediency and extreme unfeeling hypocrisy.

Personally, I think he's probably fairly inclusive, but he just sees no ethical problem with screwing over a downtrodden group for quick personal gain.

This is what's really disturbing. It's akin to Clinton's endless positioning and being on both sides of issues at the same time: when will this guy actually stand his alleged ground? For the purposes of arithmetic gain, what moral causes are dispensable? The inferences I draw are truly disgusting, and they're just aggravated by the broadly smiling dismissal and muddying of the issue.

Then there's religion. Presume, when dealing with me, that any use of religion for leverage in the political arena is bigotry by definition. Adding the racial bigotry and the homophobia on top of this, this is shittiness cubed, and people who don't see the moral turpitude have got a boatload of it themselves.

He KNEW about this guy. He was specifically asked to get rid of him. He was offered black gays to put on the bill after he decided to "balance" it in a Clintonesque bit of deception, but put on a white one instead. That's just appeasing racists, plain and simple. He repeatedly minimized McClurkin's prominence in the show. This was deliberate from the point it was pointed out; perhaps he didn't know about the guy before, but he did WELL BEFORE the show, and chose to play divisive games anyway.

That's what's most disturbing. As for him being a homophobe, I think you'll find quite a few of the more vehement posters on this subject to not even address that. Quite a few do, and that's their issue to defend or refute, but not mine nor that of many others.

Why is this unclear? Just because one doesn't hate a group doesn't mean that the abuse of them for personal gain isn't an issue or simply didn't happen. It's actually more disturbing when it's viewed as cold-blooded vote-getting.

I'd love to hear some response on this crappy line of logic. So here, I specifically state it, standing by my voluble and abrasive posts on the subject, that I don't think the guy's necessarily a homophobe. (Even if he thinks their rights should be broadened and secured, he sure as hell doesn't really give a damn about them, though, now does he? That's OBVIOUS; this is a fuck you to them.)

I just think he's an unprincipled user in this instance, and that truly sullies much of what's good about him. If he's truly for togetherness, this is a complete refutation of that stance, and defending it is indefensible.

[mitchtv]

28. you say it so more richly than I

fact is, He threw us overboard for political gain. Not a homophobe, just a typical politician

[Raster]

31. Thank you for interjecting HONESTY and CLARITY into a straw discussion.

No one said Obama was a homophobe, only that he *apparently* had no problems with courting a homophobe for the Black, Christian vote. Of course, that point will be lost on most. By their actions, you shall know them.

[trotsky]

37. Stated perfectly.

The raw and heartless political calculation involved in this incident is what bothers me the most.

[David Zephyr]

30. Thanks Magic Rat.

:thumbsup:

[mitchtv]

32. Didn't Rick Santorum have a gay COS?

your argument is silly

[ripple]

33. Thank you for posting that.

If anyone takes the effort to look at Obama's actual record, they will realize that he believes ALL Americans deserve equality in the eyes of the government.

[Raster]

38. Except, of course, when it can garner him the black, christian, homophobe vote.

Other than than, no worries.

[ripple]

39. Oh, bullshit

One doesn't change attitudes by alienating people. It's more difficult, but far more effective to change minds through principle and by breaking through their stereotypes and prejudices.

[Raster]

44. Ah, really? And why would Senator Obama allow a born-again homophobe MC a campaign event

...against the advice of GLBT advisors? Obama was PANDERING to the bigoted, black, christian, homophobe block. No other reason for such a STUPID FUCKING DECISION. By their actions, you shall know them. Bullshit? Yeah, whatever.

[ripple]

46. McClurkin was already booked and heavily promoted

before his radical views were realized. To cancel him at that point would have drawn even more attention to his views. It would have been a media frenzy.

Obama made it clear that he disagrees with McClurkin and if anyone choose to look at his record, you will find that he has consistently stood for equality. In fact, as a lesbian, I believe that Obama is the only candidate that has the ability to break through long-entrenched stereotypes and prejudices and achieve his mission of equality for all American, whether they be gay or straight. And yes, in order to do that, it is sometimes necessary to speak civilly folks we disagree with. Or, you can call them names, solidifying their prejudice. Given the number of constitutional amendments we've seen over the past few years that sanctify bigotry, I'd prefer to go a different route.

I don't blame you for your anger, but sometimes it's important to think things through to the desired outcome.

[Raster]

47. Don't lecture me. And please, "...already booked and heavily promoted...."?

That's even worse.

[ripple]

48. I have no interest in 'lecturing' you

If you weren't interested in my opinion, perhaps you shouldn't have responded to my post. Sorry to interrupt your righteous indignation by providing a little dose of reality.

Believe what you wish to believe, just know that you do NOT speak for the GLBT community at large any more than I do.

[Raster]

49. Not lecturing, eh? I can just see the finger wagging...

Obama PANDERED to black bigotry to appease black christian homophobes. He should have known better, in fact, he did know better. Bad decision for someone that wants the most important job in the country. And I NEVER claimed to speak for anyone other than myself. And thank you, for graciously allowing me to believe what I wish to believe. As for me, I won't be sitting in the back of the bus so Obama can sit at 1600. Perhaps Senator Obama is the best choice for President. If so, he needs to act like it. By their actions, you shall know them.

Take care. Bless your heart.

[maxanne]

50. it is never too late

to take a stand and do the right thing.

To cancel McClurkin would have won the hearts of everyone - gay and straight - and would have shown
Obama standing on principle.

He blew it.

[Raster]

51. Canceling McClurkin would have been the hard thing, the tough thing, the right thing.

Obama could have actively demonstrated his regard for all Americans, black and white, gay and straight. He could have...but he did not.

I won't sit at the back of the bus so Senator Obama can sit at 1600.

By their actions, you shall know them.

[trotsky]

34. I don't remember seeing anyone accusing him of being anti-gay.

Cozying up with anti-gay bigots to court votes, yes. But anti-gay himself, nope, haven't seen that claim.

[JVS]

36. For the sake of argument: isn't that tokenism?

[Cha]

43. No it isn't for the sake of argument.

Jon Cooper chose Obama.

[Cha]

40. Well, Jon Cooper and I

have had the same evolution when it comes to hillary.

[eridani]

45. Obama is like Kerry in 2004

Kerry was one of the few senators to vote against DOMA in an election year. Yet in Cinncinnati, he chose to appear with the only black ministers in town who had NOT endorsed repealing the anti-gay referendum. The pro-gay rights vote went from 32% in February to 65% by the election in November. Kerry chose to be with the losers.

Obama's own minister performs gay marriages, yet he chooses McJerkoff to represent him. Why?