we were really mad at her during her first term here in NY bec she didn't help with marriage when it was in our courts--she learned her lesson.

she's not great, but she's never cozied up to haters or ex-gays, which is a plus.

Obama's reaching out now--only since McClurkin--but i don't know if it's working--when he has GLBT fundraisers he keeps it private too-- http://www.advocate.com/news_detail_ekti...

"... According to several sources, including Johnson and Lenore, Obama said he did not think it was “politically feasible” to secure marriage rights for same-sex couples in the country at this point. Sen. Obama acknowledged that the community wanted full marriage rights but said that he favored civil unions for now while leaving open the possibility that his position might evolve in the future.

In terms of ENDA, Obama said he supported an ENDA that included transgender protections but that he didn’t believe a fully inclusive bill had enough votes to pass the Senate at this time. ..."

the fierce urgency of the politically feasible? ugh.

Obama refused to have his picture taken with him - http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...

I'm beginning to think the Rainbow version of the Unity Pony is on back order.

he ensured that--exit polls from CA and NY showed that we're going Hillary -- "... NBC exit polling found that among the 4% of California voters who identified as GLB, 63% voted for Clinton, 29% for Obama, and 1% for Edwards. In New York, 7% of voters self-identified as GLB and 59% voted for Clinton, 36% for Obama, and 3% for Edwards. ..."

-- http://election2008.advocate.com/2008/02...

It's understandable--people who need things from govt--like our rights enforced and affirmed, for instance--tend to go Hillary.

Over at TalkLeft *there is a thread about how Donna Brazile seems to be behind the FL/MI cockup. Which of course leads to much speculation, about how she might(and I stress might, because it is just mere speculation, though it does look suspicious) be trying to game the process in Obama's favor(it especially puts the tainting of the Michigan ballot with Obama's withdrawal in a new light for me, along with her demand for caucuses in WA over the state legislatures choice of primaries and the demand that FL switch to caucus in exchange for their delegates back)since it's been obvious for a while now that she is the tank for Obama. Which also led to this interesting tidbit, which insinuates that Brazile was behind the DNC's decision to prevent LGBT activists from being added to the party's affirmative action delegates. She says it's an afront to civil rights for "teh gayz" to be included, but it is looking to me like she just might be the slightest bit homophobic, and maybe Obama's anti-gay outreach just be an attempt to keep his most influential supporter happy.

Of course those are nothing but rank speculation, but it is surprising to me how these commonalities keep showing up.

*Seriously check out that thread. Many commenters are posting their email exchanges with Brazile, which include such precious gems as "I don't care about the votes...I care about the rules" and "Now that the nomination has been decided, it is time for me to come out of the neutral zone."

Bill Clinton for First Dude!!!

Off topic...well sort of...

Barry Obama's home county, Cook County gave Obama a 429,000 vote margin over Clinton. Illinois voters gave Obama a 650,000 vote margin. Now how big is the popular vote gap between Clinton and Obama? Can it be that Obama's one claim to the nomination is his home state's vote. the rest of the country's primary votes are a wash, a tie. If the popular vote total difference is below 650,000 in June, how do you feel about Illinois and Cook County being the determinate of the Democratic nominee for president of this United States. Cook County...one of the most corrupt county governments in all the land.

Dean's elimination of specific GLBT employees/offices, etc--i wonder if he was pushed to minimize their outreach to us, and the prominence of us, by Brazile and others?

She's totally pro-Obama--on CNN it's obvious.

Related---Elton's performing at Radio City for Hillary next week. : >

I wonder who Cher and Mariah and Britney are for?

update--Cher's for her too! : > http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/2/8/155240/3056/745/452847

I've heard it referred to as the First Laddie...Bill Clinton.

was for W, but since she seems to like empty suits, I'm gonna guess Obama.

Bill Clinton for First Dude!!!!

You have to count out New York's vote totals, too, since that is her home state. I do seem to remember reading that the only part of Illinois Obama carried was Cook County, the rest went for Clinton.

And the story behind my sig, is that I saw a 70-year old man wearing that button at a recent Clinton rally(with the wonderful lady herself, no dumb old Bill).

Bill Clinton for First Dude!!!

from Americablog is taking this news.

that Avrosis(Americablog guy) stood so staunchly behind Obama after the McClurkin thing, though I know many in the LGBT community were soothed after Obama sent out his letter to the community.

Of course, LGBT people are just as likely as others to vote against their own interests(Log Cabin anyone?). Women support anti-choice politicians, though those politicians condemn contraception, something 95% of women have used. Poor people support Republicans, though Republicans do nothing to improve their quality of life. And LGBT people have been marginalized in our political process, because in most cases they really don't have many options, unless you live in a haven like SF or Philly(I loved those LGBT tourism ads Philly had a few years ago). Your choices are usually between a candidate who thinks gays should be stoned, and another one who doesn't hate gays(he has gay friends!) but agrees that they should be discriminated against. So I would posit that they are more used to swallowing that bitter pill, than many others in the electorate.

Bill Clinton for First Dude!!!

gay repubs are overwhelmingly well-off white men, while the rest of us are Dems.

There aren't enough of us nationally to have much impact, so we work locally and tend to focus more on things closer to home--and sadly, as we've gotten more culturally visible, we've lost rights in many states, and federally. And our DC/Nat'l groups are horribly ineffective.

I predict he will assimilate the news into his worldview without missing a beat.

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

most DC Dems want us invisible and quiet anyway.

I know she should have done much more on the issue of basic rights, but it's great that she has a public image of being gay friendly, including being the first First Lady to march in the NYC Gay Pride Parade.* And that she doesn't back down from that image in PA, even when needs a big win there (To be honest, I think she respects PA Democratic voters not to be homophobic).

Obama being somewhat shy of The Gays while being deceptive about McClurkin, Meeks, and Caldwell during the Democratic primary has me more than a bit worried.** If he's the nominee, will he be worse during the GE? If president, will he fight for GLBT rights when under the inevitable barrage of fire?

*Yes, I know she was running for senator, but the effect was still the same.
**Caldwell had planned on campaigning for him, according to the Houston Chronicle, before news spread and it was nixed. Both the Chronicle article and the ministry website that specifically referred to homosexuality as a "sin" that had to be cleansed quickly went 404 (i.e. they're gone).

She'll be read for free on SEPTA!

The marriage issue is saddening...it's screwed up to begin with. I align with the Hidden Cameras POV...ban [all] marriage.

With Obama, I think this is an experience thing. Does he have long lasting relationships with the gay community? Not really. His message is propelled by an idea of politics as based on pushing the political expidency of centrist views (Republicans agree with us here! Right now! Let's DO IT!) so I think that automatically leaves gays at the back of the line. There is so much pushback to the hate that needs to be done, and I think there's a lot of laws that need to be put on the books.

Is that 2% of the country has such power in this country?? Is this really a fucking important issue?? Give me a break. It still pisses me off that Kerry lost the election because the Republicans used this against them. Kerry would have won Ohio if the gay lobby had not gone after this so much. It won Bush the fucking white house! Now your mad at Obama because he is side stepping it. Or that he cares about the masses more then a political agenda by a special interest group.

And what happened in MA is just plain wrong. It was illegal. The legislature is supposed to make law, not the court systems. That is an abuse of power. And Obama did not pose with that idiot mayor from SF, because he also abused the law.

Now you can all rant about me, being a homophobe, because I actually think there are hundreds of issues more important then this crap. The sad part is it is not fluff, because it won the presidency for Bush in 2004. If a state wants to allow gay marriage, it should be voted on by the voters. The feds should stay out of it. Whether it is voting for an amendment in the congress banning gay marriage (what Bush tried to do), which is a federal abuse of power, or having the feds dictate to the states saying they have to accept gay marriage.

And a newsflash to the posting about the tax code. IT HAS NEVER BEEN FAIR! To you think it was fair that Bear Stearns got bailed out with 29 billion dollars of taxpayer money?? That idiot Bernanske says they won't lose money. We will wait and see. Or that tax loopholes are everywhere for people in power. Hell there is a tax deduction for the sales tax on buying a damn boat! Gotta have those boat buyers get a tax break. They certainly are hurting for cash.

Why the fuck should the rest of the 98% of the country who are not gay, think that this is an important issue? Frankly I wouldn't care, if I did not think it would possibly win the White House for the Republicans AGAIN. Lets play the gay card. It works every time.

And before we talk about whats fair, because gay people statistically are generally affluent people, lets talk about what really is unfair. What has been done to the working class of this country the last 7 years. That is what Obama stands for.

Oh and George Takei was hilarious on the Howard Stern show today. Guy came out of the closet 3 years ago. Good for him. But whether he can be legally married is not a fucking important issue.

I think the post you're looking for is over here, SAF.

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

But whether he can be legally married is not a fucking important issue.

And it is not just important to the that 2%.

Either we all have rights, or none of us do. Blacks are also a small portion of the population, would you say their issues are unimportant? And if Obama's supposed to be this big progressive leader, shouldn't he be moving the Overton window on this? It seems to me that he is quite content with the window where it is.

Bill Clinton for First Dude!!!

yes let's make everything about political points. Aside from the various evidence, lack of detailed job stimulus plans and real universal health care aside, that I could present to show Obama is no candidate of the working class, does it not occur to you that some of the gayz come from the working class? Seriously, screw you for thinking that the totally locked out horizon of widely accepted, legitimate marriage doesn't affect gay people. Screw you for accepting discrimination as political fallout. Oh and uh, blaming gays. FOR KERRY LOSING THE ELECTION.

Gays have every right to be pissed that their libido is merely a political football for most Democrats, and a life or death matter for the red state Ds. Physical injury is a very real threat to many gays around the US.

You want the red states on your electoral map but you refuse to acknowledge and defend some of the issues that keep those states red. Very nice.

We're all in this together....not.

you might have a point, but Obama and Hillary specifically call it a state issue.

Marriage court cases started with Hawaii in the early 90s--we didn't make it a giant issue--the GOP did--and our party ran away scared--instead of standing up for rights.

We have more important issues--like ENDA and getting us included as part of already existing Civil Rights and anti-discrimination laws.

We've stopped expecting action, but don't dare cozy up to those who hurt us and slur us.

exactly.

and what Aeryl said too--don't say that you care about rights unless you mean it. don't talk about the Constitution unless you mean it.

I agree that to determine what effect Illinois has for Obama, you have to take out New York for Hillary. In that case, Obama's home state accounts for about 350,000 votes in his popular vote lead.

Kudos to HRC for giving the interview. As the article says, an alliance of LGBT papers have long sought interviews with Obama, Clinton and Edwards. Finally, one of them steps up.

Did you know? Obama ran the first known LGBT specific presidential ad.

What really makes theses ads important, is the fact that it is the first time in any presidential campaign, let alone a primary, for there to be an LGBT specific message in an ad. There were LGBT press ad buys in 2004 but the message was the same message being placed in traditional media. These ads further underscore the Senator’s commitment of inclusion and his belief that the LGBT community is a critical part of the American fabric.

And in case you missed it, here's the Open letter from Obama on equality for LGBT that Aeryl referenced.

Finally, thanks for the fundraising story, amberglow. While you (fairly) focus negatively on the "feasibility" argument, its worth noting these quotes from the article, too:

I’ve been to many events over the past 10 years of candidates running for office,” said Corey Johnson, one of the hosts, “This was the most forthright, eloquent, and detailed stuff I’ve heard from a politician [regarding gay issues].”

Molly Lenore, 43, compared Obama’s discussion of the LGBT community to the speech he gave about race in America last week. “During his race speech, everybody said afterward that he treated the American people like adults, and I felt like that’s what he did,” said Lenore, who is transgender and an Obama supporter. “I might not agree 100%, but I want to have an intelligent conversation with somebody.”

Finally, I highly recommend this article in LA Weekly profiling two of Obama's fundraisers.

... the Japanese internment camps. I'm pretty sure they were under 2% of the population, so who gives a fuck?

Jews hover at around 2% of the American population. They'd better get on the quiverful bandwagon, or they'll fall off the deserves-equal-rights charts, too.

Until the good Rev dropped his little bombs, Obama pretty much answered every question about LGBT policy through this campaign with a little Sunday School lesson, right up through the Texas and Ohio primaries.

But when the Wright problem forced him to ix-nay the esus-Jay for a little while, he told us that that our rights were one of those little divisive issues which apparently somehow get in the way of letting him solve global warming.

Honestly. F*ck him on a stick. This particular fiction - that he's someone GLBT folk should get behind - is massively and deeply offensive. It's been his strategy from day 1 to bring the Faith thing front and center (Democrat! Now with extra Jesus!) and keep the fringes (homos, e.g.) at arm's length. He snubbed Mayor Newsome for a photo op in friggin' 2004. (And then we are expected to believe it was pure accident that he picked an "ex-gay" for his Bible-thump through the Carolinas...)

Speaking strictly for myself, Newsome presiding over those weddings in SF was the most unforgettable political moment of my adult life and was all about REAL hope and REAL change. Obama isn't fit to lick Newsome's sweaty asshole. No way I'm voting for that self-righteous prick.

Obama's McClurkin moment was the deal-breaker. And then he had another "homophobic mishap" with Rev. Kirbyjon Caldwell, a player in his campaign.

Hillary's interviews with Philly Gay News is another example of her openness to the LGBT press. In Ohio, Eric Resnick for the Gay People's Chronicle talked about the differences between Hillary and Barry. Hillary took time out to actually talk with reporters. Obama didn't, sent an open letter, and then a cranky campaign surrogate , Robert Gibbs. Resnick's story here.

During Hillary's interview with Ohio/Texas gay pubs-- Gay People's Chronicle, Dallas Voice and Outlook Weekly--she advocated a repeal of section 2 (other states can't be required to recognize the "relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage" from another state) and section 3 (prohibits the federal government from recognizing decisions made by the states--civil unions, domestic partnerships or, in MA, full marriage rights, which affects Social Security, taxes and other benefits) of DOMA. Here's the cached text of the interview... can't seem to get the site to load.

She also was interviewed by the Washington Blade back in February. And I watched her on Ellen DeGeneres show. It was kewl. Hillary gave her a custom T-Shirt, Ellen for Hillary.

Hillary isn't afraid to be seen or associate openly with gays and lesbians. She's marched in Gay Pride parades.

Barry's way, way too homophobic for me.

Does anyone think her interview will be picked up by the mainstream media, either the papers or the TV networks? I doubt it, since it would likely benefit her (She did take a courageous stand considering this is PA and a must-win-big for her).

I didn't realize how strong the reaction would be amongst (some) gays and lesbians to this interview. Friends of mine were crying after I sent them the link.

"no press" fundraisers to get our money--Obama won't allow press at any GLBT fundraiser.

as usual.

We're one of the many groups who vote in larger proportion than our size, and need specific things from govt--he won't give us any of them, and makes it clear that while he wants our cash in private only, he won't act for us--and he cozies up publicly to haters.

Absorbing Gay Pain & Praise, Clinton Says She's Evolved -- http://gaycitynews.com/site/news.cfm?new...

gaycitynews always had great -- & harsh when needed-- coverage of her, but now they're owned by other people.

-- http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/city/20080331_Phila__s_gay_Democrats_emerge_as_a_voting_force.html

I have to say, the local campaign is somewhat disorganized. I was having a discussion Saturday night at Philly campaign HQ after Saturday canvassing about Sunday canvassing in the "gayborhood" (yeah, yeah, I know...but that was the wording on their flyers) and hooked up two out-of-towners to that project, and I had NO idea the Chelsea thing was happening the next day.

(Probably couldn't have done anything anyway. I needed my afternoon beauty nap for the Mary J. Blige show Sunday night...)

are ppl there more for her or no?

swallow your wedding ring if you think it's so unimportant. Then shit it out and give it to me, so I can go take it to my civil union. woohoo!

First, let me say that I wish very much that Clinton and Obama were advocating for gay marriage. Either would be an improvement over Bush, or McCain, but it's disappointing that neither will advocate for gay marriage. Having said that, I remembered being very moved by a story about Clinton and Neel Lattimore. I remember it was an early reminder in the campaign that I liked the real Hillary Clinton, as opposed to the caricature of Hillary Clinton.

Anyway, I was able to find the article and here's the story from it:

Neel Lattimore, who served as press secretary to Clinton for five years when she was first lady, has similarly warm and fuzzy anecdotes to share. When he was promoted to the highly visible job, Lattimore took Clinton aside and told her he was gay, just so she would know in case any of the Clintons’ numerous political foes wanted to make an issue of it. The conversation in the Map Room turned into a heart-to-heart. “I said, ‘I want to be a good role model for my nieces and nephews -- there’s not a lot of role models out there for gay men,’ ” he remembers. “I thought that was a perfectly logical thing to say. But she was like, ‘Who are you running around with?’ I said, ‘Excuse me?’ And she said, ‘If you don’t find some people that you consider to be role models in the next several weeks, come back to me and I’ll introduce you to some.’

“That’s when it was clear that she had friends who were gay,” he says. “If I was struggling to find people that I could look up to, she was like, ‘I’ll give you a list, I’ll set up some meetings. You can feel good about this.’ ”

Several years later, no longer in her employ, Lattimore held a fund-raiser for her New York Senate campaign at Washington’s Mayflower Hotel, attended largely by gay friends of his. It was a campy affair -- “We’re showing pictures of her with bad hair on the screens, and she’s just laughing!” -- but the tone turned downright mushy when Lattimore introduced his mentor to the crowd. “I told the story about the role models, and I said, ‘Mrs. Clinton, I want to introduce you to my role models.’ ” He pointed to the 500 guests in the room. “And I heard her very quietly in the back go, ‘Oh, Neel.’ ”

that is touching. A great story.

In this thread Obama has been criticized for not allowing press at his GLBT fundraiser. Well, methinks its not unusual to keep the press out of fundraisers in general.

Gay fundraiser for Hillary draws 300

The May 23 Clinton fundraiser was closed to the press, according to Jin Chon, a Clinton campaign spokesperson

I wear a Hillary sticker on my person everywhere I go, because on the street, I saw none of it, while I'd see two or three Obama buttons on folks while completing any random errand.

I do get a lot more feedback than I thought I would, and of those who choose to say something - admittedly self-selecting - it runs roughly along the same lines of the earliest polling: older folks leaning Clinton, younger Obama, regardless of race. And people in obviously rough spots (I'm talking, missing teeth) also pipe up for Clinton. People in not-so-rough spots (partying yuppies, Benz-drivers) have made it clear they don't like her.

I did an afternoon of campaign canvassing, and one thing that does seem for certain is that practically no one is part of the famous wishy-washy undecided. From what I can see, folks here have made up their minds, and (imagine!) very few of them are rude about it.

swallow your wedding ring if you think it’s so unimportant. Then shit it out and give it to me, so I can go take it to my civil union.

woohoo!

Not if I fish it out first. Now shut your mouth, you overly-empowered two-percenter, and get digging!

Sounds like a lovely "man of god" - you know the god that seems to hate a significant number of his own children.

One of my favorite sayings, I think from Anne Lamott, "you know you've created god in your own image when he hates all the same people you do."