I must say that I don't have a horse in this race. I wanted Mr. Gore, but that seems very unlikely. There were many diaries yesterday about Donnie McClurkin's appearance at the South Carolina campaign rally over the weekend.
The fact that this whole mess could have been avoided is very much water under the bridge. As a gay man I am disgusted by the whole affair. There was an excellent diary last week about why reparative therapy is so vile to the GLBT community. (I have no idea who wrote it because I would link to it if I did.) That is the crux of why Rev. McClurkin's appearance was so protested prior to the event.
People have brought up Mr. Obama's voting record on GLBT issues, but this McClurkin Rally goes to deeper issues and I don't mean throwing a voting block under the bus.
Eight years ago George W. Bush was just a governor of a large state. His experience was questionable, but he had experienced people around to run his campaign and ultimately lead the government. A large group of people assumed they knew what they were doing. How wrong they were.
Mr. Obama is not a governor, but a freshman Senator. While he seems intelligent I can't say anything about his experience. My misgivings about the nation needing a far more experienced hand at running the country very much stands. Bush has shown that on the job training is not something that should be done. (I'm not directly comparing Bush to Obama merely pointing out relative experience levels when it comes to governing.)
I'm not one for piling on, but I'm also not one for blind idolization either. I see people trying to pull the Clintons into this discussion about DOMA in 1996 or 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' in 1993. People forget what the compromises were on DADT in '93 and what a Democratic Congress under the leadership of Sam Nunn was prepared to do if Pres. Clinton lifted the ban on gays in the military. DOMA, while a piece of calculated drivel, actually removes the issue of Gay Marriage from the national stage. It was a state by state ban that was pushed by the Right in 2004.
Pres. Clinton's leadership on GLBT issues was mixed, but a ton better than W's. If DOMA was political calculation for a reelection campaign in 1996 then what is Rev. McClurkin in 2007? If it was a mistake then it was a mistake on two fronts. It would be a mistake of vetting and a mistake of failing to control the event.
If Sen. Obama's raison d'etre for his election to the presidency is a new kind of politics what does this say about him? Was this political calculation like DOMA in 1996? Is this wedge politics?
I've seen comments about this not being a big deal in the grand scheme of things. (Those comments I read at work and have no idea which of the many Obama diaries they were posted in.) To me though, this is a big deal. This is about allowing a campaign event to be a platform for bigotry. And all of this could be avoided.
I was not going to vote for Sen. Obama in the primaries. I thought he was too inexperienced and this flap reinforces that view to me. I am very unhappy with my choices at the moment, but it might be over before Texas votes any way.
I just want to say one thing. This isn't about African-Americans against gays. Sheila Jackson-Lee is African-American and represents Houston's GLBT community with pride. Maybe I'm spoiled here in Houston, but we really are a nice melting pot of diversity. Many communities don't see eye-to-eye on every issue, but we can and should make common cause where we do agree.
This isn't about the Clintons or John Edwards. This isn't about one community versus another. This issue is about leadership, knowledge, and choices. How Sen. Obama responds to this incident will speak volumes. Ultimately, this is a self inflicted wound and those hurt on so many levels.