LogoTV/HRC Presidential Forum: Mini Review

I just finished watching the LogoTV/HRC Presidential Forum on gay rights issues, and I have to say I was impressed. Mostly by the fact that it was held, televised, and that most of the Democratic candidates appeared. For the record, the Republican candidates were invited, but declined.

My DVR--for some reason--cut off the beginning of the program, so I missed Barrack Obama and most of John Edwards. I have managed to catch several clips from their sections, but I don't have an entire view of how well they did.

From what I saw, Obama was his usual self, seeming (slightly) unprepared (lots of "uhs"), and pandering a little to his audience. Edwards (my favorite, but slipping) seems a bit patronizing, and talks like he's uncovered amazing facts we don't already know. I still like him, but I'm going to be watching closer.

Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich came off very well (if overselling the love thing a bit). Unfortunately, they have virtually no shot at winning. Bill Richardson came off as a bit of a lummox, managing to sound both conceited and humble at the same time, and badly fumbled the "is it a choice" question.

Hillary Clinton continues to surprise me. When I saw her at a forum here in Las Vegas, I was stunned by how she commanded the room. She did the same thing here, exuding warmth, regardless of her "cold" reputation. She dodged a bit on same-sex marriage, but to be honest, I'm not sure any of these candidates is really against it--they just don't feel they can say so. Which is a bit sad.

So, who came off best? Melissa Etheridge! I thought she was a slightly odd choice as a questioner (and I think she did too). But she more than acquitted herself, coming off as intelligent, articulate and funny. Can we vote for her?

Here is a clip from Good Morning America. I really don't like the reporter's tone, and don't much agree with his assessment, but at least you can see a few clips.




If you are interested in seeing more about this event, go here: LogoOnline

Rachel Maddow's Take on the Big Gay Debate

It is often said, and I believe it's true: Conservatives tend to march in lock-step, but getting liberals to agree on anything is like herding cats. They can't even decide on what they're called, liberal or progressive.

In many ways, this is a good thing. It shows individuality, thoughtfulness, and the ability to "think outside the box." It also makes it difficult to compete against an opposition that is in almost uniform agreement--or will at least act that way until the election is over.

Gay politics is very much the same as the liberal example. I have always found it amusing when conservatives throw around the term "gay agenda," as if gay people could ever agree with each other long enough to actually have one. This clip features one of the most prominent out, gay political voices there is, Rachel Maddow of Air America Radio. Rachel gives her take on the upcoming (tomorrow at 9:00pm EST/6:00pm PST on LogoTV) "gay debate." Oops, sorry Rachel, we're not supposed to call it that, are we?

You might expect Rachel to be jubilant at this opportunity, over-the-moon supportive. Not so much, and she has pretty good reasons, too. I'll reserve my judgement until I see the thing, but Rachel gets it right, most of the time. Watch.