PhillyTablet Inquirer Daily News
Mobile
Home Delivery
philly.com
email
font size
options
 
Thursday, December 18, 2008

Obama's strange bedfellow


 
We’ve posed this question before:

Is it feasible to believe that Barack Obama can reach across the cultural divide, in the spirit of reconciliation, without undercutting core progressive principles and infuriating his own supporters?

The answer is, no. But Obama doesn’t seem perturbed by the prospect of angering his base. Clearly, in the interest of building bridges and establishing a nonpartisan tone, he considers such fallout to be acceptable collateral damage.

Which certainly explains why he has chosen pastor Rick Warren, a Christian conservative leader and adamant foe of gay marriage and stem cell research, to deliver the Inauguration Day invocation.

This is the same Rick Warren who, notwithstanding his affable manner, considers abortion rights, gay rights, and stem cell research to be immoral issues and therefore “non-negotiable.” This is the same guy who has equated gay marriage with polygamy, child molestation, and incest; and who supported the November referendum banning gay marriage in California (by contrast, Obama opposed the referendum). In essence, Warren is just a friendlier version of Christian conservative leader James Dobson; they differ mostly on style, not substance.

The choice of Warren was announced yesterday; not without reason, prominent gay activists quickly went berserk. Joe Solomonese, president of the Washington-based Human Rights Campaign, wrote Obama a letter: “You have tarnished the view that (gay people) have a place at your table…Rev. Warren is not a moderate pastor who is trying to bring all sides together. Instead, Rev. Warren has often played the role of general in the cultural war.”

And Kevin Naff, editor of the Washington Blade, characterized Obama’s decision as “a slap in the faces of the millions of (gay) voters who so enthusiastically supported him…This tone-deafness to our concerns must not be tolerated. We have just endured eight years of endless assaults on our dignity and equality from a president beholden to bigoted conservative Christians. The election was supposed to have ended that era. It appears otherwise.”

But gay leaders are not the only people who feel betrayed. People for the American Way, a longtime Washington group that tracks the religious right, said in a statement that the decision to have Warren deliver the invocation is “a grave disappointment” that “further elevates someone who has in recent weeks actively promoted legalized discrimination and denigrated the lives and relationships of millions of Americans.” (Meanwhile, one liberal blogger dismissed Warren as "James Dobson in Dr. Phil's goatee.")

It’s tempting to simply ignore this episode; after all, does it really matter who delivers the Inaugural invocation? It’s just a symbolic gesture, and it hardly means that Obama will conspire with Warren on substantive policy-making. On the other hand, Obama himself has argued persuasively that words do matter. Here are some of Warren’s words, uttered in opposition to gay marriage:

“It is a moral issue that God has spoken clearly about…I’m opposed to having a brother and sister be together and call that marriage. I’m opposed to an older guy marrying a child and calling that marriage. I’m opposed to one guy having multiple wives and calling that marriage.”

And here are some words from a recent interview, sort of akin to how whites talked 50 years ago, when they boasted that they knew some Negroes:

“I have many gay friends. I’ve eaten dinner in gay homes. No church has probably done more for people with AIDS than Saddleback Church. (Wife) Kay and I gave given millions of dollars…helping people who got AIDS through gay relationships. So they can’t accuse me of homophobia.”

By choosing Warren, it’s clear what message Obama is trying to send. He wants to foster more dialogue with ideological opponents (Warren is open to talking about global warming), and perhaps to forge closer ties between Democrats and evangelical Christians. Indeed, at a press conference this morning, he said: "It is important for America to come together even though we may have disagreements on some social issues." But by choosing Warren to bless his historic Inaugural, he is essentially blessing Warren – in essence, vetting Warren as a mainstream moderate in front of a mass television audience.

And that brings us full circle: Will there come a point when Obama risks building one bridge too far?
Posted by Dick Polman @ 10:06 AM  Permalink | 192 comments
Comments   
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 10:13 AM, 12/18/2008
    I'm a big Obama fan, but this was a mistake.
    — AHiredGun
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 10:24 AM, 12/18/2008
    He sits in the church of a racist, anti-American and controversial pastor for 20 years, has him baptize his children, marry him and his wife and it is no problem. Much ado about nothing. Invite a controversial pastor to deliver a five minute or less invocation one time and it's the end of the world? Explain this to me. I am genuinely stumped why this is such a travesty yet Rev Wright is not a problem for hm.
    — Ramon
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 10:24 AM, 12/18/2008
    This is typical of B Hussein Obama. According to a report I saw on PBS' Frontline, he welcomed conservatives and often gave them assignments over liberals during his tenure at the Harvard Law Review. If you want to make an omelet, you've got to break some eggs. You can't build a broad coalition without bringing in dissenting viewpoints. What I find curious (possibly because I haven't experienced the discrimination personally) is how intolerant and close-minded the homosexual extremists can be. I guess they're just fighting fire with fire.
    — Phrossty
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 10:26 AM, 12/18/2008
    I have no problem with it. Perhaps it is no more than a thanks for treating him fairly @ the Saddlebrook town hall meeting. Seems to me like a logical starting point to trying to bring people together. You've thrown this guy a bone, now you see where the relationship goes, if Warren stays hardline, then you address it. Seems consistne with his message. You have to build trust and mutual understanding before you start mnaking requests/demands. Start dialogue. Throw the guy a bone.
    — gee1971
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 10:33 AM, 12/18/2008
    Amazing how you're only allowed to have liberal viewpoints in this country anymore. I thought liberals were all about being tolerant of opposing viewpoints??
    — doorspj24
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 10:53 AM, 12/18/2008
    The reason America is hated around the world today -- or at least, one reason -- is that we refuse to speak to anyone who might not agree with us. Talking to those who differ with you is the only way to build understanding, respect and, if need be, a live-and-let-live peace. I disagree with Warren, too, but I would sit down and talk to him. If we don't learn to start doing this we'll always be as divided as we have the past eight years.
    — NigeltheMastiff
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 11:04 AM, 12/18/2008
    In the how far we have fallen category: People who CONTINUE to believe as others have for thousands of years that homosexuality should not be condoned are now the ones on the defensive, having to defend their beliefs against a civil rights comparison of homosexual behavior and one's ancestry, race or religion. The "gay marriage" issue is relatively new because even gays didn't have the idea in their mind 40 years ago,let alone have the nerve to even bring it up in polite company.
    — WriteWinger
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 11:07 AM, 12/18/2008
    I think it's a mistake. You can build a bridge to one community without tearing another down. He can have dialogue with the religious right without having the guy give the convocation. And the comparison to Rev. Wright is bogus. Obama publicly repudiated Wright when the Rev. went too far.
    — Djoko Pritza
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 11:12 AM, 12/18/2008
    I understand the gesture of reaching across the aisle, but if I were gay, I'd probably take it as a slap in the face also. This isn't about liberals not accepting other people's viewpoints (Phrossty, you'd make a better point if you didn't start with B Hussein Obama), this is about a group of people who either are discriminated against or at the very least think that they are discriminated against feeling that the candidate that they heavily supported has now decided to give a big stage to a public person, Warren, who is a strong supporter of their either real or perceived discrimination. In 2004 if Bush had put a gay Episcopalian bishop (or a UU minister) on the stage at the inauguration, do you think the evangelicals would have simply said it was ok and that he was reaching across the aisle?
    — donde
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 11:24 AM, 12/18/2008
    Obama is a snake and he will turn on anybody to further his political ambitions. I told you so!
    — CD75
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 11:25 AM, 12/18/2008
    America has become a place where it's "wrong" to have morals and values. If you're against something like gay marriage or abortion you better go run and hide and shut up.
    — doorspj24
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 11:26 AM, 12/18/2008
    As you liberals and loons would not listen back in the summer, the Rev. Wright thing was relevant, because it shows that Obama will throw anybody under the bus when it is in his best interest. Of course, you liberals and loons did not want to hear that back then. The conservatives were right, and you were wrong. Admit it.
    — CD75
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 11:28 AM, 12/18/2008
    Progress or lack thereof on gay rights, abortion etc still rests with Obama. Let us all treat Rev Warren as the invited guest that he is ! And with all the messes Obama has correcting and fixing the Bush depression - let's get him right to work !
    — ModerateMarge
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 11:30 AM, 12/18/2008
    Who cares who gives the invocation? Back to the financial mess: Repost from last blog; Phrossty, I'm just an ordinary citizen so pardon my ignorance:) Can you explain the role that Freddie and Fannie play in the housing market and securities? Should they have played by different rules than other institutions since tax $$$ were at stake? Also, did the Community Reinvestment Act have anything to do with this problem in your opinion? Thanks!
    — NEPhilly
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 11:34 AM, 12/18/2008
    marge, there you go again calling it a depression! Are you just lowering the economic bar for Obama to jump over? Please show us the link where we our economy is in a recession! I think it is nothing but campaign rhetoric and the campaign is over, you won! Consumer confidence has suffered because of irresponsible comments like yours!
    — NEPhilly


192 comments | View All Comments | View All By Latest
View comments: 1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  | 

Total pages: 13 | Jump to:
About Dick Polman

Cited by the Columbia Journalism Review as one of the nation's top political reporters, and lauded by the ABC News political website as "one of the finest political journalists of his generation," Dick Polman is a national political columnist at the Philadelphia Inquirer. He is on the full-time faculty at the University of Pennsylvania, as "writer in residence." Dick has been a frequent guest on C-Span, MSNBC, CNN, NPR and the BBC. He covered the 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2004 presidential campaigns.

ARCHIVES

All commentaries posted before April 18, 2008, can be accessed at www.dickpolman.blogspot.com.

Advertise Here