« Americans Practice Looksism | Main | SoCal is On Fire »

Obama Alienates the Gays

First, I have never been a Barack Obama for President supporter. He doesn't have enough experience and we don't know enough about him. My point has been proven. Obama is going on tour with gospel singer Donnie McClurkin. Obama has refused to cancel these dates by releasing this lame statement.

McClurkin is anti-gay in the worst way. He also claims that he was gay, was "cured" and wrote about it in his book. An example of the hate that he spews:

Donnie McClurkin, who, they say, on The 700 Club “has accused gay Americans of trying to kill our children.”

The bottom line is that Obama's appearances with this hate monger are unacceptable for a Democratic Presidential candidate now and forever. We will not forget this endorsement of hate speech. The anger is growing just see AgitpropPam and Towleroad to name a few. Did he think that the rest of us wouldn't find out?

I quit Barack Obama forever.

Posted by Catherine on October 23, 2007
in Current Affairs, LGBT, Politics | Permalink| Comments (18) | TrackBack (0)


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Obama Alienates the Gays:


I sort of liked him at first but he is so weak in the debates I lost interest in him. I am actually liking Edwards - as he is probably a sure win as Bill Maher pointed out in his last show...

Posted by: denisdekat | Oct 23, 2007 2:02:32 PM

I heart Dennis, but Edwards is a good choice, too.

Posted by: catherine | Oct 23, 2007 2:21:35 PM

I know the liberal blogosphere does not agree with me at all, but Clinton remains my first choice. Obama had a shot at my vote, but I informed him via E Mail that this issue officially lost it. I consider his response cowardly, at best. As for Edwards, I like him, but feel he was a lightweight on foreign policy in 2004, and nothing has changed in my mind. All of the others either lacks money, electability, executive skills, or positions I agree on. It is HRC for me as of now.

Posted by: Scott | Oct 23, 2007 2:55:37 PM

obama is not going on tour with him. get your facts straight. donnie is performing at the end of a campaign created event where obama was never going to attend.

Posted by: dpg | Oct 23, 2007 4:28:55 PM

I feel sorry for Obama. For someone who seems to try and treat every debate with the amount of complexity it deserves, (ie, he condemned this man's conclusions while refusing to condemn the man, who is obviously trying to cope with a horrible experience by falsely applying it to a larger context of the gay community as a whole), he certainly isn't seeing a return on that respect from us. I say, good for him for not sacrificing this man to the trivial immediacy that serves our collective assumptions about him. While this man has exposed himself to this kind of ridicule by writing a book about his views, I don't need Obama to participate in this ridicule to prove his ideas on homosexuality to me. I think I'll pay more attention to his votes and policy as it relates to protecting gay (and all for that matter) rights.

Posted by: JP | Oct 23, 2007 5:47:47 PM

We are judged by the company that we keep, so I cannot get past the fact that this man spews hate toward my fellow man.

JP, we do not know enough about Obama at this point and these actions confirm it.

Posted by: catherine | Oct 23, 2007 6:01:41 PM

Agreed, Catherine.

Plus, Obama said that gays are part of the American family more or less. However, at no point in his disavowal did he said that homosexuality is NOT a choice. That matters to me because given his recent over-stressing of his faith, I have to wonder where he REALLY stands on social issues.

Posted by: Scott | Oct 23, 2007 6:21:28 PM

u never wrote about jena; this is more outrageous than jena.

the hypocrisy is all too glaring.

Posted by: pmb | Oct 23, 2007 8:02:27 PM

PMB, if you scroll down then you will see that I did write about Jena.

Posted by: catherine | Oct 23, 2007 8:27:24 PM

And what does one issue have to do with the other issue? If Clinton or Edwards had come out and said something racist on the Jena issue, then I am betting that there would be talk similar to what is being said about Obama's take (or lack thereof) on homosexuality.

Posted by: Scott | Oct 24, 2007 6:26:52 AM

To beat the enemy, be the enemy...If Dems want to beat the bigots, they have to act like them in the early going to corral swing voters. We know Obama would protect the rights of all minorities as Prez, especially with a Dem majority. But if he wants to get that middle-aged white guy from Utah who's pissed about gas prices, he has to pretend he could care less about certain minorities. Sounds cynical, sounds horrible, sounds American as apple pie.

Posted by: Kathy | Oct 24, 2007 8:57:15 AM

Yawn - a minor campaign gaffe - Obama apologizes (and he's not actually appearing with this maniac).

Obama has called on blacks to be less homophobic in the past. He's also easily the most liberal MAJOR candidate on gay rights. This post is yet another blog trying to "put a fork" in someone prematurely...

Posted by: Democrats Against Hillary | Oct 24, 2007 11:49:22 AM

Too many apologists for Obama, who I was ready to vote for only a month or so ago. If Clinton made a similar "apology" for remarks about blacks or even Christians, she would be blasted. Obama gave a half-assed apology, did not say homosexuality is born, still is connected to this guy, and has shown an increasingly strident tone regarding faith that worries me. We do not know what he will be if elected, but I could handle semi-panders; not a homophobic one.

Posted by: Scott | Oct 24, 2007 12:40:28 PM

I agree with Scott. My main point is that it feels to me as if Obama is pandering to homophobic people. I have zero tolerance for prejudice of any kind.

Posted by: catherine | Oct 24, 2007 1:08:31 PM

I feel, for white liberals, saying "he doesn't have experience" is code for " is Black."

Sucking Bill Clinton's dick (or not sucking it, as the case might have been) doesn't qualify as political experience, white folks.

Posted by: ProblemWithCaring | Oct 25, 2007 3:06:22 PM

PWC, if you had read my blog look at today's entry you will see that this is NOT about black/white. Do some searching on this blog and you will see that I ran a toiletries drive for Katrina victims and that I donate to the NAACP.

My objection in this post is about him not denouncing a prejudice jerk.

You're making an unfair and inaccurate assumption.

Posted by: catherine | Oct 25, 2007 3:39:33 PM

Besides incredibly weak sentence structure, you are seriously off the mark. Obama was my first choice (and I believe many others) until he revealed more of himself to the public. Now that I see harbingers of religious intolerance to his tone, I am concerned. To this point, he has not said anything reasonable to lead me to believe that he is not pandering to the homophobic crowd. Also, he has yet to state that homosexuality is not a choice.
You are correct in saying that "sucking Bill Clinton's dick" does not qualify a person for the White House. Incredible experience, insights, skills, knowledge, and leadership, on the other hand, do.
I should point out that being black does not qualify a person for the White House either. Perhaps in 2016, after Obama has served in a Clinton cabinet or spent more time in the Senate, he will have the experience and understanding to properly run for the presidency. For now, his campaign has stumbled badly, and he is not ready for prime time.

Posted by: Scott | Oct 26, 2007 6:13:08 PM

the mixing of religion and politics to me is offensive....and in this country it usually means political campaigns pandering to Christian views, evangelical voices. Yes, people of "faith" can vote, just don't make the rest of us sit through the "Jesus Saves!" routine - we're not buying it.

Posted by: taradharma | Oct 29, 2007 1:28:44 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.