DISQUS

RevDrBillyBob · 11 months ago

There were those of us who kept saying that Obama was NOT progressive ... on this or other issues. BUT there were those who just chose not to pay attention. Here it is: WE TOLD YOU SO.

cowboyneok · 11 months ago

Yes, but there were also those who claimed President Clinton was progressive on gay issues and he proved how easily he would compromise or throw us under the bus every time. We waited his entire administration until it was too late to move forward. The "leaders" in the LGBT community made some movement forward but there is a new breed of us "over forty" LGBT crowd who aren't going to just sit on our hands during this administration. OUT TIME HAS COME and no one is going to continue to withhold our civil rights without consequences.

ThingsComeUndone · 11 months ago

John Obama has gotten played this is no coincidence. I do not know what the Rev Warren promised Obama but I do know that Warren wanted to be in this position.
Now either way Warren wins Obama loses and is seen as a loser.
Option 1 Obama acts like Bush and stays the course Gay support dries up.
Option 2 The Rev Warren claims he was let go from the White House prayer because the Gays control Obama.
Tactically Obama is screwed best thing to do is say that the Rev Warren led him on and that he fell for it like a drunk Sailor pawing a Transvestite.

cowboyneok · 11 months ago

Obama was in control of this. If he was played, he was WILLFULLY played or too stupid for words. No one forced him or his team to invite a bigot, like Warren, to stand before the American people as a spiritual leader to "set the tone" of the inauguration. Personally, I think Obama did it as a "wink and nod" to the Talibangelicals that he was going to support their causes of preventing the LGBT community from realizing our civil rights. Personally, I think he thinks he can continue to maintain the status quo while promising our community he is a "fierce advocate" for us but its "just not possible to 'allow us' to realize our civil rights at this time." Personally, I hope I am wrong but I've seen this play before and I don't like the ending.

Oh yeah, and until I see Obama letting some David Duke type preacher get up there, and pray I don't want to hear all that claptrap about allowing "different opinions at the table." The disagreement about equality and civil rights was over a long time ago its just that some still think civil rights are somehow "social issues" all of the sudden.

ThingsComeUndone · 11 months ago

I'm good with "too stupid for words" Yes Obama thought he could Sister Souljah Gays and get away with it.
But did Obama expect the GOP to try and nullify already existing Gay Marriages before he even got to the White House?
A move which will change the math behind Obama's previous calculation to screw the Gays, the ante just got upped Obama does not win now even using his numbers.
The question is now is Obama smart enough to fold a hand or do we have another Gambler President to Dumb and Prideful to fold a losing hand?

RitornaVincitor · 11 months ago

I truly wonder if Obama thought this was a way to reach out. Either way, he would be wrong, of course. But I wonder what his motivation truly was. I'm troubled by the pattern I see in the preachers he chooses to honor. McClurkin, Wright and Warren.

coolcatdaddy · 11 months ago

Well, if you play with fire, you're going to get burned. When you play with fundamentalists, you wind up toast.

There's also an option 3 - Obama uninvites Warren and invites someone else that makes a different kind of statement.

My suggestion would be Jay Baker - son of Jim and Tammy, Jay represents a new youth movement among evangelicals that rejects the big megachurches and homophobia. It would be a choice that would build bridges and make a statement about looking to the future.

http://radaronline.com/features/2006/12/empire_of_the_son_part_iii.php

ThingsComeUndone · 11 months ago

Life hands you lemons make Lemonade :)

nicho · 11 months ago

Dance with the devil and you're going to get burned. I thought Obama was smarter than that. Apparently, he's not the super slick politician everyone thought he was.

I smell a one-term president here -- and one who will spend his last two years in office with a GOP Congress blocking his every move.

I imagine Bill and Hillary are just weeping buckets of tears at the thought that Hillary may have to step in and save the party in 2012 by running again.

wildwest · 11 months ago

I thought these people were trying to protect the sanctity of marriage?

RitornaVincitor · 11 months ago

Before they got to work in California I'd never heard of 18,000 perfectly valid marriages being struck down at the ballot box. I'd certainly heard of lots of people voluntarily choosing to end their own marriages in court. But I never thought marriage was so arbitrary that it could be dissolved against the participants' will by total strangers using a secret ballot with complete impunity. Seems to me that does more harm to the institution of marriage than any supposed harm that could come from the supposedly "wrong" people choosing to embrace and honor marriage.

Older_Wiser · 11 months ago

Does anyone else besides me think that Obama is turning the "other cheek" far too often, forgiving and forgetting, trying to be too "christ-like" in his treatment of the rightwing?

They will never return the favor, you know. That should be obvious to anyone who follows politics. Obama should know better, even if he does consider himself "moderate" much less "left."

Play with the rightwing and you get burned...in more ways than one.

cowboyneok · 11 months ago

Yes, I think you are exactly right! The Talibangelicals don't understand compromise. They understand "stoning" when it comes to their selective Levitical issues like civil rights for the LGBT community.

RitornaVincitor · 11 months ago

I totally agree that they will never return the favor. I'm not so sure about Obama's motivation being Christ-like. Christ despised hypocrisy. And I don't feel I understand what is really motivating Obama. But I'm concerned about the pattern I see with some ministers he chooses to honor prominently, i.e., McClurkin, Wright and Warren.

gwyneth · 11 months ago

Obama is religious. I saw that pastor of his on his campaign and I wondered about him then. That pastor looked like a screaming looney tune for sure! I'm concerned that he believes a screaming crazy person, I just didn't think he'd manifest that in his Presidency. It's not like we had much choice though... after the primaries it was Hilary or Obama and I would have liked to see Hilary but, it didn't pan out so I went for the lesser of the two evils.

katjam · 11 months ago

Ken Starr?? What is it about high profile conservatives? Why are they so obessed with the sex life of others?

When these moralistic arbitrators of American life propose an omnibus constitutional amendment that includes making divorce illegal and adultery punishable by stoning I will accept the logic of their argument that we must follow the Bible when determining our laws about sex including making same sex marriage illegal. I have noticed how often their view of the sanctity of marriage has a lot of leeway for them personally.

renegademom · 11 months ago

co-sign.

RitornaVincitor · 11 months ago

Very good points. It is interesting that born-again Christians have the highest divorce rate in the country. So for them divorce would be a poor choice upon which to focus attention. Far easier to pick an issue that involves only someone else - an issue that requires absolutely no personal discomfort or adjustment or sacrifice. Plus Ken Starr is an opportunist who will will go after what he hates where he believes he can win. He can go after sexual issues with impunity because certainly nobody wants to entertain so much as a single thought about Ken Starr's sex life.

Jack01 · 11 months ago

Quit yer bellyaching, and be patient. Just as soon as he needs us Log Cabin Democrats again we'll be called on again for money, GOTV, whatever. Then we can be happy an content to be wanted, and swoon when smiled upon.

JayR · 11 months ago

Sent this to Sullivan but wanted to comment here as well.
I’ve been thinking about the Warren thing and it simply doesn’t make sense to me for the standard reasons out there (i.e., an in with the evangelicals, defusing Warren as an opponent, being inclusive) and, in fact, it seems needlessly cruel at this moment in time after thousands were stripped of their equal rights.

Obama does not appear to a needlessly cruel man nor does he appear to be a thoughtless or heartless man. All I can think is that he sees the moment, as you do, as a great opportunity to organize a new movement for equality. Despite his protestations that he’s against gay marriage I doubt he really cares that much and it’s really just political speak but if there was a movement – a real movement – how could he resist pushing towards true equality?

Equality for gays is the premiere civil rights issue of the day (and I’m not saying that there still isn’t massive inequality racially but that’s caused more by problems in the system than any massive population of racists trying to hold minorities down) and I’m sure Obama recognizes that.

Now I’ve only read a little about Saul Alinsky so I could be way off base but it appears one of his community organizing tactics was to “rub raw the sores of discontent”. As I understand it this means to get people so pissed they get off their duffs and do something rather than simply complain. What better opportunity to get people agitated than using his inauguration and what better time than now?

In this context, and no other, I can fully understand the Warren pick. I ask myself if a man can be that calculating but I doubted Obama at moments during the primaries and presidential campaign only to be shown that he did have a plan all along. I don’t see why it would be any different here.

tlsintx · 11 months ago

interesting theory. i think this fits best with how Obama operates...i hope you're right.
Warren is looking more and more detestable, that's for sure...

timncguy · 11 months ago

Warren is only looking more and more detestable on a few gay and progressive blogs as they continue to push with more information about him. I have seen NONE of this additional data make its way to the main stream media. I have seen only very few main stream media references to the fact that Warren promoted the Yes on 8 campaign by "bearing false witness". Most of the main stream media coverage I have seen on this has been coming to the conclusion that the LGBT community is over-reacting to a a prayer at the inauguration that will only last a couple of minutes. Even many members of the LGBT community share this opinion that Warren is nothing to get all riled up about.

Ohio_Dem · 11 months ago

I agree. MSM is moving on and unless a LOT of noise is made by the GLBT community and their straight allies, this will be glossed over and forgotten by everyone except us. All this information about Warren MUST be discussed as much as possible on blogs, in editorials, talk radio, wherever we can get a foot in the door. No one else cares unless we educate the public about what kind of person Rick Warren really is.

Hold their feet to the fire. Plan an organized protest.

tlsintx · 11 months ago

oh ye of little faith.
that's how it always starts...that's why we keep it up!

hrc.org has an action alert...hold Obama's feet to the fire.

RitornaVincitor · 11 months ago

Which is why we mustn't stop.

RitornaVincitor · 11 months ago

Donny McClurkin... Jeremiah Wright.... Rick Warren. I see a pattern, but not one increases my faith in Obama. Your theory is that Obama is trying to piss people off so that they will stand up against the people Obama honors. I can't buy that.

DougStamate · 11 months ago

I am not saying that I don't like the Warren invitiation or that it doesn't bother me; but I do recognize that there are a lot of people in this country who are still bigoted. Many of them, Mr. Warren is an excellent example, are hiding that bigotry behind a religious facade, just as they did with racial discrimination (and women's suffrage, for that matter).
I remember reading somewhere that during the 1930's someone was urging FDR do some specific thing ( I don't recall what, exactly) and FDR replied "I completely agree with you. Now, make me do it." If I understood correctly, FDR was telling the person that whatever they wanted couldn't be done simply by presidential say-so, it needed people behind it and that person needed to get organized and force the president to act on the matter.
Any organizing in regards to complete equal civil rights today for gays, however, would need more than the usual LBGT groups (and I certainly am not slighting the LGBT activists and the groups they have founded) - such a movement would need to be an active political coalition that included unions and professional groups, as well as other civil liberty organizations. And, most importantly, it would also need political candidates willing to endorse a gay civil rights plank in their campaign.
And there, I believe, is the problem - how many Democratic candidates would be willing to run a campaign in 2010, say, with gay civil rights as part of their platform? I live in Indiana and I doubt there would be a single Democratic candidate willing to run with that as part of their campaign. Something about winning, I understand.
I don't think that Mr. Obama is trying to emulate FDR in this instance, though; I think that there is a much simpler explanation: it is just the way he approaches politics - you do not gratuitously make anyone your enemy. And, whenever possible, you attempt to find some connecting link between yourself and a person who, while holding some views that are antithetical to your own, might agree with you on other points. That is, I think, what applies to Mr. Warren.
Of course, if Mr. Obama (and the other Democrats on Capitol Hill, too) should, for the sake of some other political goal, actually hurt our interests (as opposed to our sensibilities) I won't even try to be understanding...

aquarius2 · 11 months ago

John

You can keep up the constant and justified outrage over Rick Warren's invitation BUT what is the purpose? Obama has made it clear he will not rescind the invitation and Warren's ego will not allow him to withdraw.

coolcatdaddy · 11 months ago

Part of the point is to be heard and let people understand that certain types of behavior are unacceptable.

Take it from someone that lived through the Clinton years - if you just sit back and say "Oh well, let's move on," they just drop you and forget about you. LGBTs really showed too much patience when Clinton was in office and, in the end, didn't get anything except DOMA, "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", and a constant barrage of attacks from the Religious Right.

When Clinton got in office, we had high hopes after the Reagan and Bush years and the terrible toll that AIDS had on the community. It all went down the drain in short order. That's what makes Warren such a bitter pill, at least for me.

RitornaVincitor · 11 months ago

Clearly Obama is sensitive to criticism. He was forced to address the Jeremiah Wright flap. This is Obama's second inclusion in a position of honor of a blatant homophobe, Donnie McClurkin being the first. And Rev. Warren doesn't just condemn gays. Obama may not remove him from the podium on January 20th, but Obama must hear loudly, strongly and continuously what an outrage this is. He is demonstrating a pattern with regard to preachers who preach hate. We should not expect Obama to change without pressure. So there is the purpose.

JJ · 11 months ago

I see on Warren's website that alcoholics are also denied membership at his church, even though alcoholism has long been considered a medical illness, not a character flaw. Really.

That's compassion at its best, isn't it?

What a pig.

Older_Wiser · 11 months ago

What do you expect from someone who locates his Disneyland "church" in white, reactionary, anal-retentive Orange County? Warren makes those people believe they're perfect if they just follow his "purpose driven" bullshit.

RitornaVincitor · 11 months ago

Not that I am a Christian any longer, but if there was anything that Jesus despised, it was assemblies of religious people who thought of themselves as the righteous. Jesus called sinners. His church was to be a refuge for sinners. He despised the holier-than-thou's. He reviled them openly as "hypocrites" and "whited sepulchers". He saved a prostitute from a mob of them by demanding that the first stone be cast only by someone who was sinless. He said of people like the Rev. Warren that God would vomit them from his mouth. Yet this man is good enough for Obama.

ShirleyGoodnessanMercy · 11 months ago

The US just refused to sign a UN resolution decriminalizing homosexuality worldwide:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-ridley/the-u...

cowboyneok · 11 months ago

Yes, because if they did then they might have to criticize the wonderful "Democratic" society the Bu$hco. Admin created in Iraq who now seeks to gun down or stone LGBT citizens of Iraq.

Our country isn't even willing to sign a NON-BINDING resolution declaring we should have equal rights. Boy, is our nation ever NOT the "Land of the Free" and if this nation were truly "One nation under G-d" then that resolution would be signed. Also, its not just about homosexual activity it is about the PERCEPTION of one's sexual orientation. The KKKristian Talibangelicals in our government want us dead. Unacceptable...

bill__free · 11 months ago

Was it a mistake going with Obama instead of Hillary?

cowboyneok · 11 months ago

No, we have a Democratic President elect. That was not a mistake. A mistake would be to remain silent and allow that Democratic President to think he could just continue on with the status quo while promising to be a "fierce advocate" for us. He needs to know the LGBT is watching and will NOT just stand idly by if the promises to our community are not kept in a timely basis. Those who voted against Obama were voting against him with the very idea the LGBT would realize our civil rights. The time is RIGHT for us to get our civil rights and, by G-d, we better start seeing some change.

Nasara · 11 months ago

Clearly this is all Obama's fault. Not, you know, the gay rights movement for failing to mobilize its base PRIOR to November 4 for what was one of the most important marriage equality votes of our life times.

But no, let's blame Barack...bitter histrionics is a lot easier than dealing with the truth that gay civil liberties has become an anemic and voiceless movement.

RitornaVincitor · 11 months ago

You can hardly say the gay rights movement failed to mobilize its base prior to November 4th. Despite major financing from Mormons, major support from Catholics and evangelicals, strong prejudice from some racial groups, and a highly deceptive add campaign, 48% percent of Californians voted no on Prop 8. Did the No On 8 campaign screw up? It sure did. It was anemic in some key ways. But the base was more than mobilized.

As for Barack.... Is he to blame for choosing to honor a preacher who condemns gays, Jews and all non-Christians to hell? Or in your eyes are gay people to blame for that too?

timncguy · 11 months ago

You may ask yourself... What, did Obama and his team learn NOTHING from the REv Donnie McClurkin incident during the primaries? But, think this through more carefully, Obama learned EXACTLY what he needed to learn from that. He learned that the LGBT community (or parts of it) would bitch and complain for a few days. But, they would all still continue to support him, continue to send in their money, continue to stump for votes for him and actually cast their own votes for him. He learned that many in the community would give him a "pass" for that slap in the face. He learned that many would object to any and all vocal objections against him for fear it would make the community look bad. For fear the community could be labeled intolerant of the intolerant.

Obama learned his lesson from the McClurkin incident very well. Why would the community expect anything different than what it is getting from him now? Because it is the LGBT community that didn't learn a lesson from the McClurkin incident, not Obama.

RitornaVincitor · 11 months ago

I complained endlessly during the Donny McClurkin flap, and was banned from posting as a result. Almost nobody here wanted to hear anything against Obama during the Primaries. People sprang to his defense about McClurkin. But many LGBT voices were raised elsewhere against Obama's inclusion of McClurkin. I was a Hillary supporter, by the way, but have become a strong Obama supporter who is nevertheless stunned by his pick of Warren. He seems to have learned nothing from McClurkin and Wright.

You are correct that not enough pressure was put upon Obama by the LGBT community, and largely because so many of them wanted to see him elected. But now he is to be our president, and the time to give him a pass is past. Rather than engage in recriminations against gays, let's get our act together and go after the problem in every way we can.

Rob Mule · 11 months ago

I feel the oddball in the gay marriage mix...you see, I never imagined whole rafts of gay people would emulate the most recent standard paradigm of God sanctioned male-female union as so many of us were victimized by it in our formative years.
Man, was I wrong...I blame Rosie O'Donnell.
As I've been gay and partnered for longer, it sometimes appears, than many of you have been alive, I want to say something about the perverse sexual detail obtuse and often obese fundies lard into their most flamboyant oratorical outrages.
Both of my two partners (#1-15 yrs, #2-11 and ongoing) were abused as children. Both of my partners were absolutely beautiful little boys mostly ignored by birth parents selfishly consumed in their own epic dysfunctional dramas.
When I met them (#1 was 18 and #2 was 37) the after effects of childhood sexual torture still ruled and stymied large elements of their lives.
Beyond partners and beyond friends the most important thing I've been to both men is that I've been a father and a source of unconditional love and guidance as both would acknowledge.
It has been fun but it has also been a difficult path, a path not helped by the past occasions of heterosexual marriage and parenthood as witnessed by this human.
I feel a great sadness for people who persist in making a commodity of sexuality...slicing it, dicing it, accessorizing it, weighing it upon a scale and, of course, profiting from it.
The evidence of our culture's sickness lies all around us...I would urge Reverend Rick and others like him to stop being part of the problem and to join other sensible humans in seeking a path leading to a day when all humanity's children can be all they were born to be.

OregDon · 11 months ago

Interesting that papers like the LA Times stressed today the news of Jerry Brown coming out against Prop 8; he'd been pledged before to support it. I think his opposition now to the measure is significant.

I wonder if when it becomes common knowledge that Warren appears to be anti-Semitic, his role in the inauguration will be changed.

Saw a bit on MSNBC last evening. .a remark from a reporter from Slate (I think). That Obama seems to get into trouble with his pastors and, this is simply more proof of the wisdom of separation of church and state..

RevDrBillyBob · 11 months ago

What was/is Hillary Clinton's view on gay marriage ? We all know that she continues to be pro-Iraq War, but what about her view on gay marriage ?

Bush Bites · 11 months ago

She supported the Defense of Marriage Act (an anti-gay marriage measure) when her husband was in the White House, but I think she changed her position after she became Senator of New York.

Not quite sure where she stands now, frankly.

DutchDyke · 11 months ago

Same tired old thing as Obama - Marriage is between a man and a woman, but equal rights for same-sex couples.
During the primaries, I believe only Kucinich stated he was outright in favor of gay marriage.

RitornaVincitor · 11 months ago

She was far more outspoken in favor of gay rights during the Primaries than Obama was, but yes, you are correct. Like Obama she supports the separate but equal policy of allowing gays to have rights equal to marriage, but denying gays marriage. In other words, gays may not drink from our water fountains, but we'll treat them as equal to us by building them their own water fountains.

Dave of the Jungle · 11 months ago

Hey, some of the biggest assholes I know are clinically obese.

cowboyneok · 11 months ago

and I know quite a few of them who refuse to admit their gluttony is a sin. In fact, they will gladly list the sins of every single person they know but overlook the fact they ate an entire sheetcake for breakfast while weighing over 300 pounds...

Granted, not all overweight people are bigoted, but the Talibangelical fat asses are.

RitornaVincitor · 11 months ago

I'm not concerned that he has a few calories to burn off. The fact that he condemns gays and billions of non-Christians to the fires of hell concerns me more.

cowboyneok · 11 months ago

Yea, me too. His gluttony is just low hanging fruit. I know I probably shouldn't go there, but its just too tempting. I'm so sick of self righteous gluttons, like him.

Ohio_Dem · 11 months ago

(oops - this was supposed to be a reply further down the board.)
I agree. MSM is moving on and unless a LOT of noise is made by the GLBT community and their straight allies, this will be glossed over and forgotten by everyone except us. All this information about Warren MUST be discussed as much as possible on blogs, in editorials, talk radio, wherever we can get a foot in the door. No one else cares unless we educate the public about what kind of person Rick Warren really is.

Hold their feet to the fire. Plan an organized protest.

Rob Mule · 11 months ago

I'll eat my shoe (or maybe now I'll toss it) if the Puritanical MSM ever dips a little toe into the steamy hot waters of sexual ambiguity outside of an occasional Paul Lynde rerun.
Dick, Jane, Mother, Father, Spot and Puff..the steel-molded analog corporate media template will never change...'Mos, when alluded to outside comedy, always OD and suicide, it's the family way and Father knows best.
Even Rachel seems tightly cinched into her standard anchor chair.
But, I totally agree with your call for continued noise...like a puppy, the media's nose must be constantly rubbed in it.

Cjeffery · 11 months ago

I for one I'm sick of reading about this. If you read any of Obama's books you know he likes to have people around him that don't neceesarly agree with his point of view because if you don't know why they think the way they do how can you work to change there point of view?

Ohio_Dem · 11 months ago

Really? How many racists does he like to have around him? How many racists will be speaking at his inauguration?

knobandtube · 11 months ago

Or how many that preach the rightness of political assassinations? Or that abortion is somehow like the Holocaust?

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/12/17/warren-invo...

This is not a nice man.

Gridlock · 11 months ago

I didn't know bigotry, prejudice, and hate were "legitimate points of view"

Why don't you go tell some Jews that, and see what they say?

Don't be so f#cking stupid.

RitornaVincitor · 11 months ago

No problem if Obama has people around him that don't agree with his viewpoint. Fine if you can form a dialogue and actually change people's minds, though with "people of God" that seems next to impossible. But no matter who you have around you or how you may hope to influence their thinking, NEVER honor an outspoken homophobe who works to take away the civil rights of a group of American citizens. NEVER allow someone who says that gays and Jews and non-Christians are going to hell to deliver the invocation at the inauguration of a president. NEVER chose hate as inspiration! Sorry you're sick of hearing about it. But honestly, I don't think you're really heard.

Atlanta Jim · 11 months ago

I have a right to be angry, just as Obama has a right to select Warren.

I trusted Obama and he is starting to betray that trust. He needs to do something significant in the area of GLBT rights (maybe pushing for the repeal of DOMA) to start back the trust.

I am 54 years old and have been out since 16. I am tired of being told wait and be patient. I certainly was not told that when I was asked to donate and do GOTV for Obama. Obama and his team are talking about bold initiatives. Let's see how bold we get with GLBT issues (or issues affecting us all such as health care).

cowboyneok · 11 months ago

I think every one of us in the gay community who is over 40 needs to do something concrete, during the inauguration celebration, to protect the rights of the next LGBT generation. I am willing to boycott any sort of Inauguration Party or event, march or do any sort of non-violent protest short of the Hunger Strike I suggested earlier, and in talks with my pastor, we determined is too dire for this particular situation but I'm holding for any kind of back tracking in which I think the Hunger Strike might effectively get the Obama Administration to change their mind.

tlsintx · 11 months ago

HRC.org has an action alert up now...
if Obama allows Warren an honored spot in the inauguration, there are several things he can do in the first days of his presidency to prove his fierce support of gay and lesbian Americans...

go sign it.

Bush Bites · 11 months ago

I hope the gay community is planning some kind of major protest during the inauguration--and is planning to pressure other politicians to take part.

Nothing too crazy....black armbands or maybe everybody turning their backs when what's his name prays. How about busing people in to join in the protest?

It seems like that's one of the only options left, and I worry that the gay community doesn't plan these things until it's too late.

houstonray · 11 months ago

Everyone hold up a shoe! Take it off, or bring an extra one from your closet, but bring a shoe and just like the lighters at concerts, lets see shoes held up high in the air! It could have a nice visual impact for the 'nightly news'....

p.s. Oh, and no throwing, we DON'T need that on the nightly news...

gwyneth · 11 months ago

That's a great idea! It would be a visual impact, right as he gets on stage, of course.

RitornaVincitor · 11 months ago

I think at a minimum those who attend the inauguration should be prepared to boo loudly if Warren says anything disgusting, and I'm not sure the man will be able to resist saying something disgusting and judgmental..

But more than anything symbolic that could be done at the inauguration, I believe John and others are on the right track by continuing to publicly expose to the nation just what kind of preacher Obama has chosen to honor in such a major way. The media attention will put pressure on Obama to consider more carefully in the future. This is after all his second outrageous blunder with an outspokenly homophobic preacher, and the third minister in Obama's life to bring scandal because of his extreme views. McClurkin, Wright and now Warren. Apparently Obama needs public pressure to shake him back to his senses, because he just keeps doing it.

RainbowPhoenix · 11 months ago

Someone suggested that everyone there take off one of their shoes and hold it over their head while Warren speaks.

Jay · 11 months ago

I'm burning all my Obama magazines and my Obama posters.

Can someone tell me how to get the "I LOVE Obama" tattoo off my body?

beware of the leopard · 11 months ago

$5K and a competently wielded laser.

cowboyneok · 11 months ago

A sander?

1billinnj2 · 11 months ago

we gays are now the new blacks. we will be enslaved soon.

Rob Mule · 11 months ago

Don't be insane...The world would completely grind to a halt without us...We bring good things to life!

HarpoSnarx · 11 months ago

Obviously overeaters are welcome in that church, eh yer Wholly-ness?

Rob Mule · 11 months ago

Brunches, coffees, spaghetti dinners, chicken and fish fries and, by God, the pies, like manna from heaven!

Dave of the Jungle · 11 months ago

Gluttony is a Sin!

woodka · 11 months ago

Dammit, I want my marriage nullified, too!

Our 25th anniversary is next year.

Let's hope the California Courts take Brown's advice soon and overturn 8.

RitornaVincitor · 11 months ago

Hey, so is ours. Well, our 25th anniversary is next summer, but by then we will have only been married one year. If, of course, our marriage still stands next summer. We also got married four years ago when Mayor Newsom opened marriage in San Francisco to gay couples. But that was nullified six months later when the courts decided our beloved "Saint Gavin" had overreached his authority. But our current marriage is fully legal and valid for now. Imagine if 18,000 couples were to have their perfectly valid marriages canceled by total strangers who chose to simply check the "yes" box in the privacy of their voting booth. I am no longer a Christian, but I still am amazed at the ugliness that can come from the followers of someone who spoke so often about love.

Lolis · 11 months ago

This is good news that they got Ken Starr because he reminds me everybody of the past.

Over the last few days, reading these blogs you would think progressives and gays are losing a war, when we are actually winning the war. The numbers are growing on the side for equality and get better every year. The gay rights movement has new allies in Jerry Brown, Arnold Governator, and even prominent evangelical Richard Cizick has publicly changed his views on gay rights.

A battle was lost in California with Prop 8, but progressives and gays are winning. Rick Warren is on defense on this issue, even Obama is on defense with this issue, because the tide has turned. Courage Campaign and HRC are treating this like an opportunity to further their agendas.

Gary SF · 11 months ago

Knock it off with the fatty/obese stuff, unless the objective is to alienate the majority of Americans. We have enough on Warren without having to go there.

Corey Mondello · 11 months ago

I thought being gay may be some biological weakness that Warren states, if that is a fact, then gays should "fight" to not act on it.

Well, seeing as obesity is a HUGE problem in the USA and there are thousand apon millions, in the USA and the world that are starving, I suggest fat ass Warren start going to OA (Over Eaters Anonymous) meetings.

ps

Why is it many of these fundy Christians are fat asses anyways?

Not getting enough adult fun and to much young children action that doesnt fill their emptiness (holes) enough?

Boycottutah · 11 months ago

Here is some good news!

On the bright side, California Attny General asked the state Supreme Court to throw out Prop 8!!!

http://www.edgesanfrancisco.com/index.php?ch=ne...

ChrisSF · 11 months ago

Yay Jerry!!!

lewis_stoole · 11 months ago

you tell'em jerry!!!!

>>The attorney general, Jerry Brown, had previously hinted of his opposition to the measure, Proposition 8, but made his legal opinion concrete on Friday in a brief to the California Supreme Court, which is reviewing the measure. “Proposition 8 must be invalidated because the amendment process cannot be used to extinguish fundamental constitutional rights without compelling justification,” Mr. Brown said in a statement.<<

http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/jerry-br...