Whatever Happened To "Respect Is Earned?"

by: Paul Rosenberg

Sat Dec 20, 2008 at 11:25


"Respect is earned."  It's supposed to be a conservative mantra.  And Obama is supposed to be trying to reach out to conservatives.  So, why does he insist we must bestow respect on Rick Warren that Warren clearly has not earned?

The fact is, there are a lot of "conservative" principles that I respect.  Except they're not really conservative.  And they're also not exclusive of other principles that might seemingly conflict with them.  For example, I think that everyone is worthy of a basic level of respect.  Being treated with a fundamental level of dignity is, to my mind, a human right.  But I also think that there are higher levels of respect that must be earned, just as one must earn trust.  And giving the invocation at a presidential inaguration certainly counts as a position of respect that must be earned.

So, like I already asked, whatever happened to the conservative principle that "Respect is earned"?

I ask because of an incident recalled by Dan Radosh, author of Rapture Ready: Adverntures in the Parallel Universe of Christian Pop Culture. (h/t Andrew Sullivan by way of  Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle).  It seems that Warren himself has been none to open to the whole "having disagreements without being disagreeable" thing, as Radosh explains....

Paul Rosenberg :: Whatever Happened To "Respect Is Earned?"
Radosh:

Being disagreeable

Barack Obama is defending his invitation to Rick Warren with a plea for postpartisanship.

    What I've also said is that it is important for America to come together even though we may have disagreements on certain social issues... That dialogue, I think, is a part of what my campaign's been all about, that we're never going to agree on every single issue. What we have to do is create an atmosphere where we can disagree without being disagreeable, and then focus on those things that we hold in common as Americans.

Greg Seargant asks "why campaigning against division and polarization by picking an equally radical choice on the left to give the invocation would be politically unthinkable?"

Meanwhile, consider how agreeable Warren himself chose to be -- how open to dialogue -- after the gay group Soulforce prematurely announced that leaders of Warren's Saddleback church, perhaps including Warren and his wife Kay, had agreed to break bread with gay Christian families on Father's Day:

    We did not invite this group and I will not be meeting with them. They invited themselves to draw attention to their cross country publicity stunt. My staff has already told them that neither my wife nor I will meet with them for any discussion or debate.

Bear in mind that the Soulforce families were not asking to speak from the pulpit, or for Warren to publicly embrace them. They wanted a private conversation, to let Warren get to know some real people who were being hurt by his teachings and actions. And yet, not a chance.

For those not familiar with Soulforce, here's what they say about themselves:

Soulforce Vision Statement

"The purpose of Soulforce is freedom for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people from religious and political oppression through the practice of relentless nonviolent resistance."

Soulforce Mission Statement

The mission of Soulforce is to cut off homophobia at its source -- religious bigotry. Soulforce uses a dynamic "take it to the streets" style of activism to connect the dots between anti-gay religious dogma and the resulting attacks on the lives and civil liberties of LGBT Americans. We apply the creative direct action principles taught by Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. to peacefully resist injustice and demand full equality for LGBT citizens and same-gender families.

As co-founder Rev. Dr. Mel White explains on his not-recently updated bio page:

The Rev. Dr. Mel White has been a Christian minister, author, and filmmaker all his adult life. Raised as a evangelical Christian, taught that homosexuality was a sin, he fought to overcome his own homosexual orientation for decades in all ways available to him: prayer, psychotherapy, exorcism, electric shock, marriage and family. That struggle and his halting, poignant steps to understand and accept his homosexuality, reconcile it with his Christian faith, and express his sexuality respectfully and responsibly, are described in his book "Stranger at the Gate: To Be Gay and Christian in America," published in 1994. His latest book, "Religion Gone Bad - The Hidden Dangers of Fundamentalism," is due out in September, 2006.

In 1993, Mel White came out publicly when he was installed as dean at the Dallas Cathedral of Hope of the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches (UFMCC). He announced during his first sermon, "I am gay. I am proud. And God loves me without reservation."

Mel White founded Soulforce Inc. this year with his partner, Gary Nixon. Though Soulforce was established recently, Mel White has been developing his work with soul force principles for many years.

He was dismayed by the increasing confrontational tone on both sides the homosexual issue, and the hateful words and actions that increased the divide. Inspired by the nonviolence movements of Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr., White developed a program based on their principles. These principles were called satyagraha or "soul force" by Gandhi, who based many of them on the teachings of Jesus, and White adopted them to address the suffering of lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transgendered people.

During his six years with UFMCC, he traveled across the country constantly to minister to those impacted by prejudice and hatred against gays and to campaign for civil rights, theological reconsideration, and social acceptance for sexual minorities. His work has resulted in his being arrested on the White House steps during a hunger strike protesting the 'Defense of Marriage Act.' He was also arrested for protesting the Rev. Pat Robertson's virulent anti-gay rhetoric. (After a weeks-long hunger strike in jail, White was visited by Robertson, who promised to avoid inaccuracies and inflammatory language.)

.... In addition, he ghost wrote several books for fellow evangelicals, including Billy Graham ("Approaching Hoofbeats"), Pat Robertson ("America's Date with Destiny"), Jim Bakker, and Jerry Falwell ("If I Should Die Before I Wake" and "Strength for the Journey"). In all those writings, however, he never wrote against homosexuality. White began coming out privately and gradually during the same period that the religious right stepped up its anti-gay rhetoric. Since 1993, he has devoted himself full-time to minister to lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and the transgendered and to work on their behalf in the media, in the political process, and with fellow religious leaders.

In short, Mel White has more than earned a position giving the invocation at Barack Obama's inaguration.  In fact, his presence there would clearly elevate the event.

Rick Warren, not so much.

But, then, when did the religious right ever walk the walk?

Respect is earned President-elect Obama.  Never forget that.

Respect is earned.


Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
You miss the point (0.00 / 0)
Obama does respect Warren because he has been able to get a large number of followers to do his (Warren's) bidding.
Obama respects people with clout and has surrounded himself with them from the beginning.
 What is not to like they are soul mates until he becomes a political liability like Rev. Wright.  

I Think It's More (4.00 / 1)
the elitism of early 20th Century progressivism, as I've written about a number of times before.

For example, Obama also respects scientific experts, as a number of recent appointments have shown.  They don't have political clout, and in fact they're opposed to some people with considerable clout.  But for some reason--various different ones are possibles--hard sciences have his respect in a way that other disciplines don't.

It's problematic, to say the least, that in somes realms his elitism really does seem to collapse into little more than what you describe.  But I don't think that it will do as a general explanation.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
That is different (0.00 / 0)
Those people might not have a clout individually but the concept of competent scientists and science in general has HUGE clout with majority of Americans and almost all of Obama's base. Rick warren in turn has clout with 10s of millions of people (sold 33 million books world wide). That is why I cringe when people bring out why Obama is not bringing people like KKK to the table as reaching out as a counter argument. Do they have any significant clout in open society and represent millions of people's views? No. where is the evidence that Warren's views are shared by millions of people? (or some parts of it) The fact that even in the mostly very liberal California prob 8 failed. Tough but that is the reality.

[ Parent ]
or rather (0.00 / 0)
Prop 8 passed. correction.

[ Parent ]
The Drumbeat on Open Left Continues... (4.00 / 1)


Shorter Brigid: (4.00 / 4)
"I got nothin'.  Just STFU!"

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
remember that converstation about violence in rhetoric (0.00 / 0)
Hey Paul - you know, I got banned for making fun of stoller - and I didn't even mean it in a bad way, i was just horsing around. there was a series of posts about 9 months ago or so on OL which was about, how the editors of a website write about things plays a roll in shaping the broader culture of how society deals with challenges and opponents; that snarky aggressive tone from the editors adds to a kind of justification of dealing with opponents in 'violent' or aggressive means. I'm not trying to pick on you here. but I just kind of want to highlight to you that maybe your reply seems a bit nasty when it didn't need to be to make its point.

of course I was the one advocating egging obama's car the other day. so im definitely not saying im better. :)

~* the * Will * to go on *~


[ Parent ]
Well, Look, I'm A Snarky Smart Aleck, Right? (0.00 / 0)
And, if you read me enough, you'll see that I take pot-shots at myself from time to time as well.  I'm not at all above laughing at my own foibles--even sometimes exaggerating them a bit for comic effect.

I also will try really hard, some times, to reach out to someone I really disagree with who I see as being quite sincere, and arguing in good faith.

This is just who I am.  If I weren't like this, I would never have devoted so much of my life to thankless, unpaid political activism.  And while I could certainly try to restrain myself more (and I'm so damn loquacious, you really have no idea how much I'm retraining myself as it is), I think that the end result would be diminished spontaneity that in turn would make me less generous as well to those I disagree with but see value in dialoging with.

Look, all I'm doing here in the above example is simply pointing out that this is a totally assinine remark, whose total lack of substance only serves to validate the critical attitude it seeks to complain about.

But I actually said it much nices in the original, don'tcha think?
 

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
maybe its just about finding our inner Obama a little (0.00 / 0)
yah, like I said, not trying to come down hard. I personally always hated the tone at dailykos because the front page writers are so acerbic, and something about this little exchange just reminded me of it. just something to think about really.

yours truly,
egg thrower

~* the * Will * to go on *~


[ Parent ]
I think I hope I pray (4.00 / 3)
I think and in fact being religious person I even offer prayers that Obama will be a great president.

I want him to succeed more than anything in world because quite frankly his failure would be the worst thing to happen to this world since Bush got elected.

 That said I think we need to go into this with eyes open.  Obama will only be a great president if we do the work and not pretend that all is well when things like Warren crop up.


[ Parent ]
As well it should! (4.00 / 6)
It's becoming clearer and clearer is the kind of invite that no Democrat ought to extend. The de facto anointing of this rightwing blowhard as "America's pastor"--which is what this is--is contrary to just about every principle we hold.  Why is it wrong to admit that?

[ Parent ]
Disrespect is also earned (4.00 / 6)
Rick Warren has worked hard to earn it, and richly deserves it.

"Post-partisanship" could mean reaching out to reasonable people with a potential for shared values and common ground. But if it means that no one ever has to say they're sorry, including those who have brought so much grief to others and certainly ought to be sorry for it, count me out.


Speaking of earning respect (4.00 / 1)
What is more important for our future, the points made in this diary or the points made in this address?  Which should earn our respect more and which should be the central topic of conversation today?:



Why Is It Always Authoritarian Hero Worship and Either/Or Thinking With You? (4.00 / 2)
Always the same sort of lamitude.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Speaking of lamitude... (0.00 / 0)
There is nothing but anger in your response, no substance.  You guys define this site as the left or "progressive" and then try to take it in a direction which frankly many oppose by its narrow-mindedness.  Are you earning the respect of the many new people brought into activism by the Obama campaign or are you doing your best to push them back into where they were prior?  I only ask you to look at the fullness of the man, the entire picture when trying to figure out the meaning.  You have a man championing Science while reaching out to Evangelicals.  That is a very interesting dynamic, far more than your narrow up against the wall motherfucker narrow view of the world which never took root and only resulted in the failures of the left for the past four decades you've been pushing them, content to have the small isolated victories out of the mainstream which only prove in your ego-riddled brain the correctness of your position since nothing mainstream can ever be as righteous as the fringe.  But that old road is, if not rapidly, aging nevertheless.  

[ Parent ]
Check The Mirror Dude! (4.00 / 2)
There is nothing but anger in your response, no substance.... You have a man championing Science while reaching out to Evangelicals.  That is a very interesting dynamic, far more than your narrow up against the wall motherfucker narrow view of the world which never took root and only resulted in the failures of the left for the past four decades you've been pushing them, content to have the small isolated victories out of the mainstream which only prove in your ego-riddled brain the correctness of your position since nothing mainstream can ever be as righteous as the fringe.

Anger, check.  Substance?  Not so much.

In case you didn't notice, Mel White is an evangelical minister himself.

I have no objection to reaching out to evangelicals.  My objection is to pandering to the worst in them.

But, then, you don't do substance.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
The criticism becomes (0.00 / 0)
little more than he is not doing what you would do rather than what he actually is doing. How is making a full commitment to elevating Science in all aspects of policy somehow pandering to Evangelicals?  Warren's stance on gays may anger a lot of Obama supporters but certainly Obama's stance on Science may anger a lot of the creationist nutbags in Warren's audience, including many who ran for President. Obama is not altering his stance on Science, nor Civil Rights for that matter, by his invitation.

What you fail to see because you fail to look is Obama often seeks common ground in situations where it favors his side.  The common ground between the two men is empathy, no let's make that Empathy because it is at least a professed guiding light for both men.  Tell me, who is more likely to change his stance if Empathy truly becomes his moral center - the one who has an exclusionary view of Civil Rights, or the one who has an all-inclusive stance?  And if you want to impact the country as a whole, you don't do it with the ghostwriter, you do it with the name which sells the books.


[ Parent ]
You Are Becoming UTTERLY Incoherent (0.00 / 0)
The criticism becomes

little more than he is not doing what you would do rather than what he actually is doing.

Well, it does if you ignore the argument part of the argument, and skip directly to the Cliff Notes version of the conclusion.

Warren's stance on gays may anger a lot of Obama supporters but certainly Obama's stance on Science may anger a lot of the creationist nutbags in Warren's audience, including many who ran for President.

(1) So pissing everyone off is how we bring them together?  Interesting idea!

(2) Exactly how many creationist nutbags do you think ran for President?  20,000? Two million?  Because you sure seem to live in a different universe than the one I know.

What you fail to see because you fail to look is Obama often seeks common ground in situations where it favors his side.  The common ground between the two men is empathy, no let's make that Empathy because it is at least a professed guiding light for both men.  Tell me, who is more likely to change his stance if Empathy truly becomes his moral center - the one who has an exclusionary view of Civil Rights, or the one who has an all-inclusive stance?

I would like to know where you get your drugs.  Because even the alternate universe theory can't explain this hallucinogenic logic.  Frauds like Warren spend all their time faking empathy and compassion.  And all that Obama is doing is giving him a huge assist in putting his fraud over. Indeed, that was the whole point of this diary.  So if you want to make this absurd argument of yours, first you have to lay the foundation that Warren is not a fraud.  Only then does your argument become the least bit plausible.

And this, really, gets to the heart of the problem I have with you.  You--like Warren--simply wallow in your own beliefs without ever coming close to realizing what's needed in order to build a convincing argument for them.  It's like you've never had any training in logic, rhetoric, any of that good stuff.  And then you attack me as if I were just as clueless as you are. (See my first comment above.)

I'm sorry, dude.  I realize I have an unfair advantage. My father was a college professer.  I was raised on learning logical syllogisms.  I had them memorized before I could read.  But that sort of unfair advantage is monstrous overkill when it comes to dealing with your careless, unfounded, mass-projecting accusations.

And if you want to impact the country as a whole, you don't do it with the ghostwriter, you do it with the name which sells the books.

(1) Just because I left out the part about Mel White's own books doesn't mean they don't exist.  I left in that ghostwriting part in so folks could see just how much of an insider in that world he was before he came out as openly gay.

(2) Again, basic logic here: when the concern is impacting the country, it sort of matters what you are impacting them with.  A whole lot of bad/phony is not better than smaller amount of good/honest and sincere.  So even if your rationale about the magnitude were sound, it would still be absurd.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Wow. (0.00 / 0)
Not sure which is funnier:

So even if your rationale about the magnitude were sound, it would still be absurd.

or

I'm sorry, dude.  I realize I have an unfair advantage. My father was a college professer...


[ Parent ]
Again (0.00 / 0)
A detailed deconstruction of your utterly failed logic, answered by the most failed lame attempt at humor.

Hmmm.  Which is worst?  Failed logic?  Or failed humor?

Depends on the situation, I suppose.  Failed logic when someone is running a country is pretty damn bad.  It gets people killed, although not necessarily right away.

But failed humor when you're locked in a movie theater for three hours can be enough to drive you murder and mayhem, stat.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Pual (0.00 / 0)
Grow up. Seriously you have way too thick of skin when confronted by any dissension. That is not the way blogs should work. I have seen you loose it every time someone comes out critical of your positions (Reactionary "Hero worship" name calling and subsequent posts in reply as an example in this case).


[ Parent ]
How Come? (0.00 / 0)
Your handle says "LeftPoint" but all I ever see you make is RightPoints?

And I don't mean "correct."


"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
My views (0.00 / 0)
Are left of center on center on most things. which would probably earn the title of right wing from some around here. heh.

[ Parent ]
Argh (0.00 / 0)
"Left of center"

[ Parent ]
And Here I Just Thought You Were Lying! (0.00 / 0)
Or is that what you just said?

This can all get so confusing some times.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Uh, dude, wasn't Paul's post precisely about empathy? (0.00 / 0)
(And, no, I'm not capitalizing that s.) Mel White's empathy wasn't good enough for you, because it made me a little moist in the eyes, myself. For a guy who says he promotes inclusion, very peculiarly selective notion of what constitutes empathy.

[ Parent ]
As a queer scientist (4.00 / 1)
I can say that the above address really didn't seem to have much that was new, though the DoE appointment is nice.

The Warren thing is surprising and disturbing.  Not in and of itself, but in the context of Obama's missteps with us during the election, and in the context of the way that Clinton stabbed us in the back, really badly.  


[ Parent ]
Until gay orgs show they can GOTV in critical states (0.00 / 0)
gay people will continue to be used as whipping boys for DLCers.  Hell, Obama even threw black people on the bus with his insidious Bill Cosbyesque "Father's Day Speech."

Maybe if HRCF could raise its profile among gays in Florida by 2008 making political force capable of changing a close election, we'll finally get some respect from "big tent" types like the mealy-mouthed neoliberal Obama.


[ Parent ]
I meant to say (0.00 / 0)
"by 2012, main it a political force..."

[ Parent ]
And by the way, I don't see him saying anything truly bold (4.00 / 1)
he's not talking about supporting the next generation of particle colliders.  he's not talking about reviving the LISA mission, or building a new space telescope, or any of the myriad of other government-sponsored science projects that have been trashed over the past 15 or so years since the SSC died.  (disclosure:  I'm in physics, so most of my knowledge is physics-related)

Genetics and semiconductors are the smallest of potatoes.  


[ Parent ]
Are They Even Potatoes At All? (0.00 / 0)
More like the slimest of rhizomes, one might argue.  And not even edible ones.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Is Obama Sanctioning Religious Bigotry at His Inauguration? (4.00 / 3)
Warren may have certain qualities that Obama finds agreeable but Warren also espouses intolerant views that mainstream Americans reject.

Inviting him to the inauguration to give the invocation, even though he rankles mainstream Americans, has the potential to mar the entire inauguration by engendering deeply felt divisions and antagonisms.

I am baffled at Obama's reasoning and poor political judgment in inviting Warren. If what he is trying to do is to chart evangelical waters for a re-election bid, his timing is way off base. If he is trying to build bridges for future reconciliation, the inauguration is not the place to start.

Instead of setting the stage for a new era of tolerance and understanding, Obama appears to be sanctioning religious bigotry by inviting the intolerant Warren to give the invocation at his inauguration.  


Careful (0.00 / 0)
Warren may have certain qualities that Obama finds agreeable but Warren also espouses intolerant views that mainstream Americans reject.

Wrong, Epic Wrong. Just check out prop 8 and see what majority of the most liberal state in the union think. Maybe Majority do not agree with 100% of his views but they agree with he views that are coming under scrutiny here. some  think (Thru tunnel vision of blogs) that Obama's election just changes everything with a magic wand and now all liberal stances are majority opinions; grave mistake IMO and a possibility for a rude awakening if some people take it too far.


[ Parent ]
This Is Badly Mistaken (4.00 / 2)
Warren isn't just anti-gay marriage.  That's only the tip of the iceberg.  You are actively spreading disinformation here, and I have to ask. "Why?"

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Yes (0.00 / 0)
he has other objectionable views, abortion and some others. he has good views on global warming and poverty too. But the only big objection I see every where is because of his views towards gays. It is his stance on prop 8 that is earning lion's share of all the objections. I am just pointing out facts --where these seems to be an echo chamber-- not misinformation.



[ Parent ]
You Really Are TOTALLY Clueless! (0.00 / 0)
For example, from Digby, yesterday:

America's Pastor Rick Warren says that being gay is kind of like having a bad tempter or immaturity --- largely a matter of lack of self control. So why should they be allowed to get "gay married" when they can just grow up and be good heteros?

Now you might think that people wanting to join in monogamous, committed relationships would indicate that it isn't just a matter of poor impulse control, but Warren clearly thinks that there isn't any reason for it because they aren't really gay in the first place. It logically follows that their marriages aren't real either.

In short, it's not just his "position on the issues."  It's the sort of outrageous, nonsensical, logically incoherent arguments he makes, not just on this, but on a wide range of issues.

You really are not in the best of positions to be promoting yourself as "just pointing out facts", given how many of them seem to have escaped your notice.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
I just don't care about Rick Warren (0.00 / 0)
As soon as Obama says that Rick Warren is correct in all his views, and/or that we should all join his church, I'll be right on the battlelines with you guys.  But until you tell me exactly what difference this Warren picks makes, I have trouble caring.  It isn't policy, isn't personnel--isn't even a symbol, because I think symbols tend to be interpreted the same way by most people.  This is doing something that you (as do, admittedly, a fair amount of other people) interpret as being a dig at homosexuals.

Now, if I ruled the world, would I have a Universal Unitarian priest or somebody similar give the invocation?  No--I wouldn't have an invocation at all.  But assuming there had to be one but I had my choice, I would choose someone quite different from Rick Warren.  But I also recognize that it's not my choice, that I can't change it now that it's been made, and that it doesn't matter very much anyway and I should pick a more important battle.

The comments about Warren now being "America's pastor" or whatever because he's doing the invocation are, frankly, ludicrous.  Can anybody tell me who did Bush's invocation four years ago off the top of their head?  Hell, I had even forgotten there was an invocation until this mess started.


Keep digging Obama (4.00 / 1)
This is Obama's fall back tactic when criticized. It works fine the first few times around, but as more people hear it over and over it will start to fail unless the tactic evolves.

Obama likes to counter any criticism of himself by countering that we can "disagree" and be "respectful" and thus implies that critics are not being respectful. This is a great tactic when your opponents use hyperbole like the Republicans have. But it will fail as criticisms more and more are based on substance.

Eventually this "Be Respectful" will become mocked. In fact - I've just made it official.

Obama: "Be Respectful"

Watch for it on Saturday Night Live.

--

Thinking about it I've just come up with the framework for a good SNL skit. Here is the outline. Obama is giving a press conference and reporters keep asking him tough questions about his recent decisions. And each time he says some blather and then says "We need to show respect". After a few of these a person on his team - which are behind him - yells "Respect". This builds. Finally Aretha Franklin comes out singing respect leading his whole team. Team members mock the press, "Why did you invite a gay bashing priest" - they yell back at themselves "RESPECT". "Why won't you protect american's from spying?" "RESPECT!" "Why bailouts for hot shot bankers?" "RESPECT!!!"

I'm a genius. This respect shit is toast.

~* the * Will * to go on *~


How about showing Obama (4.00 / 3)
going back to the antibellum south in a time machine, imploring slaves on the auction block to "show some respect" for southern "traditions"?

[ Parent ]
might be funny (0.00 / 0)
to have some folks in KKK outfits come in from the side amid all the singing and join in. And Aretha Franklin might suddenly note them and act startled as the chorus and the KKK folks keep singing respect together.

~* the * Will * to go on *~

[ Parent ]
If you follow the logic of the kool aid drinkers (4.00 / 1)
that's exactly what they see happening with fundies - we'll all hold hands and break into song together.

[ Parent ]
yeah (4.00 / 1)
this is a very good skit out line, nails everyone. I am a genius. ;)

~* the * Will * to go on *~

[ Parent ]
Owning slaves (4.00 / 3)
was a deeply held religious belief at the time! Therefore no one has any right to criticize it, and if they do, it just means they  hate God and America and baby Jesus.

Montani semper liberi

[ Parent ]
Note to Obama (4.00 / 3)
"disagreements on certain social issues"

Civil Rights are not a social issue pal. Wasn't this guy a constitutional law professor.  

~* the * Will * to go on *~


No, That Was Apparently Some Other Barack Obama Dude Who Shared The Same Name (0.00 / 0)
Curiously enough, the same sort of thing happened with S.I. Hayakawa back in the 1960s, only that was about general semantics.  When he got all authoritarian on the students at San Francisco State--where he was the President, a number of folks spoke out suggesting that he needed the help of the other S.I. Hayakawa.

Pretty amazing really.  Neither of these dudes was named something like Joe Smith.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
these rheotirical flurrishes can't last (0.00 / 0)
I really do think he's in trouble.

Bowers was wondering how to fight back the other day. I think it would be very effective to start mocking Obama on his catch phrases.

"Respect each other"

"certain social issues"

"Be civil"

"disagree without being disagreeable"

"find what we have in common"
like... Everyone hates the jews! :)

.

of course leftist cynical heroes have already baked politicians like Obama before:



~* the * Will * to go on *~


[ Parent ]
great into on this one, with fun graphics (0.00 / 0)
[ Parent ]
This is not (0.00 / 0)
A civil rights issue IMO. As far as I know Obama never mentioned it as one either. The situation here is similar to Racism (in its current form) and sexism, they are social issues.

[ Parent ]
of course obama frames it as a 'social issue' (4.00 / 2)
if he acknowledged that this is largely about marriage equality, which it is, then he would be forced to acknowledge that its about equal treatment under the law. and that is why its a civil rights issue. "social issue" is just spin to excuse denying someone their rights.

sexism ceases being a social issue once someone beats their wife.

~* the * Will * to go on *~


[ Parent ]
Obama really seems to have bought in to this being a center-right country (4.00 / 4)
Paul's the unreasonable one here for having to defend the view that we shouldn't reinforce viewpoints that we see as wrong and mistaken?

Obama as of now has won by 7.3 percent, which is roughly the same vote share (53) and percentage as George Bush in 1988. His 52.9 percent is 2 points better than Ronald Reagan did in his realigning election in 1980.

And yet he's out looking for a pat on the head from a leader in a movement that is among the most conservative an republican of all demographics and that he showed little headway among - because they believe in completely opposite things than the average Democrat. They're not going to move. Its like thinking that African Americans would move to the Party of Southern Racism because some Republican goes to a NAACP conference and offers a prayer. Not going to happen. Laughable.

I don't recall hearing Reagan or Bush bringing Buddhist monks to deliver an invocation or having an atheist come up and declare that there is no god and thus no need for an invocation - to show that they could reach out to the other side.

Yet here we are praising Obama for validating the same people and worldview that is going to try and destroy his agenda as soon as that inauguration over. Doesn't anybody think that part of the reason that white conservative groups are seen as legitimate interest groups and liberal ones are not is because we constantly send out signals like this that that's correct?


Not to mention (4.00 / 4)
Rick Warren totally punked Obama with that Saddleback appearance. The day after the debate, a reporter went to Saddleback looking to see how many of Warren's followers would be voting for Obama, he couldn't find one.

http://www.salon.com/news/feat...

Warren has an estimated 22,000 devotees, yet he did not deliver any of them to Obama. And how many of us voted for Obama? How many of us told our friends, relatives, neighbors and passerby that they needed to vote for Obama?

Montani semper liberi


[ Parent ]
Rats Are Smarter (4.00 / 2)
One time down a tunnel with no cheese, and that's it.

On to a new tunnel.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
"Rats Are Smarter" (0.00 / 0)
Real mature. I am sure you are earning respect right now with that tone.

Maybe he is trying to soften their stances? would you want a Lynch mob like Plain voters or Huckbee voters as your opposition in 4 years? I know what I would want.


[ Parent ]
Every Day I PRAY For a Lynch Mob Of Palin Voters In 4 Years! (4.00 / 2)
And I'm an atheist!

The GOP might actually fall below 20 Senators with that sort of front line.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
That is very Risky (0.00 / 0)
What if they succeed? People fell for palin until her stupidity blew it for her but you can see how someone more discreet would have passed the smell test with a bit more competence (bush-Rove). It is a losing proposition when one party is very radical, because the chances are very real that they will eventually take power and reck the country in a short time (once again bush). while a more moderate opposition leads to a better electorate in the long run (Europe, conservative parties there would be democrats here).

Think long term. and think numbers. the same lynch mobs (millions of people) might be your neighbors and their views will affect the whole society more negatively. if there is a choice to moderate them by taking their icons like Rush Limbaugh or Haguee and possibly replace them with Rick Warren it would be for the better imo.


[ Parent ]
In Case You Hadn't Noticed (0.00 / 0)
You are describing the GOP past.

Where, exactly, have you been the last 28 years or so?

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Voting (4.00 / 1)
I have to push back on this.  Sometimes we begin to sound like conservatives discussing "negotiating with terrorist".  You know how they go on and on how we can never change the mind of a terrorist so we might as well just kill them all.  The goal to win "hearts and minds" is useless.

Same deal here.  Sure, Obama can't win over many, if any, of Warren's hard core devotees.  But there is a large segment of the population that respects people like Warren on a more superficial level.  I think something like this very much helps Obama with that segment of the population.

For the record, I still come down against having Warren deliver the invocation and support the backlash against Obama due to this choice.  But let's not deceive ourselves on the matter; there are good reasons for this, they just add up to less than the good reasons not to do this.


[ Parent ]
If by backlash (0.00 / 0)
you mean organizing a real fight for equal rights then that's probably all Obama was looking for.  

[ Parent ]
Disagree (4.00 / 2)
The principle I'm fine with.  And I'm an atheist.

But Warren is the wrong person to chose to do this with on multiple levels.  And I'm very far from being alone on this.

Obama is simply insulting people by pretending they disagree with what he says he's trying to do.  People know how politically savvy he is, and they know he could easily accomplish his stated goals with someone who is much more acceptable to all concerned on both sides--which would have the benefit of actually accomplishing what he claims to want.

But he hasn't chosen to do that, and so his explanation doesn't pass the smell test.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Or maybe he's still organizing. (0.00 / 0)
That's consistent with his actions.  

[ Parent ]
WTF? (4.00 / 1)
Sorry, but that's way to cryptic for me.

Organizing for what?  To get people totally pissed off with him who worked their asses off to get him elected?

Please clarify.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
The Alinsky method of agitation (0.00 / 0)
of which he has been described as a natural. He appears to be agitating certain groups and it can only be intentional.

[ Parent ]
If So (0.00 / 0)
Then there are several tens of millions more Alinsky organizers out there than anyone ever realized.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Yeah I don't think that's how that works. (0.00 / 0)
He's actively getting people who he would naturally work with pissed. People power doesn't rely on him. Alinsky would agitate oppressed groups and teach methods of organizing and leave. He didn't want people to rely to much on him or his organizers. He wanted people to do it on their own.  

[ Parent ]
doubtlessly the most recent secret obama plan (4.00 / 3)
[ Parent ]
Nothing secret about what Alinsky did. (0.00 / 0)
Nothing secret about what Obama was taught.

It's all written down.  


[ Parent ]
its obamas plan to have the opposite effect of what he's done so far (4.00 / 1)
that is the secret

~* the * Will * to go on *~

[ Parent ]
I don't follow. (0.00 / 0)
What's the opposite effect of what he's done so far? When you agitate it appears you directly pick a scab to motivate the person to change their life. Aren't people up in arms? The question is whether this moment will be seized and a real movement formed or if HRW will simply receive more donations and wage more ineffective top down campaigns for equality.  

[ Parent ]
I get it! (0.00 / 0)
It's tough love, right?

Or three-dimensional chess. One of those, for sure.

Montani semper liberi


[ Parent ]
Three-Dimensional Chess, Without The Chess (0.00 / 0)
Or the Three Dimensions.

Tiddly-winks in zero dimensions, perhaps?

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Well agitation is certainly tough love (0.00 / 0)
in a way. Rub raw the sores of discontent is how Alinsky described it. The intent is to motivate people to action when inaction is their normal state.  

[ Parent ]
Yes, (4.00 / 1)
"inaction" has certainly been the normal state of the gay rights movement for the past 20-30 years, right?

Are you saying they are too shiftless to organize themselves, they need Obama to rub salt in their wounds to get them off their lazy asses?

Because that's about the most arrogant thing I've heard in a long time.

Montani semper liberi


[ Parent ]
I don't know. Were blacks too shiftless (0.00 / 0)
to organize themselves in Woodlawn or Rochester? Or in the South? Were the immigrant populations too shiftless to organize themselves in the Back of the Yards?

The fact that you think the gay rights movement is active - I assume you believe effectively active - is belied by the facts.  


[ Parent ]
Like blacks, gay people (4.00 / 1)
created their movement for themselves. They didn't need a three-dimensional chess playing genius superhero pissing on them to make things happen.

I guess that's what it comes down to for you. Obama is so special even his piss has magic powers, we should all be so lucky that it falls on us.

Montani semper liberi


[ Parent ]
You Have To Admit, Though Sadie (4.00 / 1)
The "left wing" authoritarian fantasies are a lot more... interesting than the boring old rightwing ones.  Magic piss and three-dimensional chess.  Or was that magic chess and three-dimensional piss?  Or magic piss on three-dimensional chess?

Anyway, sure beats the hell out of Commander Codpiece.  By at least, oh, I dunno, two or three years of adolescent development, at least.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
It's unfortunate that on a site like this (0.00 / 0)
people appear to be wholly unfamiliar with one of the most influential community organizers.  

[ Parent ]
Bull! (4.00 / 1)
I first read Rules For Radicals when I was maybe 14 years old. I think you're just eggregiously twisting him to create yet another fantasy about Obama, and I see no reason to take the bait.


"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
How is it twisting? (0.00 / 0)
Please be specific.  

[ Parent ]
I read Alinsky more recently (0.00 / 0)
but Paul is right. You are torturing the poor man to make a hero out of Obama. Give it a rest.

Montani semper liberi

[ Parent ]
Well that's not true. Please research Alinksy. (0.00 / 0)


[ Parent ]
If he wanted a token reach out (0.00 / 0)
Sure, but then the people he was intending to reach out wouldn't be reached, since they wouldn't care for a token choice that doesn't represent them (or known to them as much). This actually shows he cares about what he says, not just symbolic or deceptive talk that many accused him of doing during his GE run(Fairy Tails!, "Clouds will open and angles will come down" talk from Hillary).

[ Parent ]
I'm Not Talking About A Token Outreach (4.00 / 1)
I'm talking about outreach to an evangelical minister who is not a stone cold bigot.

Because, really, what's the point of trying to cater to bigots?

If he wants that, why not just switch parties to the GOP?

This line of argument makes even less sense now that it did in the beginning.

Say, did you fry your brains on drugs, is that it?

Is this one of the Palin in-laws to be?

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Heh (0.00 / 0)
You sound more like Palin your self, not her in laws. Demonize the opposition with innuendo once you run out of civil arguments.

Fact is what you call bigots are 52% of the people in California. sure lets exclude them. and probably 60% of people in more conservative states. Not.


[ Parent ]
You're The Bigot, Bozo (0.00 / 0)
For assuming that everyone who voted against gay marriage is a bigot.  They're not.  A lot of them are mislead, misinformed, confused, trusting of those least deserving of trust.  But you're such a simpleton that those sorts of distinctions are all lost on you.

And those are precisely the sorts of distinctions that Obama ought to be trying to make and take advantage of.  Which is precisely what he is not doing by inviting Warren, and precisely why this is such a completely honeheaded move on his part.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Whatever (0.00 / 0)
You sir are very rude. I am going to leave it at that.

[ Parent ]
Not Rude (0.00 / 0)
Rude would be insulting you right off the bat.

I've made you work hard. You've really earned that insult.  You should be proud.

That insult is your reward for all your stubborn refusal to actually engage with the arguments presented, in favor of the ones you can win.

Not to mention your habit of insulting people who aren't present to defend themselves.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Who (0.00 / 0)
would be "much more acceptable to all concerned on both sides" as the member of the clergy picked to give the invocation at the inauguration?

Maybe there are evangelicals who would be much more acceptable to the GLBT community and to you, but frankly, I think the litmus test being applied to Rick Warren disqualifies from the inaugural every leading evangelical who would be widely recognized by rank and file evangelicals as one of their own.

Paul, I am not sure why you are so upset at everyone who proposes a different perspective on this that you insult your critics rather than engaging them in a dialogue that would at least have some potential for being constructive.

Your posts analyzing social, political and historical data are always stimulating and thought-provoking.  But this invective of yours in this comment thread detracts from all that good analysis that you post.

If you cannot propose a substitute for Rick Warren who would currently have substantial stature in the Evangelical community, I hope that you will apologize to everyone who has written in this comment thread that Obama deserves the benefit of the doubt on this choice.


[ Parent ]
If there is no such thing as (4.00 / 1)
a non-bigoted evangelical, whose fault is that? I have long suspected that "evangelical" was just something the bigots cooked up to hide behind.

Thanks for confirming that my hunch was correct.

Montani semper liberi


[ Parent ]
Why on earth should he have to choose an evangelical at all? n/t (4.00 / 2)


[ Parent ]
You would never guess (4.00 / 1)
MAINSTREAM Christians are the majority in this country. No, it's evangelical this and evangelical that and what will the evangelicals think?

Evangelicals have been running the government for eight years, it's time to give us normals a swing at the ball.

Montani semper liberi


[ Parent ]
But That Might Hurt Their Poor Feelings! (0.00 / 0)
Seeing as how we can actually hit the ball!

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Sadie And SB Have Both Offered Obvious Responses (0.00 / 0)
(1) If there aren't any non-bigoted options, that's not our fault.

(2) Regardless of what excuse Obama offers, he doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt for promoting a bigot--for the simple reason that there is no doubt.

(3) Sorry for any hurt feelings.  You see, I would suffer fools gladly, if only there weren't so damn many of them!


"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Show me. (0.00 / 0)
Fundamentalists are despised outside of their enclaves. Did you know the fastest growing religious identification in America today is "none?" The Religious Right bears most of the responsibility for that.

If you really believe there is some "silent majority" out there that voted for Obama because he kissed up to Warren, but that this silent majority is nowhere to be found inside of Saddleback, then please, show me some evidence for this.

Montani semper liberi


[ Parent ]
Silent majority (0.00 / 0)
I think this was a response to my post way, way, way up there someplace.  (Come to think of it, mine was a response you yours, so that makes sense.  Hard to tell through the cat fighting.)

I never claimed there was a majority out their supporting Warren, silent or otherwise.  I just believe lots of people out there who are inclined to approve of people like Warren who don't actively follow him.  I certainly could be wrong.  But most people are not passionate about all things; they have the stuff they really care about and then have all this other stuff have opinions on, but don't care about that much.  I trust someone as famous and popular was Warren has many such lower tier support.  That just seems incredibly obvious to me.

Of course, there are other people like those who identify as religiously as "none" who hate the religious right.  I'm one of those!  But just because one category exists doesn't mean the other does not.

------

It's funny.  When given a choice on most matters, we all are  capable of looking at the pros and cons.  We make these little lists in our heads all the time when trying to decide anything from trivial choices like which toilet paper to buy to life-altering events like which college to go to or which job to take.

But once we make up our minds, we tend to rationalize the decision.  All the pro's for the other side and con's for the side we choose start to fade from thought.  We get defensive and exaggerate.  This isn't lying, it is simply how we think; it's just human.  I do it; everyone does it.

But that doesn't mean it is correct.  I know it sounds like I'm defending Obama on this for more than I intend to.  I agree with all you and Paul say on this matter in terms of all the problems related to this move by Obama.  But that doesn't magically make the "pro" side of the ledger go away, no matter how much we may rationalize it off the table.

There was a lot of stupid stuff written in defense of Obama at dKos lately (three dimensional chess, being the favorite), but there was one I thought was pretty good, where someone emailed his conservative relative who follows Warren:

I guess I was wrong.  I guess Obama maybe meant it when he said he wanted to change the tone.  If he is willing to listen to us, maybe we should be willing to listen to him.

I'm sure there will be plenty of people at my church who are mad, and I will bring this up at Bible Study on Friday and let you know what they say (and I am sure it won't be good).  Like I said, people were mad when Warren had Obama speak at his church.  But this just shows me we are wrong to be that way.  How can we solve anything if we can't listen to each other?

Anyway, it's just a prayer.  It's not like he's agreeing with everything Obama says.  We'll get over it.

Is that person going to vote for Obama?  Of course not.  But it takes some of the punch out of the opposition and might make it easier to pass health care.  That doesn't make up for the problems with this move by Obama, but that doesn't mean it isn't true.


[ Parent ]
You may be right. (4.00 / 1)
But all I can see is, Obama is squandering the birds in his hand (liberals) trying to catch the ones in the bush (people like the uncle in the story).

If he lost two supporters to win that uncle, then it's a net loss. And from what I've seen, he has lost a lot of trust with this action.

Montani semper liberi


[ Parent ]
Or Worse Than the Ones In the Bush (0.00 / 0)
The ones in the Palin.

You betcha!

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Good Thoughts (4.00 / 2)
First, That decision-making process you describe is actually quite rational.  Once a decision has been made, reopening it every ten minutes means it really isn't a decision at all.  And decision is deeply ingrained in our evolutionary history for a reason: it works.  So even if it sometimes--heck, frequently leads to bad decisions being made and held onto when they shouldn't be--the overall result is significantly better on the whole than any readily-available alternatives.

Of course, we can--and do--improve on it when we make a specialty of informed decisionmaking--in the studies of philosophy, logic, science, systems management, etc.  But even folks who specialize in those fields generally don't carry over the better practices into most of their everyday lives.  That's because the cost/benefit ratios don't support it.

For me, all of this merely serves to underscore that making Obama pay a serious cost right up front will be far more effective than any sort of long-term "three dimensional chess" fantasy of our own. Whack him good before he's even taken office yet, and that will be factored into all that follows.  Getting him to change after the fact is fighting against millions of years of evolution.

Second, I read that diary on DKos, and I agree that it was not just ludicrous tripe.  But, at the same time, it was mighty small beer.  We tend to forget that even with the relatively high turnout rate of the last election, there are still many, many more people who aren't even registered, much less voting than there are folks on the Christian right like this person who might just soften their opposition a little.

What I'm getting at here is the Willie Sutton theory of politics.  You know Sutton.  He was the bank robber who was asked by a judge why he kept robbing banks.  Sutton replied, "That's where the money is."  Well, you look at the folks who demographically by all indications should be reliable supporters, if only there were involved in the process, and the Willie Sutton theory of politics says, "That's where the votes are."

Simple as that.

As for chasing after the lady mentioned in that diary?  That's just hubris, plain and simple.  Sure it's rationalized to sound all high-minded, and such.  But it's really, at bottom, nothing more than a selfish ego trip on Obama's past.  "Look at me! I can charm the spots off a leopard!"

And the only one who has to pay any sort of price for his egotism is the ones at the bottom of the power hierarchy, the geatest political outcasts, "the least of these" as it says in Matthew 25.

Third, toilet paper?  Well, yeah, okay, you've got kids and kids are finicky that way.  But for me, the decision list is pretty much dominated by what's on the shelf when I'm almost out.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
There's also the problem, however, that by choosing someone (4.00 / 2)
who really does not represent a mainstream religious viewpoint that the pick radiates disingenuousness. Obama does not validate himself as a mainstream-ish man of faith and ideals; he reveals himself as imminently political, which is not terribly helpful. The pick Warren validates those on the evangelical right, but it disregards a much wider swath. And not just those on the far left, as many commenters have suggested throughout the netroots.

[ Parent ]
Respect must be earned (4.00 / 1)
Except, of course, when "grown ups" are involved.  Are we regressing to the point where those who already have power are expected to get "parental" respect automatically?  In a sense, Obama has earned respect from those in power because he was able to win the presidency.  He needs to earn the respect of the electorate by making the government functional, as opposed to the general train wreck of the past few years.

Of course, respect for the rule of law and appropriately punishing those who broke it would also be good.


the problem is the low bar (4.00 / 2)
ive just lived 7 years of marginal competence being praised as superb leadership due to the staggering ineptness of the former leadership. This is Bloomberg after Giuliani. the tragedy is people are so lazy and will compare Obama to Bush and say "its so much better" - vs - having some idea in their mind of what good leadership should be and measuring their electeds by it.

~* the * Will * to go on *~

[ Parent ]
yeah i basically agree (0.00 / 0)
but it's not mainly laziness i think - it's lingering fear or the fact that it offers them cover for their  own politics which might not  be so progressive (which is fine) or simply being overwhelmed and confused by it all.  It's hard to deal with the appearance and messaging of "new" when you have a restoration of "old" going on.

[ Parent ]
Hm. One group is agitated enough to start a real (0.00 / 0)
movement and their opponents are pacified. It appears that some sores of discontent have been rubbed!  

Another thought (0.00 / 0)
I had not thought about this from the African American viewpoint but from my and Obama's local newspaper
Some people were outraged that Obama bypassed prominent black pastors and selected a wildly popular white evangelical minister to give the sacred prayer on an occasion that has special significance for generations of African Americans

http://www.suntimes.com/news/m...

This is a side of the equation that has not even been explored by us.
  This would be the right time to acknowledge that the struggle for equal rights in the African American community is not finished.


USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox