Subscribe to Breaking NewsVIDEO: The Presidential Forum
, AfterEllen.com 08.10.2007 1:22am EDT
News & Politics
Want to watch the entire Presidential Forum in only six video clips? You’ve come to the right place!
Barack Obama:
John Edwards:
HOW TO EMBED VIDEO: See the small blue downward-facing arrow in the blue cube at the bottom of each video? Click that, then click “Embed.” Copy the code and post the video wherever you want!
Dennis Kucinich:
Mike Gravel:
Bill Richardson:
Hillary Clinton:
The greatest issue above all is the war in Iraq, and out of all the democratic candidates, only two have been against the war from the beginning Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel. None of the others can be trusted on this issue. Since Kucinich and Gravel have almost identical views on gay issues, the edge goes to Mike Gravel, for totally legalizing drugs (although Kucinich is close) As Mike said, prohibition did not work during the 1920’s for alcohol, it’s not working for drugs now.
Although Obama’s stand on gay marriage is not exactly up to what I expected from him I still felt respected by the man. Out of all of the front runners (and sadly there are only a few) he has this honesty and straight forward approach about him that I do not see in the other front runners. He stands behing what he says, instead of doing all of this preaching. He does not take money from lobbists but continues to lead the rest of the presidental canidates with donations from everyday people. Even though people do not believe he has the experience needed to be president, I believe he has different experiences. Experiences with everyday, middle class, people instead of being so wrapped up in Washington that you completely forget what public service means. His words, his history, his teaching experience, and his ability to unite speak for themselves.
I myself really relate to Dennis Kucinich. I do not believe that Obama has enough experience. Although, deep down I know Hillary Clinton will (has) take the front seat. I do believe that there is an attachment to the word “marriage”, and religious beliefs and institutions have a strong hold on it. I have a very good friend that is a devoted republican and what I hear from him is “everything takes time” and I believe that it does. America, right now I believe is in a state of paranoia, rather it be because of the media or the president himself. But we have come a long way and we as a gay community have stuck together and been stead fast on our goals.
I generally vote Republican, although I consider myself an independent thinker. I’m also a Christian and despite the sterotype, I am very interested in gay issues. I beleive a lot of harm has been done by CERTAIN members of religion and the political arena. Please dont stereotype us all. I don’t plan on voting Democratic for many reasons, but I thought Obama was the most honest of the candidates. I, like him, beleive in equal rights for all citizens and if he really feels the way he says, (which I thik he does) he will do the most good for the GLBT community.
The only two candidates who are our true supports are Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel. They came across as sincere and were not afraid to stand up for what they believe is right, despite the political fallout. Although I believe that any Democratic candidate would do a better job than Bush, I admire a candidate who is not afraid to take on the religious right and stand up for full equality. I don’t really care if America is “ready” for gay marriage. America wasn’t necessarily “ready” for interracial marriage when the U.S. Supreme Court decided Loving v. Virginia (striking down an anti-interracial marriage statute). The LGBT community must demand full marriage rights, not a watered-down version called civil unions. Just imagine if interracial couples were only allowed to have civil unions. Wording is important. Perceptions are important. If the LGBT community just settles for civil unions, we will continue to sit at the back of the bus. We will continue to be considered less than equal. Just like the late Rosa Parks refused to take a back seat to whites, the LGBT community should refuse to take a back seat to the heterosexual community. The LGBT community should never settle for less than full equality or be satisfied with what is “achievable,” as Bill Richardson unfortunately stated. African Americans never compromised their fight for full equality. Let’s follow their example and never compromise ours.
when Obama and edwards claim they dont take lobbyist money, thats just a flat out lie based on semantics. they both still take bundled cash from wall street and they both still take lobbyist money that works at the state level. just because the lobbyist doesnt work in DC doesnt make it OK.
Thank God for evolution and progress.
Kucinich 08
A vote for anyone other than Kucinich or Gravel is a vote for Politics As Usual. Do you want equality? I certainly do, and you won’t get it from anyone else.
I cannot vote for anyone like Obama b/c I always say his name as OSAMA instead – and that is totally unintentional. Plus he has littel experience and is already in deep with lobbiest who have given him campaign money – like the big business corporations. Also, he is black and this country ain’t ready for no one named BARACK HUSSAIN OBAMA – sounds like a sci-fi channel character.
Edwards is a jerk for many reasons – the most – for letting his wife say he is more feminine than Hillary Clinton – and I guess that is why HEIL COLTER said John Edwards is gay. But not to defend neocon – Colter, whom I dispise, but if John Edwards thinks that his sick dying wife’s life is best serving his campaign which is placing more stress on her daily and hastening her demise, then Elizabeth is wrong. Mr. Edwards has NO CLUE how women feel if he can’t have sympathy for his dying wife. Also, I cannot relate to any man paying $400 for a haircut.
Richardson is a Hispanic Catholic American who will be worse than Bush when it comes to dealing with the illegal immigrants in this country and he flip flops like a pinata whenever he is uncomfortable with a question he cannot answer honestly. Plus I don’t believe him to be an honest man in general and we are also not ready for a Hispanic president of his ilk either. I mean, haven’t all of us had enough of hispanic president bush yet?
Hillary has already had her shot in the White House (for 8 years) and I don’t know about her really – she’s not for gay marriage but then she’s married to Billy Boy- so I don’t quite blame her for being soured on the institution. Maybe she just doesn’t want gay people to suffer like she has so I’m tossed about her.
Gravel doesn’t have a chance in hell – too old. Kucinich comes across like an actor auditioning for the role of the lunatic brother in the WES CRAVEN movie “PEOPLE UNDER THE STAIRS”. “let’s chop this up and do this…” He’s very eager without any planning. BIDEN is strong but I think it’s going to be CLINTON & BIDEN AS PRES (HER) & Vice (Biden) in the long run.
Wow Bonju. Won’t vote for a man because of his name, that’s intelligent. Why not just vote republican… some of those guys have great names
To Sam:
How can you be “not Washington” and get things done *in Washington?* That’s precisely why I think I”m going to support Hillary, because she understands the way things work and can manipulate the system to the best of her ability, and not supporting yet another person who gets into the White House just to have all of their wonderful ideals stamped upon.
Those are the people we look back upon and are hurt and angry that they “threw us under the bus,” not because they necessarily didn’t want to get their ideals through, but because the reality of the political situation didn’t let them. They didn’t really understand that it would be impossible, with hundreds of factions fighting against them, to get their ideals pushed through.
The New Mexico governor was trying to make that point, I think.
I’m a heterosexual who counts himself a friend of this community and wants the same rights for everyone. I find the “Marriage” word problematic, because in my view it has two meanings: 1)The legal union of two people which confers certain right to the people. 2)The spiritual union between two people in the eyes of their chosen faith.
Given this, I think striving for legally sanctioned “same-sex marriage” is not the best way to equality. The better solution is to take the word marriage out of government! Replace it with “civil union” or “legal union” or whatever ,and let churches, synagogues, mosques etc. continue to marry whoever they choose, while the state issues civil unions to everyone. This gets rid of the ambiguity, it protects religious freedom, and provides the same rights to everyone.
Let me know your thoughts.
Oh my God. I am with Melissa… it’s hard not to fawn over Kucinich. He is just everything that not only the LGBT community is looking for, but incredibly liberal people are looking for. His platform on everything (foreign policy, immigration, LGBT rights, energy efficiency, health care) is rock solid and 100% liberal. 100% for the people.
Thank God for Kucinich.
Kucinich 2008
Adam, are you suggesting that we should apply logic and reason to a political issue? If the problem with Same Sex Marriage is that the word “Marriage” is bound up with religious connotations, it would make entirely too much sense to remove the word from a government founded on a separation of church and state. I mean, this is the kind of thing a wacko like Gravel would come up with.
(Gravel 2008…rah rah…)
here is my response to the HRC presidential forum which you can see for yourself at:
http://visiblevote08.logoonline.com/2007/08/10/video-the-presidential-forum/
Barak Hussien Obama- his name alone is seemingly enough to shake up the male white establishment, but when you take a look at his positions on the issues, it’s obvious why he is able to have a name like barak hussien obama and still be a front-runner in this race. up to this point, my reservations on obama have been 1. his support of free-trade 2. his support of mandating private health insurance as opposed to universal medicare 3. he hasn’t said he would pull out iraq and 4. his support the politcally safe term civil unions as opposed to marriage citing religious beliefs.
his responses to the HRC’s questions were very scripted to the point that i was annoyed. he spoke of instating a “version of civil unions that would include full marriage benefits”. he also went on to say it should be up to individual denominations whether to recognize gay unions as marriages. which i completely agree with except: our country has no problem with hetero civil marriages called marriages and to not instate the same institution by the same name for queer civil marriages is not only discriminatory, but a giant waste of time on the part of our government to draft up separate legislation for civil unions…
overall i feel like obama knows what he needs to say in order to get the GLBT vote, but i don’t think if elected he’ll do anything for our community.
Jonathan Edwards- has tried to appear to care about the working class, but also support free trade and prides himself as being the first fool in the race to call mandating private health insurance a universal health care plan.
During the forum he started to go off on tangent about how he visited the LA gay and lesbian center and how inspired and saddened he was by the youth some of whom are homeless because they came out to their families. he said it wasn’t fair to use religious faith as an excuse to not provide civil rights for GLBT folks. he described his feeling towards these issues as a journey that he’s still on and he doesn’t know where he’ll end up. but when asked where he thinks he’ll end up, he totally fucked up any credibility he gained through that speech he said that his position hasn’t changed. it was funny because you could see the frustration on the panelist’s faces (especially mellissa etheridge).
Dennis Kucinich- this is the candidate i support because as i have pointed out before, his positions closely resemble mine ie. peace, choice, single payer not-for-profit healthcare, fair as opposed to free-trade etc.
during the forum he was asked if there was area in which he and the HRC disagreed and he couldn’t think of anything. and it only get better from there. this forum only solidified his platform of peace and civil reform.
Mike Gravel- i feel like i would probably support him if Dennis Kucinich weren’t running. i don’t know how i feel about his healthcare vouchers plan which would be determined on projected need…my gut says it’s silly because i don’t see a way to fairly distribute these vouchers. but in either case, i appreciated his candor in the forum.
he rejects that the word marriage is a religious term because it predates religion. he questioned why he any GLBT would support any candidate other than one who supports full equality including marriage. i like gravel, he’s a premium s**t-talker.
Bill Richardson- he didn’t do so well. he supports “doing what is feasable” in order to gain queer civil rights, meaning he does not support full marriage equality. even when asked if a marriage equality came accross his desk would he sign it, he paused for a minute and reiterated that he “supports what is feasable and what is feasable is civil unions…” again you could see the frustration in the room.
Hillary Clinton- performed like a slightly better-spoken version of Obama…that’s really all i have to say about her.
the only surprise was how horribly Richardson performed.