By David Usborne in New York
For a candidate so intent on bridging the political and social divides in America, Barack Obama has sometimes seemed oddly deaf to the gay and lesbian community. Mark Segal, publisher of the Philadelphia Gay News, became so infuriated by his inabilty to secure an audience with Obama he left part of the front page of his latest issue blank - white space where the interview would have appeared. It was a good tweak - and it seems to have worked.
Lo and behold, Obama has now reacted, talking lengthily to the weekly Advocate magazine. (It is, nonetheless, only the third interview given to the gay press since he announced his candidacy.)
He tells the magazine most of what it surely wanted to hear: he favours repealing the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy introduced by Bill Clinton only sort of allowing gays and lesbians to serve in the US military. Hillary Clinton, who has been far more accessible to the gay press, made a similar pledge last week. Obama also promised to introduce new legislation to curb discrimination of gays and lesbians in the workplace and to guarantee federal benefits for gays in civil unions. (He steers clear, however, of the words "gay marriage".)
So what took him so long? "I haven't been silent on gay issues. What's happened is, I speak oftentimes to gay issues to a public general audience," Obama tells the Advocate. "I actually have been much more vocal on gay issues to general audiences than any other presidential candidate probably in history."
May be so. But gays and lesbians have been feeling left out and that, we dare say, is not so smart.
otpqfrjd rhsofgb grkbai qkpojahdx wobthdqn zteivlmjk getcx
Posted by: vgplzbe ljztnxv | 22 March 2009 at 05:13 PM
Rainy! THANK YOU!!
I've been going on and on and on and on and on about this!!?
Posted by: rantmagazine:boohoo | 14 April 2008 at 05:03 PM
by voting mcain - who by all accounts want a never ending war - and twice george bush is infinetly worse than obama not giving an interview to a certain media section.
Posted by: R. | 11 April 2008 at 09:00 AM
Get a clue folks. This is an L1 no-brainer
"If a civil rights lawyer walked into court and argued that fundamental civil rights should be denied solely for metaphysical reasons [religion] one could fairly wonder if he were a charlatan who found his law degree in a box of Cracker Jack. Legally, Obama's position on civil marriage is intellectual rubbish. Audacity indeed!"
See "Untangling Barack Obama's audacious mumbo jumbo," by John P. Mortimer, Bay Area Reporter 11/16/2006 at http://ebar.com/common/inc/article_print.php?sec=guest_op&article=73 .
Posted by: John | 11 April 2008 at 06:59 AM
History in the Making: Obama wins the Presidency
http://tardesgrises.wordpress.com/textos-en-ingles/barack-obama/
Posted by: Aparecido | 10 April 2008 at 10:57 PM
Hillary Clinton's husband signed into law 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' and Defense Against Marriage Act. She doesn't want to repeal DOMA, she wants to repeal some portions of it. Mark Segal is a Clinton supporter and has donated 1k to her campaign. Barack Obama does not pander to groups. He has spoken out for gays in black churches. Has Clinton done that? NO! She is a panderer. She is just out for the vote. She doesn't go overtime for the gay community. She gives an interviews. So what? What else has she done?
Posted by: Rainy | 10 April 2008 at 09:21 PM