No,
Thank the heavens, I am not going to go on about having a viable local TV station here in Buffalo. No, that would be much to crass and I am sure the Buffalo Rising readerhip has already contemplated how to get millions to move here with the finest in public access. Rather, a moment to highlight some of the finest in local TV adverts.
John Waters. I understand your work now!
rap music. It sells clothing. Dinette sets? Not so much.
That crap.. it just boggles the mind
Already I want to move millions to Rockingham county!
James's Journal
My Podcast Link
01/24/2009 20:45 #47513
Local Television is the best Television01/24/2009 01:39 #47504
I WANNA GO!I love filth.
Too bad I will be a good puritan that weekend.
Too bad I will be a good puritan that weekend.
paul - 01/25/09 01:18
JOhnny Hazzard is so hot!
JOhnny Hazzard is so hot!
01/21/2009 17:34 #47475
SOS poolHey everyone,
Looks like our beloved Senator Clinton was just confirmed by the Senate as Secretary of State. So now the ball is in Gov. Patterson's court. Who will he appoint?
Names like Caroline Kennedy and Andrew Cuomo have been circulating from the beginning. But people like Brian Higgins and Byron Brown have been getting focus here.
Who do you think is going to get the appointment?
Patterson is not very popular right now. And if his budget slices and dices every program he is going to be even less popular. He very well may face a primary challenger next year and Andrew Cuomo is just the man to do it. Appointing him would take Patterson's biggest challenger out of the game possibly.
The other way he could play the popularity game is to appoint Kennedy. The world adores a Kennedy and having an ally like her in the Senate could mean both a boost in popularity and a fund raising machine in Washington who owes Patterson big time.
I would like Higgins to get it, but I doubt he will.
I would not like Brown to get it, and I doubt he will.
Kirsten Gillibrand is a congresswoman from just outside Albany. She is white, she is a woman, and she is marginally upstate (Albany is its own economic and cultural morass that has issues different than the burnt out hulls of Buffalo/Rochester/Syracuse). In political games things like race and gender are a big deal. She would be a good choice, and an ideal compromise candidate.
So, throw your imaginary money on the table. Who are you betting for?
My Monopoly money is on Gillibrand. Why? Because this is the season of optimism in the face of a gathering storm.
Looks like our beloved Senator Clinton was just confirmed by the Senate as Secretary of State. So now the ball is in Gov. Patterson's court. Who will he appoint?
Names like Caroline Kennedy and Andrew Cuomo have been circulating from the beginning. But people like Brian Higgins and Byron Brown have been getting focus here.
Who do you think is going to get the appointment?
Patterson is not very popular right now. And if his budget slices and dices every program he is going to be even less popular. He very well may face a primary challenger next year and Andrew Cuomo is just the man to do it. Appointing him would take Patterson's biggest challenger out of the game possibly.
The other way he could play the popularity game is to appoint Kennedy. The world adores a Kennedy and having an ally like her in the Senate could mean both a boost in popularity and a fund raising machine in Washington who owes Patterson big time.
I would like Higgins to get it, but I doubt he will.
I would not like Brown to get it, and I doubt he will.
Kirsten Gillibrand is a congresswoman from just outside Albany. She is white, she is a woman, and she is marginally upstate (Albany is its own economic and cultural morass that has issues different than the burnt out hulls of Buffalo/Rochester/Syracuse). In political games things like race and gender are a big deal. She would be a good choice, and an ideal compromise candidate.
So, throw your imaginary money on the table. Who are you betting for?
My Monopoly money is on Gillibrand. Why? Because this is the season of optimism in the face of a gathering storm.
museumchick - 01/22/09 12:24
My money is still on Fran Drescher.
My money is still on Fran Drescher.
jim - 01/21/09 20:00
I'd like to submit my name for consideration. Not too late I hope.
I'd like to submit my name for consideration. Not too late I hope.
james - 01/21/09 19:28
Bloomberg is a registered independent, so I don't think he would be getting the nod (though I would be perfectly happy if he did).
Oh man, I was be pleased as punch if she did.
Bloomberg is a registered independent, so I don't think he would be getting the nod (though I would be perfectly happy if he did).
Oh man, I was be pleased as punch if she did.
jason - 01/21/09 19:25
Apparently according to some hot off the press news, Caroline withdrew herself from consideration.
Apparently according to some hot off the press news, Caroline withdrew herself from consideration.
metalpeter - 01/21/09 19:24
How about Bloomberg the Mayor of New York, not sure if he is in the running but that is my guess.
How about Bloomberg the Mayor of New York, not sure if he is in the running but that is my guess.
01/20/2009 12:58 #47460
What I learned from the inauguration1) It is a strange day when you feel bad for Cheney
2) Aretha Franklin still has it and she isn't ever going to let it go
3) Rick Warren has such a gay beard, and I am not talking about his wife.
4) I now know why so many people like Rick Warren: he is an idiot
5) Poetry can still alienate, uninspre, and take far too much time.
6) John Williams, please stop. Just. Please.
7) Obama made the first shout out to atheists at an inauguration.
8) Jospeph Lowery's benediction was so good even non-believers gotta shout "amen!".
2) Aretha Franklin still has it and she isn't ever going to let it go
3) Rick Warren has such a gay beard, and I am not talking about his wife.
4) I now know why so many people like Rick Warren: he is an idiot
5) Poetry can still alienate, uninspre, and take far too much time.
6) John Williams, please stop. Just. Please.
7) Obama made the first shout out to atheists at an inauguration.
8) Jospeph Lowery's benediction was so good even non-believers gotta shout "amen!".
james - 01/20/09 23:08
I agree Drew. I did not find either to be divisive, I just didn't care for Warren.
I agree Drew. I did not find either to be divisive, I just didn't care for Warren.
drew - 01/20/09 22:57
Just for the record, I find neither divisive. I have no problem calling white people do what's right. Sure, other people have done wrong, too, but if we whites started acting seriously concerned with justice, then America would be about a million times better. I know we've come a long way, but I can see clearly that we have a long way to go. I know for a fact that I have all kinds of privilege that I would not have were I born into a black family. Can it be overcome? Of course (see: the president) but I am neither as smart nor as hard working as he is. Probably the main factor in me being where I am is my parents, and for them, their parents. For many people in this country, their grandparents didn't get a shot at college education.
The playing field is more level than it has ever been, but a lot of people still get a giant head start.
Just for the record, I find neither divisive. I have no problem calling white people do what's right. Sure, other people have done wrong, too, but if we whites started acting seriously concerned with justice, then America would be about a million times better. I know we've come a long way, but I can see clearly that we have a long way to go. I know for a fact that I have all kinds of privilege that I would not have were I born into a black family. Can it be overcome? Of course (see: the president) but I am neither as smart nor as hard working as he is. Probably the main factor in me being where I am is my parents, and for them, their parents. For many people in this country, their grandparents didn't get a shot at college education.
The playing field is more level than it has ever been, but a lot of people still get a giant head start.
joshua - 01/20/09 19:52
(e:james) - what can I say? He's a Christian preacher and he wasn't going to stick to generic terms. Find me *even one* inaugural invocation that didn't invoke God and/or Jesus, or possibly both of them at the same time. Take a look at Billy Graham's invocation for Bill Clinton for some proper historical context. I think you'll probably be more offended with what Graham said but I could be mistaken. Barack Obama invoked God seven times during his speech this afternoon. Are you going to crucify him for it (tee hee) because he didn't refer to "the creator?"
So we can all avoid disappointment in the future - chances are the next inaugural invocation, and almost all of them in our lifetime, will involve a Christian preacher that will invoke God and possibly even Jesus directly.
What Lowery said, beyond doubt, was absolutely, 100% racist. (e:drew) I didn't expect you to think what he said was racist because you didn't think anything Rev. Wright was a racist, lol. You think it was untrue, I think it was a shocking and insulting thing to say, and was BY FAR the most divisive thing said during the inauguration. And, it was patently untrue - why? Because we don't live in the Rosa Parks era, and that is exactly what he was trying to evoke. Race baiters have no place in our society anymore. Does racism exist? Of course. But I will ridicule any attempt to suggest that the condition we're in is even close to what Lowery described, because the truth is that it is not.
This is a case of imagined divisiveness vs. quite authentic, real and blatant divisiveness. Rick Warren didn't speak one divisive word during the invocation and Lowery did so egregiously - and we're debating the possibility of Rick Warren's invocation being divisive because he invoked God and Jesus directly? This isn't even a contest, guys!
(e:james) - what can I say? He's a Christian preacher and he wasn't going to stick to generic terms. Find me *even one* inaugural invocation that didn't invoke God and/or Jesus, or possibly both of them at the same time. Take a look at Billy Graham's invocation for Bill Clinton for some proper historical context. I think you'll probably be more offended with what Graham said but I could be mistaken. Barack Obama invoked God seven times during his speech this afternoon. Are you going to crucify him for it (tee hee) because he didn't refer to "the creator?"
So we can all avoid disappointment in the future - chances are the next inaugural invocation, and almost all of them in our lifetime, will involve a Christian preacher that will invoke God and possibly even Jesus directly.
What Lowery said, beyond doubt, was absolutely, 100% racist. (e:drew) I didn't expect you to think what he said was racist because you didn't think anything Rev. Wright was a racist, lol. You think it was untrue, I think it was a shocking and insulting thing to say, and was BY FAR the most divisive thing said during the inauguration. And, it was patently untrue - why? Because we don't live in the Rosa Parks era, and that is exactly what he was trying to evoke. Race baiters have no place in our society anymore. Does racism exist? Of course. But I will ridicule any attempt to suggest that the condition we're in is even close to what Lowery described, because the truth is that it is not.
This is a case of imagined divisiveness vs. quite authentic, real and blatant divisiveness. Rick Warren didn't speak one divisive word during the invocation and Lowery did so egregiously - and we're debating the possibility of Rick Warren's invocation being divisive because he invoked God and Jesus directly? This isn't even a contest, guys!
jason - 01/20/09 18:42
I'm going to admit to you all I had absolutely no problem with anything Rick Warren said today. He was folksy in comparison to Billy Graham. It was basically a nice invocation and I'm not going to nitpick the guy.
I'm going to admit to you all I had absolutely no problem with anything Rick Warren said today. He was folksy in comparison to Billy Graham. It was basically a nice invocation and I'm not going to nitpick the guy.
james - 01/20/09 18:28
With all due respect you don't understand the purpose and the scope of an invocation.
I did not say he had to call on specific deities by name. I said he should stick with the generic terms. That is inclusive and respectful of everyone's beliefs.
And blacks are not asked to sit in the back? Racism doesn't exist anymore you are saying. Really? Really?
With all due respect you don't understand the purpose and the scope of an invocation.
I did not say he had to call on specific deities by name. I said he should stick with the generic terms. That is inclusive and respectful of everyone's beliefs.
And blacks are not asked to sit in the back? Racism doesn't exist anymore you are saying. Really? Really?
drew - 01/20/09 18:26
While there are no rules forcing blacks to the backs of busses, discrimination and racism are still very real, even if it isn't so in the white house. I don't think that what Lowery said was either racist or untrue.
While there are no rules forcing blacks to the backs of busses, discrimination and racism are still very real, even if it isn't so in the white house. I don't think that what Lowery said was either racist or untrue.
joshua - 01/20/09 18:17
Lol - actually (e:james) if you look at my first comment again you'll see that I never pointed you out, explicitly or implicitly. Different story for the second comment, where I was explicitly talking to the "you" you. Of course I noticed you mentioned you aren't a Rick Warren hater. I'll take you at your word, although this is similar to me saying "I'm not an Obama hater." You don't hate him but you obviously don't support him.
Otherwise, all I can really say is that you clearly were wishing for something other than an invocation. What you are/were asking for isn't an invocation. During an invocation you don't invoke "more than God" or "the sum of our nation's history." Look, with all due respect - you're not understanding the purpose and the scope of an invocation.
"Warren failed when he called Jesus by name exclusively. Obama was able to call attention to Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, atheists and by extension all other faiths. Warren just named Jesus."
Obama is not an ordained Christian minister and Warren is, and he's an evangelical at that. What exactly did you expect? For him to have not mentioned Jesus would have been irrational and ridiculous. Not only that, but it has been done before by other ministers during inaugurations. Why the stink now? To think that a Christian minister, during an invocation, would invoke Hindu and Muslim deities is silly, (e:james). There really isn't anywhere else to go with this at this point.
Look, this is the bottom line. This sort of thing is a ginned up quasi-scandal that only a scant minority are bothering to discuss. It was an invocation not much unlike others that have occurred during inaugurations. Being mad that a Christian mentioned Jesus while giving an invocation is hilarious to me because of its sheer absurdity.
As for Lowery -
" 'Lord, in the memory of all the saints who from their labors rest, and in the joy of a new beginning, we ask you to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to get in back, when brown can stick around... when the red man can get ahead, man; and when white will embrace what is right. That all those who do justice and love mercy say Amen. Say Amen'"
This is shockingly racist, although I can perfectly understand how liberals would find this acceptable. This is 1960's civil rights lingo that isn't applicable any more. We don't live in a country where "blacks are asked to sit in back," and we certainly live in a country where "brown can stick around" etc. This preacher, while I'm sure is a fine man, was telling a lie and propagating racist division in this country even further by saying something like this. Rather than make an assumption I'll just ask - is the reason why you liked Lowery but not Warren ideological? Otherwise it makes no sense as to why you'd laud this guy and lampoon Warren.
Lol - actually (e:james) if you look at my first comment again you'll see that I never pointed you out, explicitly or implicitly. Different story for the second comment, where I was explicitly talking to the "you" you. Of course I noticed you mentioned you aren't a Rick Warren hater. I'll take you at your word, although this is similar to me saying "I'm not an Obama hater." You don't hate him but you obviously don't support him.
Otherwise, all I can really say is that you clearly were wishing for something other than an invocation. What you are/were asking for isn't an invocation. During an invocation you don't invoke "more than God" or "the sum of our nation's history." Look, with all due respect - you're not understanding the purpose and the scope of an invocation.
"Warren failed when he called Jesus by name exclusively. Obama was able to call attention to Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, atheists and by extension all other faiths. Warren just named Jesus."
Obama is not an ordained Christian minister and Warren is, and he's an evangelical at that. What exactly did you expect? For him to have not mentioned Jesus would have been irrational and ridiculous. Not only that, but it has been done before by other ministers during inaugurations. Why the stink now? To think that a Christian minister, during an invocation, would invoke Hindu and Muslim deities is silly, (e:james). There really isn't anywhere else to go with this at this point.
Look, this is the bottom line. This sort of thing is a ginned up quasi-scandal that only a scant minority are bothering to discuss. It was an invocation not much unlike others that have occurred during inaugurations. Being mad that a Christian mentioned Jesus while giving an invocation is hilarious to me because of its sheer absurdity.
As for Lowery -
" 'Lord, in the memory of all the saints who from their labors rest, and in the joy of a new beginning, we ask you to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to get in back, when brown can stick around... when the red man can get ahead, man; and when white will embrace what is right. That all those who do justice and love mercy say Amen. Say Amen'"
This is shockingly racist, although I can perfectly understand how liberals would find this acceptable. This is 1960's civil rights lingo that isn't applicable any more. We don't live in a country where "blacks are asked to sit in back," and we certainly live in a country where "brown can stick around" etc. This preacher, while I'm sure is a fine man, was telling a lie and propagating racist division in this country even further by saying something like this. Rather than make an assumption I'll just ask - is the reason why you liked Lowery but not Warren ideological? Otherwise it makes no sense as to why you'd laud this guy and lampoon Warren.
jim - 01/20/09 18:17
I saw it as mostly generic and boring but otherwise didn't care one way or another about what he said.
I saw it as mostly generic and boring but otherwise didn't care one way or another about what he said.
drew - 01/20/09 18:15
For what it's worth, Warren's career would have been over had he not specifically prayed in Jesus' name. I understand the desire to be inclusive, but he has already alienated his base so much that this would have done it for sure. (Not that a pastor should be so calculating, but we DO have to think about what's best)
I do like that the other prayer was more narrative, this is a re-emerging theological trend: ( :::link::: )
The theology, in my mind, is a good thing.
For what it's worth, Warren's career would have been over had he not specifically prayed in Jesus' name. I understand the desire to be inclusive, but he has already alienated his base so much that this would have done it for sure. (Not that a pastor should be so calculating, but we DO have to think about what's best)
I do like that the other prayer was more narrative, this is a re-emerging theological trend: ( :::link::: )
The theology, in my mind, is a good thing.
james - 01/20/09 17:30
Joshua,
Now, maybe I missed why you extrapolated what I said in order to neatly categorize me as a lefty, atheist, and a Warren hater, but apparently I am missing brain cells and irrationally hate Christianity.
I did not say god does not belong in the invocation. In fact, I applauded Lowery's benediction for having god fit into a larger narrative which played out today. I said that we were invoking more than god, we were invoking the sum or our nations history. I felt Warren was simply able to conjure Jesus Christ.
Of course god belongs in an invocation. Warren failed when he called Jesus by name exclusively. Obama was able to call attention to Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, atheists and by extension all other faiths. Warren just named Jesus. That is certainly lacking and generic names like god, lord, or creator would have served perfectly well without alienating swaths of people. This isn't about what this one particular atheist wants (by the way, I don't speak for all atheists. They can speak for themselves individually thank you very much) this is about an invocation that paled in comparison to all other speakers that day with the exception of that anemic poet. That actual Warren haters have plenty of ammo, and calling his god by name isn't a big gun so much as a minor headache for them I imagine. I really have no idea as I am not one of them; something you failed to notice even though I explicitly said it.
Did I call for special Obama prayers written by god? Were any of the prayers written by god? Did anyone have the expectation that god would personally write these prayers? More so, would an atheist think that god would write a special Obama prayer? Rick Warren leads a giant mega-church and is a best selling author, he can write his own prayers and that is what was expected. If a prayer standard was called for the event then any guy with a prayer book could get up there and give one. No, when you are called to do the invocation for an event, any event, you write your own and you make it appropriate to the event. I have been to hundreds of public events and have heard Rabis, Catholic Priests, and Protestant Pastors give individualized prayers. I felt he failed at that. Again, he did not invoke history and nation, just Jesus.
And whether or not he was apologizing is moot. I didn't think he was apologizing for his stances as much as he was apologizing for the controversy he caused. That was just my reading of it. Perhaps I would feel differently if he invoked a little history and we can all apologize for our collective wrong doings as a nation: racism specifically.
Joshua,
Now, maybe I missed why you extrapolated what I said in order to neatly categorize me as a lefty, atheist, and a Warren hater, but apparently I am missing brain cells and irrationally hate Christianity.
I did not say god does not belong in the invocation. In fact, I applauded Lowery's benediction for having god fit into a larger narrative which played out today. I said that we were invoking more than god, we were invoking the sum or our nations history. I felt Warren was simply able to conjure Jesus Christ.
Of course god belongs in an invocation. Warren failed when he called Jesus by name exclusively. Obama was able to call attention to Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, atheists and by extension all other faiths. Warren just named Jesus. That is certainly lacking and generic names like god, lord, or creator would have served perfectly well without alienating swaths of people. This isn't about what this one particular atheist wants (by the way, I don't speak for all atheists. They can speak for themselves individually thank you very much) this is about an invocation that paled in comparison to all other speakers that day with the exception of that anemic poet. That actual Warren haters have plenty of ammo, and calling his god by name isn't a big gun so much as a minor headache for them I imagine. I really have no idea as I am not one of them; something you failed to notice even though I explicitly said it.
Did I call for special Obama prayers written by god? Were any of the prayers written by god? Did anyone have the expectation that god would personally write these prayers? More so, would an atheist think that god would write a special Obama prayer? Rick Warren leads a giant mega-church and is a best selling author, he can write his own prayers and that is what was expected. If a prayer standard was called for the event then any guy with a prayer book could get up there and give one. No, when you are called to do the invocation for an event, any event, you write your own and you make it appropriate to the event. I have been to hundreds of public events and have heard Rabis, Catholic Priests, and Protestant Pastors give individualized prayers. I felt he failed at that. Again, he did not invoke history and nation, just Jesus.
And whether or not he was apologizing is moot. I didn't think he was apologizing for his stances as much as he was apologizing for the controversy he caused. That was just my reading of it. Perhaps I would feel differently if he invoked a little history and we can all apologize for our collective wrong doings as a nation: racism specifically.
joshua - 01/20/09 16:29
"That makes me ask, what is the whole point of doing it if the prayer seems more at home in Sunday service than it does at the inauguration of the 44th President of the United States?"
Because there aren't special Obama prayers that God came up with for Barack Obama, and I suspect you have unrealistic expectations for what an invocation should contain. It isn't a secular event. The invocation does not serve some kind of different public function - it is religious in nature no matter how much you may feel that the religious aspect should be tampered down to focus on Obama. It wouldn't have been an invocation had that occurred. You also fell into the same trap that ABC did regarding Rick Warren mentioning Jesus. It is ridiculous to complain about it.
He wasn't apologizing for himself and his church. I'm puzzled as to why you'd think that he was apologizing! People don't apologize when they think they are right on a subject. He's not sorry for believing that gay people shouldn't marry, and he isn't sorry that he believes homosexuality is comparable to incest. Trust me, he wasn't apologizing.
"That makes me ask, what is the whole point of doing it if the prayer seems more at home in Sunday service than it does at the inauguration of the 44th President of the United States?"
Because there aren't special Obama prayers that God came up with for Barack Obama, and I suspect you have unrealistic expectations for what an invocation should contain. It isn't a secular event. The invocation does not serve some kind of different public function - it is religious in nature no matter how much you may feel that the religious aspect should be tampered down to focus on Obama. It wouldn't have been an invocation had that occurred. You also fell into the same trap that ABC did regarding Rick Warren mentioning Jesus. It is ridiculous to complain about it.
He wasn't apologizing for himself and his church. I'm puzzled as to why you'd think that he was apologizing! People don't apologize when they think they are right on a subject. He's not sorry for believing that gay people shouldn't marry, and he isn't sorry that he believes homosexuality is comparable to incest. Trust me, he wasn't apologizing.
joshua - 01/20/09 16:10
During an invocation the focus isn't going to be Obama, (e:james), it is going to be about God and asking him for something, usually forgiveness!
I've lampooned and gently chided lefties for over a year now regarding how some of them get confused over the two, but c'mon. Is that the big gun the Warren haters have, the big complaint, that a preacher focused on God during the invocation? This is why I never entertain atheist thoughts about religious topics or religious discussions. It would be sort of like me participating in talks about how to advance the progressive agenda across America - I'd be similarly insincere and apathetic to the cause, therefore my participation would be pointless.
It gets even more over the top than this. Rick Warren mentioned - GASP!- Jesus Christ during the invocation! Imagine that, a Christian preacher, no different than any of the others that have given invocations during the past 200 years, mentioning Jesus during an invocation. Anyone that would be offended by that is missing brain cells, or is simply an irrational hater of Christianity, for whom there is no help. The reason why I mention this is that the coverage on ABC was disgraceful and atrocious when Rick Warren mentioned Jesus - whatever crusty old man was leading the coverage acted surprised and offended when Rick Warren mentioned Jesus. Being indignant over such a thing is beyond ludicrous - it is unreasonable and irrational.
If the atheists don't want an invocation then they should petition for it to be removed, rather than offer trite and silly complaints that likely wouldn't have existed anyway had someone other than Rick Warren given it.
During an invocation the focus isn't going to be Obama, (e:james), it is going to be about God and asking him for something, usually forgiveness!
I've lampooned and gently chided lefties for over a year now regarding how some of them get confused over the two, but c'mon. Is that the big gun the Warren haters have, the big complaint, that a preacher focused on God during the invocation? This is why I never entertain atheist thoughts about religious topics or religious discussions. It would be sort of like me participating in talks about how to advance the progressive agenda across America - I'd be similarly insincere and apathetic to the cause, therefore my participation would be pointless.
It gets even more over the top than this. Rick Warren mentioned - GASP!- Jesus Christ during the invocation! Imagine that, a Christian preacher, no different than any of the others that have given invocations during the past 200 years, mentioning Jesus during an invocation. Anyone that would be offended by that is missing brain cells, or is simply an irrational hater of Christianity, for whom there is no help. The reason why I mention this is that the coverage on ABC was disgraceful and atrocious when Rick Warren mentioned Jesus - whatever crusty old man was leading the coverage acted surprised and offended when Rick Warren mentioned Jesus. Being indignant over such a thing is beyond ludicrous - it is unreasonable and irrational.
If the atheists don't want an invocation then they should petition for it to be removed, rather than offer trite and silly complaints that likely wouldn't have existed anyway had someone other than Rick Warren given it.
james - 01/20/09 15:49
well, he need not exclusively been talking about himself. After hearing people make a stink about him for a month (and I defended the choice, thinking the evangelical community is one the Democrats need to reach out to more) I couldn't help but think Warren was half invoking half apologizing for himself and his church.
Then there was the use of Jesus' name four times. Invocation serves a public function that is very different than a prayer he would offer in his church. That contributed to the cut/paste feeling I got.
Perhaps I was unclear about the focus on god. Lowery had god in his benediction, but he also had the man, and even more so, he had history in his prayer. Warren had mostly god and it was a god divorced from the event. That makes me ask, what is the whole point of doing it if the prayer seems more at home in Sunday service than it does at the inauguration of the 44th President of the United States?
well, he need not exclusively been talking about himself. After hearing people make a stink about him for a month (and I defended the choice, thinking the evangelical community is one the Democrats need to reach out to more) I couldn't help but think Warren was half invoking half apologizing for himself and his church.
Then there was the use of Jesus' name four times. Invocation serves a public function that is very different than a prayer he would offer in his church. That contributed to the cut/paste feeling I got.
Perhaps I was unclear about the focus on god. Lowery had god in his benediction, but he also had the man, and even more so, he had history in his prayer. Warren had mostly god and it was a god divorced from the event. That makes me ask, what is the whole point of doing it if the prayer seems more at home in Sunday service than it does at the inauguration of the 44th President of the United States?
drew - 01/20/09 15:37
yeah, I'm pretty sure he wasn't talking about himself only, he believes we all have that tendency--I don't think he was referring to his own controversy.
I liked the forgiveness thing, too.
I also kinda expect a prayer to focus on God. If you're going to have an invocation (and that's a question worth asking) the focus should be on God, and not the man or the day. I kinda like that it would work for any President, because the eternal remains the eternal, regardless of who we elect.
yeah, I'm pretty sure he wasn't talking about himself only, he believes we all have that tendency--I don't think he was referring to his own controversy.
I liked the forgiveness thing, too.
I also kinda expect a prayer to focus on God. If you're going to have an invocation (and that's a question worth asking) the focus should be on God, and not the man or the day. I kinda like that it would work for any President, because the eternal remains the eternal, regardless of who we elect.
jason - 01/20/09 15:25
I don't think he was talking about himself. That's projection, which is understandable.
I don't think he was talking about himself. That's projection, which is understandable.
james - 01/20/09 15:17
Warren's invocation seemed caned. Like it was cut from a thousand other invocations he has done and glued together with a few mentions of Obama, our nation, and service. Most of all, Warren talked about god. God is nice and all, but this isn't a time to put down our focus on the great history leading to this point and an even greater focus on the future to come.
I wouldn't have minded it so much were it not for Lowery. He had a great sense of history. He was able to capture the incredible historical moment and talk bring in god on that topic. Where Warren seemed disconnected from the event. He could have been delivered the same invocation for John McCain, but Lowery's could only have been delivered to Obama's.
Now, I am not a Warren hater. I recognize that he has done a lot of good and that he is very meaningful for a lot of people. But he seemed out of place. And when he said
"When we focus on ourselves, when we fight each other, when we forget you, forgive us. When we presume that our greatness and our prosperity is ours alone, forgive us. When we fail to treat our fellow human beings and all the earth with the respect that they deserve, forgive us."
he was making it all about himself. Forgive me America for the controversy I caused. Don't focus on me, really, don't, focus on something else, like that Obama guy or something. Though I do appreciate his asking for forgiveness.
Warren's invocation seemed caned. Like it was cut from a thousand other invocations he has done and glued together with a few mentions of Obama, our nation, and service. Most of all, Warren talked about god. God is nice and all, but this isn't a time to put down our focus on the great history leading to this point and an even greater focus on the future to come.
I wouldn't have minded it so much were it not for Lowery. He had a great sense of history. He was able to capture the incredible historical moment and talk bring in god on that topic. Where Warren seemed disconnected from the event. He could have been delivered the same invocation for John McCain, but Lowery's could only have been delivered to Obama's.
Now, I am not a Warren hater. I recognize that he has done a lot of good and that he is very meaningful for a lot of people. But he seemed out of place. And when he said
"When we focus on ourselves, when we fight each other, when we forget you, forgive us. When we presume that our greatness and our prosperity is ours alone, forgive us. When we fail to treat our fellow human beings and all the earth with the respect that they deserve, forgive us."
he was making it all about himself. Forgive me America for the controversy I caused. Don't focus on me, really, don't, focus on something else, like that Obama guy or something. Though I do appreciate his asking for forgiveness.
drew - 01/20/09 15:03
I did really like Lowery, but I also liked Warren. What did you find idiotic? (Besides the beard--I would agree with you, as another overweight balding white pastor with a goofy beard, I'm gonna keep my mouth shut)
I did really like Lowery, but I also liked Warren. What did you find idiotic? (Besides the beard--I would agree with you, as another overweight balding white pastor with a goofy beard, I'm gonna keep my mouth shut)
01/18/2009 20:52 #47442
let America be America AgainIn light of Obama's inauguration I found this old poem to be especially moving.
Let America be America again.
Let it be the dream it used to be.
Let it be the pioneer on the plain
Seeking a home where he himself is free.
(America never was America to me.)
Let America be the dream the dreamers dreamed--
Let it be that great strong land of love
Where never kings connive nor tyrants scheme
That any man be crushed by one above.
(It never was America to me.)
O, let my land be a land where Liberty
Is crowned with no false patriotic wreath,
But opportunity is real, and life is free,
Equality is in the air we breathe.
(There's never been equality for me,
Nor freedom in this "homeland of the free.")
Say, who are you that mumbles in the dark?
And who are you that draws your veil across the stars?
I am the poor white, fooled and pushed apart,
I am the Negro bearing slavery's scars.
I am the red man driven from the land,
I am the immigrant clutching the hope I seek--
And finding only the same old stupid plan
Of dog eat dog, of mighty crush the weak.
I am the young man, full of strength and hope,
Tangled in that ancient endless chain
Of profit, power, gain, of grab the land!
Of grab the gold! Of grab the ways of satisfying need!
Of work the men! Of take the pay!
Of owning everything for one's own greed!
I am the farmer, bondsman to the soil.
I am the worker sold to the machine.
I am the Negro, servant to you all.
I am the people, humble, hungry, mean--
Hungry yet today despite the dream.
Beaten yet today--O, Pioneers!
I am the man who never got ahead,
The poorest worker bartered through the years.
Yet I'm the one who dreamt our basic dream
In the Old World while still a serf of kings,
Who dreamt a dream so strong, so brave, so true,
That even yet its mighty daring sings
In every brick and stone, in every furrow turned
That's made America the land it has become.
O, I'm the man who sailed those early seas
In search of what I meant to be my home--
For I'm the one who left dark Ireland's shore,
And Poland's plain, and England's grassy lea,
And torn from Black Africa's strand I came
To build a "homeland of the free."
The free?
Who said the free? Not me?
Surely not me? The millions on relief today?
The millions shot down when we strike?
The millions who have nothing for our pay?
For all the dreams we've dreamed
And all the songs we've sung
And all the hopes we've held
And all the flags we've hung,
The millions who have nothing for our pay--
Except the dream that's almost dead today.
O, let America be America again--
The land that never has been yet--
And yet must be--the land where every man is free.
The land that's mine--the poor man's, Indian's, Negro's, ME--
Who made America,
Whose sweat and blood, whose faith and pain,
Whose hand at the foundry, whose plow in the rain,
Must bring back our mighty dream again.
Sure, call me any ugly name you choose--
The steel of freedom does not stain.
From those who live like leeches on the people's lives,
We must take back our land again,
America!
O, yes,
I say it plain,
America never was America to me,
And yet I swear this oath--
America will be!
Out of the rack and ruin of our gangster death,
The rape and rot of graft, and stealth, and lies,
We, the people, must redeem
The land, the mines, the plants, the rivers.
The mountains and the endless plain--
All, all the stretch of these great green states--
And make America again!
-Langston Hughes
Let America be America again.
Let it be the dream it used to be.
Let it be the pioneer on the plain
Seeking a home where he himself is free.
(America never was America to me.)
Let America be the dream the dreamers dreamed--
Let it be that great strong land of love
Where never kings connive nor tyrants scheme
That any man be crushed by one above.
(It never was America to me.)
O, let my land be a land where Liberty
Is crowned with no false patriotic wreath,
But opportunity is real, and life is free,
Equality is in the air we breathe.
(There's never been equality for me,
Nor freedom in this "homeland of the free.")
Say, who are you that mumbles in the dark?
And who are you that draws your veil across the stars?
I am the poor white, fooled and pushed apart,
I am the Negro bearing slavery's scars.
I am the red man driven from the land,
I am the immigrant clutching the hope I seek--
And finding only the same old stupid plan
Of dog eat dog, of mighty crush the weak.
I am the young man, full of strength and hope,
Tangled in that ancient endless chain
Of profit, power, gain, of grab the land!
Of grab the gold! Of grab the ways of satisfying need!
Of work the men! Of take the pay!
Of owning everything for one's own greed!
I am the farmer, bondsman to the soil.
I am the worker sold to the machine.
I am the Negro, servant to you all.
I am the people, humble, hungry, mean--
Hungry yet today despite the dream.
Beaten yet today--O, Pioneers!
I am the man who never got ahead,
The poorest worker bartered through the years.
Yet I'm the one who dreamt our basic dream
In the Old World while still a serf of kings,
Who dreamt a dream so strong, so brave, so true,
That even yet its mighty daring sings
In every brick and stone, in every furrow turned
That's made America the land it has become.
O, I'm the man who sailed those early seas
In search of what I meant to be my home--
For I'm the one who left dark Ireland's shore,
And Poland's plain, and England's grassy lea,
And torn from Black Africa's strand I came
To build a "homeland of the free."
The free?
Who said the free? Not me?
Surely not me? The millions on relief today?
The millions shot down when we strike?
The millions who have nothing for our pay?
For all the dreams we've dreamed
And all the songs we've sung
And all the hopes we've held
And all the flags we've hung,
The millions who have nothing for our pay--
Except the dream that's almost dead today.
O, let America be America again--
The land that never has been yet--
And yet must be--the land where every man is free.
The land that's mine--the poor man's, Indian's, Negro's, ME--
Who made America,
Whose sweat and blood, whose faith and pain,
Whose hand at the foundry, whose plow in the rain,
Must bring back our mighty dream again.
Sure, call me any ugly name you choose--
The steel of freedom does not stain.
From those who live like leeches on the people's lives,
We must take back our land again,
America!
O, yes,
I say it plain,
America never was America to me,
And yet I swear this oath--
America will be!
Out of the rack and ruin of our gangster death,
The rape and rot of graft, and stealth, and lies,
We, the people, must redeem
The land, the mines, the plants, the rivers.
The mountains and the endless plain--
All, all the stretch of these great green states--
And make America again!
-Langston Hughes
museumchick - 01/22/09 12:44
I've always loved that poem by Hughes... thank you for reminding me of it.
I've always loved that poem by Hughes... thank you for reminding me of it.
joshua - 01/19/09 10:22
Langston Hughes - a great American and one of my favorite poets of all time. This is a beautiful poem but in its correct context the meaning of it is far more profound. Thanks for posting it!
Langston Hughes - a great American and one of my favorite poets of all time. This is a beautiful poem but in its correct context the meaning of it is far more profound. Thanks for posting it!
That last one is great. "I am a fiscal conservative AND a support of athletics and the arts"!