Is the Wright scandal the reason 0bama used McClurkin instead of his own minister?

[mondo joe]

During the McClurkin incident a number of people pointed out that 0bama's own minister is more gay friendly than McClurkin.

This was sometimes pointed to as evidence that McClurkin was part of a calculated strategy to send a message to anti-gay bigots, as 0bama's own minister wold not have provided the same message if used as a spokesperson.

I now wonder if it was more about 0bama knowing he'd need to keep Wright under wraps because of his potential to be a campaign scandal.

Either way it's very calculated, but I consider the first possibility more cynical than the second.

[waiting for hope]

1. Wow - you're brave to post that.

[mondo joe]

3. Oh I hate to be told I'm brave. I didn't mean to be.

Why is it brave?

[waiting for hope]

8. Critical thinking has become

a pastime here.

[TechBear_Seattle]

9. I think rather, critical thinking has fallen out of fashion here

It used to be a requirement, then it became a hobby. Now, however....

[MNDemNY]

2. 2 wrongs don't make a wright?

[xchrom]

4. i find The Anointed One

completely cynical when it come to lgbtq folk period.

more, i think we give him the heebeegeebees.

and religious overtones of his whole campaign turns me off.

and this from someone who was very excited about all of the candidates at the beginning -- especially the first two debates -- from there -- it's all gone to hell in gucci handbag.

[MADem]

5. I think there were a couple of things happening there.

First, I think the antigay message was deliberate, and was targeting the less sophisticated, more rural South Carolinian congregants, many of whom EMBRACE that antigay "Leviticus" philosophy. The "Bible Quoting" Chapter-And-Verse types do take issue with that whole "gay business." And they use the word-for-word citations from the Bible to back up their beliefs. That Reverend Kirbyjon Caldwell, Bush's Pet Black Pastor, was ALSO on that "Embrace the Change" gospel tour--and he's another one of the "Pray Away The Gay" crowd.

Second, the fact that the South Carolina congregants ARE more rural, less sophisticated, and more "Chapter-and-Verse" Bible-quoting traditional might play into the whole picture. The churches in South Carolina aren't, by and large, like the urban Trinity UCC. And their urban, Philly-born pastor might be a little too "citified" for their tastes. That sort of in-your-face, ANGRY style might not get such a warm reception amongst those more rural and smaller-city urban audiences. Passion is one thing, anger is something else. I really don't see "God DAMN America" selling across the board in South Carolina congregations. I just don't.

[terrya]

6. That's entirely plausible.

I never thought of that possibility. You may be right.

[Bluenorthwest]

7. Absolutely that is why

And also why he has refused to apologize for McClurkin's sermon against gays. It is a way to demonstrate that he disagrees with Wright on some things and agrees with the mainstream church. I said this months ago when he refused to just say sorry and it won't happen again.
I supported Obama because of Trinity UCC and then stopped due to Mcclurkin and Caldwell. I know I'm supposed to dislike Wright but he's always been on my side, as has Trinity. We have work and goals in common. They fly the rainbow flag, litterally, at that church.
McClurkin is the opposite of Wright.

[mondo joe]

10. I wonder how long 0bama can use speakers he says he disagrees with.

I mean there might be some abstract, intellectual rationalization, but to surround yourself with people who say things you later say you disagree with seems like a quirky strategy.

[mitchtv]

11. A common Obama tactic

His position on Nukes changed when he saw Clinton and Edwards got a better reception than him. When he was criticized for putting the social security age requirements on the table, that quietly disappeared too.

[mondo joe]

12. I might take him more seriously if he didn't say he'd fire Imus or anyone else

who said what Imus did, while giving a platform to McClurkin and then just saying he disagrees.

[The Night Owl]

24. TUCC might welcome gays into the congregation, but it still condemns homosexuality.

TUCC might welcome gays into the congregation, but it still condemns homosexuality...

http://www.tucc.org/upload/tuccbulletin_mar11.pdf

Prayer Breakfast
March 31, 2007 • 8:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.
Monument of Faith Church • 2750 West Columbus Ave. • Chicago, Illinois
Guest Speaker: Rev. Sean McMillan, Pastor, Giant Steps Church

Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Fornicators,
idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites, 10thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, robbers—none of
these will inherit the kingdom of God. 11And this is what some of you used to be. But you were washed, you
were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God. —1 Corinthians 6-9–11

[canis_lupus]

13. Wright's waaaaaaaay to liberal for South Carolina

He'd have skeered all them South Carolina voters so Obama had to go with someone like McClurkin who knew how to speak their language. You know ... like "hey, y'all! Anyone here have a rope jes' in case them homo-seck-shuls don't wanna pray away the gay?"

[pnwmom]

14. I suspect it was simpler than that.

McClurkin had his own big following in the south, which is where Obama used him. Wright wouldn't have drawn as many people to the event on his own behalf.

[davidinalameda]

15. another day-another hit thread on Obama

keep up the good work guys

[mondo joe]

16. Just responding to 0bama's hit on GLBT people.

:hi:

[davidinalameda]

17. no offense

but you're wrong

again; as usual it seems

I don't know if its ignorance or just stupidity on your part

I'm hoping it's ignorance

but then again, when someone presents facts time and time and time and time again to someone and refuse to accept the truth, maybe its just stupidity

:hi:

[mondo joe]

18. Please don't confuse your opinion with "the truth".

0bama dissed GLBT people. Intentionally, IMO. You can take the abuse if you want, but not all of us will.

[davidinalameda]

19. he didn't diss anyone

you need to go back and read EVERYTHING that he's said and not just the bits and pieces that support your dislike, which for some of your buddies borders on pathological hatred of Obama and his supporters

if bothered to do a bit of research, you'd find out that Hillary didn't support full repeal of DOMA until last year, and that was only because her biggest rivals for the nomination were in favor of full repeal

AND and we all know who signed DADT and DOMA

where was she when Bill was signing two of most anti-gay pieces of legislation in history

[mondo joe]

20. You haven't said anything I didn't know already. I don't know why it bothers you so much

that I disagree with your interpretation of these matters, but I suggest learning to live with it rather than name calling.

[davidinalameda]

21. you don't interpret facts

you, on the other hand, choose to ignore them

I don't understand how anyone can keep their eyes closed to the truth

Obama is the better candidate for the GLBT community

go look at the thread I just posted in GD-P

I found out that I was wrong about Hill's position on DOMA

she still doesn't favor a complete repeal

say what you will about Obama and McClurkin and any other broken record you and yours decide to play, Obama supports full repeal of DOMA

[mondo joe]

23. You're again mistaking your opinion for fact.

On the whole, I don't trust Obama, or think he gives much of a shit about me. On the whole, I see where I stand among his priorities, and there are competing priorities that are far ahead of gays.

Al things being equal he might be fine with a "basic set of rights" for gays, but when push comes to shove he's not coming down on our side. This is the man who said he'd fire anyone who said what Imus said - but he could put that shitstain on a stage to say as bad, and then not even apologize for it.

I won't look at your thread on GD P because I'm not looking at any threads there.

I still don't know why you're so upset that I disagree with you. I didn't call you ignorant or stupid because you disagree with me.

I don't know if that's just something about you, or about your candidate. You might want to think about that.

[mitchtv]

22. DADT is actually an improvement over

what we had. It didn't work but I don't blame Bill
Doma had a veto proof majority
and Obama's supporters cost him a lot of good will

[JoFerret]

37. When Clinton wanted to sign the executive order

allowing gays in the military he got hit with a ferocious shitstorm. DADT was the result. A terrible compromise. But understandable, and time for it to go.

[kdpeters]

25. It was my understanding that McClurkin was intended to be entertainment

I don't know anything about Wright's singing career, but it is my understanding that McClurkin is actually much better known for his gospel music than his ex-gay advocacy. If I were to guess what Obama was calculating, I'd guess he was thinking he could ignore the controversy and it would go away after it was over. Then McClurkin went off script on-stage and that little gamble blew up in his face big time.

[Zuiderelle]

26. A president who makes decisions hoping that he can ignore any ensuing controversy

is not a president I want.

[kdpeters]

27. I like Gravel too, but unfortunately he never polled a full percent

Kucinich didn't fare a whole lot better. So what are we going to do? We're stuck with one of the other candidates that disappoint us in some ways. There's tons about the three remaining candidates that I dislike and by far the worst is McCain. A hot-headed warmonger who makes repeated false accusations pushing for war with Iran is not a president that *I* want. Give me one of the Democratic candidates. I have my opinion on the better choice, but they're both net pluses to me.

I hope there are other factors in this race that matter to you. There have been plenty of elected officials that I disliked personally who performed well in the job. It's not so bad. Bill Clinton comes to mind. In Obama's defense, he confronted the Wright controversy head-on so at least you know he has it in him.

[Zuiderelle]

28. On the other factors that "matter to" me... they are essentially the same Obama and Clinton.

It's not about liking someone personally. I don't really care how Obama confronted the Wright controversy. That only concerns me more frankly. Now he says that he doesn't agree with a lot of what his own preacher believes in (who also is much more supportive of gay rights), yet he claims that his religion (Obama's, and not Wright's apparently), prevents him from supporting gay marriage.

[kdpeters]

29. Interesting. Iraq was the biggie for me.

I see them as essentially the same on GLBT issues -- Obama and Clinton -- both of them pretty good for us by appointing fair judges (the main thing I'm concerned about) and signing legislation we can pass in Congress. Neither of will really stick their neck out for us or take the lead on our issues. I don't get the impression that either one of them really "gets" it. We'll have to force change no matter who is in office rather than expect any leadership from Washington on gay rights.

[Zuiderelle]

31. They both want to pull out of Iraq, so how are they different?

I base my decision on their current positions. And I won't compare these two candidates on a decision made several years ago, that only one of them was in Congress to make.

Marriage is a CRITICAL issue for me, and they are not the same at all.

[kdpeters]

35. We approach the issue differently.

I base my decision on their current positions. And I won't compare these two candidates on a decision made several years ago, that only one of them was in Congress to make.

Nothing wrong with that. It's your vote to cast. But I will and I do. For me, there is not, and cannot be another issue more critical or more urgent than war.

[Zuiderelle]

36. "there is not, and cannot be another issue more critical or more urgent than war. " I agree.

Which is why they are the same to me. We need to get out of Iraq. They both want that too.

[mondo joe]

30. He was the emcee. That was a foolish choice on Obama's part - or a calculated one.

Either way, not good.

Obama compounded it by not simply apologizing - which supports the Calculated possibility.

[kdpeters]

32. No disagreement as to the foolishness choice. He flubbed it.

I just don't think the decision was as a substitution for Wright as much as it was that McClurkin is a bigger name and a bigger draw in South Carolina. I just don't see any evidence of a systematic strategy to appeal to overt homophobic sentiment being a part of his campaign. I think he just messed this one up and was made a fool of by McClurkin.

Obama compounded it by not simply apologizing - which supports the Calculated possibility.

I can see why you would feel that way at that time. It's a healthy suspicion. He did reject McClurkin's opinions and reiterated his vow to fight for tolerance and unity making explicitly clear that includes us and our rights. Here we are now five months after the fact in the last leg of the primary race. If calculated nods to anti-gay bigots were a part of his campaign, I'd expect a pattern to have betrayed this strategy by now. Absent that, it should be enough. It should be over. I don't see why sincere folks haven't moved beyond it yet five months later unless you see evidence that confirms your suspicions that I haven't seen.

[mondo joe]

34. He didn't need a pattern of nodding to bigots - the one time was enough, especially

with his refusal to heed the warnings of Human Rights Campaign and his refusal to apologize.

This seems simple to me: If you gave someone a platform, and to your surprise they said offensive things you disagreed with, what would you do? Most people would do one thing: Disavow and apologize.

But that's not what happened here - which I can only construe to be a calculated move.

[Laughing Mirror]

33. McClurkin is the #1 best-selling singer in gospel music, with the biggest audience

Sorry to say, I think that's why.

McClurkin makes me think of Little Richard back in the 1960s & 70s. When Little Richard's rock & roll career died out he switched to gospel, coming on TV announcing how he'd given up his jewels, his heroin, his homosexuality. Then, when gospel stopped paying the bills, he'd make a comeback as the screaming queen of rock & roll and ride that out for a while, and then when the novelty wore off that again and nobody was buying his records, he'd convert back to his old staple of fundamentalist gospel again. I don't know how many times he switched back and forth from gospel to rock. I don't know which persona he is allowing to manifest itself now. I suspect the gospel closet is less necessary for him these days, if he lives in Beverly Hills, as opposed to back then, when it was the very enlightening atmosphere of somewhere in Alabama.

McClurkin may one day reconvert back to homosexuality, the day he stops drawing crowds, or the day when he finally sees the light and accepts what he is.

[Jamastiene]

38. I don't know but I seriously question how he can

be so close to one minister that is pro gay rights and one that is against gay rights at the same time. I mean, pick one, already. I am super leery of Obama when it comes to ever getting rights.