1) Clinton should not quote Rev. Harold Mayberry approvingly in campaign materials...

Kurt_and_Hunter

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-22-07 07:49 PM
Original message

1) Clinton should not quote Rev. Harold Mayberry approvingly in campaign materials...

Edited on Mon Oct-22-07 08:30 PM by Kurt_and_Hunter

1) Clinton should not quote Rev. Harold Mayberry approvingly in campaign materials, if she has. (I don't want to jump-ugly while under-informed, but that's common sense as a hypothetical.) She should not court the support of or publicize the support of any other outspoken anti-gay figure. No one can control who supports them, but a campaign can choose to not publicize support from someone, so if she if using his name as someone favorable to her she should remove any such reference.

and...

2) Obama should have Donnie McClurkin removed from the fund-raiser line-up. Period. Obama is not merely associating himself with McClurkin, he is using the man as a tool of the Obama campaign... using him to raise funds. Fund raising is a quintessential campaign activity, so campaigns can not casually distance themselves from a fund-rising event organized by the campaign itself.

If removing McClurkin is impossible for any reason, Obama should remove his own name from that one concert, should stop advertising and promoting the show, should not have his candidacy promoted at the event, and should accept no money from the event.

Simply repeating that he loves the gay folks is insufficient to the point of being offensive... even republicans say "Gays are people, AIDS is bad." It's hollow boiler-plate. Obama's statement actually does not really criticize the subsyance of McClurkin's views. It is quite carefully written. Boil it down to what is really being said: African Americans and LGBT must stand together in fight for equal rights, SO I disagree with Reverend McClurkin's views. In other words, the reason he disagrees with McClurkin is in the interest of harmony, not in the interest of any specific concept of gay rights.

It is a non-apology apology, like saying "I'm sorry if anyone took offense..." No statement at all would have been better.

and...

3) Any other Dem candidate seeking the endorsement or approval of anyone, even a black preacher, who is outspoken in opposition to homosexuality should cease seeking such support.

Just one man's opinion of things. Fair is fair.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

ruggerson

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-22-07 07:50 PM
Response to Original message

1. Agreed

and we'll have a very long wait

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

cuke

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-22-07 07:52 PM
Response to Original message

2. What was "approvingly" of quoting him

Edited on Mon Oct-22-07 07:54 PM by cuke

I saw the quote. I saw nothing that HRC said that could be considered "approving" aside from it's actual presence in the press release

Why can't you just stick to the facts and say that HRC quoted him? Why include the characterization?

Or is that simply quoting him is something you recognize is vastly different than what Obama has done?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Kurt_and_Hunter

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-22-07 08:00 PM
Response to Reply #2

3. The point is that he was quoted to make one think more favorably of her.

If it was not meant to be favorable to her then it wouldn't be in campaign material.

It's not a formal endorsement, but it's symbolic.

I am not saying it is a big deal. The Obama thing is MUCH worse, and I tried to make that clear in the OP. But in the interest of diminishing the us-vs-them quality of the debate I prefer to bend over backward to say that my disappointment is not driven by preference or dislike of a particular candidate.

I am saying that there should be zero tolerance of any sort of wink-and-nod.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

cuke

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-22-07 08:04 PM
Response to Reply #3

4. If it's that obvious, and it is

then why did you have to editorialize?

Seriously? It's obvious you're trying to paint these two things as equal, and your determination has led you to stretch as much as you can. First, it was an endorsement (which you originally backed off of, but now you repeat it). Then it was "approvingly". Now, it's back to an endorsement, but this time, it's a symbolic endorsement.

"I am saying that there should be zero tolerance of any sort of wink-and-nod."

Then just say it. There's no need to distort something to make them appear equal.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Kurt_and_Hunter

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-22-07 08:27 PM
Response to Reply #4

5. It's not obvious to me that I'm trying to paint these two things as equal

Edited on Mon Oct-22-07 08:29 PM by Kurt_and_Hunter

The word "approvingly" is important. It would hardly be wrong to quote him as an example of bigotry, for instance.

I am trying to say that the problem with Obama's position is not a tit-for-tat candidate vs. candidate issue, and that I have no interest in arguments about whether "Clinton did it too"

My argument is not that Obama is a bad man, but that this position he has taken is bullshit. And any even remotely similar bullshit from anyone else is also wrong. So if someone wants to say "Clinton did it to" I have no interest in their argument. I am happy to concede that if Clinton did wrong it's wrong.

That does nothing to dimminish the wrongness of Obama's position, unless my goal was to draw a distinction between Clinton and Obama, an that's not my goal.

My goal is to say that Obama's position is wrong, and would be wrong even if everyone in the world did it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

cuke

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-22-07 08:31 PM
Response to Reply #5

6. I think you really screwed up

with the whole "wrong is wrong". It's not true. It's too simplistic to lump all bad things as "wrong" without drawing distinctions between them. And it wasn't wise of you to assume that listing both of those would be interpreted as anything but a comparison

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

zulchzulu

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-22-07 08:38 PM
Response to Original message

7. I've emailed the campaign telling them to remove McClurkin from the gig

Based on what Obama said in a recent release, they are probably going to replace his act with someone else. McClurkin will not perform that night or if he does, there will be plenty of protests.

Was it Obama's fault? No. It was possibly thr South Carolina advance team that forget to check out his credentials.

Should Clinton remove Rev. Harold Mayberry's endorsement from her web site? Yes, but only with a statement why. Otherwise, I have the code and PDF to make available online to anyone who wishes to see it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Kurt_and_Hunter

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-22-07 08:59 PM
Response to Reply #7

8. isn't that a bit much?

"Should Clinton remove Rev. Harold Mayberry's endorsement from her web site? Yes, but only with a statement why."

Campaign web-sites are dynamic documents subject to constant Orwellian revision... that's the nature of them.

I think Obama should take down the advertising on his site for the one event, but I don't expect him to replace it with an explanation.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

cuke

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-22-07 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #8

9. You shouldn't believe z

Just a few hours ago, z was saying that there was nothing wrong with this. Now that it's getting bigger, z is admitting that there is something wrong here, but won't admit that Obama was wrong. z also claims that Obama will probably remove the bigot from the tour, even though Obama himself said that he won't remove the bigot.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

zulchzulu

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-22-07 09:55 PM
Response to Reply #9

14. I've never said there was nothing wrong with Donnie McWhatever performing...

If you were paying attention, I was saying that him being one of four gospel groups performing music on one night in Columbia, South Carolina was not an indication that the entire Obama campaign and millions of supporters are somehow complicit as homophobes, bigots and anti-gay as some here on DU and elsewhere found the enjoyment of saying. Add that the same performer had performed at Clinton events and was on stage with Bill Clinton this summer in South Carolina for an event.

90% of the them doing this charade were Clinton supporters. And now that it is out that the Hillary Clinton web site features an endorsement by a visceral homophobe who thinks homosexuality is "thievery", suddenly we see just how vapid these people are by cackling that it's "not the same thing" or trying to change the subject or better yet lie about the event itself.

I've been accused by the same assholes for being a "homophobe" even though I've done lots of grassroots work over the years for the LGBT community and fighting hard against the recent anti-gay legislation here in Wisconsin. I have a gay brother who I dearly love and support and witnessed a wonderful uncle die of AIDS at his death bed. I've helped people learn about PFLAG as well. Yeah, call me a goddamn homophobe.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

cuke

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-22-07 10:02 PM
Response to Reply #14

15. "I've emailed the campaign telling them to remove McClurkin from the gig"

If there's "nothing wrong" with McBigot, then why did you write and ask for the bigot's removal?

If there's nothing wrong with associating with a bigot, then why do you think Hillary should remove the quote from her website?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

zulchzulu

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-22-07 09:43 PM
Response to Reply #8

12. Clinton is using Mayberry's endorsement as part of an effort showing African-American support

If she or the campaign decide to take the endorsements from the SF Bay area African-American community, I would fully expect that those others that were mentioned might want to know why they got tossed off the site. Therefore, a statement would be in order.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Forkboy

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-22-07 09:41 PM
Response to Original message

10. You'll never get anywhere around here if you insist on being logical.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Colobo

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-22-07 09:42 PM
Response to Original message

11. This is being blown up by people that never liked Obama in the first place.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Kurt_and_Hunter

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-22-07 09:51 PM
Response to Reply #11

13. Hi Katz, I hope I'm not on that list

You weren't around last night so you missed the worst stuff. Obama's not my guy, but I'm not after him either.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3631841&mesg_id=3631841

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

ruggerson

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-22-07 10:17 PM
Response to Reply #11

16. I have two gripes with Obama

1) The Coburn thing. That alone shot my antennae through the roof. Coburn and Imhofe are unacceptable bigots.

2) This "ex-gay" imbroglio.

I can see that Obama takes the right positions on many gay and lesbian issues. Not on marriage, but none of the frontrunners do. But, I just don't buy that he GETS it. You can't GET it and then buddy up with some loon like Tom Coburn. You just can't.

I'm perfectly willing to be openminded and made to see where I'm wrong. And I agree with Obama on a host of issues. I also find him inspiring at times. But does he get who I am and what my family is? I just am not convinced.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Fri May 03rd 2024, 02:35 AM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.