"talking to people where they are, not where we would like them to be"

[Leo 9]

You may remember The McClurkin Affair.

I remembered something said about it which I found here.

The McClurkin Affair

The criticism surrounding this incident has been some of the most frustrating and quite frankly most ridiculous I have ever seen and shows both political ineptitude and also just poor empathy across the entire Netroots. Before we can attack a man, we need to walk a mile in his shoes. The story is here http://findarticles.com/... The basic outline is the Donnie McClurkin was raped twice when he was very young, survived Leukemia and went on to be a gospel singer. Mr. McClurkin believes that his Homosexuality was an infliction on him and that he was saved from this infliction. While as progressives we may find this troubling, because it argues against the belief that is scientifically held that Homosexuality is not a choice, For Mr. McClurkin, he believed it to be a choice and for him a wrong and evil choice. This makes him fundamentally different from a James Dobson, or Pat Robertson. He is mostly responding to his own personal story in ways we may not like. However his History and Music have been inspirational to many people and also have been recognized with a Grammy Award for Gospel Music. He is a draw in the African American Community because of his Music. That Senator Obama’s association with such a person whose beliefs about sexuality maybe be misguided, but are obviously deeply personal would cause him to be the subject of such scorn given his overwhelming positive record on GLBT issues, is just frankly sad. Do I agree with Donnie McClurkin, of course not and neither does Senator Obama but the fact that was so obscured by the netroots is the fact that Donnie McClurkin support for Barack Obama means that he is willing to support a candidate who disagrees with him on Homosexuality. In some ways he proved himself more tolerate than us. Donnie McClurkin and Gene Robinson can support the same candidate that is uplifting. The work of uniting this country is difficult and Senator Obama is doing that. Why is the netroots not praising the fact that 2000 South Caroline’s went to a Gospel Concert for a Democratic Presidential Candidate that kind of new outreach of talking to people where they are, not where we would like them to be is to me inspiring.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/10/30/132434/36/472/404304


"talking to people where they are, not where we would like them to be"

I remembered this phrase and thought about other controversial figures (particularly controversial religious figures) Obama has talked to where they were, not where we would like them to be.

IMHO it's not only Barack's talking to people where they are, not where we would like them to be that is so inspiring, it's his proven ability to bring them along.

Here's something from today.


Obama an effective mediator in Illinois Senate

By Steven Thomma | McClatchy Newspapers
Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. — Facing the challenge of overhauling the death-penalty law in a state rocked by revelations of botched prosecutions, Illinois state Sen. John Cullerton made a tactical political decision.

The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee decided to separate one controversial proposal from the broader package, one that would require videotaping interrogations in murder cases. Police and prosecutors opposed it so much that keeping it in the broader package threatened to sink the whole effort.

The state senator who later took on the task of pushing the proposal to videotape interrogations was Barack Obama.

Obama worked with Democrats, Republicans and especially with police and prosecutors to fashion a bill that all of them could support. By the time it reached the Senate floor, everyone was on board. It passed in a unanimous vote, and is now Illinois law.

How Obama did it reveals a lot about his political style, which is at the core of his appeal. It defines an approach to political problem solving that he vows can change how Washington does business.

snip

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/31759.html


Not only has Senator Obama shown great ability in talking to people wherever they are, he has also shown great ability at bringing them along.

I think if we thought about The Rev. Wright Affair in these terms, it might make it easier to understand.


Kindly K&R if you agree.

[2rth2pwr]

1. Kind of reminds me of Rumsfield.

[Leo 9]

5. In that Obama could even bring Rumsfeld along?

And who or where is this "Rumsfield" of which you speak?



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Rumsfeld


Of course I suppose what's most important is who is bringing whom along and to where.




Cooperation by Hillary Rodham Clinton and Rupert Murdoch has stirred perplexity, and anger.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/10/nyregion/10hillary.html

[2rth2pwr]

6. "You fight with the army you have"

[TheDoorbellRang]

2. K&R

Obama's the sort who'd go over to free republic and say "Talk to me. What are your concerns?" Doesn't mean they'll change his mind. Just means he can add another facet to his understanding of any issue.

[lumberjack_jeff]

3. I'm of two minds of this.

a) Like Wright, I can understand how McClurkin formed his world view. I also appreciate the value of outreach. (although I think that Obama supporters can learn something vis-a-vis Hillary supporters here at DU - but I digress)
b) I also understand how choosing spokespeople who believe that America is irredeemable (Wright), gays choose their orientation and can be cured (McClurkin) and that the free market trumps free people (Goolsbee), reflects on the candidate.

I find the OP largely to be a case study in being an apologist. Obama has demonstrated that he's willing to go get people where they are, he's not really demonstrated that he's bringing change to their attitudes.

[Leo 9]

7. "bringing change to their attitudes" I think is something he'll be good at.

Though in your opinion "he's not really demonstrated" this ability, I think (and many others think) that he does somewhat have it.

You are right in that this is an apology for and a presentation of this situation in order to frame it in a more positive way.

Thanks for your thoughtful analysis.

As for Obama, give him time, and the Presidency, and I think he'll do well at demonstrating bringing positive change to their attitudes.

[JimGinPA]

4. I Have A Feeling This Thread Will Be Kicked Around For Awhile

:popcorn:

[loyalsister]

8. Thanks for this

One of the first things that drew me to Obama:
"talking to people where they are, not where we would like them to be"

I grew up in a conservative family with wide disagreements on politics. Eventually it bacame personal.
I desperately wanted to be understood myself. It became clear that it would not happen until I listened to the other person and valued their opinion even though I disagreed.
We eventually came to the conclusion that throwing each other away as people despite vehement disagreement was counterproductive to our lives.
Not only does Obama have great potential to work with people to bring them along, I think he is a good role model for things like community reconciliation.

Beyond that, some state governments have followed the model of division and pure hate that has been perpetuated at the federal level since the Clinton years. I am not sure where the hate the Republicans had came from but it served to create an environment that was unhealthy across the country.

To have a president who can encourage legislators to work with each other at the federal level would finally serve to help governors and state legislators get things done.

[Leo 9]

9. Thanks for your thoughtful and well written response.

It deserves a thread of it's own.

If you do like my poor effort at putting some thoughts together please K&R this thread.

I'd like to keep this discussion going.

[loyalsister]

10. Thanks

I would like to keep this discussion going as well.

I would hope that it will not deteriorate. I think it has potential to develop into something worthwhile.

There is a concept of discussion in which people do listen to one another without judgement.
I think that maybe if we were to consider that maybe whether others agree with us in theory is not relevant to solving basic problems.

The bottom line is that people have a right to think.
We are not always going to find consensus on the belief, but if we can get past belief in belief and move on to solving real everyday problems that result in practice of belief we will get somewhere.

It's simple. The problem is not the belief. It is the practice of the belief.
We are not going to change peoples minds, but we can improve practical outcomes if we forget that and look for compromise.
That requires respecting them as people despite different beliefs.