What do Hollywood liberals and gay activists have in common with Catholic and Christian pro-lifers? Not much one would think. But these days they're united against an upcoming event: Pastor Rick Warren of Saddleback Church giving the invocation at Barack Obama's inauguration. Liberals who oppose California's Proposition 8 upholding traditional marriage feel betrayed by Obama for selecting Warren. Catholics and Christians feel betrayed by Pastor Warren for aiding and abetting an incoming president who champions abortion, infanticide, and same-sex marriage. While Warren's selection may be making diverse groups angry, Obama's choice looks like a shell game to promote himself as one thing to the uninformed while acting behind the scenes as another. Obama has already positioned himself as the enemy of pro-life Christians. They see him as a plague who will undo all progress made during the last 35 years to defend the unborn and their mothers, to provide conscience protection to health care workers, etc. His support for same-sex marriage, expansion of homosexual privileges, and assaults on first amendment free speech rights also has earned their staunch opposition. From that perspective, the Warren choice loses Obama nothing but gives the appearance of him being less strident than he really is. The social issues played virtually no role in the election, and many voters still have no idea of his extremism. Choosing Warren, known for being pro-life and for his defense of traditional marriage, allows Obama to maintain the charade of a man who believes in Christian values and wants to make abortion rare. The strategy, after all, worked for Bill Clinton, who faithfully carried his Bible to Church while he committed adultery in the oval office and attacked the religious right. What worked for Bill can work for Barack on the political level. Play Christian in public, destroy Christian values in private.
Obama has more to lose with the liberal left who are his staunch supporters. But they are smart enough to know that actions matter a lot more than appearances. Their outrage may even be part of the game, done with a wink and a smirk. After all, Warren played a huge role in getting evangelicals on board to support Al Gore's alarmist pseudo-documentary on global warming. Why not use his charismatic appeal again to keep a large voting block in line. Since Obama has promised to pass FOCA, support homosexual rights legislation, reinstall the Fairness Doctrine to censor conservative views, go after fossil fuels, etc. why should they care if he stages Warren as window-dressing? Even if the liberals are really angry, they won't jump ship. They'll stay on board ready to forgive all as long as the payoff comes. And it will, with executive orders signed immediately after the inauguration. The orders are probably already drafted and awaiting the presidential pen. And there will be more payoffs to come.
Obama is, one must remember, a disciple of Saul Alinsky and will do whatever is necessary to accomplish his goal of radical social change: tell the truth or lie, flatter or criticize, wear gucci's or cowboy boots. We've already seen that if someone is useful to him he'll keep him as a friend, but cut the ties if the relationship starts to cost him. Which is why Jeremiah Wright will not be at the inaugural podium leading the prayer. It's all part of the manipulative strategy: the end justifies the means. That's the Alinsky method and, as Alinsky's son, David pointed out during the campaign, "Obama learned his lesson well." The Rick Warren controversy takes its place as just one more gimmick in the community organizer's bag of tricks.
