Barack Obama is on Fire

November 11, 2007 at 1:30 pm 11 comments

In this speech at the Iowa Jefferson-Jackson Dinner Barack Obama shows why he is the best Democratic candidate for the presidency and why he should our next president. In this speech he harkens back to his 2004 speech at the Democratic National Convention with a powerful and inspiring call to action for change that we can believe in.


Entry filed under: Uncategorized. Tags: , , .

Black and Latino Gays on the Big Screen Casting Out Gay Demons

11 Comments Add your own

  • 1. 42  |  November 11, 2007 at 8:58 pm

    um, is this the same Barack Obama who farted in our faces awhile back with that Donnie McGurgle lunatic? you know, the “ex-gay” who thinks we’re all trying to “kill your children”? that didn’t bother you?

  • 2. Brian  |  November 11, 2007 at 10:01 pm

    Yeah… the Donnie incident destroyed any chance of me supporting this guy.

  • 3. Christopher  |  November 11, 2007 at 11:48 pm

    Obama sold out the LGBT community by honeying up to Donnie McClurkin.

    He’s made his choice and I have made mine, and it doesn’t include Obama in 2008.

  • 4. Don George  |  November 12, 2007 at 12:55 pm

    I strongly disagree with the above 3 comments. Would you three please read especially “Abandoning our allies, part 2.”

  • 5. Don George  |  November 12, 2007 at 12:59 pm

    Oh and would you 3 — Christopher, Brian, and 42 check out Obama’s post on a blog explaining his views on gays vis a vis the McClurkin issue.

  • 6. Michael Crawford  |  November 12, 2007 at 1:04 pm

    Not one of the major presidential candidates is perfect on LGBT issues. I am not happy about that and am frustrated that that is the reality that we have to deal with, but it is.

    Obama’s staff made huge mistakes with the Donnie McClurkin fiasco. But, Barack is one of the only candidates to talk about LGBT civil rights to none LGBT audiences and as a state legislator in Illinois he voted for a non-discrimination bill that included sexual orientation and gender identity.

    If you keep crossing out candidates who are not perfect on gay issues, who will there be left for you to vote for?

  • 7. Stephen Clark  |  November 12, 2007 at 1:58 pm

    Don, much as I respect your views, I disagree with you on Obama. I find his Bilerico statement evasive, manipulative, condescending, and insulting. Every time I hear someone from the Obama campaign respond to the McClurkin fiasco by lecturing the gay community on the importance of dialogue it undermines further my respect for Obama. In what possible way was giving McClurkin a microphone to spew his bigotry unchallenged for a half an hour creating any sort of “dialogue”?

    Obama either deliberately screwed over the gay community to pander to bigots or his campaign operation is so incompetent that I’d have no confidence whatsoever in its ability to respond to the withering attacks that will come from Giuliani or whomever in the general election campaign. This McClurkin thing has been going on for weeks now, and the campaign continues to wallow in it with one mistake after another. It might help if in any statement released by the campaign we could actually hear any authentic gay voice who seemed to understand why any of this was legitimately offensive. Instead, we get the sound of statements written by people who don’t know what the hell they’re talking about.

    As I’ve said elsewhere, the last straw for me was that deeply offensive press release that basically told the gay community that our outrage was unjustified because McClurkin only wanted to help “unhappy gays” choose to save themselves from the evil of homosexuality. The only thing Obama can do now to cause me to give him any further consideration is clearly and unambiguously apologize to the gay community for the whole, sorry, incompetent affair. And that still would leave deep doubts about the competence of his staff to handle a general election. He’s looking more and more “not ready for prime time.”

    A lot of pie-in-the-sky promises about DOMA repeal etc. don’t cut it, especially not when combined with condescending lectures. Good grief, Don! You were in the Blade calling us all bigots for taking offense at McClurkin! How does that possibly win gay votes for Obama?

    Read the comments following the Obama post on Bilerico, and I think you’ll get a sense of how counterproductive this insulting rhetorical strategy of criticizing gay people for taking offense is. Few are buying it, and it’s just making matters worse for Obama.

    Rather than bullying HRC, Obama might be well served to ask them how to dig himself out of this mess, since he doesn’t seem to have any campaign staffer who is able to understand this from a gay perspective.

  • 8. Christopher  |  November 12, 2007 at 4:14 pm

    I don’t understand the ease with which some people can turn the other cheek to Barack Obama hiring Donnie McClurkin for his S.C. fundraiser.

    For the sake of argument, let’s turn this thing around.

    What if, John Edwards had hired David Duke to head up a fundraiser in Baton Rouge, LA? The shit would hit the fan in the black community — as well it should.

    But then Edwards issues a statement disavowing himself from Duke’s racist points of view and reaffirms his commitment to the Voting Rights Act, Head Start and Affirmative Action.

    Is all forgiven?

  • 9. Michael Crawford  |  November 13, 2007 at 7:12 am

    I am not turning the other cheek on the disastrous inclusion of McClurkin in the S.C. event. It was a bumbling mistake by Barack’s campaign staff that showed how it important the vetting process is. The whole thing was mishandled from start to finish.

    I do not think that it was something intentional on the part of Barack. If I did, I would withdraw my support from him. I believe that on a range of issues including LGBT civil rights that Barack has the vision and intelligence to move us forward. That’s why I continue to support him.

  • 10. Brian  |  November 13, 2007 at 9:51 am

    As a member of the UCC, I consider Obama’s views on homosexual issues to be a little weak. Our denomination teaches that gays should be ordained, put into positions in the church, be allowed to get married, adopt, etc. No distinction is made between the rights of homosexuals and their heterosexual counterparts.

    Obama has clearly made efforts to distance himself from his denomination (even canceling a public prayer by his minister at an event) because of this issue and others.

  • 11. Brian  |  November 13, 2007 at 9:53 am

    I am drawn to John Edwards for many reasons, including the fact that his family has been loud and proud about voicing their approval of same-sex marriage. While Edwards hasn’t went so far, he has implied that he would support such a measure. I don’t understand why more gays and lesbians aren’t supporting his candidacy. Here’s the page on his official website that details his views on gay rights:

    The following article wasn’t written by me, but it chronicles the decision of one gay person to support Edwards over the other candidates.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed

AddThis Feed Button
Political Blogs - Blog Catalog Blog Directory

Blog Stats

  • 834,234 hits


%d bloggers like this: