<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: LGBT leaders release letter of support; and, Why I&#8217;ve chosen Edwards</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.interstateq.com/archives/2425/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.interstateq.com/archives/2425/</link>
	<description>LGBT news/opinion from Matt Comer, journalist, activist</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Mar 2010 18:48:04 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Matt</title>
		<link>http://www.interstateq.com/archives/2425/comment-page-1/#comment-57104</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Nov 2007 03:05:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.interstateq.com/archives/2425/#comment-57104</guid>
		<description>Adam... that is completely your decision. I support Edwards for the nomination for all the reasons above. However, I am still a loyal Democrat and will support who ever wins the nomination. I may not be entirely happy about who wins the nomination, but I will still support my party.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Adam&#8230; that is completely your decision. I support Edwards for the nomination for all the reasons above. However, I am still a loyal Democrat and will support who ever wins the nomination. I may not be entirely happy about who wins the nomination, but I will still support my party.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: adam kautz</title>
		<link>http://www.interstateq.com/archives/2425/comment-page-1/#comment-57102</link>
		<dc:creator>adam kautz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Nov 2007 02:57:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.interstateq.com/archives/2425/#comment-57102</guid>
		<description>Matt I have decided based on the facts you presented that John Edwards is the best and only choice us gays can live with. If either Hillary or Obama win the nomination I will vote for a Libertarian Candidate as they are the only other party out there that are truly commited to our equality. because to me choosing the lesser of two evils is still evil. I would rather choose the one that will do the most for us LGBT&#039;s.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Matt I have decided based on the facts you presented that John Edwards is the best and only choice us gays can live with. If either Hillary or Obama win the nomination I will vote for a Libertarian Candidate as they are the only other party out there that are truly commited to our equality. because to me choosing the lesser of two evils is still evil. I would rather choose the one that will do the most for us LGBT&#8217;s.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt</title>
		<link>http://www.interstateq.com/archives/2425/comment-page-1/#comment-57078</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Nov 2007 00:27:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.interstateq.com/archives/2425/#comment-57078</guid>
		<description>Brandon, I shouldn&#039;t have to remind you that Sen. Clinton is the one who supported her husband when &quot;Don&#039;t Ask, Don&#039;t Tell&quot; was instituted. Also, I shouldn&#039;t have to remind you about Sen. Clinton&#039;s convoluted reasoning as to why DADT was a &quot;good thing.&quot; Her argument: DADT was a step toward getting rid of the gay ban. Two steps forward, one back anyone?

I&#039;m &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pamshouseblend.com/showComment.do?commentId=38738&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;borrowing this&lt;/a&gt; from a friend:

&lt;blockquote&gt;In addition to the fact that he&#039;s the most electable Democrat in the race, it&#039;s easy to see why from a policy perspective gay and lesbian Americans support John Edwards over Hillary or Barack:

First, Barack showed his true colors last week by courting evangelical voters by using a known homophobe as his surrogate. And Donnie McClurkin wasn&#039;t the only homophobe on the tour as Mary Mary compared gays and lesbians to murderers and prostitutes. If Barack had really wanted to lead, he would have admitted that he made a mistake and then cancelled the tour. Instead, he tried to sweep it all under the carpet by asking a gay minister to join the tour. Too little, too late.

Second, that episode came on the heels of both Barack and Hillary&#039;s failure to respond when General Pace said that gays and lesbains are immoral. Edwards immediately denounced this statement. Hillary and Barack took days to see how they should respond (and only after they saw the public&#039;s reaction).

Third, Edwards wants to repeal Don&#039;t Ask, Don&#039;t Tell. The Clinton&#039;s put it in place and now Hillary is saying that passing DADTwas all part of a long-term strategy to get rid of it. Huh? Talk about &quot;two steps back&quot;. She should explain her brilliant strategy to the thousands of proud gay and lesbian Americans who were drummed out of the service because of her support for DADT. Or how about to the American tax payers who have spent millions training those individuals only to have that investment flushed down the toilet of DADT.

Fourth, Edwards wants to repeal ALL of the so-called Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Hillary only wants to repeal a PORTION of it (she believes that states should still be allowed to discriminate and violate the full faith and credit clause of the Constitution). Besides, we wouldn&#039;t even have DOMA if it weren&#039;t for the Clintons. They said that Bill hated &quot;having&quot; to sign DOMA, but then they were up on the air with ads in the South within two weeks boasting of how Bill took the lead to pass DOMA.

Fifth, Hillary is also lying about DOMA and the anti-gay Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA). She says that DOMA was all part of an effort to stop the FMA. But there was no FMA until EIGHT years later. She doesn&#039;t really expect us to buy that line, does she?

Sixth, Edwards supports ending immigration discrimination against gay and lesbian families by passing the &quot;Uniting American Families Act&quot;. Barack and Hillary both oppose the Act. Get this: based on &quot;national security&quot; concerns. Where have we heard that crap before? Go see for yourself; look at their responses to the HRC questionnaire (if you can even find the actual responses any more since the Hillary-loving HRC staff appears to have taken it down and only shows their white-washed summary of the responses in tabular form without any of the details which are what really tell the story. Same thing goes with Hillary&#039;s response only favoring partial repeal of DOMA).

Seventh, Edwards supports federally funded needle exchange. Hillary does not, saying that there is not the &quot;political will&quot; to pass it. I thought that she said she wanted to be a leader and that she knew how to work in Washington. I guess that only applies when it comes to getting money from lobbyists, huh?

Eighth, during the 2004 campaign, Bill Clinton took it upon himself to call John Kerry to tell Kerry to support the anti-gay Federal Marriage Amendment. Kerry refused to throw us under the bus, but Clinton showed (yet again) what he&#039;s made of and where his principles are. And the saddest part is that Hillary boasts that he would be one of her top advisors. With &quot;friends&quot; like that ...

You know the old saying, &quot;Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.&quot; The Clintons have fooled us time and time again. Barack has now shown his true colors as well.

It&#039;s time for us to wake up and support Edwards. He&#039;s the best Democrat in the race and he&#039;s also the most electable!&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Brandon, I shouldn&#8217;t have to remind you that Sen. Clinton is the one who supported her husband when &#8220;Don&#8217;t Ask, Don&#8217;t Tell&#8221; was instituted. Also, I shouldn&#8217;t have to remind you about Sen. Clinton&#8217;s convoluted reasoning as to why DADT was a &#8220;good thing.&#8221; Her argument: DADT was a step toward getting rid of the gay ban. Two steps forward, one back anyone?</p>
<p>I&#8217;m <a href="http://www.pamshouseblend.com/showComment.do?commentId=38738" rel="nofollow">borrowing this</a> from a friend:</p>
<blockquote><p>In addition to the fact that he&#8217;s the most electable Democrat in the race, it&#8217;s easy to see why from a policy perspective gay and lesbian Americans support John Edwards over Hillary or Barack:</p>
<p>First, Barack showed his true colors last week by courting evangelical voters by using a known homophobe as his surrogate. And Donnie McClurkin wasn&#8217;t the only homophobe on the tour as Mary Mary compared gays and lesbians to murderers and prostitutes. If Barack had really wanted to lead, he would have admitted that he made a mistake and then cancelled the tour. Instead, he tried to sweep it all under the carpet by asking a gay minister to join the tour. Too little, too late.</p>
<p>Second, that episode came on the heels of both Barack and Hillary&#8217;s failure to respond when General Pace said that gays and lesbains are immoral. Edwards immediately denounced this statement. Hillary and Barack took days to see how they should respond (and only after they saw the public&#8217;s reaction).</p>
<p>Third, Edwards wants to repeal Don&#8217;t Ask, Don&#8217;t Tell. The Clinton&#8217;s put it in place and now Hillary is saying that passing DADTwas all part of a long-term strategy to get rid of it. Huh? Talk about &#8220;two steps back&#8221;. She should explain her brilliant strategy to the thousands of proud gay and lesbian Americans who were drummed out of the service because of her support for DADT. Or how about to the American tax payers who have spent millions training those individuals only to have that investment flushed down the toilet of DADT.</p>
<p>Fourth, Edwards wants to repeal ALL of the so-called Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Hillary only wants to repeal a PORTION of it (she believes that states should still be allowed to discriminate and violate the full faith and credit clause of the Constitution). Besides, we wouldn&#8217;t even have DOMA if it weren&#8217;t for the Clintons. They said that Bill hated &#8220;having&#8221; to sign DOMA, but then they were up on the air with ads in the South within two weeks boasting of how Bill took the lead to pass DOMA.</p>
<p>Fifth, Hillary is also lying about DOMA and the anti-gay Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA). She says that DOMA was all part of an effort to stop the FMA. But there was no FMA until EIGHT years later. She doesn&#8217;t really expect us to buy that line, does she?</p>
<p>Sixth, Edwards supports ending immigration discrimination against gay and lesbian families by passing the &#8220;Uniting American Families Act&#8221;. Barack and Hillary both oppose the Act. Get this: based on &#8220;national security&#8221; concerns. Where have we heard that crap before? Go see for yourself; look at their responses to the HRC questionnaire (if you can even find the actual responses any more since the Hillary-loving HRC staff appears to have taken it down and only shows their white-washed summary of the responses in tabular form without any of the details which are what really tell the story. Same thing goes with Hillary&#8217;s response only favoring partial repeal of DOMA).</p>
<p>Seventh, Edwards supports federally funded needle exchange. Hillary does not, saying that there is not the &#8220;political will&#8221; to pass it. I thought that she said she wanted to be a leader and that she knew how to work in Washington. I guess that only applies when it comes to getting money from lobbyists, huh?</p>
<p>Eighth, during the 2004 campaign, Bill Clinton took it upon himself to call John Kerry to tell Kerry to support the anti-gay Federal Marriage Amendment. Kerry refused to throw us under the bus, but Clinton showed (yet again) what he&#8217;s made of and where his principles are. And the saddest part is that Hillary boasts that he would be one of her top advisors. With &#8220;friends&#8221; like that &#8230;</p>
<p>You know the old saying, &#8220;Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.&#8221; The Clintons have fooled us time and time again. Barack has now shown his true colors as well.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s time for us to wake up and support Edwards. He&#8217;s the best Democrat in the race and he&#8217;s also the most electable!</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brandon Greeson</title>
		<link>http://www.interstateq.com/archives/2425/comment-page-1/#comment-57040</link>
		<dc:creator>Brandon Greeson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Nov 2007 19:35:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.interstateq.com/archives/2425/#comment-57040</guid>
		<description>Matt,
I commend you for bringing the facts about Senator Obama to the readers of InterstateQ.  I, however, differ with your opinion on Mr. Edwards (he is no longer a Senator).  There are a few statements made in your post that I wanted to comment on.  I want to first say that I respect your right to choose who you feel will be best for the values you seek and my comments are only to further engage the conversation of LGBT rights and the run for the White House.

In one paragraph you state:

&lt;blockquote&gt;
Senator Edwards, on the other hand, is the only candidate who has continuously stood up for the respect and equality of LGBT people. I respect that Sen. Edwards can say he is “not quite there yet” and temper that with a policy position that, unlike other candidates, has not pushed entirely closed the door to full equality on the issue of marriage. Also, Sen. Edwards has not attempted to lie down with those who, if they had there way, would like to see nothing less than the disappearance of every LGBT person on the globe.
&lt;/blockquote&gt;

You state in the first sentence of that paragraph that &quot;Senator Edwards, on the other hand, is the only candidate who has continuously stood up for the respect and equality of LGBT people.&quot;  Matt, you know that this statement isn&#039;t totally accurate.  Many of the Democratic candidates have voiced support of LGBT rights.  Many have gone beyond voicing their support and been active in legislation.  The fact is, Senator Clinton is one of the only &quot;mainstream&quot; candidates running on the Democratic ticket that has put her voice into action.  She has historically been fair to our community both in policy and action.  Her recent support of critical legislation (including the hate crimes bill and ENDA) reinforce her support of LGBT people.  It&#039;s common knowledge many of Senator Clinton&#039;s closest friends are gay &amp; lesbian.

The reality is, Mr. Edwards chooses to use religion as a crutch to deny full and equal rights to the LGBT community.  His wife rebuttals the media by saying that she has gay friends who John hangs out with.  Sorry, that&#039;s just not good enough for me.  If Mr. Edwards don&#039;t have LGBT friends in his personal life, what makes you think he will support us in his public life?

Senator Clinton has been a champion for many communities - not just the LGBT.  She has been the inspiration behind giving middle-class children insurance, fighting for women&#039;s rights and has been a friend of the economy.  Her work in legal aid has helped thousands retain their constitutional rights and be treated fairly.

When it comes down to the bottom line, I&#039;m supporting Hillary Clinton for president because I believe she not only has the experience to get the job done - she also has demonstrated her willingness to be fair to all people.

As I said, you deserve the right to vote for who you want.  But to say that John Edwards is the only candidate who has been fair to the LGBT community is just not true.

Thanks Matt for engaging in the conversation and for all the work you&#039;re doing to bring attention to the electoral process.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Matt,<br />
I commend you for bringing the facts about Senator Obama to the readers of InterstateQ.  I, however, differ with your opinion on Mr. Edwards (he is no longer a Senator).  There are a few statements made in your post that I wanted to comment on.  I want to first say that I respect your right to choose who you feel will be best for the values you seek and my comments are only to further engage the conversation of LGBT rights and the run for the White House.</p>
<p>In one paragraph you state:</p>
<blockquote><p>
Senator Edwards, on the other hand, is the only candidate who has continuously stood up for the respect and equality of LGBT people. I respect that Sen. Edwards can say he is “not quite there yet” and temper that with a policy position that, unlike other candidates, has not pushed entirely closed the door to full equality on the issue of marriage. Also, Sen. Edwards has not attempted to lie down with those who, if they had there way, would like to see nothing less than the disappearance of every LGBT person on the globe.
</p></blockquote>
<p>You state in the first sentence of that paragraph that &#8220;Senator Edwards, on the other hand, is the only candidate who has continuously stood up for the respect and equality of LGBT people.&#8221;  Matt, you know that this statement isn&#8217;t totally accurate.  Many of the Democratic candidates have voiced support of LGBT rights.  Many have gone beyond voicing their support and been active in legislation.  The fact is, Senator Clinton is one of the only &#8220;mainstream&#8221; candidates running on the Democratic ticket that has put her voice into action.  She has historically been fair to our community both in policy and action.  Her recent support of critical legislation (including the hate crimes bill and ENDA) reinforce her support of LGBT people.  It&#8217;s common knowledge many of Senator Clinton&#8217;s closest friends are gay &amp; lesbian.</p>
<p>The reality is, Mr. Edwards chooses to use religion as a crutch to deny full and equal rights to the LGBT community.  His wife rebuttals the media by saying that she has gay friends who John hangs out with.  Sorry, that&#8217;s just not good enough for me.  If Mr. Edwards don&#8217;t have LGBT friends in his personal life, what makes you think he will support us in his public life?</p>
<p>Senator Clinton has been a champion for many communities &#8211; not just the LGBT.  She has been the inspiration behind giving middle-class children insurance, fighting for women&#8217;s rights and has been a friend of the economy.  Her work in legal aid has helped thousands retain their constitutional rights and be treated fairly.</p>
<p>When it comes down to the bottom line, I&#8217;m supporting Hillary Clinton for president because I believe she not only has the experience to get the job done &#8211; she also has demonstrated her willingness to be fair to all people.</p>
<p>As I said, you deserve the right to vote for who you want.  But to say that John Edwards is the only candidate who has been fair to the LGBT community is just not true.</p>
<p>Thanks Matt for engaging in the conversation and for all the work you&#8217;re doing to bring attention to the electoral process.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
