Preachers and Senators

Apparently a lot of liberals (a camp I proudly place myself in) are more than a little annoyed with our Pres-to-be for asking evangelical preacher Rick Warren to lead the invocation at his Inaugural. I won’t lie to you; when I initially heard about it, I was a bit miffed myself. The symbolism of having a guy who is determinedly anti-gay and anti-choice handed the honor of blessing this historic moment is discomfiting, at best. I would have expected a Jessie Jackson-type or another prominent African American icon to have been selected. After some consideration and, more precisely, after hearing from Obama himself about the selection, my faith in this guy’s vision and leadership is even further reinforced. First of all, the Reverend Joseph Lowry, considered by many to be the current dean of the Civil Rights movement, will also offer a blessing during the events. But more important was To Be’s simple explanation; that is, we have to push ourselves out of our narrow comfort zones and seek areas of agreement rather than focus continually on what divides us. Rick Warren, while holding views on some topics which I find patently abominable, is also known for his commitment to fighting AIDS and advocating for personal responsibility and community involvement. Allowing him to have a prominent part in this historic event not only sends a message of inclusion to those on the right, but it reminds folks like me that we aren’t going to solve any of the enormous problems we face unless we can find ways to work together. Moreover, his presence does nothing to change mine – or Barack Obama’s, I suspect – commitment and support for rights for gays and women. This is the same guy who promised us that he would use diplomacy ahead of warfare when dealing with our enemies, so what’s so surprising about praying with a fellow American with whom he happens to disagree on some serious issues?

For what it’s worth, I wouldn’t have gone with Aretha, either, but there you go.

Another big cause of debate this week has been Caroline Kennedy’s foray into the political scene with her announcement that she would like to be appointed as Hillary Clinton’s replacement in the Senate. I’m trying to do some self-reflection to understand why I’m so blatantly gung-ho in favor of the idea. It can’t be completely about the emblematic vision of her six-yr-old self standing next to her mother with her white hair bow and classic wool coat as President Kennedy’s funeral procession went by, can it? Her own grown up gracefulness, while so compelling, is hardly the stuff great Senators are made of, is it? And, after all, from one who went with Obama over Clinton during the primaries (after the non-reality of a Kucinich presidency finally took hold) primarily because Obama was not a legacy or “dynasty” candidate; I have to cop to some inconsistency. After all, Ms. Kennedy holds a law degree, is a respected and competent fund-raiser, published author and certainly has benefitted from growing up around some of the most legendary politicians of our lifetime. Seemingly, she’s learned something. And, unless I’m forgetting something, I’m not sure there was an equivalent furor when her late younger (and decidedly less accomplished) brother was being encouraged to seek office, with or without Daryl Hannah on his arm. And, let’s not even bring up the Cousin-ater in California. Ah, Sexism isn’t dead. In any event, I’m not sure why – and I’m not a New Yorker anyway – but I rather hope we see another woman from an ex-President’s family in the Senate next year.

NOT Jenna Bush, by the way.