One of the reasons I don't need any Old Sneeps to tell me that Barack Obama is not the Greatest of the Great New Wonderfuls---besides the fact that I'm a grown-up and I read the newspapers and I gave up waiting for King Arthur's return a long time ago---is that Avedon Carol's and Wev McEwan's blogs have been at the top of my daily blog reading for four years and counting and AC and Wev have both been very good about pointing it out to their readers whenever Obama wanders off the road to Progressive Utopia. Which he's done again with his decision to let the Reverend Rick "God Loves Assassins and Hates Gays" Warren deliver the invocation at the Inauguration.
You'd think a guy who wanted to be a president for all Americans, someone who wanted to be inclusive and eschew partisanship, would at least have the decency to choose someone who wasn't already a famous, political, controversial, pseudo-moderate right-wing creep to give the invocation at the inauguration, wouldn't you? Someone who wasn't a pants-on-fire bigot?...
I'm sure Obama could have found a preacher who hangs out with the Jesus of love, hope, and charity if he'd really wanted to. But instead he picked a public clown. This crap does not bring the country together.
The McEwan:
I understand that Warren isn't going to be driving policy, that he's only leading a prayer at the inauguration (and why there is a prayer at the presidential inauguration is a whole other post), but I also know that there are, literally, thousands of other religious leaders from multiple religions and Christian denominations, who aren't anti-choice, anti-gay, and anti-science, whose presence at the inauguration wouldn't be a sharp stick in the eye to progressive women and GBTQ men, and all their allies, so it would have been really fucking nice if any one of them could have been selected for this prominent opportunity instead of Rick bloody Warren.
(Quick note to Avedon: I wish you had a cute icon like Wev's so I could have used it here. I wish I had one of my own too.)
I think Obama is going to be a good President, and not just in comparison to any Republican. But as Avedon and others have said, pace FDR, he'll be only as good as we make him be. I'll add something I said all through the primaries, something that would have been as true of Hillary as it will be of him. He'll be only as Progressive as Congress allows him to be or forces him to be, and as it looks now, if things don't change in Harry Reid's Senate, that won't be anywhere near as Progressive not just as we want him to be but as the country needs him to be.
At the moment, Barack Obama is still not actually the President, so I'm withholding judgment. Harry Reid is majority leader of the Senate and it doesn't look to me as though even when he has a real majority come January he'll have any more of a clue as to how to keep the Plantation Caucus from running things, and ruining things, than he does now.
As I said, I'm withholding judgment. I like a lot of what Obama's been announcing he plans to do for the economy and some of his Cabinet choices and picks for advisors and agency heads have been very promising. Others? Not so much. For every two steps he takes in the right direction he takes one step in the Right direction.
But one of the ways Obama reminds me of Franklin Roosevelt is that he appears to be as coolly calculating a politician as FDR was. I've never believed that all that talk of bi-partisanship and post-partisanship was anything other than a ploy to convince disenchanted Republicans and Independents that it's safe to vote Democratic. The Right's success over the last generation was partly due to their convincing voters that Democrats were the OTHERS. Get them around that idea or over it or through it and they'll find they have a more congenial home in the Democratic Party. If that's the plan, then I suspect that Obama's using Rick Warren the same way John McCain tried to use Joe the Plumber, except, of course, more subtly and more cleverly.
I'm afraid, though, he's not being too clever by half.
Wev reports that Obama and Warren are actually friends. If that's true, it's a good reason for the Obamas to have him on their Christmas card list and even inviting him to sit with the family at the Inauguration. But having Warren at the Inauguration is one thing. Asking all of us to pray along with him is quite another.
Like asking us to pray against our gay friends and family members.
Not to mention, as The Nation's Sarah Posner puts it (via Tina at the Agonist) "a slap in the face to progressive ministers toiling on the front lines of advocacy and service".
More from Tina here.
Echindne reports that Warren's invite might not have come from Obama.
Updated to give Scott Lemieux the final word because he's right:
It's unlikely in the extreme that Rick Warren's "purely symbolic" selection is going to attract any non-negligible number of reactionary evangelical voters, while slapping major Democratic constituencies in the face surely carries its own risks. And worse, it elevates Warren's stature further, giving him "bipartsian" media credibility when he inevitably attacks any decent part of Obama's agenda. It's a dismaying choice, wrong on the merits and wrong on the politics.
Updated again so Scott no longer has the last word but he's a big boy and won't mind: As you've probably heard by now, Warren was definitely Obama's own choice and he's not about to back away from it. Wev has the video and a transcript.
According to Steve Benen, this will be the first Presidential inauguration that features an invocation. I'm surprised. I could swear that every one I've watched opened with a preacher and a prayer. Is an invocation something different? Something more? Also, according to Steve, this will be the first with a benediction, which must be different from a closing prayer because I'm sure that I've seen those at inaugurations in the past too. Now, while Warren will be delivering the invocation, the benediction will be given by Civil Rights legend Dr Joseph Lowery. This apparent counter-balancing act may be Obama's attempt to split the difference or look as though he is. It may be, as some of Steve's readers argue, that having Lowery wrap things up trumps having Warren doing the cold opening. But there is this: Every Right Wing Evangelical who tunes in to hear Warren is likely also going to stick around to hear, not just Lowery, but Barack Obama, who, I'm just guessing here, probably isn't going to sound all that bi-partisan or post-partisan to your average conservative. Will Lowery trump Warren? Better question. Will Obama trump Warren? The answer to this explains why various Right Wing types are as furious about Warren's invocation as we are. They're afraid it is a ploy and Obama is using Warren.
Now, the "ploy" works like this, if it works. Scott is probably right, the number of Right Wing evangelicals who can be peeled away from the Republican Party is almost certainly negligible. But the number of socially conservative, religious Republican voters who have been voting against their own economic interests and who might be brought to see that is not. The actual number of these potential converts to the Democratic Party doesn't have to be very high to tip some Congressional races. Not all Christians are Evangelicals, just as not all Evangelicals are conservatives. If these voters can be persuaded that Barack Obama is not a scary liberal-angry black dude-Muslim by the presence of Rick Warren and they start making visits to the Democrats' neighborhood, they very well might decide they like the look of things, such as guaranteed health insurance, economic policies that keep their jobs in this country, higher wages, and more stable and socially conservative communities (Remember, it's our policies that actually reduce the number of abortions and out of wedlock pregnancies and keep kids in school etc etc etc), to the point of not minding having gay couples and other hippies as their neighbors and so they stick around and become somewhat reluctant Democrats, meanwhile, their kids grow up quite contentedly as enthusiastic Democrats.
You will notice I said Democrats, not Liberals, and not Progressives.
This is how it should work. If it doesn't work, it doesn't work and Obama has to look elsewhere for more votes. Or...something like what Digby's afraid will happen happens.
_____________________________
Some heartening news: Warren isn't the only one of Obama's friends who'll be a featured speaker at the Inauguration. Poet Elizabeth Alexander will be reading a poem she's writing for the occasion. Obama and Alexander go way back.
Here's the link to Alexander's webpage.
Hat tip to Sherry Chandler, poet and blogger.
And there's more from the Academy of American Poets.
Well, Lance, if you agree with us (I'm including myself in the Sneeps, even if I'm not interested in preaching at Dem-hopefuls), then why be irritated when we point out the obvious?
It's not raining on the parade. That was what my communist friends intended to do the night of the election (they wanted to distribute anti-war flyers at Jack London Square - in Oakland, which has a big black population). I talked them out of that because yeah, we needed to be able to celebrate for a little while, before being confronted again with reality.
But if we go on being hopeful, giving Dems time, giving them the benefit of the doubt, being nice, we're basically ceding ground. That's what we always do. Yeah, our elected leaders might not do much we like, but hey! I'm sure in their heart of hearts, they really agree with us about all these issues central to our lives.
Not good enough, you know. Some outrage is in order. And yeah, even despair, because it's almost hopeless to try and engage our leadership - we're way too far to the left to be relevant in this country's politics.
The parade is over. Obama panders. He's been elected with a huge mandate and he's still pandering.
When was the last time you caught a Republican pandering to the progressive left? It's maddening.
The truth is, there's a more fundamental divergence of views here, between you and us Sneeps. You are a Democrat who still remembers a hopeful America that was progressing, more good than bad, basically a sound place. And there's something to be said for that view - this has been a great country in many ways, and through sheer inertia, will be a decent place to live for fortunate people like us for another decade or two. I am someone who doesn't believe this is basically a sound country, based on sound principles. I used to, and I don't any more. This is why I don't share your hope.
Not because I'm so bitter, I don't want to see others being happy. If people want to hope for better things on the way down, that's probably for the best - not much can be gained by being pessimistic. But the hopefulness does look to people like me very much like fooling oneself.
Posted by: Apostate | Thursday, December 18, 2008 at 12:23 PM
I should've said "even if I'm not generally interested in preaching at Dem-hopefuls." Because I obviously just preached at you.
Sorry.
Posted by: Apostate | Thursday, December 18, 2008 at 12:24 PM
Apostate,
I'm not sure I'd classify you as an Old Sneep. The difference between an Old Sneep and a critic of Obama like Avedon or Wev is that the critic wants Obama to be better than he is and an Old Sneep wants me to feel bad for voting for the guy or being glad that he won or, to generalize it, because Sneeps don't just want people to feel bad about their political choices, a critic says as you're heading out to the park for a picnic, Looks like rain, better take an umbrella, and a Sneep waits for you to come home wet and says, I told you so, even if he didn't. And then if you tell him that you're not wet because it rained, you're wet because you fell in the lake, he tells you that he knew that was going to happen too.
Posted by: Lance | Thursday, December 18, 2008 at 12:56 PM
That makes sense.
Posted by: Apostate | Thursday, December 18, 2008 at 01:01 PM
Thanks for the shout out, Lance. I, in turn, learned about Elizabeth Alexander from the Wom-Ponies: http://usm.maine.edu/wompo/
Do I think a poet at the inauguration balances out a right-wing preacher? Well, truth to tell, I'd rather see Reverend Wright on the podium. And/or Patricia Smith, whose Katrina poems in Blood Dazzler make my hair stand on end. (Though I'll admit I'm not familiar with Alexander's work.)
Interesting the direction Obama's faith has moved in over the last year.
I am in wait-and-see mode but so far Obama's words and his actions don't seem to match up real well.
Posted by: Sherry Chandler | Thursday, December 18, 2008 at 01:17 PM
Everyone should read Digby on the Warren selection.
Obama is happy with the choice of Warren, who was picked from a shortlist compiled by Obama and Biden.
Jon Favreau wasn't fired either.
None of this is surprising. Which is why I'm not freshly disillusioned - I voted for Obama with my eyes wide open, expecting this sort of thing to happen. Over and over.
But imagine the missed opportunity to have a liberal female minister do the invocation, after an election season in which women were pilloried and in a world in which America pretends to be the leader of women's rights while fighting deceptive wars in patriarchal Islamic countries. But why do any healing in this direction? Why bother to reach across the aisle to women?
Dems don't push our agenda. It's sad.
Posted by: Apostate | Thursday, December 18, 2008 at 01:52 PM
It's been fascinating today, reading comments on this selection at liberal blogs. At least half of them are people like John Cole at Balloon Juice snidely telling gay people to calm down and STFU. He actually had a post just to complain about the amount of people using the clichè, "a slap in the face". How petty, and fuck that guy.
So, Lance, it's your privilege to "withold judgement", but I'm not feeling as generous. As mentioned above, gay people are still supposed to be kicked around and told we're lucky it's not the Republicans kicking us. As for "reaching across the aisle", bipartisanship as some sort of self-evident virtue- this is just appeasing the unappeasable. It's never enough for right-wing Christian evangelicals. Give an inch, they'll point out you're admitting wrongness and demand ten miles.
Sincerely, honestly disappointed. But even on liberal blogs, we're shouted at to shut up, we're radical leftist shrills who are presumptuous, or dreamers with unrealistic notions- like perhaps am antigay jillionaire God-botherer wouldn't get pride of place. But we get a MARCHING BAND! One of seventy.
I no longer feel invested in Obama's doing well as President, I'm numb to caring, he's lost my good will because he wants to make friends with people who think I'm worse than a murderer because i'm gay. Petty of me? This choice of Warren was utterly gratuitous, completely his choice, the symbolism unmistakeable.
Posted by: Desch | Thursday, December 18, 2008 at 05:08 PM
(Btw, Echindne's link has been updated to note that it was, indeed, ObamaNation's pick.)
Posted by: Ken Houghton | Thursday, December 18, 2008 at 05:34 PM
so if i gather the critics of Obama having warren there say O, could have found a good progressive to show how open he was to all people. Ummm if he really wants to have people that represent all Americans around him then who the flock was he going to get to throw a bone to wingers. I see why people are pissed about this and i would just as soon as have no prayers at all. but who should have gotten? he choose a winger to show that he is open to all people. this is exactly who he said he was, he wants to get past the old culture wars and be the president for everybody.
Posted by: greginak | Friday, December 19, 2008 at 12:21 AM
I hope you are right greginak. I wouldn't want to wake up to another "standard" politician in charge. The country and now the world are in real trouble and need real change not fake change.
I would also hate to wake up to be shunted into a train car and hauled off to Delaware & NJ to work in the chemical plants as the far "christian" "right" would like to do us!
( Tipping my hat to people who live there: Yes there are beautiful places in Delaware and NJ but once we were tattooed and ensconced in the chemical factories we wouldn't be allowed anywhere near them!)
Posted by: Uncle Merlin | Friday, December 19, 2008 at 12:09 PM
Pass out a few lemons just before the invocation and this outrage will be taken care of.
Posted by: Scandale | Friday, December 19, 2008 at 01:16 PM
Personally, I'm enjoying the guilty pleasure of watching Obombers fall all over themselves to attack this hatemonger after they fell all over themselves to defend another hatemonger, Jeremiah Wright...
Posted by: actor212 | Friday, December 19, 2008 at 03:03 PM
Very different view point over here from a family:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/12/18/115142/58/762/674536
I can't quite tell where the author stands, he makes it clear where his aunt stands (with Warren yet mad at him for accepting!!) and he makes it clear where his cousin stands ( out Lesbian).
Posted by: Uncle Merlin | Friday, December 19, 2008 at 09:06 PM
The one sure way to convince religiously conservative voters to come join the Democratic party would be to actually put forward policies that indeed would be in their economic interest. Don't wait, move on universal health care day one. Watch what happens to the Republican party if health care for all actually becomes a reality under President Obama. And while you're at it, how about a mortgage write-down/refinance program that might really work at keeping people in their homes? Of course, this would require Obama to take on those financial wizards who still refuse to accept loan modifications because they don't want to eat the losses. Real programs. That's it. Stop the complex analysis. Giving Warren the stage is politics at its most basic: pandering pure and simple. It is cheap, and unnecessary. More than anything it reveals much about Obama's insecurities as he prepares to take the helm. The fact that it is being done by driving a stake through his base is quite worrisome. That it's happening in the wake of Prop 8 is particularly hurtful. And more of this without measurable progress will greatly harm his presidency.
Posted by: Lori Jablonski | Monday, December 22, 2008 at 01:48 AM
>But one of the ways Obama reminds me of Franklin Roosevelt is that he appears to be as coolly calculating a politician as FDR was.
At this point the only valid comparison tro FDR, the greatest President of the 20th Century is...there isn't any.
> I've never believed that all that talk of bi-partisanship and post-partisanship was anything other than a ploy to convince disenchanted Republicans and Independents that it's safe to vote Democratic.
And that is where you engged in exactly the self-delusion Obama wanted you to. In fact, Obama is not a center-left politician (like Hillary); he is center-Right pol like Lieberman. He admires RWR much more than FDR, and I predict he will go down as the biggest mistake Democrats have made since FDR.
Posted by: tdraicer | Tuesday, December 23, 2008 at 05:29 PM