Random thoughts on Rick Warren.

[WilliamPitt]

In no way am I even remotely trying to defend the man, his crappy opinions, or the choice to have him deliver the inaugural invocation.

But I have two thoughts.

Obama/Biden won Colorado, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, North Carolina, Ohio, and Virginia.

I did some very rough math in order to get a sense of the religious demographics in these states, i.e. I wanted to try and determine what percent of each state's total population is comprised of the kind of evangelicals Rick Warren represents. What I came up with is hardly conclusive, and could be off by several million people, but it's in the neighborhood of accurate.

The total number of "Rick Warren-ish" evangelical/anti-choice/anti-gay/anti-evolution Christians in those states comes to somewhere on the order of 20 million people, maybe more, maybe less, but in the neighborhood for sure.

Obama would not have won without those eight states.

The "Warren" people live in those states are almost certainly GOP voters and make up the already fragile GOP base. Pull 10% away from voting GOP, and no Republican wins those states again.

So.

#1. Right off the bat, having Warren be involved seems like something for the be-careful-what-you-wish-for file re: 2008: we can do great things by winning states like those 8, but lots of people who live there are "Warren" types. Can't avoid the side-effects.

#2. What is better for America in the long run? Keep Warren off that stage, or keep winning Red states and annihilate the GOP? Put Warren up there, and maybe we keep winning, and after enough wins, there won't be any more "Warren" types in enough numbers to bother with.

Just some thoughts.

[babylonsister]

1. Deft. Thanks. nt

[Veritas_et_Aequitas]

2. No, I think you're right. Obama's collusion in supporting him is a calculating political move.

But that doesn't mean it's right.

[anonymous171]

12. Correct. nt

[tsuki]

33. And this is change...how? nt

[MadMaddie]

73. I agree with you

I think this is a strategic move.

I think that by offering the Olive branch it puts the onous on Warren to perform. Along with the Olive Branch is some rope....Warren is either going to man up and work to heal the country or more than likely he will make an ass out himself on a national stage. This will link him directly to the extreme fringe right and minimize him.

Obama is not stupid, I think many people still underestimate him. This does not mean we can't criticize him and it doesn't mean we have to agree with everythng he says.

[Captain Hilts]

3. A sack of potatoes would have beaten McCain. nt

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[firedupdem]

76. yeah right... n/t

[WI_DEM]

86. but not by the proportions Obama did and not with the kind of coattails Obama had.

[Captain Hilts]

87. We stomped the Republicans in 2006 also. nt

[musette_sf]

4. Mel White would have been the correct choice

not Warren.

[Trajan]

5. As a dedicated Atheist ...

I can understand the political benefits, even if I grumble at possible excesses ...

I suppose it is the exact nature of what such excesses may exist, if at all ...

I like my freedom, and I certainly support Rick Warren's freedom to do as he wishes for himself ...

Some good points, Will ...

They would be even better once I enjoy a delicious ale ...

Comin right up ... :beer:

[readmoreoften]

6. What makes you think that having Warren is somehow "crucial" to winning Red states?

Wouldn't a moderate evangelical who stays neutral on abortion and LGBT issues do just as well? Do you really think Obama won white, evangelical, homophobes who don't like labor?

[WilliamPitt]

18. I never said it was

It's one minute out of the whole.

Could it help?

I think probably yes, no doubt.

[rhett o rick]

45. Not worth the risk. nm

[BigBearJohn]

23. I agree 100%

[Mari333]

7. aye, but here's the rub

if he keeps this up he will lose MY vote in 2012.

[MannyGoldstein]

8. There's Got To Be Someone Better Who Could Do This

Warren spews hatred with a pretty perfume scent. But it's hatred and intolerance, precisely what we don't need.

He says that Jews are going to Hell - I'd imagine that Muslims, Hindus, and all others who don't believe in Warren's doctrine are going to Hell as well. This is bad, bad stuff.

[Veritas_et_Aequitas]

11. That's the scary thing - of his breed of Christian, he's the most palatable.

He at least attempts to dress up his hatemongering in pretty terms, which is a lot more than his fellows bother to do.

Again, I understand the logic behind the choice, but I still don't agree with it.

[scarletwoman]

32. I don't see why we should pander to "his breed of *christian*" at all. They're fake, phony, and

destructive to the body politic.

Justifying having Rick Warren at the inauguration is like insisting that anthrax be represented at a cattle convention.

sw

[anndash]

36. Why not a Buddhist?

Where are we represented anywhere?

[Hekate]

77. As much as I love a good dharma talk I recognize what a tiny minority Buddhists are. One of Hawaii's

... Congressional Representatives is a Buddhist from what I hear, though, so you could say that Buddhists are represented in the US Congress.

Hekate

[Tangerine LaBamba]

9. How naive are we?

Does anyone honestly think that Bigot Warren's prayers at the inauguration are going to "win over" those people who would rather die than vote for Obama, would rather die than join with any of us on any issue, would rather die than allow gay people to have full rights just like we straight people do?

If anyone believes this patently offensive "gesture" is going to cause any of those people out there to rethink their beliefs, then I would advance that those people, the ones who believe this, are clinically insane.

It's an empty gesture, only it has the added pizazz of being a big punch in the face to the gay and lesbian community as well as to those of us who supported Obama and truly expected better from him, even on the small issues, if this could be called a small issue.

Thanks, Barack. Now you've ensured that that fat fuck's picture will be in all the history books. Good luck in explaining to your kids when they're old enough to ask you why you had such a vile, narrowminded bigot pray over you at your inauguration.

The instrument hasn't yet been invented that can measure my disappointment.

[Mari333]

13. yes, my mother would have only voted for Obama

if the Pope had said it was okay.

[Veritas_et_Aequitas]

17. I think you raise an excellent point.

It's Obama's inaugural Hail Mary to win over a segment of the population that will remain hostile to him. I think Obama's hoping that if one of their own prays over his administration they'll have less grounds to criticize him.

That won't happen. Cognitive dissonance seems to be common among evangelicals and fundamentalists of all sorts.

But, hey, maybe something good will come of it... Maybe Warren will lose street cred with is own people for colluding with Obama. One can hope.

[WilliamPitt]

20. Nothing happens in one fell swoop.

Obama isn't going to revolutionize politics. He's a step in the right direction.

Putting Warren up there won't win any elections.

But it'll be an image for the GOP base to chew on.

One small step.

And like I said, this is me just thinking out loud.

[anndash]

31. Exactly....bigots don't belong front and center

at the inauguration of the first black president.

[gollygee]

10. Republicans who voted for Obama would be happy with any white, Christian man

they could have found someone who wasn't part of the flat earth society.

[whirlygigspin]

16. if this is any indication of what an Obama regime will be like...

then I hope he makes plans to find another job in 2012

[anndash]

26. I was going to vote for

Kucinich until Palin was McSame's VP pick. I didn't know that Obama was such a pushover for the religious right. I think they are despicable.

[yardwork]

14. Thanks for nothing, and, I'm not that naive.

Rick Warren isn't going to win Obama a single vote, but Obama's elevating him in this manner just alienated a lot of Obama's base.

That's bad politics. There were other, better choices.

[David Zephyr]

84. Well said.

!

[stlsaxman]

15. As I remember the Shacklefoot "Debates", the crowd was very polite, welcoming and attentive...

Maybe in deference to Warren, but if they heard one nth of what Obama said that night- they grew a little. That in itself a miracle.

Of course the crowd went gaga for McCain but that was expected.

Good points, Mr. Pitt!

[DS1]

19. I don't agree with the choice personally, but I agree with it politically/strategically

and it's a shit choice to have to make, but that's where we are.

[EFerrari]

21. Oh, f#ck me. People who vote against teh gay are older voters.

The younger people are with us and pandering to a diminishing minority is not the fast track to a permanent majority.

Plus, it's wrong.

[WilliamPitt]

35. If we've learned anything in the last few years,

it's that securing a permanent majority is a pipe dream. Demographics are always changing, and the trends all favor Democrats, but there's still a lot of poison in the pipes.

In situations like this, I always remember Al Gore. When he became a Senator from Tennessee, his constituency was stoutly anti-choice. His first votes on choice reflected his TN constituency, i.e. he voted anti-choice. But he went to work on those voters, and made his arguments, and started making pro-choice votes. The TN voters didn't repudiate him for it, because he convinced enough of them that he was right.

He cast bad choice votes at first, but moved enough of his voters to his side that he could vote pro-choice without getting crushed. It took time, and amounted to a small swing overall, but it worked.

My point: Warren isn't the issue for me. The very idea that such a man is going to be up there disgusts me, but then again, so do the beliefs of the millions who think as Warren does. Involving Warren in this small way is, to me, like Gore's early anti-choice votes. Warren being there includes those fucked up Christians in the whole, and including them lets us move them away from their craziness.

Ignoring them won't make them go away. Making them think twice about voting GOP, however, might do just that.

Plus, there are a lot of them out there, and quite a few voted for Obama, so throwing them a bone like this isn't wildly out of step with Obama's outreach/post-partisan ways.

It sucks, it sucks really badly, but those people are out there and need to be dealt with. Keep friends close and enemies closer, says the Godfather.

[EFerrari]

39. Your thread made me think of the things Jack Kennedy wanted to put over

for his second term.

:hug:

[PVnRT]

97. Why do it at inauguration?

I've yet to hear an nswer for that. There are plenty of forums this could have been accomplished at.

[WilliamPitt]

102. Just a guess

What would require several hours in a smaller forum can be accomplished in one minute on that big stage. The inauguration is for all Americans, not just Democrats. We're giving the fundies sixty whole seconds of TV time. We can pull through.

[scarletwoman]

22. If "annihilating the GOP" means morphing into a facsimile, I want none of it.

If we're going to evolve as a society, I fail to see how showcasing and therefore legitimizing some of the most UNevolved facets of the collective consciousness accomplishes it.

Instead of pandering to ignorance and superficial psuedo-spirituality, how about presenting an opening to a compelling new direction?

You know, like, maybe enlightening people?

Sorry, no sale. Already did eight years of swallowing bullshit and declaring it delicious during the Clinton administration. Not gonna do it anymore.

sw

[Individualist]

27. Ditto!

Morphing into a facsimile of the neocons is exactly what DLC wants, and that's exactly why I detest DLC. :puke:

[anndash]

28. Ditto 2

[Maven]

30. +1

[rhett o rick]

47. Exactly, exactly. nm

[readmoreoften]

51. Great post.

[BoneDaddy]

118. Come on dont be so naive

That is not the way the world works. It never has and it never will.

[anndash]

24. I'm going to stop

payment on the check that I just sent the his inaugural committee. It's just as bad as Palin's pastor doing it. I disagree totally with his choice. Why not Thich Nhat Hahn - the peace-loving Buddhist and my favorite. No, he picks a bigot. Disgusting.

[Hekate]

79. You really sent a check to Obama's inaugural committee? After reluctantly giving up on Kucinich?...

... and only voting for Obama because of Palin? (I think that's what you said upthread)

I'm impressed. What made you write that check in the first place, since you have such enormous ambivalence about Barack Obama?

Oh, btw, your bank will charge you for stopping payment on a check.

Hekate

[Maven]

25. Yeah, that's the ticket. We've just gotta keep *winning.* We'll stand for something soon enough.

Just keep on trying to *win*.

That's what we're about.

[SammyWinstonJack]

116. !!

:thumbsup:

[Phentex]

120. Yes, we sit back and wait our turn.

:thumbsup:

[Lisa0825]

29. Thank you.

I don't like it, but it's just a moment and a gesture. It's not a cabinet position. It's not legislation signed or vetoed. It's not a Supreme Court pick. I hope that we'll eventually look back on it, or frankly NOT look back on it because we'll have forgotten it in lieu of the good things that will have actually been DONE.... as opposed to the gesture of giving a moment to a preacher that millions of other people (not me) identify with.

[Ohio Joe]

34. I have to disagree

Do you honestly believe that in 2012 when the GOP puts up another fundy nut job that any of them will vote Dem because we give this POS a platform? I don't buy that for a second.

[Mari333]

38. I knew Obama wasnt Kucinich

but I kind of hoped he wouldnt become Lieberman or Pelosi. in this choice, he did.

[Pirate Smile]

37. If Rick Warren isn't the modern day equivalent of Billy Graham then I don't know who is.

:shrug:

(I'd prefer Jim Wallis, of course.)

[Smarmie Doofus]

40. If LBJ had dropped the Voting Rights Act business we'd....

... still be carrying Mississippi and Alabama every election.

[rockymountaindem]

41. Best response in this thread n/t

[Smarmie Doofus]

49. Thanks, Rock. nt

[readmoreoften]

53. Seconded.

[kath]

58. Thirded - LBJ frickin' DID THE RIGHT THING even though it was politically costly.

I'm starting to wonder if we'll ever see Obama have enough spine to do something similar.

[enlightenment]

55. Priceless!

*applause*

[Blue_Tires]

70. well said....

[SidDithers]

82. Kick for this reply...

:applause:

Sid

[Uzybone]

106. No we wouldn't

The Dixiecrats ran in 1948. Wallace and his ilk already had firm grip of the South by the time LBJ signed the voting acts bill.

Plus since we are doing hypotheticals, RFK would not have been assassinated and then he would have signed the bill in 1968.

[KoKo]

42. I live in NC...and those who voted for Obama were not those who support Rick Warren...

It's the transplants of all races and the African-American population that put him over the top here in NC. I'm a transplant via SC to NY/CONN/NJ/NY and then back South to NC. I don't count myself as an Evangelical Christian even though by birth I'm Southern...but not Evangelical. Obama was elected in NC for CHANGE by folks here who are enlightened and not like those in Mississippi, Alabama or LA or the rest of the places that are so caught up in their Religion they can't see the failing economy or the ravages of war.

Just saying...although I understand what you say. Obama did run for UNITY...it may be his way of truly reaching across the aisle. But, many of us still would have hoped for better picks for some of his cabinet positions but held back. Rick Warren giving the Inaugural Invocation threw many OTT who just saw it as "one pick that went too far for 'Unity.'" What kind of Unity?

[Malikshah]

43. Ah the Chess game strategy.. Didn't work in 2000, 2002, 2004.

How things stay the same...

[Ichingcarpenter]

44. Still doesn't prevent you from letting them know how you feel

I can play politics with this too and I don't play nice with Warren's bigotry

enter your comments on this page:

http://change.gov/page/s/yourstory

[anndash]

46. I've already sent a reply

to the email I received about making a donation to the Inauguration. I made one and now stopped the check. Don't want to be any part of this charade.

[bigtree]

48. he's got the honorable Rev. Lowery on the other side giving the benediction

. . . like bookends to his swearing-in.

[kath]

59. Oh GACK - TWO fuckin' prayers in one *government* ceremony, of a govt that is *supposed to* have

separation of church and state??
:puke:

why can't we keep that shit in churches, temples and mosques, where it BELONGS, and OUT of govt functions?????

[bigtree]

64. I don't believe the prayers themselves will be any kind of an imposition

There's no requirement that you listen, or any mandate that the words are heeded or adhered to by the President or the Vice-President.

I suspect that most folks welcome the accompaniment of the prayers in the ceremony, aside from whatever feelings they may have about the ones delivering them.

[rhett o rick]

50. First of all, one of the reasons Obama got so much support was that he didn't stand for what Rick

Warren does. If Obama sells out to get the wacko vote, he will lose a large number of Democrats.

Second, giving in to those homophobic idiots is unthinkable. Especially for political gains.

Give up our principles and we got nothing. We will be republicans.

[Jim Sagle]

54. Another random thought: Fuck'm.

;)

[tomp]

56. here's a random thought for you.

thousands of people who would otherwise be celebrating the inauguration will be protesting. that'll help.

here's another one. obama is alienating the left. that'll help in 2008-2012.

[The River]

57. I Would Like To Think

that everyone on the "Left" would big smart enough
to see and understand the bigger picture but I guess some special
interest supporters lose the ability to see beyond
their particular issue.

Will is right about
undercutting support for the GOP but there is also
the strong possibility that Obama is reassuring, including, disarming,
dare I say befriending, a large segment of the Country
he will need on his side to implement the change he seeks.

What are the chances that a "Green Job/Industry" revolution
(or any other progressive program) will become reality if all the
good Church goers start telling Corker and McConnell to STFU and give the
man a chance because Rick Warren thinks he's OK?

IF Obama has managed to get Rick Warren to help out,
to be on the side of whats going to be good for the
Country, then its a brilliant move.

[Mari333]

60. perhaps he can shore up the neonazi vote, then

by asking David Duke to speak at his next rally?
same concept.

[MountainLaurel]

93. That was my first thought

I guess H8 is OK when it's not his family being affected.

[David Zephyr]

61. Bullshit. Bullshit. Bullshit.

You began your excuse making with the classic canard: "In no way am I even remotely trying to defend the man, his crappy opinions, or the choice to have him deliver the inaugural invocation."

Your entire post was only that: a pathetic defense of this creepy man prefaced with your cheesy disclaimer.

Thanks, William.

You are always absent whenever GLBT issues come up.

Noted.

[bluedawg12]

66. Appeasement. Appeasement. Appeasement.

And for what and on who's backs?

[Bluebear]

62. 'In no way am I even remotely trying to defend the man' - but my whole post will defend his choice.

Shame.

[jonnyblitz]

65. EXACTLY. sad.

[bluedawg12]

67. What is anyone gaining from this so called token honor?

It's not like the bigot is going to change.

[enigmatic]

72. yep

:thumbsup:

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

74. Exactly

[bluedawg12]

63. Not a question of being politically savvy, there are ways to do that

he can be inclusive of Warren on some other political issues and in private negotiations, but has Warren earned the right to be front and center and did we gain enough capital from this move to change those rw minds about civil rights for gays or any other social issues?

Or is it the other way around and it sends a message: the cultural wars are alive and well?

[Luminous Animal]

68. That's how Republicans win elections...

pandering to ignorance.

[PurityOfEssence]

69. There's a joke in show biz:

Show Biz is like a huge mountain of shit with a delicate, exquisite black rose at the summit. The problem is that after eating the mountain to get to it, you might forget what the rose was for.

What price glory?

What does it profit a man to gain the world if he loses his soul?

If one is skilled at maneuvering, what makes anyone think he'll ever do anything but maneuvering?

Rorschach Obama.

Think about it.

[VOX]

71. Trying to grasp the strategy angle, but it still sticks in the craw like a spoonful of powered alum.

The * administration never made a single concession along these lines. In fact, they handed out responsibilities and posts to their fellow ideologues, boldly and with a fuck-you-if-you-don't-like-it- attitude. No efforts were made to meet at least a 1/4 of the way.

After eight years of rack after rack of right-wing bullshit, here comes the Rick Warren pick. While it may be politically savvy, it's certainly nauseating to the soul of anyone who has a lick of common sense or compassion.

[HEyHEY]

75. Except that you're making "Warren types" feel justified, hence more come out of the woodwork.

And only now, they infest the democratic party and begin perverting what the party is supposed to stand for in the first place. It's already happening here. So many dems defending leaving same-sex DUers out to dry because they're scared of losing. That fear of losing will grow, and more and more bullshit like the bile Warren spews will follow. And as the dems continue to turn a blind eye and even accept it, so will die many great ideals.

[rvablue]

78. I'm in VA and I nor anyone I know voted for Obama b/c Rick Warren said it was OK. n/t

[David Zephyr]

80. A random kick for this sorry thread that needs more viewing.

.

[LeFleur1]

81. Supporters of the Warren Pick

I'm just wondering if you would support a sexist homophobe or a racist? Because Warren falls into two of these categories, at least. I thought this was the exact thing we were changing from.

I am disillusioned. How could anyone who believes in freedom and justice and equality for all choose a person to pray him into the whitehouse who doesn't believe in these things? Excuses such as saying those who support Warren voted for Obama and should get payback is weak to sick. Sometimes you must have to stand for what is right no matter the votes.
I thought that was the kind of man we elected.

Would you be as supportive of a white supremist minister? Where do you draw the line at discrimination? This man is not okay.

[David Zephyr]

83. Ask those questions to the OP author, William Pitt. I'm kicking up this lousy thread so more see it.

I agree with every word you wrote. My kicking the thread up is to keep it up in front of the DU community.

[WilliamPitt]

110. Ah. More shame.

Get a hobby. Soon.

[jonnyblitz]

111. get the fuck over yourself SOONER

bigot apologist.

[WilliamPitt]

124. Awesome.

That's almost as cool as when I got called a "breeder" last year.

One more time.

1. Obama won Colorado, Florida, Ohio, Iowa, Indiana, North Carolina, Virginia and Nevada.

2. Obama would not be taking the oath without those states.

3. By my math, there are more than 20,000,000 fundamentalist Evangelical Christians in those states.

4. Obama has to be president of them, too.

5. He'd also like to win those states again in '10 and '12.

6. So he's throwing the religious right a bone by letting Warren speak for exactly, precisely 60 seconds.

I think the repuiblic will survive.

Hope I see you soon, tough guy.

[jonnyblitz]

90. and this is a truly SORRY fucking thread. nt

[mnhtnbb]

85. The evangelicals that Warren represents did NOT vote Obama here in NC

nor in any other state, my guess. Numbers do not mean shit, Will. Were you there in the voting booths with those people? My guess is they LOVED Sarah Palin and they'll be supporting her run for national office in 2012.

I am extremely offended by Obama's choice of Rick Warren. He's going to trash his inaugural with
the presence of this bigot. Really smart move, Obama. Aren't you clever with your 'reaching out'
and simultaneously alienating millions of people who worked hard to get you elected?

Too clever by half, as the Brits would say.

[David Zephyr]

88. One more "random" kick to keep these "random thoughts" in full view.

.

[WilliamPitt]

100. OK...

Thanks. You're scheduled to kick this again in 14 hours. Be sure you do, or else it'll evaporate, or melt, or whatever.

This is you trying to shame me with something I wrote and posted, something I've kicked a few times myself. This is really what you're doing, and you sound pretty psyched about it.

This is me being kind of amazed you don't have anything better to do with your time. Also, I guess you missed the memo, but I took my shame out behind the barn and blew it's brains out quite a while ago, so really, you're just grinding your gears by trying to shame me with my own post. I'll get you another copy of that memo, and I'm also going to need you to come in on Sunday, OK? Great.



;)

P.S. Feel free to dial up the snark to an equally obnoxious level when you reply. Also, the OP was me pretty much thinking out loud. Ever heard one of these go off?



That's me thinking out loud. Sometimes I think impure, un-righteous thoughts when I'm thinking out loud, because I'm thinking things through and stuff, because I don't always know for sure what I think about things before I think about things, so sometimes I have to think about things. Good thing I got rid of my sense of shame, eh? Otherwise I'd have all these perfect liberals trying to make me feel bad for straying off the script.

(Pretty shitty, David. I thought we were friends)

[Evoman]

89. He fucking won....why is he still fucking campaigning at his inaugaration?

[WilliamPitt]

99. Seriously?

He's got 18 monthws - maybe - before he has to start campaigning for the '12 election. All 435 House members are already campaigning, and the new Congress hasn't even been sworn yet. Most House Reps, especially those holding hotly contested seats, need to raise $10,000 a week, every week, for the next 22 months so they can defend their seat in the '10 midterms.

The campaigning never stops. Obama will need Congressional support if he has a prayer of passing anything with enough votes to overcome the GOP's mindless opposition to everything he proposes...they'll do like they did with the Detroit bailout, just fuck things up for the sake of fucking things up. Ergo, Obama needs to win over the voters in several crucial states, so they don't piss all over their Senators and Reps and cost him votes on key bills (Virginia leaps to mind). He has to campaign to do that.

The midterms are like 30 seconds away, and the re-election race is only minutes behind.

Life is easy when the Democrats only win those "Gore states" we're all familiar with, for two reasons: 1) we are familiar with those voters in those states, and we mostly agree on most everything, so getting along in harmonius accord is a snap...but, 2) Winning just the "Gore states" translates into losing presidential elections, twice now, which makes it even easier. We're not running shit, we have no power, and we all knoiw each other. Let's protest!

But when the Democrats go batshit crazy and win stuff like Colorado, Virginia, Indiana, Iowa, Florida, North fuckin' fa chrissakes Carolina and Nevada, well...two other things happen: 1) We get elected, which means we are responsible for all sorts of heavy shit, and; 2) We have to deal with the many tens of millions of voters in those crazy states we fucked up and won, including the millions of fundy Christian types who live there. We like winning, so we have to talk fundy to them if we want to keep winning, which means dealing with shit like this.

Obama is president of everyone, including a lot of dipshits whose votes we'd like to get next time around, so we can get that filibuster-proof majority and use it to stack the Supreme Court with competent jurists who respect the rule of law, and choice, and habeas corpus, and subpoena power, etc. So he has to deal with everyone, and we're out of practice on that score after so many years of only winning the same states we always win. This guy sucks out loud, but I want good judges on the court, so I'm gonna swallow hard and press on.

The campaigning never ever ever ever ever stops.

[ruggerson]

91. Why don't we appoint James Dobson as "Family Czar" with broad powers

and win some deep Southern states next time as well?

[Lyric]

92. In response to #2--having Warren come speak does nothing to win over Repukes.

They hate it almost as much as we do.

Besides, the only way that we can steal Repukes and bring them over is to adopt and/or appease some of their positions. If we do THAT (especially in regard to civil rights issues) then the Democratic Party, as a vehicle for progressive policy, is a failure.

I don't want unity with bigots. I want them to die off until they're a minority, and then relegate the rest to fringe obscurity where they belong. Trying to "unite" with them just legitimizes bigotry, selfishness, and greed--the three Holy Virtues of the conservative right.

I am NOT interested in that--no way, no how. Some things are just flat-out wrong, and should not be compromised on.

[SarahB]

94. So we won, now we should be wimps?

What the fuck?

I'm sorry, but you are dead wrong. First of all, Warren will be an absolute non-issue by 2012 to conservatives four years from now. No fundie is going to be sitting in a voting booth in 2012 saying, "I wasn't going to vote for Obama this time, but when I think about that Warren inaugural speech back in Jan '09, wow, it changes my mind." How naive and silly!

What will be an issue is our party staying strong and loyal to the core values that make us better. My party is not a party that is in favor of bigotry and I'd like to keep it that way. We are better than this.

[WilliamPitt]

101. Wimps stay close to home and only talk to people they agree with

It's a fucking hard-ass hustle to go out there and win over millions of GOP voters. Wimpy? Try it.

P.S. Those wimps do that so we can get real jurists on the high court. For starters.

People who approach the filthy hog-wallow of politics dressed in white robes of purity bewilder me, especially when they get all pissy about the mud.

It's a filthy business.

P.S. If you read the OP again, I clearly said this Warren thing was just one little gesture, and not remotely potent enough to win any votes. I said it's a start, a small bone thrown their way that will certainly be followed by more, because we have to keep winning.

P.P.S. Your party is the party of bigotry, homophobia and mysoginy, because your party is made of millions of Americans, and not all of them root for Sidney Poitiet in "Guess Who's Coming To Dinner." Stop pretending it's any other way. We are not better than that, but we're working on it night and day.

And that's the point...because that work happens where all that mud is. Wimpy? I think not.

[SarahB]

103. But pretending that homophobes and misogynists are RIGHT does nothing.

I'm not going to say that Obama's choice of Warren is right. I'm not going to say, "Oh yeah, well if we're just nice and understanding, they'll see the light." I'm sorry, but what's right is right and what's wrong is wrong. Some of us actually see and experience these "theoretical questions" on a daily basis. For example, high risk pregnancies leading to painful choices for women and families, issues with inner cities, children, and schools, GLBT issues, health care. It's not just random theories for some of us to compromise on. It's our lives. It's our work. It's what we do.

Yeah, some of us stay close to home. Some of us have families, responsibilities, and do not have the upper middle class privilege of devoting our entire lives to politics 24/7 or have jobs that allow us to sit on a website most of the day. Some of us stay close to home vote, work, and volunteer in multicultural, diverse environments who aren't afraid to speak our minds in the face of bigotry in our families and neighborhoods. It's "little people" who make slow changes in the minds of others that actually have an effect of thinking over generations.

edit: grammar error

[KG]

104. !!!

:thumbsup:

[PeaceNikki]

121. Giving a voice to misogyny and bigotry should never be accepted.

[depakid]

95. That's a classic false choice

The bottom line is that there were MUCH better alternatives than to have ignited this all too forseeable shitstorm that would have played equally well with the concerns of those voters.

Indeed, what heppened since may well end up alienating them further.

Not a very bright move- and hopefully one that won't be repeated time and again down the line....

[PVnRT]

96. 1. Increased voter turnout

2. Bad economy
3. Unpopular incumbent party
4. Changing demographics

Those four factors led to Obama's win in those four states. It had nothing to do with sucking off fundies so that they feel OK.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

98. Rick Warren provided the impetus that propelled Obama past McCain?

That's 'effing stupid.

[alittlelark]

105. I tried that argument last night (different wording)

I got attacked right and left for awhile.... but I think some ppl 'got it'.

[AntiFascist]

107. My random thought is: WHAT THE FUCK!

There are many, many other ways to appeal to red states... we don't have to resort to placing the lowest common denominator in the spotlight! Whoever advised Obama to do this (and I certainly hope he didn't come up with this on his own) simply did not understand the politics.

Placing gay rights issues front and center in a national campaign is a RIGHT-WING strategy. This is done to create a wedge issue that forces people to take sides and polarize them. This is something Governor Palin would do. I would wager that most Southerners do not strongly associate with Warren, and right now gay rights issues are nowhere near the top priority of their concerns, particularly with the economy the way it is and with job losses.

There are plenty of ways to be inclusive, even where it comes to religion, without alienating the progressive part of your base, the most important part of Obama's base when it comes to CHANGE that is needed in moving us on from the Bush Administration. You talk about those red states like they are hopeless causes, as if we have to address their evil side in order to win them over. I would rather give them the benefit of the doubt.

[Duer 157099]

108. B&W thinkers view compromise as weakness

There is no way that this benefits the progressive movement in the long term. No way.

Oh, they might pay lip service in the meantime, but have no doubt, every compromise he makes is being logged as a sign of weakness, and like the jackals they are, they will bide their time and when their numbers are strong enough, will take him (metaphorically speaking) down fast and furious.

[NoPasaran]

122. You could say the same about the self-proclaimed progessives

Although they tend to call compromise "pandering" if this website is any indication.

[Critters2]

109. The gay haters I know in Iowa didn't vote for Obama,

so there's no reason to throw them a bone.

[quaker bill]

112. I tend to agree

While your analysis may be an estimate, a strategy of competing in 50 states, or expanding the map of battlegrounds, an aspect critical to this victory, required speaking to voters who have typically supported the republican candidate.

This concept has always generated conflict on DU. The critics are on both sides are correct in their own way. If you broaden the party, its body will then include people who may have a mix of less than progressive views on some issues. To some extent the party is transformed into a more ideologically diverse group. A generalized toleration of views that some other portions of the party finds offensive is an inherent part of this increased diversity. An expanded party requires some of this from all directions. Some will always complain of the discomfort and the marginal loss of control of the overall party message, and they are correct, it is not comfortable and some measure of control has truly been lost.

On the other hand, the other critics are correct, that failure to expand the party results in repeated losses at the ballot box. While it is always more comfortable to be in a group of like-minded individuals, if you lose the election, nothing changes, except perhaps as has been true over the last 8 years, things do change, but all for the worse.

The essential rub is that change is never a comfortable process. Change is always hard work and involves challenging our assumptions and the limits of our comfort zone. Things that happen will not always be subject to our approval, nor meet with it. Giving up some level of the sense of control is always necessary and coming to understand that we are not individually entitled to get all things our way is essential.

As a Quaker, I know that I will not get all things to go my way. It would be a very different country if I did. We were once called upon to do an invocation for a public meeting. It was an interesting challenge because we have no minister and generally do not invoke things. We muddled our way through as best we could. It is likely a good thing that Barack did not pick us for this assignment

[MadHound]

113. First of all, if this is a calculated political move, then it is despicable

An inauguration needs to be a celebration, not a political event with one eye on the the next election.

Second, and most important, Obama's use of Warren is not, absolutely not, going to draw in one single vote from the people who look favorably upon Warren. Despite all the BS rhetoric that Warren is a kinder, gentler fundie, the reality of the matter is that his anti-gay, racist, anti-feminist, kinder, gentler schtick is nothing more than Falwell, Robertson, etc. repackaged with different language. His agenda is the same, his viewpoints are the same, and his followers are the same. For a PE wanting to unite the population, this is one hell of a divisive move. And as a political move, it fails miserably, since Obama won't get one single vote for himself or other Democrats, while alienating a large swath of his constituency.

Obama may say he's a fierce protector of the LGBT community, but his actions say otherwise. First, he doesn't support gay marriage, and second, this stunt is truly a slap in the face of everybody in the LGBT community, or who cares about them.

Bad move, politically, symbolically, and socially.

[Marrah_G]

114. I find it more shameful if it was done for votes Will

There were plenty of people out there whom he could have chosen that were anti-gay, anti-abortion, anti-woman activists.

I doubt I will be tuning in to what should have been a joyful, momentous, historic night.

Just another politician pandering to hate group leaders, giving them a voice.

Some folks, including Obama, are okay with it because they aren't a member of one of these groups this person actively and openly hates.

Obama was supposed to be different.

[Creideiki]

115. Okay, Will

The Evangelicals here in Colorado--I'm here, you're not--were strongly against the unions, women's right to choose, and the African-American and ethnic minority communities, and we had constitutional amendments for all of those on the last ballot.

7% of the voting population is LGBT. I hope you can win without the LGBT vote on those issues and the next time Obama, Udall, DeGette, and others are up for re-election. Cause I'm not going to support you or your small-minded, petty, little issues since you won't support me.

Thanks for letting me know the coalition is broken. I'll find a progressive party and start supporting it, because it's clear that you don't want or need our votes.

[BoneDaddy]

117. I have been saying this in almost every post

but all I get in return is accusations of not supporting the gay community, which is ludicrous.

I guess if you are not with us you are against us is the current mentality for some on this issue.

It is a political move.

[burythehatchet]

119. Winning is so cool. Everything else is meaningless.

[terrya]

123. And in the process, kick GLBT people to the curb.

Oh, well. No big deal.

[Strathos]

125. My random thought about Warren, MOTHERFUCKER!

Fuck him and his knuckle dragging followers.

[DonEBrook]

126. Here's another random thought: He's an asshole and so is anybody who supports him.

...