the morning after (they never, ever, call)

[jawnbc]

I bet the new US President is pretty fookin' tired after what must've been a looooong day.

Everyone I know was captivated by yesterday's events. Some folks' employers set up TVs so their staff could follow events live (like querrelle  's). At my office, land of technology galore, we've not a TV with a decent signal. So most of us followed things at our workstations on webcasts. Aside from two unfortunate aspects (Roberts stuffing up the oath and Warren's rambling evangelical babblefest that was the opposite of non-denominational), it was a grand event on a grand scale.

I've not seen (ok, experienced) this sort of excitement, expectation and hope for a newly elected head of government. Obama's speech only reinforced that for me, with his unambiguous acknowledgement of most of the challenges he faces. And his unequivocal call to action: for Americans, but also everyone else whose lives are affected by what the US does. And does not.

And yet, nearly everyone I talked to up here said the same thing about the new President:

• I'm excited and relieved; and
• I hope they don't shoot him.

Isn't that horrible? Not that people were forthright with their concern, but that they shared it? A few nights ago we went to see Milk, which is also the story of a visionary public official who brazenly challenged the status quo...and paid the ultimate price for it. There was nothing new in the film's narrative for me: I know the story and it's time mainstream America did too. But the parallels to today: Prop 8--Obama's ascendancy--are striking to me. As is the scope for the Obama story to have a similar, tragic end.

Please America: don't kill him.

Comments

[zurcherart.livejournal.com]

Yep.

Agreed.

But, I hope you, or someone, can help me figure out how "Warren's rambling Evangelical babblefest was the opposite of non-denominational".

Because, I totally agree that it was ... the opposite of non-denominational (and kinda offensive), but I'm trying to put my finger on why that was. The recitation of the Lord's Prayer of course is part of it... I think, and the Jesus reference (though taken at face value it was phrased rather neutrally. I'm trying to ignore oratory style --- because while it's a typical evangelical style of speaking I don't see how we can fault his speaking style for being evangelical any more than we can fault Lowery's way of speaking.

Would the same words be more innocuous delivered by another speaker?

I'm not arguing with you ... just trying to figure out my reaction which was about like yours I imagine.

(The Israel reference in relationship to the "God of history" in this political setting seems particularly provocative and asinine but not blatantly evangelical, or is it?)

[jawnbc]

A non-denominational thingamajig would've focussed on values and feelings exclusive of any specific theological framework. Warren used the familiar, invoked fear of Gawd, positioned his talk in creationism ("everything comes from you" etc). These aren't even representative of most Christian faiths, taking into account the number of Roman Catholics and Orthodox Christians in the world.

Generally wishing the new President able to be strong, honest, humble etc is what this calls for.

How's that?

[zurcherart.livejournal.com]

That works.

Though I wonder if "the everything comes from you" would still be perceived poorly in another context. Creationism is implied because of Warren's background, but don't most Christian faiths assume everything has God at the source?

Well whatever. He said it. I hated it. I guess that's enough.

[mikeybill.livejournal.com]

And don't hate him when he can't do everything people expect.

[jeneration.livejournal.com]

Yah, I was somewhat disturbed that all of the discussion around the morning-tea table at work was about how long it would take before the first assassination attempt, the effective assassination attempt, which US president had been assassinated fastest, etc.

[snousle.livejournal.com]

There is something disturbing about the way I hear people voice this concern about Obama - as if they are already jockeying for the best "told you so" bragging rights on the matter.

[jawnbc]

Well that's not what's happening here.

[snousle.livejournal.com]

I should be clear that I'm not talking about what you are writing here, which is very sincere. I'm talking about what I hear other people say on the subject.

[jawnbc]

No Tony, you're talking about me. Everyone is. All the time. It gets to be a bit much, you know, being so worth talking about....

[bluebear2.livejournal.com]

A few months ago I was talking to a visiting American about Obama. He hadn't yet been elected but it seemed likely at that point (at least to a Canadian.) I said something like, either Obama's part of "them" and it's a trick or he isn't and they'll shoot him. The visitor was shocked and said that this was a kind of negative viewpoint. I said "Welcome to Canada."
I think if Obama is clever enough he'll not touch the things that would cause them to. Kennedy was going to investigate all the money that goes to covert military operations and don't have any accounting and that's when it happened. If he can leave them alone then he might not be considered a threat.
But still, who's going to do something about the military-industrial complex. It has to happen eventually. I don't know how.

[jawnbc]

I think JFK's take on segregation put him at greatest risk, though arguably it was his resolute stance against socialism that got up Oswald's nose.

I also think a lot of Americans don't connect the dots between assassination and gun culture.

[foresterx.livejournal.com]

there is a lot of fear in Australia that some nut case will try and kill him as well - a american nut case - and i hope it doesn't happen either. But as far as I see it - providing he makes the USA a better more caring place instead of a war munger - he has done his job

[nfotxn.livejournal.com]

Is it wrong that I think the whole Rick Warren deal wasn't as scandelous as it was made out to be? Two terms of Bush really should have made it clear to us that fundamentalists have some political clout. We gays trigger our righteous indignation too quickly on this stuff. Ideally would we not invite somebody like Warren at all? I think the president demonstrates tolerance and understanding... Even forgiveness beyond what it seems political GBLT folks seem to be able to muster. I think it's time for healing and talking like human beings. Being about diversity but then selectively exclusionary is one of the things we seem to do to our "enemies". And it doesn't solve a thing.

[jawnbc]

I would disagree. Traditionally the invocation thingie is done by a clergyman from a moderate denomination who gets that inclusivity isn't about taking turns at the microphone so much as saying things that emphasize commonality while holding it. Take a look at the list:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inaugural_ceremony_prayers_(US_presidential)

Most others--even W--went out of their way to pick someone non-controversial, even mainstream. Or to include multiple reiligious leaders.

[deafdyke.livejournal.com]

Thank you for saying this.

As irritated as I am about Warren, I'm still thrilled with a President who might actually Do Things, and has the charisma and intelligence to pull it off.

And -- yeah, I've been hoping no nutjob targets Obama since the McCain/Palin rallies. It's a safe bet that security is a little tighter than usual for the new Pres.

[nfotxn.livejournal.com]

I don't agree with you. While having some affirmational milquetoast tell us God loves all of us might make us feel good I think it's far more progressive to invite the religious right to the party. Being all "our dude is in and yours is out!" solves nothing and is in fact the ignorant elitist attitude that creates division. I might understand your position if Rick Warren were universally disliked but in fact many people seem to like this dude. And to tell those people "Ok you had 8 years now you're not allowed to be part of this process neener neener" is in fact a second wrong on our behalf. And you know what they say about two wrongs.

[wwabbit.livejournal.com]

...Being all "our dude is in and yours is out!" solves nothing...


Bingo: that's the entire point of an Obama presidency as far as I'm concerned. We need to get over this whole left/right divisive crap and the only way to do it is to include all parties at the table - even those parties that would exclude others.

Rick's religion (and feelings about gays) is shared by a very huge percentage of Americans. We won't win any friends by treating them the way they treat us. The gold rule is do unto others as you would have them do to you - even when they act like dorks.

[notofthisworld.livejournal.com]

Keep in mind that Milk wasn't killed for his actions in office. He was killed by a disgruntled coworker.