Barack Obama Gets Blank Space Punishment from Philly Gay News


Fed up with the fact that Obama has not done an interview with local gay press in 1,522 days, the Philadelphia Gay News, which yesterday published a long interview with Hillary Clinton, made their point with a big white space in the paper today.

BarakThey even let a typo in his name go uncorrected.

The paper’s publisher Mark Segal spoke to the Philadelphia Inquirer: “We had great success with the Clinton campaign. They were very open to us and inviting from day one. The surprise to us was the Obama campaign. When we realized we weren’t getting very far with them, we decided to enlist other people — who are supporting Senator Obama — to assist us. These people happen to be some of his superdelegates and his strongest political supporter in the state: [U.S. Senator] Robert Casey and congressman Pat Murphy. All of whom advised him this was an interview he should do. We were told there had been scheduling problems. We’ve been told this now for weeks.”

UPDATE: Segal neglected to disclose that he donated $1,000 to the Clinton campaign back in 2007.

Segal: Obama Hasn’t Spoken to Gay Press Since 2004 [the daily examiner]


  1. Rex says

    Im a Gay man and Yes Clinton is saying she’ll be “good to the gays”…and so wil Obama….I just want a Dem to be elected – so IF Obama has too for-go his “pro-gay” stance for a bit – thats fine with me…I know he’ll do the RIGHT thing when it comes to gays….20yrs of the same familys enough – America needs change….Im voting Obama

  2. daveynyc says

    OBAMA DOESN’T CARE ABOUT GAY PEOPLE. This is his one and only time in the big game and when he’s done (and he will be soon) He can mover over and let a Clinton do what the Clinton’s do best… run this country with Good Solid Ideas, Passion and Grace. Hillary ’08!!

  3. Sebastian says

    Maybe he realized they were going to give HRC a pass on real issues, and, endorse her, so, why the need for a sit down interview? Or, his staff has been reading gay blogs and see some of the vitriol about him and the sainthood many gays have given HRC and realizes he won’t win anybody over with whatever he says, and most certainly not the publisher of this paper, so, more shrill and no facts from HRC supporters who were and will not ever listen to anything Obama has to say, thank goodness the rest of the country see’s right through her and her man and her sense of entitlement.

    Anybody but the $55 million dollar rich woman who offers the country nothing but the same old same, Bush/Clinton, ENOUGH ALREADY of these two families!

  4. aidanc says

    This doesn’t excuse Obama’s evasion necessarily, but it’s been reported that PGN publisher Mark Segal has donated to the Clinton campaign. In the interests of full disclosure he should be making this clear to his readers.

  5. says

    “Oh, brother!” to the news outlet that did the white-out and to anyone who reads into his not doing the interview. It’s like the editors are behaving the same way as that nutty, aggressive autograph-seeker Obama had to deal with recently. I’d react the same way if it were Hillary—they’re not going to do everything. I think some people think Obama is perfect, and that’s a mistake, but it’s bewildering to me why so many gay people are so blindly loyal to Clinton (as opposed to all of the gay people who support her intelligently) that they seek to destroy the amazing, positive things Obama has brought the party. How jaded to beat down a candidate chiefly because he’s outsmarted your personal candidate when both are in your party. I voted for Hillary and would be happy with either. More Dems should be thinking along those lines.

  6. Derrick from Philly says

    Barack knows where most of gay folk stand already–in the Clinton Camp. No matter how many times he’s spoken of civil rights for gay people in front of hostile audiences, he gets NO credit.

    There’s plenty of time to do interviews with gay newspapers–after the convention. Y’all aint goin’ no where, you are?

  7. Dan says

    This is insane. As anybody in Philly will tell you, the PGN is the gay publishing world’s answer to the Springfield Shopper. If anything, I found it somewhat embarrassing for HRC that she’d stoop to wasting time with the hacks behind that rag.

  8. rene says

    Clinton gave an interview to a gay paper. The only time she speaks on gay issues is to a gay audience. Obama has spoken and defended gay rights to the general population as well as reprimand a conservative christian audience for being hypocritical when it comes to gay rights.

    I would rather have an advocate who fights for my rights all the time not just when I am in the room.

    This newspaper did a disservice to their readership because of vanity.

  9. Michael Bedwell says

    Too bad “The Washington Blade” and Ohio’s “Gay People’s Chronicle” didn’t have the balls to do the same thing when Obama [unlike HC] refused interviews with them. And maybe LOGO News could have just shown a blank screen for 15 minutes after he [unlike HC] refused to talk to them—after all he’s written about being “a blank screen upon which people can project anything they want.”

    Eric Resnick, reporter for the Ohio paper, and the one who interviewed Sen. Clinton, wrote about his treatement by the Obama camp:

    “Occasionally, the stories behind what went into reporting the news are as informative as the news. This is one of those times. Additionally, the stakes are high, and the LGBT community needs to have discussions like these before the result, not after.

    Immediately following the February 18 Wisconsin presidential primary, I began, on behalf of the Gay People’s Chronicle, to work on getting interviews with Democrats Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. …

    By Friday, about the time it would take for them to figure out the New Jersey report [on civil unions] contradicts their candidate, the Obama campaign stopped returning my calls. When I was lucky enough to reach press staff, they were very quick to tell me they didn’t think they could work an interview into the candidate’s schedule.

    This is a good time to be clear. I am not in either candidate’s camp. I supported and voted for Dennis Kucinich. I was elected the Kucinich convention delegate in the 16th Congressional District of Ohio.

    With Kucinich out of the race, my only dog in the fight is that the LGBT community has the best information with which to make the best choices. As a community, we are not at a point where we can afford fair weather friends. ….

    Obama spokespeople pivot to the MLK Day speech as though it settles every debt to the LGBT community, past and future.

    In my 12 years as a reporter, I have never experienced anything quite like Obama’s national communication director Robert Gibbs, either. I wasn’t biting on the crap he tried to feed me, and he got offended.

    When I stood there not writing any of it down, Gibbs said to me, “Let me tell you how this works. I talk and you write down what I say.”

    “I’ll write down what you say when you answer the question,” I responded, adding that “I’m no campaign’s stenographer.”

    Gibbs actually took the pen and pad out of my hands and wrote his own answer!…

    Both campaigns knew that talking to me wasn’t going to be like the made for Saturday Night Live performance of Melissa Etheridge on the Logo forum. (This is not an insult to Etheridge. I can’t sing. We should all do what we’re good at.)
    Nonetheless, it was Hillary Clinton, with her much longer record of talking to our community, who stepped up to the guillotine, and Obama who refused.

    Regardless of what was said, Clinton gets points in my book for her willingness. It is somewhat troubling that it appears that LGBT people are starting to flock to Obama, despite his lack of vetting.

    This has nothing to do with Obama. It’s good politics. It has everything to do with the LGBT community. It’s stupid citizenship. We deserve better and we need to demand that candidates at least answer our questions.”

  10. 24play says

    PGN publisher Mark Segal donated $1,000 to Clinton, as reported here:

    If Obama’s press people knew Segal was a Clinton backer, I’m not surprised the senator declined to be interviewed by PGN.

    And frankly, PGN’s childish overreaction to Obama’s “no” seems like rank partisanship. Segal sounds like a real jackass. Of course, that’s par for the course in gay publishing.

  11. yoshi says

    Did I miss some memo that states Clinton still has a chance?

    (i also think the newspaper is being completely childish – but childish is what most gay mags are so its par for course)

  12. Landis says

    I think what irritates me about Obama is his and his supporter’s holier-than-thou attitude. And it shows in both not interviewing with PGN, and whatever comments Obama candidates make at this forum.

  13. Dan says

    … and what bothers me about Hillary supporters is their inability to get the minds out of the gutter. C’est la vie.

    Seriously – take one look at PGN’s “website” and try telling me this is a credible site. I’ve seen high school newspaper sites with more significant presence. Add in the typos, poor formatting and clunky writing… How can anybody take this paper seriously? Is Hillary that desperate for media she’ll sit down with any schmuck with an iMac and a copier?


  14. jmg says

    Hmm….interesting tactic. Blame the gay paper for not being the NY Times!

    Soon we will be hearing from people saying that the PGN is not really a gay paper because it’s not printing what gay people are supposed to think (by analogy with people who think that gay republicans are not really gay because they vote republican, or Condoleeza Rice is not really black).

  15. Dan says

    Just think about it for a second. Both Hillary and Obama must get hundred, if not thousands of requests for face time with various media outlets. Any media handler who’s doing his/her job will look at the source, look at their credibility, look at the people behind the paper and decide when/where to grant access accordingly.

    My guess is that Obama’s folks took one look at the PGN, decided it was a typical fly-by-night paper (primarily used to advertise bars and escorting services, as noted by Jeff) and it simply wasn’t worth his time. Hillary’s folks saw some free media (and they love free over there) from a committed supporter.

    Would I like Obama to set aside some more time with the gay media? Sure. But not with some POS bar rag. That’s just embarrassing.

  16. scientitian says

    I love how childish crap like this totally overshadows any chance at real political discourse. Who cares about anyone’s stance or record when we can have them jump through news media hoops to make us happy?
    Obama hasn’t done an interview yet – does this mean a damn thing in regard to his potential presidency? How will his not granting an interview affect the outcome of the war in Iraq? Global warming? The economy?
    This whole interview thing is clearly very important to some people, so someone out there must have some awesome, logical theories establishing a connection to REAL campaign issues.

  17. Incredulousity says

    Why would Obama talk to this paper? It is so beneath him! Hillary will talk to anyone because she’s low class like that. If you’ve ever read this paper, you are not good enough to vote for Obama anyway. Only the right gay people matter. Why are we questioning what Obama does? It scares me when people do that. He’s busy and important. He will toss the gays a bone later, when more important people than us aren’t looking. Don’t worry.

  18. Jimmyboyo says

    All well and good. Yet in front of non gay crowds??????????????????????????

    crickets chirp because hillary never says such things in front of non gay crowds

    Obama has. Multiple times now spoken in front of non gay crowds. In Churches NO LESS!!!!!!!!!! in support of us.

    The Clinton supporters, kudos on your support for her, but read what Donna Brazille recently said. “Hillary Clinton’s supporters are ruining her candidacy…….”

    Also, I would like to ask Hillary supporters to detail how exactly she is going to win the nomination.

    Be specific on just how she is going to overcome

    -obama pledged delegate lead 120+
    – OBAMA POPULAR VOTE LEAD 700,000+ NOT INCLUDING 10 CAUCUSES THAT didn’t count popular vote at all which would put his total actualy over 1 million + popular vote count if they had counted the popular vote in those 10 states
    – more states won by Obama
    – the supers who haven’t comited , one and all saying that they will NOT overturn the vote

    Please give details of a plan that actualy gets her the nomination.

    Otherwise you are just being spiteful and hurting the presumptive nominee and enabling McCain a chance to win

  19. Mike says

    Don’t worry…I’m sure he’ll by some ad space in a gay rag soon and make us feel special.

    I think the real issue is that he doesn’t want to be tied down to specifics and be held to promises he cannot keep later.

  20. Brandon says

    This is one of the most childish things of which I have ever heard. There must be some sort of plantation mentality at the PGN. I can just imagine the dialogue at the PGN: “How dare Obama not give us an interview?! Who’s that uppity man think he is?”

    You’ve GOT to be kidding me that this sort of nonsense has become part of the political discourse.

    Given this response, I would not be surprised if the Obama folks expected a hatchet job or a spin job and wanted to pass.

    I mean isn’t this awfully convenient spin for Hillary?

    Kudos to the Clinton camp for this one.

  21. Parker's Back says

    Did anyone read that part about it being 1,522 days since an interview in a local LGBT paper? That seems to be more important. How does Obama explain that one?

    I don’t have a problem with Obama really. In the words of Wanda Wisdom, “Obama, save me from your people.”

  22. ZWBush says

    Hillary cant win. Get over it guys! She needs to back out yesterday. I can’t wait to see Obama and McCain on the same stage debating. That shits gonna be a landslide.

  23. The Realist says

    This whole myth that Obama is going to free the gay community from discrimination is laughable.

    Once again, this man is lining up with anti-gay preachers and all anyone can talk about is that he said the word gay in front of a bunch of straight people.

    I trust someone that talks to me, not about me. Talk to my face dude. Tell ME what you are going to do for the gay community. Let me see your face when you tell me you are for separate but equal status for LGBT people.

  24. Clarence says

    Congrats to towleroad for posting this…the fact is Obama hasn’t done an interview with the gay press for 1,522 days and counting… guess he doesn’t want to be seen pandering to queers… shameful! Say what you will about HRC, but at least she talks to us – and isn’t embarrassed to let everyone know it!

  25. nick says

    Never underestimate the twisted thinking in HRC’s political machine. It strikes me as unusual timing that this article comes out the same afternoon that HRC releases her tax returns. It is a smart move. We’re talking about this rather than her $109 million dollars in income since leaving the White House. I can imagine HRC would love this story to gain traction to deflect from people questioning her new Rocky fight for the underdog persona when her returns prove she is a top dog. She had the audacity/genius of proposing a Cabinet-level “Poverty Czar” on the same day she releases the returns. It’s all about the deflect from the truth for HRC. Like I said, it’s the twisted logic of Clinton Camp!

  26. david says

    Clinton’s a fucking bold face liar. Obama is waiting to fuck the right up with his support for gay people. Vote for Obama and we will have equal rights vote for clinton and we’ll have bill and that bitch liying to us again.

  27. Michael Kingsford says

    I love watching the homo sapiens in the circus that is politics, and see how utterly predictable they are. Ah yes…Politics, a complex social process that seeps into every human institution, and it’s made only possible by the intellect of our frontal lobes–yet it appears to ultimately be run by more primitive structures where emotions govern. Like perfect little examples of classical conditioning, the Obama bell rings and the slobbering begins. The same applies to the Clinton supporters.

    Obama, Clinton; the people posting; y’all are interchangeable.

    I’m certain that if Clinton had been the one who declined the interviews there wouldn’t be a shortage of “bitch” aimed at her for it.

    So hopelessly biased some of you are.
    Do you not see?


  28. says

    I’ve said it before — it’s really easy to be pro-gay when you’re in a gay ghetto and talking to gay press which is what the Senator from New York does. It’s hard to be pro-gay when you’re dealing with the rest of America, which is what Obama has done and continues to do. He’s consistent on his message of tolerance of gays, whether or not he’s talking to us or to a black Church on MLK’s birthday.

    And frankly, I’d rather have that kind of real support than the Senator from New York’s shameless pandering.

  29. Bill says

    It’s all about a five-letter word: M-O-N-E-Y.

    Hilary Clinton has the backing of the monied gay establishment in Philadelphia. Segal’s convenient non-disclosure of his donation to the Clinton campaign totally undermines his credibility and the credibility of his report.

    While Hilary Clinton has stood by in silence, Obama has spoken up again and again in this campaign against homophobia, including to audiences (e.g., Beaumont, TX) that he knew would not receive that message. He has courage and conviction.

    Hilary will continue the politics of triangulation and throw the LGBT community under the bus as fast as her husband did, once elected.

  30. Bill says

    It’s all about a five-letter word: M-O-N-E-Y.

    Hilary Clinton has the backing of the monied gay establishment in Philadelphia. Segal’s convenient non-disclosure of his donation to the Clinton campaign totally undermines his credibility and the credibility of his report.

    While Hilary Clinton has stood by in silence, Obama has spoken up again and again in this campaign against homophobia, including to audiences (e.g., Beaumont, TX) that he knew would not receive that message. He has courage and conviction.

    Hilary will continue the politics of triangulation and throw the LGBT community under the bus as fast as her husband did, once elected.

  31. says

    So the folks who gave us The Defense of Marriage Act (& are still defending it!) And “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” have the “courage” to sit down with a marginal gay newspaper in a state who’s primary is do or die for them; but the opposition (Obama) doesn’t & we’re supposed to see this as some kind of betrayal by Obama? Hell, Clinton sat down with that nut job Richard Mellon Scaife last week, she will do anything, anywhere , with anyone to get this nomination & she’s hurting the party in the process. As Bill Mahr said last week, with Hillary, it’s “get elected or lie trying!” I think Clinton is going to win big in PA but it’s too little too late, the nominee is Obama. Somebody ask DAVID MIXNER what he thinks about the Clintons!

  32. Bill in PDX says

    Obama is not homophobic. I do not see how granting an interview is required for vetting a candidate. He is in the lead nationally and will probably get the nod. It is time for us to pull together and defeat the real enemies of glbt civil liberties –the republicans!
    Both candidates would be fairer on our issues than McCain.
    He has often spoken to the mainstream press about how destructive it is to use us as a wedge issue. He has make several speeches and comments that he supports our liberties and dignity.
    I will support whoever gets the nomination as both are better on the issues. I believe that he brings a lot of new people to the table and cares about all Americans. He has a great voting record both in the state of Illinois and the senate and deserves respect and consideration for that. Again, he is not a homophobe.

  33. rrgg says

    Even if he’s not a homophobe, he wants to ignore us just like everyone else trying to stay away from gay issues.

    Obama said he does not support gay marriage.

    Obama said it’s basically a waste of time to even discuss it because of other more important problems.

    Apparently, he thinks civil rights only matter if you’re black.

    Let’s face it. Many black churchgoers don’t have a reputation for being friends of gay people.

    There is no reason for any gay person to support this man. The GOP has not even got started yet ripping him apart. By November he will be unelectable.

  34. FunMe says

    This reminds me of an old joke … sHillary is now doing small town papers because “she never made it to the big room” in Vegas.

    Oh well, now that I see her tax records, let her spend more money.

    The election for her is OVAH!

  35. Bill in PDX says

    The attributions are reversed I said the pro Obama stuff not the reverse. I believe the gaygardener responded to my post please correct. Thanks.

  36. Darrell says

    The fact remains he hasn’t spoken to the local gay press for over 1522 days. There is something wrong there… and bashing the paper for pointing it out isn’t a rebuke – it’s a cop out. I don’t like it, and unless I can get a reasonable explanation it is completely unacceptable, PERIOD! There is no fricking way his schedule has been full for 1522 days….

  37. Michael Bedwell says

    The NEXT place Hillary will be hiding her pro gay views from the straight public will be on the Ellen show Monday. Of course, with her Evil Witch powers none of the MILLIONS of straight viewers will be able to see or hear her say that,

    “she would defend gay rights as president and eliminate disparities for same-sex couples in federal law, including immigration and tax policy.” – Associated Press.

    Instead they will see a rerun of Bruce Willis promoting his last movie.

    PS: Anyone out there know a special dry cleaner? I’m still trying to get those huge tracks off the back of my favorite shirt from last October when the bus paid for by Obama and driven by Donnie “Gays are trying to kill our children” McClurkin ran over us. In any case, I hope your dicks are longer than your memories.

  38. Bill in PDX says

    I am Bill from PDX and my post was pro Obama saying that he was not a homophobe etc and the attribtutions were reversed w gaygardener I posted a correction and it was attributed to fumme.
    There are errors with this site. Please correct the problem. I like this website and the discussion has been lively but…..

  39. Matt says

    re Michael Bedwell. Either you’re his grandson or you’re dead:

    but I digress. Just when I was beginning to accept the aptly-initialled B.O.’s nomination, something like this comes down the pike to make me start hating him again. Sure this Philly rag is small potatoes but if he’s also refusing to talk to other big city pink pages, I have to question his motives.

    And btw children: our rights will always be more important than civil rights because we are all colors and we are all discriminated against by straights.

  40. Rey says

    When it comes down to it, the only goal of a gay or lesbian (or cool) voter this time around should be to elect somebody who will select smart Supreme Court nominees.

    There is nothing about either candidate that is any worse than the current jerkoff in office. Absolutely nothing.

  41. daniel says

    I think it is sad to watch how the “new way of politics” really is nastier than the old.

    Obama supporters don’t seem like their leader is a going to be able unite Americans if their behavior is any indication. I don’t observe rhetoric that is hopeful and full of optimism by them in this forum or any other forum in blog world.

    If the Obama supporters are going to say Hillary is politics as usual, you can’t be surprised if her supporters are nasty.

    If you Obama supporters are the new way, why are you hopeful, optimistic people so rude and degrading to others that don’t see things the way you do??? Doesn’t sound like uniting to me.

    Same old, same old

  42. Bill in PDX says

    It seems a lot of people are worked up right now. This is an election and things can get heated. Don’t hold the candidate hostage to devoted followers who get worked up. Although I volunteer for Obama and want him to win, I would support Hillary if she pulls of her long shot bid. As has been stated neither of these could be worse than the present President or McCain who has really pandered lately to conservative Xns. Hillary has well documented ties to the family an ultra conservative religious political group with ties to fascist dictators. This has been explored in several publications including the WA Post and Mother Jones and covered on MSNBC recently. Google it if you don’t believe it. Stating that fact, I would still support her if she got the nomination because she would still be better than MCSAME or the Bush cartel incarnation II.

  43. Keith L says

    When LOGO had its TV interviews, Obama was the first candidate to agree to go on. As in, before Hillary did. She followed his example, as she always does. He led, and when it didn’t backfire, she followed.

    Therefore he was the first one to appear on the show. That was less than a year ago, so yes, he HAS talked to the gay press since 2004. Unless LOGO is not part of the gay press.

    I am a gay man who has been working for Senator Obama (volunteering) for over a year, and there are plenty of gays and lesbians doing the same. It’s a myth that we are all for Hillary. We’re not. Im not.

    As has already been noted, Obama talks about the importance of treating gays fairly in front of audiences who don’t all want to hear it, like conservative black churches. He has done this on several occasions. He said the same thing in the 2004 convention speech. In other words, he says it where it counts. Anybody can show up to a gay pride parade and preach to the choir. It does a lot more good to speak out for gay rights to those who need to hear it, but don’t want to.

    The Clintons started their 8 years by giving us Dont Ask Dont Tell, and finished by giving us DOMA. Meanwhile, they patted us on the head, accepted our votes, and changed very little. If you Hillary people want to tell me all the great things that the Clintons did for gays, I’m all ears.

  44. kc says

    Obama needs to step up to the plate. It seems he has decided he doesn’t need the gay votes in Pennsylvania. If a publication is willing to give you exposure side by side with your competitor to a target audience, you take it, instead of making excuses. Another example of bad judgment. He seems to think money alone will get him the votes and nomination. More and more he touts the “math” and the money as a sign of electability and superiority. Relating to people and making them feel like they count is the ultimate political power, and Clinton is running with it to the finish line. She has nothing to lose and as a side-effect, to the consternation of Obama fans, she highlights his lack of people skills outside of giving speeches.

  45. Landon Bryce says

    Obama has vaguely said in front of straight audiences that they are too mean to the gays. He has not stood up in front of anyone and said what he supports actually doing for gays. Has he? Doesn’t that matter?

    It is shameful that so many of you refuse to hold him accountable in any way for his failure to grant substantive interviews in the gay press and his failure to ever make an appearance in a pride parade. It is one thing to believe that he will be better for gays than Clinton would or that his nomination should really be inevitable at this point- I would agree with both of those conclusions. It is something else entirely to deny that he would be a more appealing candidate for gays if he were willing to spend more time talking with us and if he made the risk of appearing at pride events.

  46. BIll in PDX says

    He is not avoiding gay media. He is very busy and is drawing record crowds. Hillary has nothing to lose at this point and is not favored in the MSM at all. She is posturing as neither will deny gay civil rights with a dem house and senate in play. We need to elect a dem and it will most likely be Barack. Listen to his speeches;they are all over the net. Try you tube. I am in Oregon and he will very very likely win our primary. Hillary is in Oregon but not Portland as Barack drew 13,000. We gave out 13,000 tickets in three hours. Double that number would have shown up but he filled our large venues. Remember that there are republican bloggers who pose as dems to try to split us apart. We need to elect a dem. How could things be worse than now and McCain offers nothing new. Barack is not anti gay nor a radical nor a muslim nor inexperienced. Hillary is not evil. Let us rise up and make this country better.

  47. Sean R says

    There are some interesting excuses offered for Obama’s silence. The idea that Obama will simply do what is right is naive, and that he’s too busy campaigning to talk to gays? So he’s talked about homophobia to unfriendly audiences… what’s the point of that – where’s his policy idea on cuntering homophobia? Saying homophobiba is wrong, is like Mr Mackie in South Park saying ‘drugs are bad, m’kay!’It’s back to the old phrase he used himself: just words… and he has nothing to say to gay people!

    Hillary has the integrity and manners to do an interiew, that says much more to me as an observer of US politics.

  48. Jon says

    Whatever… I’m going to have to stop reading these comments, they are just rants and that gets boring quickly. The article said “LOCAL” gay press… last time I checked LOGO and the Advocate were National. Blah, Blah, Blah… You can spin it anyway you want, but Obama hasn’t spoken to local gay press, HRC has – PERIOD. It has gotten PLENTY of negative NATIONAL press coverage and has alot of people wondering “what the F@#K”. Of course the diehard Obama supporters will “spin spin spin”. Have at it; but no one is buying it. There is no reasonable explanation as to why…so try to deflect to HRC as the evil spawn, talk about why Local Gay Press is inconsequential; talk, talk, talk… but try as you might, just understand it isn’t working because you aren’t answering the question. I believe it is pitiful and shameful, but not at all surprising. The whole campaign has gone this way… long on rhetoric, short on substance. Fortuately, people are starting to pay attention and are begining to realize the emperor has no clothes. Obama supporters realise this, which is why they are trying to run out the clock – saying HRC should step down for the good of the party, etc. etc. etc. They know the longer this goes on, the more people will realize it’s all a bunch of hot air…

  49. mikr says

    ah, the chorus of tiny violins is deafening around here. whine, whine, spin, lie, whine, wheeze. Americans are biggest bunch of spoiled children i’ve ever heard. Obama’s a gay-hatin’ nigger, Hillary’s a rich, racist cunt. OK, you’ve made your points. Move on.

  50. says

    “Clinton gave an interview to a gay paper. The only time she speaks on gay issues is to a gay audience. Obama has spoken and defended gay rights to the general population as well as reprimand a conservative christian audience for being hypocritical when it comes to gay rights.”

  51. Mike says

    Congrats Andy with putting this up where we can all see. Now where is the article about his mentor, the anti-gay bigot baptist Rev. James T. Meeks???????

  52. Chip says

    Can the gay community please not screw this up again? We need to accept the fact that the final election, between Obama (or Clinton) and McCain, will be a play for the median, independent votes. They will have to appeal to the average American, and the average American isn’t so hot on gay civil rights. It’s sad, but for now, it’s true. Politics is a game, and to win it, the Democratic candidates have to conceal some of their more liberal positions from the general public.

    I will vote for Obama or Clinton, whoever gets the democratic nod. Both will be better for the country (and especially us) than McCain. If we don’t stand united, the republicans will win again. We can’t have any more conservative Supreme Court Justices who will vote against gay civil rights.

  53. Jimmyboyo says

    Turns out

    Mark Segal, a guy who owns one gay newspaper in Philadelphia has been involved in groups endorsing Republican candidates in the past. Suddenly a log cabinite is a-ok to those who once could not understand how they exist.

    Mark Segal has many controversies surounding him such as fundraisers for Aids in which the funds never quite made it to the groups supposed to be benefitted!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    basicaly STOLE from AIDS fundraisers!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Hello, anybody out there?

    Not the poster child of the Gay Media anyone should be holding up

    Still, NOT 1 single explenation from a Hillary supporter on just how she wins the nomination

    – Obama leads pledged delegates by 167 (with supers 120+) meaning Hillary must win 65%+ in each and every remaining primary (only 10 left) though she only hit that number once in Arkansas and now her favorability rating has dropped to 38%. The lowest since 2000

    – Obama leads the popular vote by 700,000+ not including 10 caucuses that he won where they do not record the popular vote which would mean he is actually ahead 1,000,000+ popular vote

    – all interviewed non comitted super d’s saying they will NEVER overturn the vote

    -even many of Hillary’s super d’s now saying (Corzine, Murtha, etc) they will abandon her and vote for the winner of the vote when at the convention

    Please detail HOW exactly she wins the nomination.

    kudos on your support of her, but reality is fast aproaching.

    She has ruined her chances at the VP slot. Too bad because it would have been nice.

    She would be excellent as Obama’s 1st Supreme court apointment. Her experience as a lawyer and a politician would give her gravitas in dissenting against scalia and thomas. She would be a huge supporter of gay, women, and minority rights on the bench.

    A Mccain presidency will be detremental to us gays, women, minorities, and the US economy and millitary standing.

  54. ohmemercylard says

    According to the comments posted here, gay people have been completely sewn up by the Clinton camp. Oh, really?

    This old queer ain’t in her camp, and I don’t know anyone who is, gay, straight, black, or white. Even my 84-yr-old redneck Republican dad is pro-Obama. And says he would never vote for “either of the other two.”

  55. David says

    Two points:
    1. The Clinton’s gave us don’t ask,don’t tell and DOMA.
    2. While not widely reported it is well known Mark Segal is a money donating, card carrying Hillary supporter.

  56. Jim says

    Promises. Promises. All politicians make them; very few keep them. Our memories are short term. We forget the failure to follow through and keep electing the lying bastards.

  57. will says

    obama does not stand with gay people, this guy runs screaming from glbt people and does not want to associate with us. if he wins the nom, i’ll write in hillary’s name on the ballot, obama can go to hell.

  58. Michael Bedwell says

    This continued and shameful-for-those-who-like-to-think-of-themselves-as-objective spin doesn’t change the fact that Obama doesn’t have the balls that a woman has to face the gay press again. As much as I don’t want him to get the nomination, I have still said that he would be better than any Repug, and gave him much credit for finally articulating [albeit in response to a question] in Beaumont, TX, weeks ago, his opposition to nondiscrimation BEYOND simply dropping the G-word. Can no gay Obamaite simply say, “I still support him but he is wrong to refuse these interviews”?

    Instead we see another classic example of what Princeton economist/NY Times columnist Paul Krugman calls “Clinton Rules”—that is, anything Sen. Clinton does is ipso facto evil; anything Obama does is ipso facto pure and innocent. If it was Hillary refusing an interview with PGN, “The Washington Blade,” the Ohio “Gay Peoples Chronicle,” and LOGO News, and Goddess knows how many other gay media, you would be over her like ticks on a dog. But while she has faced the questions of those media outlets, Obama has refused and you switch the topic to how busy he might be [as if she’s not] or the alleged lack of objectivity of the publisher. Read this slowly:

    IT’S IRRELEVANT! “The Wall Street Journal” damn well wouldn’t endorse Obams—or any liberal Dem—but can you imagine him refusing an interview with them? Where are the deconstructions of why he didn’t interview, as she did, with the Blade or LOGO News—no “tiny newspaper no one reads anyway” but an international TV outlet?

    Obama paid for a full page ad in the Ohio paper but refused, unlike Sen. Clinton, to talk to them. If a picture making him look like St. Barack of Assisi and a couple of bumper sticker phrases about gay progress were could enough for their readers why wasn’t being asked to answer the same questions Sen. Clinton did? Where are his balls?

    “The Advocate” revealed months ago that he only agreed to be interviewed by them when he was trying to do damage control after having paid for the bus that Donnie “gays are trying to kill our children” McClurkin ran over us with. Sen. Clinton had been interviewed by them weeks before.

    The Messiah for the Gays hides behind blink and you miss them hollow sounds bites dropping the G-word and y’all squeal like little girls, wet your polyester panties, and act as if he just raised all the people who ever died of AIDS from the dead. How long will you let this smile fucker play us for stupid?

    Hillary’s known for her pants suits.
    Obama is ever more obviously an empty suit.

  59. 24play says


    Clinton took the huge risk of consenting to an interview with a guy who had already contributed $1,000 to her campaign.

    Obama decided to pass on an interview with that same 4-figure Clinton backer.

    Can you not simply say, “For undisclosed reasons I hate Obama’s guts, nonetheless even I must admit Obama would have to be a moron to have agreed to be interviewed by this major Clinton donor”?

  60. 24play says

    And now I must apologize to the various Towleroad commenters who have asserted that tiresome Obama-basher Michael Bedwell and tedious Reichen-basher Leland Frances are, in fact, one troll posting under 2 screen names, because apparently they ARE one in the same.

    If you follow this link to a 10:17 post on Queerty, you’ll see it’s identical to Bedwell’s 10:32 post above—except the Queerty comment is signed Leland Frances.

  61. Landon Bryce says


    Where are all the interviews Obama has done with gay publications who support him? And in what world does a thousand bucks make you a “major donor” to a presidential campaign? How will he ever navigate Fox News if he is scared to death of this gay local paper? You lose all credibility in supporting Obama when you fail to admit that he has shafted the gay press.

    He has done all of one interview with gay press during his presidential candidacy. With the Advocate. Only after decided to keep bigot Donnie McClurkin on his tour. He did also take part in the Logo equality forum with all other Democratic candidates.

    And that’s it! Ever! Why are you in love with a guy who won’t allow his very dubious positions on gay issues to be questioned from a gay perspective?

    Or maybe that’s it. Maybe you know on some level the weakness of his commitment to gay issues. You don’t want to have to read what he would say to gay press because it would make even more obvious the fact that he will always put those who believe that equality for gays is an affront to the civil rights movement (like his vigorous supporter Donna Brazile) ahead of you. All of the evidence points to this, but you fear what he will say under any sort of questioning.

    Or? Why do you refuse to admit that he really should find time to talk to a gay reporter today?

  62. Jimmyboyo says


    I think it has less to do with Mark Segal being a Clinton donor and more to do with the stench of controversies that suround Mark Segal.

    Who in their right mind would aproach anything let alone touch anything associated with mark Segal?

    Mark Segal a man that has supposedly been part of AIDS fundraisers where the money doesn’t get to the AIDS charities!

    That is HUGE!

    No politician in their right mind let alone no human being with any sense of deceny would or should associate with Mark Segal and his paper.

    The man has stolen money from AIDS fundraisers!

    If obama did do a interview with his rag then all the Obama haters would be screaming about Obama associating with a man who has stolen money from AIDS chairities.

    Still waiting on just 1 legitimate plan on how Hillary wins the nomination

  63. RB says

    I agree with you Jimmyboyo, Hillary cannot win the nomination and she sure as hell cannot win the general election should she pull off a “miracle”! However, Obama cannot win either, and if he does, our problems will only worsen. I have posted time and again that we have seen his campaign of hope and new leadership before; from Jimmy Carter.

    We are already upside down in the housing market, as a result of the banking deregulations, thank you Bill Clinton. Iran is on the rise, oil at an all time high and America weakened on the world stage. In walks Obama, what is next? 21% interest rates?! Sorry, no surprises here, but I will not be voting for either of them. I remember the Carter years as a young kid and they were very miserable. I cannot repeat them!

  64. Jimmyboyo says


    But McCain? Just imagine for a moment the supreme court justices he would put on the bench.

    There are 2 right now that are holding on but probably won’t last through a McCain administration.

    It isn’t a far stretch to imagine sodomy laws being redeclared unconstitutional with McCains justices apointed to the bench.

    Also take a look at how Obama has run his campaing. He even challenged people from right before the primary to do just that. To judge how he would run the country based on how he would run his campaign.

    A little known insurgent comes out of nowhere and takes down a powerful and well moneyd political machine. None of the debt problems that both McCain and Hillary have in their campaigns. A superbly organized ground team in each and every state. etc

    His managment of his campaign and the campaign team he has surrounded himself with point to a well run administration that won’t be like the carter years.

    Jimmy Carter’s biggets problem was that he was a micromanager. So much so that he even organized the white house bowling lane cleaning schedules. He didn’t like to give up control to his team and thus wasn’t a good manager at all.

    Though brokering a peace accord between Egypt and Israel was no small achievment. Putting solar panels on the white house roof (reagan had them ripped off when he came in) and installing tax breaks for home owners that installed solar cells (reagan had those nixed)was ahead of his time.

  65. 24play says


    Remember that little exchange we had in reference to Obama’s speech on race? The one where I pointed out to you that you were holding Obama responsible for anti-gay actions and bigotry by blacks with whom he has absolutely no connection?

    Well, I don’t waste my time discussing Obama with racists, so I won’t be responding to you.

  66. says

    As a reporter for a gay newspaper, we quite frankly would rather have the money from the full-page ad that Obama’s campaign took out than an interview where the candidate spews platitudes. Times are very tough for LGBT news outlets, and Clinton’s campaign would not give us the time of day. The interview with her was done through a conference call, so reporters didn’t even have a one-on-one experience.

  67. Landon Bryce says

    Yes, 24play. Your position is indefensible, so call me a racist. It won’t change the fact that Obama will not speak to the gay press. Derrick says that he’ll be falling over himself to sit down with gays once he has the nomination. I’m predicting that he won’t be doing any such thing heading into a general election where gays are a much less important constituency. I’m anxious to be proved wrong.


    Tell us about the one on one interview Obama did for your paper or don’t criticize Clinton for the conference call. I can see where economically a paper would prefer an ad, but it has no journalistic value. Sad that one needs to point that out who someone who claims to be a journalist. I’d prefer to read an interview, even one done by the dreaded conference call.

  68. David says

    If the Philadelphia Gay News is anything like the Seattle Gay News, then Obama just got my vote (again). Hell, even I wouldn’t grant that piece of trash an interview.

  69. Ronny says

    I love the spin the Obama fans have on this.

    Sad that democrats are being taken by all this smoke and mirrors by Mr. “Change” & “Hope”.

  70. Sean P Kanousis says

    Obama campaigned against the Defense of Marriage Act while running for the U.S. Senate. I find it ironic that the gay community goes crazy for HRC when they have the ability to vote for someone who not only campaigned against DOMA, but to this day will speak about gay rights – NOT JUST – to gay audiences but everywhere, including churches. It’s funny that someone above stated that the Obama people have a “holier than thou attitude”. This is coming from someone who is supporting someone who believes the presidency is owed to her. For more on HRC’s DOMA position:

Leave A Reply