December 22, 2008
There has been quite a bit of attention focused on Barack Obama’s choice of conservative evangelical minister, Rick Warren, to deliver the invocation at the Presidential inauguration ceremony on January 20. Most of the outrage over that choice stems from the fact that Warren was actively involved in promoting Proposition 8, the controversial California ballot initiative banning same-sex marriages.
A large number of objections to Warren’s participation in this historic ceremony are coming from Hollywood. As Tina Daunt reported in the December 20 Los Angeles Times, the entertainment community’s reaction to Warren’s role in the inaugural was “swift, angry and bitter”. Her article quoted Hollywood publicist, Howard Bragman who said the following about Barack Obama:
“What he didn’t realize was how much untapped energy there was in the gay and lesbian community because of the passage of Prop. 8,” said Bragman. “Obama didn’t realize, after all the support he got from the gay and lesbian community, we feel betrayed right now.”
Meanwhile, back at the nation’s capitol, Barney Frank, the openly gay Senator from Massachusetts, had much to say about Warren’s role in the inaugural ceremony. As Jason Blum reported on December 21 at the Bloomberg website, Senator Frank said this about the inclusion of Warren in the event:
“Giving that kind of mark of approval and honor to someone who has frankly spoken in ways I and many others have found personally very offensive, I thought that was a mistake for the president-elect to do.”
I particularly enjoyed the piece written by Christopher Hitchens for Slate on December 19. I thought the televangelist lobby would have been run out of Washington in the wake of the 2008 elections. Chris Hitchens appears to be sharing my disappointment over that group’s enduring presence on Capitol Hill, despite the efforts of many to preserve the separation of church and state. The most impressive point made in this article concerned Warren’s insistence that there are no Jews allowed in heaven:
It is a fact that Rick Warren, pastor of the Saddleback Church in Orange County, Calif., was present at a meeting of the Aspen Institute not long ago and was asked by Lynda Resnick — she of the pomegranate-juice dynasty — if a Jew like herself could expect to be admitted to paradise. Warren publicly told her no.
Similarly, Time magazine’s Joe Klein had this to say in his December 16 posting on his Swampland blog at Time.com, concerning Warren’s insistence that Jews can’t go to heaven:
I am not a big fan of Rick Warren’s. He thinks I’m going to hell. He said so in mixed company, at an Aspen Institute forum. He was asked if Jews were going to hell. He said yes. He can go ahead and feed every poor child in Africa and I’m still going to think he’s a fool for believing that. Reverend Rick is also not too big on gay or women’s rights. (Indeed, if Jews–and all other non born-again Christians–homosexuals, feminists, and anyone who has either had an abortion, performed an abortion or reluctantly agrees that it’s none of our business who has abortions … if all those people are going to hell, then heaven’s got to be about as interesting as linoleum.)
Regardless of the controversies over Proposition 8 and same-sex marriage, is it really appropriate to have a man deliver the invocation at the Presidential inauguration ceremony, when that man professes that Jews are not allowed into heaven? Does Warren believe that there is a big “No Jews Allowed” sign at the pearly gates? Has heaven been getting away with something that American country clubs have not been able to do, since the 1970s?
There is obviously plenty wrong with having someone of Warren’s ilk speaking at the Presidential inauguration. Gay weddings constitute just one of many issues these characters have on their list of things to not tolerate. Chris Hitchens suggested three questions to be asked of the Obama transition team, before the inauguration proceeds:
— Will Warren be invited to the solemn ceremony of inauguration without being asked to repudiate what he has directly said to deny salvation to Jews?
— Will he be giving a national invocation without disowning what his mentor said about civil rights and what his leading supporter says about Mormons?
— Will the American people be prayed into the next administration, which will be confronted by a possible nuclear Iran and an already nuclear Pakistan, by a half-educated pulpit-pounder raised in the belief that the Armageddon solution is one to be anticipated with positive glee?
Remember John McCain’s old expression, “agents of intolerance”? Who would have thought that one such agent would deliver the invocation when Barack Obama is sworn in as our next President?
Another Crisis On Obama’s Crowded Front Burner
December 29, 2008
Barack Obama’s first day as President is still three weeks away. Nevertheless, on that first day in the Oval Office, he will be expected to focus his attention on a number of crisis situations. How many are there now? First, we have the economic crisis and all of its subplots: infrastructure spending and job creation, stopping the foreclosures, oversight of the TARP giveaway (which should include bringing the TARP thieves to justice), a new economic stimulus package, getting the Securities and Exchange Commission to start doing its job, responding to cries of help from state governments and deciding on what to do about the American automakers. As if those economic emergencies weren’t enough, the new President will need to multitask his crisis management skills to take on a number of other issues. These include health care reform, undoing all of Bush’s “midnight” Executive Orders, winding down the Iraq war, building up troop strength in the neglected Afghanistan war and, speaking of neglect, the age-old Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which has again reared its ugly head.
Jeremy Ben-Ami is the Executive Director of J Street, which he describes as “the political arm of the pro-Israel, pro-peace movement”. On December 27, Mr. Ben-Ami issued the following plea to the Obama administration from the J Street website:
The December 27 Israeli air strike on the Gaza Strip was code-named: “Operation Cast Lead”. Reaction to the strike from the Israeli media ran the spectrum from support to outrage. On December 28, The Jerusalem Post ran a favorable editorial approving the attack:
On the other hand, Gideon Levy wrote a scathing commentary on the incident for the December 29 edition of Haaretz:
On December 28, Barak Ravid of Haaretz provided an excellent, objective “back-story” on the planning and execution of this air strike. The article explained that prior to the offensive, Israeli Foreign Minister, Tzipi Livni, went to Cairo to inform Egypt’s president, Hosni Mubarak, of Israel’s decision to strike at Hamas. Ms. Livni is the candidate from the centrist Kadima party who will oppose Likud party stalwart, Benjamin Netanyahu, in the February 10 election for the office of Prime Minister. Netanyahu had been ahead in the polls, prior to the execution of Operation Cast Lead. If Israel can avoid a ground war in Gaza, she may win the support of the more hawkish voters who would have voted for Netanyahu. A televised broadcast by Haaretz in conjunction with Channel 10 News, reported that “Palestinians said 180 of those killed were Hamas officials, the rest — civilians.” As of the present time, the total death toll from the assault is believed to be 280. If 180 of those individuals really were “Hamas officials”, this could work to Livni’s advantage in the upcoming election.
The Obama administration’s diplomatic initiative on this conflict will redefine America’s role in the Middle East. A December 28 editorial in The Washington Post concluded that the Gaza incident could prove to be a costly distraction from the effort to curb Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Nevertheless, if Hillary Clinton were to dispatch an envoy to Syria to engage the al-Assad regime in getting control over Hamas’ activities in Gaza: Could this undermine Iranian hegemony in the area? Ultimately, everyone in the world is hoping that the Obama administration will provide the aggressive diplomacy that has been lacking in the Middle East for the past eight years. The pressure for immediate results will be just one more headache waiting for him on Day One.