The Log Cabin Democrat

[sniffa]

Yes, yes another Warren thread.

I haven't weighed in too much on the subject - I have but I've mostly avoided commentary despite where I come down on the issue. Many of my would-be responses would get deleted and with my track record here I prefer not to give myself the final push out the door. What I have said in various threads I'll try to incorporate into this thread.

The selection of Warren was despicable - a direct slap in the face of the GLBT community and our allies (as well as other blocs). There should be outrage and hurt expressed at this.

However, the real hurt comes from the response from too many on DU. Many get it (and some have come around after seeing it in a new light), but sadly too many don't. A few have been openly hostile but I believe most of those who "don't get it" are at best indifferent and at worst cruel. It's this response from DU that continues the constant Warren threads. We expect DUers to be on our side unconditionally (ha!) and would love to have the Democratic Party leader at least throw a bone.

You want the Warren threads to stop? Then look at yourself and your reactions here. If you can't acknowledge the hurt, then there will be more Warren threads. If you acknowledge the hurt but qualify your support for the GLBT community then yes, there will be more Warren threads. If you openly mock the hurt expressed here you betcha there'll be more Warren threads. If you can't empathize you can at least not contribute to the ongoing backlash. ("I'd love empathy but I'll settle for STFU.")

Someone correctly noted that at least the Log Cabin Republicans know what they're getting. That's just fucking sad. It's time for the party to become a two way street. They need to fight for us and not just pay lip service.

I want Obama to do well. I need Obama to do well. We all need Obama to do well. I don't like being mad at him but I really don't like being mad at DU.

[GarbagemanLB]

1. One thing that always amazes me are those who continually post outrage threads

against Warren thinking they are in the minority here on DU.

[Two Americas]

2. explain that

What is it you are claiming to see? I think you want people to see something, or think that something is there - you want people to see or think that the people posting threads about Warren are not to be taken seriously or listened to, because they are posting too much, because posting outrage is just emotional venting of no real value, and because they are delusional to think that there is opposition here when there actually is not - opposition as defined by you.

What makes a thread an "outrage thread?" How can you know that people are "thinking they are in the minority," and even if they are thinking that, what is wrong with that, how do you know they are wrong?

I think that there IS a small minority of people who are taking a real stand on this issue. There is also a small number defending the Warren choice aggressively and cleverly. Then there is the majority, the wishy washy cautious "middle," and those people are being driven into de facto opposition to the GLBTQ people here by posts such as yours.

Explain to me why we should not be outraged about posts such as yours, that continue to unfairly and inaccurately characterize a large group of people, with insinuations and vague hints?

[GarbagemanLB]

18. I am simply saying that most of DU agrees with you. The minority are those who don't

think Warren is a big deal.

That is all.

[grantcart]

22. exactly

[Two Americas]

28. I don't see it that way

You are cavalierly and contemptuously dismissing those who do not see things your way. That is what I am objecting to.

You say "most of DU agrees with you." I don't think that is true. I think most of DU wants to pay lip service to this, for the purpose of hiding and not being called on to take a stand. People can merely say "I support equal rights" and think they are done, and then use that as cover for expressing the same arguments that the religious right uses.

Most of DU potentially would agree, yes, if given the chance to do that. They are denied that chance by the barrage of "get over it" and "move on" and "it is no big deal" posts, along with the inflammatory, slanderous attacks and fear mongering campaigns - "this will hurt Obama! We will lose the war over this battle!" - that are frightening and confusing people.

[GarbagemanLB]

55. I'd say the vocal ones are on your side.

[Two Americas]

61. good

I think hundreds of straights here should be taking a stand and speaking out strongly, and was surprised that so few did. I hope we get a lot more vocal.

[The Doctor.]

106. Hundreds have.

[Two Americas]

116. I don't agree

The support from the straight community has been tepid and conditional. Mine was.

[The Doctor.]

158. Why was your support tepid and conditional?

[Two Americas]

173. never thought that it was

I didn't think it was tepid and conditional.

I wrote up an OP about the thinking that leads to tepid and conditional support. It is a big subject.

[Starry Messenger]

3. k & r

[mopinko]

4. what a lot of us feel-

is that we have to protect our president. we honed that pretty well when he was just our candidate. we know very well that we will spend the next 8 years doing the same. some people are taking this as a slap at them, but that is not what it is.
i confess to being an obamanaught still. i just wanted it to be all joy now. i was hoping to not have to go into defensive mode until jan 21.
i am sure that for many here who have resisted the outrage, it is about defending our president. especially defending him against illogical, emotional, hot button attacks. i do see the point. if i had a magic wand, i would for sure grant our lgbt family members an immediate end to all discrimination. i do see the issue.
i just would take a bullet for this guy. many of us here would. i don't see that being acknowledge by anyone. i see that being belittled and attacked.
we not only love him, we fear for him. that is what makes our buttons hot.

[sniffa]

7. I don't think anyone would question my support of Obama

However, he fucked up. I can only hope he redeems himself some day.

I wouldn't take a bullet for him though - that's the SS job.

Weird though that you mentioned the belittling of those who want to defend Obama. That's not much of an issue in comparison.

[mopinko]

57. well, it may seem that way.

but some of us are very emotional about our country, and our democracy, and we feel like we just battled a huge and evil beast. and won. and now a lot of people seem to want to tarnish that very hard fought victory. there have been many threads really hatin' on our pres, calling him a sell out, people burning their t-shirts, etc.
this is as personal to me as gay marriage is to any straight person here. or maybe it is 4000 dead soldiers, a million dead iraqis, 3000 dead new yorkers, etc, more personal. to think that people who want to protect him are not emotional, that there are not life and death issues on the other side of the table, is only possible if you can forget what has happened in the last 8 years.

do not get me wrong. i understand the issues. and of course i want an end to this entire puritanical pile of bullshit. and i am not trying to say that the war is more important than civil rights. i am just trying to point out that there are some deep emotional currents among those who want to protect their president. things that are every bit as much at the core of who we are as who we love. it won't be good for anyone to have another presidency like bill clintons. that is what some of us are worrying about.
people can say whatever they want about me. this is not about me. this is about protecting my president.

[Th1onein]

97. What you said, mopinko.

I stand in solidarity with my GLBT brothers and sisters, but I fought HARD for this candidate and I don't like to see him trashed.

[Riverman]

122. Sorry, but Obama tarnished his own victory with a slap in the face

of those who fought so hard to get him elected. I believe he did not do that intentionally. However, I hope some of his aides are giving him the feedback from the progressives who got him the nonimation and worked for this victory that giving Warren the stage on his our day of celebration was indeed thoughtless and he has damage control to do. He can start by withdrawing the invitation, which of course he won't do. He is a politician who will make such mistakes by trying to play to some portion of the opposition. He did not need to do this at this time.

[saracat]

138. All I can say is I wouldn't take a bullet for ANY politcian +fundamentally that is what Obama or

any elected official is. And I have yet to meet one whose life is more important than my own or any of my family's.

[NWHarkness]

17. "illogical, emotional, hot button attacks"

I'm sure that you did not mean to offend, but that's exactly the kind of dismissive characterization that keeps the flames high on this issue.

[sniffa]

20. That's why there will be more Warren threads

and why there should be.

The code words that pop up are another reason that they will continue and should.

[NWHarkness]

23. Like "it's just a two minute prayer, it's not a cabinet post"

It's like having a political discussion with a parrot.

[byeya]

121. Warren should be a daily issue until he's uninvited

or gives his hate prayer. If he appears, it should still be an issue so a similar
occurrence doesn't take place. Obama needs daily reminder about those who voted for
him believe in equal justice for all.

[Norrin Radd]

132. Agree.

[donco6]

151. I agree, too.

This is not OK, won't be OK, and each day that passes in anticipation of this jackass getting a place of honor on the stage is another day of getting madder and more pissed. ALL of my friends are upset about this - it's a topic of conversation everytime we get together. They can't understand it - because there IS no understanding it. It makes no sense from any angle you look at it.

[Skittles]

162. correct

[mopinko]

59. it wasn't meant to be dismissive.

just descriptive. i take emotions very seriously. i honor them. i honor those that care deeply. i honor the love that people are defending.
but love is not logical. love makes people crazy. that is not an insult. that is just the way it is.

and i love my country. maybe i am as illogical as anyone here in that. but there it is.

[Two Americas]

64. but it is dismissive

"illogical, emotional, hot button attacks"

[mopinko]

70. well, i guess you can take it however you want.

i just think this is the achilles heal of the left- an appeal to our sense of fairness, something that pokes us in our outrage. we are so open to manipulation at that point. i didn't mean it just in reference to this particular situation. i meant it more generally. we have a lot of knee jerk responses that lead us to turn our backs on our leaders. like the people who supported bill clinton, but nonetheless got their panties in a twist about a blowjob.
it is both our biggest strength and our greatest vulnerability. i see it being played in a way to prevent any of the promise of this president or this country from being realized. we have to figure out how to get a grip on this kind of shit storm. we have no choice.

[bettyellen]

77. it was totally dismissive...

[mopinko]

78. and just how would you know that?

are you listening to my thoughts? do you know me?
this is the kind of shit that pushes these conversations over the edge.

[bettyellen]

82. you claim calling an arguement illogical and emotional is not a put down? seriously?

you can try and backpedal, bur we both know better.

[DWilliamsamh]

165. If a person's argument IS illogical, or based on emotion,

is it dismissive to say that? Why is that not just a statement of fact? Is is dismissive to point out the faults in an argument if those faults actually exist? I don't think so. I think it is telling the truth, as surely as it is trying to make some of my friends who disagree with me on other points see when they are being illogical. It isn't always the case but when they are, and I point it out I am not being dismissive. Don't I owe honesty to my political friends when we disagree at LEAST as much as my opponents?

Dismissive is more like "you just don't undertsnd my 'feelings' so you are insensitive." Or "I don't care what you say you are wrong and you'll never change my mind about this...."

[Raineyb]

112. Then perhaps you should rephrase

If one does not intend to dismiss yet uses language that is dismissive the intent doesn't really mean much does it?

"I didn't mean to be sexist"
"I didn't mean to be racist"
"I didn't mean to sound belligerent"
"I didn't mean to sound like an asshole"

Such explanations don't wash. It really doesn't and as long as the "I didn't mean to" fill in the blank "explanation" is continued to be used instead of a simple apology for being dismissive, etc. these conversations will continue to happen.

:shrug:

Regards

[Two Americas]

91. we should be

We should be responsive to appeals for fairness and justice. That is not an Achilles Heel, is it?

"Turning our backs on our leaders" you say - if the choice is between that and turning our backs on appeals for fairness and justice, we should turn our backs in our leaders. If we don't, then they are not leaders, they are royalty, and we are not citizens, we are subjects.

It is unfair to say that opposing bigotry is the same as right wingers getting "their panties in a twist about a blowjob." Can you n not see how insulting that remark is?

Taking stands and opposing the right wing does not help them, nor hurt us.

"Getting a grip on the shitstorm" for the sake of realizing the promise of this president, is to say we should suppress dissent for the sake of loyalty.

[defendandprotect]

104. Are you suggesting that those here . . .

criticizing Obama's honoring of Warren do not "love their country" -- ?

Loving your country, however, also means turning it around when it is

moving in the wrong direction -- against equality for all.

[noamnety]

19. taking bullets for people

Having served, this is an issue I've given some thought to - a lot of people in the army really do have to consider if they would take a bullet for someone, even if it never comes down to that.

On another forum, there was a post by someone that has stuck with me firmly - this was from someone who wasn't raised in the US, who was raised in a country going through civil war. She said that what she notices about Americans is that they are always quick to defend people with privilege, that's who they identify with, and way less quick to show that same passion toward defending those who are oppressed. We don't identify with them in the same way. I think this is why so many working class people vote republican - they identify with the upper middle class/rich and kinda sorta view themselves that way (but for a few twists of fate), even though that's not who they have the most in common with.

We we are quick to daydream about scenarios where we "take a bullet" for our heroes - and so often "our heroes" are people in positions of power.

Two statements:
I would take a bullet for Obama.
I would take a bullet for a gay person who is a victim of a hate crime.

I think Americans/democrats in general are quicker to identify with the first sentence and are more likely to have even imagined that scene, to have thought about their loyalty in that way. But it's the second sentence that is far more likely to happen, and it's that second person who the real victim and is more in need of people standing up for them with that sort of passion.

[mopinko]

66. well, it is sad that we think we know each other, but really don't.

if you knew me, you would know that, first, i don't give a second thought to people's sexual orientation. and second, that i would step into an attack on any person. i am a middle aged, short, gray haired lady. but most people who know me would never do anything like that in my presence.

it is about this man, barack obama, but it is also really about this country, and the promise of this country. everyone is included in that. even the idiots that i hate. i cannot let that hate blind me to the humanity of religious idiots. i cannot let that hate exclude them from this country. you may not wish to extend a hand to the many, many followers of this moron. i am not very good at reaching out my hand to them. or talking to them for 5 minutes. but it is what barack promised to do. and why i wanted him to be the pres. it is what we need to heal. it is what it takes to make peace.

[jumptheshadow]

37. You nailed an important point

So many of us were looking forward to the inauguration. I hope to take the day off from work and had seriously thought about going to some of the parties there. I am saving a bottle of champagne and will probably savor the moment here. We wanted to partake in a rare moment of unfettered joy in community with other Democrats who have suffered like us throughout the past eight years.

Instead, we get a kick in the gut and a reminder that we are, in ways, unwanted and undervalued guests in the celebration.

[sniffa]

38. Really?

You feel that you're kicked in the gut for wanting to celebrate his inauguration?

[jumptheshadow]

54. Yes

This inauguration is a deeply emotional event for any progressive, and especially for people of my age who never thought we would see an African American president.

I have been looking forward to it so much. And for P.E. Obama to invite a bigot of Rick Warren's ilk, in betrayal of my community, definitely puts a damper on the ceremony and on what should have been a joyous day.

[Two Americas]

63. be joyful

Be joyful about Obama. No one is trying to take that away from you.

Can we not defend each other, defend the kicked aside and the left out, the abused and the forgotten, the isolated and dismissed with the same vigor that we defend the wealthy and powerful?

[mopinko]

68. who said i defend the wealthy and the powerful?

as far as defending each other, it is what i worked my ass off to get obama elected FOR.

[Two Americas]

94. no "middle" position, and no fighting for justice by remote proxy

There is no "middle" position between defending the interests of the wealthy and powerful and opposing them. The moderate middle position is an illusion. We can see how that illusion confuses and paralyzes people by the fact that people have such difficulty taking an unambiguous stand about the Warren selection, and have so much hesitation and reluctance to stand strongly and clearly with the GLBTQ community.

Electing a Democrat - working and voting for one - does not replace the need to take stands for justice and equality. Supporting a politician is not itself taking a stand for justice and equality. Too many people have replaced commitment to the cause of justice and equality with the much safer and easier position of loyalty to politicians. We can see the destructive effect of that right here in the debates over the Warren issue.

You are saying that when the two come into conflict, that the success of a politician is more important than our commitment to the cause of equality and justice, and that our loyalty to Obama should supersede standing in solidarity with our GLBTQ brothers and sisters here.

I can understand and respect your reasons for thinking that, and appreciate you spelling it out.

I disagree with you on that, however.

[mopinko]

95. insisting that the world is black and white

does not make the greys disappear.
and you have twisted what i said.

[Two Americas]

96. there are times when it is

There are times when we need to take an unambiguous stand. I am convinced that this is one of those times.

How did I twist your words? That wasn't my intention.

[defendandprotect]

105. Thank you ---

Electing a Democrat - working and voting for one - does not replace the need to take stands for justice and equality. Supporting a politician is not itself taking a stand for justice and equality. Too many people have replaced commitment to the cause of justice and equality with the much safer and easier position of loyalty to politicians. We can see the destructive effect of that right here in the debates over the Warren issue.

You are saying that when the two come into conflict, that the success of a politician is more important than our commitment to the cause of equality and justice, and that our loyalty to Obama should supersede standing in solidarity with our GLBTQ brothers and sisters here.

[LostinVA]

5. k&r

[sniffa]

34. ty

:hi:

[mrreowwr_kittty]

6. I'd like to see discussion on Warren's creepy misogyny in addition to his homophobia

Realizing, of course, that the two are inextricably linked. Pastor Rick considers abortion to be a "Holocaust" and advises women to submit to their husbands and allow them to make the important family decisions. After he compared homosexuality to pedophilia and incest, he smugly claimed that he had manly urges to "have sex with every beautiful woman I see". His supposed work on AIDS and poverty is a farce; it's focused on giving people Bibles and abstinence lectures. He's a bigot, a pig, and a charlatan. The one bright spot in this whole debacle is that these things are getting exposure, though I don't think that was Obama's goal in picking him.

[LostinVA]

9. Some of us tried to, but were pretty much pooed pooed as well

And yes, misogyny and homophobia are linked liek conjoined twins: you can't have one without the other.

[pollo poco]

115. Misogyny is a subject

who's time has not yet come for discussion on DU.
Sad but true. You can be flamed to a crisp here for even suggesting it exists.
The stupidest arguments ever can be found here on this subject.
It's interesting too, that misogyny is on the list of things that had to be back burnered here in order to show support for Obama during the campaign.

But I wish it could be reasonably discussed here, because I think it is a huge injustice that bears on over 50% of the population. Oddly, we can get quite righteous over the rights of minority groups. But this is a majority. And I see that many who do not want to press for equal rights are women. It's too painful to admit that you are a second class citizen-much easier to defend the rights of others than to face the heartbreaking reality of the situation. Women who stand up for others are in line with what the culture tells us to be. Women who stand up for women are very far astray.

There are some amazingly ill considered arguments that have been granted full discussion in these threads. Perhaps we will hear some today, from people who have never cracked a book on the subject. :+

[Riverman]

123. Yes and if Hilary were Elected and made the same invitation to

Warren, (can't imagine her doing that and I did not support her for the nomination) the reaction would be not just from GLBT people and our allies but outraged women who would demand and get the invitation recinded!

[jpgray]

8. Rec'd. Many forum-dominators are more about how DU responds to the issue than the issue itself.

Indifference here regarding the insult Warren represents is very much worth discussing.

[sniffa]

26. Thanks for weighing in

I've greatly enjoyed and appreciated your input in the past week on this.

So thank you.

[RetroLounge]

10. K&R

thank you...

RL

[sniffa]

47. Thanks for the rec

[racaulk]

11. Fantastic post!

I couldn't have said it any better than that!

K&R

:applause:

[sniffa]

35. Gracias

That's Spanish for thank you.

:D

[Raster]

12. Kicked and recommended!

:yourock:

[sniffa]

49. Thank you

:D

[Zuiderelle]

13. Fantastic post.

Thanks.

[sniffa]

40. YW & TY

I have to kick this every time a certain thread gets kicked to the top so I'm responding as such.

I loved Sundog's post - and it's great to see him - and I'll get to that soon I'm sure.

[Maven]

14. K/R

[sniffa]

29. TY

:)

[tbyg52]

15. My thoughts and feelings exactly. Thank you. nt

[NWHarkness]

16. k&r

Many have tried to make these points, but you have done so eloquently.

[cali]

21. wonderful post

you're always worth listening to when you weigh in.

[Balderdash]

24. I never thought that I would be saying this to you Sniffa

but K&R, with feeling!

:hug:

[JohnnieGordon]

25. Very good post, it's exactly how a lot of us feel

I don't like contemplating my future in a world where even self-described progressives can't be trusted as friends.

[bullwinkle428]

27. K & R!

[sundog]

30. good summation

:thumbsup:

i think it's ridiculous for fellow "liberals" to suggest the glbt community wants to somehow take obama down

he's the only leader we have right now

we all supported obama in this election

the selection of warren was (at minimum) offensive & there's no reason to be ashamed of vocalizing that


however, some people don't seem to understand that we HAVE to let our voices be heard at this moment, while a democratic leader is in office

want to try advancing civil equality while a republican is in office?

it's now or never



this does not equate undermining obama, despite what many people on du will claim

this also does not equate ignoring other pertinent national issues, despite what many people on du will claim

[sniffa]

50. Sundog!

Your post is most likely my favorite on this thread.

It's good to see you.

[BeFree]

51. Help what?

[sniffa]

52. Thanks for the kick

[BeFree]

53. I guess

You are just here for the kicks?

[BeFree]

56. I guess #2

You would like it if I were to STFU and go away?

Because, as one reads down further, I asked you a question and you are avoiding the question.
Some discussion you want, eh?

[sniffa]

62. Thanks for the kick

[BeFree]

65. Heh

I see you kicking yourself pretty good. You don't need me.
I guess you are afraid of me? I dunno why.
If you are so sure of yourself and the comments you made, you'd think you'd stand up for your words.

But I guess that's not for everyone.

[PeaceNikki]

58. I'm gonna go ahead and K&R this thread right about here-ish.

:thumbsup:

[Two Americas]

174. here-ish is good-ish

This is as good a spot to kick the thread as any - better than most, maybe.

:thumbsup:

[riqster]

110. The key point:

"however, some people don't seem to understand that we HAVE to let our voices be heard at this moment, while a democratic leader is in office

want to try advancing civil equality while a republican is in office?

it's now or never"

Exactly. PE Obama has something of a tin ear when it comes to GLBT issues, and it is not only our right but our obligation to raise a ruckus when he makes a mistake. He is a good, decent man and will respond to input, unlike the Reeps, so let's make sure he KNOWS we're pissed off, so as to get his attention.

[PBS Poll-435]

31. K&R

:thumbsup:

[AtomicKitten]

32. Go Sniffa!

:thumbsup:

[No Elephants]

33. I am not on anyone's side unconditionally. I am pro-gay marriage and against Warren giving the

invocation, though.

[Forkboy]

36. K&R

:kick:

[foxfeet]

39. K&R

:kick:

[AntiFascist]

41. K&R, agreed...

DU needs to be whipped into shape, even if it takes 100 more Warren threads. Many simply don't understand the broader issues.

[Texasgal]

42. I agree Sniffa.

I'll admit I was hesitant to post anything regarding Warren because I simply did not know the mans background.

I have been educated on the matter and I agree with you 100%.

This has been a real eye opener for many of us!

[BeFree]

43. Problems

...We expect DUers to be on our side unconditionally

...If you can't empathize you can at least not contribute to the ongoing backlash. ("I'd love empathy but I'll settle for STFU.")

We expect?!?!? And you'd settle for STFU!?!?!?

Those are some serious problems you have.

[sniffa]

44. Yes, if they can't empathize they can at least STFU

That would actually help here.

[BeFree]

46. Help what?

[matcom]

69. don't you know?

YOU STFU but don't you DARE tell anyone else to do the same!

it's in the rules.

:eyes:

[sniffa]

71. I love that you show up on these threads

I can't understand why anyone would question your status as an ally.

It must be some misplaced vendetta by some rogue militants.

[matcom]

72. and I love that you continue to reply

:hi:

[BeFree]

73. You mean?

Some of us have different rules? Now, in fairness, she didn't tell me to STFU, but the idea that some of us should, was quite transparent in her OP. And that did kinda break a few rules?

[Starry Messenger]

74. Sniffa is male. n/t

[matcom]

75. your bravery is noted

:rofl:

[Starry Messenger]

76. Thank you!

:patriot: I'm here to keep the thread kicked.

[BlooInBloo]

45. I don't minimize Obama's craptacular decision...

I minimize those who *maximize* Obama's craptacular decision.

I fully recognize that the difference is unintelligible to DUers.

[ruggerson]

48. Word - recommended

[Swamp Rat]

60. k&r

[Danger Mouse]

67. I disagree with your analysis of the situation.

[sniffa]

80. Ok

How so?

[Danger Mouse]

81. I don't think the flamewars are continuing just because of straight DUer's being insensitive.

I think that's a major part of it. However, I think there are some PUMA's on the sidelines stirring up shit.

[PeaceNikki]

83. Jeeesus

I've seen that BS posted before. Some people REALLY want to continue the primary wars and have even referenced "lists" of Clinton supporters and claim that it's all about that.

It's not. As is evidenced by this OP who was VERY clearly NOT a Clinton supporter.

[Danger Mouse]

84. I have no interest in continuing the primary wars.

And notice I never said it's 'all about that'...I said 'some'. As in a few, as in, it's only a small part of the bigger picture.
I just don't think it's fair to say that the whole problem is coming from one side.

[PeaceNikki]

85. Both "sides" think the other is responsible for continuing it and deny any responsibilty

from their own.

It's fucking outrage-a-thon 2008.

And... on edit: I don't think you are saying it's ALL about the "PUMA" factor, but even bringing it up boils my blood because some have. The primary wars are over.

[Danger Mouse]

86. I don't have a side. I see a lot of people acting like dicks, personally.

That includes the drooling morons who are accusing gays of acting like 'spoiled children'.

[PeaceNikki]

88. On that we agree.

And, FTR, I didn't see the OP as pointing the finger at one "side" as much as explaining how one side feels and clarifying that these folks can question, feel hurt and betrayed without wishing failure upon Obama.

[Danger Mouse]

89. Well, I agree with that much..

and I'm glad that we fundamentally agree.
I hate to see all of the fighting between people that are essentially on the same side. I mostly avoid it.

[Starry Messenger]

87. Robert Anton Wilson had a great word that never caught on:

"Somebunall" trans: "Some but not all."

http://deoxy.org/wiki/Sombunall

I've been thinking of it a lot this week in terms of the communication on DU. I miss him.

edit: dumb typo

[bettyellen]

79. kick

and a kiss!
*mwaaaah!*

[jonnyblitz]

90. very eloquent. as usual!

:hi:

[sniffa]

92. Bah, you're the second one to call me that

:loveya:

[jonnyblitz]

93. yeah i was too lazy to check the thesaurus for a new word.

I could have called you articulate but that would have been racist!!1

i didn't read all the responses either. it's a bad habit of mine when the thread is long...

[Starry Messenger]

98. kick.

[dbmk]

99. I think almost everyone here understand the paint the Warren pick inflicts

And I don't use the term understand as in "living the exact same experience", but in the sense of being able to empathize to their fullest extent without having lived it.

Even having that empathy, some might see Obamas choice as part of a bigger/different picture and hope - or even believe - that it will be a short term pain for a long term gain. A painful shortcut to improvement. At least thats what I hope is Obamas plan/hope too.
(And let me be clear; I don't use the term "bigger picture" to insinuate that people arguing against it is not capable of such. Theirs just being a different bigger picture.)
Another view could be that it is necessary sting to advance other issues - without it meaning giving up on the LGBT issue in the long term.
And there of course is the stance that it is completely and utterly wrong. Period.

The wisdom of any of those stances is open to debate.

I can't really fault the first as it is hardly possible for most of us to appreciate the long term consequences of Obamas choice. It might be naive, it might not. Lets for arguments sake say that someone COULD see in the crystal ball that this would advance the cause of GLBT rights faster than not doing it? How would saying so be recieved?
The second definately is cynical to a large extent. Not conveying much sympathy in its overt practicality.
But either way, the pain it causes on the GLBT community must of course be acknowleged.

The third one can't really be faulted. It is a choice that offends and leaves a large group of people feeling slapped in the face. And rightfully so.
But what it generates is a debate on whether the fervour and approach to getting that message across is harming more than it is doing good. Is it dismissing the pain to suggest that rage is in danger of derailing progress?

Practicality and ideology have never been really good friends. And here they are making enemies of friends.

And before anyone makes a note of it; I am as much on the sidelines as I can be on this. White straight male, living in a country where the debated rights are established and religion has a miniscule influence on politics. I don't live this. So if my viewpoint seems overly distanced and practical, let me know but please afford me some excuse on that account. Because if so, I don't know any better.

[Rockholm]

100. Thank you Sniffa. Finally, someone gets it!

And explains it correctly (IMHO) for even the simpletons to UNDERSTAND.

[Chulanowa]

101. I understand perfectly. What puzzled me, however...

was the sheer numbers of posters who turned their pissedness at Warren and those pinheads who were being, well, pinheads, and decided to label anyone and everyone who happened to be conveniant with a long litany of slurs and insults. Did you know that I'm a fucking good-for-nothing homophobe piece of shit because I didn't feel like changing my avatar? 'Tis true! I saw people asking "What's the big deal, it's two minutes of him giving a vanilla prayer" only to get a ten-reply chewing-out over what a horrible human being they were... without a single reason for the "big deal". The assumption was - and apparently to some still is - that you're either in complete agreement, or you might as well be demanding gays wear pink triangle armbands. Complete seige mentality

It should go without saying that, if you want to bring people to a better understanding of the issue at hand, that's not the best way to do it. We all understand that the gay community of DU was pissed. Most of us understand why y'all were pissed. In fact, given that Warren doesn't exactly stick to gay-bashing, pretty much everyone had reason to at least be annoyed with the pick. However, it seems that attempts at solidarity got drowned out by a constant stream of obscenity from what I hope was a small but vocal minority of DU's GLBT community.

Pretty much everyone around here is with you guys on the Warren thing. But from your post? "We expect DU'ers to be on our side unconditionally" is pretty odd considering all "loyalty tests" supporters of the GLBT community have to put up with around here. Are we allowed to like Obama? Yes or no? I have no fucking clue at this point, and I'm pretty sure either answer will get me called a nasty name by someone. But like it or not, I'm still in support of GLBT equality. :shrug:

[shellgame26]

160. You sir/Maam

are correct. For me it was always very simple: On Gay Rights-we agree. On the Warren thing being a big astronomical devastating fuck up-we disagree.

[NJmaverick]

102. Considering your behavior, your concern about DUers feelings

is disingenuous at best.

[sundog]

113. that's the best you could come up with?

[NJmaverick]

117. It was more than enough

[sniffa]

125. If it's any consolation

I don't care about you one iota.

[NJmaverick]

143. Doesn't matter to me Fonzie

[Forkboy]

133. You'd know about disingenous.

That "let's all get along" thread was one for the ages. :rofl:

[NJmaverick]

144. Is that really the best you could do?

where is the wit? intelligence? originality? posters today ain't worth shit. All they can do is post- :rofl:

shame that they let anyone post, with no regard to intelligence or their ability to contribute:eyes:

[Forkboy]

145. "shame that they let anyone post, with no regard to intelligence or their ability to contribute"

:rofl:

[NJmaverick]

146. sorry to hear that is the best you can do, I guess there will be no loss putting you on ignore

[Forkboy]

153. Awesome...now I can make fun of you without you knowing!

:woohoo:

[sniffa]

149. Indeed

:rofl:

[NJmaverick]

152. This is PERFECT! Shows the complete and utter dishonesty

and hypcrosisy of the OP. You lose Fonzie.

Have a good night.

[sniffa]

155. K Richie

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Bluebear]

169. kick

[sniffa]

172. Kick back

:kick:

[cliffordu]

103. So:

"You want the Warren threads to stop? Then look at yourself and your reactions here. If you can't acknowledge the hurt, then there will be more Warren threads. If you acknowledge the hurt but qualify your support for the GLBT community then yes, there will be more Warren threads. If you openly mock the hurt expressed here you betcha there'll be more Warren threads. If you can't empathize you can at least not contribute to the ongoing backlash. ("I'd love empathy but I'll settle for STFU.")"


I guess blackmail is the new (?) tactic.

And yet 15 people showed up at Warren's Death Cult 2000 'church' for protests last weekend........

I believe completely that GLBT rights have to be the same as my own.

I don't know how I could support you more.

But if you're going to threaten me for not doing it EXACTLY like YOU want me to, then your problem goes beyond civil rights and into self indulgence, and I'll have no truck with that.

But my absolute belief in your rights being the same as mine still stands.

[sniffa]

126. My OP was threatening? Blackmailing?

You're at least the 2nd person to surmise that here.

[cliffordu]

129. And what do your own words really mean?

Perhaps the two of us who are wrong about it are too stupid to understand.

Let me clarify my point.....

Sniffa sez-

"Do this: Whatever....."

"Or the Warren threads will continue."

So if we do: Whatever - the threads will stop?

Somehow I seriously doubt it. Or maybe we are now negotiating your rage.

Who knows??? If everyone toes the line,

maybe 16 hard core activists will show up at the next rally outside Death Cult 2000.

Somehow I seriously doubt that, too.

So much easier to threaten more nasty threads unless everyone empathize, acknowledge the hurt, not minimize the hurt....

How many threads have we seen about DOING SOMETHING instead of being HURT by DU?

[sniffa]

130. You do whatever the fuck you want to do

Seriously.

[cliffordu]

131. Thanks for your understanding and compassion and understanding my hurt.

[sniffa]

135. Your welcome

[donco6]

148. It obviously cannot be blackmail.

To be blackmail, the person making the threat has to be in control of the outcome - e.g., IF this happens, THEN I will do *this*.

Sniffa is in no position to bargain with Warren threads - he doesn't control everyone who posts them, MANY of whom are straight folk - and a LOT of them who are just posting threads because they're pissed at all the Warren threads! If you doubt me, look at the first page in GD:P.

What I see is Sniffa just stating a fact: Here is how people feel, and this is why they're doing what they're doing. You may not agree with how they feel, or their response to it, but there's no getting around that they are pissed, and it's not subsiding.

And apologies to Sniffa if that is an incorrect interpretation.

[sniffa]

150. No, that's perfect

Thanks. :D

[cliffordu]

157. And my response....My statement is one size fits all concerning those

who would demand certain behaviors "or the posts will continue"

"Gimme the candy bar or the clown gets it"

"Gimme some sympathy or I'll crap the nest"

"Gimme some understanding or Warren will be the only subject available here on DU"

I don't understand why sniffa thinks anyone else here would negotiate away their rage.

Apparently sniffa thinks he DOES have the finger on that pulse or can control it.

My suggestion, (and I could be wrong here), would be to say the same thing to those who are actually standing

in the way of GLBT rights in this country:

"Gimme my rights or you'll not attend your church in peace again."

"Gimme my rights or We'll sit-in, stand-in howl-in until we are completely equal."

"If you're going to quote Leviticus, let's quote the whole fucking thing, including the stoning of adulterers

and that little slavery thingy....."

But that's just me, and I obviously don't understand what Sniffa was saying.

And all I ever did was demonstrate against the exploitation of immigrant laborors. And for the end of the Vietnam war.

Obviously not nearly as successful as negotiating my rage on an internet chat board.

[defendandprotect]

107. K&R --

[mudesi]

108. In my opinion they all need to be banned or at least suspended

I have been shocked and saddened but not at all surprised by the conservatives here.

Rick Warren is tantamount to having a klansman doing the invocation 60 years ago. It's disgusting and the DUers who "understand" it ought to be tombstoned.

[NorthernSpy]

111. Rick Warren, for all his faults, is NOTHING like a Klansman...

That's precisely the kind of rhetoric that makes it a bit difficult to take your position seriously.


The KKK was a terrorist group. They blew things up. They killed people. And they advocated blowing things up and killing people.


Rick Warren runs his mouth. But he doesn't blow things up or kill people, and he doesn't advocate terrorism. So there's quite a big difference, actually.



(edit: supplied missing word "a")

[Starry Messenger]

118. I think he's more like Anita Bryant.

[Riverman]

124. No he is worse! All Hateful Violence starts with thought, then words,

then random violence, then organized violence where the authorities look the other way and/or secretly support and participate in, then there is state organized violence - holocusts being one of many such horrific examples. Hate thoughts are given voice with words directed at a minority group who is perceived as being without power, weak, vulnerable and inconsequential. Warren must believe that he stands with the majority in righteously pointing his fat finger at a minority as the cause of ruining marriage, our children, our country. Let's get 'em! Using the power of organized religion, enflaming their passions and joining with the power of the state to deny rights to a minority. All in the cause of advancing his organization and keeping his position. He may not be the one swinging the club at the head of a young gay man and tying him to a fence to die, but he is an accomplice in such violence towards those he so publically condemns. He gives the crimminal minds a pretext to act out such hate speech with violence!

The verbal and violent attacts on GLBT people is not new, nor isolated to them alone certainly. Most minority groups in US history have been subject to such hate - African-Americans, union organizers, Irish, Italians, Jews, Chinese, other Asians, Mexicans, women, and so forth. Always a small minority of each spoke out against such injustice, many were called troublemakers, ostracized, isolated, expelled, deported, beaten and killed for daring to speak-up!

So, dear DU'ers I, and many others, will never STFU! I am more concerned with those who do shut up from being shouted down! And, even more so those who do the shouting! What exactly are you afraid of?

[yardwork]

161. Various Klan groups are still very active and many of them talk just like Rick Warren.

If you visit the Southern Poverty Law Center website you can learn a lot about hate groups that are active in the U.S. Quite a few of them are very clever in what they say and appear to do. They sound a lot like Rick Warren.

I contribute to the SPLC every month because this organization goes after hate groups by taking them to court and suing them out of existence. It's been a very effective way of destroying some of these organizations.

[Skittles]

163. yes he IS

he's just able to FOOL people

[keepCAblue]

109. K&R....

[Rowdyboy]

114. Superbly stated...you speak for me as well.....

Its a difficult subject for me to handle. Feel like my best friend just kicked me in the balls but I still love the worthless sonovabitch.

Proud to be your 60th rec

[sniffa]

127. Thanks RB

It's good to see you. :hi:

[RiverStone]

119. I empathize with your hurt, and support our Prez Elect

Obama was wrong on Warren, but very right to be the next president.

[Jakes Progress]

120. From an old, straight, white guy

here is a kick because I was to late to rec. We fought against just this kind of "don't be pushy" stuff with anit-semitism in the fifties and racism in the sixties.

This has nothing to do with wanting Obama to fail or hating him. It has to do with him not being the best he can, the kind of best we need now. It is scary to think that he doesn't get it, that he won't be willing to try to understand.

Homophobia, like racism and misogyny, can live deep inside a person. Socially, they know it is wrong, and they would never let slurs escape their lips in polite company. But if it is not examined and dealt with, it will allow otherwise good people to dismiss things like this as inconsequential.

Well spoken post.

[sniffa]

128. TY

And thanks for the kick. There's a certain thread I keep seeing at the top of the page and I like to keep this one close by.

I'm grateful for how my thread was mostly well received but saddened (but not surprised) that the other thread has almost twice as many rec's.

[Jakes Progress]

134. There are none so blind

as those that will not see.

[unapatriciated]

167. Well we will just have to give it a few more kicks then....

since I'm also too late to rec.
I have tried to stay off of DU lately, because of all the rationalizing of the Warren pick.
To me it is simple, Warren has made it clear that his only goal is to implement his religious beliefs into government and law.
Beliefs that discriminates against all who are not straight white males with money to fill his pockets.
Obama made a big mistake by giving him a national stage to further his goal.
I'm glad that so many have been vocal about Warren, it has exposed him for what he is a charlatan and a bigot.

[yardwork]

171. Everyone who recommended that thread is on the wrong side of history.

It's a convenient thread in some ways. It shows people for who they are when the chips are down.

[yardwork]

170. Thank you.

[helderheid]

136. Error: you can only recommend threads which were started in the past 24 hours

[Toasterlad]

137. Thank You, Sniffa.

[MUL98]

139. My Take

I have been a long time lurker here at DU. In the interest of full disclosure, I'm lifetime registered Democrat who is slowly drifting away from the party as it continues to move to the right.

I have been following the discourse about Warren here since he was picked, and I have to say that I'm appalled anyone can find nuance in the choice. Picking Warren is nothing shy of an endorsement of bigotry. Everyone should be appalled by this selection, and loudly saying so. It says a lot about Obama that he will even tolerate someone like this, let alone give him a national stage from which to speak.

Unfortunately I am not surprised by the selection either. Obama's centrist credentials have been on display since the moment he threw his hat in to the ring. I think part of the reason people are so outraged, is because of a misconception that Obama actually is a leftist. He's not. At best he is a DLCer, at worst he's Joe Lieberman. Add to that mix his own strong religious convictions, which he so proudly flaunted on the campaign trail, and it's not hard to see how he could be tolerant of Warren. It's too bad - but I think we got exactly what we voted for.

Can someone explain to me why there are ANY prayers, preachers, religious representatives participating in a government function?

[sniffa]

140. "at worst he's Joe Lieberman"

:rofl:

[sniffa]

141. At best he is a DLCer

:rofl:

[anachro1]

142. However...

Barack Obama has CLEARLY said that he does not support gay marriage. We assume he is gay friendly, but how can HE support denying us our rights, as a man who, some 50 years ago, could find himself in a similar situation?

I could 'agree to disagree' with him on the issue, but for him to sidle up to a man instrumental in Prop 8's passing really irks me. I feel used. Simple as that. I had no problem with what Reverend Wright said; HE should be in Warren's place.

As an atheist, I equate the religious with the stupid. They are synonymous. I don't believe they should ever be encouraged. Our country has become sufficiently stupid without myths muddying things up.

[AntiFascist]

154. Your post dismisses the anger that should be directed at Obama himself...

He stood before Warren's people at the Saddleback Church and announced to a huge nationwide audience his religiously bigoted feelings on marriage. This same message was used in ads and robocalls by the Yes on 8 campaign and could very well have persuaded enough people to push Prop 8 over the top. Obama has not CLEARLY made his feelings about gay marriage known, he simply opposed Prop 8, very late in the campaign, simply because he felt that a civil right should not be taken away. We should feel more than simply 'used', we have been run over by the Obama bus.

[AlCzervik]

147. Well done Sniffa.

i've stayed away in the past week because of the Warren issue and the reactions from many posters that i used to enjoy, many disappointing responses.


:hi: :loveya:

[sniffa]

156. ..

:loveya:

I hear you on that. :hug:

[yardwork]

159. Very good. Thank you. k&r.

[sniffa]

176. YW

Oh look at that, kicked back to the top.

[Spryboy]

164. Brillian post

Perfectly said. Perfectly reasoned.

Thank you.

Alas, I fear it will still go over the heads of more than a few people, and that's just sad.

[Cary]

166. I have a fair number of gay and lesbian friends.

I've asked them about this issue and none of them see this as the earth shattering deal breaker that some DUers seem to believe it to be.

Not that this is the final word on the matter. It isn't, but neither is condemnation of people who empathize with you but just aren't willing to go as far as you want them to go on this particular point regarding this particular person.

I don't think I would have asked Warren to do the invocation if I were elected to be President. But then I am not a Christian and would never pay much attention to this guy anyway. Nor would I ever run for President.

I assume Barack Hussein Obama knows what he's doing here.

[unapatriciated]

168. It's not a deal breaker.....

very few here have said that. It's hurtful and a great disappointment. I view it as a political strategy that was not fully thought out.
Warren is committed to inserting his religious beliefs into government and law. He will use this to further that goal.
We have had eight years of this and did not expect day one to continue supporting bigotry.

[Starry Messenger]

177. An excellent summary. n/t

[MoonRiver]

175. Every time I acknowledge your hurt I get blasted,

because I was a former Hillary supporter. Therefore, anything supportive I say is seen as suspect. This is really becoming an impossible place to have any kind of rational discussion. :(

[sniffa]

178. I wish some people would just fucking stop