Yeah, but you don't see Obama inviting David Duke to speak

I disagree there there in no opportunity here.

I don't think that Obama is that naive.

Really, what is the alternative here? That he choose a mainstream religious leader that supports gay marriage? Is there an abundance of those that I'm unaware of? But, assuming one exists that carries even a fraction of the same influence that Warren does, let's say that Obama chooses this person. Those who already support gay marriage might be pleased, but it further alienates Obama from the opposition that he is trying to reach. There is no advantage that I can see because the divide between the two sides only widens.

On this at least, we agree.

I would argue that, not only is Duke not a minister, but he has pretty much been made irrelevant over the years. The difference is influence - like it or not, Warren speaks to millions of Americans who follow his every move. And as no surprise, many of his followers are also upset that he chose to accept this. Why do you suppose that is?

And if both sides are upset, I tend to think Obama is on to something.

I suppose you have an argument there. But Obama cannot be ignorant of the extremely raw feelings following the November election, so it does smack of a stab in the back.

I'm confused, because I can't read anything else into what you've said. That is was a political choice, that this doesn't directly address the issue, that it merely opens the door a sliver that maybe someday down the road an opening will arise to sway Warren and/or his followers.

But anyway, let's move on since Obama's choice of poet for the event has been announced.

The presence of poetry really offends me.

I highly doubt that Obama is ignorant of this fact. But the sting from that slap in face is going to fade pretty fast, if he is able to do something substantial to heal the divide that is truly tearing this nation apart. And the alternative is to simply appease his base. I don't know about you but I've had enough of that route in the last eight years.

If the gay lobby will be mollified when Obama ends Don't Ask/Don't Tell, won't the anti-gay people pleased by Warren's praryer be similarly put aback?

In other words, doesn't this invocation by Warren really only have a chance of working at gradually changing minds if Obama chooses to NOT do anything of significance to advance gay issues in the near future?

I don't think that Obama is so naive that he thinks this gesture is going to change any of Warren's beliefs or that someday he will be less of an ass. But this gesture does show quite clearly that Obama meant it when he said that he was going to try and bring both sides together. "You are wrong and I am right" rarely accomplishes that.

Again, I'm not opposed to that (reaching across differences). I just don't think this is the correct forum for it. The inauguration is not a dialog it is a elevation of honors (to Obama and to the people he selects for it).

But despite our arguing I do think we agree in most other respects.

I suppose time will tell if it was a waste of time to try something like this. I just have a feeling that seeing Obama surrounded by only those that agree with him would have left a pretty bad taste in my mouth as well.

One of my biggest pet peeves about our government is that nobody ever really tries to do what is right anymore, they simply do everything they can to win the next election, and that usually means appeasing their base no matter what. And I don't like it, even if I happen to be on the side now that would benefit from the appeasing. And this "party before country, we're always right and you are always wrong" crap will continue until someone actually has the courage to put a stop to it. I'm hoping that day has come and I'm even willing to take a slap in the face for the cause.

I suspect the same.