Actually I want to know how much involvement Obama actually had in the Warren pick. The lineup for the Inauguration events on the south lawn are picked by the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies, and have been since 1901. That's chaired by Diane Feinstein and the members are Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer, Bob Bennett and John Boehner. The President-elects Inauguration Committee handles all other events that don't take place on Capital grounds.

Of course as an Atheist, I take issue with an invocation at all LOL.

as a far left radical progressive liberal etc...who also happens to be a seriously devoted christian,i think its important to note that the hypocritical,gay bashing intolerant megachurch fanatics who have hijacked my faith do not speak for me,nor do they speak for many other christians that i know personally.there are plenty of smart,honest progressive people of faith who would have been terrific choices.rick warren is not one of them.

@24hourjack

Couldn't agree more. For instance, Sister Joan Chittister would be an outstanding choice.

What 24hourjack said....

I have slept on this too and I think what is bothering me the most is the fact that the first big conflict out of the box is going to once again be about Separation of Church and State. What can't we just stick to political issues..... :::SIGH:::

But, but, he says he loves Jesus. Bad behavior is all water under the bridge if you're right with (the western, Christian) God.

>>the first big conflict out of the box is going to once again be about Separation of Church and State.

I get your point, but I think it's a mistake to view it through this prism. The arguments against Warren are fuel enough. Overreaching and making this a larger constitutional issue will overshadow the basic problems with Warren. In other words, there will absolutely be an invocation and benediction. 100 percent chance. There would've been an invocation anyway -- with or without Warren.

Calm down people
Is this a terrible choice…yes. Is this the end of the world NO. So Obama is batting what now .990. I realize a lot of people are upset but in the grand scheme of things this will all be forgotten come January 21.

Progressives need to accept the fact that Obama is NOT a lock step liberal or progressive for that matter. He is basically a pragmatist that is embracing Warren to expand his reach amongst the tens of millions of “regular folk” who follow Warren. Now will that piss off his progressive base…hell yes…but really where else do we have to turn. To me this is a long term win win for Obama.

>>So Obama is batting what now .990.

Dohohohoho.

Clinton, Salazar, Emanuel, Villasack, etc etc.

>>He is basically a pragmatist that is embracing Warren to expand his reach amongst the tens of millions of “regular folk” who follow Warren.

Hey how many holocaust deniers are there? Let's reach out to them too!

I think its a bad choice too. But as someone who is somewhere between an agnostic and an atheistic (is that a word?) - I am not going to lose sleep over this. In the grand scheme - it matters not.

I understand why people are upset. I don't agree with Warren's views. Could someone else have been chosen? Sure, you can say that about a lot of things. It is also good that Rev. Lowery is doing the benediction, which NOBODY seems to recognize because people are up in arms about Warren.

Can you honestly tell me that people would have cared who gave the invocation or benediction if Warren wasn't involved? Nope. I'm pretty sure that most people can't remember who gave the benediction the last 4 inaugurations, or didn't care. I don't care either way because most people won't pay attention or remember the invocation or benediction. It's all about the swearing-in of the new VP and Prez. and the inaugural speech, after that no one is going to look back about Warren's invocation, which is only a 2-minute prayer and that's it. Nobody's elevating Warren - he certainly doesn't need that and when he is in an Obama cabinet or dictating policy, which given the fact that they disagree on many issues - he won't, then I'll have reason to complain.

So now all of a sudden Obama's going to change his stance on gay rights and women's reproductive rights because Warren was chosen to say a prayer? A prayer you're going to forget 2 minutes later? It's cool and understandable that people don't like this choice, but this is just more outrage over something that will be insignificant once Jan. 21st hits.

Save the outrage for when Obama doesn't push policies for gay rights or women's productive rights, not for this.

To put it another way, imagine an incoming president wearing a lapel pin that says "no fat chicks" while giving a speech about bringing the nation together. While I'd personally find this hilarious- the action, which has no technical impact, would send a message.

OK - my post still hasn't shown up...

QT

Can't we just go back to one of the oldest definitions of marriage? Trading women for livestock.

I actually want to go back to the earlier than that definition - the woman you spend the night with is your wife.

Seems to me that that definition would go a long way to reducing promiscuity and cutting through a lot of bs. You inherit more wives if you can't keep it shut, and they all have to be kept. How many wives would Bill Clinton have by now, happily spending his money?

QT

Bob,

>>I get your point, but I think it's a mistake to view it through this prism. The arguments against Warren are fuel enough. Overreaching and making this a larger constitutional issue will overshadow the basic problems with Warren. In other words, there will absolutely be an invocation and benediction. 100 percent chance. There would've been an invocation anyway -- with or without Warren.

You are absolutely right about this. Of course I am overreaching, and I know that this is something that we have to live with in this political age that we are in. It none the less just drives me crazy that this is what is going to be defined as the first real confrontation between Obama and the progressive left. It seems that everything else that he has been doing in trying to form a fair and balanced government is being overrided by the 24/7 constant barrage of news and crap that is out there.

I guess I am still trying to bask in the afterglow of what I thought this election was about. I guess it's back to the real world.

>>I guess it's back to the real world.

Tell me about it. I've been a cynic about politics my entire life, and I've never taken a candidate at his or her word.

But with Barack, I honestly thought this administration would at least attempt to approach things differently. And thus far, it has been more of the same.

Change you can forget about.