HEADS UP: Rachel Maddow has more bigoted video of Rick Warren

[IndianaGreen]

and it is recent!

MSNBC

It will follow the current Blago report.

[thewiseguy]

1. But Rick Warren likes gay people.

[Skittles]

131. he eats in gay homes!

[IndianaJones]

2. its against DU rules to attack Rick Warren. nt.

[Cali_Democrat]

7. Since when?

?

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

152. Rick Warren Says "Hate" Speech Directed At Him "Christophobic"

He has put his big foot in his fat face this time.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctnI4uiZF4A

[Egnever]

3. Wooohoo how exciting!

Cant wait!

:puke:

[awoke_in_2003]

36. How dare she...

put the spotlight on a bigot.

[Dennis Donovan]

4. Rachel will NOT give up on this!

:woohoo:

Warren needs to be exposed for the bigoted freak he is.:thumbsdown:

[Egnever]

5. Which you think will accomplish what exactly?

Other than to build a bigger wall between you and the millions that agree with him.

[Dennis Donovan]

6. Let that wall be built...

I have no desire to associate with bigots, anyway. They SHOULD be shunned.:thumbsdown:

[Fearless]

8. Then we liberals lose don't we.

Clearly the heterosexual community is larger. Clearly history dictates that views on homosexuality tend to be negative in this nation. We could shun them, but that fuels the fire. Go ahead and try it, it's worked so well so far.

[Dennis Donovan]

11. Show me where we win by allowing their bigotry to stand unchallenged...

[Fearless]

15. If I said it once I've said it a million times...

Condemn the action NOT the person. Show through example that their beliefs are wrong. People today think that just because they're right (or believe they're right in the opposite case) that they shouldn't have to do anything to get others to believe that right or "right" belief, that it should happen of its own volition. Obviously this will not happen. Obviously if one shuns the person they will not learn and they will continue to pass on to their children hate and bigotry. To stop the cycle, we must educate. It must be in our every action and in our every day lives. We must use the media to erase the stigmas and stereotypes that exist against the community today. We must confront the bigotry but not confront the person. It's not a personal attack, it's a ideological attack that we must take. If we attack the person, we justify their hate of us. If we do this, we will fail. They will pass to their children and so on the hatred and bigotry that they themselves believe.

[Dennis Donovan]

19. Ideas and actions are propagated THROUGH the person...

Warren is a person with a platform - with a microphone. By exposing HIM, you expose the bigotry.

Rick Warren has had enough time to mull over the reason why people are upset, and has shown NOT ONE sign of changing. Watching Rachel's show tonight proves it.

[Fearless]

30. It's not about how much time he has had...

I'm sure given all the time in the world he will not voluntarily change. That's what I just said. We have to show him. We have to gain his respect like it or not. It is the only way he (and all others like him) will listen. We have to crush his every argument, but to do so, we have to take his arguments seriously. If we ignore or abjectly shun those arguments or the people that make those arguments, it turns into an "I told you so" situation whereby he can dismiss our disagreement confidently by saying "See, see, I was right." We have to prove that he is not right to him (and others like him) even if we know ourselves that it isn't true. We have to destroy his every foundation leaving him nothing more than a man without a leg to stand on ideologically. Even though we're right, we have to prove we're right. He's made his points clear. Now we have to take them apart one by one, making sure not to criticize the person. In this way, he is like an adolescent child. He will shut his ears if you accuse him. He will not listen and nor will anyone like him if we accuse him. We have to dismantle his arguments, prove ourselves through our actions, and then forgive him. If we cannot be adult enough to take our part of responsibility in this we cannot expect that those who disagree with us will do so of their own volition.

[Dennis Donovan]

42. Take his argument seriously?

It's devoid of logic because it presupposes the existence of a supernatural being that dictates to us; approves or disapproves of what we do as individuals.

Why show Warren an ounce of respect when he shows none for me as an atheist, for a woman's right to choose, or for our GLBT brothers and sisters here on DU?

[Fearless]

49. You have to take his belief in that argument seriously.

It isn't as if he came up with it for fun. Clearly it is caused by something. It is those factors which, as I said, we have to eliminate. Leave him a strawman and even if he doesn't change, he will not have a following.

[Egnever]

59. You are a wise person.

[Fearless]

61. If you could see me blush...

:+

[Two Americas]

96. lust for wealth and power

Of course he didn't come up with these ideas for fun. The leaders of the religious right have found that they can attain wealth and power by deceiving and manipulating people, by pandering to their fears and prejudices, and they use religion as effective cover for that.

I can't believe that people here are defending the legitimacy of the religious right.

[Fearless]

106. I have defended NOTHING.

I have shown what we must do to defeat them. We must love them. We must embrace them. We must gain their respect. Only then will they want to change. WE will hate the feeling. We will despise everything they say and everything they stand for. But it will be worth it. And in the end, when they've changed, we have to make the final move. We must forgive them. A frightening thought, no doubt, but we cannot allow resentment to exist between us and them. Then we would be no better than they are now, resenting us.

There is NOTHING legitimate about their beliefs, however they are legitimately people and we have an choice. We must decide for ourselves what our goal is. Is our goal to rid them from the earth, to physically remove their taint from our lives and this nation? Or is our goal to show them why we are right, teach them about love and equality and acceptance? I firmly believe that the latter is what we should do. I do not accept eradication, it would be akin to what Hitler did to us, to what many of them want to do to us. I refuse to shun them as people; I refuse to continue the cycle of hate. We must break the cycle. Disprove their beliefs by our actions, dispel their hate by our love. I don't demand that everyone agrees with me, but that those who do believe as I do do their part to the best of their ability because all of our lives and happiness depend on it.


Make love not hate,
NTF

[mondo joe]

121. You've *SHOWN* that? Have you really?

Don't get so full of yourself that you confuse your typing on a message board with having shown anything to be effective.

[Fearless]

122. That's not what I meant and you know that.

I don't claim to be the authority on anything, I just call it as I see it. I see that hate begets hate and love begets love. It is in my experience one of few universals in this world.

Peace my friend,

NTF

[awoke_in_2003]

38. "Clearly the heterosexual community is larger"

Ah, the "tyranny of the majority" that some of our founding fathers spoke of.

[Egnever]

40. Disdain for a fact does not make it less of a fact.

if you want the majority to come to your position you need to show them the way, they wont come to it based on your revulsion. Just the opposite.

[awoke_in_2003]

43. So, if I was getting sworn in...

would it be cool to have David Duke hold the invocation? Does allowing a racist to speak at my inauguration help "show the way" for racists to come over to my position, or does it strengthen the position of the racists?

[Egnever]

47. It would be within your right to do so.

Do you agree with david duke on anything? Racism aside?

If you had to move a boulder that was too heavy to lift by yourself and there was only you and david duke there to do it would you just not do it or would you work with him to get it done despite your disagreements with him on other things?

[awoke_in_2003]

55. The problem with that analogy...

is that there ARE a lot of other people besides Duke to help me move the boulder. Rick Warren is not the only person in the country capable of giving a totally unnecessary (in my opinion) invocation.

[Egnever]

60. Except there arent enough of them yet are there?

if there are why isn't it done?

Sorry you still have lots of work to do.

[awoke_in_2003]

73. No, you gave me an analogy...

that does not match Obama's predicament. In my analogy, Duke is the only other person around. Warren is not the only preacher out there. You wouldn't have to look at too many UU preachers to find one that supports equal rights for gays.

[Egnever]

80. But you miss the point

you would be including the yes men and excluding the rest of the people you need to get that boulder lifted.

WE won the election we have a guy who has promised to work to advance GLBT rights. You would turn your back on him because he wants to try to get those people to help him lift the boulder instead of doing it himself.

[awoke_in_2003]

88. I am not turning my back on Obama...

I am questioning why he made this pick. The problem with politics today has been caused by years of not holding politicians accountable.

[Fearless]

53. That action in itself will not change anything...

It is only the beginning... an opening of the dialog if you will. Then you must pursue the argument and kick his legs out of under him through the use of my aforementioned techniques.

[awoke_in_2003]

76. Then why not have a public debate?

He will not be kicking the legs out from under Warren's position at the inauguration.

on edit: Obama says he doesn't support gay marriage, so he is not going to convince Warren it is right.

[Fearless]

77. Debate is exactly what we have to do.

We have to stop saying how he's a bigot and how Obama was bad for picking him and all that jazz. We have to focus on looking like we aren't just whining. We have to present legitimate arguments counterpointing the arguments that Warren and his ilk have made. And we have to shun the belief NOT the person. A shunned person will not change. We do want their views to change I assume.

[Two Americas]

99. I strongly object

I strongly object to this malicious effort to isolate the people in the GLKBTQ community.

I resent the way you are trying to paint this as an "agenda" that only a minority "wants." You are promoting the very core foundational ideas of the religious right and the haters with that statement.

You will have to come through me with your "they are only a minority" hateful and malicious attack.

We stand together. We stand for justice and equality, we stand with our persecuted and abused brothers and sisters, no matter what the pretext is for abusing and persecuting them.

The religious right says that "the gays" are trying to force "their agenda" on us, and that it goes against God's plan.

Now we have many here saying that "the gays" are trying to force "their agenda" on us, and that it goes against Obama's plan.

Same argument, different excuse.

[yardwork]

126. Thank you, Two Americas. I got your back if you ever need me.

[Fearless]

127. I'd like to point out that I am one of "the gays"

I am not saying that all heterosexual people are against equality. I am saying that in this current climate we ARE a minority. This is not an attack. It's truth. Find me a poll or a study that says otherwise and I'd gladly disabuse myself of that burden. To be honest, if we cannot agree on that, then you probably won't want to keep reading.

As you said, we have to stand together for all persecuted people. But that is just words. Intentions are great, but they don't say how we must affect change. I have provided in this thread how I believe we must go about affecting change. I believe that hate begets hate and only with love will we conquer hate. We must love all our brothers and sisters even if we disagree with them. We don't have to accept their beliefs; we must fervently demolish them. But they won't crumble on their own. Just because we are right, doesn't mean that they will agree because we say they have to. Bigots are not going to change their minds of their own volition unless they see something in us that is worth more than the hate that they currently have for us. We can help them but it must come through love and not hate. Hate closes their ears to us. Hate begets hate. Love them and respect them, earn their respect (even if we feel sick doing so, the conclusion will be worth it), and they will find respect for us. Where there is respect in their hearts for us, hate will subside.

Frankly, and I mean no disrespect to you or anyone, I will go through you if I need to, to love them as people and affect the change in their hearts that needs to take place for them to love us in return. I will. Gladly. But, realize that in trying to block love you continue the cycle of hate that has plagued our people and others for so long.


EDIT: See my just below here (Post 128)... I tried to clarify what I actually meant. It seems a pronoun I used (they) is easily misinterpreted as meaning heterosexuals when in fact it means "bigots"

[Two Americas]

144. you are asking the wrong question

So long as we are asking the wrong question, we will always get the wrong answer.

If you ask "do you support the gay agenda?" the majority of people will say "no."

But if you ask "do you support the ongoing isolation, persecution and abuse of people based on arbitrary criteria, such as sexual orientation?" the majority of people will answer "no" to that as well.

[yardwork]

125. You assume that all heterosexuals are as bigoted as Rick Warren. Why?

[Fearless]

128. I do not.

I realize now that it could be misleading. I'm sorry.


I combined two thoughts with an improperly placed pronoun. I meant to say that the heterosexual community is larger, is the majority. And, that said, that they (bigots only, not all heterosexuals) should not be shunned as people but their ideas fought and defeated. To shun them as people causes them to fan the flames of intolerance.

[yardwork]

130. Is there anyone you would shun?

There are people I would shun. Maybe there's nobody you would shun, in which case I certainly understand why you wouldn't shun bigots.

But shunning isn't the issue here. Nobody is asking Obama to shun anyone.

[Fearless]

132. I was just responding to the poster above...

Who had suggested building walls around our community. As I see it, many people here and around are saying that Obama's choice of him is the opposite of shunning Warren and that in actuality he should be shunning Warren. On this point I disagree. I don't believe in building walls. I think that we should work with the flaws of those who are bigoted against us and try to convince them that we are right. I think that the only way to do this is through love, that our hate of them only justifies their hate of us. It, I believe is cyclical. I believe we must break the cycle of hate. Certainly, they won't be doing it of their own volition, so it's up to us. That's all.

To answer your question, I don't believe I would shun any PERSON. Ideas certainly. Beliefs of course. But not people. My belief centers around a core belief of mine that no person is born evil (or good) but learns it in life from their parents, family, and friends (and the media, etc.). I believe also that everyone has the ability to love gay people and that no one should be shunned simply because they have yet to receive the tools to love them. I want to provide those tools, through respect of the person (not the belief), kindness, love, and a feverish dismantling of EVERYTHING bigoted that they believe in using proof and not just words. In short, be the change you want to see in society.

Peace,
NTF

[Egnever]

9. Yes and lets bomb some iraqi children while we are it it!

Intolerance from both sides is counter productive. Hating people does not make them love you or wish to establish your rights.

I am quite sure you don't agree with that so Flame On!

[Dennis Donovan]

14. I don't hate a soul on this earth. I will NOT stand or allow bigotry...

...or those who actively campaign against civil rights. Dr king didn't - as Progressive citizens, neither should we!:thumbsdown:

[Egnever]

23. And you will do what other than call them names to rectify it?

you may not call it hate but it sure sounds like it from the cheap seats.

[Dennis Donovan]

26. I'm identifying them - calling them out...

...EXPOSING them so reasonable people will also recognize them and shun them.

[Egnever]

33. Because calling people names makes you seem resonable ??

I suppose if we hold to that theory then I guess anyone who calls people faggots is making a reasoned argument against gay rights.

[Dennis Donovan]

44. Ooh, so we shouldn't call a bigot a bigot?

You seem to be determined to defend Warren, right down to opposing my usage of the word "bigot" to describe him.

[Egnever]

54. I couldnt give a flying fuck about warren.

He means less than nothing to me. In fact I dont like him just based on the fact that he is the leader of a huge evangelical church( I think organized religion is a scam). That doesn't mean I don't recognize the fact that lots of people do like and listen to warren. Despite the fact that i think organized religion is a scam i don't go around telling everyone who ascribes to that idea they are suckers.

You are just dying to call me homophobic though aren't you?

[Dennis Donovan]

62. Nope...

If you agree with Warren, then yes. You just stated you didn't.

[mondo joe]

56. You can call me a faggot if you want. It doesn't change the homophobia of others

into something more pretty sounding.

[Egnever]

63. and you are free to call me a breeder

neither course will get us any closer to what you want.

[mondo joe]

66. Why would I call you that? I don't care about it. But bigotry is worth being called out.

Always has been.

[Egnever]

68. is that what we are doing here calling out bigotry?

Or are we looking for reasons to be upset?


Cause IMHO this warren move was in a way a masterstroke by obama for the GLBT community. It and the passage of prop 8 has put the conversation back on the table loudly and strongly where it belongs. I think the conversation needs to be had by many but when you start vilifying Obama for being willing to have that conversation you lose me entirely. Have the discussion but much of this debate here has been widely overreaching IMHO.

[mondo joe]

70. I have little desire to be upset. Being joyful is greatly preferable.

Enabling bigots, giving them a platform and increasing their exposure I find disturbing, rather than joyful.

In as much as I don't expect anyone particularly progressive to be chosen instead, Warren is a particularly bad choice, via his role in Prop 8 and his equation of gays with pedophiles.

It's a real insult to real injury.

If you want to be crass about it, and ignore the real loss gays have experienced, you are within your rights to do so.

[Egnever]

79. I understand your concern

and i really don't wish to try to negate any of your personal feelings over this. I do however recognize the fact that religion is not on your side. Put ten preachers in a room and 8 of them are going to be at least as bad if not worse than warren. The ones that arent will more times than not be the shepherds of small congregations.

We cant continue to battle religion though and expect to win, We have to make an end run around it instead. Telling warren to go fuck himself might be satisfying for you and me but the millions of people who ascribe to his views will see it as another "attack on Christmas" by the loony left. At a time when I truly believe there are real openings there for constructive dialog.

As i said Earlier I am a pasty white straight guy, I happen to believe in equal rights for everyone but it wasn't always that way i had to be exposed to other lifestyles before i learned not only to not fear them but embrace them. I have been consistently trying to tell my friends not to fear teh gay for decades now but this last week reading some of the shit thrown here has made me think at times fuck em its not worth the aggravation. Thats a sad thing cause I do believe in equal rights for gays. It benefits me not one iota however to achieve them other than a sense of justice in the world.

If throwing around hompophobe and trying to pin that tag on obama has had that sort of effect on people like me who are generally in your corner imagine the affect it has on people who are not.

I agree yours is the right cause, I understand that it should be plain to everyone but it just isn't and proclaiming what you believe truth for all like it or not doesn't do you any favors at all.

[mondo joe]

83. While many, perhaps most, preachers are as bad or worse than Warren, that's not

what I supported Obama for.

I'm mindful that TRUTH and STRATEGY are not always aligned. And I'm not above strategy.

But I'm not yet ready to forgo telling the truth on DU. I don't wish to upset you or anyone else with it, but if this isn't the place to be honest I don't know what is.

[Egnever]

85. Well then let me ask this then

What did you support him for?

Is this the only issue? Cause if it is boy did you pick the wrong horse. Not that i don't think he will do much to try to achieve at least civil unions. I think he will but I don't for a second think it was a top priority for him. I hope for your sake I am wrong but I think unfortunately he feels he has bigger fish to fry.

[mondo joe]

87. Since you asked:

I supported him because he was the lesser of two evils.

I have never felt completely comfortable with Obama, and always felt he was more beholden to the church than is optimal in a President.

I now have to wonder whether I underestimated how beholden he is.

Lastly, I don't expect or need or even desire that civil unions, DOMA or DADT are among his first priorities. I thought cavalierly getting into gays in the military so quickly was a real mistake Bill Clinton made. I thought it then, and think it now.

But while I can be patient and strategic, I'm not prepared to eat the shit sandwich and smile.

[Egnever]

92. Thanks

I have high hopes that in four years you will vote for him enthusiastically cause he will have made you proud to be an american.

If he does not then well I may have to join you. Till then I aint eatin nothing till I see someone starting to do some real cooking and not this garbage dog and pony show stuff we are seeing now.

Best of the holidays to you and yours I am going to sleep.

[IndianaGreen]

10. Warren's millions hold irrational beliefs that are beyond the reach of facts and common sense

For all of Obama's babbling about civil unions, the fact remains that the same people opposed to marriage rights for gays, are also opposed to civil unions. We might as well go for the whole enchilada.

[Egnever]

29. That may be

It doesn't take away from the fact that it is what they believe. Nor does it erase decades of tradition. People put presents under their tree despite the fact that it is a goofy fairy tale. You wouldn't get far in changing that either by calling everyone that does it some sort of monster.

You have the more compelling argument make it. Calling them names doesn't advance your argument a bit with them.

[mondo joe]

50. Telling the truth is its own reward, and always worthwhile. NT

[Egnever]

65. Thats what Warren tells himself every day

his side is winning right now time for yours to get smarter.

[mondo joe]

67. I can't help it if his lies win. It's not going to make me stop telling the truth.

Nice integrity you've got there.

[Egnever]

69. how is it I have integrity because I recognize what may be true for you

is not necessarily true for someone else.

Kind of arrogant on your part no?

[mondo joe]

72. What is true is true. One can be right or wrong about it, but the truth is not subjective.

[Egnever]

84. Who told you that?

whoever it was slap em in the face the next time you see them. There is very little that is true on this earth.

[mondo joe]

86. You may feel so. I'd say there is a great deal that is true, though many are in error in

what they say is true.

[Egnever]

89. truth often times is colored by ones point of view

I happen to agree with your particular view of what is true in this case though despite the fact that millions don't so maybe someday i will stand next to you somewhere and loudly proclaim it to someone.

Have a good night

[Two Americas]

93. not true

The leaders of the religious right seek power and wealth, they created an extremist right wing political movement masquerading as religion. They succeed by duping and misleading people. Attacking the hypocritical leaders is not the same as attacking the followers. Reaching out to the leaders is not the same as reaching out to the followers.

What is this cringing fear of the right wing, the blithe acceptance of their power and legitimacy? They sure have a bunch of folks here intimidated, and many here just as duped by the lies as their followers are.

There is a glaring contradiction in the arguments by the defenders of the Warren pick. First, they say that those criticizing the selection are fear-mongering and inappropriately "making a big deal" out of the threat. Then they turn around and say "well he represents a lot of people, and we have better not offend them."

[yardwork]

124. Millions still agree with the shrub. Do you agree with them? Should we shut up about w now?

[Two Americas]

137. millions who have been deceived, you mean

Legitimatizing the leaders of the religious right, who seek wealth and power through lying to and deceiving people and cloak that in "religion," is what builds up the walls.

Exposing them for the frauds they are breaks down the walls.

[ecstatic]

12. In another thread, you linked Obama to Farrakhan... why did you

do that? :shrug:

[Sarah Ibarruri]

13. Rick Warren is an asshole, but Obama hugs him, included him in his book, and...

wants him as his presidential preacher. Isn't that special?

[Captain Hilts]

18. It wouldn't be so cool for women, gays, blacks, Catholics and Jews to go back to the '50s...

which is what Warren wants to do.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

22. That's exactly it. Obama wants a bigot, homophobe, sexist pig as his preacher nt

[Egnever]

71. Yes i am sure thats exactly what he wants.

:eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes:

[Captain Hilts]

82. It's what Warren wants. More folks like you, and he'll get it nt

[Sarah Ibarruri]

151. If someone picks someone, that someone is what he wants nt

[GarbagemanLB]

21. Got a quote on Obama wanting Warren to be the 'presidential preacher'? What about the person giving

the benediction?

[Sarah Ibarruri]

24. The only relationship Rick Warren should have to the inauguration should be....

that he sits on his sofa, eating mac and cheese and watching it on TV. PERIOD. Nothing else need be discussed.

[GarbagemanLB]

25. So you have no proof and you just pulled that claim out of your ass. Got it.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

28. It's somewhere but you can do searches on it the way everyone else does

You must've mistaken me for your servant or something.

[GarbagemanLB]

31. There is no quote. It's okay. It is difficult to admit you are wrong, I understand.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

35. Our president-elect had better act quickly. He's losing a large portion of his base nt

[GarbagemanLB]

37. No, he isn't. Keep the false claims coming, though.

:rofl:

[Sarah Ibarruri]

39. Not my problem. However, Obama is not going to fool me in 2012

My money, vacation and door-to-door canvassing will not be donated to him ever again if this is the sort of individual he is.

[jefferson_dem]

64. He better act, huh?

He better do exactly what I want and do it right now! Dad gummit!

He's only "losing" those who were already looking for a reason to bolt, or weren't paying attention in the first place.

[mondo joe]

74. He's trading GLBT supporters for religious righters.

Or for those who can flex enough on race.

[jefferson_dem]

58. Presidential preacher?

What the fuck is that?

Hater.

[GarbagemanLB]

75. There are simply some people that refuse to see reality.

[Mike Nelson]

16. Good for Rachel!

his views need to be rendered unacceptable

[IndianaGreen]

17. We are a bunch of Christophobes, according to Warren!

:crazy:

[JohnnieGordon]

20. I tried to get people to start a thread about that in GD-P this morning

My post count isn't high enough to start threads yet. There was a thread about the video in GD, but not here.

[JoFerret]

27. Christophobes

that's what people who object to this bigot are. In Warrenspeak.

Enough with these effing 'pastors'.

[noamnety]

32. Rachel did great.

Not just the new video - she had old clips showing him exactly contradicting his current claims.

(paraphrasing here)

Now: "I never once equating gays and pedophiles."

then: "Are you equating gays and pedophiles?" "Yes."

[mtnsnake]

41. Yup, she did

She reduced Warren to a pile of dung.

[bluedawg12]

98. She caught America's pastor in a BOLD faced lie.

The video where he lies abut comparing same sex marriage to his parade of horrors and then where he says it: priceless.

[Clio the Leo]

34. I want to go on record saying.....

.... I am RESISTING the urge to start a new thread.


:popcorn:

[dana_b]

45. LOL

perfect. remember though... "resistance is futile!!"

[Clio the Leo]

46. I asked my question to my cat instead....

he yawned and walked away.

I actually think I got a better answer than I would have if I'd made a thread.

Well, at least I didn't get yelled at.

[polmaven]

140. You didn't?

Wow....good for you! My Democat yells at me all the time when we discuss politics!

[Clio the Leo]

141. Maybe it's because I was asking my cat Tucker.....

.... who is clearly a Republicat.

[polmaven]

142. Oh, yeah...

That may be it. My Tigger is clearly a Democatic tiger, much like many on DU. No disagreement ALLOWED!

[polichick]

48. Put me down as a "Con-man-pastorphobe" - I've got no problem with Jesus.

[mondo joe]

52. Warren is JOE THE PREACHER. Just a grifter with religion. NT

[polichick]

57. Yep - I'll bet his butt crack shows! :)

[bluedawg12]

103. He sells his Church like a franchise - a real entrepreneur.

He gives $eminars on how to grow the business.

[polichick]

139. Ick - just another snake oil salesman!

[JohnnieGordon]

51. In contrast, Malloy reads Melissa's Huffpost and incorrectly says Warren's site permanently scrubbed

He seems to have fallen hook line and sinker for Melissa's self-appointed spokesperson shtick. I hope Malloy gets wind of the fact that the anti-gay stuff isn't going to be permanently removed from Warren's site, and he continues to make outrageous anti-gay statements.

[JohnnieGordon]

78. Rachel's show repeating NOW 11pm EST

I haven't seen it yet because I was listening to Mike Malloy. But I cleared space on my DVR to record it.

[zulchzulu]

81. I can't wait for her footage of Reverend Lowery...

...oh wait, she doesn't want to do the FULL STORY.

:puke:

[Bluebear]

90. I WILL NOT HAVE RACHEL RUIN THIS FOR YOU!!11

I WILL NOT HAVE RACHEL RUIN THIS FOR YOU!!11
I WILL NOT HAVE RACHEL RUIN THIS FOR YOU!!11
I WILL NOT HAVE RACHEL RUIN THIS FOR YOU!!11
I WILL NOT HAVE RACHEL RUIN THIS FOR YOU!!11

[Phx_Dem]

91. It's a brilliant idea to keep calling Warren and every other religious

person who agrees with him a bigot. Cuz that helps bring them to your side and helps them to dispel the stereotype and see what good people gay sare.

Personally, I haven't seen Warren-the-bigot, but I'm sure the idea to hate him and everyone else who doesn't support gay marriage will reap huge rewards! Carry on.

Woo hoo.

[Bluebear]

94. 'Personally, I haven't seen Warren-the-bigot' - have you been looking

[bluedawg12]

97. Facts like watching the actual video are pesky things for some.

[bluedawg12]

95. What gay stereo type is on your mind?

If you haven't seen the video that makes you not qualified to discuss Maddow's commentary.

It just means your blowing it out your :hurts:

[mondo joe]

101. Who on earth would call a guy who equates gays with child molesters a bigot?

Why he's a saint!

[Hanse]

100. Is she going to have Uncle Pat on for color commentary?

I can't see how Maddow is not a hypocrite on this issue.

[mondo joe]

102. She debates Pat and proves him wrong. She doesn't endorse him with special honors.

As you ought to know.

[Hanse]

104. She affectionately calls him Uncle Pat.

Sure, she disagrees with him, the same way Obama disagrees with Warren.

Yet she's cordial and respectful. And a hypocrite.

[mondo joe]

105. If I start calling you Uncle Hanse, do you know what would happen?

It wouldn't be considered a sign of respect.

And NO ONE said Obama shouldn't talk with Rick Warren, even politely and respectfully.

You're just making shit up.

[Hanse]

110. Right, but you're not Rachel Maddow and I'm not Pat Buchanan.

"And NO ONE said Obama shouldn't talk with Rick Warren, even politely and respectfully."

I think we both know that's not true.

[mondo joe]

112. You're making shit up, Uncle.

:-)

[Hanse]

113. Where?

What's made up?

[mondo joe]

114. The notion that opponents should not be engaged.

They should be. But that's different than kissing their ass.

[Hanse]

115. Kissing their ass?

No who's making things up?

[mondo joe]

116. Get back to me when you have something to contibute other than snark and baseless

accusations.

[Hanse]

118. Wow.

Epic cognitive dissonance.

[JohnnieGordon]

107. She's calls him "shitbag" and then she has no right-winger to come on and debate..nt

[mondo joe]

117. She's polite to everyone. She'd be polite to Warren as well.

But she wouldn't let his disgusting comments go unchallenged.

[JohnnieGordon]

108. Obama disagrees but does not debate with Warren, false analogy hon..nt

[Hanse]

109. He's publically spoken out against Warren's beliefs, sugar.

You're grasping at straws.

[mondo joe]

111. No debate. Your analogy is inaccurate. NT

[JohnnieGordon]

134. Rachel debates Buchanan face to face, no comparison, dearie

[bluedawg12]

119. Maddow is a hypocrite for showing Warren's lies on video?

In bizzaro world maybe.

[mondo joe]

120. She'd be as polite to Warren as anyone, if he went on her show. But she would hold

him accountable.

Some people don't understand that you can do both.

[bluedawg12]

123. Warren craves media attention and not an honest debate.

He is controlling the story at this point, not the transition team.

Maddow performed a public service she documented his lies.

[leftofthedial]

129. attacks on Rick Warren are not allowed

here at DLCU

[bluedawg12]

133. Isn't he "divine?"

:evilgrin:

[Fearless]

135. Well that's plain just not fair

:cry:

It's much more complicated than that, and yet at them same time, much simplier... damn I hate politics.

:eyes:

[polichick]

138. LOL

[Hissyspit]

136. Video HERE:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x252932

[EFerrari]

150. Thank you!

[flpoljunkie]

143. Link and excerpts from the LATimes article Katha Pollitt wrote on Rick Warren...

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-pollitt22-2008dec22,0,2699863,print.story

To understand how angry and disappointed many Democrats are that Barack Obama has invited evangelical preacher Rick Warren to give the invocation at his inaugural, imagine if a President-elect John McCain had offered this unique honor to the Rev. Al Sharpton -- or the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. I know, it's hard to picture: John McCain would never do that in a million years. Republicans respect their base even when, as in McCain's case, it doesn't really return the favor.

Only Democrats, it seems, reward their most loyal supporters -- feminists, gays, liberals, opponents of the war, members of the reality-based community -- by elbowing them aside to embrace their opponents instead.

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.

[Captain Lance Bass]

145. Madcow can kiss my and Obama's ass

grow a pair Rachel and get over it...what a waste...she is just another talking head

[Captain Hilts]

146. "Grow a pair" of what?

Oh, you're just being sexist.

Never mind.

[JohnnieGordon]

147. What a gross thing to say about a woman

And it looks like a backhanded reference to Rachel being a lesbian too.

[Captain Hilts]

148. Yes, I agree. It's like 'complimenting' a black person by saying "that's awfully white of you!"

[IndianaGreen]

149. They used to tell Simon Wiesenthal to "get over it"

his relentless pursuit of justice, even after the nazi war criminals were of advanced age.