"Identity politics" sounds like a buzz word to me. Should someone happen to be the target of hate, perhaps at risk of being killed for even appearing gay, or unable to get information from their mate's doctor in matters of life and death, I think they have a total right to protest loudly the decisions the people they elect make if it affects their lives negatively. There is a place for civility and politeness, but when that is interpreted as enforcing silence or expecting people to look the other way that's asking too much. I support Obama. I worked for him and will continue to work for the causes he said he believed in, but when he makes a decision that is a bold affront to people I care deeply about, I will speak out and I urge others to do the same. The goal is to perfect a democracy, not to arrange a polite political tea party where the conversation is limited to teacakes and drapes.

For what its worth, the hard core conservatives are upset with Warren for accepting.

"I'm not a member of any organized political party. I'm a Democrat." -- Will Rogers

I am beginning to think that democracy just doesn't work if there is a permanent common ground.

Thanks. That's one of the more profound things I've read lately. It's definitely going into my big list of significant thoughts - with full attributions of course.

Thanks again.

I am beginning to think that democracy just doesn't work if there is a permanent common ground

.

Well, that makes sense seeing it is abnormal when everyone thinks the same way. I appreciate the fact that Obama wants to share the table with people of opposing views, but darn! Rick Warren is THE opening act. No matter what Obama says or anyone else says. this will mean an awful lot of Obama supporters will not be enjoying the inauguration in the way they would have had he chosen to do the touchy-feely thing with Warren in a different spot.

Inclusion yes, but offering high honors to someone like Rev. Warren? That's what is wrong with this plan.

Instead of total rejoicing there now will be in many corners of the USA a "well, we will just have to wait and see" attitude. I'm just sorry that this is happening on Obama's first day in office.

I have never personally read Warren's stances about gays, if anyone has a link I'd like to. I have seen interviews with Warren and his wife about their interest in helping AIDS victims in Africa and trips they've taken and he's interested in helping the poor. Warren isn't as bad as Dobson, but Dobson wouldn't show up anyway.

I have seen interviews with Warren and his wife about their interest in helping AIDS victims in Africa . . .

This frenzy that right wingers such as the Warrens, Jesse Helms, and Dubyuh have taken to help AIDS victims only came about after they discovered that the virus does not discriminate against straight people.

I watched a friend die of AIDS in 1992 when televangelists, including the beloved Billy Graham, were spouting that the virus was God's gift to mankind, a way to rid the earth of homosexuals and intravenous drug users.

My friend's family had disowned him at the age of seventeen when they found out he was gay. He was renting a room from one of my other friends when he was fired from his job as a convenience store clerk in the last year of his life. His landlord learned to administer the two daily IV's that slowed all the opportunistic diseases that plagued him. During his last week his mother decided that it was her duty to care for him even though she was scared to death of catching something. By that time he didn't recognize her anyway.

He died a month before this thirtieth birthday and his mother asked that his gay friends not attend the funeral. She did not get her wish.

Visit us at

The Home

If the keening disappointment over this "compromise" invocation is any indication, a lot more of Obama's supporters are going to become thoroughly disillusioned when it comes to matters of policy. Anyone who's done any sort of reading of Obama's short stint in the Senate should be able to see that idealism - while readily at his lips - is not so readily on his agenda.

Instead of total rejoicing there now will be in many corners of the USA a "well, we will just have to wait and see" attitude.

Frankly, if his consistent votes to support the Iraq War during his tenure and his choice of Banksman Biden as running mate weren't indication enough, there's always his speech to AIPAC to give one pause...

____________________________

Dirty deeds done dirt cheap! Special holidays, Sundays and rates!

I'm a political pragmatist, and it seems to me that this is beginning to sound like five year olds hollering "no fair!"and just fails to acknowlege reality. Anybody who didn't think that Obama was going to disappoint the Left just wasn't paying attention. Maybe he didn't have a Sistah Soldjah moment, but like Bill Clinton, Obama is a compromiser and a triangulator. He wouldn't have been elected otherwise.

I hate Prop. 8, and have gladly signed petitions attacking the LDS church's tax exempt status. But the referendum it sent a clear message to politicos -- passing something like that California means it's going to pass in any other state that runs it, too.

Nothing happens before its time, and although it's the job of activists to push the agenda forward, they need to decide whether they'd be better off had the other side won.

Obama--this is the guy who turned on his long-standing minister and who threw his dying grandmother under the bus, all for political expediency. His campaign was launched, in great measure, from the anti-war camp, but he has given every indication that he has become ready, willing, and able to serve the military-industrial complex and its cohort, the Israel lobby. Increasingly, the only "change" Obamamania represents is the new crop of gullible, naive supporters who put him in office.