Posts Tagged ‘History’

On the Rick Warren Invitation

December 18, 2008

You can admire President-Elect Obama on many things. His eloquence is extraordinary. His charm and charisma refreshes the stale halls of the White House. His earnestness is something that is needed–especially in terms of the dark times ahead. Resoluteness and intelligence marks his leadership ability especially when trying to deal with chaos and unrest as a result of the economy and the conflict overseas.

But the most remarkable thing about Mr. Obama is his capacity to forgive and extend a hand to those who do not agree with him. You’ve seen this aspect when he had met with his former opponent in the 2008 election, Arizona Senator John McCain (R-AZ). It was also apparent when Alaska Governor Sarah Palin (R-AK) showed up at the governor’s conference held recently in Philadelphia.

And now, one will see it again with the future American leader’s choice in picking Reverend Rick Warren to give the Invocation at the Inauguration. The pastor is a rising star in the Christian Evangelical world.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m highly supportive of Mr. Obama’s efforts to get our country together. This is despite the fact I’ve disagreed with some of his choices for his Cabinet such as Hillary Clinton, Larry Summers,Tom Vilsack, Janet Napolitano (D-AZ), Timothy F. Geithner, Tom Daschle, and Ray LaHood (R-Ill). The keeping on of Bush Crony Robert Gates did not strike my fancy as well.

But, for the sake of all decency, Mr. Warren being given a position of honor at the Inauguration is a slap in the face and a travesty to all that is right and justified in this society. The spiritual leader’s views of the GLBTQ community is quite derogatory and hateful. His pro-life stance is appalling and antiquated. Furthermore, his position on Prop. 8 distastefully shows his narrow-minded and rather boorish views in regards to extending humanity and decency to all sectors of society.

Mr. Obama publicly stated his reasons why out of all the progressive clergy in America he could have chosen, he settled with Mr. Warren. As a result, the President-Elect demonstrated his capacity to reconcile with the very people who have slandered him and his beliefs. It is, in essence, turning the other cheek.

If it were only that simple in this complex world.

No matter how enlightened, powerful and astute that some in the MSM perceive this invitation on one of the most important days in American culture and history, it is still a decision that is rather controversial and troublesome. With his ideas and actions, Mr. Warren attacks true equality and freedom in a thriving democracy. That is why this choice cannot be respected.

The President-Elect could have invited the spiritual leader to do anything in a variety of capacities other than appear on this noteworthy event in January. But to put the pastor of the California megachurch on the national stage is to give wider recognition of his negative views. Although America has prided itself on freedom of thought, there are times the basic civility and respect for human-kind outweighs the promotion of a closed-minded individual who hides behind his religion.

Camelot Might Return to A New York Senate Seat

December 5, 2008

Since Hillary Rodham Clinton has been tapped to fill the office of the Secretary of State, her old Senate seat in New York has been left open. Some of the names that had been floated about in the past consisted of Andrew Cuomo, former President Bill Clinton, Byron W. Brown and Robert F. Kennedy. As it stands, Clinton and Kennedy had turned down such propositions.

And then, a new name came across the way. Caroline Kennedy, a First daughter and tireless worker for many causes, has expressed interest in filling the seat once held by her late uncle, Robert F. Kennedy. Despite the criticism that Ms. Kennedy is immensely private and represents the privileged in a time of a dire economy, her consideration of Ms. Clinton’s old seat brings back a sense of historical nostalgia. Her possible ascension also brings to mind a different time in which the nation was held captivated by the charisma of her father, the late John F. Kennedy. During the era of the early sixties, people were inspired to work for the greater good for their country until the specter of assassination indelibly changed the United States to a darker, more cynical place. The deaths of Robert F. Kennedy and Dr. Rev. Martin Luther King brought this mind-set along. Watergate solidified it.

Governor David Patterson should consider Ms. Kennedy-Schlossberg for the seat. If given the green light, she would not only carry on the Kennedy brand of philanthropy and working for causes affecting the poor and disenfranchised; she would also bring prestige and respect back into American government after eight years laid waste to its ruin. In this fashion, she is wished all the luck in the world to be picked for this important office. It is of high hopes that if chosen, that she uses such a position to further carry the torch not only for her family, but to help implement the policies needed to put Americans back on their feet during these sordid times.

But there is yet another reason that must be pondered upon when dealing with this news regarding the possible choice of Ms. Kennedy-Schlossberg: her uncle, Massachusetts Senator Ted Kennedy, is at the waning years of his time in the Senate. Someone has to take up the mantle in Congress along with her cousin, Representative Patrick Kennedy (D.-RI).

The Nixon Tapes Shed Some Light On Another Dark Time In History

December 4, 2008

There’s been a lot a talk lately about the release of former President Richard Milhous Nixon’s tapes made in November and December of 1972. Aired in different places within the confines of the MSM, they shockingly paint a portrait of a man who was not only rather paranoid in many respects; the recordings convey a public figure who was rather adamant in maintaining control over everything–from setting policy to “taking care of those who opposed him.”

Until he resigned, Mr. Nixon became the epitome of what his successor, the late Gerald Ford, called “the imperial presidency”. In that guise, the Executive Branch superceded the separation of powers in the American government. In the end, the President considered himself as a supreme leader with little or no input from the Judiciary and Legislative branches.

Kinda sounds like someone else, does it not? 😉

What is more, is that hearing these snippets from Mr. Nixon’s time in the Oval Office not only give way to a complex picture of the man in the shadow of Watergate; it also provides insight into his decisions and mannerisms–some which explain why the disgraced American leader had one of the lowest approval ratings ever(24 %).

Well, that is, until President George W. Bush came along (19% and dropping).

Enjoy these excerpts from ABC News:

In the conversation with Kissinger, filled with long pauses, Nixon expressed fears that Congress would cut off funds for the Vietnam War.

Nixon: “We may be faced with that. So what do we do then, Henry?”

Kissinger: “Blame the Democrats.”

Kissinger went on to call the North Vietnamese Communists “filthy bastards.” He said the North Vietnamese told the Russians they think Nixon will cave in and reach a settlement before his second inauguration the following month.

This is what happened next as told on the same page as the previous part:

Kissinger added the North Vietnamese may be ready for a quick deal when they realize he is not caving in.

Nixon: “We can’t gamble on that.”

Kissinger: “It is a gamble which, if we lose, we will really be paralyzed.”

Both men sometimes avoided the word “bombing.” Instead, they talked of “the action.”

As Nixon said, “Let’s look at the action. We can’t have any doubts about it.”

[…]

The bombing was to include Hanoi and result in worldwide criticism of the United States as well as renewed anti-war protests at home.

Can we say that Mr. Kissinger might be a little perturbed right now by what’s been uncovered?