News Tips?
-- tips@phblend.com

PHB Mobile


33|175:175

About
-- The Blog
-- Pam | My home page
-- Autumn
-- Daimeon
-- Julien
-- "Radical" Russ
-- Terrance

Contact the Baristas

The Blend Blogrolls

Activism


Best of the Blend
Blog Posts

Special Events and Interviews

Blend-o-licious endorsements...



The Christian Civic League of Maine's Mike Hein calls Pam's House Blend:
"a leading source of radical homosexual propaganda, anti-Christian bigotry, and radical transgender advocacy."

He is "praying that Pam Spaulding will "turn away from her wicked and sinful promotion of homosexual behavior." (CCLM's web site, 10/15/07)


Ex-gay "Christian" activist James Hartline on Pam:
"I have been mocked over and over again by ungodly and unprincipled anti-christian lesbians."
(from "Six Years In Sodom: From The Journal Of James Hartline," 9/4/2006, written from the "homosexual stronghold" of Hillcrest in San Diego).

"Pam is a 'twisted lesbian sister' and an 'embittered lesbian' of the 'self-imposed gutteral experiences of the gay ghetto.'" -- 9/5/2008



Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth Against Homosexuality heartily endorses the Blend, calling Pam:

A "vicious anti-Christian lesbian activist."
(Concerned Women for America's radio show [9:15], 1/25/07)

"A nutty lesbian blogger."
(MassResistance radio show [16:25], 2/3/07)


Pam's House Blend always seems to find these sick f*cks. The area of the country she is in? The home state of her wife? I know, they are everywhere. Pam just does such a great job of bringing them out into the light.
--Impeach Bush


who monitors yours Bevis ?? Just thought I would drop you a line,so the rest of your life is not wasted.
--"Joe"

Content © 2004-2008
Pam Spaulding

House Blend logo © 2005
Melissa McEwan

Photo of Pam Spaulding
© Judy G. Rolfe
All Rights Reserved.


SITE TERMS AND CONDITIONS
Support the Blend




An Online Magazine in the Reality-Based Community.


Team Obama: recruiting a white pastor=bad idea

by: Pam Spaulding

Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 21:00:00 PM EDT


[UPDATE (10/26, 1:45 PM): I just spoke with the pastor directly -- he identified himself -- and stated plainly that he's white; since the question was still open in some minds -- and he didn't state affirmatively in Mike's interview, I decided to put that to rest.]

It's funny, I couldn't tell from the picture whether Rev. Andy Sidden, pastor of Garden of Grace United Church of Christ in Columbia, SC was white. After all, I have a family full of relatives who aren't any darker than Sidden.

It boggles the mind that the Obama campaign would select a white pastor to deal with a situation that is awash in black homophobia. Politics 101.

Rev. Sidden is supposed to counter the presence of the recloseted/now-decloseted anti-gay Grammy winning gospel singer Donnie McClurkin at the "Embrace the Change" concerts in South Carolina, sponsored by the Obama campaign. Sadly, Sidden is now an unfortunate victim in this debate. I'm sure that whatever message he would deliver would be sensitive and entirely appropriate in many ways, but part of the message has to be that you can be black and gay, and black and gay-affirming. Barack Obama is clearly showing he doesn't understand the need of the religious black community to see one of their own deliver that message.

Sidden was on The Mike Signorile Show today. I just spoke to Mike (will have audio later), and he said that Sidden didn't consider himself very politically active, and that he accepted the mission not because he was an Obama supporter, but because he couldn't turn down anyone asking him to pray. One of the reasons for his selection, he said, was because he was a UCC minister -- and because he was openly gay. When Mike asked if Sidden was chosen because of his race, he said no, and did not deny Jasmyne Cannick's description of him as white in her post on the matter.

The last thing a crowd of black folks who have a problem with homosexuality needs is: 1) to be "told" by the Obama campaign that a message about tolerance must be delivered from a white voice of faith, and 2) to have their beliefs confirmed that being gay is "a white man's perversion." Coming from a white pastor under these circumstances, can only be seen as paternalistic and patronizing; the shields of defensiveness will go up, the message will be ignored.

The most stinging message that the Obama campaign has sent is that they apparently didn't see the relevance or necessity of removing the ability of religious blacks to stay in denial, that somehow there is not an intersection of being black and gay. This move renders us invisible yet again, as politically expendable, because it telegraphs that it's too politically volatile to address the division in the community by having them confront one of their own -- black gay and gay-affirming ministers -- when it comes to looking at bigotry.

Alvin McEwan of Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters:

We have been given the hook, pushed to the side, had the trapdoor to the alligator pit released under our feet.

LGBTs of color haven't been just pushed to the back of the bus in this controversy. We have been kicked off of the bus and told to find our own way home.

Perhaps Obama's people couldn't find an openly gay black pastor in time for the event? I don't know. I guess I will give them a little slack.
No, I can't cut these folks any slack. Did they ask the National Black Justice Coalition for a recommendation for a pastor? I certainly saw a whole lot of them when I attended the organization's National Black Church Summit this year.

Again -- could the Obama campaign not type Google.com in their browsers?

Why look, here are four right here...



Rev. Dr. Michael Eric Dyson, Rev. Benjamin Reynolds, Rev. Zach Jones and Rev. Dyan McRay.

I even had audio up of these folks for the feeble Obama camp to listen to if they wanted to do some research.

What about Rev. Deborah Johnson? Bishop Yvette Flunder? Rev. Irene Monroe?

Forget surfing the web -- Obama and his staff were obviously present at the CNN's YouTube Presidential debate. Did they have iPods on when Rev. Reggie Longcrier, pastor of Exodus Missionary Outreach Church in Hickory, N.C. asked this question of John Edwards?


Sen. Edwards has said his opposition to gay marriage has been influenced by his Southern Baptist background. We know religion was once used to justify slavery, segregation and women not being allowed to vote, all of which today are recognized as unconstitutional and socially and morally wrong. So why is it still acceptable to use religion to justify denying gay and lesbian American their full and equal rights.
Certainly I would have had Longcrier on speed dial after that.

Then again, perhaps no gay or gay-affirming black pastors were willing to extract Obama from this mess of his own making. Who knows at this point.

Terrance has a couple of suggestions in his post "Obama’s Crap Sandwich, With Extra Homo", if you Obama folks (that is, if you still have your jobs) -- Rev. Horace Griffin, author of Their Own Receive Them Not: African American Lesbians And Gays in Black Churches and Rev. Irene Monroe as well.

Political amateur hour, folks. You have to wonder what was going through their heads.

Keith and Jasmyne have more.

Pam Spaulding :: Team Obama: recruiting a white pastor=bad idea
Tags: , , , , , (All Tags)
Bookmark and Share
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Irene Moore
My pick.  I have seen her in action.  A dynamo.  Even though I am an atheist and think Christianity is bull shit, I understand the need to teach in steps out of it.

Make alot of noise. Life is short.

We should not lose sight of this...

...none of these problems would exist without religion.

 

Religion itself IS the problem.  All religions essentially teach that they are correct and anyone who believes differently is wrong and must ultimately, somehow, be punished.

 

The world is not a right/wrong, black/white place. There are many shades of gray and million different colors inbetween right and wrong.  Only a religionist will tell you that something is either right or wrong. 

 



Not all religions.
MIne teaches the exact opposite in fact -- that all are equally right.

Indeed, that they are *true*

But only for those who believe that way.

http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...


[ Parent ]
Jasmyne's post has a link to her interview on a Black Talk Radio Station in Chicago

I think this is positive, if this issue gets discussed on black talk radio.  Jasmyne did quite well. 

I know that homophobic blacks tend to prefer white gays to represent gays - because then they can fall back to the "being gay is a white thing", nonsense.   



HRC needs to be faulted too

from Jasmyne's comments -

 

To Anonymous, the HRC were the ones who 'pitched a b*tch' (to use a colloquilism) the loudest about McClurkin in the first place. It was the HRC's objections that reached the mainstream, not black GLBTs' objections. So it makes sense that Obama's people would interact with the HRC, since they've made themselves the most out spokespeople for gays on this issue.

 

I'm not going to diss Obama or his people for this. If Sidden is indeed the HRC's choice, *then the fault lies completely and squarely with the HRC*. Is the HRC a predominantly white gay organization? If blacks are reaching out to Obama, but the HRC is demanding that Obama use their own representative at this conference......... what does that say about white gays and black gays, that the first representative the HRC could come up with, is a white?

 

Obama is being screwed over with strange advice, yes.... but I am not enjoying how whites are once again using blacks to fight their wars, and blacks will get nothing but scars and bruises and a foot on the neck.

EY:  I think HRC has some splainin to do.  

 

 



not HRC's choice

From Back Story:

Yesterday, HRC President Joe Solmonese released a statement that condemned Sen. Obama's association with McClurkin and encouraged Sen. Obama to continue reaching out to the GLBT community on how to best confront the serious issue of homophobia. Sen. Obama's subsequent announcement that South Carolina minister Andy Sidden would be joining the tour's lineup was determined without the input of HRC or Joe Solmonese. If asked, we would have gladly suggested a number of key black, GLBT or straight-supportive ministers who have been outspoken in the call for the equal treatment of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people. Here are just two who would have been excellent choices: 

Bishop John Selders:

Bishop John Selders is a bisexual, ordained minister serving in the United Church of Christ and is the organizing pastor of Amistad United Church of Christ in Hartford,  Connecticut.  He is presider of the Inter-Denominational Conference of Liberation Congregations and Ministries, a new religious body, and a member of the Human Rights Campaign’s Religion Council. 

 

As a nationally renowned teacher, prolific guest on African American radio and HIV/AIDS educator, Bishop Selders has and continues to play an instrumental role in reaching out to young people and African-American religious leaders to foster honest dialogue about GLBT equality within the African-American community.  “There is a connection between the oppression that is experienced of all people,” explains Bishop Selders.  “How we make those connections is important for me as a faith leader. We need to critique how we have experienced and talked about sex and sexual orientation.”

 

Bishop Yvette Flunder:

Bishop Flunder is the author of Where the Edge Gathers: Building a Community of Radical Inclusion. She also founded the City of Refuge, a thriving inner-city congregation in San Francisco, CA that celebrates the radically inclusive love of Jesus Christ.  As part of her ministry, she has established a Foundation in her name whose goal is to ameliorate the HIV/AIDS pandemic. City of Refuge boasts one of the largest ministries to transgender people in the country.

 



[ Parent ]
Another not-insignificant choice ....
Peter Gomes, the renowned Harvard professor of divinity who came out about 10 years ago.  He just switched from R to D to support Deval Patrick in the Mass Guv's race.  Written several brilliant books on religious philosophy (which I'm sorry to say I own, or have owned one, but didn't make the time to read.)  But then, would he have wanted to be a beard for a self-hater like McClurkin???

Oh no he didn't
You know, I saw the picture and thought, That looks like my cousin who identifies as mixed-race.

I will cheerfully admit that I did not have one single moment in which it occurred to me, Obama's people hired a white man to do Irene Monroe's job.

Their new slogan can be 'Barack Obama: Even a Stopped Clock is Right Twice a Day'. It's gonna look great on a bumper sticker.

But wait, there's more!


Help me, Please.
I need to understand why this is such an enormous issue.

I'm of mixed race -- and my children are even more so. You can think of me as white, if you want. Or black. Or brown. or red.
I don't care.

I'm fully aware that black homophobia is absolutely horrific in ways that put the efforts of Dobson, Perkins, et al to shame.

I'm aware that those of us who happen to be "of color" and LGBT are invisible within the black community. And, in my case, on all sorts of levels.

But why is it an issue?  He's campaigning right now. He's trying to beat Hillary. Its still the primary.

*of course* he's going to kowtow to the extremists.  They actually get out there and vote. That's why the reps are pandering to the antigay right with all the abandon of children at play (albeit psychotic children in a wonderlandesque way).

please, explain it to me.

why should this overshadow other things?

http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...


he's cozying up with haters
while giving limp lip service to respect and equality.  if that doesn't give you pause, then it's not worth my going further.

Lurleen on Twitter

[ Parent ]
So does every politician out there.
Is it because he's particularly said he's in favor of our freedoms and liberties being no longer stopped?

Obama himself gives me pause. His words prior to this idiocy of his gave me pause, because they were lip service and that was to only maintain the status quo.

http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...


[ Parent ]
i disagree
i don't see every politician out there (except the repubs) publicly sharing the stage with open bigots.  i really don't.  no politician (or anyone for that matter) can avoid dealing with bigots in the course of our daily lives.  but most of us buy our groceries or whatever and move on.  this is different than publicly currying the favor (votes, support) of them and refusing to acknowledge in a meaningful way the inherent conflict of interest created by doing so.  i'm not aware of edwards of gravel or even hillary going such things.  got any examples?  if you do, i'll be all over them too.

Lurleen on Twitter

[ Parent ]
Ok, that's it.
The fact he's on a stage with them.

thank you.

I have to confess that Obama isn't even on my radar insofar as someone I'll vote -- whether or not he receives the nomination.

I may not vote against him, but he doesn't have my support and never really had a chance after his general failure on issues of import to me (LGBT and not)

I can agree that what he's doing on that stage is wrong now -- I just needed to understand *why* it was wrong, when its merely an extension.

Hillary's staff isn't completely clean on LGBT stuff, but I will say I've never heard nor encountered anything about Edwards' being like this.

THen again, he's still more or less coming in third.

I may switch my party affiliation to vote for him in the primary.

again, thank you, and huggs.

http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...


[ Parent ]
Some help

dyssonace, this is a case of cultural insensitivity and Black lgbt visibility. It’s important for a minister addressing a Black gospel music crowd to look like the group he or she is addressing.

As a Black gay man, I’ve grown up hearing lots of myths in the Black community about homosexuality. “Homosexuality is a white western phenomena because there is no African word for It.” or “If you are Black and gay you are not considered a positive part of the Black community”. And of course the deep seated anti-gay interpretations of the Bible which keeps many Black lesbians and gays in the closet. The twist on this is the fact that the Black Gospel music industry is FULL of Black gay performers, but it’s a very Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell situation. 

I’m sure Rev. Sidden is a wonderful minister; this is not about his credentials. This is about the gospel music folks already thinking that homosexuality = white. That it’s something outside of the Black community…and this will only be reinforced by having a white gay man on stage. Like I said on Jasmyne’s site, former NBA John Amaechi tells Oprah that a woman he met on his book tour thanked him for speaking about coming out because she didn't know Black people could be gay!!!  Like others have said, there is a long list of Black lgbt religious leaders who could have been an excellent choice. This was a great opportunity for Black gays to be visible within our own community, especially one with a  religious focus. I’m really baffled that the Obama camp could have made such a blunder. If his inner circle was diverse enough to include Black lgbt voices, this whole drama could have been avoided.



[ Parent ]
This may be the most terrifying statement of this whole issue
It’s important for a minister addressing a Black gospel music crowd to look like the group he or she is addressing.

Of course! I mean, you can't expect a crowd to listen to a man from a different race!


[ Parent ]
Most terrifying?!?
Wow, does a trophy come with that distinction? It’s not just about listening, it’s about identifying. A mostly straight Black church going, gospel listening crowd will be turned off being spoken to about the subject of homophobia coming from someone who is seen as being outside their community…that community being religious Black church goers. It has recently been reported that Obama’s people turned down Rev. Michael Eric Dyson’s participation, along with Bishop Yvette Flunder, Bishop Tonyia Rawls, and Bishop Carlton Pearson. All of them are Black and either openly gay or have gay affirming positions.  I never said people of different races shouldn’t speak or learn from each other. Read the ENTIRE post!

[ Parent ]
I did read the whole post

Hence my "this is the most terrifying part." See? item A, from larger group B, has been identified as the most terrifying.

 

And identifying = "looking the same".  Got it. You don't need to keep explaining what you mean; I know exactly what you're saying.



[ Parent ]
Thanks, Brotha
Im familiar with the same myths, and the basic insensitivity and such.

When I was in the south, I was often sorta socially thrown into the "black" group, although most peeps that know me wouldn't normally place me there (or any of the normal ones, for that matter).

That was one of the things that really got keyed into the reality of racism in America (on all sides).  The LGBT part kicks in because I was *always* called gay. Gotten written up for smacking a Top with a broom handle that he thought it would be funny to wake me up with by trying to sodomize "the little faggot" with it. (sorry for the quoted slur)

Here in Phoenix, I don't exactly have to deal with that issue quite as much (although thanks to my family and in laws I was grouped often into the hispanic thing, lol) because there's not a lot of people of color here except white and brown.

I did lose a job becuase I "lied on my application" when I check "white".  Apparently the individual felt I *had* to check black.

But outside of little things like that, I can't claim to have "fully experienced" the extremes that can happen other than as an outsider. As someone of multiple races, I'm constantly subject to all kinds of stupid little things that are based on what different people of different races do. It doesn't matter, either -- they can be black, white, brown, purple, pink -- it always seems like they up and decide to deal with me entirely based on their perceptions of what single race I am.

So when I see issues that are racially structured within a particular race, I'm always questioning it. ANd in this case, it didn't make sense to me initially.

Between you and the other poster, I think I've gotten a better grasp on the take here, and appreciate the time taen to respond.


http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...


[ Parent ]
No prob

I can’t say I know how you feel, but if as a nation we are behind in race relations (black/white/brown etc.), we are REALLY behind when it comes to bi-racial multi-racial folks. I think the whole ‘one drop’ rule is very outdated, but race-identity politics is so strong that people are forced to ‘choose’ a racial group when such a decision is not as simple as checking a box.

I think we make racial progress by questioning and hearing different stories like yours.



[ Parent ]
They'll Follow Us Home

Hey Pam, this is the self-same Ktwdawg from Salon.  I was wondering what your take on the separation of Church and State is- obviously pertaining to candidates for high political office.  You seem to want Obama to speak to the black christian community about their homophobia and- while I know he opens some room to maneuver on the C&S issue simply by organizing an event around Gospel artists deeply connected to that constituency- I can't help but feel like you are treading a very thin line in what you're asking Obama to do.  Of course, that's according to my interpretation of where the line should be drawn between a candidate engaging a specific religious constituency on political matters, and a candidate wading full-steam into a cultural battle that embroils the THREE hot-rails of contemporary politics: Race, Religion, and Equal Rights for the LGBT community.  That's why I'm very interested to know your interpretation of the Church/State/political candidate dynamic is;  A bigger political boondoggle could not be invented by Karl Rove, etc. if he tried his damndest.  

I want to say that I do fully support rights for LGBT citizens- though I have the same reservations about federal language dealing with the term 'marriage' as Obama does.  I'm a 26 year-old white male 'breeder',  and none of this is neither here nor there for me, however, as my concerns are mostly with the delineation of the problem of homophobia in the black community, its undeniable roots in the black Church, and what the appropriate strategies for change are- especially concerning the involvement of a political candidate in a deeply religious issue.
The real rock-and-hard place that Obama finds himself between is the expectations of a progressive black leader in the middle of a heated contest for the Presidential nomination, that demands special attention to his 'own' demographic (since, I think, he has been found 'black enough'), all of which includes the issue of LGBT rights and the tightly bound problems within the (black) Church.  
I think we can both agree that the best thing would have been for Obama not to have put him in this situation, but now that he's here- do you think it is fair to him, and appropriate within your understanding of the lines between C&S, to be attacked unilaterally, without pluralistic caveat- especially considering his record on LGBT issues?
Thanks,
Kw



church-state separation

Hi Ktwdawg, thanks for stopping by.

Actually, I fully believe in church-state separation. Unfortunately the right (and some on the left, with less malice), try to have it both ways. And as far as the right goes, they've chosen to cross the line by trying to deny civil rights to LGBTs citing religious reasons as a basis for doing so.

The problem is the top tier candidates have been the ones to cite and cleave to their religious beliefs as a reason to deny civil marriage for gays and lesbians. Not only that, the Democratic Party has spent a lot of time, energy and money trying to find out how to court the religious (specifically evangelical) vote. Religion holds no place in the campaign, or in government other than to support the right of people to practice and exercise it. 

Obama has been a friend to the LGBT community, aside from hiding behind his religious beliefs as an excuse to refuse to support civil marriage for gays and lesbians. That doesn't let him off the hook for being surrounded by complete ineptitude on this issue.

I'm only pointing out that once he opened the Pandora's box of oersonal religious convictions, Obama -- or any candidate -- cannot then step back and pretend he holds no responsibility for crossing that line when the going gets tough.

Mitt Romney certainly vacillates in the same way regarding his Mormonism. 



[ Parent ]
Ahhhh

Thanks for taking the time to respond Pam.  I suppose Obama either did or should have known what he was getting into, and I must admit I am dissapointed.  I'm still not comfortable with the burden to fight this issue aggressively in the middle of his presidential campaign that he is being saddled with, but then he did kind of ask for it.  I doubt, however, that Hillary Clinton would be catching such flak if she had made a similar mistake.  I digress however, because the intricacies of the black community are not something I am intimately familiar with.   (I would add that M. Eric Dyson is a somewhat controversial figure, who might have been seen as Obama 'bringing in an outsider'. [I was also unaware until reading it here that MED was gay!])

It seems apparent to me, from your response and elsewhere, that a major sticking point with mainstream democratic candidates is their favoring 'civil unions' over 'marriage', which they attribute to their religious beliefs.  I think your language on this is too dismissive- that they're "hiding behind their religion"- when it comes to candidates' decisions on that specific issue.  I must say that I find the debate to be little more than summantics- the word 'marriage' as opposed to 'civil unions', which convey the same legal rights and protections under the law.  As such, it troubles me that this is such a sticking point between the LGBT community and candidates of faith. 

As I see it, the term 'marriage' is an inherently religious term, used to describe the union of two people with the specific purpose of having and raising children.  Yes, in modern times LGBT have a few options to start their own families and raise their own children, but traditionally- religiously- historically- the term is a fulfillment of God's covenant with his people to multiply, and is used to convey a union for this specific purpose.  That is how I view the debate over 'marriage vs. civil unions'.   In fact, I would be much more supportive of a movement which advocates the removal of the term 'marriage' entirely from our laws, replaces it with the term 'civil union', and leaves the traditional, historical assignation of 'marriage' to the religious institutions who guard that heritage. 

Can you (or another of your informed readers) explain to me exactly why the term 'marriage' is such a sticking point here? 



[ Parent ]
The religion thing is disingenuous

The word 'marriage' is important because that's what people do -- they get married. No one talks about growing up and hoping to find the right person to civilly unionize; no parents go out to lunch to tell all their friends that their son or daughter is getting domestically partnered.  Marriage is the "currency" of relationships. I would add, too, that there is no such thing as all the rights of marriage without the word -- one of the rights of marriage is being married.

If Obama or Clinton or whomever really believes that civil unions are the same, I would invite them to divorce their spouses and go beg Vermont or Connecticut or New Jersey to give them a civil union in its place. I would bet, though, that none would be interested.

Aside from the fact that marriage in the US is indeed a civil institution not a religious one -- no straight couple needs the permission of a church or synagogue or what not to marry -- if they were really concerned about religion the whole line of debate would not be happening.

Numerous religious denominations do not define marriage as being between 1 man and 1 women. Just a few examples include the Unitarian Universalists, Reformed Judaism, and most tellingly, the United Church of Christ .... to which Barack Obama belongs (as do I).  As these faith traditions do indeed exist, all the candidates are being entirely disingenous by pointing to religion as their reason for opposing marriage equality; indeed, opposing marriage equality is not only discrimination against LGBT persons, but also is discriminatory against a variety of religious traditions as it also places the religious views of of the UUs, the UCC, etc., as inferior.

Obama is more disingenous than the other candidates since his own denomination supports equal marriage (not civil unions) and yet he cites religion as his reason for opposing equal marriage.

 



[ Parent ]
no church-state lines being crossed
the church-state problem happens if either:
1.  the state tries to favor or enforce a particular religion,
2.  a not-for-profit religious organization campaigns for or against a particular candidate.

neither of those things is happening here.  i see no problem.

Lurleen on Twitter


[ Parent ]
The ineptness amazes me
I was 100% behind Obama until this incident.  I was even willing to overlook the Durkin thing because I'm not so naive to believe that no other candidate has ties to someone with the same beliefs.  But his staff has just botched this thing so badly that I'm afraid of how they'd handle much more sensitive and possible life threatening situations.  He may not have a lot of political experience - but knowing that he should be going out of his way to surround himself with experienced staffers.  It isn't just being a political amatuer - it's really about bad decision making and screwing up the simple stuff.  How hard is it to google people before making a committment?  Reach out to the HRC and similar organizations and say 'What's your take on this guy?" 

campaign school

While I'm never been an Obama supporter - I endorsed Hillary Clinton in May - I feel some empathy for the senator and his staff. What is happening to him is something that happens in darn near every campaign. His intentions were good - to reach out to the African-American community who are celebrating Obama's historic run for the presidency - but the campaign wandered aimlessly into a long-simmering conflict. 

I believe Obama when he says he doesn't hold anti-gay views and I think all LGBT advocacy groups give him high marks on his LGBT voting record and pledges. The campaign has made a mess of this issue and LGBT advocacy groups certainly aren't giving him much help. Maybe we ought to help the guy out a little bit and stop piling on.

Since it's becoming increasingly clear that Senator Clinton is likely to win the nomination, it doesn't serve our interests to box any of these fine presidential candidates into a corner. They would all make great additions to the ticket  - Obama, Edwards and Richardson are my favorites - and I don't want to see any of them tainted by poor campaign mistakes. 



help him?
i've seen no indication that he wishes to accept help other than in the form of a campaign check.  if he had wanted help, he would have jumped on the phone to NBJC or enlisted some black clergy as soon as he realized his initial mistake.  but no, all we get is a weak "I *said* we should tolerate you guys!" press release.  how can you help someone like that?  he doesn't want our help.  he wants us to shut up and go away.

Lurleen on Twitter

[ Parent ]
Or

Maybe he doesn't think he owes one identity group any more than another identity group, and he might want to consider campaigning to the other 98% of the electorate. Not to the exclusion or against your group, but there are other issues to worry about.

Black homophobia is not exclusively his issue to fix. It seems the black community needs to work on this themselves as well; not simply expect Obama to validate it by working his campaign around it.



[ Parent ]
perhaps that is indeed his thinking.
but then he shouldn't be surprised at the response he gets from us.  the guy acts utterly naive.  it's embarrassing.

Lurleen on Twitter

[ Parent ]
Who said he was surprised?
He's not acting naive. He's threading a possibly-impossible-to-thread needle between racial intolerance and homophobia.  He stands accused of sending the wrong color religious leader to address a homophobic crowd.  Yeah, that's an easy task in modern-day America. [eyeroll]

[ Parent ]
oh my.
let's jsut save pixels and agree to disagree.

Lurleen on Twitter

[ Parent ]
Sure
We can disagree as to his motives, but there is no disagreement that there is no direct proof, of any kind, that he wants you or yours (however you're defining that) to "shut up and go away."

[ Parent ]
I admit I looked at him and thought "light-skinned black"

and no big deal. I assumed they picked him as a Local Guy (ie, pastoring in SC) - yes I suppose it would have been better to pick someone with darker skin, and expand outward from SC UCC to consider other denoms and SC-raised pastors working elsewhere. It would have been very cool to jettison the "must be from SC" requirement, and get someone from Atlanta.

 Gomes is a reserved type but has the prestige factor of Haavaaad. Dyson has oodles of media savvy but doesn't come across as a "real" pastor (ie working  for a congregation). I'd give Flunder the job, she's a high-voltage speaker. Monroe if you wanted someone from a "mainstream" (non-"gay church" denom) who can work a crowd. I haven't seen the Unity Fellowship pastors in action - no UFs in my city, UF is a very small denom., the "black gay church", very much the old-time Gospel format. And I forget the name of the successful black preacher who changed his mind and his ministry once his son came out, lost his ministry (people left the congregation), and he has gone on preaching tours. At any rate, lots of talent out there.



adding it all up
I would have selected Reggie Longcrier (from NC, high profile from the YouTube debate).

[ Parent ]
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Report TOS Violations



Join the Blend Chat Room



Premium Sponsors



BlogAds






Search the Blend
Current site


PHB 2.0 Web
Search Blend 1.0 Archives
Ad Networks


BlogSheroes BlogAds


Miscellany

RSS Feeds

Subscribe with Bloglines

Visit NCBlogs


frontpage hit counter

Stats

Powered by: SoapBlox