Why do people think that Obama was aware of Warren's Prop 8 support?

Why did Obama become associated with Warren? It's very simple:

Warren is well-known as an "Oprah-approved evangelist." Obama has been told by his handlers that Rick Warren is the new Billy Graham - a non-controversial preacher who apparently can appeal to everyone in America. Therefore, Obama thought Warren would be a perfectly safe choice for his invocation. Warren's personal opinion on gay rights almost certainly never even entered Obama's mind. In fact, Obama likely wasn't even aware of Warren's support for Prop 8, nor was he likely interested in inquiring.

And that's that.

It's ALL OPRAH's fault!

A few minutes on Google, looking for the usual angry religo-nutjob craziness (Jews burning in Hell, Gays=pedophiles, etc) would have dug up everything.

a lot over the past few decades. I wonder if the Obama camp is aware of rumors of her drinking before shows?

So the PETA people are pissed at Obama for inviting her which just goes to show that no matter what or who, someone is going to be mad at Obama's choices!

it's a disappointment any way you slice it. On the plus side, maybe he'll see now that he needs to do something to show that he is indeed as fierce an advocate for lgbt rights as he says.

:eyes:

Did you know about Warren's comments when Obama went Hillary, McCain and Obama all met with Warren previously? I didnt and odds are neither did any of them or Hillary and Obama wouldn't have gone.

Because Obama has those and their job is to check these things out. No way he just didn't know.

My uncle was a senate aide, and they do that in the senate. No way they don't do it for a presidential inauguration.

Was he expected to go through all Warren footage for incendiary remarks before choosing him? I knew of him and thought of him as a middle of the road average megachurch preacher. Nothing liberal but certainly nothing controversial. I honestly don't think he chose him knowing about the remarks he said about gay marriage and incest. When he went to saddleback no liberals in the media, not even Maddow, mentioned his views, so who would have known that this was what he really felt?

All the Obama team had to do was go to the Saddleback website before it was scrubbed.

Is this the new vetting process that we can expect to see from all politicians in the future?

He's saying a prayer, not being appointed Secretary of Defense!

This information wasn't hard to find, and politicians have staff whose job is to do just that. It's ridiculous to think Obama just didn't know.

It was also on it when Obama and McCain met with him as well. Why no outrage then?

Why would anyone expect anything else from McCain anyway?

in the room.

Remember?

So you're saying he's NOT that smart?

Got it.

RL

I'm just saying that just as we defended Obama from angry Republicans for not having checked all of Rev. Wrights sermons for "G-D America" or other comments then I will defend him for not doing that on every preacher he comes in contact with.

It's ridiculous to think otherwise. Not "every preacher he comes in contact with", but every one who is in a position that will reflect upon him. This is one of the jobs of political advisors and other staff.

So it's reasonable to think he vetted this warren scumbag and then asked him anyway.

RL

Obama stood before the audience at Rick Warren's church and announced that he also believed that marriage should be between a man and woman, obviously pandering for their support. Furthermore, the Yes on 8 people used this statement in their ads and robocalls. Obama knows exactly what their stand is on Prop 8... it has not only "entered his mind" but he is trying to use to his advantage. The OP is absolutely WRONG!

on gay marriage long before he attended the Sdaddleback Forum, so he wasn't "pandering" to anybody.

The fact the Prop 8 people used his words is not his fault, nor is it his fault the anti-Prop 8 people didn't use Obama's remarks where he came out AGAINST Prop 8.

Obama never said that the only people he will allow near him must agree with Obama on everything. He made it clear those who disagree with him are also welcome in the fold.

He didn't pick Warren to give a sermon, he picked him to give a prayer, just like he picked Rev Lowery (anybody remember him?) to also say a prayer.

the anti-prop 8 people did use his remarks (against Prop 8) in their robocalls as well, but Obama made these comments too late in the campaign to do much good.

The fact that he had to reaffirm his position at the Saddleback Forum to great applause, without stressing the constitutional arguments of the other side, can and should be viewed as "pandering". He seemed to be making it clear that his personal beliefs on the matter would guide his presidential decision-making as well.

Obama is in agreement with Warren on the issue of marriage equality, so your third statement is not relevent with respect to Prop 8.

I appreciate the choice of Rev. Lowery as well, but he he is much less prominent of a figure: he is not being called "America's Pastor" nor is he considered by the media to be the successor to Billy Graham. Has Rev. Lowery also written a popular book that can be exploited by this exposure?

He did make it "clear that his personal beliefs on the matter would (NOT) guide his presidential decision-making as well" and he made it clear he does NOT believe in a Constitutional ban on gay marriage:



As for the Prop 8 people taking Obama's words out of context and using them disingenuously, that is not something you can hold Obama accountable for.

And anybody calling Warren "America's Pastor" is stating a personal opinion. Since there has been no vote to reaffirm that the vast majority of American's consider him to be "America's Pastor," such a label is meaningless.

his personal beliefs will not guide him on the issue of a Federal constitutional amendment, and that he is tolerant enough to acknowledge that his personal beliefs should not be written into the Federal constitution.

HOWEVER, he was using his position as presidential candidate to be a bully-pulpit on the issue when he endorsed Warren's point of view, in front of Warren's audience, and in the very state which is about to make a decision which either supports or is contrary to Obama's personal belief.

I don't believe that the Yes on 8 people were necessarily using Obama's words disingenuously, even though Obama eventually came out against Prop 8. Obama said what he meant, in a public forum, rather than keeping his personal beliefs to himself.

In a way, this reflects our position on the inauguration invocation. The invocation could have been a very personal religious blessing for Obama, but instead he chose a very publically outspoken figure who is promoting his ideology in the form of a popular book.

Obama endorsed Obama's point of view, or to be more precise, Obama explained his point of view.

He was asked a question and he answered it, explaining how he, not Warren, felt about the issue.

In fact, you could argue Obama dissed Warren's point of view when he said he was NOT for a Constitutional ban on gay marriage, something I'm sure Warren and his sheep are for.

And it wasn't just said in front of Warren's audience, but in fact it was said in front of the entire world as it was being broadcast live on TV. He wasn't addressing those people in the audience, he was addressing the people at home watching on TV.

Also, gay marriage wasn't the only issue discussed that night. Stem cell research and abortion, among other things, were also discussed, and Obama's answers to those questions were against what Warren and his sheep believe, so you can't say Obama was pandering to Warren or his flock when in fact he went against their beliefs on said issues.

this is called pandering.

Definition: "to provide gratification for others' desires"

Did you ever stop to think that for that one night the audience wasn't made up entirely of Warren's people?

After all, they applauded for McCain too, who said the opposite of what Obama said.

In fact, "Each campaign was provided 100 seats."
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/guestvoices/2008/08/saddlebacks_civil_forum_with_m.html

And how did you measure how "resounding" the applause was? Did you have an applause meter that measured the level of clapping?

Who got a more "resounding" applause? McCain or Obama?

And isn't it possible people were applauding just to be polite?

I think you might be more concerned with who got the most applause than what the candidates actually had to say. I watched the forum, and frankly, I paid no attention to who or how much the audience applauded because I could not care less. I was more interested to the answers given to the questions than whether the audience approved or not.

I didn't so much care about it then because I knew Obama was trying to get elected. I care about it very much now because Obama is continuing on with the "Saddleback" theme, something that took some us by surprise. The entire nation is not the Saddleback church, but you might think differently the way the media tries to promote such Evangelical unification a la Billy Graham.

A simple 10 minute web search by any staffer would have told them what Warren was, while I can see why they looked at him for the position that doesn't explain why they went ahead after the look and put him there. Either they didn't look which isn't much of an excuse or they thought pissing some of us off was worth whatever they thought they'd get for it from the rest of the public. I'd rather think they made a bad choice than are incompetent myself, so he made a bad choice. Everyone does now and then. The fact that he made it doesn't bother me half as much as how some of us are doing back bends to defend it though.

I've still got high hopes for Obama but he needs to hear from us when he screws up, silence is not golden and we should have learned that over the last eight years. We've had too much silence. His supporters I'm starting to have some doubts about but the man himself I still have some faith in, if he hears from us enough. As Roosevelt suggested before he made the new deal, we've got to make him do it. Without the public pressure the change doesn't happen.

Obama wouldn't have made this decision without having Warren checked out thoroughly. He had to have known. You're very naive if you think people aren't checked very carefully - everything about them - before something like this.

It would be far worse if he didn't know about Warren's support for Proposition 8.

its really a pathetic excuse to say he didnt know

The gays can have 3 days, 4 max to demand equal rights. Then they need to let it go.

-- a fierce advocate

On one hand, GLBT people here have been told that their struggle isn't REALLY a struggle yet because they haven't been shouting from the rooftops long enough. Remember all the post Proposal 8 threads that said basically that.

BUT on the other hand, when they shout from the rooftops, they need to STFU already.

that there are outrage from us? look at the first page. its really quite funny that we get blamed for the plethora of threads

not to mention, did the hide thread ability disappear. is it so hard to click on the little X button?

/:hi:

:shrug:

RL

And it would be terrible if gay people became shrill.

that lets you hide the thread. That might help with the problems you're having.

happy.

Or go ahead and continue with adding to the boring, repetitive, shrill and uninformative posts.

RL

All the speculation is stupid. Even my older sister, who has been a member of Saddleback since it began, had no idea that Pastor Warren had said those things. And yes, she is not happy with him either. She was the maid of honor at a gay wedding a few months ago and voted NOOOOOOOO! on Prop Hate. Even so, all this verbal wrangling is not going to change a thing and is getting old. President-Elect Obama took a stand against Prop 8 months ago and that's what matters.

Snip: The Obama letter reads in part:

"As the Democratic nominee for President, I am proud to join with and support the LGBT community in an effort to set our nation on a course that recognizes LGBT Americans with full equality under the law...And that is why I oppose the divisive and discriminatory efforts to amend the California Constitution, and similar efforts to amend the U.S. Constitution or those of other states."

*Edited to add link


http://www.noonprop8.com/articles/2008/10/31/no-on-prop-8-campaign-slams-dishonest-mailer-targeting-african-american-voters

I would put the part about your sister in an OP if you haven't already.

a full 4 days before the election! :sarcasm:

it's not like an issue in California was his top priority. He did take that stand, regardless of when. Why don't you save some vitriol for the Catholic and Mormon Churches as well since they were major bankrollers of Prop Hate?

People were told to shut up in those threads too, actually.

that churches that financially interfere in politics should pay taxes. Period.

it appears that Obama took that stand against Prop Hate prior to July of 2008.

http://www.democracyforamerica.com/blog_posts/25781-obama-oposes-prop-8

the fact is that Obama made his comments supporting straight marriage in plain view of a large portion of the television viewing audience receiving very high ratings. I wouldn't doubt that this affected the outcome of Prop H8 more than anything else he has done.

whether his letter is posted here (which it was) or on Democracy For America which I believe was started by Howard Dean does not matter much. I think your intent is to muddy Obama regardless of his position. It's a civil rights issue to our President-elect and I think he will take that very seriously.

my intent has never been to "muddy Obama regardless of his position". I didn't spend months and months of supporting him in favor of Hillary only to try to muddy him after the election. All I'm asking is that he and his supporters (on the issue of the Warren pick) try to understand our outrage at Warren being picked, even if for only a brief prayer, and above all that he consider how his personal view on marriage, which he has chosen to promote in public, can be viewed as religiously bigoted.

and I wish he would do the honorable thing and bow out...

It is clearly an OP involving Warren. Why would you even read it, let alone bother to post, if you find these threads so distressing? There are plenty of threads on other worthy topics from which to choose.

All you have to do is google rick warren, prop 8, saddleback and you get the Yes on 8 video.

You can bet the caterers at the Inaugural balls have been fingerprinted and have low level security clearances. (You need a basic clearance to do even low level work in DC since 9/11). Warren should at least have been checked out.

Do you think they vetted Maya Angelou, or yo yo ma? Warren, Lowery and these performers are not political operatives, and I would rather his transition team be focused on his job of running the country in less than vetting inauguration people.

the inauguration is about swearing in the new president and for him to address the nation to lay out his vision for the country.

It's not about a preacher saying a prayer or a singer singing a song.

And I don't get why you are telling me the election is over. I mean, duh!

Is proving that Obama can take criticism from the LGBT community and Warren can take criticism from the anti-abortion community and the two can be widely seen trying to build a bridge to overcome the vast cultural chasm between them and their supporters.

For days people have been saying that the Warren pick was part of a brilliant long term strategy that was so far above our heads that only Obama could understand it.

Now, the Warren pick is indicative of Obama not knowing what he was doing?

But not even close.

I think him and most of his advisers probably didn't foresee this kind of a reaction from the GBLT community and other pro gay marriage groups to the Warren pick, I mean has there ever been outrage before over a preacher who got selected for an inauguration day event?