About
Learn More about our progressive online community for the Granite State.

Create an account today (it's free and easy) and get started!
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Search




Advanced Search


The Masthead
Managing Editors


Jennifer Daler

Contributing Writers
elwood
Mike Hoefer
 susanthe
ActBlue Hampshire

The Roll, Etc.
Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Betsy Devine
Blue News Tribune (MA)
Democracy for NH
Live Free or Die
Mike Caulfield
Granite State Progress
Seacoast for Change
Susan the Bruce

Politicos & Punditry
Krauss
Landrigan
Lawson
Pindell
Primary Monitor
Scala
Schoenberg
Spiliotes
Welch

Campaigns, Et Alia.
Paul Hodes
Carol Shea-Porter
John DeJoie
Ann McLane Kuster
ActBlue Hampshire
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC

National
Balloon Juice
billmon
Congress Matters
DailyKos
Digby
Hold Fast
Eschaton
FiveThirtyEight
MyDD
The Next Hurrah
Open Left
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo

50 State Blog Network
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin

I Won't Be Watching the Inaugural

by: elwood

Wed Dec 17, 2008 at 18:13:23 PM EST
The Joint Congressional Committee on the Inaugural Ceremony has announced its program. The committee, working with our new President, has selected Pastor Rick Warren to deliver the invocation.

Reverend Warren is the smiling face of hatred and bigotry.

He presents himself as a moderate Christian and his Saddleback megachurch hosted a Presidential campaign event. But he actively supported Proposition 8 in California, which seeks to eliminate the right of gay couples to marry. He compares gay marriage to polygamy and incest. (Think about that, if you like to meet folks halfway with civil unions.)

The New President will have him kick off this moment of "Hope" and "Change."

I'll be renting a movie.

Update:
Warren goes on Fox to endorse calls for assassination of foreign leaders.  Yo-Yo Ma, Yitzhak Perlman, Aretha Franklin: do you really want to associate with him.
elwood :: I Won't Be Watching the Inaugural
Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
I Won't Be Watching the Inaugural | 132 comments
Between this (4.00 / 1)
and Vilsack and Duncan, it's been a lousy couple of days for the transition.

I was under no illusions that Obama was going to flex progressive muscle as POTUS, but this is getting ridiculous.

Oh. And Mary Schapiro at SEC (4.00 / 1)
and LaHood (R) at Transportation.

Good thing there was no mandate for change or anything.

[ Parent ]
Oh for crying out loud (4.00 / 2)
Obama pledged to include a Republican in his cabinet, and Ray LaHood is about as moderate a Republican as you will find.

He also has a pretty good record on public transit and passenger rail funding and policy, so there really isn't any reason to get wound up about this appointment.

I also think Duncan was a solid pick. I don't want a knee-jerk apologist for the education establishment, but I also understand that you need someone who has demonstrated the ability to work with both the teacher's unions and with the reform community. Duncan, thorough his work with Chicago's Ren2010 initiative, has shown this ability.  

America was not built on fear. America was built on courage, on imagination and an unbeatable determination to do the job at hand. -Harry Truman

[ Parent ]
And Obama NEEDS to court Republicans (4.00 / 1)
now that he is telling the gay community and progressives who care about gay rights to kiss off.
[ Parent ]
I'd rather not get into a discussion (4.00 / 1)
of education policy, as it would veer into my professional life, where I would prefer it to stay.  I often find that discussions on education quickly turn overly theoretical and hyperbolic and stoopid, and I've been in front of a classroom at both the public and private spheres long enough now to have some fairly settled ideas on what works and what doesn't.

But here's a fairly detailed diary on dKos that says it better than I can.

And I found this article to be fairly perceptive on what makes a good teacher good.

[ Parent ]
Our Blogfather Caulfield has a couple of good posts on the subject (4.00 / 1)
including this
isn't it just a little bit interesting that when Obama was looking for a Secretary for the Department of Energy he was able to find a person that was a Nobel prize-winning physicist who had also distinguished himself as an administrator? And that when he went looking for an economic team, he grabbed highly respected economists who also had some administrative skill?

But when he considered who should lead the Department of Education, Arne Duncan, an administrator with no scholarly or professional credentials in the practice or theory of teaching, did just fine.



Hope > Fear



Create a free Blue Hampshire account and join the conversation.
[ Parent ]
He's head of one of the largest school districts in the country (4.00 / 1)
Ultimately. the SecEd's job is about setting and implementing policy at the "macro" level. That is where Duncan's experience lies. he has been part of a pretty damn significant effort to turn around a troubled district, and has shown an ability to get warring factions to work together. I think that sort of experience is far more relevant than classroom teaching time.

Let me use a different example. Would you base your criteria for selecting a Secretary of Defense on whether the person scored 297 on their APFT and qualified Expert on the M-16 range twenty years earlier? That stuff makes for a good soldier, and helps give a bit of perspective, but it really isn't terribly relevant to the job of administering a Cabinet level department.

America was not built on fear. America was built on courage, on imagination and an unbeatable determination to do the job at hand. -Harry Truman

[ Parent ]
Coupla comments (0.00 / 0)
  1. There's a strong likelihood that we have too many Cabinet officers. Any President is unlikely to give all of them a full hearing. It may not really be good for Education to have a separate Cabinet post competing with Treasury and the Interior for attention - versus having education as part of HEW getting strong attention from a Secretary who has the President's ear for his broader portfolio.
  2. But that ship has sailed.
  3. Duncan may have an access advantage here as a personal friend / basketball partner of Obama. That may be more useful to the cause of education than any particular pedagogical background.


[ Parent ]
interesting take on #3, one can hope. n/t (0.00 / 0)
[ Parent ]
I'd throw Salazar in there too. (4.00 / 2)

I know there are several noteworthy environmental groups who aren't happy with him at Interior. The Center for Biological Diversity and Big Wildlife are two groups leading the way.  
[ Parent ]
Yes. (4.00 / 1)
I agree with you, though for me it's partly softened that he'll be out of the Senate, a place where he could do more damage on key cloture votes.
[ Parent ]
Mixed feelings (4.00 / 2)
Not about Warren, about the pageantry of the inauguration. In theory, it needs a bit of red, I suppose. Remember Nancy Pelosi's purple seat?

Obama won through outreach, I am sure of that. I hope he is better at drawing the policy line than Bill Clinton.

I'd rather Warren wasn't there. I'd rather John Cornyn wasn't there. But I'll still watch.

Suit (4.00 / 2)
Not seat. Though it had a purple seat, I suppose.
[ Parent ]
Hi-Ho, It's off the deep end we go. n/t (0.00 / 0)


www.KusterforCongress.com  
Yeah, the deep end. (4.00 / 1)
Where issues like civil rights and equality for gay people matter.

And where going on Fox to cheer on Hannity's calls for assassinations disqualifies you from speaking as a religious leader at a Presidential Inauguration.

It's probably warmer up there in the Shallow End.

[ Parent ]
How about plain civil rights and equality (4.00 / 1)
There is no shortage of specific demographics getting shorted.

Pardon, but this diary rants like Hannity spewing over Obama talking to Ahmadinejad.

The pundits, the pundits like to slice-and-dice our country into Red States and Blue States; Red States for Republicans, Blue States for Democrats. But I've got news for them, too. We worship an "awesome God" in the Blue States, and we don't like federal agents poking around in our libraries in the Red States. We coach Little League in the Blue States and yes, we've got some gay friends in the Red States. There are patriots who opposed the war in Iraq and there are patriots who supported the war in Iraq. We are one people, all of us pledging allegiance to the stars and stripes, all of us defending the United States of America.


www.KusterforCongress.com  
[ Parent ]
Oh, Obama is always good with Pretty Words (4.00 / 1)
And no, he is not inviting the Ku Klux Klan on stage to join Warren.

You seem to think agreeing to meet with an adversary is comparable to giving someone a place of honor at an important American function. I'd get that checked.

[ Parent ]
You're equating policy with a soiree. (0.00 / 0)
Rent a movie. It's all good.
Rant away. It's all good.
30 year mortgage rates are down below 5%. It's all good.
We are healthy and live in America. It's all good.

But good ain't perfect.

www.KusterforCongress.com  

[ Parent ]
No, I'm not. (4.00 / 2)
And I can only dream of a world where Obama supporters had the self-knowledge and integrity to bite their lips rather than accuse others of ignoring policy and being swayed by theater and atmospherics.
[ Parent ]
Is that what I said? (4.00 / 1)
I am not accusing you of "being swayed by theater and atmospherics." It seems I am accussing you of deploying them.

Didn't you drop out of the party or something to "make a point?" I think it was over FISA or something earth shattering.

This all makes for great blogging, no?

www.KusterforCongress.com  

[ Parent ]
Let's assume, for a moment (4.00 / 1)
.. that Jack's reaction is his inner independent voter speaking, not the guy in the Obama tank. I think people tend to recoil from guilt by association. So even if Warren is a jerk, can't Obama still have him by virtue of Warren being a popular leader?

Or put another way, the significant defining act is Warren showing up, not Obama inviting him. The President is bigger than the guest list, if that makes sense.

Now I'm wondering who -- if any -- Christian leaders qualified? If he had the Catholic cardinal of Chicago, I can only imagine the reactions.

But again, I'd be happier if Warren wasn't there. I think Obama is rewarding the non-endorsement, which surely helped in some places.


[ Parent ]
People don't "show up" (4.00 / 3)
on the rostrum. They get invited.
[ Parent ]
Fair enough n/t (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
This is what uniting looks like. (4.00 / 4)
I'm not thrilled about Warren either, I'm just as angry about Prop 8 as you are, elwood, but a lot of people like him, and a lot of Americans are against gay marriage, much as it drives us crazy.

You knew he wanted to unite the country.  You knew what he meant when he said that.  It was this.  If you take your ball and go home every time someone makes a gesture to the other side, you'll never accomplish anything.  If you want to be able to unite the country without such people, you need to convince the American people not to agree with them.  Until they are marginalized, bringing people together means the ones we disagree with too.

No, this is not what uniting looks like. (4.00 / 1)
This what selling out one group that supported you, in order to chase another group, looks like.

And I am not "taking my ball and going home." I am simply not joining in a celebration presided over by a hate-monger.

The Obama cultists - and I am including you and Jack in this - have a reflexive move these days. Whenever his actions elicit complaint, the cultists personally attack the people objecting. Their objections are trivial, they are spoiled, they do not know how politics works.

This is a recipe for a Presidency that fails in the first year.

[ Parent ]
Hare, Hare... Hare Obama! n/t (4.00 / 2)


www.KusterforCongress.com  
[ Parent ]
I didn't "personally attack" you, elwood, but you did just call me a "cultist". (4.00 / 1)
I'm not saying I would have invited Warren, I'm saying it's consistent with what Barack Obama has been saying since 2004.  We can't unite the country without bringing in the people who disagree with us.  And once they're at the table, maybe we can convince some of their supporters to join us on these issues.

This is where Bush failed.  He wanted to make us one nation under his ideas.  It doesn't work that way.

Obama has to be their President too.  I don't agree with this decision, but I know where he's coming from, I'm not surprised by it, and it won't keep me from going to the inauguration.

[ Parent ]
"If you take your ball and go home" (0.00 / 0)
Douglas, you called me a spoiled child. It's right up there for you to re-read.
[ Parent ]
Rick Warren (4.00 / 7)
is also adamantly opposed to a woman's right to choose. He compares any position other than his own on abortion to "Holocaust Denial."

I do not want to be united with those who hate my gay brothers and sisters. I do not want to be united with men who hate and fear women so much that they want to control their bodies.

This isn't what progress looks like. Having this smug ideologue who preaches a slightly more palatable version of hate than Falwell on the stage is an insult to those of us who believe in equality.

Warren's followers did not work for Obama. They didn't knock on doors, make phone calls, work at the polls, or even vote for him. This gesture makes my skin crawl.

The Nation on Rick Warren

[ Parent ]
The Presidency has to be big. (0.00 / 0)
This is a way of making people feel like Obama is their President, too, without making concessions on issues.

We have to be able to get over political divides sometimes, or we'll never get anything done.  And Obama got some applause in Warren's church.

[ Parent ]
that's a nice sentiment Douglas (4.00 / 1)
but I'm tired of being on the side that always has to make all the concessions. Let me know when they get ready to meet me halfway. Let me know when they get ready to stop oppressing women and gays.

This is not a political divide. This is an ideological divide. I'm not willing to get chummy with the Christian Taliban at this juncture.  

[ Parent ]
You're right. It is a nice sentiment. And that's all it is. (4.00 / 1)
I'm tired of concessions too.  I think there's a fair point to be made that there should be no religious portion of an inauguration or a campaign event.  But if "unity" means making a concession, and we're in a position to make real decisions, let our concession be purely symbolic.

And by the way, Warren's right-wing supporters are angry at Warren for seeming to say it's okay to support Obama who, unless you believe in guilt by association, is a real advocate for LGBT rights.  And yes, I know Obama is technically against gay marriage (and you know that I very strongly support gay marriage) and for civil unions, but let's not forget he also says it's a state issue, and was against Prop 8.

Look, I'm among the crowd that hopes Obama will be able to roll back some of the unnaturally right-wing social atmosphere forced upon us in this extended Reagan Revolution era, and I'm not thrilled about this Warren business, but I don't think it has to mean anything more than reaching out to Warren's constituency, and as we saw at Saddleback, some of those people are Obama fans.

Meanwhile, I'm frustrated that I've seen TV News people falsely claiming that Warren will be "swearing in" Obama, when in fact he will merely be speaking at the event, as swearing in Presidents is a job for Supreme Court Justices.  I know you're not saying that, Susan, but it's worth refuting.

[ Parent ]
Throwing in my two cents (4.00 / 4)

Elwood thanks for bringing this up. I'm upset about it as you are.

After the Donnie McClurkin cluster**** you would think the Obama campaign would be more careful. The fact that this is coming right after Prop 8, makes this sting even worse. A blogger wrote that the inauguration is a civic occasion and turning over any role to any religious leader is unacceptable. I agree 100% with that.

The stuff I'm finding out on Warren now is unbelievable. It borders on irrationality and nonsense. That's how bad he is. Why would the Obama camp make the same mistake twice? Do they think that they have nothing to lose politically? Why else would they choose him?

This is an example where Obama's pragmatism/consensus stuff is going too far. Hey, I like Obama y'all. But this is one bad decision I'm not letting him off the hook. Seriously, they send out a scribe to tell bloggers to "shut-up" and then they roll out a guy like Warren to deliver the invocation.  

I think the blogs (and other advocacy groups) must rally around this and get Warren taken off the inauguration agenda.  

Don't hold your breath (4.00 / 1)
I think you may be overestimating the strength of the "blogger card."

The chattering of bloggers will generate a buzz that will nudge the trade-meds into covering this. The story won't be about Warren. It will be about, and I'm framing it as it will play out, the fringe left boiling over Obama's centrism. There will be charges of "false advertising", answered by "let the buyer beware." The Sunday pundits will kick this around in a bigger picture of defining the Obama administration.

As a member of the radical middle, frankly I am sick of the activist bullhorns that charge the windmills of public awareness, or lack thereof, without regard for some sense of rational, national priorities.

Actually, I am proud that in America those "activist bullhorns" exist and are heard. In another place, they might be lined up and shot or just go missing. That said, it would be nice for specific causes to temper their communication, so as not to promote polarization.

There was this chant over the cycle. I hate chants, but it went,"Tired of political drama? Vote for Barack Obama."

Our country is sick. Obama has to do triage.



www.KusterforCongress.com  

[ Parent ]
Fine. You guys are all so smuch smarter (0.00 / 0)
and nobler than the rest of the progressive community.

And after you finish sneering at us you will build your continuing majority with Rick Warren's bigots.

We're just whiners who Don't Understand Politics. You don't need us.

[ Parent ]
No not at all (0.00 / 0)
We know this will pass. The "whiners" will chill out, see the big picture and get in line.

It happens every time.

After 8 years of Bush/Cheney, shouldn't the "rest of the progressive community" be a little ashamed for not storming the Bastille? Please, it can't get much worse. Nothing was done.

Obama emboldened the moderates, The "libruls" heard what they needed to hear to stay motivated.

www.KusterforCongress.com  

[ Parent ]
ouchie n/t (0.00 / 0)


"Poetry is not an expression of the party line. It's that time of night, lying in bed, thinking what you really think, making the private world public, that's what the poet does." Allen Ginsberg
[ Parent ]
Not storming the Bastille? (4.00 / 2)
No, the progressive community that fought for universal rights and fought to overturn domestic spying has nothing to be ashamed of.

This is a serious disconnect from reality on your part.

[ Parent ]
Ya, just like the 60's and early 70's (0.00 / 0)
Who is the Leonard Peltier of 2000-2008?

Please define "fought"?

www.KusterforCongress.com  

[ Parent ]
Fought: (4.00 / 1)
What Obama did not do on FISA.
[ Parent ]
That's fair, but (0.00 / 0)
There ought to be a limit on mentioning it, though I'm not sure what the limit should be.

[ Parent ]
Not fair (4.00 / 1)
Just because we lost doesn't mean we didn't fight.
[ Parent ]
Jack (4.00 / 2)
Obama IS a moderate. He's no progressive - never has been. Let's at least be real about that.

I voted for Obama for 2 reasons. 1) he wasn't John McCain 2) The Supreme Court.

Now that we've received the Warren slap in the face, I'm worried about the future of the Supreme Court.  

[ Parent ]
Too far (4.00 / 1)
Why does Rick Warren speaking for a minute or so at the inauguration make you worry about the Supreme Court?
[ Parent ]
his appointments (0.00 / 0)
already worry me, and now Rick Warren, preacher of hate? Obama may well decide to bring us all together by nominating another right wing judicial activist to SCOTUS.  
[ Parent ]
Disagreee (4.00 / 1)
But can't prove you wrong. Still too big a leap for me.
[ Parent ]
"a civic occasion and turning over any role to any religious leader is unacceptable" (0.00 / 0)
That's a reasonable point, and I'm inclined to agree.

But for now, having Warren, annoying as it is, shouldn't make anyone worry about policy.  It seems pretty clear that Obama's strategy is: first you get everybody on board, then you steer the ship.

[ Parent ]
I don't like Rick Warren, (4.00 / 3)
either, especially because he turns Biblical scripture into materialistic pablum for the hungering masses of seekers. The homophobia, sexism, etc. is the rotten gravy.

That being said, we cannot expect Obama to be our perfect progressive president.

Our country has swung so far to the right over the last 28.5 years, that it will take a lot to even get it back to the center. A huge, heavy entity isn't that easy to turn around, unfortunately.

And the heavy lifting on that is for us to do. That includes the disappointment over certain Cabinet positions. Again, we have to change things from the ground up. When change comes from the top down, at least in my reading of history, it's never been a good thing.

So hold Obama's not yet inaugurated feet to the fire. We have to.

I won't watch Warren, either, but I will watch the first African American take the presidential oath of office.

But this is pro-active by him. (4.00 / 1)
It isn't a matter of cutting him slack because he can't turn quickly to port.

He is turning to starboard.

It is easy to have a low-profile pastor who avoids political involvement give the invocation.

[ Parent ]
it's a good thought jbd (4.00 / 1)
but the time to hold their feet to the fire is BEFORE they're elected. Once they're in, they don't need us any more.  
[ Parent ]
We have to be active (4.00 / 1)
at all times. I'm assuming Obama will want another term in office.

noweeman at Daily Kos has this piece of information:

As suggested by a number of commenters, you can email Parag Mehta - his email address is: parag.mehta@ptt.gov - with your opinion.  He is Obama's LGBT liaison on the transition team.

Let them know what you think. Even if it doesn't change the Warren situation, it may do some good for the future.


[ Parent ]
yep (0.00 / 0)
but the joy of the 2 party system is that we'll have a choice in 2012 between Obama and some horror show of a Republican. The lesser of two evils approach to government guarantees Obama a second term.

[ Parent ]
Well, (0.00 / 0)
I'm still holding out hope that Obama will be better than a lesser of two evils president.

Time will tell.

[ Parent ]
From Progressive Review (4.00 / 1)
PR's source:
http://spiegelman.tumblr.com/p...

"The Sen. Barack Obama who showed up for the first debate with Sen. John McCain did a fine Bill Clinton imitation." (WSJ). . .

"Obama emerges as a liberal Reagan who can reunite America." (Andrew Sullivan)

"The similarities between Carter and Obama are considerable." (NYO). . .

"His rhetoric does include echoes of the 1968 Nixon campaign." (Encyclopedia Britannica Blog)

"He's also the fulfillment of Lyndon Johnson's dream." (Seattle PI)

"A president like my father." (Caroline Kennedy). . .

"President-elect Barack Obama and his team are modeling their domestic agenda on President Franklin D. Roosevelt's Keynesian liberalism." (Washington Times)

"How about Obama as Hoover? Now there's a real story." (American Spectator)

"Five past presidents, [including] Warren Harding and Calvin Coolidge - had black ancestors, which would make Obama the sixth of his kind." (MSNBC). . .

"Given Obama's aspiration to practice a transformative politics in this season of discontent, Kennedy may not be the senator's best role model. The man he really wants to be is Theodore Roosevelt." (Washington Independent)

"If Barack Obama is elected President, he will be the first Harvard law school graduate to become President since Rutherford B. Hayes." (Volokh Conspiracy). . .

"Johnnie Maier, chairman of the Democratic Party in Ohio's economically depressed Stark County, said Mr. Obama probably faces the greatest challenges since Andrew Johnson." (Globe and Mail). . .

I repeat: you hear Obama differently (more fully) after you read Dreams from My Father.

He is not progressive for one simple reason: There is no such thing.

But he cares about people, or has at least convinced me that he does. He is absolutely a Democrat.

You read Progressive Review? (4.00 / 1)

I thought I was the only one, LOL! :)
[ Parent ]
Gather round the Wendelboe (0.00 / 0)
'Tis the season.

It's a free country.

www.KusterforCongress.com  

Outreach (0.00 / 0)
Check out Salazar hugging Obama. Change I can believe in.

http://www.npr.org/templates/s...

You can't make an English omelette without cheese and bacon ...


For Mulling Over (4.00 / 2)
Here is a link to a piece on Kos about the other minister, Rev. Joseph Lowery, who will have a role in the inaugaration;

http://www.dailykos.com/storyo...



"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

Both Sides Now ? (4.00 / 1)
It's clouds illusions I recall, I really don't know clouds at all...

now its just another show
you leave them laughing when you go

"Poetry is not an expression of the party line. It's that time of night, lying in bed, thinking what you really think, making the private world public, that's what the poet does." Allen Ginsberg

[ Parent ]
Blech (0.00 / 0)
Not a big fan, sorry.

"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    
[ Parent ]
so you didn't have to take me literally dude (0.00 / 0)
http://www.bluehampshire.com/s...

"Poetry is not an expression of the party line. It's that time of night, lying in bed, thinking what you really think, making the private world public, that's what the poet does." Allen Ginsberg
[ Parent ]
:) n/t (0.00 / 0)


"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    
[ Parent ]
Bad pick, I'm wondering... (0.00 / 0)
Has Obama or his camp given any explanation?  

For the record, I don't like it.  It's one thing to be inclusive by giving people with other viewpoints a seat a the discussion table.  It's quite another to give them the podium.  But I would like to know if there is reasoning behind it that I haven't heard.

He did today (4.00 / 2)
TPM has coverage including video.
[ Parent ]
Spirit of his administration (0.00 / 0)
"part of the magic of this country is that we are diverse and noisy and opinionated."


www.KusterforCongress.com  
[ Parent ]
Yes, that is his spirit (4.00 / 1)
We are diverse and noisy and opinionated.

And among us, there is room for Rick Warren but not Gene Robinson on his stage.

[ Parent ]
Funny that you should mention him (0.00 / 0)
After he endorsed Obama, he "disappeared."

I thought for sure he'd say something over the McClurkin escapade. Nada.

Any insight? Anyone?

www.KusterforCongress.com  

[ Parent ]
Millions of people are fans Rick Warren. I'm not one of them, but that's something. (0.00 / 0)
Other than his sexual orientation, why Gene Robinson?
[ Parent ]
My preference is neither - (4.00 / 1)
My ideal for the Invocation would be someone like Father Mulcahy. A modest preacher who tries to serve a diverse flock without getting into politics.

The fact that "millions of people are fans" has nothing to do with offering an Invocation. Many religious people are suspicious of that sort of celebrity.

But somehow there is room for this right-wing hater - while the inclusive Episcopal Bishop would be too divisive.

[ Parent ]
I don't see any Rabbis or Imams n/t (4.00 / 4)


"Poetry is not an expression of the party line. It's that time of night, lying in bed, thinking what you really think, making the private world public, that's what the poet does." Allen Ginsberg
[ Parent ]
interesting (4.00 / 1)
I always thought the spirit of this country had something to do with equality and justice for all.

I finally figured out what is pissing me off the most about this. I knew I'd be disappointed by Obama's inching to the right - I just didn't expect it to happen before he was sworn in.  

[ Parent ]
Ever notice... (0.00 / 0)
that arguement is the cornerstone of our justice system.

Equality only offers that sides are not treated preferentially.


www.KusterforCongress.com  

[ Parent ]
tell that to (4.00 / 3)
Rick Warren. He believes that gays and women are inferior.  
[ Parent ]
Recommend closing this thread (4.00 / 1)
Points are made, I see no new insights. Nowhere to go but down.

Before the button is sewn on, (4.00 / 3)
I'd just like to take a moment here, since time and circumstances prevented me from getting more involved in this thread, to speak out.

I think it really and truly stinks to have Warren give the invocation.

I think it stinks that mega-church evangelicals have become an American norm for religious leaders. Poor St. Francis is spinning like a top right now - and I say that as a committed agnostic.

I think it stinks that the media has repeatedly written about this tempest as an outrage confined to gay/lesbian groups as some sort of constituency to be mollified, or worse, played upon by Obama to score points in the other direction.

I think it stinks that our first bi-racial president is having a 2008 version of a pastor at his inauguration who, fifty years ago, would have twisted the words of Christ to argue that the races shouldn't mingle in marriage.

The whole thing stinks, and while not to me, I know it will be personally hurtful to many, many patriotic Americans.

[ Parent ]
Wait... can I have the last word? (4.00 / 1)

Sorry I just got here and I gotta ask this because nobody's discussed it here... not yet at least.

I understand Obama's rationale for inclusiveness. But can somebody tell me why people like Donnie McClurkin and Rick Warren are acceptable, but someone like Reverend Jeremiah Wright isn't? Something just doesn't add up here. Double standards perhaps?

Somebody make the case why they're OK... but not Wright.  

dude (4.00 / 2)
that's easy. Jeremiah Wright hates 'Murrika. Donnie McLurkin and Rick Warren just hate teh gayz and the wimmins.  
[ Parent ]
Jeremiah Wright, whatever (4.00 / 1)
Obama doesn't have close relations with any, you know, regular clergymen? Are they all controversial celebrities?
[ Parent ]
good point, Alex (0.00 / 0)
I'd be happy to loan him my minister. The Reverend Mary Giles Edes of the Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of the Eastern Slopes would be a huge improvement. She can sing, too. America would love her.  
[ Parent ]
Re: Jeremiah Wright, whatever (0.00 / 0)

Alex,

The point is that Obama made a statement (yes... a statement) that bigotry against gays and lesbians doesn't matter. Explain to me why we should tolerate those who don't tolerate others to prove a point? Who else is he going to take the stage with, the executive director of NAMBLA?

Somebody wrote that "saying Warren represents "inclusiveness" is like burning a cross on someone's lawn and claiming to be "showing them the light."

I concur 100% with that. Either that or Obama's already campaigning for 2012 and is veering rightward as of January 20, 2009.  

[ Parent ]
Obama's choice (4.00 / 1)
is akin to having David Duke read the invocation, but asking Al Sharpton to do the benediction.

[ Parent ]
I'm not defending him here (4.00 / 1)
I think the selection of Rick Warren is wrong. The guy generates enough publicity on his own without the Obama effect.
[ Parent ]
All da progressives in da house (0.00 / 0)
Yo, Yo. Come on! Yo. Throw yer handz in da air like ya just don't care.

OK Folks, Here Are the Rules
by DHinMI
Thu Dec 18, 2008 at 07:06:53 PM PST


www.KusterforCongress.com  
Andrew Sullivan blogs on (4.00 / 1)

If I cannot pray with Rick Warren, I realize, then I am not worthy of being called a Christian. And if I cannot engage him, then I am not worthy of being called a writer. And if we cannot work with Obama to bridge these divides, none of us will be worthy of the great moral cause that this civil rights movement truly is.

The bitterness endures; the hurt doesn't go away; the pain is real. But that is when we need to engage the most, to overcome our feelings to engage in the larger project, to understand that not all our opponents are driven by hate, even though that may be how their words impact us. To turn away from such dialogue is to fail ourselves, to fail our gay brothers and sisters in red state America, and to miss the possibility of the Obama moment.

It can be hard to take yes for an answer. But yes is what Obama is saying. And we should not let our pride or our pain get in the way.



www.KusterforCongress.com  
[ Parent ]
one man's opinion Jack (0.00 / 0)
I don't happen to share it.

You'll notice that his concern is solely for GLBT issues. This is a preacher that tells his flock that a woman submits to her husband.
Women make up over half the population. Obama is giving women the finger by having this jerk who conceals his misogyny behind religion on the stage.

Again - Democrats have a mandate to change. Again- Democrats are acting like the cringing, cowering pillars of jello they've been for the last 8 years.

[ Parent ]
Listen, Rush (0.00 / 0)
The actions of the inaugural planning committee do not condemn the ENTIRE Democratic Party! I am officially offended!
[ Parent ]
the leader of the Democratic Party (0.00 / 0)
made the decision, Jim. Let's at least be honest here, and stop trying to sugarcoat the decisions made by OBAMA.  
[ Parent ]
How does this decision (0.00 / 0)
make OBAMA a cringing, cowering pillar of jello?

THEY are avoiding us because they simply do not think that we -- the FAR LEFT -- can be reasoned  with.

THEY believe, and somewhat rightly so, that we are much more interested in clinging to our self-righteous fury then in being able to manage our disappointments and seeking compromise so they show up when its time for the cash or the grass-roots jolt of energy and then disappear when it comes time to legislate.

THEY believe we are the extremists, no more "reality based" than those at Little Green Footfungus because every slight seems to wipe away YEARS of good governance on issues we care about.

We (again with that we) MUST learn to find a voice of Progressive Moderation, which both stays true to our belief, but also learns how to lobby without brass-knuckles, because the whole "withhold the money and votes" threat only ends up hurting us more than them.



www.KusterforCongress.com  
[ Parent ]
Who's sugarcoating? (0.00 / 0)
You are bile-coating, and it's not fair. Maybe a dozen people have any say in this, and you are condemning the whole party. I'm tired of being shot down by my allies.
[ Parent ]
you aren't going to get shut down, Jim (4.00 / 1)
I am. The left is more despised by the Democratic Party than the GOP. All you have to do is read Jack's post. In order to achieve mediocrity, you have to silence folks like me.

I repeat - this was Obama's decision. Trying to blame it on anyone else is dishonest. Obama pays lip service to GLBT issues - but  his actions speak louder than words. Donnie McLurken. Rick Warren. Separate but equal. Obama is not good on gay issues. Maybe that's not important to you. It is to me. Feel free to heap all kinds of ridicule on me for believing that gays and lesbians (and don't forget the vagina Americans)  are my equals and should be treated as such.  

[ Parent ]
There you go again (0.00 / 0)
Because you're more upset about 60 seconds at the inauguration, you're more liberal than I am? That is completely reductionist, divisive, and unfair.
[ Parent ]
Time to roll out John and Yoko (0.00 / 0)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

Now I'm just being flip. The drama made me do it.

www.KusterforCongress.com  

[ Parent ]
OK (0.00 / 0)
Trying to blame it on anyone else is dishonest.

OK, fine, blame Obama. Then why this blanket smearing of the Democrats? I hold signs in the rain on Election Days, make phone calls to hostile voters, and do all kinds of other crap to be tagged as "jelly" because Obama invited Rick Warren to give the invocation? That doesn't strike you as a bit unfair?

[ Parent ]
Oh, baloney. (0.00 / 0)
Who do you think the Democratic Party put on the committee - some renegades?

These are the same people who control the Executive and Legislative Branches "on behalf of" Democratic voters.

In one sense Obama is reducing partisan rancor. I won't be able to make fun of Log Cabin Republicans.

[ Parent ]
What's baloney? (0.00 / 0)
I am not responsible for every action taken by every Democratic leader.

You guys can't have it both ways. You can't separate when it suits you.

[ Parent ]
This is baloney: (0.00 / 0)
Your claim that the decisions of the inaugural committee established by the Democratic leadership in Congress and the incoming Democratic President should not be taken as the actions of the Democratic Party.

Further baloney from you in this post, with the plural "you" suggesting a cabal of Leftists in berets plotting their unified dogmatic view.

It's laughable.

The Party sets up and staffs a committee to act on its behalf, and you claim it doesn't represent the Democratic Party.

Posters here a hundred miles apart who haven't seen each other since the FIRST BlueHampshire get-together post similar views and we become "you guys" sharing a predicate.

[ Parent ]
Susan said, and you, Elwood, applauded (0.00 / 0)
The following:

you aren't going to get shut down, Jim  (4.00 / 1)
I am. The left is more despised by the Democratic Party than the GOP. All you have to do is read Jack's post. In order to achieve mediocrity, you have to silence folks like me.

So what are we to infer here?

1. Susan is more "progressive" than me.

2. There is a shutdown planned, but it won't affect me. I am safe, why? Because I am an apologist? I already said I'm against this.

My "you guys" was very specific -- you and Susan. Who's doing the herding? You've already staked your moral high ground on this, fine. But for the sake of 60 seconds of speech that no one will remember the next day, anyone who fails to climb to that high ground gets smeared as weak jelly. Well like I said earlier, it's not the fault of party rank and file. So how can you honestly claim any separate status? And even if you can, what is the point?


[ Parent ]
You really are in denial. (4.00 / 1)
"60 seconds of speech that no one will remember the next day."

This didn't start in this thread. Five weeks BEFORE, the appointment has provoked outrage in the gay community and throughout the liberal blogosphere. It isn't about 60 seconds.

Obama apologists elsewhere cheer because they claim this will make Warren the "new face of evangelism" and somehow devalue Dobson. That's not an absurd view - at least the first part - given the dynamics of the media.

This choice of Obama, Feinstein, and others in the Party leadership has consequence.

I'm generally pretty free with '4's (to help make up for any bristliness in my text, perhaps). I was recommending Susan's observation that the left is more despised than the GOP by the Democratic Party (leadership, to be explicit).

[ Parent ]
Evidence? (0.00 / 0)
How does the Democratic Party's hatred of the left manifest itself?

[ Parent ]
Relative to the GOP? Let me count the ways. (0.00 / 0)
  1. The Congressional vote condemning MoveOn for its Petraeus ad while staying silent about right-wing ads
  2. The accolades to Sen. Corker from Reid, Dodd, etc. after he killed the carmaker rescue plan
  3. The refusal to support Democratic nominee Lamont followed by the grant of a Committee Chair to McCain campaigner Liberman

I could go on; you get the idea.
[ Parent ]
Move On was out of line! n/t (0.00 / 1)


www.KusterforCongress.com  
[ Parent ]
Trolled on what grounds? n/t (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
Back, huh? (4.00 / 1)
Trolled because Jack has been completely disruptive of honest discussion throughout at least this entire diary / thread. He posts little darts that don't address the post they respond to but intend to provoke. He mis-states, he dismisses concerns as trivial, he changes the topic from one posting to a conversation going on in a different blog.

You don't like the discussion in this thread. I think the problem is Jack's approach.

In this particular case he cut out half of one of my three points and effectively challenged me to focus on that or leave his post as the final word. I chose the TR instead.

[ Parent ]
Never left (4.00 / 1)
Procrastinating on shoveling.

Jack's view about MoveOn, while not my view, is shared by Thomas Ricks, author of Fiasco. If I recall correctly, Ricks said that "betrayal" is not a word one tosses around when discussing a military man. It's far too inflammatory, and anyone who condemned it was, in effect, defending the honor of all military personnel.

I think Jack's darts were trying to deflate the steam bubble in this thread, but I'll let him speak to that.

OK I really have to shovel. Good night all ...

[ Parent ]
It's a defensible view (4.00 / 1)
I'm not a big fan of MoveOn; I thought the ad was stupid but not offensive. (Military men who get into politics don't get a separate vocabulary from the rest of us.)

As I think an honest reading makes clear, my point was that MoveOn was singled out other ads at least as offensive, aimed at Dems, got a free pass.

[ Parent ]
General Petraeus (0.00 / 0)
at the time was in command of the Multi-National Force-Iraq. He is now in command of CENTCOM. He is NOT "into politics" in any capacity that his duties do not mandate.

I was particularly offended by Move-On's ad. They went for cheap theatrics. I get it, hell I defended it and so did the General.

I had moved on until you brought it up.

www.KusterforCongress.com  

[ Parent ]
Stop throwing baloney. (0.00 / 0)
He was speaking on behalf of the Administration. He was neck-deep in politics. Of course his duties mandated it.

And of course he sought and accepted those duties.


[ Parent ]
I wonder if he'll resign (0.00 / 0)
If he was serving a president, he'll resign. If he is serving our nation, he will stay on commanding CENTCOM and see through the shift to Afghanistan.

Unless, of course, Obama asks him to resign.

Maybe he'll run for senate in NH.

www.KusterforCongress.com  

[ Parent ]
.pdf version of rulebook? (0.00 / 0)
Who's got one?

Honest discussion? I saw a rant.

I actually support full GLBT rights, but this henny penny shit is political follies.

You /snarked, calling me a diplomat. You know I'm a soldier. Sniper, actually.

www.KusterforCongress.com  

[ Parent ]
OK (0.00 / 0)
The left is taken for granted, that is true. I would like to think we could be part of the change by changing that dynamic.

[ Parent ]
Haven't drank kool-aid since I was 8 (4.00 / 2)
and even then my mother cut the sugar in half, so it was never as sweet as it was supposed to be.

I'm not a cultist and I'm not a sugar-coater.  Do I like Rick Warren?  Nope.  Do I agree with what he has said about women, abortion, and sexuality?  Nope.

But is this inauguration about him?  Nope.  And the more the liberal left wing blogosphere goes on and on about this, the more it becomes about him.  

For me, I've been in Barack Obama's corner for a long time.  And I stood with him through the McClurkin "fiasco," et. al., and I believe he knows what he is doing.  He is not the left-wing, be all and end all progressive that some may hope him to be.  Remember, he is a pragmatist. He wants to build coalitions, he wants to bring people together; and if you exclude those on either extreme, there will be no center, no coalition by which to govern.

This inaguration isn't a "thank you" to those of us who worked hard to get Barack Obama elected, it isn't supposed to be for "us," but for all Americans.  Those people who didn't vote for Barack Obama, the right-wing Christian evangelicals? Well, they are Americans too, and he is their President too. To invite a VERY prominent minister, who in addition to doing a lot to end the scurge of HIV/AIDS and Poverty in Africa, also has a best-selling book, that a lot of Americans look to for guidance; to say a prayer of blessing at a national celebration, says to those Americans, "We might not agree on everything, but I am your President too, this inauguration isn't just for me, it's for you; and we will work together to make this country better.  We can talk to each other."

I know, he led the effort to pass Prop 8.  I know.  Again, not happy about it.  But, it's not my inauguration.  Could he have picked someone else?  Play it safe and stick with the Presidential Graham family? There's no choice that would have pleased 100% of the people.  

I am a feminist, and I have worked very hard for equal rights for GLBT Americans (and their immigrant partners), I am pro-choice; but I am not offended nor bothered by this.  

When President Obama repeals DOMA and Don't Ask Don't Tell, when he signs an immigration equality act (which will be unnecessary when DOMA is repealed, BTW, I think); and passes comprehensive hate crime legislation and signs comprehensive and transgender inclusive anti-discrimation laws... then perhaps people will stop saying that he pandered for LGBT votes.  Who BTW, weren't exactly in his corner until it was him against McCain.

If he doesn't do those above things, then I will be the first to join in the "You're sticking it to us" parade that some have started.  But he never promised not to talk to or associate with bigots, he never promised not to invite divisive characters to the inauguration, so once he starts going back on things he actually committed to do, then I'll cry "foul" with the rest of the left-wing blogosphere.  

But as for now, there are bigger problems facing this country then who gets to say a prayer when with who for what.  And I'm still confident that our President-Elect will guide us through those problems.

Feeling hopeful since 2004...

Well said n/t (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
There was nothing about cult in the diary (4.00 / 1)
That came in after our diplomat Mr. Mitchell joined the conversation to call the complaints whining.
[ Parent ]
No harm, no foul, Mr. Wood (0.00 / 0)
Just saying, I don't consider myself to be one.  I'll be the first to step out of line if and when the time comes, but it hasn't come yet.

Feeling hopeful since 2004...
[ Parent ]
And by Mr. Wood, I mean: (4.00 / 2)
Mr. El Wood.

Feeling hopeful since 2004...
[ Parent ]
In your opinion. (0.00 / 0)
I strongly believe you are wrong. The time has already arrived.

And it isn't a matter of talking to activists like Warren, or even of inviting them to the inauguration - as I think you know. That is a straw man. I would have found nothing wrong in that.

It is a question of giving a national honor to an activist like Warren. That is a different matter.


[ Parent ]
You know I respect you... (0.00 / 0)
so we'll just have to disagree on this one.  

I just worry what all this indignation accomplishes.  Who will we be able to have to head up the CIA?  Who is left?  Who has not worked for the agency in the last 8 years, that would have the credentials and experience that would pass the "blogosphere" litmus test.

I understand that people have legitimate concerns and that people feel passionately about ALL of these things.  But I do worry that sometimes we might be shooting ourselves in the feet; and there are miles to go...

Feeling hopeful since 2004...

[ Parent ]
WTF???? (0.00 / 0)
Did I say ANYTHING about the CIA? Here or elsewhere?

You just stereotyped me based on nothing at all.

[ Parent ]
No,no, no... (0.00 / 0)
Not you Elwood, I guess my post in this diary is all of my pent up feelings about the responses to a lot of the responses people have had to the transition.  In no way have any of my comments in this post been towards you directly... with the exception of the "You know I respect you..."

I was responding to the "netroots" the "liberal blogosphere" in general, not to BH or you specifically.  I'm simply saying that I'm starting to see a pattern in the way that either "the Left" is or is being portrayed as having a role to play in the choice for CIA head, and other decisions the Obama transition team is making.

I guess I should have let sleeping dogs lie, Elwood... Not being with power; and in this New Media, voice; for 7 days, when I logged on and read this diary and all of the comments back and forth between people who hold commond ideals and purposes; I felt the need to chime in.  To demonstrate that you can be Radical and Left and Progressive and not be crying mutiny.  That's all.

Sorry that I offended you.  I would hope that you would know that I wouldn't be attacking you.  Not my style, never has been, never wil be.  I think we should take JimC's suggestion and close this diary.  

Feeling hopeful since 2004...

[ Parent ]
It is about honoring (0.00 / 1)
the millions of folks that listen to him. Warren is a bridge. Or are we supposed to turn our backs on those folks?

Didn't Kelly say Obama is their President too?

The subtext I've heard is "We worked to get him to the WH. He belongs to us." Go to Kos. That theme is running in 3 out of 5 diaries.

Talk about Bologna.


www.KusterforCongress.com  

[ Parent ]
Hey, not fair (4.00 / 4)
Elwood and others here are saying that they object to Warren because he has expressed an outright anti-gay/lesbian attitude, not that "Obama belongs to us."  

"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    
[ Parent ]
On Kos, Kathy. (0.00 / 0)
That "us vs. them" mindset is prevailing on Kos. How do elwood and Susan not echo this.

They are drawing lines, not circles that include.

I have had 3 troll ratings, of which one was rescinded. Fair and passion seem not to be able to co-exist.

That's OK. This will peter out. It always does.

www.KusterforCongress.com  

[ Parent ]
I didn't troll rate you Jack (0.00 / 0)
and I'd say strongly that you're perpetuating just as much of an us vs. them mindset as anyone on Kos. Instead of attempting to understand, you're just ridiculing, stereotyping, and trying to shut down the discussion.

I like and respect you, but your attitude on this thread has been highly intolerant.  

[ Parent ]
Ditto (0.00 / 0)
Which is why I haven't set foot on the death penalty thread.

www.KusterforCongress.com  
[ Parent ]
Circles and Lines (4.00 / 1)
Well, if you believe in circles, then don't be so heavy handed with your own lines - and you know you can be heavy handed.  

I haven't gotten into the fight on the merits here, because on the one hand, having a homophobe invited to lead us in prayer is wrong, but on the other, I understand that Obama is trying to reach out to the entire population on a day of what is a national celebration of the peaceful transfer of power, not just a day for Democrats to dance in the streets singing ding dong the witch is dead.

Unfortunately, New England still seem to be in the minority when it comes to the recognition that the denial of civil rights on the basis of sexual orientation is morally indefensible. Susan is right - there are other people who could have been invited to do the prayer.  And Democrats do a hell of a lot more reaching out than the other party.  But, I am not going to skip the ceremony because of Warren. I'll bite my tongue and pray that he and the rest of the country come to see this as we do here. And wonder if I am being a hypocrite.  

"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

[ Parent ]
Perhaps I'm Wrong (0.00 / 0)
But when it comes to people and opinions, I think there are three types of people: fanatics (who can't change their mind upon further evidence to in response to something they've experienced), hypocrites (people who do change their mind (people who can change their mind to response to something they've experienced) and cowards (people who don't have their mind set on anything and/or don't experience anything).

Kathy, if you are a hypocrite, I think it's far less of a deal than you think because eventually we all are hypocrites it seems unless we're fanatics or cowards.

In the end, it seems best to have a good mix of all three.  

[ Parent ]
Post election dust up (0.00 / 0)
We shouldn't tip toe around here.

I think we were way to Kumbaya due to the election. Some discord can be constructive.

The push was returned and the chips are falling. It really does make for good blogging, no?

As a party leader, having to get everyone to work together, I can see how such talk would be troublesome. My apologies on that count. It should be clear that we all have way more in common, than we differ.

www.KusterforCongress.com  

[ Parent ]
Oh Lord, Kumbayahh....... (0.00 / 0)
To me, the difference between a debate and an argument is that when you have a debate with someone, you don't feel like you want to strangle them afterwards.

If discord comes in the form of debates rather than arguments, that's fantastic.  

[ Parent ]
Warren (4.00 / 1)
is a bridge to nowhere. He uses the building blocks of hatred.

If Obama wanted to build a bridge to evangelicals he could have asked Jim Wallis - an evangelical who is not a hatemongerer.

[ Parent ]
It's Not The Democrats Fault That Your Electricity Isn't Coming Back On (4.00 / 2)
Oh wait, sorry. That was last week on here.

After awhile blog rage begins to blur.  

I told you to close it, Dean :) (4.00 / 1)
Maybe I should close my piece of it. My turn to shovel anyway. Good night Blue Hampshire.
What I Assume Obama Is Thinking On This (Wasn't Sure If It Was Worth Another Diary) (0.00 / 0)
I can't be arrogant enough to say that I know for sure why Obama really went forward with inviting Warren to the inauguration, but here's my guess.

1. What Obama wanted to "Change" was not Democrat rather than Republican, but open minded rather than close minded:

If you're close minded towards the close minded, that makes you close minded. Sometimes it may be wise to be close minded in that situation, but not here for him, because he sees the political profit as greater than the political cost.

2. The base probably isn't going anywhere, and if they're mad about this, then that helps him paint himself as that model of "change".

If i'm wrong, who will or would want to run against him in 2012 and have a shot at winning?

Again, I think he's thinking a change from Bush isn't going from conservative to liberal but from going from ideological to pragmatist.

If he's portrayed as "betraying liberals", that helps him cast that identity as non-ideological. He's done that consistently with his cabinet choices.

3. Nobody ever agrees with everybody on everything.

Even issues as sensitive as Gay Marriage. Both probably look at this in terms of strategy rather than tactics if they see it politically, or they see it because they've developed a personal friendship.

For Warren, it's a no brainer since this is a huge honor regardless of what party the president is in.

Obama sees Warren as a conduit to reach out to both his immediate church as well as the conservative community, which will amplify his message of...

4. "Trust me, because you can't trust my opponents since they are not open minded. If they disagree with you on something, they will be your enemies, but I won't necessarily be your enemy if we disagree on something."

Generally, that's going to be Republicans, but I think he's thinking more in terms of the pragmatist/ideologue divide.

America dislikes ideologues right now since Bush exemplified ideology run amok and it got us into two wars without plans a recession and a government that can't function.

If Obama goes out of his way to support DOMA or Don't Ask Don't Tell, then that's a problem.

If the street isn't mostly one way and Warren tries to use Obama to spread his message more than Obama tries to use Warren to spread his message, then that's a problem.

Otherwise, I get where Obama is coming from here.

This invocation is disappointing, but a few months from now most of us are going to have forgotten this will have happened more than likely. At least, that's what I assume Obama is betting on.  

I Won't Be Watching the Inaugural | 132 comments
Connect with BH
     
Blue Hampshire Blog on Facebook
Powered by: SoapBlox