There's a saying in the 12 Step programs about being sick and tired of being sick and tired.
It's at this point -- generally your own personal version of rock bottom -- that you surrender and admit something has been screwing up your life.
Well -- I guess that's where I am now. I'm sick and tired of hope.
I wanted to explain this to Linda Douglass, Obama's heavy-duty spokesperson, when she called unexpectedly and unsolicited at 7:30 Friday morning. But I was taken aback. When she started to identify herself, I stopped her and said, "I know who you are. I remember you from your time as a reporter here in L.A." - before CBS News moved her to Washington to cover the Justice Department. I was once a small time producer at CBS News and admired Douglass' journalistic talent.
But Linda did not call to chat about our different career paths. She called me as the news editor of LA's two largest LGBT publications -- IN Los Angeles and Frontiers magazines -- to talk about evangelist Rick Warren, who President-Elect Barack Obama selected to deliver the Inauguration Invocation. In case you haven't heard, there's been something of a firestorm from LGBTs over the choice.
Obama chose Warren, Linda said, primarily because Obama "has a strong belief in seeking common ground with those people with whom he disagrees on important issues" so difficult discussions can be conducted with civility. Obama admires Warren's efforts on behalf of the poor and people with HIV/AIDS and climate change, she said, but he disagrees with Warren on issues involving the LGBT community, women's reproductive rights, and other issues.
The goal, Linda said, was to make this "the most open and inclusive Inauguration in history, including all points of view." The choice of Warren "was about his seeking common ground with somebody who is trying to be a voice of moderation" to others in the Christian Evangelical movement and beyond through his book "The Purpose Driven Life."
"This is a choice that reflects these steps toward inclusiveness," Linda said, adding that the Inaugural program is being rolled out very slowly and by the end, the Big Picture will be revealed as including a "very diverse, inclusive set of people" and an environment that reinforces the belief that "we're stronger when we're united. That's the goal."
Linda urged me to urge my LGBT readers to look at Obama's Warren choice in the context of "the Big Picture -- a set of goals that have to do with making sure every voice is heard and making possible progress" by resolving those differences that "get in the way of doing what is right for all the people. There is no reason to fear that [Obama's] commitment to equality for gay and lesbian people is going to waver."
Linda noted Obama's "own strong belief in the importance of equality and the importance of doing away with discrimination." Look at the fact that on Election Night Obama "gave a firm shout-out to gays and lesbians that was heard all around the world," Linda said, as well as his strong record on LGBT issues, including his opposition to Prop 8 (the California amendment that stripped marriage rights from lesbian and gay couples).
Linda noted that civil rights icon Rev. Dr. Joseph E. Lowery has received "short shrift" as the person doing the Benediction. He's an "outspoken champion of LGBT issues - one of the really, really strong voices" and he's "at the other end of the program."
Yes, thank God.
But Linda, I said, the Inauguration isn't a town hall meeting where different policy discussions can be hashed out. This is a hugely important moment when you say, "this is what we stand for" -- and with no openly gay person on the podium -- or in his Cabinet - Warren's pick is a devastating kick in the solar plexis.
Was Obama aware that in an interview with Beliefnet Rick Warren compared same sex marriage to incest and pedophilia? "I don't know if he was aware of any specific thing," Linda said. But he is aware of his disagreements and Obama is a "strong, strong champion" of LGBT rights who favors repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and will sign federal hate crime legislation.
Look at the Big Picture.
But it's hard to look at the Big Picture when you're doubled over with pain.
I brought up Melissa Etheridge's question to Hillary Clinton during the
Logo/Human Rights Campaign debate last year - when Melissa basically asked Hillary how can we trust you when we had such high hopes with Bill Clinton and he threw us under the bus?
Linda said she's been listening to a lot of pain.
I can imagine. I don't think the Obama folks were quite prepared for the reaction. And I KNOW LGBT folks were not prepared for the sucker-punch -- especially after having our legitimate, fundamental right to marry stripped from us by a simple majority of California voters.
But maybe the outrage has done some good. Maybe Obama will finally "see" us -- not as a motley crew with a common issue -- but as real flesh and blood human beings who get hurt and angry with good reason -- we are the last minority against whom it is acceptable to discriminate.
I was in the room in 1991 -- before there were medications to "manage" HIV/AIDS - when candidate Bill Clinton went off script and said to a theater full of angry and pained gays and people with AIDS, "I have a vision and you're a part of it." Even without close advisors David Mixner or Bob Hattoy whispering in his ear - Clinton wanted and sought and got the LGBT/PWA vote -- because things were soooo bad under Reagan/Bush. We were traumatized -- experiencing life and death daily like water gushing through clenched fists.
Clinton included us in the Inauguration -- gay families on the family float -- panels from the AIDS Quilt -- a LGBT viewing corner along the parade route -- meetings between LGBT and AIDS activists with transition team members -- including Hattoy -- who spoke at the Democratic National Convention, and Tim Westmoreland.
And then, as everyone knows -- in the face of Sam Nunn and threats to defeat every piece of legislation if he executed his promise to lift the ban on gays serving openly in the military -- Clinton threw us under the bus and created the "compromise" policy "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" with the Defense of Marriage Act following not far behind. But everyone knew beforehand that Clinton was more conservative than LGBTs and people with AIDS wanted.
But at least Clinton saw us. He seemed to understand our lot as American exiles living in America and he "felt our pain."
So I was as moved by Maya Angelou's Inauguration poem for Clinton, "On the Pulse of Morning," as I was when I heard JFK's Inauguration speech as a child. The possibility of hope filled the air -- a marrow-bone belief that one day we will see each other and celebrate our differences with civility.
I think of Maya Angelou everyday as I walk my dogs and nod to my neighbors, "good morning." For a moment, it all rushes back -- that positive possibility of a better world, starting one to one.
That's what Obama promised. Yes, together we can change America. That's why the brilliant gay author and legal scholar Tobias Wolff flew across the country on his own dime defending Obama and asking for a second chance after antigay Gospel singer Donnie McClurkin headlined Obama's "Gospel Tour." Wolff promised that henceforth no antigay people would speak for Obama.
So when it was revealed that Obama picked Rick Warren to deliver the Inaugural Invocation -- I felt sucker-punched. My mind drifted to the opening paragraph of the famous book by Ralph Ellison -- "Invisible Man."
"I am an invisible man. No, I am not a spook like those who haunted Edgar Allan Poe; nor am I one of your Hollywood-movie ectoplasms. I am a man of substance, of flesh and bone, fiber and liquids =- and I might even be said to possess a mind. I am invisible, understand, simply because people refuse to see me."
At the end of the book, Ellison writes: "Perhaps, on the lower frequencies, I speak for you."
I finally got it.
It's not that Obama thinks of this as a "Sister Souljah" moment as I first thought. The fact is -- Obama doesn't think of us at all. The gays who might be near him are staffers who happen to be gay and for whom being gay is apparently not an issue. He doesn't see them as gay -- and therefore he doesn't see us at all.
We are not a substantive part of his vision.
What to do? Well, for one -- expect nothing from this new president for whom we are a nuisance, given how huge are his priorities. Let the national organizations push to their hearts content. But the real work on securing our equality with other American citizens will be done on the ground -- locally, statewide and through grassroots networking and coalition building. Through the Victory Fund and electing our own. Through the political clubs and electing delegates to rise up through the ranks to start running the parties. There are as many options as there are creative imaginations among us. Let us be the visionaries. At least we see each other.
Now that's a cause for hope.
Prejudice against foreigners, men and atheists is also acceptable (speaking as someone who is all those things).
I don't normally say this, but that was a beautiful diary.
We are one of the last, but not the last. And if we every do win equal rights, they'll move on to someone else.
Right now Rick Warren is embarrassed. He scrubbed the anti-gay statements from his church web site. Recently, Melissa Etheridge's article on her friendly contact with Warren surfaced. The leftward crabwalk would never have happened without the LGBT backlash, and the ensuing sympathy/empathy from everyone not locked in to Jerry Falwell ideology.
Obama, Axelrod, Plouffe and company are the most astute politicos in a generation. They knew the backlash would come, and they knew it would serve the LGBT agenda. Having Warren do the invocation is one of the most clever strategic moves I've ever seen. It is part of a visionary plan, truly the work of a unifying President.
Consider what would happen if the selected minister was openly gay or lesbian, and was known for her or his aggressively liberal agenda. Paroxysms of joy in the LGBT community, yes, and approval from progressives like me. But the backlash in the non-progressive community would be overwhelming, and would permanently damage Obama's ablity to be a healer and a unifier.
The short term disappointment of an offended people is understandable. But think the matter through before you react to anything Obama does. It will always be more complex than it appears, and it will always serve the goal of equality and justice for all people.
It is far more likely this unfolded because LGBT issues are at the bottom of his list, as was laid out in this article. He hasn't tried to explain or shape this, he is just ignoring it hopes it goes away. No one was expected him to honor right wing preachers above so many others who actually supported him. There has been no backlash from the right against lowery, because this is what everyone expected, a progressive person of faith at the inauguration. He could have picked desmond tutu, or the dalai lama, or countless non-political pastors, rather than someone like warren. How is Obama a healer when he has so grievously wounded so many in this fashion.
Regrettably, that's understandable too. If your life has been unfairly impacted for a very long time, by people who are anything but fair and rational, why would you not be outraged. Why would you not abandon the President-elect who is the best hope since JFK.
We are not living in a time or in a nation where the Gestapo or the KGB comes to the door and takes away entire families. The discrimination is reprehensible--I and people like me have stood against it all our lives, and I'm 56. But this country is a better place, even if change comes more slowly than it rightly should.
It is not blind faith. Ten Presidents have performed their work on my watch, and only the second and the upcoming eleventh meet the gold standard in my opinion.
Mark my word: Obama will deliver the goods across the board. His record will not be perferct, nor will he completely satisfy any niche group (including mine, aging hippie males with ponytails). But he'll do the best anyone could do. Most especially for LGBT, climate, pollution, energy, diplomacy, and the lot.
And he'll do it the same way he did during his Harvard Review days. He'll take more heat from the left than from the right.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/melissa-etheridge/the-choice-is-ours-now_b_152947.html
The light of Obama was so bright perhaps because it was so improbable just a few months back. But on election day, we were deprived not only of our rights here in California, but as importantly, we were deprived of the joy we so desperately craved and looked forward too.
Unfortunately, inauguration day will not be any different.
Is it naive of me to think that Obama will do right with us? Is it naive of me to wait for the day when he will tell the Rick Warrens that we don't have to agree on the issue of gay marriage, but we can still hold hands and agree that all are equal under our constitution.
As a common theme with many, it's all or nothing...either someone sees this your way, with your passion, or they are the enemy. YOU have not tolerance or understanding of anyone else's position, opinions, views, or thoughts. No ability or even interest in trying to understand where someone else MIGHT be coming from...just assumptions of nothing but the worst.
this one laid it out very well.. very thoughtful.
thank you.
(Of course, Rick Warren is also anti-choice, but for some reason, that part of it does not seem critical.)
Barack Obama is not a spiritual leader. But this year, to be wise Obama must reflect spiritually, not politically, on the issue of Rick Warren.
The hasty choice of Warren perhaps makes political sense, but it does not make pastoral sense, and this inauguration is both a political and a pastoral occasion.
Warren has led important work around the world, but his words and actions of exclusion based on sexual orientation have not honored the human dignity of every American. If one of the great sacred dimensions of meaning of this national moment is the healing of the pain of bigotry, Warren cannot be an appropriate choice for this American moment without inverting the very meaning of a moment of history.
This invocation must be delivered by a spiritual leader who can authentically invoke the prayer Obama’s election incarnates: a prayer for the end of bigotry. Fortunately there are many leaders of religious faith in the world who can do this authentically: Desmond Tutu and the Dalai Llama are two who come to mind.
I hope our President will listen for the hurt and disappointment beneath the anger being expressed over Warren’s selection. I believe it is anger over loss - loss of what this day could have meant.
Of course it is not too late to choose an appropriate world spiritual leader beyond reproach.