"Maybe it's true what they (used to) say (out loud) about blacks and music: funk it up and anything blacks' ignorantly fear becomes sacrosanct and you, a racist, for objecting."

Certainly that kind of thing does happen. Racism (or any -ism) as a term and an idea gets abused and bankrupted by those who benefit by using it because they're constantly tempted to use it on even the least of their problems by casting its causes in terms of the -ism. Then the knife is dull when another job comes that it's really the best and most appropriate tool for.

The laziness of refusing to look for solutions beyond the most efficient things (as accusations of whatever conventional wisdom currently deems most reprehensible tend to be) is a trend which drives much of modern life.

It's good that he doesn't judge people by their sexuality.

Mr. Obama has lost my support, due to the fact that he has shown himself to be exactly the same kind of politician he claims not to be. He had plenty of notice and opportunity to kick McClurkin to the curb when the facts about his anti-gay propaganda and preaching was made known to him. Instead, he tries to suck up to the gay crowd by adding a gay minister to the program. This in no way repudiates McClurkin's comments. The only way Obama could prove that he does not agree with this homophobe was to cancel his appearance period. But just like every other politician, that Obama holds himself above, he caved to the fundamentalist right, in order to pander for their votes. Goodbye Obama, hello Hillary.

It is certainly perplexing that Senator Obama would allow Mr. McClurkin to be a part of his campaign knowing Mr. MClurkin's position of condemning other United States Citizens for their sexual orientation which is "born in" as much he wants to cause them to be "born again"! Religious demagoguery in America is rampant! I personally don't want as American Taliban taking over the Republic of America! I believe in freedom of religion and freedom from religion. Religious people should keep thier God to themselves!

I hear your, john, and couldn't agree more. Obama may not realize it, but by pandering to this agenda of fueling blacks to vote based on bigotry about sexual orientation, he is following in the footsteps of people like the lovable cutie pie, Anne Coulter. Political manipulation makes strange bedfellows.

Obama knew exactly what he was doing when he invited Miss McClurkin to this hot mess.

The GOP has been trying to drive a wedge between the LGBT and black communities for years now, and Obama is helping them perpetuate this nonsense in the name of pandering for votes. He had a real opportunity to build a bridge and actually live up to his "audacity of hope" talk. But no, he rejected TWO different black lesbian ministers who offered to come to the concert and speak. Instead he is perpetuating the hurtful stereotype that gayness is a white man's perversion. He has put black LGBT folk back decades with this foolishness.

As a black bisexual woman I am profoundly disappointed in Obama but at the same time I'm glad he's shown his true colors. One more reason for me to vote Kucinich in the primary, even though he doesn't have a chance in hell.

Well Obama certainly has my vote....and not because of any perceived "anti-gay" stance. Donnie McClurkin being a supporter (or not) of Obama is not indicative of Obama's stance on any proposed legislation or laws effecting the civil rights of gay individuals. I don't believe that I should hold Obama to what each of his supporters believe..I'm pretty sure if I called up each and every supporter, chances are I'll find one or two that disagree with me on...oh...LOTS OF ISSUES....and by that I should hold Obama accountable?? Oh hell no.

Obama's ideas are nothing new. We have to keep things in perspective. Our beloved Marx condemned the sexual freedom advocated by Fourier and Saint-Simon as a relapse into a "bestial" state of "universal prostitution". Engels condemned homosexuality among men of ancient Greece in two separate passages of The Origin of the Family, Private Property, and the State, describing it as "morally deteriorated", "abominable", "loathsome" and "degrading". Marx apparently shared Engels' views, writing that "the relation of man to woman is the most natural relation of human being to human being" and describing the author of a text promoting sexual freedoms as "that queer prick" ("Schwanzschwulen"). According to the socialist writers Hekma, Oosterhuis and Steakley, Marx and Engels saw any form of sexuality outside of a monogamous heterosexual marriage as a kind of degeneracy fostered by capitalism, which could be cured by socialism. According to Engels, "natural moral principles" would flourish in the socialist future, when (heterosexual) "monogamy, instead of declining, finally becomes a reality — for the man as well, and homosexuality would simply disappear.
August Bebel's Woman under Socialism (1879), the "single work dealing with sexuality most widely read by rank-and-file members of the SPD," was even more explicit in warning socialists of the dangers of same-sex love. Bebel attributed "this crime against nature" in both men and women to sexual indulgence and excess, describing it as an upper-class, metropolitan and foreign vice.
Obama just follows in a long line of Socilists in his ideas.

Wow, August, and how is your History of Socialism and Sexuality class going this semester? I appreciate the tiresome, if detailed account of past bigots. Aside from showing off your esoteric knowledge on this issue, what are you saying? Obama is not 'a socialist' anymore than he is an individual. As an individual, you either respect that human dignity and liberty go hand in hand or you don't. Obama is a human man - if he supports LGBT people, than he needs to be consistant and not cozy up to bigots.

To much talk about gay/straight. I don't care what you do behind closed doors.

Why are most people a little nuts??

I am baffled by this seeming belief that a candidate has to agree 100% with his/her supporters; the natural logic of this argument is that Obama is an unsuitable candidate because he has the endorsement of Oprah Winfrey, who in the opinion of many, makes trash TV. I don't agree with Obama's position on a number of issues, but on the vast majority I do, and that is why he has my support.

Timothy, when you are a minority being used as feed for the lion of bigotry, you rely on the conscience of good leaders. You may not know what this vulnerability feels like. I am thankful for it in myself. It causes you to care more about truth and fairness.

Come on folks, this is old news. The emperor has no clothes. The indisputable legal truth about this affirmative action brat from Harvard Law School was spelled out a year ago by John P. Mortimer in "Untangling Barack Obama's audacious mumbo jumbo."

Superb article Debra Dickerson. Superb! Very well done!

Debra Dickerson got it right except that if H. Clinton flip-flopped Obama never did. The above article by John Mortimer makes that much clear. Obama's civil rights position has always been 'seperate but [not] equal " for Gays.

Here is a link to the article John Mentioned. It reads a bit more like an editorial than an investigative report, but it does cite enough quotes and facts to underscore the point: Obama is a hypocrite. Dickerson's story affirms the same. Thanks for covering this.
The article:
http://ebar.com/common/inc/article_print.php?sec=guest_op&article=73

Obama is nobody's house Negro. He does not have to explain nor apologize. If the Gays don't like it too bad. Just remember, without the Black vote, you will get another 8 years of Jeb Bush