I think he means that it's in bad taste for the diarist to gloat about the fact that McClurkin drew cheers and little protest.

I don't think the criticism is in bad taste. I am an Obama supporter, and I understand why people were and still are upset about this. I think it's in bad taste for an apparent Obama supporter to post a taunting, gloating, "Ha ha gay people, McClurkin showed up anyway and you only got 20 people out there to protest" diary. It's idiotic and embarrassing.

There are people here who think McClurkin is right- they just don't want to come out and say it- have you noticed?  They're masking it with other language but you can tell.  Of course, people have the right to think they want but at least quit the subterfuge and come out with it.

what did he say -- sry i've had a crazy few days

I did not read anywhere that McClurkin made damaging remarks right there on stage.  That is serious business, as, if that is true, it would bring this issue into a completely new stratosphere altogether and would indeed damage Obama's campaign tremendously.  That is why I think you really need to bring proof about what you claim here, direct quotes, an article about this, links, audio.   Please flesh out your comments with a link or audio that supports what you claim here, as that is the requirement for a verification of a serious new development like the one you claim to have occured.    

Why does it always have to be about race?  Anything you disagree with Obama about you always attack him by saying "did you know that he is black?"  It's obvious that you never had any intention of voting for Obama, even if he did not hold that concert.

White liberals kill me with their double standard bull sh*t!  Bill Clinton invited William Fulbright, a life long segregationist, into the Democratic fold to sure up the bubba vote and it was defended as political pragmatism to win the south.  Democrats as a whole are a bunch of hypocrits and I include myself because if we didn't posess a degree of homophobia we would support gay marriage, but the majority of Democrats DON'T.  At least the bigots admit they think homosexuality is a sin; Democrats just talk around the damn issue by saying we believe that homosexuality is choice, but we still won't give you full and equal rights, which quite frankly is worse!

As an atheist, I'm offended by the prevalent Christian belief that I'm going to burn in hell  Yet, I have no objection to any candidate associating with Christians who hold such beliefs. To insist that they not would be both wrong and impractical, it seems to me.

I don't see how my position differs from that of those angry about this. Our country is and always will be deeply divided on issues of religion, sexual morality, and more. To be sure, liberalism takes a certain amount of pride in its permissive view toward pluralism. So long as our laws don't unfairly advantage a particular sexual orientation or religion, I'm fine with pluralism on matters of personal morality, religion, etc. I don't feel the need or inclination to insist on consensus about these things. In fact, battles over the soul of the culture seem naive and anti-liberal to me.

I would add that i disagree with the kind of gloating that appears to motivate a diary like this. My comment above was just in response to the idea that Obama or other candidates should avoid any association with socially conservative voices. I disagree, all though I would have a problem with socially conservative policies.