A Progressive Case for Rick Warren

[DeepModem Mom]

WP op-ed: A Progressive Case for Rick Warren
By Geoffrey Garin
Friday, December 19, 2008

Many of Barack Obama's progressive supporters feel let down by his choice of Rick Warren to deliver the invocation at the Inaugural. I understand why, but here's a different way to look at it. The real story here is not that President-elect Obama has somehow blessed Rick Warren's views on abortion or gay rights, but that one of America's leading evangelical pastors has decided to bless the presidency of someone who is strongly pro-choice and committed to the civil rights of gays and lesbians. That's a rather extraordinary development.

Does anyone think the selection of Rick Warren means that Barack Obama will govern differently on social issues than he said he would during the campaign? I certainly don't. There has been a remarkable "what you see is what you get" quality to President-elect Obama's political career, and there's every reason to think that will continue to be the case.

Rick Warren is the one who is making the bigger statement here. In no uncertain terms, the best known pastor of our time will be telling his followers and fellow evangelicals that there is nothing ungodly about a president who believes that government shouldn't interfere with a woman's right to choose and that gays and lesbians deserve the protection of our laws as much as any other American. That's a moment progressives should celebrate....

Obama has told us all along this is an all-hands-on-deck moment for America, when we have to start acting like we are all in this together. Putting that view of leadership into action as president isn't easy, but we are much worse off as a country because President Bush never tried for even a moment when he had the chance eight years ago. I have every confidence that Barack Obama will stay true to his campaign commitments on gay rights and reproductive health, but I'm also glad he is keeping his promise to lead us toward a more united, less polarized America.

(The writer is president of Hart Research Associates and conducts polling for many Democratic candidates and progressive organizations.)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/19/AR2008121902414.html?nav=most_emailed

[polichick]

1. So we pretend that a blessing from such a man is a valuable thing?

[Recursion]

30. Until last week, I associated self-righteousness only with conservatives

I'm very sad to see how wrong I was.

[Taverner]

2. Very good point

Not sure if its 100% convincing, but at the same time not sure its 100% off either...

Time will tell

[DeepModem Mom]

5. This is my first (and only?) post on this subject. It was not my view...

but I think it is an interesting piece, from a progressive, and maybe food for thought.

[jaysunb]

7. Thank you posting it.

I too have steered clear of this topic, but I'm glad to see someone ( Geoffrey Garin )
put to words what I've been thinking. I just hope those who are offended will give this point of view strong consideration.

Again, thanks for posting...you always come through. :hi:

[redstateblues]

3. Good post- I don't like Warren- but I'm not upset about him speaking

[QC]

4. I just KNOW there's a pony in here somewhere!

[ooglymoogly]

13. LOL nt

[Hugin]

27. Hahaha! My favorite reply in this whole episode! Hahaha!

Congrats QC! :rofl:

[QC]

29. Thanks! n/t

[NJmaverick]

6. You know it's clear now, that there are many liberals don't believe unity

is a good thing. I am glad there are many brave liberals (and a very brave President Elect) that are willing to suffer the slings and arrows of those that think a united Country is a bad thing.

[Captain Hilts]

8. But, but he's said that most of my friends - Catholics and Jews are going to Hell. nt

[meowomon]

9. There is no case for this bigot.

[anitar1]

17. Meowoman, You have just stated my view, thank you.

When I think of how we have spent 8 years of having these ranting , raving evil people trying to rule this country and impose their belief system on all of us, it is scary. They will not stop promoting hatred. They are not Christians. I will not listen to someone who is the face of evil IMO. After spending 75 years on this earth and actually having a bit of hope, I finally get it.Obama is very naive if he thinks this will help him. I am straight and and white and can only say that henceforth I will observe and detach from political involvement in this country. No more. My deepest sympathy to the GLBT community and to all who desire equal rights.

[DCKit]

24. You're only eight years old????

Sorry, but they've been at it for a lot longer than that.

[Skittles]

22. and it sucks seeing DUers showcasing "cases"

nothing but apologists - :thumbsdown:

[Two Americas]

10. what I think it means

I don't think that Obama "has somehow blessed Rick Warren's views on abortion or gay rights," rather he has said they are not important issues and that the right wing framing of the issues is correct, or at least legitimate and valid. Once that has been conceded, then a person can still say they "disagree" with the religious right and they pay no price for that, and need take no stand. They can have it both ways. "People have different opinions" and "we need to work with everyone" is said. The "differences" are not seen as anything very important. We have "more important" things to do, and politics and stands on principle are obsolete, old fashioned, and to be seen as an obstacle to the march into the glorious future where nothing means anything, except as each individual determines for themselves.

Warren and Obama share a modern "spirituality of success," a New Agey amorphous Christianity of personal exploration and development. In that context, political issues are seen as minor, and those who bring them up are "making mountains out of molehills," making us feel unhappy and are perhaps spiritually "un-evolved" or unenlightened.

Talking to Fundamentalists who are Warren fans this week, they most definitely see this as a chance to convert Obama, or at least make it more difficult for him to push the "liberal agenda" and they plan to use this to promote their own right wing agenda, not to consider any of our views. That isn't going to happen. They see Warren as the hero in this scenario, as the magnanimous one, as the one who is "reaching out" and being "inclusive." The purpose of reaching out is not to find any common ground, is not to cooperate, but rather to forward a very narrow and extremist agenda. They are very much aware that Obama's recent moves gave diminished and marginalized us, and are quite pleased about that. They are happy that we are being put in our place, weakened and discredited.

They oppose Obama's stands, but they see that as a function of pressure groups, fringe fanatical zealots with "an agenda" who are pressuring him to take stands for women's rights and gay rights. Step one, then, is to discredit and isolate and marginalize the people in those "pressure groups." They want Obama to choose one or the other - us or them - and have absolutely no interest in finding any "common ground" on "liberal issues" and the "liberal agenda." They are more than happy to find common ground on vague, self-promoting New Agey Christianity, but only because they hope that will help them push their political agenda.

While Warren is welcome and can play a role in this narrative of the spirituality of the successful, we - the poor, GLBT folks, the Left, the blue collar workers - are not welcome and will not be playing a role. We are a living, breathing contradiction of the movement, annoying relics from the past, discordant and unpleasant reminders. We are to be seen as the discredited ones, as the unvalidated and rejected ones.

[Recursion]

31. Did you, umm, hear anything he said during the campaign?

He's tired of a politics based on confrontations on the most contentious issues.

He and Warren agree with each other about climate change, poverty, and the need for health care for all Americans. We need to work with conservative Christians to make that happen, just like we'll need to work with fiscally conservative gay people to make gay marriage happen.

[Two Americas]

34. sure

Being tired of the confrontations with the right wingers - nothing new there, since Democrats have been reluctant to do that for quite a while - simply means that there will be contentious confrontations with the Left. That is the way things work in the real world.

The general public does not think that we need to work with the right wingers nor the religious right - they repudiated and rejected that. Why we would resuscitate and rejuvenate the right wing now? That is a mystery that historians will be sorting out for a long time to come.

You say that "he and Warren agree with each other about climate change, poverty, and the need for health care." Are we now to believe that Warren is some advocate for any of those? Then, if he is really on our side, why does he not come over and fight with us? Why are we required to go to him, and do so on his terms? I favor universal health care - not sure if Obama does or not - and I favor tacking climate change, and eradicating greed (falsely called "poverty," which is the effect not the cause.) But I don't expect for people to therefore come kiss up to me nor help me promote my career or business.

[Recursion]

35. Are you joking?

You say that "he and Warren agree with each other about climate change, poverty, and the need for health care." Are we now to believe that Warren is some advocate for any of those?

Are you ignorant of what he has done on all those fronts, or do you think what he's done is bad?

Then, if he is really on our side, why does he not come over and fight with us?

He has been. He's dragged a large portion of evangelicals to the table about climate change and poverty. He's also won a lot of support among younger evangelicals who want the church to focus on those issues. And he's raised Bono-like levels of money for HIV/AIDS relief in the third world.

[Two Americas]

37. well, hallelujah

Sign me up. I had no idea that the religious right was actually the progressive Left.

I will leave it to others to explain how the charity done was secondary to and supportive of the prime mission - evangelism.

[Recursion]

38. You take me for a fool

So I don't know what to say. I apologize, and I hope you might re-think how you have judged him.

[Two Americas]

39. judged whom?

Warren, or Obama?

I haven't judged anyone, I have disagreed with them. I have judged their arguments.

This reversal people are now espousing here - asking us to see the persecuted as the persecutors, the judged as the one judging, the victims as the trouble makers and the oppressors as the oppressed - undermines and contradicts every principle and ideal we stand for.

We stand with the tormented and abused, we don't worry about "including" their tormentors and abusers, the very ones who preach excluding so many of us. We stand for those without power, we don't make excuses for those with power. We stand for those without a voice, without a seat at the table, not with those who have dominated the national political discussion. We stand for principles and ideals, not celebrities or personalities.

[eridani]

40. Obama's former church jolly well did not share a "spirituality of success" n/t

[kimmerspixelated]

11. Finally, the right answer.

Thanks DeepModemMom! "Extraordinary development" is right on target!

[yowzayowzayowza]

12. This is in the ballpark. K&R.

[ooglymoogly]

15. This is a foul ball....nt

[1776Forever]

14. This is NOT the time for this action - Sharing a stage with Warren at this important time - NOT!

This was a choice to try and bring into the celebration on President-elect Obama, a person he thought would be a good example of his tolerance with those on the "other" side. What happened here is that Warren is a homophobic person who has proven with actions and words that he is not tolerant of Gays on any level. He has called them names, that if used to reflect on any other minority, would have been defiantly reprimanded by all Democrats. I am very disappointed with this selection by President-elect Obama to share the stage on one of the most important days in our history with a man who will not allow anyone who is Gay or Lesbian to join his church, as reported by Rachel Maddow last night.

See my post about this here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4688627&mesg_id=4688627

[bvar22]

16. Geoffrey Garin.....a "Progressive" Case?

Isn't that they guy who filled in for Mark Penn on Hillary's campaign?

"While at the company, he has worked as a pollster and strategist for several Democratic senatorial candidates. They include Charles Schumer of New York, Dianne Feinstein of California and Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia."

http://news.muckety.com/2008/04/08/geoffrey-garin-fills-penns-post-in-clinton-campaign/1882

Oh yeah....those are some impressive "Progressive" creds.

A better title would be:

Geoffrey Garin creates another Centrist Rationalization for Rick Warren

[madmadmad]

20. exactly- another convoluted rationaliztion for placing politics before principles.

or rather abandoning your principles all together.

the man simply should not be on that stage.

[rhett o rick]

18. I understand the argument that we need to extend a hand to those that hate us. But....

This isn't the way. This is a privilege that should have been bestowed upon someone that has demonstrated thoughtfulness, moderation, compassion,etc. But no, Obama bestows this privilege to a very nasty, hateful person. It is a slap in the face of many on the left, those religious leaders that have been responsible, and especially the gay community.

[Skittles]

21. CORRECT

this is just another apology for embracing homophobia

[GeorgeGist]

19. Yes ...

Does anyone think the selection of Rick Warren means that Barack Obama will govern differently on social issues than he said he would during the campaign?

[DCKit]

23. Rick Warren never saw a pulpit he could resist....

and this one is, IMO, the most prestigious of all.

It should not have been offered to a homophobic, misogynistic, dominionist fundamentalist.

[rpannier]

25. After his FISA vote last summer my answer is Yes. I could see him doing that

Back in February he said he wouldn't vote for it and then after he had the nomination he changed his position.

I could see him governing differently.

[Sherman A1]

26. Some interesting points

Rick Warren is not an issue to me. I understand that he is an issue to some and very much respect their opinions. I will ignore him during and after the ceremony just as I have ignored him before.

Rick Warren speaks..... I don't listen.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

28. Change comes in stages.

What a terrific step this is!

Shows deep wisdom to be able to take an action that can galvanize so many because it knocks on doors no one's even considered before!!!

Thanks! Great article!

[prostock69]

32. I am completely torn on this issue now.

I want to believe that this is the start of Obama genuinely trying to deal with a very touchy and divisive issue in America: gay rights. But now I am beginning to wonder if he IS just placating the Religious Right in order to get himself reelected in 2012. I see both sides of the argument. Personally, I would much rather there be NO praying at all and no mention of god at all. I would like this administration to be the first true secular administration but obviously that is not going to be the case. I no longer view Obama's choice of Rick Warren as being "brilliant". I really regret stating so in my previous posts and I apologize if I offended anyone for saying so. I see it now as being "calculated". Nobody but Obama and his closest staff really knows why he picked Warren. I have to have "faith" that he is not throwing the gay community under the bus on purpose and that he does have a very good reason for picking Warren. I am so tired of being disappointed by our leaders. I am just trying to find the pony in the pile of poop.

[dccrossman]

33. Thank you for posting this

I'm not a fan of Warren, and he continues to feed that fire, but he is getting at least as blasted by his base as Obama.

The all-or-nothing mentality is a huge problem.

Take the "gays in the military" issue. Don't Ask Don't Tell is a horrible piece of legislation, yet it got us to a point where we can now discuss openly the idea of being able to repeal it and avoid any restrictions based on sexual preference. Without that half-step, the full-step would likely still not be possible, in my not-so-humble opinion.

Know that time is on our side. Newer generations are growing up to be more tolerant, whether their parents approve or not.

[tomm2thumbs]

36. a half-poisonous cup of coffee is still poisonous

this isn't milk we're chatting about folks