My final thoughts on the Warren thing

[smoogatz]

It's interesting. As much of a rift as the Warren choice has created within the Democratic coalition, it's created a much bigger one on the religious right. By inviting Warren, Obama has essentially neutralized and co-opted him, and forced those of his ilk to choose sides. It's fascinating: a simple act of kumbayah inclusiveness on its face, but inside the warm fuzzy huggy bear is a fist holding a scalpel which is slicing and dicing the religious right. Maybe I'm just imagining things, but you really couldn't have thrown the religious right into greater confusion/consternation if you'd done it intentionally--and Obama doesn't strike me as a guy who does much of anything unintentionally. It's politically risky, of course, but it's essentially the same move Obama made when he chose Hillary as SoS: keep your enemies closer.

[GarbagemanLB]

1. The bigger picture. What a concept.

[Skittles]

2. Warren is not Obama's "enemy"

he's a fucking friend

[GarbagemanLB]

4. I hear they have sleepovers....and there are rumors that they are BFFs. Not confirmed, though.

[jonnyblitz]

15. .....

[GarbagemanLB]

18. Cute! You can really tell they like each other.

[madeline_con]

23. This one makes me think Warren has dragon breath, and O's

just trying to be polite and maintain for the media, but wants to :puke:.

[Clovis Sangrail]

7. I think the expression is "I destroy my enemy when I make him my friend" /nt

[Skittles]

10. honoring him is not destroying him

[Clovis Sangrail]

13. you need to think about that phrase a little longer /nt

[Skittles]

17. uh, no I don't

[GarbagemanLB]

20. Yes, you really do.

:rofl:

[Clovis Sangrail]

24. you obviously completely understood what I was saying

better, in fact, than I understood it myself.

You see, I'd always understood that saying as "once I make my enemy into a friend my enemy no longer exists"
ie: "I destroy my enemy"

So honoring him really does destroy your enemy.
At least that was my misguided interpretation.

:banghead:

[Skittles]

26. correct

[Clovis Sangrail]

29. ROFL

:toast:

[ecstatic]

12. I highly doubt they are friends. Warren keeps kicking Obama in the gut

everytime he opens his fat mouth.

[Skittles]

19. you're being naive

[ecstatic]

3. Is there a link or something? The media is only reporting the division on the left nt

[firedupdem]

5. Someone said the same thing to me today....this thing reminds them

of the Hillary SOS thing. Who knows?:shrug:

[Clovis Sangrail]

6. where do you get the information about the effect of this on the religious right?

:shrug:

[Recursion]

32. Here's a good start

http://christianpost.com/article/print/20081222/rick-warren-s-biggest-critics-other-evangelicals.htm

[Lisa0825]

8. As much as I hated the pick, I fully expected that

there was political chess going on, and that Obama's team knows the game much better than I do. That is why I was willing to give the benefit of the doubt. I also expect that actual policy will make up for the hard feelings over the invocation. I am really hopeful about that.

[boppers]

9. Oh, so the religious right just gave up and went away, then?

What a relief.

[Skittles]

11. I wouldn't believe these posts if I didn't read them with my own eyes

[smoogatz]

16. Of course not.

But there's a big generational divide within the religious right: the younger fundies are more liberal than their parents--they believe in environmental stewardship and are a lot less denominationally rigid. If Obama can win over some portion of the new-fundie leadership--and Warren's the top dog--then he can cancel out the political power of the more virulent old guard leaders like Dobson, et al. It's a gamble, but in the end it probably costs him nothing.

[Skittles]

21. it costs people who care about civil rights a LOT

[stillcool]

28. You mean these people?

http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/index.html@sort=title_tagline.html#org
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/

[NWHarkness]

14. I wish I could believe that were so

But I have seen no sign of it. I fear it's wishful thinking.

If you (or anyone else) can provide any information about a split on the right, I'd appreciate seeing it.

[NYC_SKP]

22. Some don't want to see any good in this selection.

Some either cannot or refuse to even try to see things from any perspective other than, "it disrespects ME".

It comforting to know that some are able to see things with a more thoughtful perspective.

Recommended.

[jgraz]

25. "you really couldn't have thrown the religious right into greater confusion"

Well, we could show them a fossil.

[xchrom]

27. please provide link and evidence that hillary and barack are enemies. nt

[AntiFascist]

30. That's what happens when you try to bring together America under religion...

why not, instead, try to focus on American values instead of religious ones and let a no name perform the invocaton? That would have made it very easy.

[kdpeters]

31. The other good side effect is that it has exposed to sunlight some of Warren's more wacky statements

That is one of the intrinsic benefits of keeping ties and communications open, or "reaching out" if that's what you want to call it. That's when you get to a place where you can really effectively challenge some of this stuff. When we cut those ties, then this stuff never gets challenged.

I deal with super religious evangelicals in my personal life all the time and have ample opportunity to challenge crap like the stuff Warren says. Most of them are not full of hate. Mind you, plenty of them are plenty ignorant and it's often that I find myself swallowing hard and counting to ten so's that I don't blow up. I try to think of a productive response that continues to show respect to the person while challenging her positions. It's much more effective to foster mutual trust and respect, otherwise, many of these people have never been challenged to think about any of these things other than the way they've always been taught. Rachel Maddow is a role model in that regard.