***UPDATED VERSION***
Obama actually did an interview with the Advocate recently. Wowie zowie! I guess all of the LGBT groups endorsing Clinton got to him. As I have mentioned, Clinton has done a TON of interviews with LGBT press, Obama, not so much. And in this interview, he makes some DOOZIES of claims - now THERE'S a big surprise!
OK - let's look at what he said abt "Don't Ask, Don't Tell": “I reasonably can see “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” eliminated,’’ Obama told the magazine, though he wouldn’t make the issue “a litmus test’’ for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Reasonably?? Gee, Obama - thanks for the strength of your convictions!
Clinton? She wants it gone, PERIOD. She has not wavered on this, and has ben VERY clear - no mealy mouth hemming and hawing, just get rid of it. It was good at the time insofar as it was MUCH better than what had been before (though Colin Powell and the Republicans stabbed Clinton in the back by twisitng it after he left - service members were SUPPOSED to be left alone - that was the whole point).
Kudos to some folks over at TalkLeft for pointing this one out - I admit, I had skimmed over it because I was already cracking up at the BAS he was spewing, and didn't see one MAJOR part of this quote: "Somebody else who influenced me, I actually had a professor at Occidental -- now, this is embarrassing because I might screw up his last name -- Lawrence Golden, I think it was. He was a wonderful guy. He was the first openly gay professor that I had ever come in contact with, or openly gay person of authority that I had come in contact with. And he was just a terrific guy. He wasn't proselytizing all the time, but just his comfort in his own skin and the friendship we developed helped to educate me on a number of these issues. " WHAT THE HECK?? He actually met a gay man who didn't try to PROSELYTIZE him?!?! Really?!?! Wow - that is most unprecendeted - NOT!!!! Uh, Obama - you're kinda letting your bias show here. Just sayin'.
Next? He was asked why he had been so silent on LGBT issues compared to Clinton. His response? ""I don’t think it’s fair to say silence on gay issues,’’ Obama told the magazine.“The gay press may feel like I’m not giving them enough love. But basically, all press feels that way at all times.'' (Huh - somehow, Clinton has managed to find time to meet with LOTS of different LGBT press - maybe it is because she has ALWAYS been committed to this community??!)
“Obviously, when you’ve got limited amount of time, you’ve got so many outlets,’’ Obama said in the interview. “We tend not to do a whole bunch of specialized press. We try to do general press for a general readership.
“But I haven’t been silent on gay issues,’’ Obama told the magazine. “What’s happened is, I speak oftentimes to gay issues to a public general audience.
"When I spoke at Ebenezer Church for King Day, I talked about the need to get over the homophobia in the African-American community, when I deliver my stump speeches routinely I talk about the way that antigay sentiment is used to divide the country and distract us from issues that we need to be working on, and I include gay constituencies as people that should be treated with full honor and respect as part of the American family. (Uh, gee - was that before or after you took Donnie McClurkin on your campaign tour??? Did you happen to mention ANY of this to James Meeks, the ANTI-gay IL state senator, 'cause if so, he isn't listening! And he's one of your BFF!)
“So I actually have been much more vocal on gay issues to general audiences than any other presidential candidate probably in history.’’
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Ahem - now that I have stopped rolling around on the floor laughing my head off...Are you FREAKING KIDDING ME?!?!?!?!! What a pompous, arrogant, lying SOB! He thinks he has been more vocal on this issue than ANY OTHER CANDIDATE?? Maybe he missed Hillary on the Ellen Show the other day talking about gay rights (the video is on this blog), or her gazillion interviews, or even her HUSBAND talking about it. This guy is something else. If you feel inclined to read the rest of his interview, here: http://www.advocate.com/exclusive_detail_id53285.asp
And if you do, you will see why "the gays love Hillary," as Kathy Griffin would say. And we do. Because she WILL end DADT, and she WILL end DOMA - none of these, "well, ya know, I won't like MAKE the Joint Chiefs stop persecuting gay people necessarily, but I'll sure mention to 'em how maybe they shouldn't!" No "well, I'm sure interested in repealing DOMA." Yeah,, okay you spineless jellyfish. Forget you - Hillary will make it happen. No doubt!
4 comments:
Hi there Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy! Gee, what's the best way to shorten that? RRRAmy? Rev Amy?
Just wanted to stop over and thank you again and again for your participation on my blog yesterday. That thread is still going strong, and I just gave a very long, and maybe a little bit angry response to a comment to a guy who used to come around and was supportive of my blog...until I went all "Hillary" on him. Sigh...this is the one thing I hate about this election, the division it's caused.
Anyway, here I am on your blog and I wanted to say thanks for this! I have a lot of bloggers from the LGBT community that come to my blog, I've written a few posts in support of the gay community and they all know my disappointment in how our country has treated them.
Obama claims that the rights of the African American community need to be recognized. Why is it that he can't show the same compassion and understanding of the LGBT community who have fewer rights than African Americans? I'm not saying one deserves more attention than the other, but they deserve equal attention...they deserve equal rights.
When Hillary supports the LGBT community, she does it because she sees all the work that needs to be done. When Obama says he supports them, it's because the polls say that he needs to in order to win votes. Believe me, after this election, and if by some horrible twist of fate we end up with him as our President, the gay community will be left behind. Oh...well, maybe he'll mention them in a speech before the next election...maybe.
I'm adding your blog to my blogroll, kiddo. Get used to me hanging around...unless you go all Obama on me. ;-)
Fat chance of THAT, Mary ELlen!! I am a Hillary supporter,or no one at all!
And thank YOU for coming by, and adding your voice (you can call me Amy, btw!). I'll be bopping over to your site to see what all is going on there!
I conpletely agree abt Obama. He could give a crap abt our community, and we know it. There is no way in HELL he wil do anything positive on his own, no doubt abt it. And you know, it is no surprise that Donna Brazile is so gung-ho for him - they seem to be cut from the same cloth. I assume you know that she would not ALLOW LGBT delegates in the Affirmative Action group to Denver because - wait for it - it was an effront to the Civil Rights movement (I am paraphrasing, but that is the essence of it). Whaa? Are you KIDDING me?? Sheesh.
I also agree that making sure all people have civil rights does not detract from ANYONE else, so Obama can be supportive of ALL Americans being treated fairly...As IF!! (I know - sometimes I crack myself up!!)
Anywho - thank you for your comments, and for adding me to your roll - WOW!! Awesome! I am going to do likewise! (LOVE your icon, btw!!)
Amy- I've been dealing with Obamabots all freakin' day today, sheesh. The guy Robert who came to my blog and asked if HRC supporters would support Obama if he is nominated got an earful...or is it eyeful of commentary about what he posted on his blog today.
A little background about Robert, he's a really nice guy and I used to frequent his blog regularly, before this primary turned to two candidates and we went in opposite directions. Originally I supported Edwards and then after watching Hillary in the debates, I switched my support to her. She was by far the most intelligent candidate in the group, IMO. Anyway, he quit being supportive of my blog, e-mailed me with a nasty note AFTER I had already mentioned I was leaving town on a family emergency...and then was put out because I didn't continue discussing the issue of Obama with him. Now, the only time he comes around is to accuse me of endangering the country because I won't support Obama. You know...all of us must hate America because we aren't with "The One". Don't they sound like right wingers? Scary.
Anyway, I went over to his blog and had it out with him there. Like most Obamabots, he can't discuss the issues because he only knows the sound bytes he gets from the Obama speeches and his blog. When I correct his information, he just blows it off and tells me that it will be my fault if McCain wins.
This really kills me because the guy has a lot of good attributes. He goes to many of the big war protests, even in Washington D.C. (He lives in Indiana), and I respect him for taking the time to do that. But that doesn't give him the right to arrogantly tell Clinton supporters that we should throw our support to Obama because the only votes that count are the ones he won. The hell with Ohio, TX, CA, MA, NH, NM, NV, RI, and of course, FL and MI. But hey, he won the small red states that won't go blue in the general election anyway. Somehow, those are supposed to trump the big states Hillary won. Not to mention, she won by fighting him and his thugs, the media, and the AA community, along with him outspending her by twice and three times the amount of money for ads. And SHE is the one that is the weaker candidate? I don't think so!
To be honest, I'm terrified what life is going to be like if the DNC hands this over to Obama. If you think they are smug now, just wait. It's going to be hell for years to come. Robert already said today, "If Obama is President, will you eat your words when he accomplishes all that he said he would?" I just responded, it depends...on which time he said what. He's changed his message on Iraq about three times, the economy--he still doesn't have a grasp on what to do, and we already know there won't be universal health care because he never promised that, only Hillary did. How do you eat your words when he never commits to anything? Besides, Obama doesn't have to accomplish anything, they'll support him anyway and make excuses for him just like they do now. It's always someone else's fault when he loses according to them.
Ugh...I would rather see McCain win, as bad as he is, than to look at that smug look on his face for four ...or heaven forbid, 8 years.
Oh, I hear you. So many people have said if Obama wins, they'll have to keep changing their channel, like they do with Bush now. And all of the things you say abt him are COMPLETELY true - I do not know how he became such a teflon man so quickly, but he really does remind me of Bush - Lite. He's had EVERYTHING handed to him in his political career, just like Bush has with all of his jobs (and he failed at every single one of them!). I just cannot get over the similarities.
Anywho - I am sorry that someone with whom you had a relationship was not able to accept your choice. It IS your choice, but I swear - I have never seent his kind of vitriol being spewed by Dems before at OURSELVES!! It really is a divided house, and again - I blame Dean, Brazile, and the DNC for starters, and Obama and his campaign people with their arrogance, race baiting, victim-if anything-doesn't-go-their-way-crap, constant UNFOUNDED attacks on Clinton, and everything you said abt them and their supporters. And I think Obama DOES bear responsibility for how vitriolic his supporters have come. By both of the Obamas saying they won't necessarily support Hillary, they set up the division, and have continued to fan those flames ever since. I can tell you, from my experience, Clinton does NOT spend a lot of time tearing down Obama in her speeches, yet that is a LOT of what Obama does (oh - and I think someone was talking abt how the media gives him all of this coverage for things like his Economics policy, even though HILLARY IS THE ONE WHO WROTE IT!!! Since WHEN did we think it was great to support the CHEATER and not the one capable of actually creating the work??).
Anywho - I am sorry that you have been attacked, and that this process has become so contentious that people are far less willing to extend real grace to each other. It is truly a shame, epecially with Robert, especially when you were already dealing with a family emergency (I do hope that worked out okay)...
Thanks again for dropping by. Keep the faith, sister!
Post a Comment