Without intending to too strongly censure anyone, it may be that Barack Obama, who is after all a Harvard Law grad, not a humanities professor, really does not care about social issues any more than the next technocrat.

Hence, why not invite Rick Warren (who is well respected and mainstream, and about whom I remember substantially less whining from the left when Obama went to receive his blessing before he was elected) along for the ride.

He's a nice guy, and they can agree to disagree about all the fluff.

You know, a few weeks ago I expressed a lot of disappointment with Obama's foreign policy team. For the four top appointments we got one guy who actually works for the Bush administration, and who has most recently been involved in negotiating a SOFA agreement which allows for an additional three-year stay in Iraq; a senator who has adhered over eight years in office to a Middle East policy that tracks very closely with neoconservative and Aipac preferences for the region; a centrist military man; and a fire-breathing liberal interventionist out of the Beinart-Ignatieff-Holbrooke school. There is not one character in the bunch that represents the attitudes and tendencies that helped drive the opposition to Obama's chief Democratic rival and played a strong role in landing Obama in the White House. We peaceniks and progressive internationalists got the shaft.

For expressing these views I and others were treated to all sorts of calls to pipe down and shut up, and derided for our hysterical, awful, lefty whining.

Now, all of a sudden, it is politically correct to criticize an Obama appointment. Some of the same people who argued I was making trouble, and said I was building a mountain out of molehills where mere war and peace were concerned, have no trouble achieving high levels of exasperation over the tabbing of Rick Warren for the invocation at the inauguration. And yet the people I was concerned about had actually been appointed to head powerful executive agencies and departments, where they will be in a position to make daily life or death decisions affecting millions of people! Rick Warren, on the other hand, has not been named to any responsible government position, but given one freaking minute to invoke the blessings of The Almighty during an inauguration ritual.

So forgive me for being totally underwhelmed by this uproar, and totally mystified and miffed by the priorities of some fellow Democrats. The wrong position on launching wars and killing Middle Easterners? No problem. But when it comes to gay marriage, well listen to the screaming now that the bus treads are on the other corpse.

Todd tosses off "Aids and the environment" as though these are just a couple of small and insignificant positive blips on a record of evil Warrenite awfulness. But they are not small things. These are two extremely important global issues (which seem particularly important to Barack Obama and Michele Obama) on which Warren has played a somewhat constructive role. The fact that significant numbers of evangelicals are now coming around on environmental issues has had a major impact on the national will to action on environmental problems. Obama made it clear from very early on that he was interested in building bridges into the evangelical community on important issues of potential common purpose, and his ability to "speak Christian" frankly, convincingly and openly was one of his key selling points, and helped strengthen an area of chronic Democratic vulnerability. What he is doing now is entirely consistent and continuous with the political path he has pursued over the past several years.

Rick Warren is one of the most powerful men in America. He invited Obama to speak at his church for a very important, nationally televised campaign event. Obama probably won some votes from that widely seen and heavily hyped event, and it also probably helped him build good will and political capital, even among many evangelicals who didn't vote for him. As Obama pointed out, Warren extended this invitation to even though there are a number of issues on which he doesn't agree with him. The discussion, as I recall it, was not hostile, but permitted an open, frank, healthy exchange in which Obama was given plenty of space to explain his views. So Warren reached out, and Obama is returning the favor. A different, more progressive minister is giving the benediction. Is this really such an incomprehensible political move?

Symbols are as important as is the substance, so where is Rev Wright? Doesnt Obambi want diversity of opinions????

There is a pattern here...Obambi folds under Center-right talking heads but doesn't hesitate to rebuff and Defend choices that offend Center-Left talking heads and posers.

I agree that we can censure. The problem is that Obama won't seem to acknowledge that he's done anything wrong. It's hard to move on when the guy you're censuring seems to think he did the right thing.

This column only focuses on a handful of Obama's best appointments. I think that in the sphere of environment and ecology, we'll need a lot more than just John Holdren. Someone much more progressive and AGgressive than Carol Browner at EPA, and a Secretary of Transportation with more than just, well, "Republican maverick" credentials. "That's who he is" just isn't enough on issues as urgent as climate change.

BTW, TPM should have Jim Hansen as one of its special guests for a whole week sometime soon.

As for Rick Warren, I notice a lot of mobilizing that focuses exclusively or near exclusively on his ANTI-GAY politics while slighting or even totally ignoring his anti-feminism/anti-women politics. This is bad strategy, the same kind of bad strategy thinking that many are now reporting, from WITHIN the anti-Prop 8 campaign, characterized that effort. The one thing that Obama teaches that is most immediately urgent to progressives generally is that we must fight to win. Sure, Wilson's invocation is only a minute and a half. But there needs to be some kind of groundwork for future organizing on culturally progressive issues.

One thing that is perverse -- "move on" notwithstanding -- is that Obama, who places such an emphasis on unity, is CLEARLY (and as Gitlin rightly notes, unnecessarily) promoting the opposite in this case. Most of his politics is that pointed towards consensus -- divisiveness is very much the exception, even on issues like climate chaos ("global warming") where leadership that goes beyond current political consensus is urgent and essential. Promoting Rick Warren (like the MUCH over-labored concern during the campaign about Donnie McClurkin) is NOT where Obama should 'bravely' step out with some risk of division. Climate Chaos IS!