04/04/2008
Towleroad Guide to the Tube #270
GAY BACHELOR: MyPartner.com (a Towleroad advertiser) kicks off nationwide search for Most eligible Gay Bachelor.
LAURA BRANIGAN: The Filipino prisoners are back, performing "Gloria".
FAMILY: One of three powerful new PSAs shot by Babel director Alejandro González Iñárritu for the Montana Meth Project. View the others here.
BARACK OBAMA: Gets a gay marriage question on Hardball.
Check out our previous guides to the Tube here.
Sphere: Related ContentPosted 3:25 PM EST by Andy in Barack Obama, Couples, Gay Marriage, Montana, News, Towleroad Guide to the Tube | Permalink
Comments
Laura Branigan is sorely missed. One of the original gay divas!
Posted by: Shawn | Apr 4, 2008 3:29:17 PM
Obama is being disingenuious here. First he says the feds don't recognise civil unions, then he says it's up to the states to make sure civil unions have all the same rights as traditional marriage then says he will change it all when he becomes President.
If, as he says, it's the states job, then how is his being President going to change anything?
As an example, McCain, who is against gay marriage also, happens to be just as Obama is for gay civil unions with all the rights that Obama mentioned. He also believes it's a states issue. So if all we want is the rights that go with marriage and civil unions why vote for Obama?, when a vote for McCain or even Hillary will get us the same results.
Not endorsing any of them, but just wanted to point that out.
Posted by: Joshua | Apr 4, 2008 3:44:31 PM
Who'd have thought that the largest dance production number celebrating the glory of our gay past would come out of a Filipino prison.
We ought to try an organize big musical productions in American prisons. It would help bring black, white & Latino inmates together...you know?
Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Apr 4, 2008 3:47:35 PM
Is it weird to anyone else that Obama, as a Black man, is simply saying "Separate, but equal"
Posted by: Tyler | Apr 4, 2008 4:01:40 PM
yes, miss derrick, great idea... and i suggest for starters a production of west side story... i know some of those transgendered prisoners would love a crack at maria or anita... "have you seen my good friend maria, the craziest girl on the block?" cell block H that is!
Posted by: the queen | Apr 4, 2008 4:05:20 PM
I don't see how any gay person can be excited for Barack Obama. He and Hillary are the same on most issues, including this one, but at least she hasn't parroted around anti-equality pastors at big campaign events, giving them a forum for their hate. Tyler makes an excellent point about the "seperate, but equal" hypocrisy Obama exudeds every time he answers a marriage-equality question. He should be ashamed of himself.
If he wins the primary, I'll vote for him, only because McCain will set us back even further... but I'm not going to hold much hope that Obama will do anything to remove DOMA from the books, and mark my words DADT won't go away for a long time either.
Posted by: Ryan | Apr 4, 2008 4:09:44 PM
Joshua, small correction:
Obama said it's important that "the state" provide all the same benefits -- i. e. the Federal Govt., not individual states.
So well ahead of McCain there...
Posted by: kevinvt | Apr 4, 2008 4:26:56 PM
I hear you Ryan, I'm not holding much hope for Obama to do anything..can you imagine his first meeting with a foreign leader? Like America doesn't have enough to be embarrassed about...
Posted by: daveynyc | Apr 4, 2008 4:30:39 PM
Powerful ad, but has anyone read of meth'd up kids raiding homes like that? Seems a bit much.
Posted by: ridwah | Apr 4, 2008 4:33:58 PM
and Ryan, personally I think DADT will go away sooner than you think, and sooner than DOMA.
But Obama did say, "Unlike Senator Clinton, I support the complete repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA)" That, for one thing, would appear to set them apart.
Um... DaveyNYC -- these leaders have been meeting Bush for years, he's currently being protested in Zagreb, Croatia. Europeans I know have been quite impressed with Obama, so I'm not sure where you're coming from (and would rather not speculate).
For the record, I'll vote for any Dem candidate. Obama gets props for being anti-DOMA. But Hillary gets props for at least talking to the gay press in Philadelphia.
Posted by: Kevinvt | Apr 4, 2008 4:38:33 PM
I thought Obama's response to the gay marriage question was less than articulate. I must, however, respond to Joshua's assertion: "So if all we want is the rights that go with marriage and civil unions why vote for Obama?, when a vote for McCain or even Hillary will get us the same results."
In reference to CU's McCain said this to George:
STEPHANOPOULOS: So you're for civil unions?
McCAIN: No. I am for ability of two -- I do not believe gay marriage should be legal. I do not believe gay marriage should be legal. But I do believe that people ought to be able to enter into contracts, exchange powers of attorney, other ways that people who have relationships can enter into.
Supporting the right of gay people to "enter into contracts" is not the same as supporting CUs. None of the candidates are supporting full marriage, but McCain is not even supporting CUs, unless he's changed his mind again since saying this in response to NH's CU legislation: "I am opposed to that legislation."
So, let's be clear, Joshua, either Obama or "even" Hillary are better choices than McCain on this issue.
Posted by: Ernie | Apr 4, 2008 4:45:04 PM
That is the most fabulous thing I've ever seen! Prisoners dancing to Gloria!? LOVE IT!
Posted by: Cody | Apr 4, 2008 4:58:22 PM
ridwah, you are absolutely right about the meth ad. It reminds me of those pot ads that show potheads running over children, or raping girls at parties.
There are plenty of horrible consequences from using meth. We don't have to make up fiction to scare people.
Posted by: wetcnt | Apr 4, 2008 5:05:18 PM
Kevin....he quite clearly says states. And he has in the past when asked this question.
As to McCain and the legal papers....that is what he said recently, though I only read the interview, didn't actually see it. But he has on many occasions the past 3 years said he has no problem with civil unions, as long as they are voted on by the people, not court imposed. Now that court thing does make him less than Obama or Hillary on the issue. But my point was, that since Obama really offers so much less than Hillary, why are gays so thrilled with his usual rehtoric, when Hillary offers the same.
From the standpoint of someone who isn't for either of them, I have a lot of trouble understanding how people can be so obcessed with Obama when looking at his record(actually, his *lack* of a record) and seeing who and what he has allowed to be in his inner circle, then comparing that to his rhetoric, he just dosen't add up.
Hillary is a lier, a dissembler, and basically an old fashioned politician, but she does have a long public record of supporting many things that gays should be happy about and a long record of statements that she would if able to, change some mistakes made by her husband.
I very much dislike Bill Clinton, but you have to look at the time's when he went for DADT and later the Defense of Marriage Act. The first was the best he could do considering the entire top brass was against even that. The other came when he was about to fight to save himself from impeachment.
Since there's not a dimes worth of difference between Obama and Hillary on almost all of the issues, people need to back up and hold their tongues instead of villifing the other guys supporters. Neither of them have hands on experince of a Presidential level, but Hillary actually has a full term in the Senate and some real legislative accomplishments. Obama has very little going for him. If you take off the rose colored glasses and look, he passed almost nothing of note in Illinois, voted *present* on the most important issues. Was in the U.S. Senate 103 days when he announced for President, has no bills bearing his name for anything(as a sponser along with dozens of other Senators, yes, his name is on some bills, but not as the person who wrote or co-wrote the bills). He was asked by Senators to joing the gang of fourteen, he refused, he was asked to help write the new ethics bill, he refused and on several other occasions did the same....for a man who claims he will find bi-partisian answers to America's problems he sure isn't very bi-partisan(all of those things I mention were efforts by moderate Republicans and moderate to Liberal Democrats to pass worthwhile bills and move on judges). So much for that arguement.
Posted by: Joshua | Apr 4, 2008 5:27:49 PM
I understand it's a hard answer. But what I want is a timeline. When will we have full federal civil union rights? The second month, the second year, or the potential second term of his presidency. I am uneasy over the possibility that Hil and Obama are both just giving us lip service... or worse, only one, and that we will choose the wrong one.
Posted by: Mark | Apr 4, 2008 5:56:04 PM
I screamed out "separate, but equal" from the audience of "Hardball," but being in one of the last rows has its drawbacks.
Other than that statement, I was pretty impressed with Obama on my campus. He was really great about taking pictures with students who could get close enough, and seemed to enjoy himself almost as much as the audience did. He definitely jumped a few points in my book.
Posted by: Jackie | Apr 4, 2008 10:48:57 PM
This discussion is purely academic.
I hate to have to quote that brilliant philosopher, George W. Bush, but with regards to the Democrats:
"Fool me once, shame on you...fool me twice, you ummm...you can't get fooled again"
While the Republicans are undoubtedly worse, lets not get ahead of ourselves. The Federal Democrats are pretty pathetic when it comes to LGBT issues too. A Democratic Congress overwhelmingly passed DADT. A Democratic Congress overwhelmingly approved of travel restrictions against "known homosexuals." Although it was enacted by a GOP Congress, a majority of Democrats endorsed DOMA at the time.
The reality is we haven't gotten anything from the Democrats yet. Why didn't they attach the Matthew Shepard Act to the war budget like they promised? Because they traded us away for something they wanted more (extra farm subsidies). We're always the first ones to get thrown under the bus.
Posted by: John | Apr 5, 2008 3:15:00 AM
If you want to read more about the dancing prison population:
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/01/15/asia/inmates.php
Posted by: jno | Apr 5, 2008 8:13:49 AM
Recent Comments