Is Hillary Clinton really the better candidate for the LGBT community? I say no.

[AZBlue]

Clinton is often promoted as the pro-gay candidate, the one who stands up for and supports the LGBT community. But, I see many facts to the contrary.


Most recently, Clinton received the endorsement and enjoyed a good laugh-fest with NC Governor Mike Easley despite his anti-gay speech. Says Phil Attey, former Human Rights Campaign staffer:

Today in his endorsement of Senator Hillary Clinton, Governor Michael Easley of North Carolina ended his speech with an anti-gay epitaph. The hateful and sexist comment was that in his opinion, Senator Clinton makes Rocky Balboa look like a “pansy.” Directly following the word “pansy” the two veteran politicians burst into laughter and then embraced on stage.

When LGBT activists across the country heard this, our jaws literally hit the floor, as did our hearts. Since the Pennsylvania primary, we’ve been concerned that Senator Clinton is now courting and beholden to an anti-gay demographic, but never did we ever expect to be so whimsically made the butt of a joke nor blatantly thrown under the bus by politicians we once revered and some continue to support.

http://pandagon.blogsome.com/


In 2006, Alan Van Capelle, Executive Director of the Empire State Pride Agenda, described Clinton as a "complete disappointment."

In a memo Alan Van Capelle sent to his board members, the gay leader refused to "lend my name and sell tickets" to any fund-raiser for Clinton's Senate re-election campaign. Van Capelle said supporting such fund-raisers for Clinton would "actually hurt" the LGBT community. The memo was published on the Politicker Web site of The New York Observer.

"It will send a message to other elected officials that you can be working against us during this critical time and not suffer a negative pushback from the gay community," Van Capelle said. "We have become a community that throws money at politicians, and we demand nothing in return. And that's what we get: nothing. It's the wrong message to send," he said.

http://www.gay.com/news/article.html?2006/02/22/4


During Bill Clinton's administration (during which she claims she was co-President - she's running on that "experience") she supported the Defense of Marriage Act, legislation that prevented the federal recognition of same-sex marriages. And, Clinton of course brought us Don't Ask, Don't Tell.


Again in 2006 the Latino Coalition endorsed her re-election to the Senate, a group that says it's non-partisan but is in fact right-wing on almost every issue.

At the event they also released the results of a poll on Latino community attitudes towards the political parties...59% said they would be less likely to support a candidate that supports gay marriage...In the past, the Latino Coalition has joined forces with other anti-gay Latino institutions, such as CONLAMIC, so it's no surprise that they have polled individuals on this issue in order to advance their conservative agenda.

http://blabbeando.blogspot.com/2006/10/anti-gay-latino-organization-endorses.html


Clinton's church, the United Church of Methodist, is openly and rigidly anti-gay. But Rev. Wright didn't preach there, so it's not important to note that? I don't think so.


And so on.


I'm not saying Obama is the end-all, be-all to the LGBT community. Yes, I'm sure some will respond with McClurkin and such but they are missing the point of this post. The point is to set the record straight: while there are many differences between Clinton and Obama, on this point they are about equal. Neither supports gay marriage, but they both support legal unions for homosexuals. Both have made mistakes in their approach to the LGBT community and both have had victories. On this issue, one is not better than the other - they are about the same, don't be fooled by rhetoric.

[ruggerson]

1. Has Obama ever addressed the issues important to gay teenagers?

[AZBlue]

2. Such as what? Has Hillary?

[ruggerson]

4. Yep, she has

take a minute or two and watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvuwovEAl9s

[AZBlue]

8. Great - but you're missing the point.

I can post video links for Obama too. This thread wasn't meant to point out each and every time a candidate has supported the LGBT community.

[ruggerson]

11. No, I'm getting your point

I'm just disagreeing with it.

[Maven]

12. No, you're missing the point.

Neither candidate has said or done nearly enough to commit to full equality for GLBT people. And that is absolutely SHAMEFUL in 2008, after decades of gays and lesbians contributing to our communities, to our country, and to the Democratic Party. But in lieu of a candidate whose GLBT policies are truly principled--all of those candidates were eliminated early in the game, of course--we're likely to choose the candidate we believe has shown the greatest understanding of who we are and the adversity we face. Those who dismiss the appearance of a national candidate's presence at a pride parade are often the same people who deride the parades themselves for "setting back" the movement without understanding the first thing about it. The GLBT movement has been in large part about finding acceptance through visibility. The closet is a form of psychic oppression that translates to social and political oppression. It ruins lives and keeps discrimination alive. "Pride" is about the collective affirmation of self-worth by a minority group that is constantly bombarded by messages that we are shameful, immoral, dangerous and deserving targets of violence. Those from outside the community who participate do so to share in that affirmation, to show that they stand with us and are not ashamed of us. Making the effort to be there is a symbolic gesture, but an important one, because it shows not merely support but an implicit understanding of our cause.

For me, as a gay man, the fact that there isn't a single photograph of Barack Obama at a pride parade is a salient fact.

Likewise, you disregard or fail to recognize the significance of the video clip that was posted, in which Hillary Clinton talks about gay teen suicide. Let me tell you why it's important: it's not merely the fact that she mentions it, it's that she talks about it in a way that shows understanding. It's that she shows some fluency in our issues. I'm not going to rehash the whole McClurkin episode because it's been talked about plenty. But let me say that it's relevant to this discussion only because the "ex-gay" programming espoused by Donnie McClurkin and others is a major cause of gay teen suicide and homelessness. It's psychological torture, plain and simple. Yet the statement Obama released during that controversy showed no understanding whatsoever of the risk these people pose to young, vulnerable people whose own families essentially turn against them. And no video clip that I've seen since has shown such understanding either. Mention us in a speech, great; but make an effort to show you really get what we're up against.

At this stage of the game, I'm not trying to convert anyone. There are GLBT people who support Hillary and other GLBT people who support Barack. Both groups have made their choice on this (and other) issues about who would make a better leader. But--and I have to be honest here--I find the tone of your OP to be condescending. Please don't presume to tell me what's best for me. If you want to show real support, demand to know why both of our candidates are still so far off the mark when it comes to GLBT equality.

Because that's the real outrage here.

[countmyvote4real]

19. Don't Ask Don't Tell

That is the Clinton response to feeling GLBT pain.

Been there. Done that. Not going to do it again.

[AZBlue]

20. To me, what's been done speaks more than what hasn't been done.

If Obama's not been to a parade, that's worth noting. But it's far more important to note what's been done by Clinton: DADT & DOMA to name the two most important things right off.

I was condescending to no one - I'm just trying to point out a few facts that seem to have been conviently "forgotten." If after considering ALL the facts people still want to support Clinton, that's their right, as it is mine not to support her. I agree both candidates could be much stronger in their support of the LGBT community, but I don't see one above the other on this issue.

[donheld]

5. What are you talking about?

:shrug:

[ruggerson]

6. issues such as suicide, runaways, etc.

[Lord Helmet]

3. I read Bill Clinton told Kerry to throw the gay community under the bus in 2004

here: http://www.americablog.com/2007/06/bill-clinton-reportedly-told-john-kerry.html

not a good influence on her I wouldn't think

[TheDonkey]

7. Gays will be the first thrown under the bus when the kitchen gets hot for Clinton

she is shameless and I wouldn't trust her to uphold GLBT rights. Look at her track record of DOMA and DADT when it was politically convenient. Also the recent homophobic comments on the trail are pretty outrageous.

[AZBlue]

9. Exactly.

[CalGator]

18. those are two acronyms that need to be repeated time and time again...

to anyone who claims the Clintons are friendly to gays. DOMA and DADT are two of the most gay-unfriendly pieves of legislation ever passed in the history of the United States.

[davidpdx]

10. Of course he's not

because most of the long time "activists" (and I use that word carefully) got behind Clinton because she was the presumptive nominee.

:sarcasm:

I've seen nothing but Obama bashing by people who claim to be gay on here. I guess they are willing to throw Obama under the bus and would rather have McCain as president.

[TheWraith]

13. Frankly, I wouldn't read too much into the "pansy" statement.

Okay, it was maybe ham-handed phrasing, but it's a common enough figure of speech. There certainly wasn't anything else about the event to suggest that it was being used to target gays. And while yes, she is courting the conservative wing of the party, she's closer to race-baiting than gay-bashing.

I do agree with you on most of the rest... I don't see where Clinton gets a pro-gay rep. Her Senate record isn't bad at all, but some of her other actions and inactions show a lack of concern.

[TheDonkey]

17. I was very offended by the "pansy" statement

I do not think it is a common enough figure of speech. Would you want your boss to call you a pansy or call another worker a pansy?

It is completely childish and what I consider hateful. The governor should have apologized for using that sort of ridiculous taunting on the stump and Hillary definitely shouldn't have been standing there giggling.

[TheWraith]

23. Generally insulting term doesn't necessarily equate to gay bashing...

...any more than any use of the word "bitch" equates to sexism, as witnessed by the fact that one woman I know uses the word "bitch" more often any three other people.

No doubt that it was a pretty stupid and ridiculous line, but I don't think it was either a direct or indirect gay bash.

[Forkboy]

14. I suspect both candidates see them as votes, first and foremost.

Neither is a disaster for them, and neither will be a blessing. It'll be more of the same old same old for them, with a few states treating them equally (or at least trying to), and a bunch more that don't.

I'm hoping for their sake that I'm wrong. But I've seen them get their hopes up election after election only to be abandoned when the chips are down.

[ccharles000]

15. I think they are both good for my community.

However I like Hillary better.

[DevonRex]

22. Charles, thank you for your objectivity on this issue. I know you're

in Hillary's camp and it's really nice to see you answer this OP the way you did.

I'm a straight white woman for Obama. The LGBT community deserves every single right enjoyed by straight Americans. I hate injustice in all its forms and I stand proudly with LGBTs, just as I do with African Americans and others, in their quest for absolute equality.

[Laughing Mirror]

16. How did this absurd lie get started?

By Hillary herself, I would imagine. Telling gay people how marvelous she is. After all, she's shown herself quite an able and brilliant con artist. A pathological liar and a ruthless cheat. Liar Liar pantsuit on fire, obliterating war hawk to boot.

In general, however, I think women are perceived by gay people to be more accepting, more understanding of gay people than men. That's the only thing I see going for Hillary vis à vis gays. It's the only reason I can think of as to why certain gay people profess to feel more comfortable with her than her opponent. Either that, or they just choose plain ignorance as to who she is and what and who she truly represents: Herself.

But people like to fool themselves, and so they defend Hillary, when Hillary would never defend them.

[DURHAM D]

21. Anyone who does not know that Hillary is better for the GLBT community -

is willfully missing the facts.

The context and history of DOMA and DADT is complex and most Obama supporters can't listen beyond two sentences. For those of us that have lived it for 35 years - its not difficult to figure out the difference between a candidate who has us in her heart and the guy who reads from a prepared script because he is afraid of us.

[Texas Hill Country]

24. YUP.

and when was the last time obama marched in a gay pride parade or spoke at a HRC event?