A fascinating question, not in itself, but for what it says about current views of politics.

“Politics is the art of compromise.” I wish I could remember who originally said that.

If we truly believe in a multi-party, multi-ethnic, multi-viewpoint democracy, then we must compromise. It is inherent in the system – for gays, straights, progressives, conservatives, everyone.

“Haven’t we just compromised, by force and tyranny, all ideals of social justice and equality for the past eight years?”

No. We haven’t. One doesn’t “compromise” by force. What we have suffered for the past eight years is an administration which refused the politics of compromise. They were “right” about everything and rejected the idea of discussion, compromise and traditional democratic or republican politics.

The best answer to your first question is: Look at where the last eight years of uncompromising misrule have gotten us.

“The right wing evangelicals have feasted on this country for the past eight years. Can’t Obama at least wait until the second day of his administration before catering to conservative needs?”

I expect that Obama will wait much longer than “until the second day” before catering to conservative needs, or to evangelical needs (they may be very different things.)

As I tried to suggest in my essay,I don’t believe that Obama was trying to cater to evangelicals as much as to reach out to include and maybe to use them as part of his own progressive goals.

Only time will tell.

Tom

I think what you mention in this article has merit. But its also a question of timing. Really bad timing. Why choose a pastor who was against gay marriage at the very time gay marriage was taken away? Why, on top of this, choose a pastor against gay marriage from California who was instrumental in prop 8. Jeez, at least pick a conservative, domestic violence condoning, womb controlling, gay hating pastor from the east coast who isn’t at the center of prop 8. There are certainly plenty to choose from.

There are so many ways Obama could have included someone like Warren in a less offensive way. How about the simple solution of making Warren share his prayer and stage with a gay pastor, and a female minister, and hell, why not a handful of spiritual leaders from non Christian backgrounds. Buck the whole system in the name of inclusion. Make Warren compromise too.

I just really do not get why, after eight of the most conservative years in this country, there seems to be a need to include Christian, right wingers in the voice of the country. Has everyone forgotten that their voice is the only voice that has been heard and answered for the past eight years. They are the only Americans whose needs and prayers have been answered for the last eight years. It’s all the other voices that need to be included for the first time in eight years.

Just because the right (mis)labeled Obama a liberal, doesn’t mean that all of a sudden their (false) exclusion needs to take prominence over the loss of rights to gays. Or the need, as you mention in this article, for progress, change and business not as usual. Or the need to forge political alliances with a community that will never, ever accept Obama as long as he is pro-choice. Forget it, a million invocations won’t let evangelicals move past the almighty rights of the fetus. (Never mind that according to Warren, if a man is beating the crap out of his pregnant wife and her fetus this isn’t grounds for divorce).

The right wing evangelicals have feasted on this country for the past eight years. Can’t Obama at least wait until the second day of his administration before catering to conservative needs?