12/28 Update: TheJotus had this image at his place and I just had to add it to this post.
I thought that it was an interesting piece of commentary on the whole prayer-gate incident.
Of course there is this story about the Baptist pastor who says that "God will punish" Warren for agreeing to give the invocation.. extremists of all flavors seem to be mad.
12/17: According to this opinion piece at the Huffington Post:
Hmmm.. let me reread that.. yes.. it is pretty crazy. The outrage stems in part (I think anyway) from Rick Warren's support of Proposition 8 in California and his belief that "a civil union is not a civil right" and "Nowhere in the constitution can you find the “right” to claim that any loving relationship identical to marriage".Progressive groups are decrying the choice of Rick Warren to deliver the Invocation at the Presidential Inauguration as "disappointing" - but it is far more than that. It is an act of spiritual violence against lesbian and gay American citizens and a profound betrayal of the philosophy of inclusion and unity espoused by President-Elect Obama.
I wonder if people on the right side of the political aisle would have had a similar reaction if President Elect Obama had chosen Jeremiah Wright or some other polarizing pastor? It makes you wonder doesn't it?
Of course he did not pick Wright. He picked a conservative evangelical pastor. While I may not agree with Rick Warren in everything, I consider him to be a brother in Christ and a generous man who is concerned about our nation. I applaud our new president's choice and hope that all Americans will eventually support him in this.. or maybe just tone down the rhetoric a bit.
This is a problem Obama is going to face over and over. The left-wing people who helped put him in the White House want to claim him as their own. But, he has said time and time again that he is really a moderate. And, he is a pragmatist. He said he'd reach out to people with differing opinions and that's exactly what he's doing. Then, the people on the left cry foul.
ReplyDeleteReaching out to Rick Warren, in spite of Warren's support of Prop 8, is just another example of how Obama will get things done. And, the groups who are so upset about it should remind themselves that the President-elect himself does not support gay marriage.
Personally, I'm not a big fan of Rick Warren and he would not have been my choice. But, I'm glad to see Obama doing what he said he would do and what I kept trying to tell my right-wing friends who were so scared of him he would do. He will surround himself with people of differing ideologies and he will take the most pragmatic course. He will go with what works, not what is "conservative" or what is "liberal".
This is what I admire about Obama as well. He is open-minded and really does seem to look at all options before decided his course of action. I sure that does mean he can't please all of the people all of the time, but I do think it will make for an EXCELLENT President!!!! ^_^
ReplyDeleteHere is Obama's response
ReplyDeleteI don't see why the gay community seems so bent out of shape about this. Obama has clearly articulated his position on the definition of marraige in the Warren interview with Omama and McCain. Why does every issue have to be so friggin inflamatory!?!
ReplyDeleteLet's try to stop this culture war mentality and see what we can do about healing our nation.
In fairness to some in the gay community, Rick Warren has equated gay marriage to incest and pedophilia.
ReplyDeleteI think Obama's response (the video Bob linked to) was excellent.
Hi Bob ~~ I had not heard that Rick Warren was to give the Inaugural Invocation.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the video, I think that this is interesting and wonder how this and the next few years will play out.
Many prayers for our Country and our new President Elect.
Trying to catch up now...after being gone for a while.
Thanks for keeping in touch with me in Vegas.
LOL:Wanda
If O had chosen Wright, the right would have been silenced in the media.
ReplyDeleteHaven't heard much about Palin's church being the target of arson, have we?
As for the Warren choice...whatever.
I have heard too much about arson in Wasilla.. 1170 "news" articles in Google News alone.. really.. is that national news?
ReplyDeleteSorry my tone is a bit crabby this AM.. just think that we need to leave Gov Palin alone. Of course if someone had seen Joe Biden or GOP reps or members of the press in Wasilla lately.. then maybe :)
Karen,
ReplyDeleteI don't understand this. Could you explain? "If O had chosen Wright, the right would have been silenced in the media."
I did hear about Palin's church being targeted with arson. I'm not getting your point.
Personally, I'm thrilled with the Warren choice (even though I'm not thrilled with Warren). Obama is doing exactly what he said he would do. I'm also delighted that Warren invited Obama to speak at his AIDS event even though they disagree on abortion. I think it shows maturity on the part of both men to be able to agree on the the things they can agree on even while they disagree on other very important issues.
Peace,
Brian
Yeah, I think it's national news because of the recent election. I just haven't seen much of it on mainstream media. This is a crime against Palin, obviously, not just Wasilla. We need to leave her alone, yes...the attacks on her by the media are over the top. But, this is violence against her.
ReplyDeleteBrian, we could go on about this, but it's just the truth. The media is completely gaga over Obama and will protect him. Personally, I DON'T admire him for his pick. If he considered Wright to be "family" then he should have picked him, not Warren.
I'm a tad cranky this a.m., too.
;-)
Karen,
ReplyDeleteThanks for explaining.
1.) Governor Palin is no longer national news, IMO. She is now the governor of Alaska. The arson got more than enough coverage. AFAIK, it was the act of an individual, not some left wing conspiracy. So, I don't know what more coverage would look like.
2.) You may have missed it. But, Obama distance himself from Wright as a spiritual advisor a long, long time ago. Wright never played an official role in Obama's campaign. Whether Obama considers him family or not is not really the point here. I'm sure we all have people in our family that say things we find embarrassing, even offensive.
Sorry to hear everyone's so crabby this morning. I'm actually on the mend. And, I saw a peek of sun a few minutes ago. Hallelujah!
Brian,
ReplyDelete1) I completely disagree. Tell the press that she is no longer newsworthy when it comes to the chance for personal attacks. I've asked numerous people about the church coverage. Half said, "Huh? What happened?" The other half said, "I saw something about that."
2) I certainly did not miss Obama quickly distancing himself from the pastor whose church he and family attended for 2 decades. I also did not miss him lying about knowing Wright's radical leanings-the word is that he has attended the church within the last 2 years at the minimum. It is irrelevant that we might have people in our family that say things we find embarrassing or offensive. We are not the President-elect.
I don't care for Obama or Sarah Palin. However, Palin's apology to Wasilla for the fire, which is not her fault, tells me something about her character. Obama dumping his pastor in favor of politics tells me about his. His pick is a great political move for him and great publicity for Warren.
Glad you're on the mend, Brian.
LOL.
ReplyDeleteFirst people complain that Sarah Palin is getting too much scrutiny. Then, they complain that a fire at the church she used to attend didn't get enough coverage. Wow. I simply don't see how this is worthy of national press attention, Karen. I think news coverage is largely dictated by what people are interested in, not ideologies of the networks, who for the most part, are interested in turning a buck. There's just no story there.
The fact that Sarah Palin apologized for the fire is nice. As for Obama's character over the Reverend Wright incident, that's really rehashing old news. The point is Reverend Wright would not have been invited to give the invocation at the inaugural, period. That was not in the cards from a very, long time ago. Long before the tapes of Reverend Wright were released to the press. To say he was dumped in favor of Warren is one way of characterizing what happened. But, it's not the way I would choose to characterize it.
LOL? I guess I'm just laughable.
ReplyDeleteBrian, there is a difference in the NATURE of coverage of Sarah Palin. Don't know why I have to explain this.
Press loves to bash her.
Press doesn't cover her when she suffers.
Does that help?
I'm not rehashing old news. I'm expressing my opinion on his Warren pick vs. his turning his back on his pastor. It is relevant, unless the rose-colored glasses are on, and it's the way I would choose to characterize it. This move has everything to do with politics. Nothing more.
Agree to disagree.
Karen,
ReplyDeleteSurely you know I don't find you laughable.
Sorry, I just don't see the press "conspiracies" others do. There are a couple of biased networks. But, generally, I think they cover the news pretty fairly and they cover what is newsworthy.
Obama (and the press), IMO are in a damned if you do damned if you don't situation with certain people. If the press covers Palin too much they're criticized. If they don't cover her enough, they're criticized. Had Obama chosen Wright to speak at his inauguration, I suspect you'd have a problem with that. I know I would after all the things that happened over the last few months. It'd be just about the worst thing Obama could do and political suicide.
Yes, we'll have to agree to disagree. But, you know I don't find you laughable. I just happen to disagree with your position on this and I do find it humorous that you would complain the arson story should get more coverage.
So, I'm humorous. Okay.
ReplyDeleteWish we were face to face.
I actually would respect O more if he had chosen Wright. Now, I find him more suspect.
NO, I don't think that Palin's story is that big..I'm trying to make a comparison between what the press covers as "important" and what it doesn't. The church story isn't important, but the now REALLY breaking news is that: Sarah Palin's daughter's boyfriend's mom has been arrested.
:-)
"Wish we were face to face". Wow. I could take that a number of ways.
ReplyDeleteKaren, if I find humor in what you say it's not because you are humorous, it's because of my weird sense of humor. It's me, not you.
I hadn't heard about Sarah Palin's daughter's boyfriend's mom being arrested. And, I couldn't care less. Sounds like a story for Entertainment Tonight to me.
Again, I think the news covers what the public deems as "newsworthy", nothing more sinister than that. Some stories are more interesting than others. Not that all news outlets are unbiased. But, in large part, I think the biases balance out. I sit here all the time and talk to my TV during the national news saying "You call that NEWS?" They put some silly stuff on the news and they neglect a lot of very important stuff.
Yeah, face to face so's I can smack you.
ReplyDeleteNot.
The written word lacks nuance.
You'll be hearing about Palin's daughter's boyfriend's mom.
News ain't unbiased any more. None of it.
Was the news ever unbiased? Maybe we have just become more sensitive to the bias as we have gotten older?
ReplyDeleteKaren,
ReplyDeleteMy guess is the Palin's daughter's boyfriend's mom story will blow over quickly. We'll see. So far, I've not even gotten a whiff of it.
I do find it ironic that both those on the left and the right are criticizing Obama for choosing Warren. Proof that he must be doing something right.
I'm sorry if I offended you earlier. No offense to you intended at all. But, as I said, sometimes I find people's conspiracy theories to be slightly humorous.
Peace,
Brian
Bob, I think at one time news people were robotic. They basically read the news and pretended not to have an opinion. Nothing was ever judged good or bad. I think as news has morphed into entertainment and as editorials have bled into the news and as competition for viewers has ramped up, news delivery organizations no longer shy away from offering opinions and often the line between editorial and news is just about gone.
ReplyDeleteSo, I think things have changed. And, in fact, pretty dramatically. But, I still don't buy the "liberal media" theory that says the media underreports things damaging to the left and emphasizes things damaging to the right. I just don't see it. Things that are newsworthy get reported. Stories that are not newsworthy quickly die a natural death.
Peace,
Brian
No such thing ever as an unbiased media in history.
ReplyDeleteWe are overloaded media wise...cable, radio, internet, so its effect is magnified.
C'mon....no liberal media? Huh? It's pretty obvious with the love-affair between Obama and all the mainstream media.
Apology not needed, however, it would ring truer if you, then, did not refer to my opinion as "conspiracy theory."
;-D
Karen,
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes to bias, what is obvious to one person is not as obvious to others. What you saw/see as a love affair between Obama and the "mainstream" media, I do not see that way. I assume when we use the term mainstream media we're leaving out the Glenn Becks, Rush Limbaughs, Sean Hannitys, FOX News and others of the world.
I don't know what to call it other than conspiracy theory when my more right leaning friends complain abou the "obvious" liberal media bias that is supposedly based on the notion that the media think with one mind and speak with one voice, with the few exceptions of Fox News and the aforementioned guardians of the truth. How would one explain this obvious bias and the love affair short of some sort of conspiracy?
I watch and read as many news outlets as I can, I even read the Huff post. I doubt that you tune into Sean and all since you just made a crack about Fox.
ReplyDelete"How would one explain this obvious bias and the love affair short of some sort of conspiracy?"
I would call it legitimate opinion based upon experiential observation, opinion that is as legitimate as your own.
Sure, Karen your opinion is just as legitimate as my own. I was just asking if you had an explanation for the conspiracy in the "liberal" media.
ReplyDeleteObviously neither of us is going to prove the other wrong. This is a very subjective thing. But, when one starts accusing a group of supposedly independent agents of acting in collusion, I would think one might be willing to offer up a motive or a method as to how they are going about this. I simply do not see what you see and was hoping you could explain to me what you see.
And, you're spot on. I do not watch Fox News. OTOH, I rarely watch MSNBC either now that the election is over. And now that the election is over, I'm not on Huffington Post much. I get my news from a variety of sources. Mostly through the headlines that pop up on my homepage- AP, UPI, Reuters, BBC, etc., etc. Then, at 6:30, I'll watch either ABC or CBS.
You're right, we can't prove each other wrong or right. (or left or right ;-))
ReplyDeleteSuffice to say, both son and I have worked in media and with media folk (me in newspapers, him in a major news station) and the left is king. Anyone with right leanings just doesn't share.
Once again, we hijacked KB's blog. It's all his fault, you know, he keeps putting stuff out there, then it takes off...
Long live the left!
ReplyDeleteYeah, it's Bob's fault. Where is Bob, BTW?
Long live Libertarians!
ReplyDeleteBob said he was cranky. I bet we didn't help.
Off topic: does anyone else think Blagojevich looks like a great big Cabbage Patch doll?
Bob has been out grocery shopping all afternoon :)
ReplyDeleteA little different "spin" on the news geeks.. I no longer watch or listen to commentators like Hannity, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Olbermann, Savage or Maddow.. to name a few. My commentators of choice are the ones I catch on Morning Joe. Occasionally I catch Hardball but have grown tired of Chris Matthews since he openly stumped for Obama on MJoe.
But for the 'real news' (if there be such a thing) I subscribe to a dozen or so RSS feeds from AP, Reuters and the like an formulate my own opinions.
I love it that we are no longer limited to the "news" that our local newspapers and the major networks feed us. Long live the RSS news feeds.. and blogs of course!
Y'know. I couldn't put my finger on it. But, yes, that is what Blagowhatever looks like. I like the way Leno pronounces his last name, BTW. Can't repeat it here though.
ReplyDeleteI hope we didn't make Bob run away.
Just saw the story on Bristol's fiance's mom, BTW. It gets a big old "so what?" from me. My prediction, even the left wing media will let this one die real soon. It wasn't until I caught the story that I realized Bristol is due this weekend.
Peace,
Brian
Ah, spending time in the real world. Eh Bob?
ReplyDeleteYep. I love the fact there are so many sources for new now. But, the competition has caused people to jump the gun on stories rather than doing careful fact checking and ramped up the need to entertain while providing the news. Thus, you get what we've got.
Funny, I got sucked into Chris Matthews, Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann big time during the election. Before that, I don't think I had ever turned on MSNBC. Since the election has been over, I've very rarely turned it on.
I have noticed a slant from some of the news feeds I subscribe to, opposite of what Karen has seen, BTW. Not so much on the stories they report but on the way they characterize some of the facts of the story. I definitely detect some of them leaning to the right.
Peace,
Brian
"I definitely detect some of them leaning to the right."
ReplyDeleteNow I KNOW you're kidding with me.
My guess Brian is that if you like Keith Olbermann then about anything you read or hear from anyplace else would lean to the right :)
ReplyDeleteOf course I could also say that if one likes Rush Limbaugh then about anything they read or hear from anyplace else would lean to the left :)
All a matter of perspective from your favorite Centrist :)
LOL.
ReplyDeleteWell, I have to say this, Bob. I know Keith Olbermann leans left. WAY, WAY left. If I said Keith Olbermann were objective, I'd agree with your assessment.
Keith Olbermann, to me, is an entertainer, not a serious news person. Just like Bill O' (the Clown) O'Reilly or Rush (Blow Hard) Limbaugh.
Personally, while I watch(ed) people like Olbermann and Matthews during the election because our opinions tend to be the same, I never watched them to find out what my opinion should be. And, I never ever confused them with an objective source. I don't have a problem with people listening to Rush or Hannity or whomever for entertainment purposes. I listen to Limbaugh on occasion myself. The guy has got a talent. But, when people are letting those guys help form their opinion, I get a little scared.
At the risk of being called a Dittohead.. ditto this for me Brian:
ReplyDelete"when people are letting those guys help form their opinion, I get a little scared"
"Just like Bill O' (the Clown) O'Reilly or Rush (Blow Hard) Limbaugh."
ReplyDeleteGeez, Bri...opine much??
The thing is...most people using ALL these sources as an objective source.
Karen,
ReplyDeleteI love it when Olbermann calls O'Reilly Bill O' The Clown. My guess is in real life they're good friends. It's just fun!
It's been good talkin' at ya today. Catch you later.