Obama Adds Openly Gay Minister to Counter McClurkin Furor


Barack Obama held a conference call with supporters today and announced that he had added Rev. Andy Sidden, a United Church of Christ pastor in Columbia, SC, to his South Carolina gospel tour as a response to the uproar caused by his decision to retain anti-gay pastor Donnie McClurkin.

The Boston Globe reports that The Politico noted that “Obama’s advisers also asked supporters to contact the Human Rights Campaign, a leading national gay rights organization, and urge the group not to criticize the senator.”

HRC’s president, Joe Solmonese released a statement late this afternoon: “I spoke with Sen. Barack Obama today and expressed to him our community’s disappointment for his decision to continue to remain associated with Rev. McClurkin, an anti-gay preacher who states the need to ‘break the curse of homosexuality.’ There is no gospel in Donnie McClurkin’s message for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people and their allies. That’s a message that certainly doesn’t belong on any Presidential candidate’s stage. I did thank him for announcing he would be adding an openly gay minister as part of the tour and for his willingness to call on religious leaders to open a dialogue about homophobia. We hope that Sen. Obama will move forward and facilitate face to face meetings with religious leaders, like Rev. McClurkin, and the GLBT community to confront the issue of homophobia. We also call on all of the Presidential campaigns to look within their ranks of supporters and make the same commitment to engage in a dialogue among differing views around issues of equality and fairness for our community.”

So, I guess the question is, does adding a voice of tolerance negate the hater on the other end of the scale, which is what Obama’s intention seems to be with this move? If a candidate’s tour included Fred Phelps but he or she decided to suddenly “balance it out” at the last minute by adding Judy Shepard, what kind of message does that send?

“Ex-Gay” Reverend McClurkin Speaks Out on Obama Controversy [tr]
Barack Obama Releases Statement on Reverend McClurkin [tr]
Barack Obama to Tour with Anti-Gay Gospel Singer [tr]


  1. Brad says

    Obama is really not understanding the concept of bigotry very well. Would he want David Duke on the panel and then balance it out Martin Luther King? This is not very smart. I wasn’t voting for him anyway, but this really seals the deal.

  2. MCnNYC says

    Ok so is sistah Sidden gonna preach or wave from the sideline…he STILL does not get it Rev Motor Mouth who was raped by a STRAIGHT pedophile UNCLE not a GAY UNCLE gets to have a production number….SORRY Sen. B.O. that is not balance or fair –unless you are FOX NEWS.

  3. Leland Frances says

    Sad. Sad. Sad. Would that the gay community’s response was that of George Clooney’s character in “Michael Clayton”—”Do I LOOK LIKE I’m negotiating?”

    Comparisons of homophobia with racism can be dangerous but it’s not unfair to say that if a White candidate found that he/she was supposed to campaign with someone who had written a book about, preached about, spoke in print and TV interviews about, and was a well-known spokespersonn for those who shared his belief that his interpretation of the Bible told him that Blacks were inferior, that the Mormons, and other denominations, were wrong to stop preaching that “the posterity of Cain (and later of Ham) were cursed with what we call Negroid racial characteristics,” that slavery, as Jefferson Davis and other southerners taught, was “established by decree of Almighty God,” and that candidate’s response to calls to disassociate him/herself with the professional racist was simply to book someone with opposing beliefs on his campaign tour would there not be outrage.

    Would Jews accept booking a rabbi to offset a neo-Nazi, anti-Semitic Holocaust denier invited to share any of the non-Jewish candidate’s stage?

    Yet again this proves that too many of those who genuinely want to be/believe themselves to be our friends do not take homophobia seriously. And it’s not just Obama or Oprah but Matt Lauer and his apologetic softball interview of Sen. Craig; Jay Leno and David Letterman and Jimmy Kimmel and Adam Sandler and the writers for SNL and all their trivialization of anything gay and particularly making the lovers of “Brokeback Mountain” both the figurative and literal butt of jokes.

    Many don’t get my raging against the flaming-fags-for-pay, the lavendar-faced minstrel acts like Carson and Ross the Intern and Alec Mapa and Willaim Sledd and Chris Crocker and Bobby Trendy but the Donnie & Barack Show with Special Guest Star the Rev. Sidden is but one of the results of sending in the clowns.

    We don’t want “equal time,” goddamn it—we want equal rights.

  4. dave says

    “There is no gospel in Donnie McClurkin’s message,” Joe Solmonese says. Is Solmonese a religious leader now? If so, what are his religious beliefs, and what doctrine is he speaking for? This whole thing is just a stunt to help Hillary. If it were serious, the first questions would have gone to McClurkin, to ask him why he felt comfortable supporting a candidate who supports equal rights for gays. Instead, it was “attack Barack” from the first moment. The ruthless Clinton machine at work. Disgusting.

  5. Sean says

    This has definitely left a bad taste in my mouth… Obama NEVER should have associated with someone with these views. It disheartened me at first, but in paying close attention I think its clear that neither he nor his campaign knew about McClurkin’s views until after the tour was scheduled and after that he alienates gays or blacks, who are much bigger voting block in SC. And at the same time, Hillary has a lot of black anti-gay reverends that are not only prominent supporters but actually paid advisers and consultants on her staff. Harold Mayberry, an Oakland preacher-of-hate of a 2,800 congregation, whose endorsement the Clinton campaign happily touted. And Darrell Jackson, like McClurkin a SC preacher and state senator, who gets pain $10,000 per month as a political consultant. If we’re going to focus on Obama I think its important we look at every politician, especially Clinton, the very clear front runner. Why is it OK for her to let these people play such a prominent campaign role for her campaign without the same level of questions or anger from the gay community? Or any attention at all really? I think given the prominence of bigoted views in the black community in SC and the importance of the black vote in the Democratic Party, EVERY presidential candidate likely has close affiliations with people who are offensive to us. I hope we’re not all being played by a savvy pro-Clinton supporter who saw an opportunity to splinter the gay vote away from Obama by writing a prominent letter on the Huffington Post, knowing full well both the attention it would get AND that Hillary has the same problems, but conveniently forgot to mention them.

  6. Ian says

    Ummmmm, I just have to say…

    I think y’all are having the response of white gays reacting to black culture that you don’t understand.

    What we call “homophobia” is for a lot of people “just how things are”–no matter how much we dislike that. Obama’s actions show that he’s interested in DIALOGUE amongst groups, instead of reactionary shunning of people who don’t think like us. It’s simply pragmatic. If you refuse to speak to black “homophobes,” then you never have the opportunity to open dialogue about accepting gay folks.

    Just my two cents.

  7. SeanR says

    I agree with Brad (above) this is a messy situation, and Obama is losing the plot.

    But seriously, couldn’t he have found a hot looking gay priest rather than someone who looks like Ned Flanders? LOL!!

  8. the queen says

    To Ian: intolerance, bigotry, and ignorance have always been justified on the grounds of that’s “just how things are.” And when backed up by the ignorant and superstitious beliefs of most black homophobes and/or x-tians, there’s good reason to believe that’s exactly the way it’s going to continue to be.

  9. rudy says

    Speak Truth to Power, Leland! I could not express my thoughts better than did you, so I am simply adding an “Amen” (Be it so). Do not vote for bigots; do not settle for less than being treated as a human being with inherent worth and full civil rights. The “that’s the way it is” folks have never changed society for the better.

  10. Patrick says

    He’s trying to have it both ways, get the conservative to speak and get him that part of the vote and then also have the liberal speak and get him that part of the vote.

    Sorry, it doesn’t work that way.

  11. Philbert says

    Buttering both sides of the bread only makes it messier, not better. He’s lost my vote as well as any of the gay friends I have talked to about this so far. Turns out he’s not a leader, just a political hack like most of the other politicians.

  12. chris says

    Right now Obama’s lost my vote. I’ve been looking for a reason to either support a candidate who has a chance to win or failing that, to not support a major candidate who has a chance to win. It’s too bad he’s given me the latter.

  13. Leland Frances says

    Hell-fucking-lo!!! “it was ‘attack Barack’ from the first moment. The ruthless Clinton machine at work.” Jesus wept [at such willful, invincible ignorance]! Is it too much to ask that people do the most cursory research before spouting off? Or is the only way you can defend Obama is by attacking others?

    Fact: there have been both pro and anti Hillary and pro and anti Obama pieces on Huffington Post in relation to this. Fact: you can spin and spin and spin but you might as well be sit-spinning on a life-size Obama dildo to try to equate the run-of-the-mill homophobic ministers associated with Clinton or any other candidate to Barack’s costar on a three-day tambourine tour whom Black lesbian minister Irene Monroe calls, “the poster boy for African-American ‘ex-gay’ ministries.” That’s like equating children who play with matches to a convicted multiple arsonist. It’s equating Little League players to Babe Ruth, Joe DiMaggio, and Barry Bonds; a singing pet parakeet to Pavarotti; Velveeta to Brie; tinfoil to platinum; solo masturbation to an orgy with Ian Somerhalder, Chris Evans, Patrick Wilson, David Beckham, Clive Owen, Matthew Fox, Josh Lucas, and Milo Ventimiglia.

    Again, I’m not a supporter of any candidate specifically but of whichever Dem gets the nomination. I’d still vote for Obama in the general election but all this regurgitated denial that reinforces turning the other cheek and continuing to fund him is pissing me off. So, I’ve changed my mind about posting all of Rev. Irene Monroe’s commentary from Bilerico, much stronger than mine, and, as a lesbian woman of color, possibly much more accurate [I never imagined Obama would send people to campaign at the “Value Voters” cross burning er convention last weekend].

    “Obama the vote-whore with ‘ex-gay’ at his side. – Rev Irene Monroe
    October 23, 2007
    It was intended to be an unprecedented example of how Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama’s grassroots political campaign could win over just as many religious conservatives as Republicans can. Instead, it has run afoul with lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer supporters, as well as others, who bought into Obama’s rhetoric as a healer and consensus builder.

    At the Values Voter Summit in Washington last weekend, Obama’s campaign announced that they, too, could help conservative voters have a voice in the presidential campaign. They then announced they would be hosting the “Embrace the Change! Gospel Series.” It’s a gospel fest to run in three South Carolina cities – Charleston, Greenwood and Columbia – this coming weekend with gospel mega-star Pastor Donnie McClurkin as part of the concert line-up.
    It appeared to be an innocuous announcement showcasing some of gospel music’s most successful artists that would mark the final days of Obama’s “40 Days of Faith and Family” campaign in South Carolina. But it’s actually outing some of the black gospel chitlin’ circuit’s closeted gays ministers and biggest opponents of queer civil rights.

    A reporter at the New York Daily News wrote me in an e-mail asking, “I’m writing a piece … about Sen. Obama’s gospel tour and the fact that one of the performers, Donnie McClurkin, has suggested that gay tendencies can be ‘cured’ or resisted. … I’m wondering how you feel specifically about McClurkin acting as an ambassador for Obama to the African-American Southern Christian community.”

    Well, let me tell you. McClurkin is the poster boy for African-American ex-gay ministries. “There’s a group that says, ‘God made us this way,’ but then there’s another group that knows God didn’t make them that way,” McClurkin has told the media. “Love is pulling you one way and lust is pulling you another, and your relationship with Jesus is tearing you.”

    In the highly competitive race for black evangelical votes in South Carolina, McClurkin just might give Obama the needed edge. However, that edge will come at a cost far greater than having McClurkin at his side. It comes at revealing how Obama is not only a vote-whore, but a race-card user as well.

    The Obama/McClurkin alliance introduces Obama to McClurkin’s black and white Southern evangelical base, which thinks Obama is neither Christian nor black enough.
    And many observers are starting to realize just how much of a vote-whore Obama is. For example, MSNBC talk-show host Tucker Carlson suggested Obama’s faith is “suddenly conspicuous,” saying that Obama has only recently begun addressing his religious background as part of “a very calculated plan on the part of the Democratic Party to win” religious voters in the 2008 presidential race.

    And though religion came to Obama late in life, and he was reared in a non-religious household, he came to understand “the power of the African-American religious tradition to spur social change.” And how much Obama really covets the power of the black church for his own political aggrandizement, rather than for its religion, has raised questions in the minds of many.

    When he ran for the U.S. Senate in 2004, Obama campaigned at the Salem Baptist Church on Chicago’s South Side. It’s the 22,000-member black mega-church of Rev. James Meeks, who has called homosexuality an evil sickness. Outside of the hallowed walls of church the Rev. James Meeks is State Senator James Meeks.

    Obama knew to pander to his base.
    Obama will continue to speak and write about the special relationship he has with his pastor, the Rev. Dr. Jeremiah Wright of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, as long as it doesn’t run afoul of his ambitions. When news got out about Wright’s Afrocentric theology and Sunday sermons that disparagingly speak ill of whites and Israel, Obama immediately distanced himself. Yet these same sermons were not a problem for Obama when they were spiritually nurturing him into becoming a public figure. And when news got out that Wright was to deliver the invocation when Obama formally announced his candidacy in February, Obama canceled his appearance.

    Many African Americans also suspect Obama of using the “race card” to win their votes, but his emotional detachment with issues blacks care about is a big turnoff. African-American journalist and CNN contributor Roland Martin stated, “You can’t find one major moment where black voters have embraced him and showered him with love. I was highly critical of his performance at the June debate at Howard University because that was his crowd. But he failed to ignite the room. One huge Obama supporter told me that his daughter went to the event backing him, and came out loving [Hillary] Clinton.”

    According to a recent CNN poll, Clinton leads Obama among black registered Democrats, 57 percent to 33 percent. African-American women overwhelmingly support Clinton 68 percent to 25 percent, whereas African-American men favor Obama 46 percent to 42 percent for Clinton. But it is African-American women who hit the polls in much greater numbers than African-American men.

    McClurkin is not the only singer on the gospel tour who has publicly spewed vitriolic statements against LGBTQ people. But he is the biggest one Obama can use to try to win over black evangelical voters.
    So once again, Obama is proving that his campaign marketed as “The Audacity of Hope” is really based on the audacity of hypocrisy.

  14. Joshua says

    I have said it here in the past and no one seems to get it. Obama is NOT gay friendly, nor has he ever been. He is a black politician who, like Hillary and some others play the lip sync game of spouting gay rights. But that’s all it is…..spouting….no real action.
    I eliminated him from consideration long ago due to his pandering of whatever group he’s standing in front of, and his lack of any worthwhile experience in national sense.
    Edwards is another phoney on gay issues….his policy of sending his wife to whisper sweet nothing’s in our ears while Johnstates publically that he just *hasn’t reached that road yeat* on gay marriage is nothing short of insulting. Hillary is just Bill in a pantssuit, he lied to us in 1992 and gave us DADT, DMA, and other anti-gay programs. She is a practicing Methodist, who has prayer meetings(or had) with Santorium, and Brownbeck.
    There are only 2 Democrats who fully support Gay rights up and down the line without any *if’s, and’s or but’s* and they are Kucinich and Gravel.

    Wake up sheeple.

  15. hank says

    Obama needs to go on record about the “ex-gay” thing now, since he is choosing to publicly associate himself with a vocal “ex-gay”. Does he believe it is possible or desirable for a gay person to become an “ex-gay?” On what information does he base his answer? What would he tell a conflicted young person who came to him for advice about this ? , (e.g. his own son or daughter, hypothetically.)

  16. Gregg says

    “I’ll vote for whatever Democrat gets the nomination.”

    How many times have we heard that? It’s been spouted over and over in the comments on this very blog. Well, this is what you get. Enjoy. Your pussy tactics have given us a Dem party that completely takes our votes for granted.

    If Obama or Hillary gets the nom, I will be voting 3rd party.

  17. Leland Frances says

    Oh, fuck you, Gregg, and not in the good way. You and your retarded “voting 3rd party” shit. That’s what the oh so wise, oh so smart, oh so better than us all Nader numbskulls did in 2000 and that worked out SO well for the world didn’t it. And now you want the same kind of blood on YOUR conscience that THEY have on theirs. Tens of thousands, TENS OF THOUSANDS of people are dead in Iraq because of 3rd party votes. Demonization of gays with impunity moved from the pulpit to the WHITE HOUSE because of 3rd party votes. The brushfires around gay marriage equality roared into an inferno consuming state constitutional freedoms and fueled by the Bush Reich brought to power by 3rd party votes. The environmental quality of life has worsened in the last six years because the #1 whore for the oil/gas/coal industry put into power by 3rd party voting has virtually refused to enforce our already too weak environmental regulations. And the Supreme Court may remain in the control of Troglodytes until long after you and your jejune fantasies are dead because of 3rd party voting.

    Need I go on? Need I reiterate that there ain’t no fucking Messiah for you to wait for. There ain’t no fucking Santa Claus to leave you shiny presents overnight if you just be a good little pansy. Their ain’t no fucking tooth fairy to leave all your political dreams under your pillow nor Good Witch to transport you back to Munchkinland or carefree Kansas. So pull the 3rd Party All Day SUCKER that you confuse for a magic wand out of your ass and grow the fuck up. You’re not changing anything for the better, nor punishing the Big Bad Democrats; you’re just having a childish temper tantrum, holding your breath until you get what you want. Well, people can die that way. They certainly have in the last six years thanks to 2.78 million self-centered Me Me Me 3rd party voters. You call those of us who didn’t throw out votes away “pussy.” I’d prefer that any day to “unindicted accomplice in mass murder.”

  18. Daniel says

    Just my two cents – Obama has lost my vote if he doesn’t remove the guy from a public role in the event. They have handled this thing horrendously and I’m insulted that they think that the addition of a gay minister will fix anything.

  19. Gil says

    He’s a politician like any other. Considering the unfortunate size of the Christo-Fascist demographic, should anyone be at all surprised when a politician panders to them?

  20. beergoggles says

    Give it a rest Leland. We voted Dem last time and the Dems just confirmed Southwick to the federal court system – the same Southwick that decided a mother should not have custody of her child because she’s a lesbian.

    If they don’t deserve our votes, they shouldn’t get it.

  21. Mick says

    I hope the black people can see what these Clinton loving gays are doing so we can give the full black vote to Obama and watch Clinton try to win without it.

    I say it’s time for black people to start a campaign about how gays are trying to bring down Obama just to help Clinton when she is basically doing the same thing.

  22. sunspot says

    More black people support Hillary than Obama. After this latest outrage, I can see why. Hillary is a professional Pandercrat, but I don’t recall her sticking anyone on her bandwagon as offensive as McClurkin.

    No wonder she has a lock on the nomination. Obama just seems to be spectacularly clueless. He’s not getting a dime of my money or my vote after this.

  23. Stan says

    homophobia was engineered by whites! whites are more homophobic by far. it was the Europeans who burned homosexuals at the stake, who converted African, Asian, and indigenous American peoples to Christianity and filled their heads with homophobia, when in fact before colonialism, there existed cultures which accepted homosexuality, including African cultures, African religions.

    All the anti-gay influential leaders are white. I’ll feel safer around a black person than I will around some white hillbilly. Just recently Terry Mark Mangum some Christian white hillbilly in Texas killed a gay man according to God’s orders. Most black Congressmen support gay rights, you can’t say the same for the white congressmen.

    GAYS NEED TO BE UNITED. no matter our color, we need to be out there protesting together for our rights. stop this bullshit waddling over someone’s associations. few of the candidates from both parties are for us anyway. Hillary’s not gonna give us rights, probably less of a chance of that than Obama. and Joshua shut up just because Obama is black doesn’t mean he’s any more unfriendly, I don’t understand what that was supposed to mean but seriously.

    Here’s a BLACK POLITICIAN running for President who supports gay rights, his name is Stewart A. Alexander, of Peace and Freedom Party. Think about it. gays need to stop taking Republicans and Democrats seriously. Puh leeze. Let’s starting thinking as true left-wing.

  24. Bill Perdue, RainbowRED says

    Since voting to support the invasion in 2003 most Democrats having been marching in lockstep with Bush while he murdered over 650,000 Iraqis and 3837 GI’s. Democrats, including Hillary Clinton voted for the war precisely because it’s an economic war of aggression, and voted to extend it to Iran, to fund it every step of the way, to arrogantly demand that the Iraqis divide their nation into three procoulsular colonial regions and to surrender their petro assets to American companies. The brutal oil pirates of both parties are digging in for a permanent conquest, but like Democrat LBJ’s war in Vietnam they’re going to get slapped down by the combined efforts of Iraqi resistance fighters and trade unionists, unruly GI’s and the US antiwar movement.

    That will shut up the cowardly Chickenhawks and shills backing Bush and the congressional Republicans and Democrats who support the war.

    http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/10/08/071008fa_fact_hersh going after Iran

    Iraq war as bipartisan economic aggression and mass murder

    650,000 dead

    650,000 dead

    http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/65381/ Democrats vote on war

  25. Mick says

    I could tell HRC was joke when they held that Forum on the Logo channel and they made Obama and Edwards give detailed answers on why they did not support gay marriage but they let Clinton just say it was a personal belief and get away with it.

    They will do anything to help Clinton even if it means getting down and dirty and ignoring the things she does. I have nothing against Clinton but I can’t stand these gay hypocrites.

  26. JT says

    Either/or, black/white – where does this get us?

    Seems to me that there is the ideal and the real.

    Politicians need to suck up in order to get elected. What I want to know is this: Once elected, will you serve? And who, or what, is it you will serve?

    Even with all of this rationalization considered, what can Obama possibly say to get my vote now? I think our host framed the discussion brilliantly. Would balancing Phelps with someone diametrically opposed clean the slate? And what are we willing to accept as reasonable accommodation? And are there depths to which we should not go in order to win an election?


  27. nic says

    this is unforgivable. if obama doesn’t get rid of that asshole, he’s toast. this really calls into question his decision making ability. would any other dem have done this?

  28. Jeff says

    Christ. What a mess. I have to say from a Canadian perspective, the whole thing is unbelievable. I say drop both the GD preachers from the tour. Draw the fricking line between church and state. Keep the men of the cloth in their GD churches and off the hustings!

  29. Jersey says

    This says to me that I don’t want to put up with this shit for 4 additional years so he’s completly off my radar. Dead, done finished. Doesn’t he realize how tired we are of this crap?

  30. Parker says

    Leland Frances prattles on and on about: ” This whole thing is just a stunt to help Hillary. If it were serious, the first questions would have gone to McClurkin, to ask him why he felt comfortable supporting a candidate who supports equal rights for gays. Instead, it was “attack Barack” from the first moment. The ruthless Clinton machine at work. Disgusting. You wanna known what is TRULY digusting? Seeing a justified criticism of an Obama Supporter labeled as some creation of a ‘ruthless’ Clinton machine. Why is this the more truly disgusting thought? a) because it took such little rational wofk to dream it up and b) that Leland balks at calling McClurkin’s message free of the Gospel. The word Gospel means “Good News and there is hardly any good news from McClurkin. Instead of ‘good news’ we get regurgitated mental pablum meant to demean any adult gay male as incapable of being happy and complete as long as he doesn’t ‘escape’ from homosexuality.

  31. Derrick from Philly says

    “Alito & Roberts” and if we have a Republican president, maybe a Southwick on the Supreme Court.

    I agree with Leland (but I aint gonna’ call another poster a motha’ fucka’ on this or any other blog)

    Most black evangelicals are just like most white evengelicals: they either hate gays or don’t take us seriously as people who deserve the same human rights they have. Donnie McClurkin is the same as Senator Larry Craig: a hypocrite and a liar(and maybe they can’t help it). And that’s that.

    Clinton, Obama, Edwards, Biden, Richardson, Dodd, Kucinith, or that wonderful old guy: it doesn’t matter, I must vote Democrat in November 2008.

    Has it ever occured to y’all that gay people’s equal rights may NOT be a national issue meant for presidential campaigns. Maybe, for now, our rights are meant for local and state wide initiatives. Too many Americans still believe we are sick sinners who do what we do out of spite and rebelliousness. Gay people’s civil rights become a national issue when the federal courts are involved, that’s why like I said, “Alito & Roberts” will make me go to the polls in November ’08 and vote Democrat.

  32. Sebastian says

    I don’t see what all the hoopla is about, its not as if Obama has or had a chance to win, and, when dealing with “church” folks, tolerance isn’t a word they fully understand, no matter who is trying to encourage them to open thier closed minds.

    At the end of the day, he is a politician, and, all he wants is votes, although, I don’t think he is going to get the black vote with this gospel tour, as a girl friend of mine likes to say, he is in one hot mess!

    And, Derrrick, the next one on the Supreme Court will be Southwick, Bush is not as dumb as many think he is and, that’s where the rage should be as its already set up with anti-gay bigots under Roberts, with Thomas, Scalia and Alito, goosestepping on “moral issues” with him, and one more who feels like they do, Southwick, and, the next 50 years are going to be awful, and, this “debate” over some lame gospel show long forgot.

    The Superme Court is where the focus should be when pondering who to vote for, not this concert.

  33. Richard says

    A bucket of cold water over your head Leland. Your rants on 3rd patry voting come up real short and you have a nasty mouth. You’re bullying will get you no where. Gays can vote dem all they want and will get the same old bull they have for years. Queers will check out 3rd parties and vote for real change. There is nothing self centered about voting what and for what one believes. I think most people do that don’t they? All I can see are a bunch of lesser than evil, march in line with bush dems who are as much to blame as the repub’s for starting this war and voting to continue it. I say to the Guillotine with the lot of them!

  34. Nita says

    Ian wrote, “I think y’all are having the response of white gays reacting to black culture that you don’t understand. What we call “homophobia” is for a lot of people “just how things are”–no matter how much we dislike that. Obama’s actions show that he’s interested in DIALOGUE amongst groups, instead of reactionary shunning of people who don’t think like us.”


    I’ve seen way too much talking AT blacks, instead of WITH blacks, by whites (straight but especially gay) over this issue. White gays have no idea who McClurkin is, and aren’t interested in finding out why his message resonates with so many black Christians. Instead, whites appear to be seeking to transplant their cultural ideas on blacks. This talk of ‘remove him!’ ignores the fact that this conference is not for gays, it’s for black Christians…who are going to feel exactly (if not moreso) as McClurkin.

    There is enough ill feeling between blacks and gays, without white gays pulling the white-skin card to tell blacks how we will think and who we will listen to while throwing us in the gutter anyway as not worthy of support.

    Obama has done the right thing by seeking to ADD a voice to the tour, instead of removing a voice. No one can learn anything by preaching to the choir, and hearing only people who agree with you. A learning opportunity has presented itself, and I think Obama has handled it admirably. This is how a person engages in dialogue across the aisle — not by silencing voices one doesn’t agree with, but by hearing those voices and then countering them with intelligence and life experience. If Obama had bowed to gay whites — gay whites who, as this thread and many others online show, *never* had any intention of truly supporting Obama and cut and ran at the first opportunity — he would *not* have gained any gay whites, but he would have lost a sizeable portion of blacks because he would have looked like a coward and an easily bent panderer.

    Obama is showing that he can make the hard decisions, and live with them. Good for him. Where are the other candidates, who are willing to make hard decisions and stick with them? There are none.

    I didn’t think anything of Obama before, because I thought that he was being cruelly held up as ‘the first real black candidate for president’ by whites, who once again were choosing our leaders for us and ignoring our history for us. But this incident (coupled with his straight talk to black ministers about gays, HIV, sexual promiscuity and the need to go beyond abstinence) are making me notice him in a new light. I still think he’s being cruelly held up as ‘the first real black candidate for president’, and I still think he’s being used by whites… but he is willing to reach out to viewpoints and people who usually don’t get a national stage.

    Any other candidates willing to do this?

  35. Jersey says

    Seriously Leland, we’ve lived through the worst with Bush. I can take more too so I’m not going to let the stupid dems off the hook at all anymore. I will vote third party with no problem if just to teach those lazy dems not to take my vote for granted. Its well past time for them to step up, and I think we can all agree they having been doing it.

  36. Derrick from PHilly says

    I’m sorry, Leland: You didn’t call anyone a “motha’ fucka'”. You said, “fuck you.” Well, you shouldna’ said that either! Just say something more subtle like, “go screw yourself”. No, need to use profanity. It aint gentlemanly.

  37. Nita says

    MCNNYC wrote, “he STILL does not get it Rev Motor Mouth who was raped by a STRAIGHT pedophile UNCLE not a GAY UNCLE gets to have a production number…”


    Pastor McClurkin gets a production number because he’s there as entertainment. Think before you write.

    As the link above states, McClurkin won a Grammy Award in 2006 for ‘best traditional soul gospel album for Psalms, Hymns & Spiritual Songs’. He is an extremely successful musician, having multiple gold, platinum, and a double-platinum album under his belt. McClurkin touches lives… and many of the people who enjoy his music don’t believe that he’s cured himself of homosexuality, instead confusing abstinence with being straight, but they still find inspiration and hope within his music.

    Double platinum — that’s two million souls, not counting people dubbing his music to give to family on mixtapes, or singing his songs on Sunday during church. You honestly expected Obama to toss a man like that out to the wolves? to say, ‘your voice is not worthy of being heard because those paying my bills don’t agree with you’. The only people who can get away with that are American Jews. That’s not anti-semitism, that’s real talk. You may shrug your shoulders at him — but that’s a lot of people watching how this goes who aren’t necessarily gay, or white. How Obama treats this man affects how ose who listen to McClurkin are going to respond to Obama — and that’s exactly why Obama is there in the first place.

    If gays want to make an impression, they can seek to ADD their voices to this conference, and ask for a round-table discussion with McClurkin and others on the tour who feel as he does. But it’s ludicrous to shut him down or honestly expect him to disappoint his audience by ‘stepping down’ just to satisfy folks who never heard of him, didn’t give a damn about him before the HRC tried to help their girl Hillary Rodham out, and are not going to give a damn about him and his audience after this is over.

    As for the other, how do you know his uncle was straight, and not gay? If you’re molesting little boys, it doesn’t matter if you’re also screwing older women — you are not straight. You are at least bisexual. I know what the statistics say; I also know that the medical books used to list homosexuality as a disorder, a mental illness. It doesn’t matter whether the uncle was gay, straight or bi anyway: what matters is that McClurkin was horribly abused as a child, and that’s where his ideas about homosexuality come from. Has he met any homosexuals who have shown him love, and not lust? not using and being used?

    Are any of you offering to show him love, Christian love, humane love? agape?

    Show him love, and you all might be surprised by what love accomplishes instead of hatred and silence. You all need to think. By the way, I’m agnostic.

  38. Mike_in_Lancaster says

    Nita – Interesting and valid points about inclusion.

    However, what disturbs me is a self-described “ex-gay” as part of a national political campaign and being taken seriously by a candidate.

    I voted for Obama for senate, I will not do so for president.

  39. Nita says

    Brad wrote, “Obama is really not understanding the concept of bigotry very well. Would he want David Duke on the panel and then balance it out Martin Luther King?”

    I should hope so, Brad. I cannot understand this willingness shown the past couple days by many gays to silence a voice and provide no alternatives just because gays don’t like that voice. People can make their own decisions and choices; they have to be given a chance to do so, even when those choices are disagreeable to you. To not provide an alternative voice in balance with the viewpoint you object to, is to say that your own voice is *not strong enough* to carry your message. Why would gays be afraid that their message is too weak to meet another viewpoint head to head? The tour has not fought the adding of this minister. So far he is being embraced, is he not? If you all want more of your voices to be heard, then you all need to go make yourselves seen in those communities in a positive way. You can start by opening more doors for GLBTs of color, instead of ignoring their voices and input most of the time.

    Mike wrote, “Andy, that means Mr. Obama is triangulating in a fashion that indicates his need to win trumps his need to do the right thing.”

    I don’t know what ‘triangulating’ means, in this context, though I’ve seen it at DKos. I thought it was just a buzzword. Can you explain? As for Obama needing to win — when’s Obama ever used his wife’s illness to garner sympathy votes for himself? or aped President Bush’ Iraq war stance? The only time I would suggest Obama showed a ‘need to win’ would be his embrace of illegal aliens; but *all* the candidates are opening their mouths for that particular nut, it hits close to home because of what’s going down in Chicago, and he still hasn’t gone so far with the ludicrousness as Ted ‘I’m the runt’ Kennedy.

    Everything I’ve read so far has shown Obama to be more of a friend to gays than an enemy. And everything I’ve read of McClurkin has been a lot less dire than the shriekers have made him out to be. That’s a matter of my opinion; I can accept that ‘homosexuality is an illness’ and ‘it’s possible to change one’s sexual orientation’ are fighting words in the gay community. I just look at it as blacks would look at another black claiming to be white and wanting to be white, and it makes more sense. It’s still a long way from advocating killing yourself if you are gay.

  40. Nita says

    Mick says, “I could tell HRC was joke when they held that Forum on the Logo channel and they made Obama and Edwards give detailed answers on why they did not support gay marriage but they let Clinton just say it was a personal belief and get away with it.”

    Is that on youtube? That sounds a damn shame. Typical, though. I used to support Hillary, back when she was First Lady. I thought she was given a raw deal, and no one appreciated her drive and intellect. She was more than arm candy, and that scared people. She’s been around power brokers too long, though; and in trying to play their games their way, she’s lost her soul. Too many people obviously owe her favors, and it shows in a negative way. As for civil unions versus gay marriage, I’d take the civil union if it comes with every tax break except a church wedding… and no one can force anyone not to hold a church wedding if the church allows it. It’s half a step from that to outright marriage. Is there a bigger difference than that, though, for gays to fight civil unions and seek marriage instead?

    Jersey, the problem with third parties is that sometimes they’re in the pockets of one of the major parties. A lot of people voted for Ralph Nader in 2000 and 2004. They had no idea, or didn’t care, that he was in the Republicans’ pockets, accepting Republican money, and making excuses for accepting that money. A vote for Nader was a vote for Bush. Gotta research your third parties. Of course, so many folks think it’s not worth it period, and they don’t go vote. Or do they do vote, and their votes are suppressed, so what was the point?

    Has the gay vote ever been suppressed, like the black vote? Do gays ever fear that they will vote, and their votes will not be counted anyway? or that someone will openly attempt to mislead them regarding election day, or election polling place availability?

    What struggles do gays face, in making their voices heard at the polls?

  41. Jersey says

    Nita, I really don’t care who’s pocket the third party is in I’d vote for them to let the dems, who’s platforms I usually support, know I’m not putting up with being tossed under the bus any longer. Also I can’t cut this singer guy a break when his quote is that we (gays) want to kill your children. There is no excuse! On CNN last night they were making it out that we were upset with the guy cause he’s “ex-gay”, no I’m upset cause he’s saying we want to kill your children, wtf? I couldn’t care less if he’s changed teams somewhere along the line, to each his own but the killing children thing.. no no no.

  42. says

    I met Obama back in 2003 when he came up to me at Chicago’s gay pride parade and asked who had organized the “Gays for Dean” group that had marched. He shook my hand and said “You’re doing good work.” At that point I had no idea who he was but it made a lasting impression. That impression — and his subsequent speeches on serious issues — mean much more to me than this tactical campaign error. Yes, I agree it was a mistake, but a big tent is always going to contain people I don’t agree with. This is a non-issue for me and anybody who doesn’t vote for Obama based on this non-issue is only buying into the party machine (HRC is a shill for HRClinton); it’s this same machine that got Kerry the nomination, and if this machine gets Hillary nominated, it will be four more years of Republican rule, and anyone who doesn’t see this needs to pull his head out of the sand and recognize that such a narrow focus is what got us here in the first place.

  43. MCnNYC says

    Sorry Nita I’llshow “LOVE to the sinner” but not his ignorance, hate, oppression or his “war” on homosexuality that he claims is “killing his chldren”…there comes a time when with the help of gospel SPEWING “love” is killing MY children and beating up MY brothers and destoying the lives and families of MY community.
    So no….no amount of album sales or awards–not even an NAACP “image” award (remember Issah Washington got one LAST YEAR!! spewing his hate filled speech to “his” community” earns him a production number at this word of God concert for I am sure God Don’t like Ugly.
    And my point was that an opening moment by an open gay minister can NEVER compare with the production number this entertaining singing minister who is being PAID TO SING!! by the Obama Campaign.
    The Obama Campaign KNOWS what it is doing.
    And must be shamed by this UGLYNESS for he is bringing to the table more hate and division and sorry like MLK who hid the genius and love of BAyard Ruskin with the early civil rights and baptist repusion and bigotry.

  44. MCnNYC says

    Oh BTW NITA….in the pedie Uncle’s Case one NEEDS to assume he is not only STRAIGHT but messed up in the mind to do that on the day of a family funeral. So yeah HE’s STRAIGHT he identifies his sexuality as hetero and you need to look at what your misguided “entertainer” as you call him (REALLY you think he was hired as ENTERTAINMENT!!)
    Does he not refer himself as a REV? and a GOSPEL singer (gospel meaning the “WORD OF GOD”) you think he’s ENTERTAINING his listeners?
    HE CLAIMS he was called by GOD for a WAR!!
    DARLING read his words and then open your mouth –now you have no excuses…

  45. says

    I agree with a lot of NITA’s POVs. And I might add, as a black Canadian, that I don’t think adding onto the campaign a white gay person when we all know how “finicky” us black folks can get, especially when it comes to such a delicate issue, is the best of ideas. As someone already mentioned here or on another thread, Obama isn’t getting the best of advices by his campaigners! Yup, he needs to review his staffing.

  46. Derrick from Philly says


    Denigrating comments about Dr. King should never come out the mouth of any gay person, black person, or white person who claims not to be racist. Dr. King asked black people to love a country that treated them like crap. He asked black people not to hate white people when we had every justification to do so. He was the major factor in avoiding more horrible race riots in America’s southern cities where many white people would have been killed, and many more black people would have been killed.

    In the 1960s, Bayard Rustin’s decision not to keep his sexual orientation secret was something leaders of the civil rights movement (black and white) couldn’t understand, nor did they know how to defend. Everybody knew there were homosexuals, but few knew it was something you could claim as natural and be proud of. It’s a wonder they allowed him any participation in the movement. His brilliance and an organizer and strategist is what they needed. Dr. King was concerned with black people’s survival and right to be treated as human beings in America. What could he have possibly known about the concept of “gay”, that homosexuality is more than just the sexual aspect? Some of you can’t explain what is “gay” beyond the homosexuaity. Dr. King showed more respect for Bayard Rustin than most other men of that time would have. I’m sure the very pro-gay Coretta Scott King would not appreciate some the nasty comments about her husband that have come up on this blog. I know that most black visitors to this blog do not.

  47. SFshawn says

    Another serious discussion should be the separation of church and state. Churches doing any type of political organizing should be taxed and taxed and taxed. If you aren’t currently working on his campaign as a political spin doctor Nita you should volunteer since your very good at it.

  48. Bill Perdue says

    Have you noticed any new swelling or bruises on your legs? Any fang marks on your ankles? I ask because it’s the mean season for snakes in the grass. It seems that Frances soul mates in the Democratic and Republican parties are acting a lot more like a pack of angry rattlers.

    Gay basher and liberal (but very rich) Democratic house leader Pelosi and the quisling Barney Frank are ramming their toothless version of EHDA through Congress, giving the bosses who want to underpay us just what they want. It’s payback because all but a few reactionaries had the cheek to criticize them for their sellout and worse, it’s an across the board attack on unions, GLBT communities and the rights of all working people.

    Barak Obama is slithering around imitating Hillary Clinton’s appeals to christian bigots. They’re like liberal (but very rich) John Edwards, a viper who invested his twenty three million dollar plus fortune in a mortgage company that shamelessly forecloses on Katrina victims. (Edwards quit when the NY Times exposed him.) Clinton, Obama and Edwards are not our friends, they’re our enemies.

    Another legless reptile in the grass is named Dianne Feinstein. She’s a liberal (but very rich) Democrat whose tawdry backroom deals corralled 10 or so Democrat senators who voted with Bush to seat homobigot and racist Leslie Southwick on the New Orleans-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit. He’ll be there ‘til he strokes out, punishing GLBT folk, unions and minorities. Pray that he likes hogbellies ‘n gravy.

    Obama will have to slink much further and faster to the right to pilfer Clinton’s bigot supporters. She’s been on the trail courting christians for over a year and it shows in her poll numbers and her draw from bigoted Republicans and christians.

    Liberal (but very rich) Hillary Clinton got her early lead because she and Bill Clinton supported the federal DADT and DOMA laws that shoved GLBT folk into second class citizenship. The major candidates of both parties either oppose samesex marriage or take the cowards way out to mollify bigots, a carry over of their decade long support for the DOMA, which was enacted with a bone crushing bipartisan majority of 85-24 in the Senate and 342-67 in the House. After the Democrats and Republicans voted for DOMA Bill Clinton rushed it into law to attract homobigoted voters in the congressional elections that occurred two weeks later in the fall of ’96. Radio spots featuring Clinton trumpeting the sanctity of virtues of heterosex marriage and the dangers of samesex marriage began playing in Southern states immediately after he signed it. The whole thing boomeranged and the Democrats lost anyway but we got DOMA in 36 states.

    Most Democrats supported DOMA and those 509 bipartisan Democrat and Republican bigot votes changed our lives for the worse. Keep that in mind when you hear some apologist shill claiming that Democrats are “better” than Republicans.
    If you don’t have high boots you’d better get some.

    A Republican politician is a baboon in a people suit with a totalitarian christian attached at the hip. A Democratic politician is a Republican in drag. (Except where does that leave Giuliani when he’s in drag – is he a liberal Republican or a rightwing Democrat? It doesn’t matter; they all oppose same sex marriage.)

  49. GOD says

    Until people continue to believe the hideous christian dogma, there will be no progress for human rights. Modern morality and the primitive morality of the bible are irreconcilable.

  50. Richard says

    My third party is the Workers World Party. Hardly in the pocket of the repugent repubs or dems.

    I do not appreciate any types of nasty remarks about Dr. King on this blog or anywhere else. I am ashamed that any gay person would speak in that manner. I am old enough to remember those days and we can thank whatever we thank for Dr. King and other women, men and children of courage. I was a 13 year old (white) teenager when I went with my church group to Washington to march in 1963. We belonged to the Fellowship of Reconciliation. I have been fighting for justice ever since and don’t plan on giving up.

    I agree with Nita about opening more doors for glbt people of color. We will never be the movement that we think we are (equality and justice for all) until those doors swing open. Its been so long coming.

    Until the lgbt movement once again embraces a multi-issue platform we will not win. The supression of the black vote should be on our agenda, the re-building of New Orleans, this nations shame)poverty, unemployment, and the list goes on and on should take a place in our movements march. If indeed we are here, there and everywhere then these issues and many other issues are ours. Then and only then will we be a movement for liberation along side of others who fight for justice.

    Mr. Perdue keeping writing, love your thoughts and do agree 100 %.

  51. Nita says

    I just read


    “I spoke to several people in the black gay community tonight, and many of them were outraged by the decision. It was bad enough that McClurkin was invited in the first place, but it only adds insult to injury to ignore the longstanding concerns of the black gay community by not talking to people in the black gay community themselves. And if someone had to be invited, why not invite someone in the black gay community? Or why not invite a black mother of a gay or lesbian child? Or a local black pastor who supports the full inclusion of gays and lesbians?”

    I was going by the photo Towleroad is using: he looked black to me. Light, but black. So he’s white? Oh that does put an entirely new spin on this… :

  52. Nita says

    Shabaka, thank you. I didn’t know Sidden was white. You took me aback when I read you this afternoon. So I did a little googling. Oh my. As for black folks being finicky, I’ll leave it up to Jasmyne Cannick, who writes at her blog writes:

    “Organizations like HRC help to pave the way for decisions like having Rev. Sidden at an African-American gospel concert. Decisions like inviting Rev. Sidden, a white openly gay pastor to address a mostly African-American audience further push the idea among Blacks that gay is white. The belief that whites are trying to push gay issues onto Blacks further divides the African-American community from their same-gender loving counterparts who continue to remain invisible. All of this while racial incidents involving whites and Blacks are occurring from coast to coast causing many Blacks to question whether or not there’s a coordinated plan in action for their reentry in slavery. Couple that with a heavily divided Black constituency on issues of morality during a pivotal Presidential election and we stand a higher chance of repeating the past, which resulted in the current regime. The behavior of certain organizations is almost expected. It isn’t the first time and won’t be the last. But where does all of this leave Black gays?”

    As I just posted at her blog, I’m not going to come down on Obama as many black GLBTs are for not including an out black gay POV. Obama is reaching out to get additional voices included. HOWEVER, it’s telling when a gay organization is pushing a white man to speak to blacks in opposition to a black man. That is suspect. Where is the gay black representation in the HRC? I find it impossible to believe that there were no black gays within the HRC or associated with the HRC who could have been suggested for this event.

    White gays are notorious for pretending the voices of gays of color don’t exist. White gays are now going to get away with branding Obama as a homophobe seeking to kill gays, the black community as homophobic and ignorant, and black gays of color who are out as non-existent. Hat trick. White gays show themselves to be no different from white straights. Game over. Whites telling blacks who we can enjoy, why we can or cannot enjoy them, and what we are going to believe. We can’t win, as long as we keep trying to satisfy the unsatisfiable. Let me calm down… I’m having a Florida Evans moment.

  53. jmg says

    “White gays are notorious for pretending the voices of gays of color don’t exist. White gays are now going to get away with branding Obama as a homophobe seeking to kill gays, the black community as homophobic and ignorant, and black gays of color who are out as non-existent. Hat trick. White gays show themselves to be no different from white straights. Game over. Whites telling blacks who we can enjoy, why we can or cannot enjoy them, and what we are going to believe. We can’t win, as long as we keep trying to satisfy the unsatisfiable. Let me calm down… I’m having a Florida Evans moment.”

    What in the hell are you talking about? Except for dear Florida Evans, I didn’t understand a word.

  54. Nita says

    MCNNYC, the only way to combat hate is with love. Period. End paragraph. The only way to combat hate is through example. The HRC is not providing that example. The HRC is playing politics as much as anyone. Why are they getting a pass, and it’s all (once again) on Obama’s shoulders? No one knows Sidden, but the black community knows McClurkin.

    Again, that conference was not set up for the benefit and issues of white gays. It was set up for the benefit and issues of black christians. Everything is not about you. Like Jasmyne says, “Oh and please save your energy and mine too from having to press delete. I already know that what I am saying is harsh. Harsh not racist. Harsh but true. It’s already been established that using white gay folks to explain to Blacks have the gay civil rights movement is the same as the 60’s Civil Right Movement doesn’t work. In fact, it’s an automatic turn off for most Blacks, including this Black lesbian. With a sensitive issue like this, it’s important that Blacks talk to Blacks. Our community needs to see us and hear from us and no one but us. And if we sit up here and allow this to go down, we have no one but ourselves to blame for our invisibility.

    It’s not personal against Rev. Sidden, I am sure he’s a great person. It is personal however with HRC who knows better but can’t ever seem to pass up the chance to make the national news, no matter whose community gets dumped on in the process. But oh I forgot, we’ve come such a long way.

    In a statement, HRC thanked Obama for including Sidden but said that they were disappointed McClurkin will remain part of the program.

    Please note that they were not disappointed that an openly Black minister wasn’t chosen or that there Black gays were not a part of the conversation and that it was important for African-Americans to hear from their same-gender loving daughters, sons, sisters, brothers, mothers, and fathers. No, they were disappointed that McClurkin was still a part of the program. Geez, that’s mighty…oh never mind!”

    I still stand behind what I said earlier about white gays coming into the community to make a positive presence. This is not that positive presence. The wedge is driven deeper. But you want to blame Obama, and Obama alone. Whatever.

    As for McClurkin’s uncle being straight — he raped a little boy. That is not the action of a completely straight man. Or can the gay community not deal with gay predators? Y’all can sure gleefully deal with the stereotype of blacks as ignorant hateful churchgoers.

    And as for Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and Bayard Rustin, you may be asking too much. Maybe like I’ve always asked too much of the women’s movement to get over the ‘blacks had the vote before women’ canard, and the way white women in the women’s movement treated women of color, in such a way that it seemed they were seeking an exalted place they felt was stripped from them. Times were different. Both groups had enough on their plate. Do you condemn white women for engaging in racist politics-as-usual in the march for equal gender rights, as you condemn King for what happened with Rustin?

    Derrick from Philly, thank you for dropping science. I didn’t know most of that. And you raise some good questions, some good food for thought. Thank you.

  55. Nita says

    JMG, do you honestly not know what I’m talking about?

    Bill Perdue, you have a point. None are clean. What to do? where to go? Who has less of a stink upon them?

    El Polacko, good question, about president or pope. Because the answer is ‘president’, it’s foolish to ignore evangelicals. They are also citizens of these United States, and have issues and concerns which need to be acknowledged if they cannot be satisfied. They vote. The US is not homogenous, and ignoring a sizeable portion of the nation just because another portion doesn’t like what they have to say is not the action of a Big Tenter. And yet, I’ve read somewhere that the black vote, the percentage given to Democrats, has not changed from the Clinton Administration to the Bush Administration, in spite of Bush outreach to black churches. I don’t know what that means.

    God, come back after you’ve graduated high school.

  56. jmg says

    I guess race trumps sexuality and gender. Another case in point–the women who abandoned the feminist movement to support the rapists in the Central Park Jogger case.

  57. Gregg says

    LELAND – just wanted to say that I don’t think third party is a magic wand. I didn’t “waste” my vote on Nader, and I never thought I’d vote third party. I see it now as a necessary step in the progression to political reform.

    Your taunts about the war will not garner my vote for the Dems any more than the for the Repugs who try and use the same bullying tactic. I am disgusted with the state of our political system both at home and in the world at large. I do not see any real change coming from the Democrats. So I must give my vote the worth that it really has, and spend it on what I value.

  58. Jeremy says

    Would some one kindly point out to me when the kind of Southern black choir ladies that will attend McClurkin concerts have ever lynched anyone or committed anything like the holocaust? The comparisons are getting a little hyperbolic.

    Furthermore, if one of the most outspokenly anti-racist candidates were to win Duke’s support, I would mark that as a sign of progress against racism. Obama is the only top tier candidate to speak out against homophobia directly to black religious leaders and he’s the only one supporting full repeal of DOMA. Of course, anti-Obama bloggers and the national media don’t care about these issues until it’s time to scandal-monger.

  59. MCnNYC says


    Yesterday, HRC President Joe Solmonese released a statement that condemned Sen. Obama’s association with McClurkin and encouraged Sen. Obama to continue reaching out to the GLBT community on how to best confront the serious issue of homophobia. Sen. Obama’s subsequent announcement that South Carolina minister Andy Sidden would be joining the tour’s lineup was determined without the input of HRC or Joe Solmonese. If asked, we would have gladly suggested a number of key black ministers – GLBT or straight-supportive – who have been outspoken in the call for the equal treatment of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people.

    You PaTHETIC Attempts to lay blame on HRC is reprehensible and SAD and WITHOUT MERIT OR FACTS.

    You obviously have no idea of the work HRC has done with the civil rights movement, the NAACP as well as with Corretta S. King John Lewis and the NUMBER of other people of color who work for HRC.
    HRC was pivital in the Senatorial Campaign to elect Harvey Gant in NC and have a large currant staff of committed people of color.


  60. MCnNYC says


    “As for McClurkin’s uncle being straight — he raped a little boy. That is not the action of a completely straight man. Or can the gay community not deal with gay predators? ”


  61. Derrick from Philly says

    JMG: Hey, man, are you forgetting? the young guys accused in the Central Park Jogger case turned out to be innocent. You just called them “rapists”.

Leave A Reply