1. Hillary Clinton. Hillary was clearly comfortable wth the setting and came across as well-informed and empathetic. She was very specific about what she wanted to do regarding state recognition of same sex couples: repeal Section 3 of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act. Unfortunately there are only 2 sections of DOMA. I believe though Clinton was referring to the second half of DOMA which restricts any federal benefits currently provided to married couples from being provided to same-sex couples. She was more accurate and eloquent on the issue of the ban on openly gay or lesbian people serving in the United States Armed Forces. Grade A.
2. Barack Obama. Impressive, but not as polished as Hillary. Got visibly annoyed when repeatedly asked to defend his position on same-sex marriage. Grade A-.
3. Dennis Kucinich. The biggest surprise of the debate. Clearly the most progressive of the candidates, unabashedly so. Unfortunately has no chance of winning the nomination. Grade B+.
4. John Edwards.I thought he had the best answer to the inevitable same-sex marriage question when he described his intellectual and emotional understanding of how LGBT folk feel like when they are denied the freedom to marry, but he also reiterated that his position had not changed: he is still opposed to same-sex marriage. Grade B.
5. Mike Gravel. Has raised almost no money. I disagree with other bloggers who advocated for his inclusion in this event. Grade C.
6. Bill Richardson. When asked by Melissa Etheridge "Is homosexuality a choice?" the Governor responded "Yes, it is a choice." 'Nough said. When asked whether he would sign a marriage equality bill into law if provided one by the New Mexico state legislature he refused to answer the question! Grade F.
I disagree with your "B+" for Dennis Kucinich. You lowered his grade because he has no chance of winning. If you were my professor at the university, and I answered every question correctly, would you refuse to give me an A in your class because I had no chance of passing my other classes, and therefore would never graduate? Of course not. If I did well in your class, then I would deserve an A in your class. Period.
ReplyDeleteSecond, I disagree with the grade of F that you gave to Bill Richardson. You should only have given him a D. I say this because I believe the grade of F goes to all of the Republican candidates for president who were invited to the Forum, but refused to attend.
Thanks, Bryan. I not only gave him a B+ because he has no chance of winning but also because he is a bit squirrely: The Department of Peace?
ReplyDeleteI agree all the Republican candidates would have gotten F's but they would have failed anyway because they didn't show up for the class!
I understand your low grade for Richardson, but I appreciated his candor. I don't think he was trying to say things he didn't believe simply to gain points with the audience. Considering his emphasis on pragmatism (and also thinking about his background) I think can understand where his 'it's a choice' comment came from. I agree, he's more of a 'D' -- but IMHO he can improve.
ReplyDeletePS: How would we feel about a Clinton/Richardson ticket?
I am very surprised on some of the grades you gave.
ReplyDeleteKucinich deserved an A+, and not only for his positions on our issues, which are the best of any of the candidates. He also was the warmest candidate and the one most comfortable being around queers.
I also would have given Clinton a D+, not an A. She lied when she said that "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" was an "advance" when it locked the military ban into federal law and dramatically increased lgbt military discharges. She also was disdainful of the queers in the room and in the panel. She has a sense of entitlement for lgbt votes and money even though she has offered zero leadership on our issues in the Senate. The best that can be said about her was that she didn't say anything overtly homophobic.
I think that Gravel deserved an A for his report card. The only candidate that could equal him on lgbt issues is Kucinich, and only Kucinich was more respectful of the audience. Judging debate performance by fundraising dollars would be like judging debate performance by whether the candidate prefers skiing or snowboarding. Talk about irrelevant.
Also, Gravel's effort to fight his way into the debate were terribly important for the queer community. Demanding inclusion in a queer event, rather than refusing to participate (e.g. Biden, Dodd, and the Republicans) is a huge deal for us.