Some other 'bridge-building' invitees to Obama's inauguration
By David Neiwert Saturday Dec 20, 2008 2:00pm
It seems Barack Obama's decided to invite Pastor Rick Warren, the noted homophobe, to offer the invocation at his Inauguration as a kind of "bridge building" gesture. Maybe he's able to look into his soul or something.
It's understandable, given his background as a community organizer (not to mention someone who pitches "the audacity of hope"), that Obama believes you can reach out a hand to movement conservatives and build such bridges. Indeed, he's made it clear all along that's the kind of guy he is.
I just hope that when he finally gets that hand back after reaching it out and discovers it has been chewed clean down to the bone by a thousand vicious cuts that he has a little awakening about the nature of the nasty little beast the American Right has become in the past couple of decades. Such gestures for them are mere signs of weakness, nothing but opportunities to advance themselves and their agendas and to destroy liberals.
Bill Clinton had similar naivete early in his presidency, and it cost him dearly.
Well, Obama's not listening to us anyway. We're the now-marginalized dirty hippies he gets praised for slapping. Whatever.
So, in the spirit of bridge-building ourselves, we've tried to come up with some other invitees of the same sort who might just fit the same sort of bridge-building bill for Obama's inauguration:
- Rush Limbaugh
- Sean Hannity
- Zeb Bell
- Ann Coulter
- Sarah Palin
- Bristol Palin's future mother-in-law
- Karl Rove
- Dick Cheney
- Darth Vader
- Voldemort
Maybe you can come up with some too. I'll post some of the better suggestions in an update.
Login or Register to post comments.
Hell, let's go all the way...
How 'bout Osama bin Laden?
There you go. If Obama lets a religious-type into the room..., he loves terrorists. We've made the Right obsolete! We're able to do their schtick ourselves now. Ah, progress.
Sorry, still can't figure out why I'm supposed to think all this is a bigger deal than actual issues.
Adolf Hitler Campbell.
Absolutely! Wouldn't it be such a sweet gesture for the prez to make sure a kid gets his birthday cake? ...With the picture his parents wanted on it...?
Dang, if he wanted a person of faith he should have gotten Jimmy Carter---but of course religious liberals, especially any critical of Israeli government policies, will fall in the "punch for points" category. >_<;
I saw a thing critical of the Warren thing today that went after him because he (Warren) said jews are treated well in Syria. But then I hear he's just like Jerry Falwell. Would Falwell take Syria's side over Isreal? Well, no, that's always been part of the problem. I'm confused by this whole thing. I'm told Warren's in favor of civil unions in California (the way the law was before the SC decision).
There've been a few articles the last couple of days making good arguments that Rick Warren is giving more up by showing up at the innauguration than Obama is by inviting him. I don't think any sane person would assume Obama is adopting Warren's views by asking him to pray at a ceremony...
But, then, liberals are supposed to be sensitive and uninterested in bringing people to our side. Seriously, in a country of 300 million people, most of whom disagree with us, for the moment, on gay marriage, this is the most liberal president you can expect to have in your lifetime. Why don't we at least wait to see what he does in office before we become hopelessly offended?
Joe Lieberman
Michele Malkin
Jeff Gannon
Now there's someone you can sink your teeth into. After he does it first.
dracula is laid off, asking for fresh tampons. lets get dracula back to work. pass bills that get america sucking again. or what ever.
NM
they have to be real people. Well, how about Bill Kristol?
Wow. So this is what Obama has to deal with. The right is blaming him the condition of the country, and the left has already turned their back on him because of one man.
Stay Classy Democrats...
has it that the title of Rick Warren's next book is "The Donut Driven Double Chin".
he has a flair for the alliteration!
You would think it would rather have an inclination for ASSonance!
bridge building is messy. partisanship is strong. but lets tell jokes and have fun with it.
Partisanship is strong? Partisanship is an inclusive old boys club that seeks to alienate to spite progress.
anything that blocks information that is contrary to what you agree with is partisan behavior. obama's bridge building is probably correct, but painfull at the same time. who wants to build a bridge with bil kristol? not me, but that's the trap, rising above it hurts. makes you want to punch some one.
How 'bout we build a bridge to Bill Kristol just so we can punch him in the mouth? Then we can say, "Gee, Bill, that was wrong. Tell ya what - why don't you just forgive me to show your bipartisanship?"
Criticizing and poking fun constitutes the entire left turning its back? We can hate his choice and wonder why he made it and still think he'll generally make a good president.
Or are we now supposed to be towing the party line without question like the Republicans have been doing for the past eight years?
what he said.
Niewert finds one thing he doesn't like about Obama and throws a tantrum. Gosh, I hope that dumb ol' Obama checks with geniuses like you before he does anything else.
Jerk.
you know, the greats.
To perform christian classic songs while Pastor Warren does his sermon on the mount!!
at a road side bathroom.
David Kelly (weapons expert)
Deborah Jeane Palfrey (DC Madam)
Pat Tillman killed in combat in Afghanistan under unusual circumstances
Paul Sanford attorney who accused Karl Rove of treason in the Plame outing case (pdf) and fell off a hotel balcony.
Gary Webb alledged that the Reagan administration was connected with cocaine trafficking and the Nicraguan Contras
UK Top Cop Who Led CIA Probe Found Dead
Paul Wellstone liberal US senator who died in a plane crash shortly before election day
Bruce Ivins
Deborah Jeane Palfrey (DC Madam)
OOpsie. The CIA suicided her, remember???
You;ve got Dick Cheney in there 3 times:
# Dick Cheney
# Darth Vader
# Voldemort
and perhaps Fred Phelps and family. That would be cozy!
We have a winner!
I know it sounds stupid, But nothing ventured, nothing gained.
I suppose we'll just have to wait and see.
The country is at a crossroads right now. I realize that there are some on the right who will never be persuaded. Their loss.
But to not try, is doing nothing.
I actually think Ahmadinajad isn't such a bad idea. I know that sounds ludicrous to some, but it could start a healing process with the middle east.
As I've said before, I think we should kick Israel to the curb. They've been causing too much trouble. Let them fend for themselves.
Maybe they'll think twice if they find themselves without US backing.
Invite Lush Rimbaugh. His date can be Man Coultergiest.
I'd luv to see their faces if they got the invite.
Coultergeist would be PRICELESS! His brand of humor is downright laughter inducing, especially when he dresses up and pretends to be a woman. Oh. That's not pretend?
I apologize if I've offended you in the past.
You know me, the perennial optimist.:)
I hope this New Year brings you good fortune in both health and happiness.
I know that you and other posters on here, are really awesome people. I too apologize for my sometimes rude behaviour. Please forgive all (MsJoanne? Please?).....and although not the politically correct thing to say...Merry Christmas to all on here!!!
I wish you a very Merry Xmas, too.
I wish you a very healthy and happy holiday and a glorious new year.
Luvs ya babe?
Merry Christmas. And Here's wishing you a happy and healthy New Year to you and yours.
Me and the pooch both appreciate it. :-)
I hope you all have a joyous holiday season, 'cos I'm going through some shit in my life, and I'll just be glad when the holidays are over. So enjoy some holiday cheer in my honor - someone's gotta celebrate!
I am sorry to hear you are going through a rough patch. Hang tough. I will keep you in my thoughts.
The new year is just around the corner, and I have always believed that on 1/1 at 12:01 it is not just a new year but a new and fresh start on life.
My best to you and yours...always.
this, too, shall pass.
Thanks MJ and Mick.
It's amazing how a kind word or two can be so soothing - makes me choke up.
It may sound strange, but I feel comforted knowing there are some unseen folks on this computer screen with whom I can laugh and commiserate.
Let's see what good things 2009 brings.
is hitler's yoko.
If Obama wants to build bridges to people with whom he supposedly disagrees - he should build them in the direction of our potential adversaries. Maybe we could have peace for a little while.
This build-up in Afghanistan is sickening, scary and stupid.
Why not build bridges to people like Kucinich and Nader?
Obama is bullshitting us.
He likes Warren.
He identifies with that kinda guy.
Pathetic.
Most who dismiss Nader out of hand have no IDEA his platform sounds exactly like their wishlist. Nader has been dismissed by PE Obama, even though he had 738,622 votes for POTUS, a distant 3rd and much less than his 3m+ votes in 2000.
How many fucking votes did Warren get?
The media and the repubs and most dems tell us they are (far * 10^1000) left. Don't you know that in order to be a centrist you need to be slightly right of Hitler?
I just hope Obama doesn't decide to go full centrist on us and make a cabinet post for bushchenney.
If as much focus had been directed at Prop 8 as has been directed at Obama for allowing Warren to pray, in lieu of some other right wing religious nut who doesn't even agree on global warming, the proposition may not have passed. Raising hell with Obama over the inauguration is not going to change the legislation that everyone is so angry, rightly so, over. Let us all remember that gay rights, while important, are not the only rights that Obama is working on.
...[Jerry Brown? Did I hear that right?] has announced that he's changed his mind about Prop 8 and feels that the state Supreme Court will strike it down. Again. For the same reason.
And just how many Jerry Browns ARE there in California government?
That is one gnarly picture up there with this thread.
Zell Miller
Michael Wiener
Ghosts of Nixon, McCarthy and Jerry Falwell
Joe the not-really-a-plumber-not really-buying-a-business and not-really-named-Joe
Hugo Chavez
and on the other side of the aisle:
Cindy Sheehan
Code Pink
The shoeless Iraqi journalist
Darth Cheney's lesbian daughter
The ghosts of 4500 soldiers ala Henry V
or delays it, so just war all the time, no peace or bridge building that would only cause war. lets use war to avoid the peace that just delays war. just to flog a dead horse.
can provide security, and shoot everyone. build a bridge to where you already are. ok, I'm drunk.
but drunk in a good way.
I don't know if my comment will be welcome here, as in my experience they tend not to be. But I'm going to try anyway, as I do read this site frequently and agree with many (but not all) of the things posted.
Just for some background, I am not a liberal nor am I a Democrat. I am also not a conservative nor am I a Republican. I voted independent on the last ticket, but I did vote for Obama, as I did and do feel that he is the best choice that we could possibly want at this time.
And this post, oddly enough, was quite heartening to me.
Because Obama seems to be succeeding at pissing off *both* sides. Which, frankly, is exactly what I was hoping would happen. Because, if he can't do anything right in the eyes of the partisan, then... he's probably doing it right.
I don't like the choice of Rick Warren, personally. But I'm more offended by the fact that there's an invocation in the first place. Who gives it really doesn't matter, as it's basically just an empty gesture anyway. Obama made a bad choice here, yes, but he's been hitting it out of the park with his cabinet choices, I have no reason to think that he didn't put as much thought and care into this choice as he has to the others. He's not doing it to please any one group of people, he's doing it because the time for enmity and dirty politics is past. I can respect that.
Even if you don't agree with what I just said, think about this. "Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer". Obama just did Warren a huge favor, one that is likely to greatly increase his credibility amongst the credulous. Obama is a product of Chicago politics, and he is incredibly shrewd. He will be calling in this favor. Perhaps he already has. I think Warren... has just been bought.
Cool down, everyone. Your guy got elected. My guy got elected, too. Hold his feet to the fire, yes, but he's showing the exact qualities that you wanted. Thinking things through, making the tough choices, and doing things that are unpopular that he thinks is right. Let's let the choices prove to be wrong before we throw him under a bus.
Judging from my previous experiences on these kinds of political blogs, I'm probably going to be banned now. Nice knowing you.
you get grudges that seem to call out for revenge, but we don't need that right now.
Duskglow. I figure any good, logical point about Obama's provocative choice helps me adjust my perspective on this latest poke in the eye from the Beltway.
You're going to get your eye poked more. That's what Obama was elected to do. I certainly did not expect him to have a particularly liberal agenda, and I also knew that his agenda might actually lean a bit towards the conservative. I also knew that he would generally make the right choices, regardless of what side of the aisle he comes down on at any particular time.
We got someone who is the polar opposite of Bush. Let's thank whatever we believe in for that. It could have been a lot, a lot worse. Obama is not Santa Claus, he's not going to put a bunch of wrapped liberal presents under the tree. But at the same time, he's going to come down on the right side of things the majority of the time. That's... something we haven't had in many years. And it's enough for me.
I hear what you're saying BUT it is equally important we remind Obama of who and who did not support him and his agenda for America. Keeping our mouths shut and what next? Does Obama say hey, Rick Warren didn't cause any controversy so lets see what other right wing kook I elevate. America slammed the door in landslide proportions in 2008 on the reichwing. Even Virginia and North Carolina went for Obama and in North Carolina they even outed Elizabeth Dole for a Democrat in the senate and voted in a Democratic Governor. Even in North Carolina Elizabeth Dole lost my more than she would have when she came out with her "Godless" ad to attack Kay Hagan. Across this nation on a state and national level America voted in record numbers against the right wingers and Christofascism, Obama needs to reach out more to moderates and liberals. That's who elected him and he made need to be reminded of this occassionally.
I agree that the liberals were the ones who came up with the whole netroots concept, and helped Obama raise a hell of a lot of money for his campaign. Their contributions can't be denied.
However, who, on election day, actually elected Obama? I don't think it was the liberals. Unless they went third party, that was a fairly safe bloc. No, Obama was elected by moderates and independents like me. And he knows it.
If we'd gone over to McCain, he'd be president now.
If he's trying to please anyone, that's who he'd be trying to please.
However... I don't think he's trying to please anyone. I think he's just... being Obama. Pragmatic as ever, not really caring about what side someone is on, just what use they could have for him or his presidency. I maintain we'll be seeing Warren slightly modify his views over the next few months.
He's an evangelist. They don't stand on principle. They do whatever will get them more money, followers, or power. He can be bought, and he just was.
Rick Warren's not a moderate like yourself. Those folks voted for McCain/Palin.
But he now owes Obama.
And Obama is not the type to leave a debt uncollected.
It may just be Warren agreeing to lay off on the rhetoric for a while, or just being a little more low key. It may be that Obama's planning something and will ask Warren not to interfere as much as he would otherwise.
This is not happening without a reason.
I guess we'll see and we'll be watching.
Indeed. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.
Just keep an open mind. Obama is a planner and a schemer. I half expect that six months down the line everything's going to come together and something really cool is going to happen.
Hmmmmm.....I hope you're correct. But you make a good point, and did something these here "tubes" were supposed to do - ya made me stop a moment and think.
Keep posting here. (You'd probably get banned at some wingnut website.)
Yeah. And I also crashed and burned over on the Daily Kos a couple of years ago. To this day I still refuse to give that site even a single pageview.
However, C&L has always struck me as somewhat reasonable - more center-left than anything. So I decided to try my hand here and see what happened.
FWIW, duskglow, I thought this was excellent commentary. I dunno if we're any more or less "center left" than Kos, really, but we try to emphasize common sense and open discussion. Trolls/concern trolls notwithstanding, and you're obviously not that.
Also, the Warren thing hasn't pissed me off, but I do think it's ripe for poking some fun at Obama.
On DK, if I said anything that even deviated just a little bit from the groupthink, they downvoted me to oblivion.
Frankly, it's one of the reasons I never actually went full bore Democrat/Liberal. That's almost as bad as how the Republicans treat me, just different ideology. So far, I'm liking it here. At least people disagree without being disagreeable or shouting "troll! troll!".
Oh. Libruls have been sitting on their asses for 8 years and stayed home on election day or sunk all that 1% in Nader. I see. Still marginalized in minds like yours.
If Obama is an evangelist then he'd better shut the fuck up about it. Those teenage beliefs such as that have trashed the boundary between church & state.
Holding such enemies closer is a great way to keep war going Afghanistan Pakistan batten down you're about to be plunged into hell on earth.
Notice Obama doesn't think Blackwater mercenaries are so bad either.
The point of the above illustration is thus: the reich will bite the hand that feeds them and every other hand they can reach.
Who elected Obama is not terribly important, and it's impossible to put those who voted for him into any particular slot -- we don't know who they were.
What's important is who voters thought they were electing, and that was the candidate who more-closely represented their values. So our reasonable expectations of his politics lie in Obama, not in an amorphous bunch of "moderates and independents".
I'll buck the tide and declare myself to be a progressive ideologue and NOT one who thinks Obama's much-lauded "governing from pragmatism" or "governing from the middle" is the best way for him to govern. In fact, I think it's the worst thing that could happen to America right now.
For starters, refresh your memory about John Dean's Conservatives without Conscience. How can Obama govern "from the middle", incorporating these people into his group of supporters, when conservatives have such a lust for authoritarian government and power that it overrides matters of conscience? Unless Obama becomes a "progressive authoritarian" himself, he's not likely to accomplish anything with these people creating chamber conflicts and fights. From the link:
So much for governing from some amorphous middle by bringing conservatives into the tent.
Next, there's the current situation brought about by the Bush administration. To the criminal horrors of the last eight years, now we have America's economic collapse knocking at the door, and Obama must certainly hit the ground running on that one.
Will Obama's "pragmatism" absent a progressive ideology be able to repair the damage Bush has done? Bring the administration crimes to justice so that the legal door is firmly closed against any future president who may want to illegally attack, invade, and occupy another sovereign country and torture people it captures? Illegally spy on Americans without warrants. I don't think so. Obama's already said he won't prosecute the Bush administration crimes, and his staff is saying that, too.
For an excellent critique of Obama's "pragmatism" and the marginalization of "ideology", if you didn't read it earlier, I suggest that you take a look at Evil and Pragmatism by Ta-Nehisi Coates, published in the Atlantic last week.
Chris Hayes, whom Coates quotes extensively, points out that Lincoln, one of Obama's historical "mentors", was a pragmatist, and a look at Lincoln's pragmatism is not altogether happy:
Maybe we should all pause and think before enthusiastically jumping on Obama's bandwagon of "governing pragmatically from the middle". Absent a consistent ideology somewhere on the scale of left/right, we still don't know what Obama's core values are, what will be the deciding principle when he has to make a "pragmatic choice" among all the voices yelling for his attention.
I also didn't expect him to go way to the left.
I think people are just so used to being cynical, that they've lost sight of the prize here.
Patience.
Left Jab was talking about Warren today and I thought it was interesting.
We are upset about Warren doing the invocation (and duskglow, I fully agree with you that my biggest issue is that there IS a invocation and a benediction) and the guy on Left Jab was saying we (the left) are all up in arms about Warren and that we should not even think of directly engaging with someone like him...but how would we feel about Obama direct engagement with Kim Jong Il, Chavez, or Ahmadinejad?
I thought it was an interesting discussion.
Thoughts?
My thoughts are... I dunno. That's actually an interesting point. On the flip side, is having Warren give the invocation the same thing as talking to Ahmadinejad? I'm not sure that's apples to apples by any means. To be apples to apples, we'd have to invite Ahmedinejad over and have him do some kind of rite at some state function. I don't think we'd do that, even on the best of days.
However, I think I agree with the general idea - if we're going to have dialog with any of the listed, listening to the insurgents on our homeland is at least as warranted.
HOMELAND?????????????????????
It is.
Maybe a loaded word in some respects, but no less accurate.
To my mind, there is a difference between engaging and embracing/rewarding. Let me first say that my REAL issue is the pandering to religionists. Do we no longer have separation of church and state? Did I miss the Constitutional amendment? Anyway, "engagement" with heads of states, regardless of our distaste for their policies, morals, etc., can make for sound foreign policy (not always, of course, so many examples of fail abound). This Warren business seems qualitatively different. Does anyone truly believe a rapprochement is possible with virulenty anti-gay, anti-choice, "people of faith"? Does anyone believe that these people will rally round PE Obama just because he let Pastor Warren make a prominent speech? Why pander to people who will NEVER support you? Why disdain people who HAVE supported you, materially, not merely with words?
I agree and I think the furor over this issue is ridiculous and is probably providing alot of amusement to those who voted against Obama.
Regardless of what kind of stuff can be said about R Warren, the outrage around this issue tells me that many people really hold tight to the same "you're for us or you're against us" doctrine which is iconic of the Bush administration.
The idea that the inclusion of Warren is an endorsement is shortsighted. If it is an endorsement I see it as an endorsement of keep your friends close and your enemies closer and don't give them the ability to define themselves by not being included in discussions.
The politics which we have been subject to lately has been a politics of coalitions of people often voting on single or narrow issues. There is a huge strategic risk if this continues with regard to the next elections. Obama was a long long shot and just happened to make it in due to fantastic competence in running a campaign and good fortune.
I allow that Obama is a better politician than I am. I also allow that if I were the Republican party, I would be very afraid of Obama letting Warren come to the table. The Repubs have been able to maintain their branding based largely on who they embraced and what they rejected. With the blurring of these lines they are very screwed with regard to defining exactly what or who they are against - they will have a very hard time rebranding themselves for the next election.
In the long run, this approach will likely work in favor of rights for minorities, gays / lesbians, and everyone.
Stop arguing over who is so "wrong" they shouldn't be at the table and start having the difficult discussions with those we disagree with. We were very lucky to have Obama elected. Don't waste it by assuming "we" will always be able to gang up on those we disagree with in order to have things the way we think is right.
And one thing the left absolutely *needs* to keep in mind.
We independents supported your candidate this time (I did so enthusiastically). We may not do the same next time. Both the left and the right are going to have to learn to compromise. The right didn't, and they are pretty much destroyed at this point. The left needs to NOT make the same mistake. Or they're going to meet the same fate.
Hahahahahahahahahahahhhhhaaaaa!
But he *was* the left's candidate.
Of what he said or what we heard?
I think, a combination.
to believe Hannity and O'Reilly's asessment that Obama was "far left" then have at it.
If you want to believe that the Democratic party is left-leaning - suit yourself!
Eugene Debs and Jane Addams in their graves -
they gyrate!
Did I ever say that Obama was far left? You're putting words in my mouth. I said he was the left's candidate, which is a very different thing.
I was getting emails from MoveOn.org DAILY about Obama parties, Stephanie Miller was almost gaga over him, and many left websites were going nuts over the prospect of him getting into office.
No, he was the candidate whom the left had to vote for to end the Bush crap.
The left's candidate was Dennis Kucinich, but the traditional media wanted Hillary or Obama, so they didn't give him any air time.
Looks like we're on the same page...
yeah, I voted for Obama in an effort to stop the bleeding.
I don't really expect much.
But once Kucinich was disqualified, the left threw everything they had behind him. Maybe he wasn't their first choice, but he was indeed their candidate.
Technically, yes. But for me he was more like the anti-McCain. It was all about the Supreme Court and the future beyond the next president.
your left foot with your middle foot.
Here's how it works:Republican = Far Right
Libertarian = Right
Democratic = Center
Green = Left
Socialist Equality/Socialist = Mid Left
Communist Worker's Party = Far Left.
You have been conditioned by the ProfitMedia pundits to think:
Republican= Center Right
Democrat(ic) Far Left
Think that Republicans are nothing other than far right scum.
I'm a little miffed at losing my firefighter's pension on the Republican's watch.
Where does a cripple go to get a job?
If I thought that I could get away with it....
But yes, I think that most Republicans are scum and those who aren't are fools.
....because McCain was unthinkable. That's about the size of it.
This election was engineered and systematically eliminated Kucinich, Edwards and the gentlemen who truly represented a sane and hospitable society.
Obama got my vote by default and by instinct stayed away from the stardust-drunk koolaid.
I'm 'the left' and he wasn't my candidate. He's not a candidate of the left. He was a candidate of the Democratic Party. Not a lefty in the bunch.
Dennis Kucinich and Marcy Kaptur are lefties.
Other than that, you're right!
or should I say, correct.
Agreed. Kucinich was my candidate. A real progressive.
I missed Kucinich, and I'm not familiar with Marcy Kaptur, but I've heard the name. I'll look into her.
I heartily agree with what you are saying. Obama is playing the game of politics. That is what a politician does. I imagine Obama as a fantastic chess player. He knows that the game cannot be won in a single play. It takes planning and strategy to win.
Plus, there are other more pressing matters than this. I feel that this whole Rick Warren fiasco is detracting from what is really important.
I thought that basic human rights for gays was important!
Silly me.
They are, but this may be a case of not being able to see the forest for the trees.
Sometimes what looks like a retreat is actually a move that will win the game.
Don't fall into the trap of thinking that everything that appears to be a loss is.
I mean, look at what the whole Prop. 8 thing has managed to do. In the end, it'll just get overturned, and in the meantime, the supporters are just coming off as completely unhinged. We couldn't pay for that kind of publicity.
hope that you're right.
Because all I've seen for the last thirty years is a long slide to the right.
And look where it got us.
That fact is not lost on everyone, no matter how many people wish it were.
I've expressed my outrage over this guy giving the invocation. Believe me, I hate this choice; however, I also see that people in the media are not giving the right coverage to say Cheney admitting that he allowed tortue to cover this story. I don't know how else to say that. I feel it's getting excessive coverage.
You may well be right about PE Obama's motives; I have no idea. My hope (no pun, etc.) is that he is way smarter than I. Rick Warren's motivations are another issue. The man is decidedly untrustworthy. He is devious and self-serving and his moral compass has been broken for a long time now. You and I and PE Obama may think that Warren is now in PE Obama's debt. I very much doubt that Warren will ever think so.
In a nasty plane crash.
Here's who Mike Connell is just in case you haven't heard of him:
http://www.atlargely.com/2008/12/one-of-my-so...
Oh, well. How about "the ghost of Mike Connell"?
How about that kid whose parents named him Adolph Hitler and his family? It would be a nice belated birthday present!
allowed near the Capitol during the inuagural?
apparrently not.
Lefties are only allowed 2500 miles west of DC on the Inauguration.
What Saruman has a previous engagement?
.
Invite George W.orst Bush
.
I have a feelin he will be there.
Although he shouldn't be, but, none the less, he'll be there.
David Duke.
No, I don't think Obama would reach out to him and give him a prominent position at his inauguration because Duke is a racist. I don't think reaching out would apply to those who think interracial relationships are a sin and an abomination either. Obama being black with interracial parents his sensitivities would dead on in that respect but he's not gay so slapping them in the face is ok.
Funny how everybody seems to understand why Obama wouldn't invite a bunch of racists, but seems to just dismiss his invote of Warren as though it were not exactly the same thing.
Maybe if Obama gets his outstretched hand chewed off, he'll do the right thing next time. Of course, just like DADT, then we're stuck with an ammendment banning gay marriage... that will take a generation or longer of which to rid ourselves.
David Duke would be someone that Obama could reach out to, perhaps appoint him to some position in charge of Civil Rights and equal justice for all. Duke would no doubt see the error of his ways and do a heckuva job.
yOU bETCHA !
These appointments are some more crazymaking shit. O's reversed his position on the use of Blackwater and other mercenaries as well.
Ah well, let's just sit back with our manhattans in hand and be patient.
Where on earth did you get such a clear photo of Newt Gingrich's Grandmother?
That was Babs Boosh.;)
I thought it was Newt
I think a newt is a small slimy lizard.
Sounds about right.
they're not slimy, and they mind their own business.
Maybe that's wy Minnesotans wrote in "Lizard People"?
The magical being should be invited, but would not be caught dead here. Freakin deacon, its now not classy to expect one to keep his pre- election word? This "bridge building" is just an excuse to change as little as they can get away with. Now we hear talk of not investigating criminal acts of bush and crew, in the name of getting along and building bridges and bla bla bla, almost every pick he has made so far points to same ol same ol, I hope I am wrong, but I am not hopeful. A criminal is a criminal,no gray area, they sure chase pot smokers to the ends of the earth, why not people who have started wars on lies and killed maybe as many as a million souls and who knows what other crimes. This is the same shit we got from " madam speaker" over impeachment hearings. We may yet have to march on Washington to get done what needs to be done, I hope you will be right next to me.CEO,citizens,eyes,open
Bill Cunningham
See http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/cunni...
... invite Hannibal Lecter. (Well, I guess he invites you for dinner)
and lecter in an elevator and make it stop. an old friend for dinner.
I still think men look ridiculous in Crocs.
"Bipartisan" wouldn't be prudent. Too many points of light! Build the bridge and send them to: NOWHERE...that is the answer. "Partisan" is the only thing that works. It worked for the "pube's" in crashing America. Let it work for the "Blues" making America work right. They are whiners! They admit it! It's "us" against "them". I know "them". "They" are demonic christians (believers in Ronald(666)Wilson Reagan)....the beast...the devil. Save Your Hand Obama! Reach out to us! The "force" will fight for you!...
PS...No Pelosi!
Signed Obi Wan!
They should let Richard Dawkins do it.
It's already looking like this is gonna be the 8th administration of the Reagan era.
Maybe he should also invite the New Orleans cops who aided white vigilantes and militia men in murdering black people and then accusing them of looting after the fact, and then blocking investigations of their activities.
Honestly, though, Obama's record, aside from his brief questioning of the war, never made progressive change look likely anyway.
on fox reporters
now you guys are ripping him for inviting a man to say a prayer, that most of you dont believe in anyway
give it a rest
if you think that obama will be talking to this guy during the next four years....dont worry about it
he tosses him a bone
let us all pray that the fuck gets frostbite from the cold
I don't think Bristol Palin's MIL is going to be available for the ceremony. However, should Ted Haggard be invited she might be persuaded to come - if Ted brings his dealer with him.
The best and easiest and wisest solution would be to NOT have an invocation or a benediction! This isn't the installation of a pope or other religious affair. This isn't a theocracy. America's government is secular. We fled and fought against the divine right of kingship, and set up a government where Church and State are separate institutions.
So why allow these fat cat religious bigots to elbow their way to the spotlight? Why give these greedy hate-ridden bastards a microphone? They are merchants, stripping money from the poor to pay for their mansions and megachurches.
The evangelists denigrate women, gays, catholics, jews, muslims... the other 3/4 of the population. Catholics loathe mormons, evangelists, women, etc.... the other 3/4 of the population. Mormons discriminate against women and hate gays. Jews are warmongers carrying 2000 years of grudges. Muslims stone people who violate their stupid religious laws. So, WHY allow any of these religious bigots a pulpit and camera to spew more venom and hatred of people with differences? They don't bind together... they drive apart.
They have an indordinate amount of freely given control over their followers.
Unfortunately, that is a resource that no politician can afford to waste.
Remember that religion exists only to control large groups of people anyway, and it'll all fall into place.
Bill O'Reilly.
Dig up Charlton Heston and Jerry Falwell.
If Obama starts ruling like the right wing then you can complain. Remember he is the president elect of the USA, not just one part of it. There are folks, Americans, that are not accepting Obama is their president. Warren, who agrees little with Obama is saying "you are my president"
We just went through a whole load of crap about Obama because he served on the same board as Ayers, having to defend the fact that just because he worked with someone doesn't mean he agrees with him. Yet here we are complaining about an invocation.
We've had 8 years of the children in charge, lets not replace them with more children.
Kim Jong Il
Count Dooku
Simon Bar Sinister
Pat Dobson
Larry Craig
Cobra Commander
Megatron
Laura Inghram
Eva Braun
Now I know why I didn't vote for Obama... the dude just weirded me the fuck out... like Reagan and his Skeletor 'ol Lady with the astrologers or hangin' out with that oddball Billy Graham.
I hope that Obama isn't some religious freak who sets up an alter in the Green Room to burn a lamb to give off the smell that He so much loves.
KEEP THE GOD SQUAD OUT OF MY GOVERNMENT.
Johnny Lindh Walker
Gov. Rod Blagojovich
Rev. Fred Phelps
Mark Levin
Rev. Ted Haggard
Rev. Franklin Graham
Gennifer Flowers
Rodney King
Rev. Jeremiah Wright
what's up with obama. we may be the left wing fringe, but we were also the ones who worked and gave to put him in office. unless we speak out now, he will believe the part of base that he has to listen to are the moderates who profess, "reach out in the spirit of friendship to the other side," and perhaps the very vocal african american base a minority in this country who has been discriminated against more than any other minority save the native american, and they the african american base would not will not and cannot deal with same sex marriage. so step on them. the old adage to be taller step on someone you perceive as beneath you. wake up. discrimination is discriminHation and by discriminating against this segment of the population, you are playing duncan hunter and his ilk's game. obama are you the same old sherriff. if so we've made a terrible mistake. i would have voted for dennis had they given him a chance, though i wanted either a woman or black in the white house. but stance on issues take precedence. oh my God i hope that we have not erred with obama.
And there's soemthing appropriate... something amusing, about an alligator with a severed human arm in its mouth? Tasteless choice C & L.
I don't know. I found it completely approriate. Unless the hand is supposed to represent Bill Clinton's it should have been a black hand though.
Or perhaps it's a gay person's hand. Seems like Obama threw the gays who supported him to the reich wing christo-fascist crocs.
Don't forget David Duke.
posted already.
Obama was elected to represent everyone, not just to advance the cause of progressive politics. And I believe it is clear that he decided to forego the temptation to pack the house with political idealogues like his predecessor did---which was an abject failure. Instead, he decided to pick competent people of both parties to serve America.
It is time we get past politics based solely on partisan affiliation--the black/white, either/or simplistic view promoted by the Neocons that has deeply poisoned our dialogue and realize that politics is ultimately a service business that transcends political affiliation. Obama was not elected to solely serve our interests, and adopting the perspective of self pitying marginalized victims will not help our cause one bit.
The gains that we make in the political system will be incremental and frankly, take some time. Read this book if you need some perspective:
www.paulloeb.org/index.htm
Let's go to work people and rebuild what the self centered have torn down.
So reaching out to anti-Semites and racists would be ok with you? Or do you just make the exception for anti-gay bigots?
not promoting homophobes should not be considered a "progressive cause" it should be mainstream and moderate.
You have to go all the way back to 1992-93 for the last time a new President reached out to his opponents, political enemies and the Religious Nuts.
How did that turnout?
I don't like Rick Warren either but do appreciate the premise on which the choice was made---as a gesture of conciliation. Warren would not have beem my choice and I doubt if we will ever reach the people that support him. Making people intractible enemies like the Repubs did through inflammatory rhetoric and confrontational tactics is wrong, however.
And if any of you are so cynical and disbelieving that you believe that conciliatory, coalition building tactics are naive tactics for the simpleminded, think again. Forbearance and compassion are not traits of weaklings, they are strengths that will ultimately prevail over the hateful and divisive tactics of Neocons.
Warren won't be doing anything important.
You fools hated Clinton too, before he went on to make the country better. Get out of the way; Obama's got stuff to do.
What fools hated Clinton? I think most of us here voted for him. It was reich wingers like Rick Warren who hated Clinton. Clinton ran to the "middle" and reached out to conservatives and what did it get him other than impeached? "Those who do not learn from history are destined to repeat it."
Already the righ wing is working like crazy to link Obama to Blago and the man hasn't even been sworn in yet. These people are nasty and vicious. They need to be vanquished not worked with.
Login or Register to post comments.