Why is Clinton responsible for her surrogates but Obama isn't responsible for his?

[dsc]

Over and over and over and over again I have been told during the McClurkin fiasco that Obama is completely not responsible for anything the man said at the concert. It didn't matter that Obama had been begged not to let the man sing or speak at that concert. It didn't matter that there was a years old documented record of homophobia from McClurkin. It didn't matter that Obama lied repeatedly both before and after the concert about McClurkin's role. Now Clinton is responsible for every remark by every person who has ever, does now, or will every support her. So my simple question, why the double standard? If Senator Clinton is responsible for Charlie Rangle's remarks, even though she wasn't present for them and didn't supply the microphone, then why isn't Obama responsible for McClurkin's when he did supply the microphone?

[kikiek]

1. You were reading my mind! Also why are his supporters and hers surrogates? Inflammatory language.

[Bethany Rockafella]

2. Obama supporters are a protective bunch!

I've never seen anything like it.

[Lint Head]

3. This is getting ridicules

[bunnies]

4. Clinton is NOT responsible for her surrogates.

Bill has made that abundantly clear for her. This post is a perfect example of what pisses people off about the Clinton Camp. Go BET!!!

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

5. They're called apostles, thank you.

[Bonobo]

6. You don't want an answer, you just want to keep arguing.

[dsc]

7. No I would like an answer

I got called every name under the sun for daring to say Obama should take some responsibility for his surrogate by the very same people who now want Clinton to be responsible for every damn thing said by every supporter of hers no matter where or when it was said. So yeah, I would like an answer.

[Bonobo]

10. OK.

I think the answer requires us to be able to "see" what their intent was.

Here's what I mean. If having that homophobic asshole on stage was part of a larger plan by Obama, then it is a vile and disgusting act. If having him on stage was simply because he was a popular entertainer, and Obama overlooked, accidentally or purposefully, what he said, it is still bad, but much less so. Particularly if Obama had repudiated the sentiments of the man.

Same for Clinton. If Rangel's comments, as well as that BET guy, were part of a larger plan, she is deserving of condemnation for it. If it is just an their opinion and Clinton had no idea they were going to say it, it is a different story.

That's kind of how I see it.

Intent is important.

[dsc]

26. And just what was Obama's intent

Here are the facts.

He was told, repeatedly, that McClurkin was hateful and begged not to have him perform.

He repeatedly said the man would only sing and he would have a gay preacher to counter balance him.

We find out that the gay preacher was white, spoke for a minute or two before the majority of the crowd was there, and didn't mention gay even one time.

We find out that McClurkin didn't just sing but gave testimony for thirty solid unanswered minutes about how he was saved by God from being gay.

Finally, Obama lied on MTV about what happened.

Now what should I infer about the intent of a man who repeatedly lied and refuses to issue any kind of apology?

[Bonobo]

30. I don't know 100%. But like the claims of Clinton being racist,

I think it is almost a certainty that Obama is not a homophobe. He is too intelligent, seen too much, read too much, speaks too well.

I think it was a big fuckup and he didn't handle it well.

Do you really believe this was his way to pick up the Homophobe niche of the Democratic Party? I think it is too far fetched.

[Perky]

8. I think that is absolutely fair criticism

But I think Obama continues to feel the withering heat for McGlurkin nearly four months later. Hillary deserves equal criticism no mor no less for allowing Robert Johnson on her stage.

[durrrty libby]

11. Johnson hates gay people?

:shrug:

[Perky]

I have no idea but

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4066777

[durrrty libby]

47. Dan Abrans said all you suckers got played by the media.

:shrug:

He's right. The media takes things out of context and all the clowns

with no comprehension skills lap it up

[dsc]

17. No candidate should associate themselves with him

for any reason.

[Perky]

29. who Johnson or McGlurkin?

[dsc]

38. First it is McClurkin

but in that post I meant Johnson.

[durrrty libby]

9. Of course you are correct. Sad ain't it?

Jesse Jackson Jr was a real winner:crazy:

[Skip Intro]

12. Becasue that would be racist?

I dunno, you got me. Judging from some of the posters here, it would seem Obama is above any question or criticism or accountability.

[Catherine Vincent]

13. What did Rangel say?

searching.....

[sandnsea]

14. McClurkin Is Not An Obama Surrogate

He does not campaign for Obama. He does not do interviews for Obama. He does not go on teevee for Obama.

He sang at one event.

[jackson_dem]

15. He doesn't campaign for Obama. He just shows up to campaign events and makes speeches

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dUp16hFzY8

[sandnsea]

18. Yeah, ONCE n/t

[jackson_dem]

20. Like Bob Johnson?

[sandnsea]

24. Like a long long line of smearers n/t

[Perky]

31. Bob Johnson is equally reprhensible

[dsc]

16. that is categorically false

The man spoke for not one, not two, not three, not four, not five, not six, not seven, not eight, not nine, not ten, not eleven, not twelve, not thirteen, not fourteen, not fifteen, not sixteen, not seventeen, not eightteen, not nineteen, not twenty, not twenty-one, not twenty-two, not twenty-three, not twenty-four, not twenty-five, not twenty-six, not twenty-seven, not twenty-eight, not twenty-nine but over thirty solid, unanswered minutes about how he was cured from being gay and how he was being picked on by gays.

[sandnsea]

19. At ONE event, He Is NOT A SURROGATE n/t

[dsc]

23. and how many events did Cuomo speak? Johnson?

Their comments would be ok if they only appeared before her one time? Is that really your standard?

[sandnsea]

25. They are part of a pattern, and oddly enough

They do get to stand up and do their smears once, and then blame the Obama camp when they complain.

[dsc]

28. and so is McClurkin

There were four anti gay acts at that concert. Obama stiffed the Advocate for an interview. He called gays promiscuious and sinners.

[Perky]

33. Obama did?

[dsc]

35. He most certainly did

I will post a link to the interview he did for advocate online.

[sandnsea]

37. And John Kerry voted for the war

and voted for the war and voted for the war and voted for the war and voted for the war and voted for the war and voted for the war...

This is exactly what you did in 2003. But the vote doesn't matter this year, nah, never mind that Edwards and Hillary were the architect of the war that was so damn important to you in 2003. Now it's McClurkin McCurkin McClurkin.

He did not call gays promiscuous and sinners. I read the interview. He said even if the religious community wants to label gays sinners, they need to rethink that because we're all sinners anyway.

You want to denigrate the person who is actually going straight into the religious community on behalf of gays because you support a different candidate. Just like in 2003.

[dsc]

41. actually I wasn't one of those

I actually would have voted for the war, and in point of fact admitted that. Sorry but you will search in vain for posts of me saying Kerry voted for the war. I was a Dean supporter. I felt that he had a better message and that Kerry had flip flopped on the war (that is different from not accepting his support of the war). I also felt that his being a governor with a record was better than Kerry's Senate record.

[sandnsea]

54. Oh brother

If that doesn't beat all. See ya.

[dsc]

55. put up or shut up

You have a star search for the post and prove me a liar. I am not going to let you get away with slandering me. I am off to bed but I will alert your ass if I don't see an apology or a quote.

[sandnsea]

56. If you see how to search 2003

let me know. I suppose you don't remember calling me a "liar liar liar" either.

[dsc]

57. It is very easy go to advanced search

you have to choose the earliest time frame available, do that search, and then reset the time frame and you can go back to 2001 if you wish. Oh, and I cop to calling you a liar. I did, several times, though you won't find those posts since they got deleted. But again, now that I have told you how to search, put up or shut up.

[sandnsea]

58. As usual when I search archives

Nothing comes up at all. Not on you not on me nothing. It's a suck search engine and always has been. You were a saint in 2003 and I am a big fat liar. There. Because I know you'll never shut up otherwise.

[dsc]

62. I think you are doing something wrong

I won't say it is a terrific engine but it does work.

[dsc]

63. self deleted won't work

never mind

[Bonobo]

21. DSC, I tried to answer upthread.

[Perky]

27. One event 30 minutes and Obama Disavowed McGlurkin

And he has not been at an Obama event since

[dsc]

32. He did no such thing

Sorry, but at no time, and in no place, did he disavow McClurkin. He never once said McClurkin should be fired. He never once said McClurkin was immoral or should apologize. In point of fact, he implicitly called him moral when he said there were several moral people who don't like gays.

[Perky]

34. Here is what Obama said

"I have clearly stated my belief that gays and lesbians are our brothers and sisters and should be provided the respect, dignity, and rights of all other citizens. I have consistently spoken directly to African-American religious leaders about the need to overcome the homophobia that persists in some parts our community so that we can confront issues like HIV/AIDS and broaden the reach of equal rights in this country.

I strongly believe that African Americans and the LGBT community must stand together in the fight for equal rights. And so I strongly disagree with Reverend McClurkin’s views and will continue to fight for these rights as President of the United States to ensure that America is a country that spreads tolerance instead of division."

[dsc]

36. and after he said this

not before but after, McClurkin emceed the concert. That makes those words a bit hollow.

[sandnsea]

40. So he took responsibility and disavowed the guy

which is the exact opposite of what you say in your OP and more than what Hillary has done with any of those doing the smearing except Shaheen. So as long as we're smearing black people, we don't have a problem, is that it?

[dsc]

44. No he didn't

He let him speak after, not before but after, he claimed he didn't agree with the man. That isn't disavowal, nor is it accepting responsibility. Oh, and neither Rangel, nor Cuomo have any role in her campaign.

[sandnsea]

53. Right, and voter disenfranchisement is a coinkydink too

whatever.

[Perky]

45. If you choose to ignore the content that is your choice.

I thought it unwise to allow him to emcee... but I also view it as a political calculation. It does not totally adverse to what he siad. The truth of the matter is that the public vociferousness of the gay communitity's response made it virtually impossible for him to pull mcGlurkin of the stage altogether given the crowd that was going to show up and goven the strategic importance od SOuth Carolina. At that time Hw was ttailing Hillary in Both IA and NH and NV.

SC was at that point his last chance. Bluntly if he was viewed as caving to the demands of single issues voters. He would have been villified by the press.

[David Zephyr]

60. It will do no good, Perky. Either this one can't read or won't read. It's hopeless.

But, I just might know a certain teacher that might need some remedial reading assistance.

You will get nowhere with this individual. He hates Barack.

Anyone who can't read Barack's statements or watch him on video re-making them either has trouble with the English language or just intentionally wants to keep this mischief alive which makes me suspect that there is another deep seated reason for why this one hates Obama so much.

I've given him up.

[dailykoff]

22. Because the Clintons have been playing the race card since 1992

and it's time to put a stop to their despicable tactics, that's why.

[fightindonkey]

39. Because Up Is Down, Left Is Right, Critisize Obama: You're A Racist!

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[durrrty libby]

50. That's what Dan Abrams just said about all the clowns falling for the Media lies

In other words ...you Mr Pot :rofl:

[Perky]

46. more drivel

[Occam Bandage]

43. Why is Obama responsible for his surrogates but Clinton is not? If you're claiming

a double standard, be fair. The supporters of both have changed their positions as the facts have changed.

[dsc]

48. I have seen no one defend Cuomo, except to say he had been misquoted

I don't think Johnson's comments were racist. Stupid and nasty, yes. Racist, no. That leaves Rangel and frankly the notion that anyone tells him what to say is totally ridiculous. The man has been in the House since the earth cooled and I don't think he is going to listen to anyone who tries to tell him what to say.

[Occam Bandage]

49. We see what we want, I suppose. Plenty have said he was obviously not acting

under Clinton's orders, and thus Clinton shouldn't be blamed. I'd post links, but the last time I did the post got deleted for "calling out DUers."

[dsc]

52. She should disavow his comments

presuming he said what he was quoted as saying.

[jbnow]

51. Why? Because we like him better. nt

[MagsDem]

59. Because some people have no common sense (eom)

[we can do it]

61. Great Point!

[VotesForWomen]

64. word. nt