In a news conference Thursday, Obama defended the choice of Warren: "It is important for the country to come together even though we may have disagreements on certain social issues." That's all very well, but excuse me if I don't feel all warm and fuzzy. Obama won thanks to the strenuous efforts of people who've spent the last eight years appalled by the Bush administration's wars and violations of human rights, its attacks on gays and women, its denigration of science, its general pandering to bigotry and ignorance in the name of God.
I'm all for building bridges, but honoring Warren, who insults Obama's base as
perverts and murderers, is definitely a bridge too far.
As a Jew, I certainly disagree strongly with Warren's opinions, but in America he's allowed to have them. Certainly, Obama doesn't agree with everything Warren believes, but he's free to select him to deliver an invocation on January 20. Instead of seeing Obama's choice as a slap in the face to liberals (of which I am one), I prefer to see this as a bold statement that sends a strong message to everyone involved, which I see as this: When Obama says he will change our politics, he means it. Gone are the days when ideological differences -- however profound they may be -- make it too difficult for us to be seen together, too difficult for us to break bread, or exchange emails. I admit to having had a difficult time with this choice. But I trust President (elect) Obama and believe he didn't lose contact with what propelled him to election victory and eventually to the White House.
Let Mr. Warren, who holds some pretty abhorrent views, deliver the invocation. The odd thing I've learned in life is that inspiration can come from some pretty unlikely places. We all might be surprised.
1 comment:
I couldn't agree more. While I'm always mystified by the choice of any religious leader as the speaker at the inaugural address in a country that supposedly touts a separation of church and state ---uh yeah, right---Barrack's message here is very real, and resonates with me. No, I'm not religious; don't like organized religions. No, I don't like Warren's views: Politico-religiously, I'm a mix of Abbey Hoffman, Ed Abbey, Darwin and Me...AND the timing is politically suicidal for Barack among California liberals, given prop 8 and all. That shows some real balls, right there. Gotta admire that.
Be all that as it may, though, in the context of a national and international stage, I find that after viewing this from every point of the compass, I'm left with the simple message of a man who believes in Unity, and the power and truth of that his message and actions. And it is unassailable: "The UNITED States of America".
For a body of people as diversified as we are to come together in times like these requires real compromise. Those who cling to their causes call it "sacrifice". That's unfortunate, since there are a lot of us here in the USA whose views countermand those of most of the rest of us. If We The People are ever gonna make it work, we have GOT to unify. Not talk the talk. We need to do it. Having someone as unlikely as Warren speak is a good example of what it looks like, in my view.
Right now, there is a huge swath of semi-lost, wandering-in-the-woods American conservatives, semi-and-otherwise, who may be a leeetle-bit behind the curve of political understanding, but who are nonetheless brother and sister Americans, and who are freaked. This is an olive branch, and personally, I think it's a brilliant move, engineered in a way that will garner all the highest exposure, while costing none of the higher expenses of other ways we might hope to bring the "other side of the aisle" to the table, IE legislative compromise.
Hey, what part of "UNITED" didn't you get?
--Byron Fry
Post a Comment