The Democratic leadership may be prepared to ride out the current storms over Caroline Kennedy and Rick Warren. That would be a mistake. This is a time to heal wounds, not create new ones.
If the Party wants to demonstrate a new and inclusive style, however, this is a real opportunity. Why not use some the principles of conflict resolution outlined in the U. S. Navy's conflict training program? They include: Think Before Reacting, Use Direct Communications, Look For Interests, Focus On the Future, and find Options for Mutual Gain.
Think Before Reacting
It's not hard to see the logic behind both the Warren and Kennedy decisions. And Washington leaders may be tempted to dismiss the current backlash as the shrill sound of the blogosphere. But does the Democratic Party really want to assume power with a wounded base? Before dismissing the objections, the leadership should study them.
Regarding Warren, the Obama team hopefully understands that the cries they're hearing from the LGBT community are cries of anguish. They've caused genuine pain with this decision, and they need to address it - not only because they need to unify the country, but because it's the right thing to do.
And as for Ms. Kennedy, she needs to understand that some of the opposition she's facing seems to be based on two genuine concerns. One is that she may not be not tough or experienced enough for the job. The other is that politics in this country is dominated by a tiny elite. She will remain under fire until she considers the merit of these arguments.
I have to think before reacting too, in the case of Ms. Kennedy's opponents. While I don't have strong feelings about her nomination, I've been offended at some of the blatantly sexist comments from people who oppose her - especially when those same people were rightfully outraged at sexist remarks about Hillary Clinton. And I've been baffled by Clinton supporters who insist that only someone who has previously run for office should be considered. Chuck Schumer and other Democratic leaders forced career politician Nita Lowey to step aside in New York's 2000 Democratic Senatorial primary. Lowey was considered a shoo-in until she was forced to yield to someone who, like Caroline Kennedy, had a famous last name and had never been a candidate.
But reflection makes it clear that there are valid emotions driving these comments, too - anger at our exclusionary politics and the desire for fair play. Some of the same reactions are behind Democratic resistance to Hillary Clinton's selection for the State Department, too (although I support her nomination.)
Use Direct Communications
Ms. Kennedy should immediately start taking questions from the press. And it might be a good idea if she sat down face to face with some of the people opposed to her nomination. That way she can address their concerns directly. She would also be demonstrating that she has some of the necessary qualifications for the job: the ability to take flak, and the willingness to parley with her opponents.
Regarding the Inauguration, the Obama team should consider making direct contact with members of the GLBT community and asking what can be done to make the situation better for them. If Rick Warren will sit down with gay and lesbian leaders, he should do that too. Best of all would be a sit-down with all interested parties.
Look For Common Interests
There are a number of shared interests at play here. Rick Warren has been highly effective in combating AIDS and has taken positions on civil unions that represent a step up from James Dobson. Yet he wants to inherit the Dobson mantle, so he's sent mixed messages at best. Gays and lesbians are being demonized in the evangelical community. Are there ways that Warren and GLBT leaders can work together - maybe in fighting workplace discrimination against gays? If they are to communicate effectively, however, Rev. Warren and other need to understand that civil rights are fundamental and non-negotiable.
Caroline Kennedy shares goals with many other progressives. She can use her communications strategy with the progressive community to outline those shared goals and develop a plan for reaching them. One already comes to mind (see below.)
Find Opportunities for Mutual Gain
Ms. Kennedy's backers argue that her fundraising ability makes her a good choice. That may be true, but it also illustrates a major flaw in our political system. So why doesn't Caroline Kennedy pledge that she will dedicate her public career to campaign finance reform if she becomes a Senator? And not just marginal reform, but full public funding of campaigns for higher office.
Regarding Rick Warren, why not invite one more minister to speak at the Inauguration? I have someone in mind: Rev. Gene Robinson. Gene Robinson is the openly gay Episcopal bishop whose appointment has caused a rift with anti-gay Third World Anglican communities. I'm not gay and can't speak for the community, but that might help. And if Rev. Robinson's impact on the Third World makes him too controversial, there are other gay clergy who could be asked.
One thing is certain: If this Inauguration is to be "inclusive," as we're being told, a little more "including" of the gay community is called for.
Focus On the Future
Regarding Rick Warren, it's clear by now that reconciliation and unification are part of President-elect Obama's personality. That's a plus in my book, not a minus, and I've defended him for it against others on the Left. But Ezra Klein gets it right when he says, regarding the invocation, that "the tolerance Obama is asking for ...is not from Warren. It's from the LGBT community, and women. He is asking them to be tolerant of Warren's intolerance." In his invocation, Rick Warren can reach out to those with whom he disagrees, just as Obama has reached out to him with this invitation.
Caroline Kennedy has been staking out a claim to education as her primary issue. That's a good start, but a broader agenda - and more active one-on-one engagement - might convince skeptics that she has a vision of the future they share. She needs to make some forward-looking pledges, and stick to them.
_________________
Can these conflict resolution principles heal the rifts in the Democratic Party? It's hard to know. But it would be inspiring to see them used. Everybody would win in the long run - and maybe sooner than that.
RJ Eskow blogs when he can at:
A Night Light
The Sentinel Effect: Healthcare Blog
Follow RJ Eskow on Twitter: www.twitter.com/rjeskow
They're still there. If less of them took as extreme a position you wouldn't have proposition 8 and it's imitators. Change of thought if it's going to happen at all depends on reducing the fear factor so they don't automatically vote for the next panderer of divisiveness that comes along. Ordinary citizens may be able to ignore large groups they don't agree with. Presidents of countries undergoing economic collapse don't have the same luxury if they want conditiond to improve.
And I support gay marriage, but your comparison to the KKK doesn't hold water.
While it is slower, a surer path would be to lobby, state by state, for a change in state law to allow civil unions (or marriage) with the full panoply of the rights and responsibilities of marriage, while the scientific community continues to gather definitive evidence that human sexuality is genetically programmed and therefore immutable.
Time is on the side of the GLBT community. Homophobia was close to universal when I was growing up. It isn't any longer, perhaps in part because the AIDS epidemic demonstrated that "they" were our children, our friends, our co-workers, our classmates -- not some scary, closeted "others." Eventually, and much sooner than anyone of my generation would have guessed, same-sex marriage will be legal throughout the US and the GLBT community will enjoy the equal equal rights guaranteed by the 14th Amendment. Getting there will require the wisdom to recognize friends and allies, rather than attacking them for being insufficiently ideologically pure.
Oh, the horror... THE HORROR!!!
Here's the quote: "Because membership in a church is an outgrowth of accepting the Lordship and leadership of Jesus in one’s life, someone unwilling to repent of their homosexual lifestyle would not be accepted at a member at Saddleback Church. That does not mean they cannot attend church – we hope they do! God’s Word has the power to change our lives."
You can visit, but you can't belong if you're gay. And, his church runs programs that try "cure" people of their homosexuality.
So....do not buy his routine. If he sounds like a homophobe, preaches like a homophobe and dictates organizational policy like a homophobe.....he's a homophobe. Don't let him off the hook.
I'm a registered Democrat (at least, I was). I notified the DNC that I was changing my party from Democrat to Independent, and the reason was because of Obama's selection of Warren for the inauguration. I then downloaded a registration form from my state's online voter registration - changed parties on the form - and mailed it. This may not be dramatic, but if enough of us do this, we'll certainly be counted.
One thing--Obama did invite another pastor who supports gay marriage to speak, Reverend Lowery, who is a hardcore progressive.
It seems we are suffering from a form of PTSD.
SCREW that. Mr. Obama blew it HUGELY and it will NOT be forgotten. Period.
Nobody is asking you to forget.
Peace my friend. There is no medicine better than that which Obama is prescribing for America and the World. When you bring warring factions to the table and you insist that they confront their prejudices, they soon learn that they are more alike than different.
Patience. It will all work out for the better. President Obama cannot, with any legitimacy, ask World Leaders to sit down with each other and resolves their differences if he is unwilling to do so at home. this methodology being employed by President Obama domesticlly has the additional objective of persuading International Warring factions to the table.
We need to take heed; assist, not resist, Change!
One Love
This is not a simple disagreement this is like asking blacks to stomach the KKK and Jews to stomach the nazis
All this whining is getting on my nerves, they are acting like children "do it my way or I will scream" GROW THE H$LL UP, the gay community has LARGER issues.
Yea Yea before someone gets on their high horse I've been fighting for gay rights for years. Currently we are helping two gay couples in FL adopt three infants in TX & CA by establishing residences so the adoptions then they will return home after 4-6 mths. By helping several women I know let gay couples adopt their kids, that these kids with the same sex parents should raise their child (we tend to focus on men as women can use in vitro)
EXACTLY.
INTOLERANCE is the key word here.
Main outlet of the INTOLERANCE in the US is from....get ready for it....,
THE FUNDAMENTALIST CHRISTIAN DOMINIONIST crowd with a MARTYR COMPLEX.
Have you EVER heard of a TOLERANT FUNDAMENTALIST EVANGELICAL? Didn't think so
Have you EVER heard of a TOLERANT FUNDAMENTALIST TALIBAN? Didn't think so.
There IS no "common ground" with FUNDAMENTALIST INTOLERANCE.
"Can't we just all git along?"
No.
That would be a fabulous idea. After all, "full public funding" means limiting the amount of money one's opponent can spend to challenge an incumbent Senator, in this case one with extraordinary name recognition. Nothing like using campaign finance "reform" to give yourself a huge advantage over someone who can't possibly spend enough money to even come close in terms of name recognition and political connections.
Same for contribution limits - the Kennedy name is worth how many millions of dollars in a campaign? Limit the amount of money your opponent can raise from each donor, and it's almost impossible to mount a credible challenge to you.
If campaign finance "reform" had been around in 1968, Gene McCarthy would be a footnote in New Hampshire Primary history, the guy that got anhilated by LBJ in his quixotic quest to challenge the sitting President of the United States. Instead, a few very wealthy liberals gave him a significant amount of money, allowing him to "win" New Hampshire and knock LBJ out of the race (technically, he narrowly lost, but it was enough of a blow to LBJ to force him out of the race).
Sean Parnell
President
Center for Competitive Politics
www.campaignfreedom.org
One of the saddest things I've witnessed in the last couple of months is the growing rift between Black and LGBT communities. I mean, White Gay men verbally attacking Black Gay men -- with the N-word, no less--because apparently, even in the Gay community, color comes first? Or do we really all look alike?
I'm suprised that no-ne is scream to impeach Mr. Obama.
Being Black, Female, Lesbian and freakin' poor-- I think I'll wait 'till sanity returns. I've had enough.