-
Website
http://www.americablog.com/ -
Original page
http://www.americablog.com/2008/12/feinstein-reportedly-had-nothing-to-do.html -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
All Comments
Barry the Pandering Politician can paint this outhouse with as many shades and colors that he wants, but it's still full of shit.
I won't be watching the inauguration.
In the animal rights community, we learned to count more on Durbin than Obama, who tended to buy whatever Big Agriculture told him.
Well, he can't use the "I didn't know" excuse this time, can he?
It is quite obvious that Obama feels that anti-gay bigotry is an acceptible viewpoint. He feel it is worth discussion, because maybe the anti-gays are right, i guess. At least that is the message he sends with moves like this.
In reality, this is nothing more than pandering to a large voting block.
When will the time come for powerful leaders to stand up to this kind of bigotry because it is WRONG? LBJ finally did it to sign civil rights legislation into law when it was very unpopular and cost him any chance of re-election. But, he did it anyway because it was the right thing to do.
The Supreme Court did it in Loving vs Virginia to strike down laws banning inter-racial marriage even though the majority opposed that decision.
When will people like Obama, who claim to not hold these anti-gay bigotted views, stand up for what is right even if it is unpopular?
You can invite the bigots into the big tent and be willing to talk to them without giving them a seat of honor at the table,
Please explain how Hillary was any better.
The majority of Californians sadly agreed with Warren. Do we just say to the majority that we do NOT want to associate with you? Or, do we work on finding ground and trying to change minds??? Do you not think that those who really admire Warren (and agree with his views on gayness) won't embrace this decision and then be really supportive of Obama's economic policies, etc even if they still disagree on the gay thing???
Why is this a surprise? Obama has said he wants to reach out to all people and find common ground. I highly doubt Warren will be speaking about those "social issues" that we disagree on. He's there to pray.
And, John, my guess is that you (unlike Warren) do not give 90% of your money to charity and have not devoted your life to fighting poverty. So the man is not all evil. He has done more for poverty and hiv/aids, etc than most of you have.
There has never been a "First Class" section on any cattle car.
If Obama is "reaching out to all people" how pray tell is reaching out the LGBT community...by uttered the word "gay" in his election acceptance speech? Should we all be awed by that??
Again, he speaks for millions of our fellow citizens who, when it comes to gay marriage and abortion and other issues besides, are, from our perspective, misguided.
But you are misguided if you think we're going to make our country and this world a significantly better place for all of us by getting our high and mighty ya yas out on the likes of Rick Warren. We ought to be trying to bring these folks along, not squash them or ignore them or condemn them. That's what I've done in my own family and in my workplace. You have too, actually. Obama's ready to do it on a national scale. Face it, he's bigger than you are. You wouldn't have placed a courtesy call to Ileana Ros Lehtinen either.
If Obama puts Rick Warren in a position of policy-making or policy-implementing authority, I'll scream loud and long. But he's not going to do that. And if you think he might, well, you're playing politics like a child.
The adversaries of the LGBT community are based in Newt territory. Obama is moving into Newt-land and further away from Democratic America, his cabinet choices bear out that Obama is no Democrat. Just like Clinton, Obama is another right-winger masquerading as a Dem, and doesn't need my support.
And besides, bringing a law suit about marriage equality, was NOT my point. If Obama is embracing inclusiveness, then why hasn't he invited a liberal member of the clergy, a rabbi, imam, Hindu priest, Buddhist in order to balance out the rantings of a far-right winger? The ideal choice would have been to skip the religious overtones & have the national poet laureate speak instead.
Obama can't build unity unless he keeps the people who support him.
My concern now is more on the economy... if it gets real bad out there and people are struggling, theyre going to be angry and I don't want to deal with angry, hungry, unemployed and homeless people en masse...
I think thats more important than gay marriage right now... but if you want to get married and can't then do like I told the person below.. begin a lawsuit and take your case to the supreme court...
Its about Obama making a relatively simple change in his inauguration plans to show that he isn't isolating the gay community. Choosing a new person to do the invocation isn't a multi-step, multi-billion, time-consuming act like fixing the economy is. Like he said when McCain tried to weasel out of the first debate, "presidents should be able to do more than one thing at a time".
We don't cease being human beings with real concerns that need to be addressed just because Obama has a lot of work to do. We're not asking him to drop everything and single-handedly make gay marriage legal on January 20th, we're asking him to respect our feelings and recognize the effort and sacrifice we made to get him elected because evangelical community he's kissing up to right now surely didn't. Sorry, but this is a punch in the face.
I still support Obama. I still want him to do great things for this country. But that doesn't mean I have to blindly agree with every choice he makes, and that doesn't mean I have to withhold any criticism. Lord knows thats what we've been doing for the past 8 years and look where its gotten us.
The Warren thing sends a strong message that the Obama administration frankly doesn't give a crap either.
This isn't just about Gay marriage - it's about the way that Gays are discriminated against in the workplace, discrimination against Gays and Lesbians in health care, the way that Internet filtering and censorship impacts freedom of speech and expression by Gays and Lesbians, and it's about the likes of Warren to basically give permission to society for violence against Gays and Lesbians.
It's difficult to let go when you're basically faced with someone who talks of you as if you're less than human.
Sure, I voted for Obama, but didn't expect much - more a continuation of the "ignore the Gays" policies from the Clinton years. I'm appalled that he's invited a divisive and political figure spouting Jerry Falwell's rhetoric to participate in the Inauguration.
His cabinet are all moderate Republicans, not a single Real Democrat, he's even hired Paul Volker, the architect of the Reagan Recession and one of the anti-Americans that dismantled Alexander Hamilton's plan for a strong America through manufactures.
No surprises here, just another Republican pretending to be a Democrat, one of hundreds in Congress...
Along with Mr. Obama's choices for administrative posts, that have thus far come from the center or center-right, I find myself deflated from my initial high of his election. I can not help wondering why no progressives or liberal have been appointed to any key positions. At this point in time, his administration is looking like what I would have expected from a Hillary victory in November.
Raising progressives/liberals expectations for one thing & then switching to the old Clinton model of the 90's isn't the way to maintain our support.
Give us some proof that Obama is not just another Democrat kowtowing to the vociferous conservative minority in this country. Be the president we've all dreamed & HOPED you would be!
Religion is a negative, not a positive, in the scheme of things But, if people want to be continuously hoo-dooed by religion, we will be forever fighting about who deserves rights and who doesn't.
Study history. I'm ashamed that our "leaders" are so parochial.
"A spokeswoman for President-elect Barack Obama defended the choice of Rick Warren to give the invocation, saying it reflects Obama’s desire to have “the most open and inclusive inauguration in history.” Obama's selection of Warren drew heated criticism from gay activists Wednesday.
“Warren has been a passionate advocate on behalf of the poor and has really led evangelicals to champion the interest who suffer from HIV and AIDS and been an outspoken voice on issue of global warming,” said Linda Douglass. “President-elect Obama has made it clear that he doesn’t agree with Warren on issues around the LGBT community.” Douglass said it’s notable that Joseph Lowery, who has been a strong advocate for civil rights for all and was a close friend of Martin Luther King, is giving the benediction."
If this is nothing more than a move for inclusiveness, then who is being included with a "racist" or "anti-semitic" point of view as John asks?
But that's the problem. He and Rick Warren are friends. They have talked for years. And Obama didn't think this one through to see how offensive it would be to the LGBT community.
Obama didn't grow up in a church, and since he quit Trinity UCC, he has no minister "group" he can claim. Hence, he chooses a friend who may have said some extremely offensive things but has also made headway in other areas. No way is Warren in the same category of a James Dobson or that ilk.
I shake my head, but he'll still be my president.
But, I suppose, if one has to be "strategic" and give a nod to religious nutcases than one might as well do it for something completely meaningless like an inauguration ceremony. I personally think all religions are stupid and the religious are deluded, which is also why I don't much care for ceremonies of any type, especially the kind where a priest asks for the protection and acquiescence of an Imaginary Friend. This particular priest sucks, but it at least he is not going to be Secretary of Defense
Hillary's been against gay marriage and supported the defense of marriage act.
I don't mind you ripping Obama, but all the PUMAs jumping up and down trying to change Hillary's history are pretty nauseating.
Yes, I voted for Obama - although had it not been for Sarah Palin, I had planned to not vote at all. Many of us were VERY upset when Obama campaigned with that black homophobe preacher (blocked his name from my memory, and don't care to know it again) - so much so that we were wary of anything this man has to say. And - here we are again - at inauguration no less - being pissed on by this "hero" so many of you worshiped.
But as much as we can blame Obama for this, the blame is squarely our own - for allowing this corrupt, ineffective, perverted system of "democracy" get to this point of institutionalized cronyism. Obama picked this man to speak for one reason - Warren holds power, and Obama, being equally (if not more) power hungry, will pander to anyone who has power to get a piece of it himself.
NONE of this will change until we stop supporting either side of the "same ol' same ol'" crowd.
And as for the retaliation for Prop 8 thus far, since none of what has been tried has been successful thus far, I shall try (once again) to propose a much more effective solution: all of us, and I do mean all of us, removing EVERY DIME we have in the stock markets on the same day AND running the banks as well. This is what we SHOULD HAVE threatened to do when it became obvious in the days before the election that we would lose Prop 8 - "Take away our rights, and we'll take our money out of your banks and your 401ks."
The only thing these people learn from is PAIN - and there's no better way to hurt them than with their pocketbooks.
I say we use this tactic now - especially since many pro-choice hetero women are just as pissed as we are about Herr Warren. If Warren speaks, we WILL send the economy to the ocean floor.
From "Yes We Can" to "Oh Yes, WE WILL"
Didn't think so. What a foolish idea, "Pragmatist". Oh and the majority of Americans don't actually own any stock, and if they do it's in a pre-tax retirement account that cannot be liquidated without a serious financial whack.
Now, a day of zero spending? that'd get someone's attention.
And talk about a "foolish" idea: "zero spending day"? Good grief, let's just give the right-wing Nazis a good talking to again - THAT'll show 'em. It's wimpy-ass responses like this that are getting us NO WHERE. Getting what we want means SACRIFICE. Do you think black people in the Birmingham bus boycott whined about the "whack" they got - losing their jobs, many of them? NO - because the sacrifice, in the long term, was WORTH IT.
Obama has spelled out his reasons for being against same-sex marriage numerous times. As early as his 2004 Senate campaign, he stated:
"I'm a Christian. And so, although I try not to have my religious beliefs dominate or determine my political views on this issue, I do believe that tradition, and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman."
He reiterated his beliefs during the forum moderated by Rick Warren in August of 2008:
"I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. Now, for me as a Christian, it's also a sacred union. You know, God's in the mix."
Obama does not see himself, or someone like Rick Warren, as a bigot or homophobe. According to him, it is acceptable to be against equal rights for GLBT people:
"There are good, decent, moral people in this country who do not yet embrace their gay brothers and sisters as full members of our shared community" (November 2007).
Given these statements, I do not see why the gay community so enthusiastically supported his campaign. I did not vote for Obama because I felt he was a friend of the GLBT community. I voted for him because I thought his candidacy was less objectionable than McCain's. While I am hopeful about what Obama might do to improve the lives of GLBT people during the next four years, I have low expectations.
David
------- Original message from "Disqus" <>: --------------
"This time, though, the decision to get involved with Saddleback was actually not Obama's. The Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies, run by the House and Senate, put together the program for the swearing-in ceremony. Congress, not Obama, invited Warren (as well as scheduling a musical performance by Aretha Franklin; here's hoping she doesn't reprise the 2005 inaugural performance of John Ashcroft's "Let the Eagle Soar")."
If I were you I would dig a little further to get the true story here.
I guess women will join LGBT in the back of the bus.
Exclusion, anyone?
Many GLBT community members, including myself, assumed alot of things about Obama without looking for the real examples. I still support Obama but I feel he needs to rapidly move on a few GLBT issues to show true support. Unfortunately, I put the chances of that as no greater than 50/50. After 8 years of Bush, we were hungry for something/anything...maybe we as a community didn't hold his feet to the accountability fire enough during the election. Several instances, starting with at-large delegate selection and ignoring previously agreed quota's, happened here in Georgia but we still got on the train...and this is from someone who was onboard from the steps of Springfield in 2007.
Unfortunately though, the alternative would have been a McCain/Palin inauguration...like going from the pan to the fire.
or throw your shoes.
I think the glbt aspect of this decision is bad enough. But Warren's condescending and confrontive treatment of Obama at the Saddleback forum, not to mention his way of responding to the 'cone of silence' business was reprehensible, and should have disqualified him from consideration.
I just don't get it.
Same thing with Prop 8. We sat on our asses and expected to win in spite of horrible leadership and when we lost everyone is singing the blues.
"We have met the enemy and he is us!"
Then we get to find out who is louder, a bigot with a microphopne of the voice of the people speaking in unison?
I think I basically got what I expected. I'm not pleased that Rick Warren plans to give the invocation, but that doesn't mean I'm surprised.
Regarding Prop 8, TV advertising can only be a supplement to a face-to-face campaign, so when I went to California in September, I spoke at the church in which I was raised.
http://art.magneticcarpet.com/node/76
I stood in front of the congregation. Some of the young members were liberal, but some members complained about disadvantages that gay couples would have in raising children or about the slippery slope to legalizing bestiality and incest.
Unfortunately, I'm a student in New Jersey, so I can't always speak face-to-face with people from my hometown. Monetary donation was more of a realistic way for me to contribute to No on Prop 8. I donated $1010 knowing that the margins had disintegrated to a statistical dead heat since the summer so that donations might in the end do nothing more than minimize the margin of loss--I did not realistically expect our donations, at that point, to guarantee a win. Life is not a Disney movie. Our English language includes the word "failure" because we need a word to describe those situations in which our best is not good enough.
I would not be surprised to find myself spending a similar amount of time and money on a similar campaign two years down the road (maybe just a bit less--it's physically exhausting). However, I would probably prefer to invest in both channels earlier in the election cycle. I have spoken at obscene length with a fundamentalist from the church in which I was raised
http://art.magneticcarpet.com/node/76
If possible, I would prefer that someone like David Plouffe supervise the campaign.
Answer: PROTEST AND MAKE NOISE! Ensure EVERYONE knows how unacceptable this is... We need to get organized and do something. The time of taking us for granted and throwing us under the bus is SO OVER!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger_Strike
Want to prove to the world we are serious about our rights? HUNGER STRIKE.
After reading all the comments, I kinda feel the same way. Other than the suggestion to pull all of our money out of the bank, there's not a lot of ideas about what we can do to change or impact the situation. I certainly don't have the answers but there's a lot of intelligent people out there reading John's blog. Let's come up with an action plan and DO something (just like we did with Microsoft years ago). Now that's change I can believe in!
Boycott
Marches
Hunger Strikes
Especially Hunger Strike. Our community needs to start showing we are serious about challenges to our equality by having us Hunger Strike! They are effective...
I WILL HUNGER STRIKE over this. I am OVER having my life and family treated like pariahs in this society.
I need a group of other people willing to do the same. I watched the movie, "MILK" and he asked himself, "I'm 40 and what have I done that is important this last forty years? Well, I'm 43 and I'm ready to do something to move my community and family forward." A hunger strike would prove we aren't just about "sex" and "hedonism." This is about EQUAL RIGHTS, dammit. This is about the family's we have created and need our protection. It is time for a good ol' fashioned HUNGER STRIKE and I WILL DO IT. We need to get a group of us together who are willing to make this non-violent protest... This is bigger than just us. This is about the kids many of us are trying to protect.
By the way, I read Warren's idiotic response about helping gays who were infected with HIV. So the hell what?!!? I delivered AIDS baskets to a bunch of hispanic families that had ONE or BOTH parents who were HIV positive last week in Tulsa, OK. Most of those family's had CHILDREN and one was a GRANDMOTHER so I don't need Saddleback trying to lay any guilt on me about HIV and gays. Tell it to the hispanic families who have it, and by the way are too repressed by the Catholic church to even tell their friends and family they are infected!
show no quarter john...
Get over it!
You guys are starting to act and sound like the Rethug losers you didn't stand up to in the last 8 years by jumping all over him and demanding that "Obama must do this" or "Obama must do that" as if he was elected solely as a left-wing, progressive puppet rather than a representative of all Americans (including LGBT Americans), including those that did not vote for him even before the man takes office. It's getting extremely annoying and it's not helping.
Let it go and stop the whining and trust the man you supported.
You may have voted for Obama as your personal lord and savior, but the rest of us voted for a politician we expect to hold accountable. It you Obama cultists that need to get over it.
btw...guess who has always been there for the gay and lesbian community...that's right...Hillary Clinton...she would not have insulted you this way...you can bet your life on that...
It didn’t matter to you when Obama threw women under the bus, why are you surprised now that you are joining the crowd under the bus. People who don’t stand up for human rights for all shouldn’t be surprised when they are excluded too.
I just searched your site and saw no stand from you about Obama's speechwriter and his frat boy attempts to demean the future Secretary of State. I'm not surprised. You can't see beyond yourself and your issues. Again, if you can't support human rights for all, don't be surprised when someone denies your rights.
A reading of history might help you, then maybe you would have seen this coming and made better choices.
“In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist;
And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;
And then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew;
And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up.”
Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984)
I won't abandon my GLBT friends this time or any other time. Our humanity is measured by how we care for the weakest and downtrodden of us. That's paraphrased from the bible, which you are apparently also unfamiliar with.
In the Judeo-Christian-Muslim religion, the prophets came to reform people like the Brokeback pastor, for their exclusion of others, not to endorse them.
Obama, You are not worthy to sit in Reverend Wrights church. Go worship with the nutjobs where you apparently belong. I can't believe you can raise your kids this way.