WW-WIS-D?!

flameout.

Excellent point about how some give Obama a pass on this, but would not if it were Bush. Reminds me of the fools who gave Clinton a pass when he signed the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996.

"Those of you who continue to try and rationalize it—would you be making the same exculpatory arguments if it was George W. Bush doing the things Obama is doing right now?"

Not an apt comparison. Obama is not George W. Bush. That's why people are considering this issue carefully and are willing to cut him some slack.

I think it's showing a real lack of character, not to mention savvy, but Obama can't be dismissed as a complete wingnut yet.

I've been loosing enthusiasm for this guy for a while. Actually, I've pretty much forgotten why I ever liked him. Is there still a chance Gore will get in this?

Clearly this is going to wind up another race between a giant douche and a turd sandwich.

It's worth pointing out that Kos is hardly a bastion of pro-gay sentiment. He has spent a lot of time denouncing groups that focus on issues at the expense of the Democratic Party. Concern for issues over partisanship gets characterized as "pie fights" all the time on his site, and he's the one setting the tone.

If even he thinks this is a flameout, then it's a flameout. I was already unimpressed with Obama, but this just sealed the deal for me. He won't get my caucus vote.

um, how do you unite a mostly anti-gay rights group of people with a mostly pro-gay rights group of people? maybe you find moderates in that group to work with? or does "uniting" just mean to force everyone to believe what you believe?

plus, isn't obama still, like, one of the best candidates regarding these issues?

This is truly an epic flameout by the Obama campaign, engaged in actions that are completely indefensible.

I bet that's the last time Obama hires any Grammy-award winners to perform at any concerts. And yes, Kos sounds hysterical: This is truly an epic flameout by the Obama campaign, engaged in actions that are completely indefensible. An epic flameout? Completely indefensible? Like dressing up as an adult baby and getting spanked? Attempting to have sex with a cop in an airport toilet? Telling dead baby jokes? Having sex with bicycles?

Somebody tell me why gays aren't engaging with the "faith community"? Since when is this a job for a Democratic candidate?

If Obama screws up like this in the primaries he will be TOAST when facing the right wing hate machine at full tilt.

BTW, Think he will appear on Fox News to defend himself against the Secular Progressives who are angry with him appearing with someone spewing hatred for gays?

@ Stop just stop!

"Somebody tell me why gays aren't engaging with the "faith community"? Since when is this a job for a Democratic candidate?"

We tried to engage with communities of faith and they told us to burn in hell... LITTERALLY.

8--

To get anti-gay people to join pro-gay people on issues of agreement, you focus on those areas of agreement. You don't go on an anti-gay rant at an event sponsored by your common candidate and then expect the supporters of tolerance to give you a pass.

And no, Obama's not great on these issues. If you want someone who's unabashedly in favor of gay rights, then vote for Kucinich or Gravel. The rest are good on most anti-discrimination issues but horrible on marriage equality. Obama's no better than Hillary Clinton or Edwards on gay issues.

This was a mistake by Obama.

But I wouldn't hesitate to vote for him over a Republican. They are NUTS.

I'm not exactly surprised, though. Here was a civil rights lawyer who has been against gay marriage. He mostly overlaps with the other dems when it comes to gay policy, which is a shame and a reflection on this country.

Still, the Republicans are nuts. They must be removed from power.

Realistic gay voters don't expect the Dem hopefuls seeking our votes and money to be sterling on our issues. Not insulting, at the very least, however.

well, it's clinton, edwards or obama, so...

plus, of course you focus on the common issues. but obama's not the one who focused on this exsad&gay preacher... it was the liberal media!

his response may not have been stellar, but it was probably calculated, and he probably alienated the least amount of people (a practical and perhaps contemptible approach). and having the exsad&gay preacher speak was a huge mistake.

but i think obama wasn't compromising. i think he truly wants to reach both groups, and probably would represent both groups very well. his plan didn't go over so well. but aligning himself with anyone could have this effect. when he added an openly gay gospel singer, that could have turned off a certain group as well. i'm kind of surprised that it didn't. but it didn't.

dan, i think obama was unintentionally insulting. on paper, his idea, to him, looked good. i think this might speak to his true beliefs on the subject. he's not gay -- he might believe that most gays are happy being gay, but that some don't want to be. i think that some self-hating religiously indoctrinated gays wish they weren't. so, on paper, it might not seem so insulting. but in actuality, it shows a lack of understanding.

Of the top three, Clinton's the best candidate on gay rights. She and Obama have similar voting records (89% HRC scorecard), but she's not playing politics with anti-gay activists. With Obama I get the sense that he's just putting together a coalition and would change his position on the issue (and not just these issues) if he thought he could win some votes. Hillary Clinton actually seems to believe the positions she's advocating.

In any case, even the worst Democrat is better than the best Republican. I think any of them would do the right thing as president. But a large part of the primary process is identifying the potential president who is most likely to represent you in office and least likely to fold in the face of outside pressure or perceived short-term political advantage. Obama fails that test. Even Edwards, who has a worse voting record and seems personally uncomfortable with same-sex marriages, has done better at reassuring me that he'd do the right thing as president.

What a bunch of hot air. Every single commenter here would support Obama if he were the Democratic nominee.

A real quote from Obama, "I'm a Democrat, I'll say what you want me to say as long as you vote for me".

I think that was in jest but you know...

Seth @18,

Of course we'd support him as the nominee. But you might have forgotten that there's this thing called a primary between now and then. Obama is campaigning to be our candidate, and this is a major point against him.

Is it offset by Hillary's support of the Kyl-Lieberman amendment and general hawkishness? Maybe, maybe not. For me, respect and support for basic civil rights and an unwillingness to play games with people's lives trumps marginal differences in foreign policy. Luckily, we have several candidates (Dodd and Kucinich, and arguably Edwards) who are better on both issues.

Ok, I have a question on statistics. How many gay and lesbian individuals are there purported to be in the US who will vote in the next presidential election? My other question. Just how important is the black vote when all is said and done? Also, is it really the all encompassing black vote or is it for the female or male black vote?

Luckily, we have several candidates (Dodd and Kucinich, and arguably Edwards) who are better on both issues.
When did Dodd become pro-gay rights? When his opinion mattered, he voted for DOMA, making sure the feds would never recognize same-sex marriage.

The whole Don't Ask, Don't Tell Debacle was the result of Bill's clumsy handling of gays in the military. He made a show of being progressive at the start of his presidency, then governed from the center-right. Remember, he was the one who ended welfare for single mothers. I expect Mrs. Clinton to govern the same way.

Kids, you're all right. The presidency of any one of the front runners--Clinton, Edwards or Obama--is going to be a major disappointment for liberals and progressives as they will repeatedly cave to the Republicans, Big Business and the Rich, who they're already in bed with.

If we've learned anything it's that Democrats fold faster than a 24 hour laundry!

The real battle now is over who's going to suck the least.

Dodd had a 100% HRC rating in 2006, the last complete year that they rated Congress. (http://www.hrc.org/documents/HRCscorecard2006.pdf) Granted, he skipped the FMA vote so that's a qualified 100%, and his 2004 rating was only 75% (Edwards was 66% that session, Biden was 63%, Hillary was 88%). But the reality is that none of the Democrats has a perfect record except Kucinich. All of the others have records that put even the best Republicans to shame, but of them all, Obama's the only one playing politics with anti-gay activists.

Other than Kucinich, Hillary Clinton seems to have the best record of the bunch, followed by Dodd. Dodd's also relatively good on the war and civil liberties.

...but she's not playing politics with anti-gay activists

Bullshit.

keshmeshi-

So Queerty quotes Paul Jenkins saying...

"Hillary Clinton recently trumpeted her friendship with Harold Mayberry, of the First African Methodist Church in Oakland; her press release on the meeting/endorsement left out the fact that Mayberry believes homosexuality to be comparable to thievery."

Does anyone have an actual source press release that "trumpets" her friendship/meeting/endorsement/whatever with this guy? Jenkins curiously didn't post a link to it.

The Obama folks keep saying "Mayberry! Mayberry! Mayberry!" Facts, please.

http://origin.static.hillaryclinton.com/news/release/view/?id=2857
Hillary Clinton Meets with Bay Area African-American Ministers and Community Leaders
More than 60 Ministers and Community Leaders Meet to Discuss Urban Policy Issues
On Friday, August, 10, Senator Hillary Clinton stopped by the African American Art and Culture Complex for a meeting with Bay Area African-American ministers and community leaders.

"I thank all the leaders whom I met with for their contributions to our country and their commitment to fighting for civil rights and equality," said Clinton. "As President, I will partner with African-American leaders to ensure that the promise of America is realized."

"Senator Clinton has an excellent concept about how she plans to address issues surrounding crime and education. She described how she has partnered with leaders in New York to create a charter school specifically for African American men and notes that the Allen Cathedral AME Church charter school in Jamaica Queens, New York could be used as a model of how to help educate African American young men. Her mentioning of the school shows that she's aware of outstanding successful examples of education in this country. The way she addressed the need for the federal government to partner with inner cities suggests that she's not just focusing on international issues but that she's concerned with domestic ones - particularly crime and violence in our communities. I want a president who knows how to strike a balance between addressing international and domestic challenges facing this country," said Reverend Dr. Harold R. Mayberry, Senior Pastor of First African Methodist Episcopal Church and Chairperson of Network for Interfaith Action.

love the sinner...-

*That's* it?!? She was at a meeting?!? And though you edited to imply otherwise, there's nothing in there that says she even *spoke* directly with Mayberry. There were *60* ministers there, and the meeting was organized by some completely other guys!

I thought you were going to give some groan-inducing, excuse-mandating evidence. She doesn't even mention his name. He says he likes her proposals, but doesn't even come out and endorse her!

Phew. For a second there I was worried.

wait a sec, sven, obama wasn't even at the meeting with his exgay!

Big Sven: I "edited" to show what Hill said and what her homophobe friend said. I'm not going to post an entire press release on a comment, that's why I gave the URL.

Sorry that you've drunk the Clinton Kool-Aid. When Pres. Hillary sells gays down the river I'll be the one ruefully shaking my head and saying I told you so.

infrequent and "love the sinner..."

"his exgay", "homophobe friend". Pleeze. You know, I like Obama. I will enthusiastically support him if he's endorsed. But he's basically Hillary minus the Clinton baggage (good) and the campaign acumen (bad). Except for her position on defence, you can't find a gnat's ass difference between their positions on health care, social security (until perhaps recently), crime, civil rights, etc. All this talk of "candidate x good, Hillary bad" is breathless oversensitivity.

I think it's probably a mistake for her campaign to have posted a quote from a known homophobe. And wonder of wonders, they seem to have pulled the PR piece. But if you equate (a) her handling of a meeting with 60 ministers and one of them being a homophobe with (b) having a campaign concert that includes a homophobe and then totally mishandling the resulting criticism, well, then you're willfully misreading the situation to support your badly cratering candidate.