You don't show the country you want unity by inviting a member of the American Taliban. Showcase a progressive inclusive message. Was Ann Coulter or Michelle Malkin busy? Legimizing the message of intolerance is not how you bring this country together because if that was the case than Bush would be a remebered as a great president instead of the worst president ever which he most certainly is.
Biden and Obama can defend this decision all they want but defend it they will until Jan 20th.

It's a matter of record that not one member of Rick Warren's mega-"church" was found to be willing to vote for Barack Obama, after the first time he'd "reached out" to that congregation, and showed up only to be ambushed by this preacher who asked him only loaded right-wing "gotchas" and had already given the crib notes to McCain. And lied about it.

So, the benefit to the Obama Administration to keep "reaching out" to fundies is beyond questionable, at this point. Yet, knowing Obama, there must be a method to his seeming madness.

In fact, the shrieks of horror from Obama's critics were Phase II of his madness. They were expected.

You and I (presumably), in our loud cry of "FOUL!" to the O team, were an anticipated reaction. We were supposed to object so loudly and vehemently that the protest would gain traction in the MSM. That was the whole idea of this travesty.

Recall Rick Warren's first public reaction to the backlash: he stated right up front that he was glad Obama stood up to his critics.

See? Obama will NOT be cowed, by his "far Left" supporters (gays and lesbians not being American citizens, so much as a political pressure group. Obviously).

It's as if the two of them orchestrated the one-two punch, together. Either that, or it was pure, wacky coincidence that Warren immediately said exactly the thing that would support this tactic. I wonder if they high-fived each other.

"Sister Souljah" was a marginal Black performer, whom Bill Clinton could re-market to exactly the wrong audience. He could beat-up on the gal like a bully with his pulpit, she could subsequently plunge into obscurity, and she had no real constituency or power to fight back. And Bubba would gain some image as a "centrist"

This time, the President beat up on an entire class of American citizens, not just one powerless schmuck, to make that same point with the MSM and the Beltway Villagers. That is why I can't see Obama as anything but disdainful toward gays in general, despite his lofty rhetoric. He knew damned well he was sending millions of GLBT to the back of the bus by using this premeditated tactic, and he didn't give a shit.

I still find this idea strange that by Obama inviting Warren he is endorsing him and ALL of his beliefs. Have we fully vetted Yo Yo Ma and Aretha Franklin to make sure they have not said anything bad about gays or abortion? Or donated to Prop 8?

Rick Warren did not donate to Prop 8 and yes he spoke out against it through his church, but he did not run statewide ads. He has said dumb things about gays but under freedom of speech he has the right. Many of the people who voted for Obama have not yet been convinced on gay marriage just like all the Democratic presidential candidates. Sadly, Warren's position on gay rights is not very different from Obama's.

I hated the idea of Warren giving the invocation when I first heard it, more because of his behavior on other things, than the gay marriage issue. I didn't even know he had spoken out against that. But Warren is a Southern Baptist just like Billy Graham and I doubt their views on social issues would be different if Graham were still alive. Yet Graham prayed at Carter and Clinton's inauguration with no complaints that I know of.

A lot of people who like Warren, like my sister, also voted for Obama. So by including Warren, Obama is symbolically representing a lot of his own supporters' beliefs. The Democratic Party is a big tent.

But Obama has already indicated he is restoring funding abroad to birth control measures, he plans to let gays serve openly in the military. Obama has given Warren's ideology NO role in his administration and this is a victory for progressives.

I can see why gays and lesbians may feel hurt after their defeat in California and elsewhere, but it seems like Warren is being scapegoated and I have seen a lot of his words misrepresented to the point of absurdity. For example, he thinks that divorce is a more threat of to marriage than gays, and he thinks gay couple should have equal rights when it comes to hospital visits and other legal measures. He is even open to the idea that being gay is biological. So, yes, for an evangelical he is moderate on this issue.

I do not like this man at all, and the fact that I am defending truth and freedom of speech, not him. I wish Obama had not picked him just because of the way people have reacted, but once I got over the emotionalism, I got over Warren.

Joe, does the right wing in Congress and their followers know "we can't continue to be a red and blue country", and that "we can't be divided as we have been?"

Maybe Inhofe will reach across the aisle to Barbara Boxer?

And Joe, please send me an e-mail when you get the first wingnut to reach across the aisle.

Amen, Lolis. I'm a pro-gay rights, liberal, through and through. I often say that the only thing I am intolerant of is intolerance. The only thing worse than conservative intolerance is liberal intolerance. I figure at least the conservatives' intolerance can be chalked up to ignorance and consistency with their ideology. Liberals' intolerance is far worse, because we ought to know better and are being inconsistent with our own ideology for the toleration of diversity.
Think about what the inauguration is and what it is not. Longer than any other country, we have been peacefully handing power back and forth between some very different political parties for 210+ years with never a threat of military intervention. Inaugurations represent a coming together of the disparate parts of the American quilt after often bitter campaigns. New Presidents never talk partisan politics and tend more towards painting a picture of happier days ahead, rather than a State-of-the-Union type policy address.
It personally pains me that Warren is on the agenda on January 20th, but I also recognize that he represents people who are every bit as American and patriotic as I am, though I disagree with them on almost everything. People like my step-brother who LOVES Warren. Just because I think my step-brother is nuts for admiring Warren, doesn't mean I love my step-brother any less or consider him un-American.
People need to separate their personal feelings from what is objectively right. If my wife or other family member were killed or raped, emotionally, I would want to rip the killer to shreds, but I would continue to KNOW that that would be wrong and continue to oppose the death penalty. It is objectively right to reach out to our enemies, at home and abroad, and try and find points of common interests. Just because we know that "they" wouldn't do the same for us is of no consequence. In order to truly make progress, we have to "be the bigger person."
Obama didn't ask Warren to serve on any type of policy commission. He asked him to say a prayer.
Eyes on the prize, people, eyes on the prize.

Logical Consideration:

"... the only thing I am intolerant of is intolerance."

Intolerance of intolerance remains intolerance.

Katha Pollitt says it best in today's Los Angeles Times:

To understand how angry and disappointed many Democrats are that Barack Obama has invited evangelical preacher Rick Warren to give the invocation at his inaugural, imagine if a President-elect John McCain had offered this unique honor to the Rev. Al Sharpton -- or the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. I know, it's hard to picture: John McCain would never do that in a million years. Republicans respect their base even when, as in McCain's case, it doesn't really return the favor.

Only Democrats, it seems, reward their most loyal supporters -- feminists, gays, liberals, opponents of the war, members of the reality-based community -- by elbowing them aside to embrace their opponents instead.

Can't we all just get along?

Shorter answer: No.

Well, the simple point is: if Rick Warren is Mr. Obama's friend, he should invite him to the White House and listen to whatever Mr. Warren says. Why give him a National Platform and annoy supporters?

The people who voted for Mr. Obama are supposed to be more important than those who did not.

That is the basic principle of politics.

I'm organizing a protest of Pastor Warren at TurnBackHate.com. We're asking people to silently and non-disruptively turn their backs on the Pastor when he delivers the invocation. Please show your support by signing my petition.

The religiosity of this country is making me sick. Why don't we just have a fucking judge do it?

I would prefer that Obama chose someone else, but he has said that he intends to be president of all the people, not just those who voted for him. That's what this is about it, and I can accept that.

I would suggest to Joe Biden that if he really feels that "we can't be divided like we have been," that he have a talk with his boss about not choosing one of the most divisive figures in the American culture to give his invocation.

Yes we can and should be divided, where it counts. They think science doesn't matter, that evolution never happened. We don't. They think that gays are subhuman and evil, we don't. Division isn't a crime, and "post-partisan" is the wish-fulfillment of the leisure class. There will ALWAYS be things that divide us, and they need to be decided. Gays have the right to marry or they don't. Work with this character where you agree with him. Where you don't, don't call him in to preach. What do we stand for? Which side are we on? Enough with the lovey-dovey nonsense. Read Glenn Greenwald on this matter, he nailed it.

I'm amused by the people who keep claiming this is the change Obama promised. Many of us didn't think it included bigots, just like we didn't think it included racists. There are many pastors who don't use the ugly, inflammatory language of Warren. There is no excuse for selecting him and raising his profile.

See my "Pastor Warren" onhttp://poemsonaffairsofstate.blogspot.com/

Is it me, or is Biden starting to resemble Walter?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4d/Walterdummy.PNG

Elo, Napolitano is gay and has been named head of Homeland Security. But good luck on the trannie front.