Obama Media

Obama Losing Support due to Timidity on Lesbian-Gay Rights

Jasmyne Cannick has withdrawn her semi-endorsement of Obama due to his lack of clarity on lesbian and gay rights:

I like Obama, I really do….But with all of Obama’s audacity, he hasn’t been able to stand up and say yes, I agree that separate isn’t equal and gays and lesbians deserve to be treated equally under the law with the same rights and privileges as America’s heterosexual citizens.  Now that would truly be audacity!

But that hasn’t happened and I fear that what is happening is that in this mad dash rush to get the support of the Black community, via the Black church, Obama is trying to ignore the fact that I don’t have all of my rights and that I am not treated equal.  And if he can stand up and speak out against the war he should be able to stand up and face the Black church and say that while he may  not agree with the idea of lesbians and gays getting married, that they do contribute to society like everyone else, including paying taxes and therefore deserve to be treated equally…I want the next President of the United States to be able to stand up on the right side of all of the issues, not the just the popular ones.

Obama, I’m waiting.  You know what you need to do.

Will Obama Make a Clear Statement on Gay Rights and Marriage?

Steve Rhodes in the Beachwood Reporter:

Why can’t Obama unambiguously address the morality of homosexuality? Lynn Sweet writes today about Obama’s difficulty last week addressing the issue. If Obama truly thought homosexuality was not immoral, what prevented him from saying so the first time, instead of issuing a statement after dodging the question three times?

In Obama’s envisioned world of rainbow unity, you’d think this would be a no-brainer. Instead, it’s a head-scratcher.

“For Obama, the recent campaign flare-up started the way many such incidents do: The senator was asked a question that he apparently was nto prepared to answer - at least at that moment,” the Tribune says in its account. “It was the sort of challenge from reporters and voters that he will face many times on the campaign trail.”

Huh? Just what would it have taken for Obama to be “prepared” to answer such a simple question? It’s not like he was asked about the minute details of nuclear weaponry.

And when you stop and think about it, even Obama’s response to Larry King - that he doesn’t think “homosexuals are immoral any more than I think heterosexuals are immoral” - doesn’t really make sense.

Deep in the Tribune’s story, the paper mentions what Sweet does not: Obama’s previous statements that gay marriage is against his Christian beliefs - professions of Obama’s noted faith that make some gay advocates skeptical of the statement belatedly issued last week by his campaign. As the Tribune notes, they want to hear it from Obama’s mouth. And if Obama now says homosexuality isn’t immoral, then why is he against gay marriage? It’s a fair question, and Obama ought to have the guts to answer it.

Rhodes also points to this Jerome Armstrong piece where he goes after Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs for his role with Americans for Jobs, Health Care and Progressive Values:

A group that promptly created the most disgusting ad I’ve ever seen occur in a Democratic primary against Howard Dean.

The ad (view the ad here [and YouTube]) slowly moved in on a Time Magazine cover featuring bin Laden, zooming in on a close-up of Osama’s eyes, while saying that Howard Dean was an unqualified Democratic candidate because of his lack of military or foreign experience.

Finding the Courage to Be Moral

I have avoided explicit praise or criticism of Obama, but his initial refusal this week to disavow Gen. Pace’s anti-gay comments reminds me of the Harry Belafonte quote I shared yesterday: “All he has to do is be truthful and have a vision for what to do and stop playing a goddamn game of politics.”  We can agree that neither Obama nor HRC is anti-gay, indeed, they found their morals yesterday (or at least their spokesman and website, respectively, did) after hearing from the Human Rights Campaign and others. (The fact that HRC equivocated as much, if not more that Obama does not excuse it.) Glenn Thrush at Newsday asks “why the dance?”

Clinton and Obama supporters, speaking on condition of anonymity, said both might have been trying to avoid offending socially conservative Democrats, particularly churchgoing African-Americans, who share Pace’s views.

Steve Sanders, a gay Democrat who sat on the party’s platform committee in 2000, said Clinton and Obama are engaged in a delicate balancing act. “Hillary and Barack have made very public overtures to religious Americans. They are trying to figure out how progressive Democrats can also make appeals to Americans of faith. It’s a work in progress.”

Andy has more extensive thoughts at towleroad:

It’s a pretty simple question, don’t you think?

John Edwards, so far, has been the most light on his feet on this issue. Asked by Wolf Blitzer on The Situation Room whether he agrees with Pace’s comments, Edwards replied, “I don’t share that view.”

We certainly deserve better answers from our candidates, and should demand them.