Issue Number 1014 | Should You Believe in Obama? | Advocate.com Should You Believe in Obama?  |  | Advocate.com

Advocate.com health Channel
||  COVER STORY  ||
 
Should You Believe in Obama?
He may have stumbled on marriage equality and cuddled with a few homophobes, but the people who know him best swear that he’s your man.
From The Advocate  September 9, 2008
Should You Believe in Obama?

Barack Obama had just finished a long day of campaigning for the U.S. Senate in 2004 when he called his daughters on the cell phone to say good night. Then he sat back in the car, turned to an aide (who had also been a close friend for more than a decade), and asked, “So, Kevin—have you and Greg thought about having kids?”

The aide, Kevin Thompson (who no longer works for the candidate), says Obama often asked questions about his life as a gay man: wondering how he and his partner made various decisions, why they didn’t want to get married, why they weren’t planning to have kids. And after Obama marched in a Chicago pride parade for the first time, Thompson says, questions again poured forth: “He wanted to know the history of Pride—how is it that every city has one, what was the origin of it, what was the whole story about Stonewall.”

Obama had seen Thompson through ups and downs. They first met when Thompson worked with Michelle Obama in the Chicago mayor’s office in the early 1990s. At the time, Thompson was married to a woman, but in the difficult period when his marriage ended and he started coming out, he says, Michelle became one of his closest confidantes. “I knew that [my coming out] made a lot of people uncomfortable, no matter what they said. I never worried, never wondered for a second what Michelle and Barack thought of me. They were the kind of friends who I knew would always be with me.”

Lately, though, a number of other gay people have been wondering what Barack Obama thinks of them. Obama’s record on gay rights is strong, but his history of advocacy at the national level is short—which leaves some uncertain of the depth of his commitment to gay and lesbian issues. A Harris Interactive poll in July found that Obama led John McCain among registered voters, 44% to 35%, and had a huge lead among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender respondents, but a potentially significant 17% of those voters remained undecided. “Some people don’t know what to make of [Obama] because he hasn’t known the leading gay activists or even his own advisers on gay issues for very long,” says David Mixner, who played an integral role in Bill Clinton’s 1992 campaign and was one of the first openly gay senior presidential campaign advisers. Of the half-dozen or so gay men and lesbians who occupy top positions on the Obama campaign, deputy national campaign manager Steve Hildebrand, who first met the candidate for two years ago, has known him longest.

“The mafia doesn’t know him. David Geffen, James Hormel, David Bohnett -- they’re not his friends,” says another national gay political leader. “His real gay friends are regular people in Chicago.”

In interviews, more than a dozen of those old friends and other gay leaders in Illinois who’ve worked with Obama described more than a decade of consistent advocacy for gay civil rights. Their stories cast new light on Obama’s ties to antigay Christian leaders and on his tortured, though canny, position on marriage equality. They reveal long-lasting relationships with gay people that help explain his ease in talking about gay issues, and a legal disposition that helps account for his choice to speak about gay rights, even in settings where it’s not obviously in his best political interest to do so.

Most important, they suggest that an Obama presidency would offer gay people the possibility of grasping the most valuable political asset imaginable, one that they’ve never had in relation to the White House: accountability. Tracy Baim, the publisher and executive editor of Chicago gay newspaper Windy City Times, has covered Obama since his first race for the Illinois state senate, in 1996. “He and Michelle don’t just come to gay events for political reasons,” she says. “They come because they understand the issues, and they have friends in the community. If he were to betray us, it would be personal.”

If he were to betray his gay constituents, he might also consider it to be malfeasance. Jim Madigan, an attorney who was a student in professor Obama’s constitutional law class at the University of Chicago in the late 1990s, says Obama taught the course from a distinct perspective. Every civil rights case study, from Dred Scott v. Sandford to Bowers v. Hardwick, was made “from the perspective of the individual plaintiff,” Madigan says. Moreover, Obama approached race and sexual orientation with an even hand: “The approach was always, ‘Look at how the government is treating the individual,’ ” Madigan recalls. “What was personal for him and what was personal for me -- we treated them in the same way.”

This legal approach surely helps account for Obama’s fluency in the language of gay rights. When Obama announced his candidacy for the Illinois state senate, he invited Rick Garcia of the Illinois Federation for Human Rights (now known as Equality Illinois), the state’s largest gay and lesbian political organization, to meet with him. (The state senate has 59 seats, and Obama was one of only three senatorial candidates who requested meetings with the federation during the 1996 race.) Garcia’s first impression of the candidate concerned his rhetoric: “He was able to talk about the issues in a natural, normal, comfortable way. He didn’t struggle for language. He didn’t say things like ‘homosexual preference’ or ‘sexual preference.’ He was up to speed even before we started working with him.”

Once elected, Obama immediately signed on as a sponsor of legislation to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. The latter is covered by only a handful of state laws and, because it’s the more radical idea, is often abandoned by mainstream politicians. But “Obama never wavered in his commitment to the gender identity piece, even when one of the gay sponsors wanted to take it out,” Garcia says, adding that Obama lobbied extensively for the bill. p

“One evening we were having difficulty with one of the other Democratic senators. We asked Senator Obama, ‘What can you do to help?’ And he said he would talk to his colleague. People make that kind of promise all the time, and you never know whether the conversations actually happen.” But not long after, Garcia adds, “I’m in the statehouse, and I hear a loud discussion on the landing below me on the staircase, and I peer over and see, it’s Barack talking to the other senator very passionately about how he should vote for the gay rights bill. He was confronting the senator -- without an audience, without any sense that anyone was watching.”

That other senator was James Meeks, who is also pastor of Chicago’s Salem Baptist Church and who last year was named by the Southern Poverty Law Center as one of the “10 leading black religious voices in the antigay movement.” (Among many other alleged declarations, Meeks is said to have denounced “Hollywood Jews for bringing us Brokeback Mountain.”) And although Meeks wasn’t swayed by Obama, the bill eventually passed in 2005, the year after Obama had left the legislature for the U.S. Senate.

Page: 1 | 2 | 3
Keywords:  2008 Election 

Reader Comments

These comments are reproduced as written by visitors to this Web site. They have not been edited for content, grammar, or spelling. The viewpoints appearing here are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion or views of advocate.com, The Advocate, or its affiliates.

  • Name: Mike
    Date posted: 2008-09-01 4:36 AM
    Hometown: Media

    Comment:

    The question is..." should you believe in Obama?" YES !! WE have 2 choices. 1. Obama 2. McCain which is Bush lite. We know where John McCain stands. It is NOT with us. Obama at least is working in words so far to be with us. I will give him the chance to make his words become action. I also belive that Obama has other issues on the table which the country neesd to address. Medical Care...The Economy... Remember what Hillary Clintin said in her campaign.... "Are you better now than you were 8 years ago?" Former President Clinton may not have been the answer to all our issues, but at least he was open to have us at the table. I will vote for Sen.Obama. He is the only logical choice to move America forward.


  • Name: William Anderson
    Date posted: 2008-08-27 3:05 AM
    Hometown: Tampa, FL

    Comment:

    Corrected figures for my post below. Taxes under Clinton 1999 vs.Taxes under Bush 2008 Single making 30K - tax $8,400 Single making 30K - tax $4,500 Pay $3,900 less with Bush Single making 50K - tax $14,000 Single making 50K - tax $12,500 Pay $1,500 less with Bush Single making 75K - tax $23,250 Single making 75K - tax $18,750 Pay $4,500 less with Bush


  • Name: Bill Anderson
    Date posted: 2008-08-27 2:48 AM
    Hometown: Tampa, FL

    Comment:

    Barack will roll back the Bush tax cuts. How will this affect you? If you're a single man making $75,000/yr, Barack Obama will cost you over $7,000 a year. And if you make $35,000/yr, you'll need to scrape together over $2,000 for higher income taxes. And what will you get for it? Gay marriage? Not if Obama has a say about it. Take your Bush tax cut money and fly to MA or CA and to get married. Problem solved. Don't be fooled. These elections are 90% about economic issuies.


  • Name: Keith
    Date posted: 2008-08-26 6:07 PM
    Hometown: San Francisco

    Comment:

    I'm also planning on voting for no one for president. I believe Obama's another Clinton and, one way or another, he'll end up setting things backwards for gays and lesbians. There are smaller minorities who are able to have an impact on American politics, but I don't think they roll over and cough up money and votes at the first candidate who smiles at them.


  • Name: Nick
    Date posted: 2008-08-26 6:06 AM
    Hometown: Ashland, OR

    Comment:

    We all need to remember that we are a minority in a way that no other group of people in history has been. Our numbers are small and remain a small percentage of the overall population. We do not have the voting power that can back up and elect anyone who claims to be in full support of marriage equality. If Obama were to tout gay marriage as one of his political beliefs, he would not be the democratic nominee. My fellow gays, lesbians and queers, we must face the reality that our cause is a slow, step-by-step progression. Any presidential candidate who fully supports gay marriage in todays political climate would be frozen out before he/she could finish the affirmation. Obama is the best we have and he has already beaten the Clintons in his stance on gay rights. We must 'come out' in full force and vote Obama, if nothing more than for the reason that if McCain is elected, we will lose what little rights we have won.


  • Name: Ed Gould
    Date posted: 2008-08-25 7:31 PM
    Hometown: Chicago

    Comment:

    re: WHO IS ANY BETTER THAN OBAMA? Well to be honest I am going to vote for NONE OF THE ABOVE If Obama is the best the democratic party could come up with they deserve to loose.


  • Name: Ed Gould
    Date posted: 2008-08-25 7:25 PM
    Hometown: Chicago

    Comment:

    Voting for Obama is like buying a PIG in a Poke. His stance on many social issues is at least questionable, putting aside his stance on Gay Marriage is one thing (and maybe iffy) but his asking the government for religious schools is tantamount to state religion. We *ALL* know how bad that is. If it starts small with Obama it will become a major give away under succeeding presidents. It will be almost impossible to stop. Heck maybe the Catholics will have the US government bail them out of the priest fiasco. Don't be too surprised if one day you see a requirement on a job application award. Obama just *CANNOT* be trusted. Just look at his flip flop on FISA he says one thing and votes another way. Can you really trust this guy? NO!!! As for his running mate Bidden, I was just about ready to say hey you made a decent choice. Then come to find out Biden's son is on the Washington gravy train. Bad choice Obama.


  • Name: JCH
    Date posted: 2008-08-25 6:46 PM
    Hometown: London, UK

    Comment:

    I am in a UK civil partnership that affords me full and equal civil rights, i.e. the same treatment on tax, inheritance, employment rights, immigration etc as anyone in a civil marriage. The UK government has followed this up with legislation that forbids discrimination in the provision of public services and even by privately run adoption agencies. Would I prefer my 35-year relationship to be called "marriage"? Yes, I certainly would, and I am confident that it will be redefined as such sooner rather than later. By avoiding the word "marriage" while extending all the civil rights included within it, however, the government got it through parliament with very little controversy. So don't be too hung up on nomenclature - Obama seems to me (still a US citizen and voter) to be more genuinely supportive of equality than any other major party nominee in history. Focus on the underlying rights. Let's get rid of DOMA for a start.


  • Name: DennisT
    Date posted: 2008-08-24 3:52 PM
    Hometown: NYC

    Comment:

    Obama is the lessor of 2 evils...lets just leave it at that. You either support full equality or you don't. You can't be almost pregnant with civil rights.


  • Name: Brian
    Date posted: 2008-08-24 11:10 AM
    Hometown: Round Rock TX

    Comment:

    Equality is inherently inclusive of everyone, so how can wanting equality in marriage be a selfish act or a personal agenda? What is being selfish is failing to support equality just because it's not in your own interest. Marriage and employment need to be fully inclusive at the state and federal level, period. Anything else is not equal, and should no more be acceptable today than it was in the mid 20th century. Obama touts our votes and money, then relegates us to the back of the bus. For all his rhetoric, he appears to be just another politician trying to get elected. Since voting in my first election in 1976, none has been more important for the course of America than this one. McCain is clearly not the candidate of choice to lead this nation. I remain optimistic, and hope after Obama is elected president, he'll figure out what real equality is, and act on it.


  • Name: Michael Buchanan
    Date posted: 2008-08-24 6:21 AM
    Hometown: Amsterdam

    Comment:

    Barack Obama: 'Some of my best friends are gay.'


  • Name: Michael Buchanan
    Date posted: 2008-08-24 6:03 AM
    Hometown: Amsterdam

    Comment:

    Democrats who compromise on equality for political expediency deserve to lose. We need to win with a candidate with true values. Obama is not that candidate. If you can't stomach the idea of 4 years of McCain, start exploring the option of living in another country. May I suggest Canada or the Netherlands. Spain offers full marriage rights for gays which must be recognized in every other EU nation. We don't have to just sit around and take this crap. Start holding politicians feet to the fire. Don't become the gay version of today's Uncle Tom.


  • Name: Dray
    Date posted: 2008-08-24 3:18 AM
    Hometown: NYC NY

    Comment:

    Obamas all we got people! But just the fact that he too is a minority is an improvement. Baby steps...


  • Name: UCCpastor
    Date posted: 2008-08-24 2:25 AM
    Hometown: PA

    Comment:

    Forget how upset many have been about the way the Queer Community joined others and remained silent during the sexism that brought Hillary down! Forget that Obama is tied to a long list of African American pastors and leaders who clearly have NO record of supporting GLBT folk...no record at all!! Forget that, unlike N.O.W., the NAACP has NO history of fighting homophobia, heterosexism and sexism. Forget that Obama said he "won't promote gay marriages" during the Saddleback forum. In fact, forget Obama and the DNC....and forget McCain too! VOTE NADER THIS YEAR! NOW THAT'S CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN!!!


  • Name: Steve
    Date posted: 2008-08-23 1:21 PM
    Hometown: NYC

    Comment:

    Boy, that Democratic Party Platform is a step in the right direction. 2000 and 2004 contained the words "gay" and "lesbian". Not this time around. Kind of like the queer-inclusiveness of Obama's "least of my brothers" comment.


  • Name: J.E. Green author of MERGING WITH MONSTERS
    Date posted: 2008-08-23 11:05 AM
    Hometown: Denver, CO

    Comment:

    Folks have got to stop being so bogged down by their personal agendas. It seems like many American's have become so focused on "I" that we consistently damage ourselves by ignoring the "We." By not supporting Senator Obama and clinging to hurt feelings over Senator Clinton's failure to win the nomination, we are only sending the message that we are a selfish community and a clearly divided community that can CLEARLY be defeated and held back from our own march toward TRUE EQUALITY! I'm supporting the Obama/Biden ticket because Senator Obama is the closest chance we've had EVER to getting an individual in the White House who understands the CHALLENGE of those deemed "DIFFERENT" from Day One! Just keepin' it VERY REAL folks - Peace Out!


  • Name: Jonboy
    Date posted: 2008-08-23 1:03 AM
    Hometown: Winner, SD

    Comment:

    I remember when Clinton came to the 'gay community' and gave some amazing speeches including us at the table. I supported him, gave him money and was enamored with him. I really thought his rhetoric would open many new doors for the gay community. Though it was a good start it fizzled soon. It brought "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and his administatration took a beating from the likes of Sen. Nunn. Obama may be the same as his campaign gives the same hope for the future. But, whatever happens he is far much better then McCain. !


  • Name: Mark
    Date posted: 2008-08-22 5:07 PM
    Hometown: Santa Monica

    Comment:

    Civil unions are a good start at getting more rights, but they will always be patchwork and, ultimately, separate but equal. The near equality of DP's was an important component of the CA Supreme Court's ruling. We probably wouldn't have marriage in California if partnerships hadn't been stablished first. Worrying about our own rights is important, but, at some point, we need to ask ourselves what type of world we want for future generations of gays and lesbians. One where second class status is institutionalized in the law or one where equality is a given?


  • Name: R&D
    Date posted: 2008-08-22 3:03 PM
    Hometown: Seattle, WA

    Comment:

    Jay&Robb - Couldn't agree more.. There's a reason separation of church and state are part of the foundation of this country (regardless of how the current administration have tried to blur the lines). My partner and I have been together for 8 years and fortunately, in WA state, we have made some progress, but we're still hundreds of rights short of what heterosexuals get with a marriage license... I couldn't care less what "they" want to call it, as long as we get the exact same federal rights afforded by a marriage license.


  • Name: liz
    Date posted: 2008-08-22 3:02 PM
    Hometown: anchorage alaska

    Comment:

    ok look. mbey obama doesnt support"marriage" between gays but hey he is willing to give us civil unions and thats a huge step towrd the right direction..like all things, we have been fighting for our rights and its still gonna take some time.. but i think were going in the right direction.. with obama leading us atleast we will have more freedom and mabey a president who can actually understand were the lgbt comunity is coming from.. nothing happens overnight but i think obama is a wonderful step to finally having equal rights and not just for the lgbt comunity but for everyone!!!!! support obama!!


  • Name: Jay & Robb
    Date posted: 2008-08-22 1:23 PM
    Hometown: Florida

    Comment:

    We as a community keep wanting marriage and we seem to keep forgetting that the traditional definition of marriage stems from religion. This country was founded on the basis of religious aspects. We will never change that. My partner and I have been together for 15 years and do not want marriage but equal rights in the eyes of the Federal Government. State Government recogintion is a cop out for politicians and a way to deflect the real issue or take a stance. We pay taxes like everyone else but do not get the full rights that come with it. I hate going through my life knowing the possibility that I might not be able to see my partner in a hospital if he was seriously ill. Why should I pay taxes to a government that doesn't recognize that I was born this way and allows discrimination for what I am? We as a community need to get together and rally for federal recognition. Until that happens we will always be second class citizens to everybody else.


  • Name: Brian
    Date posted: 2008-08-21 5:35 PM
    Hometown: Round Rock TX

    Comment:

    The last time I pinned my hopes on someone, we got "don't ask, don't tell" and the Defense of Marriage Act. I don't see Obama setting any new course of action for change in those areas. In fact, his stance on marriage harkens back to the Jim Crow laws of "separate but equal". I would love to have just a few minutes of his time to tell him about what it's like to lose your job after 12 years (in the Air Force) because you're different, and it's legal. I like to tell him what it meant to me to be legally married in California on July 3rd, and why it was so important for so many reasons. I doubt our paths would ever cross to be able to do that, but I can dream. I won't be pinning my hopes on anyone this year. However, I will never lose optimism for the future, and that some day, in the entire nation, every LGBT person will have real equality and protection under the law.


  • Name: Keith
    Date posted: 2008-08-21 12:07 PM
    Hometown: San Francisco

    Comment:

    For what it's worth, RGM, I respect your argument for supporting Obama. I don't hear you touting him as a messiah for equality or change. It sounds like you accept the fact that he is just another political hack who happens to be the least of two evils. I have a problem with the people who are deluding themselves and claiming that he supports equality for gays and lesbians. Neither he nor they can be trusted. [BTW, I would never support McCain.]


  • Name: rgm
    Date posted: 2008-08-20 7:17 PM
    Hometown: wdc

    Comment:

    I didn’t vote for Obama in the primaries but I am not delusional. I would NEVER vote for John McCain. John McCain is openly hostile toward gay civil rights. He has endorsed the repeal of gay marriages in CA and he boosts of his support for his home state’s efforts to ban not only gay marriage but any form of same sex couples recognition - including domestic partnerships. He supports Don’t Ask Don’t Tell and does NOT support the Mathew Sheppard Act (hate crimes legislation). On the issue of gay adoptions he stated just last month “I think that we’ve proven that both parents are important in the success of a family so, no I don’t believe in gay adoption.” Senator McCain also supported a Jesse Helms strategy to cut off AIDS funding for prevention efforts aimed at the gay community. And last but not least it was none other than John McCain who cast the deciding vote against the Employment Non Discrimination Act (ENDA).


  • Name: Keith
    Date posted: 2008-08-20 3:14 PM
    Hometown: San Francisco

    Comment:

    My Marriage License was issued by the State of California, not by a church. I am in a legally binding relationship recognized by several states in the USA and many countries throughout the world. It has nothing to do with any religion or church. These are facts which cannot be argued. Obama knows that his marriage (and mine) are governmentally defined and endorsed legal relationships. He has consistently stated that his marriage should continue to have legal standing as a marriage but my marriage should be redefined to the status of civil union. These statements are public record. Separate but equal may be acceptable to many people, but please don’t delude yourself or insult my intelligence by stating that Obama’s position is one of equality. He has convinced himself that he can “afford” me second class status. Personally, I believe if he can do this with one set of rights, he can do it with any set of rights.


  • Name: laf
    Date posted: 2008-08-20 3:02 PM
    Hometown: California

    Comment:

    Tim I think Denise is right own, I find it amazing that you as a gay man can't see what Obama may possibly bring to this country should people vote for him and he is elected. For the first time a sitting President may be in tune with the majority of other countries who do recognize gays. Gays not voting for Obama is probably a vote for McCain, and we all know his position of gay and equal rights. Tim you could be living in a country where it is a crime to be a gay person and subject to death.


  • Name: Brian
    Date posted: 2008-08-20 1:23 PM
    Hometown: Decatur, GA

    Comment:

    Senator Obama is willing to fight for our right to civil unions that encompass all the rights that heterosexual people have as married partners. The institution of marriage is nothing to be proud of given the number of couples who divorce and the number of married men I see cruising the internet for "discreet" sex with other men. Marriage is a religious institution. Gay people deserve the same legal rights that heterosexual couples take for granted when they marry. Gay people deserve to be able to serve their country without having to hide who they are and who they love. Barrack Obama cares about gay people in that he cares that we have equal rights under the law. I believe he will work toward that end. I think we cannot expect more from any politician because practicality dictates what is possible to accomplish and what is impossible in the current political climate in this troubled country of ours. He has my vote because frankly the alternative is too grim to contemplate.


  • Name: Mark
    Date posted: 2008-08-20 12:49 PM
    Hometown: Santa Monica

    Comment:

    The only Federal sodomy laws in the U.S. apply to military personnel. Sodomy laws governing the general population were state laws. Clinton blindly walked into the DADT situation because a young voter on MTV asked him if he thought gays should be able to serve in the military and, without researching the issue, he committed to it. Blaming the Reps because Clinton didn't have the backbone to veto DOMA is ridiculous. Clinton signed DOMA into law. At Saddleback, Obama made it clear, once again, the he does not support full equal rights for homosexuals. Even if marriage isn't your top priority, you can't avoid the fact that Obama can justify to himself that we should be second class citizens. Just as Clinton discarded working for our equality when it was politically expedient, Obama will sell us out the first time a group of fundies put him to the test.


  • Name: Michael
    Date posted: 2008-08-20 12:33 PM
    Hometown: New York City

    Comment:

    While I am inclined to vote for Obama, I am still underwhelmed by him so far. First, his close military advisor is Sam Nunn, who led the fight against President Clinton lifting the ban on gays in the military. I remember his "press tour" of a submarine where he pointed out to lapdog reporters how (shock) close the sleeping quarters of a submarine are. Next, his response at the Saddleback forum. He said that he could afford us civil unions. Are we supposed to get down on are knees and thank him for this patronizing statement? I just feel that their opinion is that he doesn't have to worry about us, because we have no where else to go. As for him not commiting political suicide supporting gay marriage, true, but isn't the whole point of his candidacy the fact that he is a different kind of politician?


  • Name: Tim Turner
    Date posted: 2008-08-20 12:46 AM
    Hometown: Oklahoma City

    Comment:

    Denise; I'm amazed that there are still those in the LBGT community who would seriously consider voting for Obama. It's unfortunate that most gays have lost their independent thinking to left-wing, liberal, Marxist rhetoric. If this is all the Dems can come up with, the end is near anyway.


  • Name: Denise N
    Date posted: 2008-08-19 11:56 PM
    Hometown: Santa Cruz

    Comment:

    I'm amazed that there are still those in the LBGT community who would seriously question whether voting for Obama is a good idea, given the compelling evidence of Obama's personal support of gays and his strong record on civil rights. Alleging that a candidate like Obama rings a "crushingly false note" because he is not willing to commit political suicide by championing gay marriage in this national environment is niave to the point of being absurd. The LGBT community needs to throw its full support behind electing Obama if we are to have any hope of a presidential administration that will, perhaps quietly and slowly, move the country toward equal rights for all.


  • Name: rgm
    Date posted: 2008-08-19 7:32 PM
    Hometown: wdc

    Comment:

    I would disagree, that DOMA and Don’t Ask where the most homophobic piece of legislation. I would put sodomy laws higher in that list. However let’s put this in perspective. The defense of marriage act was the first anti gay volley the Republicans put forward as Clinton was approaching his reelection bid. It was absolutely a Republican strategy to put Clinton and the Democrats on defense with blue collar workers, value voters and southerners. It was part of their agenda to solidify there hold on Congress and chip away at the Democrats coalition. As far as gays in the military that was never his intention, he pushed full inclusion but the blue dog Democrats of the South blocked the legislation and balked at letting gay people serve. DOMA was a compromise with those leaders. Clinton actually lost a lot of political capital on this as it was an embarrassing defeat for one of the first pieces of legislation the White House put forward.


  • Name: Mark
    Date posted: 2008-08-19 5:04 PM
    Hometown: Santa Monica

    Comment:

    I heard the same thing during Clinton vs. Daddy Bush. Bubba brought us DOMA and DADT, the two most homophobic pieces of Federal legislation ever. I'm not defending either Bush, but Souter was the swing vote in Lawrence v. Texas.


  • Name: rgm
    Date posted: 2008-08-19 4:11 PM
    Hometown: wdc

    Comment:

    Obama will be less likely to sacrifice us for political gain and les likely to cause long term damage to our struggle. Just this week, addressing evangelical Christians, McCain was asked, “Which existing Supreme Court Justices would you not have nominated?” To which he replied, “With all due respect, Justice Ginsburg, Justice Breyer, Justice Souter, and Justice Stephens." In a CNN interview last month, McCain boasted that he was “proud to have led an effort in my home state to change our state constitution to protect the sanctity of marriage as between a man and a woman” and that as President, he “will continue to advocate for those fundamental principles.” He also supports, Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, opposes hate crimes legislation and is against protecting gay and transgender people from job discrimination. McCain is no foe to the GLBT community.


  • Name: Tom Kidd
    Date posted: 2008-08-19 1:57 PM
    Hometown: Decatur, Illinois

    Comment:

    Oh, man! I don't hate him, but, my God! I get big ole tears in my eyes, thinking, "when are we gonna get a practical, no-nonsense candiddate who holds firm to the pledge of 'liberty and justice, for all'?" I'm gonna bite the pillow and vote for him. No way am I gonna let that ole Cryptkeeper John McCain waltz through the White House doors. . .


  • Name: Bob
    Date posted: 2008-08-19 9:37 AM
    Hometown: NY NY

    Comment:

    Watch the youtube video, with Obama talking at the Saddleback Church this past weekend and tell me does he support us- NO.


  • Name: IStayWoke
    Date posted: 2008-08-18 5:23 PM
    Hometown: Los Angeles

    Comment:

    Federal Civil Union legislation WILL be passed during the next administration. The institution of marriage will remain intact. People will be able to get married to whomever they choose in whatever fashion they see fit, but instead of being granted a "marriage" license by the state, they will receive a "civil union" license. This document will afford them nation wide protection and will avail them all the rights, responsibilities, and obligations of a state sanctioned union. Get ready y'all. Love is on the way!


  • Name: Mark
    Date posted: 2008-08-18 5:04 PM
    Hometown: Santa Monica

    Comment:

    My husband and I went down to City Hall and got a State issued Marriage License then took it down the hall where a city employee officiated our civil marriage ceremony. Now the realtor where I work provides medical benefits for my husband, and in April we will file our state income tax as a married couple. Which part of that is religious?


  • Name: robert
    Date posted: 2008-08-17 11:38 PM
    Hometown: sherburne

    Comment:

    maybe what everyone forgets is that marriage is a religious institution..and how many of us go to any church..as long as i get the same benefits as married people, i'm happy. and look what pain religon has brought to the planet..i think CIVIL is the way to go!


  • Name: WHO IS ANY BETTER THAN OBAMA?
    Date posted: 2008-08-17 3:23 PM
    Hometown: Earth

    Comment:

    I have one question: What presidential candidate is any better than Obama? Please give names!


  • Name: Keith
    Date posted: 2008-08-17 1:21 PM
    Hometown: San Francisco

    Comment:

    Quote from Obama at Saddleback Civil Forum: "I'm not somebody who promotes same sex marriage, but I do believe in civil unions... I think my faith is strong enough and my marriage is strong enough that I can AFFORD those civil rights to others." The basic message is that same sex marriage would be a threat to faith and marriage, so give us civil unions and maybe we'll shut up. The statement before this was that "marriage... is a sacred union, God's in the mix." Even God doesn't want us to have equal rights. If Obama can convince himself that these are viable positions regarding gay marriage, he truly views us as second class citizens. Note his comment about the Biblical notion of "what you do to the least of us." It was a perfect opportunity to disprove what I'm saying, but he doesn’t We may not have a better alternative in this election, but as long as we continue to give our time, money and vote to people with these attitudes, none will come about.


  • Name: WHICH PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES DO SUPPORT GAY MARRIAGE?
    Date posted: 2008-08-17 10:34 AM
    Hometown: USA

    Comment:

    Ok,... some people have said that we shouldn't support Barrack because he doesn't support full gay marriage rights - so my question is... WHO DOES? Hillary certainly didn't. Russ Feingold and Dennis Kucinich are the only presidential candidates who did.


  • Name: Mark Alan
    Date posted: 2008-08-17 9:00 AM
    Hometown: MN

    Comment:

    What type of leader promotes Civil Unions which don't work, a second class status not recognized in any other country while the community says they overwhelmingly want marriage equality? What type of courage does it take when Senator Obama borrows the oppressive language of those who persecute us? What type of character can be our friend and at the same time oppose our right to marry who we love and get access to over a thousand Federal and State rights for ourselves, for our children, for our families? He's hardly the kind of friend I'm looking for- I already know many like him. He's hardly the change he so eloquently promotes. It's more of the same. What will change? We will have to fight for decades for each of these State rights. State by State. Dollar by dollar. Forget the Federal ones.


  • Name: gayUCCpastor
    Date posted: 2008-08-17 5:12 AM
    Hometown: PA

    Comment:

    I think Obama has made his prejudices against us clear. First he has allowed (and even participated) in the sexism that defeated Hillary and this deep sexism effects our community too! Don't be fooled by believing there is no connection between sexism and homophobia!! Second his response in the Saddleback Civil Forum (on 8/16/2008) showed a man who is - as one moderator of the Logo debate with the Democratic nominees said it last year - decidely "old school." I cringed as he said "I don't PROMOTE gay marriages!" The word promote, of course, brings up all sorts of old school homophobic notions that we are a people who are trying to force or persuade others to become like us! Is it bad, Senator Obama, to promote justice for Gay Americans? I also felt that his answers showed disrespect to the progress being made for gay marriages in our country. Mark my words, my friends, if we go with Barrack we won't see gay marriages become a reality for (at least!) the majority of us!


  • Name: slightly_cynical
    Date posted: 2008-08-17 1:14 AM
    Hometown: l.a.

    Comment:

    My support for Barack Obama has, unfortunately, consistently dwindled. Especially as an African American man, how can Obama deny the rights of true marriage to same-sex couples? Civil unions, while better than nothing, are simply a modern-day implementation of "separate but equal," and I am wholeheartedly disappointed by Obama's willingness, or more accurately eagerness, to side-line the LGBT community regarding the one issue that has actually garnered national attention.


  • Name: Keith
    Date posted: 2008-08-15 1:19 PM
    Hometown: San Francisco

    Comment:

    Maybe a lot of you are too young to remember, but Bill Clinton was going to be the greatest thing to happen for gays in the history of democracy. The queer demo leaders were telling us how we had to support him, and he was going to do more for us than he was even saying he would, nudge nudge wink wink know what I mean. And what are Clinton's greatest legacies for homosexuals: DOMA and DADT. Whatever Hilary may or may not have been, Obama is just another in a long line of demo candidates who want our money and our votes and don't really care which bus runs us over. Obama has stated repeatedly that we don't deserve the same rights he has. Do you really believe that when push comes to shove he won't extend that attitude to issues other than marriage?


  • Name: Support Obama
    Date posted: 2008-08-15 5:28 AM
    Hometown: gay in America

    Comment:

    People, this is called politics and getting elected. Obama has stuck to his principles more than any other politician out there. Was Hillary for marriage equality? Is there any other candidate besides Russ Feingold who supported marriage equality? Obama is ten miles ahead of any other politician who ever was, on gay issues, and this magazine has been totally unsupportive of him!


  • Name: ER
    Date posted: 2008-08-15 12:36 AM
    Hometown: Costa Mesa, CA

    Comment:

    There's some encouraging stuff here, but if Obama wants to be known as the candidate of Hope! and Change!, why should we have to turn to his friends and confidants to find out how he really feels about human rights? I understand the political maneuvering involved, and maybe (sadly) it's too much to hope for a candidate who's willing to embrace equality without equivocation. But if that isn't a disheartening example of the "politics as usual" that Obama was so fond of criticizing Hillary Clinton for, I don't know what is. Sorry, Senator---you can't have it both ways.


  • Name: Advocatesucks
    Date posted: 2008-08-15 12:13 AM
    Hometown: USA

    Comment:

    I agree with John from New York. Is this the best that the Advocate can do? He's far better than HRC, and his positions are much stronger. In addition he's as solid a progressive as you will find, and is likely going to be even more progressive once in office. The Advocate should have been promoting him with cover stories for the last year!


  • Name: Michael
    Date posted: 2008-08-14 3:34 PM
    Hometown: Las Vegas

    Comment:

    Obama's not perfect but he is a smart guy and, I believe, sincere in his support for our community. And compared to John McCain, we're not even talking about policies from the same decade. When our community starts producing more politicians who can advocate for us on the national stage, we'll be in better shape than ever. In the meantime we'll largely be relying on our straight friends like Obama. Let's do our part in helping him get to the White House.


  • Name: Keith
    Date posted: 2008-08-14 3:14 PM
    Hometown: San Francisco

    Comment:

    When I watched Obama's interview with HRC, I saw a patronizing politician who had no idea how gay people felt and wasn't even listening. His acceptance of civil unions for gay and lesbian couples shows that he just doesn't get it. He doesn't even have the courage to say "Yes this is separate but (not quite) equal but it's the best you're going to get right now." He believes we don't deserve equality with straight couples and then denies that it's separate but equal. I'm glad that some of his best friends are homos, but why should those of us who aren't going to get our backs scratched by his campaign trust him on any issue?


  • Name: Sid Ullrich
    Date posted: 2008-08-14 1:50 PM
    Hometown: Cincinnati, Oh

    Comment:

    On the issue of gay press, look at the bigger picture. It is easy for someone to come to GLBT newspapers every few months and discuss issues quietly with gay people. But that isn't Obama's style. Just like when he gave his speech on energy in Detroit, Obama never settles for discussing issues with just the people who agree. He may have not been able to sit down with small local GLBT press, but in EVERY stump speech, from big gay-friendly cities to small conservative rural townships, Sen. Obama addressed the issues directly and called for equality, acceptance, and embracement of GLBT Americans everywhere he went. Outside of a few debate questions and the HRC Forum, Sen. Clinton did not discuss GLBT issues in a public setting. It is one thing to whisper to gay people “I Support You!” It is another thing to stand at a podium in front of a room of 3000 people of all different mind sets and declare that it is time for America to accept Gays and Lesbians as their brothers and sisters.


  • Name: Marcus Clemenas
    Date posted: 2008-08-14 11:14 AM
    Hometown: Sioux Falls South Dakota

    Comment:

    For "John" to claim that The Advocate is "a plain embarrassment to the gay community" is false on its face. Obama has only very recently reached out to the GLBT community. This article seems to me to be right on point!


  • Name: JP
    Date posted: 2008-08-13 10:19 PM
    Hometown: New York

    Comment:

    According to the publisher of the Philadelphia Gay News, Senator Obama apparently had an obligation to do a personal interview with every local gay paper in America. That's a whole lot of papers! This same publisher did not bother to disclose he gave over a thousand dollars to the Clinton campaign in early 2007. Imagine if the publisher of the New York Times gaye money to Clinton and proceeded to write negative things about Obama.


  • Name: r
    Date posted: 2008-08-13 8:22 PM
    Hometown: wdc

    Comment:

    Whether by design or misunderstanding, the Obama campaign met infrequently with the gay press during the primary season. Only after the publication Philadelphia Gay News published an interview with Hillary and a blank space for Barack, who did not agree to an interview, did the Obama campaign reach out to several publications in the gay press, including the Advocate. The Clinton campaign actively pursued the gay press throughout the campaign season. It is inaccurate to blame the Advocate for any perceived bias toward Senator Clinton.


  • Name: John
    Date posted: 2008-08-13 4:45 PM
    Hometown: New York, NY

    Comment:

    A nice article- but why did it take the Advocate a year and a half to write this? You were to busy promoting your personal favorite for the nomination, Hillary Clinton- even writing an embarassingly un-journalistic cover fluff piece on her last summer. The Advocate is not journalism, it's a plain embarrasment to the gay community.


Back to top

Submit a comment for this story:

*Type your comment here (Required, 1000 characters max.):

*Name (Required): 

*Hometown (Required): 

*E-mail address: (Required, but will not be displayed)

Is this comment for publication? 
Yes   No

Daytime phone number: (Required for print publication only and will not be displayed)

Please enter the words you see in the box, in order and separated by a space. Doing so helps prevent automated programs from abusing this service.

  

If you would like to submit a comment for posting, please fill out the form above. 

All comments submitted via this form are subject to posting or publication. (To send a private letter to an Advocate editor or writer, please use the e-mail button at the top of the page, or use snail mail.) If you would like your comment considered for publication in The Advocate magazine, please include your full name, your city of residence, and a phone number where you can be reached during business hours so that we can confirm your identity. Your e-mail address and telephone number are strictly confidential and will not be shared or used for any purpose other than to contact you about your comment.

Comments that do not concern specific articles in The Advocate or on Advocate.com will not be posted or published. See the Contact page for sending comments for reasons other than responding to Advocate editorial and news stories.

Please note that comments sent by fax or snail mail are unlikely to be posted, although they will be considered for publication along with all letters received via e-mail or via this Web page. Comments that chiefly concern Advocate.com content will be considered for posting only on the Web site. The Advocate reserves the right to edit submitted comments for grammar, spelling, obscenities, or libel; we will, however, do our best to preserve the original comment's style and intent. Comments considered for publication in The Advocate magazine may also be edited for length.