should've voted for mckinney

Obama On Rick Warren: ‘Uhh… Hope?’

Hey gays, here’s your least favorite person in the world, Noobama, who had been introducing some new economic slobs at a presser until the Q&A, when everyone asks him why he picked Chunksy McLardtits to deliver the Christian speech at his inauguration. Obama responds, “UHHHHHHHHHHHHHH” and then offers a series of actual words that basically carry the same weight as “UHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.”

What this discussion really doesn’t need from America’s many political experts is, say, this sort of thing from Marc Ambinder:

From experience, one can presume that the decision to invite Rick Warren was made because (a) Obama likes the guy, and (b) he knows it would send a message to groups like the HRC, and to conservative Christians who might be wary of the new president. Not so much pandering as it is Obama’s deft manipulation of the politics of symbolism. Obviously, Obama disagrees with Rick Warren on important issues. He has said so, many times, and publicly. And he agrees with him on other important issues. And ignoring something like Warren, a mainstream figure who commands the respect of million of Americans, would be foolish. Obama’s message is: Rick Warren is a part of Obama’s America, too.

Not to pick on Marc Ambinder too specifically, but… how fundamentally can we say this? A major problem with current “political analysis” is that there’s no need to analyze something that’s obvious to everyone. American national politics is a vulgar, transparent, and stupid drama. You can read a few news wires regularly and understand every major politician’s short- and long-term intentions. This is why most of our Wonkette posts are composed of bad/filthy jokes, because it’s the only way to write about this shit secondhand without coming off as utterly patronizing to you, the reader. It would be insulting to you for us to legitimize the horror that is American politics under the guise of “expert analysis” with such backwash as, “From experience, we can deduce that Obama picked someone with popular evangelical views so as to appeal to evangelicals, which would be symbolic of unity.”

You really don’t have to be smart, at all, to understand this within five seconds of hearing the original news. It is obvious. Most of this day-to-day maneuvering is obvious. Sometimes you can even write the “analysis” before hearing the political news, because the political news will be primitive, because national politicians assume you are extremely fucking stupid. Calling the selection of Rick Warren an example of “Obama’s deft manipulation of the politics of symbolism” is a catastrophe of American journalism.

ANYWAY. W/r/t Warren, many progressives and gays are denouncing Obama for “crossing the line” by picking this fat nut; they have all promised to vote for Nader in 2012. This furious resistance will last, at most, four days, when new shirtless pixxx of Obama in Hawaii will leak to the Huffington Post and everyone will forget about gay invocations or whatever.

But it was a dick move by Obama, mostly because of all the very recent publicity Warren has received for helping out-of-state Mormons amend the California state constitution to dissolve civil marriages between consenting same-sex adults who live together in private. This was an evil thing, Prop 8, evil and immoral and incredibly hurtful to a lot of people. And when Obama brings in someone so attached to this current ugliness as Warren to give a speech at his Presidential Ceremony, that’s an unusually cruel and timely reminder to the gay community that the Democratic Party will not push for their “equal rights;” for Obama to claim otherwise at this press conference is a lie.

But it’s just a dumb speech and gay people are weird.

[YouTube]

About the author

Jim Newell is Wonkette's beloved Capitol Hill Typing Demon. He joined Wonkette.com in 2007, left for some other dumb job in 2010, and proudly returned in 2012 as our "Senior Editor at Large." He lives in Washington and also writes for things such as The Guardian, the Manchester paper of liberals.

View all articles by Jim Newell
What Others Are Reading

Hola wonkerados.

To improve site performance, we did a thing. It could be up to three minutes before your comment appears. DON'T KEEP RETRYING, OKAY?

Also, if you are a new commenter, your comment may never appear. This is probably because we hate you.

135 comments

  1. Deepthroat

    I started laughing outloud at “Chunksy McLardtits.” I knew it was Newell immediately. There is a special place in the land of sparkling buttercup unicorns for you my dear.

  2. Manchowder

    I always wondered why I didn’t like Clinton in the 90′s. It is this kind of stuff. The slaps in the face to his own supporters in a vain effort to win over people who think he is a Muslim. Differing on views of evolution, abortion, and gays is not a simple disagreement that people can disagree on. It goes to the heart of the limitations of state action against individual rights. One camp wants to make the other camp’s life choices a federal crime. That isn’t something you can politely disagree on. Oh yeah, big sale on truck nutz.

  3. shortsshortsshorts

    Holy shit, Jim. That’s pretty much the most honest political text that has ever shown up on a computer screen, and it’s on WONKETTE of all places. I mean isn’t this supposed to be like ass fucking and Truck Nutz and stuff? YOU ARE DESTROYING THE INTEGRITY OF THIS WEBSITE.

  4. jagorev

    Every day that the gays and the netroots spend complaining about Obama associating himself with and tolerating the views of a HUGELY POPULAR fat white evangelical dude who is loved by all of the bitters in “middle America”, his 2012 re-election margin goes up by, let’s say, 0.4%.

    So, thanks. Your help is invaluable.

  5. DAmicosonegoodyear

    And on some level, this sets the tone of Obama’s administration… As in, those who got swept up in the hopegasm didn’t actually pay attention to Barry’s message, which has been consistently and strongly centrist. Progressives will have plenty to bitch about over the next 4-8 years, as Barry will do more to offend their sensibilties than those of the BITTERZ.

  6. TGY

    [re=202447]Deepthroat[/re]: Wait, aren’t you drunk? Maybe that was somebody else.

    The optimum response from Barry is: “Ooops. Haha, fuck.”

  7. DAmicosonegoodyear

    [re=202456]DAmicosonegoodyear[/re]: BTW I’m in no way saying he’s not an improvement. He’s just not bringing back free love hippie fuck days. And he’ll piss some of us off. He’s a politician, not an idealist.

  8. Gorillionaire

    I hope he does the X-tian speech in baggy camo shorts, Timberlands, wrap around shades and with his hair and goatee spiked out just like the new hip awesome “youth pastors” do at the creepy modern rock concert churches.

  9. Nigerian Business Executive

    Newell is my brand new favourite straight guy ever. Bumped the already teetering Obama from his pinnacle, he did.

  10. FMA

    What the fuck is happening to Wonkette?
    Please, more jokes about Fatass McMantits and his living a purpose-driven life bullshit.
    Or was that porpoise-driven life?
    See, a bestiality joke! It’s not that difficult.

  11. Dramatist

    Gays get stuff like this all the time, because no one is really respects us. We only get any kind of political recognition because straight people deign to give it to us, but we’re the first thing jettisoned or ignored when the wind changes. Well, no more, Barry. We know your wife is one of us. No human straight woman looks that fabulous – only drag queens are so precise. Our three-day-weekend-White-Party of reckoning will come soon.

  12. Kev-O-Tron

    Goddamit Jim- there you go talking sense and calming me down.

    [re=202454]shortsshortsshorts[/re]: I say we start a FAIL campaign on wonkette.

  13. Dramatist

    [re=202462]DAmicosonegoodyear[/re]: He’s also a populist, in that he does this shit so that we get all uppity and marchy. Into the streets, gayballs!

  14. SayItWithWookies

    No argument that Warren’s a bigot, a demagogue and a moron in charge of morons. But the politics of division is what Hopey’s been running against for the last two years, and it’s ridiculous to imagine that he’s going to start practicing the politics of division when he gets in office, but just locking out the other side. Don’t we all agree that that’s the Rovian poison that’s made the last eight years so unbearable (or at least part of it)? Let’s not fall into the trap of becoming like our enemies.

    That said, Obama needs to know that there are people who think he’s too centrist and not inclusive enough, and that we’ll keep the pressure on him to live up to his promises. Any election before 2000 I would’ve voted for a candidate to the left of the Democrats just so they knew that side of the spectrum existed. This year, however, intelligence, competence and professionalism seem like manna from heaven, and I’ll take that.

  15. Deepthroat

    Hedley: i’m sorry that my stupid winky face fucked up your comment. i would make a frowny face, but that would just fuck shit up more. i fail.

  16. rev_matt_y

    “This is why most of our Wonkette posts are composed of bad/filthy jokes”

    Wrong, the jokes are very rarely bad.

  17. DoktorZoom

    [re=202456]DAmicosonegoodyear[/re]: “Progressives will have plenty to bitch about over the next 4-8 years, as Barry will do more to offend their sensibilties than those of the BITTERZ.”

    And the utterly hellish part is that the bitterz won’t be the least bit receptive to any of that reaching across the aisle stuff–many of them are excited about the prospect of a new civil war.

  18. TGY

    [re=202468]FMA[/re]: It’s true I have problems trusting a fat preacher/cleric/what have you. I have trouble trusting any priest-type, but fat ones especially stick in my throat. Or whatever

  19. Iggy Plop

    yeah, right on. but this doesn’t cheer me up. can someone think of a way we could fuck with Warren’s website in some pointless way that involves crude sexual innuendo. that would cheer me up.

  20. joezoo

    “…he knows it would send a message to groups like the HRC…”

    Hillary Rodham Clinton is a United States Senator and SecState-elect!! How disrespectful of you to refer to her as a “group” and with a definite article, “the”!! You are a sexist group, the Mark Ambinder!!

  21. p-Sludge

    It’s important when writing to know one’s audience. In the case of mr whatsisname (Ambinder), that would be people for whom these things are NOT obvious. His “explanations” are therefore appreciated. Of course, he can inflate his own importance (and paycheck) if he assumes that the need for these explanations is larger than it is. And he can inflate them even further if he can somehow MAKE more people to be in this class of needing a pundits’ layer of explanation to feel right about things. Pods have been planted in all of our gardens.

  22. Texan Bulldoggette

    [re=202496]joezoo[/re]: Ambinder is referring to the Human Rights Commission (not Hillster Rodham Clinton). My apologies if you were just trying to be funny.

  23. x111e7thst

    It might not take all many lefty defections to some Naderlike asswipe to put a Republican in the White House the next time around. Maybe Barry would do better to dance with them as brung him.

  24. Gopherit

    Thank you Jim for not patronizing the wonkette readers. By and large, we a re a crude but savvy lot. But don’t make the mistake of thinking the average american is smart enough t see through this horseshit. We didn’t end up with Buddy Justice as president for 8 years for nothing. This fucking country is filled with stupid twatwaffles from see to stinking sea.

    On a personal note, let me say how happy I am that the next 4 to 8 years won’t be filled with Unicorns running around shitting flowers and rainbows. If that were the case, almost everyone would be happy, and happy people are fucking boring.

    Now like shorts said, MOAR ASSFUCKING, PLZ.

  25. DonkeyPants

    I agree- more ass-fucking/beastialty jokes please! Come on- Obama is smart and calculating. He knows which side his bread is buttered. And that calculation frequently causes him to associate with the Rev. Wrights and the Ayerseses of the world. The great Muslin has already stated his support for civil unions but his opposition to gay marriages. So, isn’t his whole existence as President-elect a giant black dick move against the gays/lesbian/transgender/bisexual coalition?

  26. suchsweetthunder

    [re=202455]jagorev[/re]: I think this is one of the rare (one in a million) cases where the cynical posturing you lay out is wrong.

    I do agree that Obama did this to piss off liberals, to appear more centrist. (Gee thanks, asshole.) But if there is one issue, and only one issue, that I think traditional media covers in a more liberal fashion than their audience, it’s gay rights. Because, you know, everyone in media is close to or works with at least one person who is gay.

    First off, the traditional media isn’t going to give Obama beating back the people who got him elected the story line like they would if this was say a story about Gates. Secondly, it’s just going to breed cynicism amongst the few sycophants he has left in the press corps. They may actually start asking real questions.

    It’s cynical politics. It’s amoral politics. But most of all, it’s stupid politics. And I am going to remember this for more than four days.

    (and)

    BIG SALE ON TRUCK NUTS!!!!!!!!!!!!ONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111111!!!!!!!!!!

  27. widestanceromancer

    So, what I get out of his Bushian mumble (something that truly pains me to type) is that not only will we see David Dukes sing a minstrel duet with Maya Angelou whilst riding a unicorn, Rick Warren will also do a dance number with RuPaul, in the spirit of inclusiveness, right?

    OWN YOUR FAILURE, OBAMA!

  28. Harmless

    I’m all for criticizing Obama for the pick, for expressing disappointment, for redoubling efforts to push him to work harder for the equal rights he says he supports. I just think the “honeymoon is over” lamenting, the “I told you we shouldn’t elect Obama” tisking, the “I no longer support That One I voted for a month ago because I have perceived that this nod to the 35% of the country who love Warren but do not support Obama (including Warren himself) to not be a symbolic but ultimately inconsequential gesture, but instead a firm indication that Obama wants to strip all known homosexuals of their American citizenship and banish them to an unfabulous island in the North Atlantic” turncoating to be a massive overreaction.

    I am much more disappointed and upset that Obama doesn’t support gay marriage himself.

  29. lawyergay

    “This furious resistance will last, at most, four days, when new shirtless pixxx of Obama in Hawaii will leak to the Huffington Post and everyone will forget about gay invocations or whatever.”

    Hahahahaha…OMG! I’m bleeding internally because I’m laughing so hard…seriously, I’m bleeding. Please, someone, help…help…help….

  30. smashtheduck

    That may well be the only honest essay on politics I’ve ever read. Bravo. Now back to buttsecs?

  31. JeffGoldblum

    IM SICK 2 DETH OF THISS MUSLIN OBAMA HUSSANE AND HIS DESREPSECT OF TEH AMERICA!!!!! ICH BEIN EIN FUHRER!!!!?

  32. DAmicosonegoodyear

    [re=202488]DoktorZoom[/re]: True, true… So is Barry setting himself up for a FAIL? I don’t think so, personally, but I was hoping to see more experts appointed to cabinet positions and less congressional buddy handjobs. I fooled myself into thinking this may be the thinking man’s presidency… Instead we get HILLZ as Secstate and other such nonsensery.

  33. eudaimon

    wow, I completely disagree.

    I love how the left devours itself on issues like this. and by love I mean HATE HATE HATE.

    I am not a centrist – far from it. And I find it repugnant that the democratic party, for the most part and including Obama, stands against gay marriage. (I am also from Massachusetts! hooray!) but I did huge amounts of work for this campaign in spite of that, just as people much farther to the center than I am – people who disagreed with Obama on abortion, for instance – chose to overlook those differences and support, even work their hearts out, for a candidate with whom they didn’t share every last principle.

    Obama is being inaugurated president of america, not of the netroots. come now. can’t we find it in our hearts to acknowledge that all kinds of Obama supporters deserve recognition, not just the ones who agree with you (and me!) down the line?

    My feeling, ultimately, is that if the campaign had been run the way you are all talking, Obama would have lost. It’s one thing – and a good thing – to disagree with someone openly and honestly. This is what Obama did in going to warren’s church and speaking on abortion. It’s another thing to refuse to tolerate someone, which is what you’re really suggesting. You’ve got to be able to say openly – as Obama has! – that ‘look, rick warren and your ilk, I am going to work against your political agenda on this issue. but i understand that we share a lot also and I want to work with you on those things.’ now I wish Obama meant something more substantial when he said ‘work against you’ – as in, ‘work for gay marriage.’ but I am not willing to condemn this choice.

  34. eudaimon

    and by ‘this choice’ I mean the choice to invite warren.

    and, harmless, I think you’ve got it more or less right – and have put it more concisely than I have.

  35. CivicHoliday

    Wow. Wonkette’s buttsecks jokes are…oddly…a sign of respect for us, the savvy readers? To think, all this time I thought it was because the editors thought we were all alcoholics and drug addicts. Now I realize, *sniff*, that it’s because they think we’re INTELLIGENT alcoholics and drug addicts.

  36. El Bombastico

    If he had any real balls, Barry would be all like “Fuck it, we ain’t havin’ no invocation… or convocation… or any sort of -vocation. Separation of church and state, motherfuckers!”

  37. joezoo

    [re=202502]Texan Bulldoggette[/re]: Yes, it was just silliness. I’ll drop in a TruckNutz reference next time to make it more obvious.

  38. qwerty42

    I don’t care for it; and as we all know, this has gotten a lot of discussion on the tubes. One of Sullivan’s readers has this take and Sully doesn’t dismiss it. (actually, after 8 years of a hateful, immoral regime; one that used teh gaz as a rallying cry, it is good to see that people are standing up for the LGBT community. I was glad to see Rev Joseph Lowery will be there).
    I still don’t like it.
    but as another, wiser commenter has said:
    BIG SALE ON TRUCK NUTS!!!!!!!!!!!!ONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111111!!!!!!!!!!

    I’ll only add: Get ‘em while they’re HOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  39. 2druk2phluq

    Hate: There’s not enough of it in DC yet.

    Change? No, really, do you have any spare change? Fuckwit Rick somehow doesn’t bother me quite as much as the NO MONEY ANYWHERE thing. Besides, it takes money to buy the big gay boots to put to Warren’s head in a display of homofascism the way the media expects.

  40. Manchowder

    [re=202526]eudaimon[/re]: These people think Barack is a Muslim. Being president of all of America doesn’t mean giving prizes to people who don’t vote for you. If he was really being president of all of America, he would have a non christian give the invocation along with a christian. He could bring in an atheist if he was really being inclusive. The atheist could walk up and say: “God doesn’t exist, you are all stupid.” That would be inclusive of diverse viewpoints. Obama is nakedly pandering to the religious right. That is not a change from the past president. The prior president came to Washington to change the tone of Washington, he made it so that religious right lunatics become mainstream figures. Obama is continuing that tradition in force.

  41. Josh Fruhlinger

    [re=202526]eudaimon[/re]: While I certainly for the most part agree with you, and am not by any means jumping off the SS Hopey, I do think that there’s a middle ground between “not tolerating someone” and, you know, asking him to be one (of two? or of not much more than that) people to pray at the convocation of your inauguration.

    I am reminded of the minor hubbub that broke out in the early ’00s when Eminem was nominated for a Grammy, and some folks said “You know, he’s kind of a douche in the way he throws the word ‘fag’ around a lot” and others responded by saying “OH MY GOD WHY DO YOU WANT TO CENSOR EMINEM”, and I thought, you know, there are choices other than “censor” and “give a Grammy to”. In the same way, there are choices for Obama other than “shun Rick Warren and mock him while burning a bible and laughing at middle America” and “have Rick Warren give the convocation at the inauguration.” You know, like working with Warren, in public, on areas of mutual concern (and certainly giving him the high profile that comes with such work) without giving him a prime spot in the ritual that’s supposed to set the tone for Obama’s presidency.

    Just sayin’. Of course, the Grammy controversy was settled by giving the award to a Steely Dan album that nobody had actually heard, and I hope that this dispute is resolved in a similarly baffling fashion, possibly by having Steely Dan give the convocation prayer at the inauguration.

  42. myheadsexploding

    [re=202526]eudaimon[/re]: I’m sorta sick to my stomach with this Rick Warren thing, but perhaps only because politics is ultimately sickening, and we libtards tend to freak out constantly and haz a sad and all that shit when things aren’t sparkly. Eudaimon, I think you got it right. And it’s self-defeating. Barry is the preznit to be of the whole country, including all those intolerant Xtians. So Rick Warren is a big dick. And Barry doesn’t support gay marriage. Wah Wah Wah. Grow up people. Look at the big picture. Is Rick Warren going to be preznit? No. Would you rather have McCain and Palin taking the oath? No. Is Barry going to work against gay rights? No. Is life perfect? No. Is Barry perfect? No. Is it a politically correct world? No.

    But do we have a window of opportunity here with this new Prez? Yes. Chill the F out.

  43. patrick

    I agree with eudaimon and I think youre wrong here Jim. and as a gay, I’d ask you to be a bit less of an asshole when you come to our defense from now on. i know that only libtards read this blog and thus you all luv gayz soooooooo much and thus you feel reel hurt by what barry did, but i think you oughtta get over it. I am a gay and i don’t think Obama has committed any grave sin here. in case you forgot, most of America doesn’t like the gays. They are conservative and assholes and geeze i really hate them , but they are Americans too and we have to deal with their dumbasses. being an asshole like Jim does not do anything to help the situation. TALKING to people who don’t like gays WILL help the situation. (because we’re actually not that bad) Obama’s gesture is the equivalent of TALKING to people who are DIFFERENT. This is a thing that liberals (which again, I am a gay and thus also a liberal) like to talk about doing, but never ever do. obama will do more for gay rights with his radical policies of not being a dickweed to people who think differently than him than this gay blog will do with all the assfucking and dickweeding it does. and stop being such a cynical asshole all the time Jim. its tiring. sorry to rant, love the blog. usually.

  44. HedonismBot

    Whatever, inclusiveness, etc.
    But I personally would like to see those Evango hatemongers disappear forever. That is all. Trucknutz.

  45. Nigerian Business Executive

    [re=202576]patrick[/re]: Hahahahahahaha! You are so never getting laid ever again!

  46. jagorev

    [re=202562]Manchowder[/re]: These people think Barack is a Muslim.

    Ugh. If you can’t discern the existence of a large and sizeable number of religious Americans, who are somewhere in the middle, who are open to persuasion, who are neither wingnuts who believe that Obama is a Muslim, nor all for abortion and gay marriage, then I respectfully suggest you need to get out more. Your statement about what “these people” supposedly believe is about as ignorant and bigoted as anything I’ve heard from the actual wingnuts.

  47. DeLand DeLakes

    Dear Barry:

    Please unyoke the federal privileges accorded to married people from the institution of marriage, and socialize healthcare. Then marriage would simply be a religious ceremony, church and state would be properly separated, and none of this would fucking matter, the end.

    http://www.beyondmarriage.org

  48. Gopherit

    [re=202578]HedonismBot[/re]: There’s a little something I keep hoping for called the Rapture. Keep your fingers crossed!

  49. mhale0

    Best post I’ve ever read on Wonkette. Good work.
    Reminds me (and I’m being honest here) of early Hunter Thompson.

  50. the cold war makes me hot

    i don’t see a problem here.

    1. My understanding is that it was the Inauguration Committee that choose Chunky McLardtits, not Obama.

    2. But that is besides the point. Obama has been all about reach across the aisle (or giving a reach around, if you are so inclined).

    3. McLardtits has about 5 minutes of the event. Probably not, which shows just how unimportant it is. By giving him all of this attention, we are playing into his agenda. Can you tell me who gave the invocation at any other inauguration?

    I don’t like the McLardy, but I like Obama. I’m going to give the future Leader of Everything the benefit of the doubt here.

  51. patrick

    [re=202587]myheadsexploding[/re]: awesum. do u live in DC? lets get married at the Reezultz in Dupont.

  52. Cicada

    Since everyone’s being all serious-like…

    No successful civil rights movement has ever been top-down. Anyone waiting for Hopey to waive his magic equality wand is going to be sorely disappointed. We’re going to have to work hard, just like every civil rights movement in the history of this country, to hold politician’s feet to the fire and get real change.

    This doesn’t by any means mean that Hopey gets off the hook. If our new prez repeals DOMA like he said he would, and I’ll gladly forgive the supreme dickitude of inviting a homophobic wingnut to give his convocation prayer.

    Er…BUTTSECKS?

  53. myheadsexploding

    Don’t live in DC yet but as soon as Barry hires me, which he most certainly will cuz i applied online and all, I’m moving directly. C ya soon! Heart ya more!

  54. S.Luggo

    Barry is attracted to Warren (and is willing to overlook Warren’s conservative theology) because of (1) Warren’s promotion of feel-good, help-thy-neighbor, social activism and (2) Warren’s networking model.
    *****
    I recommend this Time article about Warren: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1830147-5,00.html
    *******
    Also:
    From New Yorker article: http://gladwell.com/2005/2005_09_12_a_warren.html
    ….
    Warren’s great talent is organizational. He’s not a theological innovator. When he went from door to door in his neighborhood], twenty-five years ago, he wasn’t testing variants on the Christian message. As far as he was concerned, the content of his message was non-negotiable. Theologically, Warren is a straight-down-the-middle evangelical. What he wanted to learn was how to construct an effective religious institution. His interest was sociological.
    ….
    Warren follows a business-to-business model: b-to-b. He reaches the people who reach people. He’s a builder of religious networks. “I once heard [Peter] Drucker say this,” Warren said. “‘Warren is not building a tent revival ministry, like the old-style evangelists. He’s building an army, like the Jesuits.’”
    ….
    [Warren’s favorite quote] Ecclesiastes 4:9:

    “Two are better off than one, because together they can work more effectively. If one of them falls down, the other can help him up. . . . Two people can resist an attack that would defeat one person alone. A rope made of three cords is hard to break.”
    …….
    From Warren’s book, “The Purpose-Driven Life”:
    “Jesus, however, measured greatness in terms of service, not status. God determines your greatness by how many people you serve, not how many people serve you.”
    ….
    The members of Warren’s network …. agree, fundamentally, only on who the enemy is. (Wha’?)
    ….
    “There is only one thing big enough to handle the world’s problems, and that is the millions and millions of churches spread out around the world,” [Warren] says.


  55. Post author
    Jim Newell

    [re=202568]Josh Fruhlinger[/re]: I agree with you Josh as always, about everything. Of course he should talk to everyone. But giving an opening speech at inauguration? Considering Warren’s crap of late, that’s just a strangely insensitive thing.

  56. Josh Fruhlinger

    [re=202598]Jim Newell[/re]: I … I think that’s what I said? Or meant to say, perhaps I was being too clever.

    Actually, now that I thought it up, I really like my idea of short-circuiting this by having Steely Dan give the convocation. And I actually really fucking hate Steely Dan, which indicates my feelings for Rick Warren, I guess.

  57. lawchic

    I have mixed feelings about this whole debate. For me, it’s not just some of Warren’s views, it’s that he sees himself as more important than he is, and by giving him this opportunity, his head will only get bigger. I think he is overhyped and I am increasingly uncomfortable with religion being infused into our politics — I just think he is a douche. That being said, I know several people who have read and loved his book, and share some of the views that I disagree with. One of them being my best friend. We debate on occasion about these issues and try to understand each other’s perspective but ultimately agree to disagree. I just can’t imagine shunning her even though I totally disagree with her on some issues—this is the other lens that I view Warren through. And even though I dislike Warren, I have to give a hat tip to him. When Obama was first stumping he invited him to the AIDS forum despite widespread condemnation for his views and Warren did not back down. But I also feel great sympathy for the gay Obama voters. To them, must be like pouring salt in an open wound—and that must suck.

    Also, for those that say that Obama is trying to extend an olive branch to people who won’t take it and will continue to disrespect him, maybe we were paying attention to a different election. I’m from Ohio–and I understand from first hand experience the bigotry and lack of intellectual curiosity among the Repub and Dem voters—Obama would not have won Ohio, and Pennsylvania for that matter without a portion of these voters putting him over the top. I absolutely agree that Obama owes his presidency to many on the left that supported him, but he would not have won without other people coming out and supporting him either.


  58. Post author
    Jim Newell

    [re=202603]Josh Fruhlinger[/re]: Eh, I just skimmed it and saw a few recognizable words.

    You know who should play at Inauguration is GOLDA MEIR, HEY-O.

  59. Lemming Caution

    [re=202477]SayItWithWookies[/re]: Would it be that hard to find a minister who hadn’t said anything, publicly , strongly one way or the other about gays, gay marriage, etc.? Did he have to pick one who actively *helped* with Prop 8? There’s centrist, and then there’s goddamned conservative.

  60. Manchowder

    Only 57% identify Obama as a Christian.
    http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2008/07/10/barack-obama-secret-jew.aspx

    This whole post partisan stuff is hogwash. Obama is trying to rack up as much post partisan good will as he can with the DC establishment, but eventually Obama will have to vote on a bill that Democrats, Liberals, and Progressives support. Obama can only look “post partisan” and elevate the debate beyond being mean to Republicans for so long. Eventually he will have to make a decision that alienates people and the post partisan concern trolls will realize they have a false god on their hands.

  61. jagorev

    [re=202613]Manchowder[/re]: right, 23% might be mouthbreathing wingnuts, but 55% of Texans voted for McCain. 55 – 23 = 32%

    Ya think maybe Barry’s interested in reaching out to that 32% of non-wingnuts who didn’t vote for him this time, but may still be persuadable? Even if the Warren appearance makes only a small percentage of evangelicals rethink their stance on Obama, that’s still a huge political WIN (given the enormous number of evangelicals in this country) achieved at practically zero real cost.

    The appearance is far riskier for Rick Warren, who might lose of his more hardcore right-wing following. Obama risks nothing by associating himself with Warren.

    Look, all I’m saying is, there are many evangelicals in this country, and they are not some monolithic wingnut army; if gays want their fat pastors to be giving convocations, they had better start having babies at a rate comparable to evangelicals.

  62. jagorev

    [re=202614]Manchowder[/re]: let’s try this again:

    evangelical != Republican
    anti-gay-marriage != Republican
    anti-abortion != Republican

    None of these positions are an ideological litmus test for inclusion in the Democratic coalition.

  63. SayItWithWookies

    [re=202611]Lemming Caution[/re]: I can’t think of one off the top of my head — but then I don’t know that many of their names.
    But you know, there’s another point to be made — I’m an atheist. I voted for Obama. I put up with this stupid-ass religion shit because it’s rooted in our culture like a cancer, and even though I despise the thought that there’s any religious figure whatsoever giving an invocation, I’m defending Hopey’s goddamn right to pick whoever he wants to give it.
    Personally I won’t be happy until religion is rooted out of government and government functions completely — that goes for “In God We Trust,” “Under God,” “So help me God,” the prayer at the beginning of every session of Congress, and idiots who tell me that the US is a Christian nation and that the Bill of Rights is somehow modeled after the Ten Commandments.
    But you know what? When someone gives me half of what I want instead of all of it, I take it. When there’s an opportunity for a beachhead, I’ll grab it. Yeah, Warren is a sucky choice, and Obama deserves to hear that over and over again. But he’ll be going in the direction I’d prefer our government go — and if every so often he has to throw a bone to the troglodytes to keep them in their comfort zone, I can deal with that. At least the goddamn boat’s turning around and going in the right direction.

  64. Borat

    My main problem with Warren is I like my religous leaders to have big beards and to be incomprehensible. By this I mean really big beards and speak some foreign language.

    This is why I hate Rick Warren. He has a lame goatee and tries to speak like an everyday Joe the Preacher. Plus anyone who comes up with the idea of a ‘cone of silence’, which ends up not existing is a dick.

  65. Gurkman

    “Sometimes you can even write the “analysis” before hearing the political news, because the political news will be primitive, because national politicians assume you are extremely fucking stupid.”

    Actually, this is what Bloomberg does with financial news, allowing them to be the first to analyze corporate and government press releases/reports/bailouts.

  66. Purple Tide

    Rev. Rick Warren’s Inauguration Day Rider:

    -One Heavily Lipsticked Pig (Curliest Genitalia Possible, Please)
    -Two Economy-Sized Tubs of Pigfucking Grease® (Made Out of Pigs to Get Into Pigs)
    -12 Hard-Backed Editions of the Purpose-Driven Life (Laminated for Safety from Smug Jizz)
    -8 Jet Black Butt Plugs (Curved Slightly to the Left, in Honor of the President-Erect)
    -And Oh Yeah, the Bible (Just Paste a Cross on the Cover of Barry’s Qu’ran)

  67. qaf

    [re=202576]patrick[/re]: Actually, Patrick, the majority of Americans don’t give a shit about gays. Then there’s twenty percent who think they’re evil/sick/in the way of Jesus, and another twenty percent who are gay, have gay loved ones, or work for equal rights politically. That forty percent’s who’s fighting. The rest don’t care so long as they don’t have to smell the buttplug.

    If there’s gotta be an invocation (for the first time in decades), why does it have to be one of those anti-Christian Evangelicals who would’ve been a moneychanger in the temple back in Jesus’ day? What a profound insult to their savior.

  68. wheelie

    [re=202626]SayItWithWookies[/re]: Amen to you – on the rooting out of religion stuff. I too dislike Obama’s fondness for Jeeblish and the one thing I liked about McCain (before he picked Palin) was that he didn’t overdo the religious shtick.

    [re=202609]Jim Newell[/re]: I, as a card-carrying faggot, endorse your position on this. It’s not “should Obama engage with gay-hating pastors” but “Is this particular engagement appropriate?” On balance, I think it isn’t.

    Also, I’m concerned that Rick Warren appears to have stolen Josh Fruhlinger’s beard. Give it back, you bastard!

  69. patrick

    [re=202656]qaf[/re]: well the Benediction is being given by an old liberal civil rights dude (Joseph Lowery) who likes gays. does that make you happy? WILL ANYTHING MAKE YOU HAPPY????

  70. kapish

    If Rick Warren is “mainstream”, we have now entered the era of “Big Box Religion”.
    And I thought the embarrassed-to-be-American thing would end with Bush.

  71. smellyal8r

    [re=202526]eudaimon[/re]: Yes and Amen. As a known homo, I voted for Hopey to not have Walnuts as president and because GWB has been the WORST ever. I did not vote for him to be the first gay Preznit. Any prelate with a national audience is probably the wrong way with the gays (at least it’s not Cardinal Eagan, whose church thinks women are second class citizens). I will not be one of these lefties who wants everything as far left as possible because then nothing will get done. I love all the cabinet choices (I actually think calling these folks rivals is a little disingenuous. HRC never got THAT low and Richardson and Vilsack were hardly in the running).

    Get whoever you want to pray at your big deal, Hopey. It’s fine by me — a homo.

  72. smellyal8r

    [re=202685]patrick[/re]: At least we aren’t going to have to listen to some lameass poetry from a has-been poet. I guess the reason whatshername’s poem at Clinton’s first wasn’t that good was because she couldn’t find anything to rhyme with “skirt chasing hillbilly”

  73. Jewdishoowary Square

    I can see Obama’s thinking on this: picking a high-profile conservative evangelical for the invocation is a powerful gesture of political reconciliation and unity. I love that those are Obama’s instincts, they’re a complete 180 from Bush, who demanded ideological purity of everyone he talked to.

    I just wish Barry could have found another way to do it. I wish he hadn’t picked a guy who helped lead the charge to restrict marriage to couples that don’t make anyone uncomfortable. I wish he hadn’t picked someone who’s swallowed — and spreads –the biggest piece of bull out there, that letting gays marry will somehow lead to the arrest of anti-gay pastors or the restriction of free speech. It’s the most paranoid, nonsensical slippery-slope propaganda piece I’ve ever heard, and Warren bought into it.

    At the end of the day, I know there’ll be people who just plain can’t get around the idea of two men getting married to each other, but for fuck’s sake, at least deal with the issue at hand, not some fascist hypothetical that nobody in this country supports anyway.

    Let me also say this, Jim: you obviously care twice as much about my rights as I do. Gracias.

  74. NotthatLC

    Here’s the deal, y’all:

    Let Warren have his speech. In the end, this is Obama trying to get these people to sit down and shut the F up for a little while, so he doesn’t have to worry about them screaming about prayer in schools and abortion and calling him a Muslim while he’s trying to prevent the Fall of Rome. I think Warren is an ass, but Obama is protecting his flank, and more power to him. This country is fucked. Let the man do his goddamn job.

    Prop 8 was a tipping point, a wake-up call, and the gay version of the Birmingham bombing in 1963. In other words, it’s all over. The minute Prop 8 passed, Gay Marriage in California was assured, it was just a matter of time. I give it ’til 2010 at the latest, if it even takes that long, now that the people with money are on it. Warren isn’t going to be able to stop it, and neither is Obama. Obama, who is on the record as saying that no matter how he personally feels about gay marriage (and who gives a rat’s ass how he personally feels about it, really), he thinks that you’re going down the wrong path once you start passing laws that take rights away from other people.

    2010. Tops.

  75. HuddledMass

    [re=202640]Gurkman[/re]: So, Gurkman — what and where is the financial Wonkette-equivalent? Because the money-world needs to be mocked RUTHLESSLY. Not a ruth in sight.

    Need beer now…

  76. HappyLanding

    But wait, all you haters! Chunksky McLardtits tells Ann Curry that when we protested at his church, he gave us gayz donuts and water. Show some gratitude!

  77. gidgetbananas

    [re=202538]El Bombastico[/re]: Hell yeah, gimme that ol’ time impenetrable wall between Church and State! In other words, let’s throw bricks, not shoes!

    And screw inclusiveness. I’ll never be ready to make nice.

  78. jagorev

    [re=202739]HuddledMass[/re]: Try Dealbreaker and Clusterstock; Long or Short Capital is also pretty good.

    They’re both a little sophomoric though. For higher level mocking, my favorites are:

    Naked Shorts
    Jeff Matthews is Not Making This Up
    Footnoted
    FT Alphaville
    Epicurean Dealmaker

  79. villageatrois

    All settled then, the Invocation, the Benediction, the Retraction. I think Wookies is doing this last bit. Cant’ wait!

  80. Fathead

    [re=202529]naveed[/re]: Agreed. I can usually spot Newell by the near-juvenile flaunting of pottytalk for which we truly love him, but that 2-para dash of poignant brilliance was enough to pull me out of lurkerdom just to thank Jim for writing it. Oh, the Warren pick? I couldn’t give less of a shit.

  81. shortsshortsshorts

    So everyone has created a gigantic commenter BLAST of “thank you Jim Newell” happies, which is unequal to Anal Blast.
    Jim received his praise and needs to head back to his cage. for the sake of the American Dream.
    These people are kept in cages for a reason. We should all appreciate it.
    [re=202734]NotthatLC[/re]: Gays and blacks are entirely different. Just look at the voter demographics in whatever this state is.
    [re=202568]Josh Fruhlinger[/re]: Your evangelical philosophies will not be endorsed by this particular Interwebs.

  82. eudaimon

    word word word! and here I thought I was going to get flamed to high heaven. turns out there are folks who agree with me.

    I am going to respond mostly to you, Manchowder, because you are representing most vigorously the ‘they are dicks, fuck them and let’s get william sloane coffin up in here to give the invocation because he agrees with me on everything’ line.

    basically, I see you making two claims.

    1) you’re suggesting that people like rick warren and those he represents did not vote for obama, that they think he’s a muslim, are ignorant, mouthbreathers, etc. so why do we care about them?

    AND you’re also claiming

    2) that postpartisanship is a big load of unicorns and rainbows i.e. bullshit, that politics is basically combat and let’s get it on. because barack will have to support liberal legislation eventually.

    So as you could imagine I disagree with both of these. let me take em in order.

    1) if this were true, Obama would not have won. really. I spent a huge amount of time in new hampshire this election, and I met people who were NOT on board with abortion and were NOT on board with healthcare and NOT on board with a bunch of other stuff besides.

    and ultimately a lot of what brought them out for obama is that they felt – correctly, I think – that here was a guy and a campaign and ultimately an administration that makes me feel welcome in his coalition DESPITE THE FACT that I am not with him on these things. here is a guy who is not trying to pretend that we agree when we disagree (think the negotiation w/o preconditions affair) but who ALSO does not call me a wingnut rightwing crazy just for disagreeing on one thing. he in fact seems to understand why I feel the way I do and take a balanced approach to it.

    It is about good faith. treating the people who disagree with you on some things not like enemies but like friends, so they trust that you will be continuing to look for ways to work with them in the future. people believe this about Obama. i have seen it.

    And just on the very numerical level, Obama did NOT win this election on the backs of the massachusetts libruls like me. Look at the electoral map, man! Kerry lost that way.

    what Obama is doing by inviting rick warren is saying to his coalition ‘ok look guys. I still understand you, I still represent you. we may continue to disagree – in fact I still disagree with this dude whom many of you like – but if you continue to stand with me I promise we can work together.’

    2) So you are also saying that postpartisanship in government is bunk. my feeling is that you are ignoring history, and the structure of government. take the senate for instance. we just had a two really great election cycles in a row for democrats (2006 and 2008) and we STILL can’t break the filibuster because 60 dem senators are REALLY HARD TO GET. that’s not even touching the 66 veto margin with a hostile president. you just don’t have the troops to win in the all out legislative war scenario most of the time.

    SO the senate is built for compromise. and that’s good cause most bills that see the senate floor, i.e. bills that aren’t abortion or stem cells or iraq or teh gays are actually not that controversial and common ground is possible.

    when that common ground disappears is when those boring old bills become bargaining chips in all-out partisan warfare, and the dems want to deny the republicans ANY legislative victories because then the GOPers can go home to their district and say ‘look what I did!’ and maybe win reelection that way. and vice versa.

    and remember that it was not always this way. they called it the newt gingrich revolution for a reason: he made things partisan that never were before.

    and ultimately, as I think Obama understands, the way to change this is to change the disposition of the electorate. because for a long while the electorate has been rewarding this ‘rrr go get em tiger war war war fight’ mentality. and if people start thinking ‘hmm maybe it is better to take a more compromise driven approach’ they will reward that behavior in their legislators. and they will start punishing gingrichism. you saw this already with republican candidates trying to tie themselves to Obama this election. you also see it in the polls: people really do want compromise and a consensus-based approach to government. if people run on that going forward they will win, and if they deviate from it they will lose. change the disposition of the electorate, and you change the disposition of their representatives. THAT is how you realize ‘postpartisanship’ (awful buzzword that it is).

    now if Obama fails, that spirit will fade. but if he succeeds, it will thrive. i am not making an argument about the inevitable realization of all the good things ever because of Obama. I am saying though that this is a chance, and that to seize it we need to work in good faith with the people who disagree with us on some things, and not talk only to people who agree with us on all things.

    whooo that was long.

  83. Mr Blifil

    Wake me up when y’all start making with the funny again. I know “Chunky McLardtits” was an attempt at humor, but I found it to be more of a smokescreen than anything else.

    On a positive note, I don’t see that Rick Warren has signed the letter to Bush, yet. So maybe all that “pressure” from the left is finally paying dividends…

  84. schvitzatura

    Barack Obama, I want you to apologize to Hilary Rosen!! Robots of the World want you to apologize to Hilary Rosen!!!

    Obama’s deft faux-tin ear/politically obtuse Reverse Sista Soulja moment, with a half-gainer!

    Bravo! I can’t wait for the next one.

    UHHHHHHHHHHHHHH = HEGHHHHHHH 2009!

  85. schvitzatura

    Does this mean that Rick Warren has been crowned the new Billy Graham, to be Forever White House Evangelical Presidential Pastor Go-To Guy?

    Sonny Boy Franklin Graham is no doubt PO’ed…seeing as we now live in an era of multi-generational dynastic leadership transfers and all…

  86. BobLoblawLawBlog

    [re=202738]Deepthroat[/re]: YOU TOO???

    Okay, so it may just be because I’m not ready to hate my beloved Barry yet, but, while I think this is a gorgeous post (seriously, Jim, it should go down as one of the best), I kinda sorta get what Obama’s team is trying to do. I can’t describe how vile I think Warren is (he’s turned my cousins into mouth-breathing talking-points-repeating conservative dickweeds), but I have the distinct feeling that the challenge put to Obama was to include a conservative preacher at this shindig, and the choices just ain’t that hot. Who’d be better? Falwell? Seriously, I have no idea. The other option is to ignore them, which, while possible, just isn’t a viable option to a “uniter,” lest ye be compared to Dubya.

    That said, I find the idea that this asshat was granted the first presidential “debate” the culprit here: That fucking idea catapulted this douchebag into the national political forefront. Since I got over how mad I was at Obama for that, I guess I’m already getting over my anger at this, which I see as a direct corollary.

    Whew! Now back to business. Heh heh. I said “go down.”

  87. stellabella

    [re=202790]eudaimon[/re]: Having slept on my disappointment, I now see it was purely a crass political move. I more or less agree with you.

    Talked with the spouse too about the fact that he did indeed curry favor with many evangelicals; but there’re two elephants in the room here, peeps: GWB & we’re all poors. Let’s not forget. I never thought he won on luck, but I do wonder how 2012 will go if we’re all fat and sassy again.

    Jim Newell said it, and I do not say it to be funny: this is a nation of cretins. I voted for Barry because when I hear him talk about change I hear him promising to lead the benighted masses out of the darkness of ignorance. I’m still somehow naive enough to believe it can be done.

  88. Dreckster

    All these bright minds in here missing THE biggest point of this smooth Obama strategy.
    What’s the most common outcome when you have a bible-thumping dude with loud opposition to all things gay? Think now…that’s it.
    The fat prick, who worked so hard on Prop8, is gay. Guaranteed. He who protests the most yada-yada. Just watch him get busted with some boy, or an airport cop. Coming soon to a Wonkette article near you.
    Once he gets outed, Obama can say – see? I doth liketh gays. Why, I even had one do the religious crap at my inaug.
    Fucking brilliant, that’s what it is.

  89. elburrito

    If smug newspeople dumb down issues for me, it sucks when they’re obviously dumber than me.

    Oh, and I personally really like Rick Warren, man tits and all! I’m very excited that Obama picked him and I hope he has a role in the new administration. Wait… this part isn’t funny.

  90. WIDTAP

    Any more of this inclusive crap and I am going to start suspecting Obama of having been sincere since 2004.

    Why can’t Democrats just go back to being passive aggressive and blaming the vast right wing conspiracy for all the fails?

  91. MarieDeGournay

    [re=202452]Manchowder[/re]: Indeed. I thought this country was founded on the principle of ending religious tyranny. When any organized religion think it’s okay to to use the tools of the state to destroy the freedom and happiness of others, they don’t deserve to recognized as such. If specific sects don’t wish recognize gay marriage, that’s their problem, but DO NOT think you can shove your worthless devotion to ancient purity laws on us without a big cosmic fight. Strain a gnat and swallow a camel, much? It is that destructive habit that we’ve spent centuries trying mitigate.

  92. onehotdisaster

    i love you, jim newell. i love you. i love you in a creepy, stalkerish i-wonder-what-jim-newell-is-writing-for-me-right-this-moment kind of way. it’s completely unhealthy, but i recognize my addiction and i’m ok with it.

    …you’re welcome.

  93. mikeyboypdx

    So I had the bright idea to try to contact the administration at http://www.change.gov where the “Join the Discussion” link indicates “Our policy teams will be sharing new developments with you, the American people, and asking for feedback.” Only problem is when you actually go to comment on the site, you get this message:

    “Commenting disabled
    Further commenting on this blog post has been disabled by the blog admin.”

    Hm. Now let’s see….what do you call it when you invite discussion and then disallow discussion? Oh yeah, “hypocrisy.” Gays get thrown under the bus again, and the administration’s response? “Shut up!” Hm. Maybe Barry is related to Bill O’Reilly.

  94. God of Biscuits

    Siiiigh. Jim Newell’s right and that’s sad. Too many vapid faggot’s with ADHD, I guess like Jim Newell. New shirtless pictures and off we go.

    Good at protests, which are really just post hoc reactions, and too few preventions. Where the fuck was Amy Balliett and her typo-riddled Jion The Impoct before the election?

  95. FreeWoman19

    No but seriously…I love you Jim Newell, and my Predident Elect, and eudaimon..I’m all mixed up!!

    ….Hey!!! If eudaimon is a girl does that make me gay?…

  96. myheadsexploding

    You guuuuuuuyz…. come on now. This is exactly the CHANGE Barry was talking about. Yeah it’s uncomfortable and that’s the frikkin point. Everybody’s got something to learn here. You gotta invite everyone to the table, dude, all the Mericans. You’re not getting anywhere otherwise. (and PS, Rick Warren isn’t the new czar of anything, remember). Or, get Dubya back and it can be all “my way or the highway” again, and you can sit in your righteous hobo disenfranchised corner eating muesli and be all “they suck” all the time.

    If you want to get active about something, consider this:
    “…UNITED NATIONS — An unprecedented declaration seeking to decriminalize homosexuality won the support of 66 countries in the United Nations General Assembly on Thursday, but opponents criticized it as an attempt to legitimize pedophilia and other “deplorable acts.”

    The United States refused to support the nonbinding measure, as did Russia, China, the Roman Catholic Church and members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference.” (from NY Times)

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28302371/

    REPEAT: The U.S. DID NOT support the UN declaration to DECRIMINALIZE homosexuality.

    I would rather we focus on shit like this than the fact that Barry invited Rickie Warren to be maitre d’ for 5 minutes at his Hopey party.

  97. FreeWoman19

    “The United States refused to support the nonbinding measure, as did Russia, China, the Roman Catholic Church and members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference.” (from NY Times)

    …my my my, the company we keep!

  98. FreeWoman19

    [re=203793]eudaimon[/re]: Oh..well then goooooood…

    But if you were a girl, then I wouldn’t mind being gay…wink wink..or at least bisexual cuz I still love our Prezelect and Jim even though he doesn’t flirt back..hmmm

Comments are closed.