Over the last 24 hours, many have asked what Join The Impact’s take is on the pick of Rick Warren for President Elect Barack Obama’s invocation speech. Thousands of members have expressed anger, fear, sadness, confusion, aggrevation… the list goes on. Simply put, this is a slap in the face… especially in the wake of Proposition 8. In an effort to unify America, Obama’s choice could easily divide us further. In such a historic election, it is embarrassing that a man who DOES NOT stand for change is given a stronger voice than those that do.
The Reverend Rick Warren has spoken openly about his approval of Proposition 8 – saying that allowing Same-Sex Civil Marriage will somehow take away his freedom of speech. Honestly, I have no clue how an argument like that even holds water. There are still racists in this world Mr. Warren, and they still have the freedom to express their ignorance as unfortunate as it may be. This will not change for you WHEN WE DO RECEIVE FULL EQUALITY. The fact is, our fight for equality is like pulling off a band aid: if you continue to fight it, it’s only going to hurt more… either way, that band aid is bound to come off and you’ll realize that there is no scarring at all. Our rights do not affect you, they affect US!
If President Elect Barack Obama DOES NOT revoke his invitation to Rick Warren, then I see only one solution for the President Elect: find an openly gay leader and ask that they too have an opportunity to speak. Obama’s goal is to represent ALL Americans and he is grossly under-representing 10% of the population! To save face, he must contact an intelligent, well-known, political, and LGBTQ man or woman to speak at his inauguration. Some ideas that come to mind: Eliza Bayard of GLSEN, Joe Solmonese of the HRC, Andrew Sullivan, Kevin Jennings, Rea Carey of the NGLTF, the list goes on and on. Ultimately this might be a golden opportunity to educate the public and increase LGBTQ representation on Inauguration day by DEMANDING an LGBTQ speaker. Of course, if Obama were to choose a fully inclusive religious leader to give the invocation speech, then he can kill two birds with one stone… but it seems like he’s making it difficult on himself, so it’s time we give ourselves a voice and make our visibility known! We will NOT BE IGNORED!
I keep coming back to the following: Obama can’t go back on his word. Sure, politics is politics – everyone goes back on their word too many times to count. But President Elect Barack Obama has made it clear that these should not be the standards. He sold us on his character, his ethics, and his morals. He sold us on his promises. In many ways, this issue is a double-edged sword. He promised to give EVERYONE a voice and that includes Rick Warren. He promised to include ALL ideas and beliefs in his cabinet. Therefore, in SOME points of view, his choice of Rick Warren, could also be viewed as him sticking to his promises. So, Mr. President Elect, we at JoinTheImpact implore you to CONTINUE sticking to your promises. If EVERYONE deserves a voice – then GIVE US ONE AS WELL. You made many PROMISES to the LGBTQ community. So when will you start calling on one of our leaders to speak? It is our duty to continuously remind President Elect Barack Obama of the MANY promises he made to our community: REPEAL DOMA, REPEAL Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, STRENGTHEN Hate Crimes Legislation, PASS a Fully Inclusive Federal ENDA law… and now, since you have clearly given one viewpoint a voice, you must also give us a VOICE on inauguration day as well!
On December 20th – We will all UNITE to Light Up the Night for Equal Rights. Our Goal is to REACH 1 Million People. Based on our numbers, this is an easy goal to accomplish. So now is the time to STEP IT UP A NOTCH. Now is the time to show this country exactly why Rick Warren DOES NOT speak for us. If Obama won’t give us a voice, then WE HAVE TO DO IT OURSELVES! On December 20th, we have been asking that you come with “2nd Class Citizen” shirts on. Clearly, Barack Obama has chosen someone who DOES consider us 2nd Class Citizens to speak on behalf of all the people. We need to let the people know the words that are being put in their mouths. As such, I’m grabbing a sharpie and making some changes to my message on Saturday night. The messaging on my shirt will say the following: “RICK WARREN THINKS I’M A 2nd CLASS CITIZEN… Do You?” Join us to make our voices heard! Join us to make an impact! And Join us to SHED LIGHT on the darkeness of this important issue!
37 Responses
Have we considered the fact that maybe he doesn’t care? honestly… He never said anything about granting us equality and is in fact against same-sex marriage. What did you think would happen? Or maybe (god forbid) we just don’t have the kind of people among us qualified to run the country. The horror! So what? We are only ten percent of the population, and maybe we don’t have any well-known national leaders. So what? We’ll get there. It’s not like the election of Obama suddenly made anything better for us so suck it up and keep fighting. Making demands like this are silly and pointless because they don’t make him care about the people behind them. Besides, how many groups do you think are trying to do the same thing as we are? it’s not like we’re the only group in America who feels neglected, and we certainly aren’t more important than anyone else. Change is slow, and maybe we all need to learn some patience.
Posted on December 18th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
Elsewhere it was noted that this is an invitation from Congress, not the Office of the President Elect. See http://joedecker.livejournal.com/1120229.html?thread=8950245#t8950245
It’s my understanding he didn’t select Warren, but that the Inaugural Committee/Commission (forget which) did. I’ll go check my sources on that.
…..
Here is a quote from salon.com:
“This time, though, the decision to get involved with Saddleback was actually not Obama’s. The Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies, run by the House and Senate, put together the program for the swearing-in ceremony. Congress, not Obama, invited Warren (as well as scheduling a musical performance by Aretha Franklin; here’s hoping she doesn’t reprise the 2005 inaugural performance of John Ashcroft’s “Let the Eagle Soar”).”
Posted on December 18th, 2008 at 3:18 pm
http://www.facebook.com/home.php?ref=home#/ical/event.php?eid=45231860635
I’m not sure if that link will work but Gays United has created the following facebook event: DEMAND that President Obama uninvite Rev. Rick Warren from Inauguration.
It includes links to contact senators and representatives. I’ve sent three emails to Change.gov already because I am just so absolutely disgusted. They also give the email to Parag Mehta, Obama’s LGBT liaison parag.mehta@ptt.gov who I have also emailed.
I am hoping we can all come together in solidarity to let him know how absolutely wrong this choice was and hopefully he will hear us. I plan to boycott the inauguration. Perhaps that is something we could get going.
Posted on December 18th, 2008 at 3:38 pm
Hi M. Henderson,
Barack Obama did make promises to our community. He did so in an Open Letter to the Gay Community. So stating that he did not say anything about granting us equality is simply not true. He has even posted his promises to our community as part of his Civil Rights Agenda here: http://change.gov/agenda/civil_rights_agenda/. Also, he has strictly stated that he personally defines marriage as being between a man and a woman, BUT that the government should not define marriage. He is for the separation of church and state in that sense and that gets us a lot further than the past 8 years. If the government steps out of the marriage business, then every committed relationship can gain the same legal protections and contracts. It is then up to the couple to title their relationship.
That said, Change definitely does take time. It’s been 40 years since Stonewall, and we have achieved many things. Still, change does not happen by silence. If we sit back and do nothing, then we will gain nothing. If we take advantage of an opportunity to educate the movable middle, then we will gain allies and get one step closer to change. Right now, a man was chosen to speak for the people that doesn’t actually speak for the people. We have a right to let our voices be heard. This is our chance to educate and let the world see that we will not be silenced in the face of ignorance.
Judielaine,
Thanks for your response. It’s definitely something important to know. Barack Obama announced the decision as if it were his own, though. It sounds like he’s playing politics here, but his announcement does show compliance. I’m interest in seeing how this unfolds over the next few weeks. I honestly believe that we need to take this opportunity to educate the public about the views of authority figures like Rick Warren. We also have a right to request that our voice has a presence in the inauguration as well. This right would not be there if it weren’t for the fact that President Elect Barack Obama opened us up to it when saying that he wants to speak for ALL the people and saying that the choice of Rick Warren is meant to help this.
Thanks,
Amy
Posted on December 18th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
[...] community and its supporters that Obama would do such a thing and legitimate a religious view that eschews the equality of people who prefer the same gender. However, Obama has said more than once that the traditional [...]
Posted on December 18th, 2008 at 4:21 pm
If President Elect Barack Obama DOES NOT revoke his invitation to Rick Warren, then I see only one solution for the President Elect: find an openly gay leader and ask that they make the closing speech.
Hi,
I think you should be aware that the benediction, the closing prayer that balances Warren’s, is already being given by Joseph E. Lowery, who is a civil rights leader and a gay rights advocate.
Lowery is on record both saying that you cannot be an advocate of civil rights without being an advocate of gay rights:
http://www.interstateq.com/archives/1809/
“Here he told the story of an African-American, Washington, DC-based pastor… who led his congregation down a path of division and mis-guidance, preaching and pushing for an amendment against same-sex marriage… The Reverend went on to speak on respect for all people and how that played in to Civil and Human Rights as a whole. He said that if you are one who says, “I believe in human rights for all people, except for…” then you really don’t believe in human rights or equality. ”
And on record as an advocate of same sex marriage:
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/religion/post/2008/12/60178434/1
“When you talk about the law discriminating, the law granting a privilege here, and a right here and denying it there, that’s a civil rights issue. And I can’t take that away from anybody.”
This does not justify or excuse the inclusion of Warren in my opinion, I just wanted to note that your specific suggestion of a remedy should maybe be amended.
Posted on December 18th, 2008 at 4:26 pm
Hi MCC,
I’m spreading your comment around and amended some of my statement to stress the wording “openly gay.” I do believe that we need an openly gay leader to speak on our behalf. That said, I also believe that Joseph E. Lowery deserves our support and we should figure out the best way to show our overwhelming support for him. Thank you for bringing this to light and keeping everyone informed!
Amy
Posted on December 18th, 2008 at 5:01 pm
I urge everyone to go to http://www.change.org and make a comment or vote for the idea to dis-invite Rick Warren from the inauguration. The southern hate mongering preachers were not invited to presidential inaugurations in the 50′s 60′s and 70′s. Why should an anti-gay hate spewer be invited to this inauguration.
Posted on December 18th, 2008 at 5:12 pm
In response to M. Henderson: Depending on your source, evangelicals only make up between 7 and 15% of the population, compared to our estimated 10%. It’s probably about even. Why should politicians pander to that group, but not ours? I do not find the level of attention that evangelicals receive in the political arena to be acceptable at all. Did you happen to see Bill Maher’s recent flick, Religulous? In that, he claims that atheists and agnostics make up somewhere around 16% of the population and yet, they too are largely overlooked compared to evangelicals. As someone who belongs to both groups, atheist and gay, I can’t help but see the parallels here. Time for us to get some attention too!
Posted on December 18th, 2008 at 5:44 pm
I’m in disbelief..-I didn’t see this coming….I can not believe Obama would do this…I thought he was highly intelligent….This was a dumb mistake I hope
Posted on December 18th, 2008 at 5:58 pm
7-15%!!! I hardly think so. 10% for the gay community has been proven to be false. It may be 10% in a few large cities but not the country. You guys really overate yourselves. One more thing. The president cannot on his own nullify laws. Not to mention he has no authority to change state constitutions. We live in a democracy and the voice of the majority will be and is heard. That is why Warren is going to be visible and heard at the inaugaration and not the gay community. Obama worked very hard to get Christian votes. He’s not going to throw that away pandering to your demands. Gay marriage is not a right neither is adoption of children. I believe President elect Obama is being very prudent in not caving in to your screaming antics. Besides the country (that’s the other 97% of the populaltion) have more important issues to deal with like the economy and Iraq and global warming. Your sex lives are not significant. You lost on the marriage issue. Get over it.
Posted on December 18th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
Erik, there are plenty of Christians, and I am one of them, who believe if full equality , that’s right ! I am talking about full marriage equality and as well as rights to adopt children, by our gay and lesbian friends. You need to get over yourself, and go back to what Jesus, said, not what your fears tell you. Get over the homophobia.
by the way, this country was founded on separation of church and state, and many people are not Christian. That is a right guaranteed by our consitution.
Posted on December 18th, 2008 at 8:29 pm
I don’t agree that this is a slap in the face at all. And yet I agree with the stand that’s being taken here. I’m not going to attack Rick Warren until I learn more about him. But the question about Obama has always, always been this: can he be both the liberal and the unifer? Can he articulate black anger without falling victim to it, attend Rev. Wright’s church and yet be not a racist? He has done a dance between the irreconcilable extremes so many times and with so much success, and now he is doing that dance here. I do not think and never have thought that Obama is a savior for gay rights, but he’s something. And that something may yet stand.
Posted on December 18th, 2008 at 8:44 pm
I wish I could believe that, Jorge, but you reach a point where being tolerant can’t include being tolerant of intolerance. I think we’ve crossed that line.
Posted on December 18th, 2008 at 10:09 pm
Simple, boycott watching/attending the inauguration and hold a demonstration on Jan 20 instead.
Posted on December 18th, 2008 at 11:21 pm
Why should Obama listen to you?
It’s not like you’re going to vote republican in 2012, he owes you nothing.
Posted on December 19th, 2008 at 12:13 am
Marilyn, does full equality mean polygamy is OK now? Children can get married at 12 or 13 years old? A person can marry a relative? We have laws and restrictions against these kinds of marriages. The Mormons accepted the will of the people in the case of polygamy unlike you who has to force your ways onto others. Obama can’t and won’t change DOMA. Warren is coming to the inaugaration the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence are not. One more thing there are a lot of people who claim to be Christian and refuse to accept what Jesus taught. He does not approve of the gay lifestyle. This country was founded on freemon OF religion not FROM religion.
Posted on December 19th, 2008 at 3:44 am
I suggest ignoring posts like Erik’s (although ‘Erk’ as it appears in the last post seems ironic)
We have better things to do with our time than fueling the fire of ignorance and intolerance we wish to extinguish.
Posted on December 19th, 2008 at 7:03 am
Mr. Erk, You’re shooting yourself in the foot with your religious argument. I’m assuming when you state, “what Jesus taught”, that you are referring to the bible. There is an abundance of polygamy in the bible, so when you present polygamy as being wrong, you’re presenting the bible as being wrong too. In case you haven’t put two and two together yet, that would also mean “what Jesus taught” is also wrong. Mr. Erk, I’m sure we’re all glad to have this back and forth with you on our gay website that for some reason you were inclined to visit…(closet case???)… but next time you may want to have an actual thought process presented in your blogs. You may also want to visit Utah someday where you’ll have a first hand look at all these Mormons that have “accepted the will of the people.” Sir, gay marriage is between two consenting adults. Polygamy is one consenting adult molesting, manipulating and brain washing children. This isn’t even comparing apples and oranges, it’s comparing apples and green beans. Marriage and the definition of marriage has changed significantly in the last 2,000 years. Gay marriage is the next step so I suggest YOU get over it, Mr. Erk. I would also like to note to all my brothers and sisters in the LGBT community, (including you closet cases), not all Mormons support prop 8. An interesting site to visit is http://www.mormonsformarriage.com.
Posted on December 19th, 2008 at 8:22 am
Erik, here we go again, basically, if you are against gay marriage, then don’t marry a gay person. The ability of same sex couples will not affect your life in any way. Same sex couples are entitled to the same rights as everyone else. Freedom of religion vs freedom FROM religion? Well I think that also means that one group does not have the right to impose its religious beliefs upon others, and anyway, marriage is a CIVIL matter, not a RELIGIOUS one. If churches do not want to marry gays then no one can force them to do it, we are asking for equal CIVIL rights, which is something that I don’t think that any religious group should have a say in, just as the “people” should have the right to vote on the civil rights of a minority group
Posted on December 19th, 2008 at 9:53 am
“force your ways onto others”: Huh? I’m not requiring, or even asking, Erik, or anyone else to marry someone of the same sex. Erik, educate yourself a little better about history. Many of the founders of the United States of America weren’t even “Christian.”
This is simply about basic fairness. While meantime, Rick Warren is remarkably misinformed about the phenomenon of sexual orientation, and the actual experience of gay people.
Posted on December 19th, 2008 at 10:42 am
Erik, here we go again, basically, if you are against gay marriage, then don’t marry a gay person. The ability of same sex couples will not affect your life in any way. Same sex couples are entitled to the same rights as everyone else. Freedom of religion vs freedom FROM religion? Well I think that also means that one group does not have the right to impose its religious beliefs upon others, and anyway, marriage is a CIVIL matter, not a RELIGIOUS one. If churches do not want to marry gays then no one can force them to do it, we are asking for equal CIVIL rights, which is something that I don’t think that any religious group should have a say in, just as the “people” should Erik, here we go again, basically, if you are against gay marriage, then don’t marry a gay person. The ability of same sex couples will not affect your life in any way. Same sex couples are entitled to the same rights as everyone else. Freedom of religion vs freedom FROM religion? Well I think that also means that one group does not have the right to impose its religious beliefs upon others, and anyway, marriage is a CIVIL matter, not a RELIGIOUS one. If churches do not want to marry gays then no one can force them to do it, we are asking for equal CIVIL rights, which is something that I don’t think that any religious group should have a say in, just as the “people” should NOT have the right to vote on the civil rights of a minority group
Posted on December 19th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
It’d be really nice if comments to this blog were moderated. This site was created for the express purpose of giving fair-minded people–gays and straights, alike–a safe and supportive place to organize in our fight for equality. By allowing posters like ERK here, to call GLBTs names like “Nazi” and “fascist”, this site loses its credibility and appeal. If I wanted to engage in discourse with such ugly, vile people, I would go to free republic or Fred Phelps’ website, “Got Hates Fags.”
Posted on December 19th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
Join the protest at Rick’s church on January 18th!
http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=40182104481
Posted on December 19th, 2008 at 2:33 pm
[...] Join the Impact » The Elephant in the Room – Rick Warren [...]
Posted on December 19th, 2008 at 2:34 pm
Actually, Obama HAS included a number of gays in his cabinet. AZ Governor Napolitano and her long time partner will be moving to DC, and that is a far better display of inclusiveness than a ten minute blessing at his inauguration. On another note, I believe that we should all HANG OUT SHOES ON JANUARY 19th, MLK day, as a good riddance gesture to the outgoing nightmare George Bush. Hang your shoes on the back ofyour car, on your door at home and the office, on your flagpole, or anywhere else you can think of.
Posted on December 19th, 2008 at 2:41 pm
Hi Nikki,
Comments on this site are very strictly moderated, but sometimes a bad seed gets through every once in awhile. We actually work really hard at responding to comments that we do not approve with an email explaining why they were disapproved. That said, we try to keep mudslinging comments from both sides of the argument to a minimum. I do apologize that Erik’s comments came through and if all would prefer, I will take them down. After I saw them, I kept his comments live specifically because the responses were extremely intelligent and DEFINITELY showed that his arguments hold no water. Still, it is agreed that this is a site for respectful debate and name calling goes against our mission statement. Everyone, please weigh in on your thoughts, I would be happy to delete Erick’s comments if you feel that this is doing more harm than good.
Best,
Amy
Posted on December 19th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
Hi Amy,
Thanks for your response. Here are my feelings: Erk is a troll that is here solely to insult and antagonize. Debate is fine, but it should kept in the context of building strategy and support for the goals of this website and maintain a modicum of respect for Join the Impact’s stated mission:
“We do not stand for bigotry, for scapegoating, or using anger as our driving force. Our mission is to encourage our community to engage our opposition in a conversation about full equality and to do this with respect, dignity, and an attitude of outreach and education. JoinTheImpact, as an entity, will not encourage divisiveness, violence, or disrespect of others and we do not approve of this.”
Erk has violated every aspect of the above mission statement. S/he is clearly not here to be educated or enlightened; nor is s/he here to offer anything positive or of value toward the objective of achieving our goal of equality. I believe all of us have our hands full with the important work that lay before us, rather than having to waste our time and energy in responding to trolls like Erk. This should not be a site on which GLBTQIs must feel they have to spend precious time defending ourselves, but rather one that provides a non-hostile environment which fosters networking, engagement, action and, with respect to Erk, wise use of our time, energy and resources.
Best,
Nikki
http://www.jointheimpactsanjose.info
Posted on December 19th, 2008 at 7:06 pm
Dear Paul:
I hardly think someone who denies she is a lesbian counts! And please let us know the names of the others in the “number of gay” in Obama’s cabinet.
As for the Warren issue, the anger is justified. Warren goes beyond opposing gay marriage. He has a 12 step program for people dealing with “same sex attraction.” In other words, he believes in de-gaying people and opposes the fundamental right of gay people to exist as gay people. The Warren pick (and of course Obama chose him, the formal invitation came from the congressional committee as protocol) combined with the absolute zilch Obama has given LGBT community in Cabinet and other prominent positions is very problematic, to say the least.
I am not sure it is worth a big fight, however. I support anyone who wants to protest, but I am saving my energy for the policy battles.
Posted on December 19th, 2008 at 9:19 pm
The bottom line is this.If Obama would have invited an evangelical pastor known for anti Semitic or racist anti black comments to to give the inaugural prayer, how would society react? Especially with comments comparing Jewish or Black marriages or mixed race marriages to pedophilia, incest and polygamy? Would Obama be able to get away with saying that a wide range of viewpoints will be presented durig the inaugura ceremonies? Or would there not be outrage and a demand by minority groups for the immediate removal of such a biggotted pastor from the inaguaral ceremony. Should the gay community just sit quietly and take it? What else should the gay community take?I hope we hold weekly demonstrations until Mr.Warren is removed or/and continue to demonstrate during the inauguration ceremoney.That is the least we should do.
Sharone
Posted on December 19th, 2008 at 10:16 pm
Some are already defending the “Messiah” by justifying his despicable choice in Warren. Well, I suppose some of us have to defend Obama or risk acknowledging that he may not be everything we hope he will be, and how would that reflect on us? Obama could have reached across the table to any evangelical, but he chose a man who compares same gender couples to pedophiles, and he chose to do it on one of the most significant days in recent history. Pathetic.
Posted on December 19th, 2008 at 11:20 pm
if you include all the straight allies to gay rights who also worked very hard to bring the democrats back into the white house and nearly got a super majority in the congress (me me me), it’s way more than 10% of the population. we said we wanted “change” and we meant it.
there is no justification for choosing rick warren. allowing unrepentant bigots to speak on such a day as this inauguration is simply wrong. it certainly is not putting our best foot forward for the next 4 years. if mccain had been selected prez and he chose a racist preacher to speak, the whole of the black community would be in uproar, and this whole nonsense about “representing all sides” would show for what it really is.
religious marriage is a sacrament that government cannot interfere with. churches can deny marriages for any reason they see fit. right now, if a minister does not respect the marriage of a jew and a christian, they can deny it. they do not lose their tax-exemption, they cannot be forced to do anything. that argument from the right that it will hurt churches is simply a lie, probably invented by the chamber of commerce, who would lose millions of dollars if they suddenly had to respect civil marriages in their insurance benefit coverage (they can deny claims for civil unions).
we can no longer continue to justify rationalizing our prejudices and hatred towards one another. these social sins cannot hide behind religion or anything else. there is no justification for obama’s poor choice, it is a poor one, and anyone who can’t see that is in denial that the man can make poor choices. it matters nothing to us, our message is clear: civil marriage is a civil right. it’s what dr. king would want, and we cannot settle for anything less.
Posted on December 20th, 2008 at 11:56 pm
See, a lot of gay people were misinformed about Obama. He isn’t pro gay rights never said he was. He supported HIV/AIDs things but never gay rights. This is why I was for Hilary in the beginning. She was and is for gay rights… All Obama said was it should be up to the States to decide…
Posted on December 21st, 2008 at 1:29 am
Regarding the comments by Erik – my vote would be that they stay up where they are. Not because I agree with them, but because they’ve been read and responded to (intelligently, as you said), and it’s too late. Once it’s out it’s out. Moderating him more heavily in *future* comments he makes would be warranted, but don’t try to change the past.
I should also point out that I learn a lot of interesting things by reading intelligent discussion from opposing sides, like this one. I’m in the LBGTQ spectrum but not an activist and not in any LBGTQ communities, and this has been a good place for me to come find out what’s going on.
Posted on December 21st, 2008 at 3:28 am
It is never, ever acceptable to have someone who says hurtful and demeaning things about others to give the innovocation at the start of a supposed new era of “change” or at any other time for that matter. It is never acceptable to give a bigot a pulpit. One of the African- American commentator on a CNN panel about Rick Warren stated that it was “no real surprise. During the election Obama acted as a political animal and this is more of the same.”
Let us not forget that when Mayor Newson was hosting a fund raiser for Obama, (and it was at the time of the Gay marriages at City Hall) Obama flatly refused to stand with Newsom and have his picture taken. He is a political animal, and climber indeed. What might such a photograh suggest to Obama that he refused to be it? Obama stood by politics not his so called principle of supporting our rights. Newsom later switched his support to Hillary. Is that any big surprise?
Newsom is my hero. A man of principle who acts from principle. Not one who says one thing and does another. Not the one who claims he is for change and bringing people together.
Obama is so popular. He knows he has the power. If he really believed in us, he could stand as Newsom does and make a real change in perception happen.
Posted on December 22nd, 2008 at 11:48 am
I’d like to know if the lgbt people of this country will make themselves visible in D.C. during inauguration week. Are there any protests of Warren planned there. I will be there with World Can’t Wait http://www.worldcantwait.org protesting endless war for empire, torture, and theocracy. One of our plans for this year is to join with others in getting prop 8 repealed and we would love to join in with any planned protests over Warren giving the invocation…thats what is needed not compromising with the religious right. We can’t afford to just let this slide. Could someone let me know of any planned protests? Thanks.
Posted on December 22nd, 2008 at 12:54 pm
I am keeping an open mind. Maybe for a reason he choose this reverend. Just look who he choose to help him fix this country. To me it is saying ” If you can sit at a dinner table with your enemies and come together to create a better country.We need to keep an open mind .I hope and pray that he keeps his promises for all of us.
Posted on December 29th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
Add A Comment