And the country survived that godawful poem with little permanent damage. We even survived the band striking up the Liberty Bell (MIDI file your system can play) as soon as Bill took the oath of office, though I saw its choice as a Bad Omen.
An inauguration is nothing but theater, and was never intended to be anything else.
Well, most of it.
I’m not sure where you are getting this accusation of arguing in bad faith; all of FriarTed’s comments have been consistent with his posts over the last few years.
Beyond that, the point is not so significant as to worry about whether it is proposed in good or bad faith.
I think you have each made your points on this particular issue and both of you should probably move on.
Leave it for the Pit.
[ /Modding ]
I’m no fan of Warren, but I can’t seem to get worked up about this at all. It’s not a cabinet post or something that will have any effect on the way the Obama administration will run the country. Like dropzone said, it’s just theatrics.
I also think Obama wants to (maybe just a little) stick it in the eye of the Hannity crowd - you know, the folks who have convinced themselves that Obama will be sworn in by Jeremiah Wright with a hand on the Koran.
My initial reaction was surprise, quickly replaced by respect for Obama’s acumen. It looks like the guy really does want to work with the “opposition”, to be “open-minded” (the essence of true “liberalism”). After fifteen years (or more) of the Republican take-no-prisoners approach to governance, Obama’s apparent openness is almost mind-boggling.
I now find myself thinking: if the Obama Administration can slog its way through the current economic mess, it has a shot at going on to be a “great” administration. (Probably will depend on whether the remaining fire-breathers on the right side of the aisle can lay down their shivs and try cooperation and compromise for a change. No wonder John Adams loathed the idea of partisan politics).
I’m not surprised–anyone who thought Obama supported progressive ideas was clearly not paying attention. Obama is yet another “Democrat” who will spend the next 4 years courting the right wing and continuing the corporatist polices of Clinton and Bush while showering contempt on the people who actually voted for him.
Obama’s support of homophobe Donnie McClurkin during the South Carolina primary campaign and his rhetoric against civil equality for gay people make it clear that ENDA and reversal of “don’t ask/ don’t tell” are now dead issues.
He’s still better than McCain/ Palin–but only because neglect is better than active persecution.
Someone on another board - might have been Kos or Open Left - thought that there’s some interesting symbolism, in that Bush still will be President when Warren speaks, and Obama will be President when Lowery speaks. Kind of a “here we are now” into a “here’s where we’re going” thing.
Amazingly many who voted for him are not those who are of the extreme left or single issue (gay rights) voters. Go figure. A bunch of those who are just left of center, solidly left but multi-issue, center, and even a bit right of center voted for him too. He couldn’t have won without 'em and he cannot get anything done without their support.
You are right though, this should surprise no one. He has made it clear that he wants to “disagree without being disagreeable”, that he wants to President of all of the United States of America, and has been quite clear that he is not as liberal as the Conservatives made him out to be. It should not be a surprise that he meant the kind words he said about Rev Warren when courting evangelical voters at Saddleback and respects his POVs even if he disagrees about many points.
Shocking this aint. A big deal it aint. A bit more in his political capital account - yeah, just a bit - but he’s going need every ounce he can get. I just hope he uses it as well as I and many others expect.
On the one hand, I am generally in favor of (pragmatic) reconcilement and an end to the toxic polarization that has poisoned our political discourse over the last couple of decades. So from that point of view, some degree of “reaching out” is welcome.
On the other hand, there are a lot of vipers in DC who simply can’t be “reached out to.” They have no interest in sharing the sandbox, and they will view an outstretched hand as an opportunity to grab the offerer and try to yank him over a cliff.
So while this is, to some extent, a noble gesture, it also strikes me as potentially naive. Obama needs to be very careful about how he does this, or he’ll look weak, and turn into a pushover. So far, he has been anything but a pushover, but this is worrisome.
I think its a smart move by Obama. He knows that a decent portion of the “heartland” might still think he’s a secret Muslim or at least still question his faith. By having a very respected, very conservitive, christian speak at the inaguration might help some of that go away.
Say what you will about Obama but he is not an idiot and he understands politics. The more I see of him the more I think of Bill Clintion. Which in my mind is not a bad thing.
I’ve been reading some conservative religious blogs today which are furious that Rick Warren is agreeing to associate with an advocate of baby-killing. So Obama has achieved balance in the Force.
Warren’s not really on the level of Dobson, Falwell or Robertson. His view of marriage and homosexuality pisses a lot of the left off, but it’s pretty mainstream for a Christian pastor. In other ways – his work with poverty, HIV/AIDS, environmental issues - he’s actually quite moderate (even liberal, relatively speaking).
He’s a good choice for Obama to make to say “We don’t have to agree on everything in order to work together on what we do agree on.”
I agree with the OP, but I would just add that I hope he has balls to call the right (and the left, to be sure) on their bullshit when necessary.
I’m a passionate supporter of Obama, and it was never because he was way more liberal than other politicians, but because of the way he seems to look at issues like a grownup, and the way he manages to be a politician and do political things without sinking into divisiveness. He isn’t Dennis Kucinich, and never claimed to be. His political views are fairly similar to those of the Clintons, for instance. What sets him apart is both his pragmatism and his morality.
I think having Rick Warren speak (in a purely symbolic role) is a completely reasonable thing to do. Obama wasn’t elected present of just-gays-and-liberals. He was elected president of the USA. A lot of people in the USA (many of whom voted for Obama, but more of whom didn’t) agree with and respect Rick Warren. Obama is their president.
It’s irritating emotionally because after 8 years of getting screwed by party X, and the American public finally voting them out of office, the last thing supporters of party Y want to see is a willingness to work with X and keep X included in the power structure. I’m sure that would apply to either party, hence the variables. (Obviously Warren isn’t in the power structure at all, but it’s potentially illustrative of Obama’s mindset which could carry over into the job once he takes it.)
Rationally, it probably is smart of Obama to be inclusive. At least one side has to be willing to stop fighting for the vicious cycle to stop. It stings now, but if the attitude in politics and among the citizens shifts to country before party as a result of Obama’s choices and decisions, it’ll be worthwhile.
And would you say the same thing if he had a leader of the KKK up there instead, because a lot of Americans are racist and “Obama is their president” too ?
Warren will talk for three minutes then be done. The people who follow him will give Obama credit for that. Win-win situation.
In the grand scheme of things, it means next to nothing.
I don’t like it mostly because it is an implicit endorsement of Warren’s message, and that message is one where I am as despised as rapists and pedophiles. There are hundreds of conservative preachers who have been less rabid in their anti-gay hate than Warren, so why weren’t one of them chosen? Why Warren over everyone else?
That said, I fully expect Obama to make lots of choices over the next 4+ years that I will vehemently disagree with, and this is simply one of them, and mostly simply a symbolic one. I’m not happy about it, but really how much does that matter?
No, nor would I say the same thing if he had the Nation of Islam or the pastor of NAMBLA up there. Rick Warren is a preacher who has views that are offensive to many people (one of them me) and are shared by many, not a terrorist or a hatemonger. (I know that some would disagree but they’re being oversensitive; Warren doesn’t advocate violence in any way or shape or form, while the KKK has played strong roles in, and been found liable in court for, several murders and other criminal activities.)
I’m gay and agnostic and I detest many of Warren’s views (as with Orson Scott Card it’s not his homophobia I mind half as much as his “Here’s why I’m not a homophobe” rhetoric which compounds it). I respect Obama’s decision to ask him to speak as a true symbol of unity. Obama’s not saying he agrees with Warren’s views on gays or Ahmedinejad or anything else, merely that he acknowledges his right to them.
And there’s absolutely nobody you can ask to lead invocation who isn’t going to offend millions of people. Get a Catholic, there are people who will be outraged by the fact he’s Catholic, get a Baptist- same story, get a Mormon- ooh, you really just stepped in it, get the Dalai Lama and you’ll have people saying he’s New Age wacko, get a Metro. Community Minister and you’ve given the Christian Right ammo for their next 800 pledge drives. I’m sure if Mr. Rogers (ordained Presbyterian) was still alive and Obama somehow got him to say the prayer, somebody would get worked up.
This is another “let’s save some outrage for something that matters” matter to me. If Obama appoints an anti-gay/anti-abortion conservative to the Supreme Court- that matters, but I think we’ll see the Frost Giants setting fire to the Midwest first.
this is what i thought as well. he has both sides represented.
obama is a very smart man who looks for the highest common denominator in people and in ideas. i’m confident he knows exactly what he is doing with both speakers.
I thought Rev. Wright (“God damn America!”) would be more appropiate.
Agreed. I’m not concerned about it at all. The only ones have seen complaing are the talking heads on CNN. They’re Whining, IMO. Get over it. No one will care about the invocation in 3 months.