Barack Obama: Man of Words

or as forcefully as one can denounce something through a written statement, that as Jasmyne Cannick points out was originally "only posted under the LGBT section of Obama's site and not under his general newsroom where all of his statements and press releases are" and
Here's the statement, before we get any further along
"

I have clearly stated my belief that gays and lesbians are our brothers and sisters and should be provided the respect, dignity, and rights of all other citizens. I have consistently spoken directly to African-American religious leaders about the need to overcome the homophobia that persists in some parts of our community so that we can confront issues like HIV/AIDS and broaden the reach of equal rights in this country.

I strongly believe that African Americans and the LGBT community must stand together in the fight for equal rights. And so I strongly disagree with Reverend McClurkin's views and will continue to fight for these rights as President of the United States to ensure that America is a country that spreads tolerance instead of division."

Tough but fair words indeed but as Earl Ofari Hutchinson points out nowhere does that statement say that Barack won't appear on stage with Donnie McClurkin, which would be a far more powerful endorsement of McClurkin's views than this statement is a denouncement of. The whole actions speak louder than words thing. And more importantly the tour is of course still going on as planned. You can't expect a candidate to actually give up those potential votes, do ya?

And even if these words were meant to announce his disagreement with Donnie McClurkin (another thing that peeves me; at what point do people stop going by names like Donnie and go by Don or Donald, like a grown up?) he has said nothing about other acts on the bill including, as Jasmyne Cannick shows, Mary Mary who equates homosexuals with murderers (but it's okay that they don't agree with the gay lifestyle, they still love them.. and they want their gay fans to correct their lives and change it) and other homophobic artists.
How about instead of the "hate the sin, love the sinner" b.s., we work to get people to question what exactly is sin?
(It’s what Dumbledore would’ve wanted.)
As a commentator said "Obama certainly won't openly fan the flames of religious driven intolerance against gays. He will continue to fervently denounce it. But without a direct and forceful challenge to those such as McClurkin to do the same, they're just words. And politicians are masterful at using words when they want to win"

and as another writes " So is it (a) good that McClurkin and his usual audience will get exposure to Obama's pro-gay acceptance views, or (b) bad that the Dem hopeful is selling out LGBT people in order to capture a specific vote? Well, that's open for debate. On one hand there's an opportunity to open some hearts and minds, but on the other there is the fear that a President Obama may sign an anti-gay measure with which he doesn't agree just so that he doesn't piss off some potentially supportive 'mo foes"

Finally to a man who harps on having the "judgment to lead" I would merely ask what were you thinking? Why didn't you see this sh*tstorm coming? Where was your judgment when you allowed a concert in your name to include such proponents of hateful and hostile views? Or is it simply politics as usual?

Sphere: Related Content