To put it another way Monica, could you blame Obama, at this point for saying "a pox on all your houses both Gay and Fundy" I have a country to run, a economy to save, a prison in Cuba to close and wars to end. Get waaay in the back of the bus.

If you want fairness treat him fairly in return.

Your soldier is showing. :)

Oh, and Warren remains a grossly inappropriate and unacceptable choice.

Having a gay cleric praying does not remove the taint of Warren's association with Akinola and his advocacy of international crime.

Alcohol, before voting? I think the noise may have made a different, but, I'm still erroring on the side of, "I don't fucking think so." I'm adding this to the list of questions I'll be asking God after I am pushing up daisies, Number 6855.

"Reluctant voter." I like that.

That's right, Rebecca - and it also shows how well the Obama camp know their cheerleaders.

Obama knows he can rely upon the arrogance and guile of his sycophants to come his defense when necessary. Don't look behind the curtain!

Obedience pays, eh? Only for fascists and people that don't know history.

Is this a spin on "and he who is last shall be first?"

This is what you just said about Michael Savage:

If we get four more categories covered, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, and disability, then when people like Savage opens his mouth to spew his garbage, the outrage will be based more on the US government saying you shouldn't show hatred toward these people. It will not happen over night, but it's a start. It will, unfortunately happen long after Savage is gone and people become tired of pissing on his grave.

Why does Michael Savage deserve outrage but not Rick Warren? If anything, Rick Warren will have a wider forum.

The "freedom of speech" defense of Rick Warren has to be one of the silliest arguments made this past year (not far from with "Vote McCain for his health care plan!"). He's sold millions of books. He goes on TV, radio, print media whenever he wants. He preaches at a huge mega-church every week. He's not silent.

I think that's part of the issue here, though. Many people are loathe to criticize people who are rich, famous, or powerful if it's been accepted by others that they're "respectable." Warren's been treated like that, unlike Robertson or Dobson or Savage, so it's not fashionable to disagree with him. I get that. But I don't think that's an excuse to let him off the hook.

I am not ashamed to want to deny a man advocating violations of Hague IV a place at the front and centre of the inauguration, Monica. If I were ashamed to make my stand, I would be unworthy to advocate on behalf of the victims of men like Warren.

Freedom of speech, even hate speech is as real as it gets. The Constitution is not a cafeteria, where you get to pick what parts you like and who gets them, just like the Religious Right's habit of picking and choosing the parts of the Bible they like and what parts to ignore. Integrity is important. Where's yours?

Bush was probably the worst ’lesser evil’ that’s befallen us since Lyndon Johnson. And with Nixon and Clinton in the running that’s saying something. Bush is inarticulate and was a crackhead. He chose the rich boys way out of military service – he deserted. And because his family was rich and powerful he got away with it.

But that's not why I despise George Bush. I detest him because he invaded and occupies Iraq and murdered over a million Iraqis and as of today 4226 GIs. Obama will continue that, and continue menacing Iran, Syria and Pakistan and plans to ramp up the occupation forces in Afghanistan, killing more civilians. So there’s no difference there. None at all.

Bush is in favor of bailouts for the rich and imposing austerity on working people. So, as the left predicted, is Obama. Both supported the myriad handouts to the rich to recoup their losses after their economic looting put us on the road to a depression. And both agreed that autoworkers should endure speedups, givebacks, wage cuts and benefits to pay for the incompetence of management to get bridge loans to let GM and Chrysler survive. Again, no differences.

Bush is a bigot who runs on a platform opposed to same sex marriage and pandered to bigot preachers endlessly to cultivate their votes, just like Clinton did before him. So does Obama, and he’s at least as good at it as Karl Rove. Again, no differences.

Being sober and articulate are not litmus tests for being a successful president. For sure he’ll make the rich richer, make the murder machine happy and grease the profits of the military industrial complex, and he’ll pander to scum like Warren till the cows come home. And Democrats will call that ‘political realism’. But in the real world that’s a disaster for the GLBT communities, working people and world peace.

Correction, Polar: Gene Robinson will NOT be speaking on Inauguration Day.

I could not disagree more, Monica. Both are equally important. Speaking as a trans job seeker myself, I know that as the economy worsens so does a transperson's chances of being hired. The job front for transpeople has been awful since I've been working as an out transwoman (since '97), even in the most progressive areas of the country, and is rapidly getting worse.

I don't believe that these are separate issues but rather branches of the same tree. My ability to be able to secure and maintain employment is no less urgent than that of any other American and until an inclusive ENDA is passed (and probably for some time after that) trans and visibly gender-variant job seekers will continue to be at a disadvantage in the job market.

To do as you suggest, Monica, would be to look the other way as our own community's suffering increases exponentially, as more and more jobs disappear and fewer and fewer transpeople are able to maintain employment.

I'm sorry but that's just not a trade-off I'm willing to make. None of us should be. No one who's paid attention to the history here should be willing to do so.

We are all Americans and I, for one, am not willing to wait around quietly and patiently while others are taken care of. We voted to change that kind of thinking from our government, and we were successful in doing so. It's time to expect that change to happen as promised, not happily move to the back of (or under) the bus again.

Nice to see people debating the Warren/Robinson issue using long-dead Presidents from the middle 20th Century.

Helms contempt for history and it's lessons is why she gets it wrong all the time.

Helms ignores history because it helps her ignore why Obama is following the same low road as Clinton, who also pandered to bigots and gave us DOMA and DADT. She has to learn, but probably never will, that “People are trapped in history and history is trapped in them“, at least according to to James Baldwin. And that Those who cannot remember the past are doomed to repeat it., as George Santayana said.

So for Helms and all those Democrats who insist on ignoring history there’s this little reminder…” When the missionaries came to Africa they had the Bible and we had the land. They said "Let us pray." We closed our eyes. When we opened them we had the Bible and they had the land. remembers Desmond Tutu.

As I noted above, Susan, I expect those disparities to continue for a while after ENDA's passage, just as was the case for African-Americans once the Civil Rights of 1964 passed into law. The point is that until we have that law on the books it's doubtful that things will get substantially better.

ENDA is by no means a cure-all, but it is an important step toward the goal of equality and fairness in the workplace for Americans.

We've waited a long time and we will continue waiting once ENDA becomes law. The real question here is whether that wait will be shortened by the passage of a fully inclusive ENDA. Personally, I believe it will be.

In addition, ENDA will send a clear message that discriminating against LGBT people in the workplace is not only morally wrong, but illegal under the laws of our country. I believe that's an important message to send and long overdue.