Friday, December 19, 2008

The Rev. Warren Fiasco

For eight years, the United States has been ruled on ideological grounds by a President who promised to be "a uniter, not a divider". Instead of being a uniter, he consistently put ideologues in positions of power and actively sidelined anyone with divergent views. President Bush was not the President of the United States of America—he was the President of NeoConservative Americans and left the rest of us without any leadership at all.

President-elect Obama has chosen a man with views I cannot stand to perform the invocation at his inauguration. Many on the left are outraged at this selection. I think it's a great selection. President Obama is showing that he will be a Democratic President of America, not a President of Democratic Americans.

This inauguration does not belong to Obama or those who voted for Obama. It belongs to every single American, from progressives like myself to fundamentalist evangelicals like Rev. Warren. Everyone has a place at this inauguration.

Liberals who are outraged at the selection are no better than George Bush and Dick Cheney.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

George, I agree with your sentiment that Obama should be the president of a united US. I agree that he should be ruled by rationalism rather than dogma and that he should represent all of his constituents. That capability is one of the primary reasons that I supported and voted for him (despite disagreeing with several of his policy positions).

But I don't think it is fair to say that Warren's place in the inauguration is a uniting action. And I don't think disappointment or even outrage is out of place here.

Imagine if Obama had selected a Nazi to run the inauguration. This would clearly be cause for concern in many people, and the majority of the US population would think the concern was valid. In reality Obama has selected somebody that expresses opinions considered hateful by many. Whether you and/or the majority of the US population agrees with those opinions is irrelevant. It is a poor choice for what should be a uniting, peaceful, and glorious moment.

Frankly, I don't care about Warren. It is more important to see what Obama does after he is inaugurated. But, seriously, this is not a cool choice.

George Reese said...

Benson,

Your outrage is intolerance. And it is likely hypocrisy.

First, Obama is not asking a Nazi to run the inauguration. He is asking someone who is a friend of his to say a prayer at his inauguration. A person who holds beliefs that are strongly held--even if wrongly held--by a significant minority of this country. Those beliefs are bigoted, but there is nothing remotely similar to the Nazi party about those beliefs.

We now have one party rule. Those who disagree with Obama have every reason to be afraid that Obama will begin shoving his ideology down their throats. After all, there's nothing to stop him from doing that and, when they had the chance, they attempted to shove their bigoted beliefs down our throats.

The choice of Warren is a strong signal to those who disagree with Obama that he will not shove left wing beliefs down their throats. There will not be a tyranny of the majority party under Obama like there was under Bush.