Today - NY Times "...President-elect Barack Obama has found himself enmeshed in a new controversy "

[Sarah Ibarruri]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/20/us/politics/20warren.html?ref=us

Mr. Obama’s forceful defense of Mr. Warren, the author of “The Purpose Driven Life,” has signaled an intent to continue his campaign’s effort to woo even theologically conservative Christians. As his advisers field scores of calls from Democrats angry because Mr. Warren is an outspoken opponent of abortion and same-sex marriage, Mr. Obama has insisted that a range of viewpoints be expressed at the inauguration festivities next month in Washington.


My personal question: Is Mr. Obama going to have Baptist preachers who also happen to be KKK members, at the inauguration expressing their points of view?

[GarbagemanLB]

1. Wow. Haven't heard this argument before.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

10. Not from the NY Times - everyone is discussing Obama's refusal to remove this homophobe

Evidently, Obama strongly agrees with this man's beliefs.

[Windy]

16. that is totally ridiculous!!! He is the most gay friendly president this country has ever had.

He will work to bring about civil rights for lgbt americans. His nominated secretary of labor stated yesterday that one of her priorities is to bring equal rights to gays in the workplace. She is stating the president elects agenda.

Why do you insist on throwing the baby out with the bath water for a 2 minute prayer aimed at bringing a very large portion of the country who are very conservative, to the table during Obama's time in Washington? Obama has plainly stated that he doesn't agree with Warren but respects his work for the poor, etc. If you want to make changes, you have to bring the majority who are against the changes you want to enact, into the fold. While the population of DU is strongly in support of gay rights, the majority of the rest of the country is not. We need to work with those we disagree with on the things that we can agree on then while doing that, bring them around to our way of thinking or get them to be at least reasonable relative to the issues we disagree on. As a larger example, Iran does sponsor terrorism which results in the death of multitudes of people. They discriminate against women and treat them as 3rd class citizens and chattel. Honor killings are acceptable. They are anti-semitic. Obama campaigned on bringing them to the table, talking to them in an effort to get them to come to the right way of thinking...the lgbt community and many in the country vigorously supported that approach during the campaign. That has ALWAYS been Obama's method. To work with those on the other side to bring about change. That is why I voted for him!

[Sarah Ibarruri]

17. Oh yeah! He's SO gay friendly! It's very clear from his refusal to remove the homophobe just how

gay friendly he is.

[Windy]

21. You are so blinded by hatred. You do not help the cause. Thank god reasonable minds are in power.

I'm sorry, but your hatred and anger will do nothing to bring about the changes you seek. Thank god adults are in charge. If Obama had your attitude, he could set back enacting gay rights for a decade. The majority of the country is not for gay rights and radical reactionary tactics are not the way to change the minds of those who are not in your corner.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

22. Oh? He's the one that loves the homophobe, but I am blinded by ANGER?

Nice turn around on a situation. Congrats.

[Binka]

27. Radical Reactionary Tactics Make Change Dear

It is historical. Sorry you are so naive. BTW shut down your hatred and anger meme. Grown ups know how to get things done. A further BTW what the fuck is the cause?

[ecstatic]

43. can you give me an example of a past president with a great record

on gay rights?

[Sarah Ibarruri]

49. This man has run on hurting no one. Prop 8 has just been passed - one of its organizers was this

so-called preacher, Warren. GAYS were instrumental in fighting to get Obama elected. In FACT, the organizer of our local Obama campaign group IS GAY, for godssakes. This man didn't sleep, eat, or rest fighting to get Obama elected. And now Obama does this. What a sick thing to do.

[geek tragedy]

23. When he ends DODT, DOMA, etc then we can praise his

pro-GLBT record has president.

[alwysdrunk]

44. He'll still be a bigot to some DUers

And that is very sad.

[Tesha]

60. Wake me when he actually *DOES* those things -- I won't be holding my breath. (NT)

[Bucky]

32. Avrosis from AmericaBlog made a very similar argument Thursday

Obama reaches out to a prominent homophobe, because he wants to be everybody's president. But when has he reached out to any prominent racists?

http://www.americablog.com/2008/12/when-has-obama-ever-reached-out-to.html

When has Obama ever reached out to a racist?

I'm reading a lot about how Obama "reaches out" to his adversaries, and that's why he's building a track record of inviting avowed homophobes to stand front and center at his campaign events and now his inauguration.

Okay, I'm game. So we know being a gay-basher doesn't disqualify you from a seat at the Obama table - in fact, it seems to be an outright qualification for proving Obama's post-partisanship. If Obama prides himself on reaching out to all sides of every debate, then why is it that Obama has never sat down with, or promoted at his events, an avowed racist or anti-Semite?

[WillParkinson]

2. Now you're just being silly....

It's only OUR enemies. Not his.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

3. Obviously Obama likes this man - and he's a pig fully against civil rights for women and gays

I'm well aware of that. Did you think I wasn't?

[WillParkinson]

5. Not in the least...

That's my point. The reason you won't see the group you mentioned above is because those are his enemies. He won't consort with them. It's just fine to make play dates with ours, though.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

7. Obama is refusing to remove that homophobic-anti-woman pig from his inauguration

That is very significant to many people because it says a LOT about Obama which no one realized before.

That is not change he convinced us to campaign for. That is the same shit Bush does. Obama is another McSame.

[otohara]

13. Yep

nothing to see here....move on. agree to disagree. so what?

i just hope the man gets a million boos when his fat ugly face pops up on the monitors.

[marylanddem]

4. Thanks for posting, Sarah - Mr. Warren should withfuckingdraw

[Sarah Ibarruri]

9. No. Mr. Obama needs to remove him. He was the one that invited him nt

[QC]

11. Warren's in the catbird seat. Why would he withdraw? n/t

[Sarah Ibarruri]

18. Warren's happy. In fact, he congratulated Obama for keeping cool despite the "heat" he's taking

from his base.

How insulting Obama is being to the people that got him elected.

[QC]

24. Warren is about to get the position he's been campaigning for for years:

America's Pastor.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

46. Thanks to Obama the U.S. will have a homophobe who fought for prop 8 as pastor

Isn't that lovely.

[Zuiderelle]

6. can't help but be reminded of the many times Bush brushed off criticism by saying something like:

“That’s part of the magic of this country, is that we are diverse and noisy and opinionated,” Mr. Obama said.

What a shame.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

8. Then why isn't he having an anti-black speaker? he's having an anti-gay speaker

and one that is against civil rights for women with respect to their bodies

[Zuiderelle]

14. I agree. Equal time and all. We're a diverse nation, we should include everyone.

[elkston]

20. Sorry, but you know in your gut they are different types of "diversity".

It is not acceptable in ANY WAY, to discriminate based on race.

[mondo joe]

26. Thank you for admitting your double standard, and Obama's fib.

[JohnnieGordon]

30. It annoyed me that Skinner didn't bring up that double standard in his official statement

That means from the top down, they're not getting it, or they're being willfully blind to their hypocrisy.

[mondo joe]

31. With respect and fondness to Skinner, I think it's abundantly clear that DU has

its own double standard.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

57. Oh REALLY? Well, FYI there was a time when people said it was perfectly fine because the Bible said

that black people had the mark of Cain.

It was AGAINST evangelicals that believed this claptrap, that civil rights was pushed through the courts and black people provided with equal rights.

[QC]

12. No way! Everybody knows it's just a few whiny PUMA queers on DU

who are driving this whole thing.

:sarcasm:

[sniffa]

15. I'm hoping he has the corpse of Jeffrey Dahmer there

Yeah, I went there.

[rug]

48. Cheney will be on the platform.

[HamdenRice]

19. The dog whistling continues!

Now THAT'S a winning strategy! Carry on!

[Frank Booth]

25. You have to come up with some more talking points.

I've seen your "personal question" asked at least 50 different times now.

Sorry to clue you in, but the novelty died down a while ago. A couple days ago the mass spamming of this board was vaguely interesting -- now it's just annoying.

[Honeycombe8]

28. Your post is deceptive. Warren is not going to "express his views" at the invocation

or at least his views of homosexuality and women being second class and such. He's just there to do an invocation prayer thingie. Not give a speech on his controversial viewpoints.

But no, Obama wouldn't have a KKK member do his invocation, whether or not the KKK member expressed his views about being KKK.

But most people don't equate ministers who view homosexuality as sinful (which is most ministers in the country) with the domestic terrorist group KKK.

[nichomachus]

39. It's just a "thingie"

Thanks for belittling the rights and feelings of millions of people. What arrogance.

If it's just a "thingie," then cancel it altogether -- scratch it right off the program.

It's so insignificant that nobody will complain and the gays will be happy. So, canceling Warren would be a win-win.

[Honeycombe8]

52. Obama is religious. If you didn't want a religious President, you could've voted for Ron Paul.

Obama has chosen a minister to do the invocation.

This is normal. This is tradition. Quit acting like this is some bizarro-world "thingie" Obama has done.

Okay, you don't like his views as they apply to YOU. Would you be kicking up a storm if it were any other minister who was okay with gay rights, but still held the view that women are second class? No, you wouldn't. Because THAT'S what we have had every invocation ever....and continuing through this one.

It's time to pick your battles and realize what's important. A traditional "thingie" means nothing. As opposed to what you stated, he will not be "expressing his views." You lied. Hard to feel for the position of someone, when they lie.

[nichomachus]

53. Re-read my post

You totally misunderstood what I was saying.

People are claiming that the invocation is insignificant. My point is that it's not insignificant. If it were, we could just cancel it.

The point is that it's very significant and that's why choosing Warren is so bad.

[Matt_in_STL]

56. I completely agree

I also agree that we need to cancel the benediction by Rev. Lowery. As an atheist, both his and Warren's beliefs that I am going to an eternal life of hellfire and damnation are not a message of inclusiveness that we as progressives should expect.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

29. i find this amusing because so many threads here seem to think its only a few of us who are angry

i guess 30 LGBT duers have a lot of voice in the media

[LeftCoast]

33. "For his part, Mr. Warren is increasingly being spoken of as a kind of minister to the nation"

Thanks Obama!

That's change I can believe in!

:sarcasm:

[polichick]

34. That's exactly why this is such a dangerous decision.

[LeftCoast]

35. This is what the apologists around here choose to ignore

But it always seems to be easy for people to look past discrimination when it doesn't directly effect them.

[polichick]

36. It's interesting to watch them - sort of a desperation to believe that...

Obama is infallible.

[BeyondGeography]

37. Shaddup already

What an embarassment.

[ananda]

38. Obama denounced and distanced himself from Rev Wright..

.. even though Wright'm messages were
mostly right on.

And here he connects himself with Rev.
Warren, whose views and actions are
totally reprehensible in every way.

Wrong is wrong.. and what Obama is doing
in inviting Warren is absolutly and totally
wrong.

[nichomachus]

40. That's because Obama has no loyalty

except to his own ambition. Everyone should take heed from this.

Today he's slapping the gays around. Tomorrow, it will be another group.

I would rather have a president I oppose than one who pretends to support me, but whose support I can't count on.

[GarbagemanLB]

41. I agree with you. It is too bad McCain lost.

:rofl:

[nichomachus]

54. Ah -- taking diection from the Freepers again, I see

That's the same line they used when we criticized torture in Iraq, or don't you remember.

Do you remember how many time we were asked if we'd rather have Saddam back in power?

Same question, different name.

Still as stupid as when they used it.

[Captain Hilts]

42. This is the 3rd go 'round with Mr. Obama and bigoted preachers. nt

[Hansel]

45. Obama uses preachers for acceptance.

As an outsider raised by a white family and coming from Harvard he needed Wright and Father Pfleger to gain acceptance into the inner city black community. Chicago is a tough audience. He got what he needed from them and when they became a liability, he separated himself.

Now he wants to unite America so he needs Warren. He doesn't really pay attention to what these guys stand for nor does he care. Warren is a means to an end and he just needs him as a bridge to people who he wants to accept him. His ultimate goal: Put an end to the right's social resistance in order to get his policies enacted and to unite America.

I'm not saying his motivations are bad, but I don't believe for one second that Obama is the organized religion type. I think he is a spiritual person as his mother taught him to be and I'm guessing there isn't a church out there that fully satisfies his spiritual beliefs.

[lordcommander]

47. BINGO! n/t

[Captain Hilts]

51. He sat in Wright's church for 20 years and dedicated a book to him. nt

[mondo joe]

55. People excuse evil of all sorts if it's wrapped in religion.

I'm not excusing it.

[JerseygirlCT]

50. I'm frustrated by the way this is being played in the media, too

this isn't a case of bringing opposing ideas together to discuss. I'm all for that. I'm all for talking to those in the religious right and finding agreement in areas and working there. All that is very good, IMO.

But that's not what's happening, and those upset by this aren't upset by him talking with the right, or being willing to listen to them. Which is how too many articles on this topic make it seem. It's not that we're universally opposed to exposure to a range of viewpoints.

But at the inauguration? In such a position of honor? THERE'S the problem.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

58. Exactly nt

[anonymous171]

59. lol social wedge issues

I'm more concerned about Obama economic advisers than about who gives an invocation at Obama's inauguration.