The presidential race hits critical mass this week as candidates prepare for Super Tuesday. Semantics aside, the Democratic contenders – Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton – are hoping to boost their standing by nabbing former rival John Edwards’ gay supporters. And Obama seems to be in the lead.
Kerry Eleveld from The Advocate reports:
A critical mass of John Edwards’s LGBT steering committee is going public with support for Sen. Barack Obama over Sen. Hillary Clinton. Twenty-two members of the Edwards campaign’s 59-person gay and lesbian committee will now be working for Obama victories next Tuesday and throughout the rest of the primary season.
The new Obama converts include Eric Stern, who headed up Edwards’s LGBT steering committee, and longtime gay activist David Mixner, who famously campaigned for Bill Clinton in 1992, holding some of the very first gay fund-raisers for a U.S. presidential candidate.
A grand total of 30 former Edwards folk headed to Obama’s camp.
Mixner also took a look at Obama’s fresh flamers, including former Edwards fundraisers Jeff Anderson and Jeff Soukup. The duo spoke with Mixner recently and explained that they feel Obama keeps Edwards’ vision alive:
We want anything that we do to honor the causes and issues that John and Elizabeth have fought for. Jeff and I believe that supporting Barack is the best way to do this.
Stern echoed the men’s comments, particulary with regard to Barack’s campaign structure: “It is a pure grassroots, activist-oriented operation.” Stern also seems to think an electoral shift can help boost Obama’s delegate standing:
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
We believe that Obama can pick up more delegates if the 12%-15% of Edwards supporters nationwide — and even more in some states — will turn out for Obama. We believe we can make a difference.
Not all of Edwards’ gays are going toward Obama, however, Eleveld tells us she’s heard of at least fifteen of Edwards-loving are helping the former first lady reach her electoral goals.
Charley
Majority of us gay men will support Obama with his deep solacing voice, Majority of lesbians with her PMS anxiety ridden and irritating voice will support Hillary. A no brainer.
jojo62
Barack Obama is drawing fire for including Donnie McClurkin, a Grammy-winning gospel singer who has crusaded against homosexuality, on a concert and political tour that the Democratic presidential candidate will launch in South Carolina later this week.One gay activist involved with the Obama campaign said the situation puts the candidate in a bind, since he risks offending evangelicals in South Carolina if he cancels McClurkin’s appearance but could alienate gay supporters if the performance proceeds as planned.
“This story is quickly turning into a disaster for Barack,” said the supporter who is active on gay and lesbian issues. “He’s screwed if he goes through with the trip with Donnie McClurkin….But he’s also screwed in South Carolina if he dumps McClurkin. I hope that the staffer who set this up has already been fired.”
Charley
McClurkin debacle is history and not that important to LGBT voters. Obama won South Carolina, is flying the rainbow flag on the steps of his UCC church, getting endorsements from the Kennedy Klan, is tied with Hillary in the Super Tuesday polls. We must go forward, forget about mistakes. At least he recognizes he made a mistake. Clinton won’t do that about voting for the war in Iraq. Obama didn’t vote for the war. Shows good judgement from the beginning.
Michael Bedwell
Uh, JoJo, that’s old news but STILL totally relevant to judging Obama’s credibility.
As for Eleveld, that’s the “news editor” who deepthroated Obama’s shocking lie during his McClurkingate damage control attempt in his interview with “The Advocate.†Sen. Obama said that he, “was a chief cosponsor of and then passed“ “the human rights ordinance in Illinois.â€
TRUTH: He was not a cosponsor of any kind of the bill that finally came to a vote nor was he even still a member of the legislature when that historic bill was voted on after over thirty years of similar attempts. [To the contrary, his replacement Sen. Kwame Raoul became a cosponsor and voted for it. One less vote and it would have died, as did the three earlier bills that he did belatedly cosponsor after four years in the state legislature .] Neither Equality Illinois nor “Windy City Times,” in their reports on the by-a-hair victory, mention any efforts on Obama’s part to even speak for it.
It’s obvious why he lied, but one can only speculate why he chose not to pause his campaigning for US Senate for the few seconds it would have taken to sign onto the bill at a time when he was most needed. Could there be a correlation with his promising at least twice after being sent to DC that he would not run for President but serve out his six-year term? I guess that’s some other Barack Obama on Tuesday’s ballot. But it was that one who lied to “The Advocate†who were too lazy to fact check his claim.
SOURCE: Advocate Obama interview: http://www.advocate.com/news_detail_ektid50021.asp
SOURCE: official Illinois legislature timeline of SB3186: http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocNum=3186&GAID=3&DocTypeID=SB&LegId=11145&SessionID=3&GA=93
Mixner defines the “hell hath no fury like a queen scorned” after, while he was too busy fighting HRC for control of the subject to help the new, naive President, former friend Bill got rode hard and put up wet by those in Congress and the Pentagon demanding DADT. 15 years later, Mixner’s bitterness is still so raging and irrational that you’d think HE had a stained blue dress in his closet, too—size extra extra extra extra extra large. One might also think after the Clinton’s forgave him for allegedly lying to them about his grief over a fiancee killed in a car accident who happened never to have existed or for allegedly lying to them about dying of cancer when he wasn’t, that he wouldn’t carry such a grudge, but…..
Eric Stern’s an honorable, admirable, dedicated gay rights activist but, in addition to not looking behind Obama’s DOMA smoke and mirrors act and Obama’s lie about the gay rights bill in Illinois, he’s apparently done just as little examination of Obama in relation to his other stated motivation, the Senator’s record on money and special interest groups. I guess he missed this chain of events:
DECEMBER 22nd: FACT: “Obama slammed John Edwards at a town hall today, saying he ‘talks the talk’ but doesn’t ‘walk the walk’ when it comes to the influence of special interest groups.†Edwards denied it and condemned Obama for his tactics.
See: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/12/22/531377.aspx
Just LAST MONTH, the focus shifted to Obama’s own hands: “’I’m really disappointed that Sen. Obama has not called on his friends at Vote Hope to pull these ads down’,” said Eric Bauman, chairman of the Los Angeles Democratic Party, who has not endorsed any candidate. ‘He harshly criticized Sen. Edwards when supporters ran independent ads on his behalf. And now that it’s happened for him, he’s not said a word’.”
SEE: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/01/25/BA3TULQIT.DTL
Further, has Stern not yet noticed that Obama’s official 64-page “Blueprint for Change—Barack Obama’s Plan for America” contains not one sentence, not one word, not one syllable about LGBT issues compared to John Edwards’ plan which devoted a page to LGBT causes? By that crucial measure alone: NOTHING could be farther from, as Stern put it, continuing “John Edwards’ mission to ensure that the American dream is available to EVERYONE” than voting for Barack Obama!
Run, Bambi, run!
Michael Bedwell
Charley, Charley, how creative you are at writing fiction! It’s the United Church of Christ not the United Church of Obama, though you’re obviously one of the Obamamaniacs who think HE’s the Messiah. In fact, Obama takes the exact opposite view of his denomination on marriage equality—THEY support it while he leaves it in the hands of people like Donnie McClurkin to decide.
And, girlfriend, Obama COULDN’T vote against the war then because he wasn’t in the Senate then. Any bum on the street can have an opinion. And, as I recall, he’s since voted for funding.
John
I was an ardent Edwards’ supporter. I have to vote tomorrow for Clinton or Obama. Still haven’t decided. Discuss…
Paul
Michael Bedwell, I’m afraid it is you who are writing fiction.
Obama is a firm supporter of civil unions for LGBT. Something which Donnie McClurkin would never support.
Obama has gone on record many times stating that he absolutely does NOT agree with or support McClurkin’s views in any shape or form.
In his passionate speech at Ebenezer Church on MLK day, Obama made clear his unwavering support for the LGBT community while calling on people like McClurkin to change their bigoted ways.
The speech can be seen here…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kf0x_TpDris
Michael Bedwell
Paul, just because you’ve closed your eyes and gone down on Obama’s big one [read half truth], please don’t try to put words in MY mouth.
Yes, Obama says he encourages states to legally recognize civil unions, but he also says it’s their right NOT to—though you’d never know that from the lazy and hypnotized gay media.
According to an August 11, 2007, ABC News online story [link below]: “Obama believes states should be under no obligation to recognize same-sex marriages from other states. He wants to fully repeal DOMA, however, because he views the statute as ‘ineffectual and redundant’, in the words of [Obama supporter and his former Constitutional law professor Lawrence] Tribe. Obama believes a long-recognized public policy exception to the Constitution’s Full Faith and Credit Clause exempts a state from having to recognize a same-sex marriage from another state which runs counter to its own public policies. ‘Marriage is not something that states have ever been obliged to recognize if it’s been against their own public policy’, said Tribe, who has testified on the subject before Congress. ‘Same-sex couples [for instance] in Massachusetts are neither better nor worse off with DOMA repealed except that the repeal of DOMA is a way of telling that couple that their marriage in Massachusetts is not going to be made the subject of a symbolic and ineffectual slam by the federal government’.”
Though sent out by the Obama campaign to attack Sen. Clinton for something they called a “symbolic insult†[wonder what they think of “to be Lanced�], Tribe seems to have been rushed back to the bowels of Obama campaign headquarters after revealing too much.
SOURCE: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3468949&page=1
While the article only mentions “marriages,” it follows Tribe’s remark, “Marriage is not something that states have ever been obliged to recognize if it’s been against their own public policy,” would also apply to civil unions, domestic partnerships, whatever.
Further proof is that when he says, “But I also believe that the federal government should not stand in the way of states that want to decide on their own how best to pursue equality for gay and lesbian couples – whether that means a domestic partnership, a civil union, or a civil marriage,” the converse is obvious: he believes that they also have the right to deny us that equality by not recognizing relationships regardless of what they’re called.
Further proof that DOMA Section 2 is toothless and meaningless is that if it actually forbid anything by itself, there would not now be legally married gay couples in Massachusetts and domestic partnerships in California, DC, Oregon, Maine, and Washington state, and legal civil unions in New Hampshire, Connecticut, New Jersey, and Vermont.
As black lesbian minister Irene Monroe has said, Obama has been playing us stupid, dazzling us with pretty words and a certain level of charisma that prevents all but a few but looking behind the curtain to see what’s really there.
McClurkin? I take more seriously what Obama DID than what he said. Obama was asked not to just tell US that he disagrees with McClurkin but to tell the audience that night. He refused. Instead he simply introduced McClurkin [by video] to 3000 black evangelical South Carolina voters as one of his favorite performers and paid for the microphone and stage upon which McClurkin screeched “GOD DELIVERED ME FROM HOMOSEXUALITY!!!!!!!!!” All under the aegis of the Obama campaign, with Obama signs everywhere and Obama volunteers signing up voters.
And then came that sea of signs undulating behind him the night he declared victory in South Carolina which read, “Stand for Change.” Some might think it only a coincidence that they echo the title of McClurkin’s famous Grammy-winning hit, “Stand!” I believe it more of Obama playing the “homophobe card” even as he is not traditionally homophobic himself.
As for that speech at Ebenezer Baptist, all he said was that they should stop scorning and start embracing us which did nothing to shake up those who have been preaching, “hate the sin, love the sinner” for years. The religious arm of the Antigay Industry learned long ago how well such hollow language works with the naive to disguise their agenda and hatred. The most financially successful “ex-gay” “convertion” con conventions even title it “Love Won Out.”
Michael Bedwell
As for the migration of some Edwards supporters to Obama, obviously they haven’t read his official 64-page “Blueprint for Change—Barack Obama’s Plan for America” which contains not one sentence, not one word, not one syllable about LGBT issues. Did he run out of paper?
John Edward’s plan devoted a page to LGBT causes! By that crucial measure alone:
NOTHING could be farther from continuing what Stern has called “John Edwards’ mission to ensure that the American dream is available to EVERYONE” than voting for Barack Obama!
Run Bambi Run!
qjersey
Hrrmph, some “change,” we’ve had 8 years of GW Bush playing to the evangelicals for support.
And now we have Obama doing the same thing, yeah change, yeah.
Stevo
I agree with Michael Bedwell. Obama shows little “audacity” when it comes to LGBT issues.
In all his talk of “unity” has he ever said “Gay and Straight Together”?
miguelito
I’m turned off from Obama by the Donnie McClurkin scandal. I think that it was really a vision of Obama’s thought of mind and future when he refused to back down after the thousands of people that protested or raised question. It was a fatal mistake, in my opinion. I feel that a lot of the GLBT community thinks the same. I’ll go all out to campaign and vote for Hillary over Obama.
miguelito
Also, in terms of him in a general point of view, all he does is preach lofty bipartisan poetry. No action. No fishfighting. He’s a naive wuss. Infact, he’s too bipartisan.
Kelly
John #5: Vote for John Edwards anyway tomorrow. He’s still on the ballot and can still accumulate delegates. Why hold your nose to choose between two people who can’t hold a candle to him? We’ll have our chance to vote for the “least worst” in November. For now the message is more important.
seitan-on-a-stick
Kudos to the Obama supporters for being at every subway stop, stickering every bus shelter and USPS mailbox to energize the base. He certainly is making history as an African-American running to be the Commander in Chief. I even asked a young gay guy in the village why he’s wearing a Barack pin and he said that “It was cool and he just wanted to fit in at his college” with a laugh. Young kids! Oprah campaigned in California (Vice President?) and his wife Michelle (a future Black Hillary?) certainly energized the base with Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s wife and several of the Kennedys (4 Kennedys actually endorsed Hillary to be fair) while the Govinator stumped for McCain (I hope he doesn’t beat Maria again if Barack wins) Bill Clinton was contrite while campaigning for his wife, Hillary and said nice things about Barack, too. It was certainly a touchy-feely day. I just wished that Obama’s supporters gave me a flyer too (was it the leather chaps?) I did notice a lot of Hillary stickers and signs in the gay neighborhoods but Barack had the Smackdown on the rest of New York. Will gays turn out for our New York Senator or treat her like Al Gore in 2000 and stay home and let McCain win? I guess we will know tomorrow after people vote on issues dear to them like Universal Healthcare, National Security, the working poor, immigration reform and who is likely to be more Gay-friendly in the Oval Office. Most importantly, who can we Trust and who can Win?
jacksmith
Bottom Line:
Like all of you. I know that health care is the most critical, and important issue facing the American people. Now, and in the coming elections. And like the vast majority of the American people, I want HR 676 (Medicare For All) passed into law NOW! “Single payer, Tax Supported, Not For Profit, True Universal Health Care” free for all as a right. Like every other developed country in the world has. See: http://www.house.gov/conyers/news_hr676.htm
“HR 676:
For church goers: less money to insur. companies and more to the church- lots more.
Srs on Medicare: save way over $100/wk. Because no more medigap, long term care & dental insur. needed. No more drug bills.â€
But if we the American people fail to bring enough pressure on our current politicians to get HR 676 passed into law before the elections. We will have to identify, and replace all the politicians standing in the way of passage of HR 676. And, I think the best first place to start is with the politicians that blocked the bipartisan SCHIP bills for the kids. Passed by congress twice.
But what about the President. It was Bush after all that blocked the bipartisan SCHIP bill passed by congress to assure more health coverage for Americas kids. So which of the presidential hopefuls do I think will be most supportive of implementing the demand of the majority of the American people to have HR 676 (Medicare For All) passed into law immediately!
We have some very fine presidential candidates who would make good presidents. But none of the top Presidential candidates directly support HR 676, the only true Universal Health Care plan. So I am supporting Hillary Clinton. She is the only top candidate that has ever actually fought for universal health care before.
I have enormous admiration, and respect for Hillary Clinton. She fought a pitched battle against overwhelming odds back in 1993. To prevent this disastrous health care crisis that is now devastating the American people, and America. She fought so hard for the American people that she risk almost completely destroying her husbands presidency. I haven’t forgotten her heroic effort. If any Presidential hopeful for universal health care deserves my support, it’s her.
Also, if we the American people fail to bring enough pressure on our government to give us HR 676 which we all so desperately need NOW! Then we will need the most skilled politician we can get on our side to broker the best health care plan for the American people that we can get. Though it will be less than we need, and less than we deserve. The politician I think to best do this is Hillary Clinton. The Clinton’s are probably the most skilled politicians in American history.
The insurance industry, and medical industry that has been ripping you off, and killing you has given Hillary Clinton so much money because they fear her. They have also given Barack Obama so much money because they fear Hillary Clinton. They think they can manipulate Barack Obama against the best interest of the American people better than they can manipulate Hillary Clinton. There is no race issue with Hillary Clinton. The Clinton’s are the poster family for how African Americans want white people to be towards African Americans.
As always, African Americans are suffering, and dieing in this health care crisis at a much higher rate than any other group in America. The last time there was any significant drop in the African American death rate was when Bill Clinton was president.
My fellow Americans, you are dieing needlessly at an astounding rate. In higher numbers than any other people in the developed world. Rich, and poor a like. Insured, and uninsured. Men, women, children, and babies. And we the American people must stop it. And fix it NOW! Keep Fighting!!! Never! give up hope. There are millions of lives at stake. Bless you all… You are doing great!
Rocco Halliwell
I find it insulting that one would suggest that because Im a gay man then I am going to automatically vote for Barack and that PMS ridden lesbians are going to vote for Hillary. This is so much more than gender or race. It is about the ability to lead the country and repair the damages George W’s reign of terror has done to our wonderful country. Barack may be the current media darling with his rock star persona and his sense of humor and celebrity endorsements, but it’s about who can be the best president on day 1 and that’s why I will be voting Hillary Clinton for Commander in Chief. 35 years of experience as oppossed to 2 years. The math does itself. As far as LGBT issues are concerned, Hillary is the obvious candidate for breaking barriers and crusading that fight the no Republican would even dream of fighting. Hillary’s stance has been proven time and time again. When I listen to her speak, there is a firm sincerity in her voice which makes me absolutely certain she is the one to do everything not only wanted, but needed. Barack’s answers are not personal and I don’t buy it. He’s a great guy I’m sure, but he’s not my president. Hillary ’08.
PS For those who feel Hillary isn’t getting the young vote, I am 23 and a strong advocate for Hillary. It’s not easy to do so in Texas and so many of my friends in my age bracket are also voting for her.
hells kitchen guy
YAWN. these “steering committees” are all inside baseball. No one cares. People will vote because for someone because they had a raise, or they’re on their period, or Obama’s handsome or Hillary got a haircut.
In other words, have fun, kids!
Charley
Hillary, a woman sexually weak in the knees around men, won’t be able to fight McCain. She voted for the war and won’t say it was a mistake. If she was a fighting lesbian and got rid of Bill, truly for womens rights, I probably would vote for her.
l
Edwards is out because our moronic media cannot handle a story with more than two characters in it. (The poor things were overloaded, having to deal with real contests in both parties and in multiple states. Oh dearie dear!) Those worthless slobs really have a tough time covering news that isn’t handed to them in a press release. Like last week when they followed Bush out to a “faith-based” drug rehab program in prison. Would have been a good time to converse with our drunk, AWOL, cokehead President…. but they did not dare.