I suspect this is me not getting it again

[seldear]

I shouldn't. I really shouldn't. But...

Why does the appointment of Rick Warren to give the inauguration invocation mean Obama's turning his face against the GLBT community? Because Warren supported 'Yes on Prop 8', even if Obama didn't?

And yet clearly someone in his administration figured that, hey, we should include the GLBT community in the inauguration parade, because they tagged the Lesbian and Gay Band Association about being in it.

Exactly how is this disappointing campaign promises? Going back on his word? It's a damn invocation at the start of a ceremony, given by a man of the same faith that Obama lays claim to, even if they don't exercise their faith in the same way! And, yes, it can be considered a bone thrown to the right-wing conservatives.

However, last I knew, the USA had some 300 million citizens. In the end, Obama's gonna be POTUS for all of them, not just the ones you agree with.

Comments

[seldearslj.livejournal.com]

I understand the anger that GLBT Americans feel about this. I also hate it when someone I disagree with gets spotlight, limelight, and approval from someone I like and respect and who I thought liked and respected me.

However, I don't get how Obama choosing him to open the inauguration ceremony means "he has no intention of doing anything to change the current situation." To me, that's a big leap of logic.

This all reminds me of children carefully measuring how much is in each glass when a parent pours out a drink and complaining that they got a millimetre more, or calculating the value of birthday and Christmas gifts and claiming that she got a more valuable one that I did and that must mean you don't love me as much!

[lavidaessueno.livejournal.com]

A series of smaller actions can lead toward a general conclusion. This small action is part of a larger pattern that to me indicates that Obama will not do much to change things in our country for GLBT Americans. The blame is not entirely on him individually; the president can only do so much and must work together with the legislative branch, and I think he will use his influence on other matters. That is the way of American politics--however, I think Obama made a whole raft of promises he never intended to keep (and knew he wouldn't have to because they were beyond the scope of the executive branch).

[seldearslj.livejournal.com]

It might suggest that he has no intention of following through on his promises, sure.

But has he actually broken any promises yet?

In my experience - and with a good dose of Australian political cynicism - politicians make promises that they know will be broken, every election, every time. It's the nature of politics - as is the making of deals to get this or that through the legislative house.

[lavidaessueno.livejournal.com]

But has he actually broken any promises yet?

Yes, he has. Two that I know of. One involving taxes on "excessive profits" of oil companies, another involving limits on campaign financing (he refused public financing to avoid the constraints they would impose).