The Silver Crush at the Obama Inaugural

For the record, I was one of the many people who was trapped outside the Silver gate on Independence and 3rd...I saw the line collapse and people were generally trapped for more than an hour next to the HHS building. People kept pouring into that block, then tons of people started coming back on to 3rd from the Mall, saying they had closed the gate. It wasn't just crowded. We were squeezed against each other and only moved when the force of the crowd moved one way or another. It was scary, and only the fact that everyone seemed in a jubilant mood kept it from getting ugly. Despite the crowding and the sheer mass of people there was zero police or security presence. Rumors kept swirling that they had closed the Mall. There was no order.

Prior to this we had been in line for three hours. The much advertised port-a-potty shortage was evident, there were none for those of us in line, they were all inside the secure zone. This caused a member of my party to, uh, take the matter into his own hands.

Finally, something gave...the crowd poured across Independence...and then a security barrier went down and we rushed out onto the Mall. I saw no police. No checkpoint. No effort by security to stop hundreds of unscreened people from getting on the Mall several hundred yards from where the most heavily protected man on the planet was standing.

Everything the police has said about why people couldn't get on the Mall doesn't make sense to me. There was room, as satellite pictures show. We were clearly barred from getting on the Mall, and then security just vanished and the unscreened masses ran onto the "secure" zone.

The fact that there were no injuries is somewhat a miracle (though my bladder may be permanently stretched, I held it for four hours). But it wasn't the smooth operation they are spinning it to be.

It was not crowd control we could believe in.

The Moment

The moment I will remember most profound will be the firing of the cannon after the oath...it was at that moment an old era passed and a new one began. An era where we don't win political victories by appealing to our baser natures, an era when it is possible to be of a racial minority and be democratically elected to the highest office in the land.

It was an exclamation point in time. One moment, George W. Bush was president. Boom. Now Barack Hussein Obama is president. We didn't get to that moment by magic, but it felt magical.

Yes, yes, I know Obama became president at noon, before the 21 gun salute even started, before he and the chief justice stumbled over the words of the presidential oath.

It's just that, in that moment, change arrived. And announced itself with unyielding certainty.

How Many Times Will I Stand in Line for Obama?

I stood in line to see him in Las Vegas, in line to vote for him in Columbia Heights, stood in line at the Rayburn House Office building to pick up my tickets today (pictured) so I can stand in line tomorrow so I can stand up next to a gazillion other people to watch it on a giant outdoor TV screen while being careful to not drink anything so I won't have to stand in line to go pee.

You'd think this was an historic event, or something.

The line down 1st St, SE, around the Cannon House Office Building.

Obama's Inauguration: New Security Requirement

The Presidential Inaugural Committee is planning on releasing a new security provision for the swearing-in ceremony on January 20th. All persons witnessing the event on the West Front of the Capitol and the National Mall are required to exhale only on even-numbered seconds if their Social Security number ends in an even digit and on the odd-numbered seconds if their SSN ends in an odd digit.

This is to prevent the Inaugural Party from being smothered by CO2 from the breathes of millions of people or from being blown off the platform should everyone exhale at once.

(Those of you turning your backs on Rick Warren are exempt from this rule for the duration of the Invocation).

Rick Warren, Obama and Race

A reader writes me a hypothetical: What would Barack Obama have thought in the 60s if a president had included a preacher in his inaugural who preached that interracial marriage was a sin?

Most likely the preachers who spoke at inaugurals in 50s or 60s DID think interracial marriage was sinful. They surely must have thought and preached that premarital sex was sinful, so Obama's parents were likely doubly condemned.

Warren's religious beliefs lead him to declare homosexuality and gay marriage sinful. That's his right. And Obama has declared he does not share this view. I don't think we gays win anything by demanding someone be excluded from the inaugural because of what he or she believes. We can and should oppose them on the policy front. But prevent him from saying a prayer?

These blessings don't have the import you give to them. Who gave the invocation at Clinton's inaugural? What did he or she say? How did it shape the outcome of the Clinton Administration?

There is a double standard here and it seems to me to be this one: We supported Obama and were willing to overlook the fact that his pastor claimed white people invented AIDS to kill black people. We believed Obama that Rev. Wright didn't inform his views on that topic. Why are we so unwilling to accept Obama's denunciation of Warren's view of sinful homosexuality? His relationship with Warren is far less substantial than his one with Wright. And on the subject of gay marriage Warren and Obama do agree: one man, one woman. We knew Obama's position on this (sadly) before the election. His reaching out to Warren doesn't surprise me, especially given Warren's work in other areas (aid to Africa, which is important to the President-elect)and that fact that Warren's views on homosexuality are (also sadly)part of the Christian mainstream.

It also doesn't surprise me as I re-read Obama's speech on race.

He said:

"I chose to run for president at this moment in history because I believe deeply that we cannot solve the challenges of our time unless we solve them together."

That's Obama's overriding goal. To achieve it he cannot afford to be governed by what he, we or anyone might consider moral purity. Common ground must be found even between fierce foes. This point becomes clearer as Obama talks about black rage -- which he thinks is justified. Nevertheless:


"The anger is not always productive; indeed, all too often it distracts attention from solving real problems...and prevents the African-American community from forging alliances it needs to bring about real change."

Another part of Obama's race speech also offers insight into how he might see Warren. Referring to the most divisive and and outrageous comments of Wright, Obama reflects:

"But the truth is, that isn't all I know of the man. The man I met more than 20 years ago is a man who helped introduce me to my Christian faith, a man who spoke to me about our obligations to love one another..."

You get the point. Obama is not the type of person who rejects someone completely if he finds one thing he is vehemently opposed to in a person. Human beings are complex animals and Obama recognizes this. That's a welcome relief from the us vs. them mentality that has been disastrous for our country.

Again, I do agree that we can't give the Obama Administration the benefit of the doubt on following through on policy. I'm more alarmed by Rahm Emanuel's lowering expectations on DADT. That's directly relating to policy, and its far more important than whatever prayer Rick Warren will say on Jan. 20.

Rick Warren II

You're either with us or against us.

Remember that? Wasn't that type of rigid "thinking" part of what we wanted to change from? The whole didactic "us vs. them" mentality that has made our politics poisonous and our government ineffective?

One of the comments I read was from a fellow traveller who whined, "After working so hard to get Obama elected, this is how he repays us?"

Actually, I would hope we wouldn't settle for a pro-gay preacher to say a prayer as "repayment." That's an awfully small reward. I'd hope instead for pro-gay policies, which Obama says he is in favor of and which I think we need to follow through with him to give him support and pressure to make it happen. If I thought all I was going to get from an Obama administration was symbolic gestures to make our community feel good, why, I would have voted for Hillary.

Obama said throughout the election (and I heard him say it several times throughout Nevada, personally) that he wasn't always going to tell us what we want to hear. Guess what? He's delivering on that promise. He's telling us that he is going to deal with all Americans, and that includes the mainstream who are opposed to gay marriage, many of whom, like my own family, believes it is a sin.

It also means he's going to deal with -- and work with -- us. If Obama were playing ideological identity politics, banishing from his administration or state events those who didn't meet a checklist of ideological purity that fit the politics of the moment, we might feel better. Today.

But while we might fit on the list today, politics can change and we might not fit tomorrow.

This is what the big tent feels like. It's full of things that we admire, things that fascinate us and things we fear. And if you're going to have a big tent, there's bound to be a few clowns.

Rick Warren is a clown and this controversy is a circus. Let it go -- there are serious things we need to focus on, like repealing DOMA and DADT.

Policies are what is important, not prayers.

The Other Preacher at Obama's Inauguration

The Rev. Joseph Lowery, civil rights icon (he marched with King) and co-founder of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. He's an African-American pastor who has spoken out for gay rights and is in favor not only of gay clergy but of same-sex marriage (the latter making him more progressive than Obama).

And he's giving the benediction at Obama's inauguration.

And Lowerey's inclusion doesn't mean Obama's changed his position on gay marriage, any more than Rick Warren's inclusion means Obama's backed away from civil unions and the repeal of DOMA.

Policies matter more than prayers.

Rick Warren

An overblown issue. Calm down, people.

Do you remember the preacher who gave the invocation at the Clinton inaugural? And the influence exerted by that individual over the ensuing eight years? I don't either. In fact, that person wasn't even mentioned in the WaPo story of the Clinton swearing in.

I've seen no evidence that Obama is changing his mind about any of his pro-gay positions. And although I don't care for Rick Warren's positions on gay people, he probably doesn't care for my positions on gay people.

Frankly, I don't care which witch doctor casts his spells over the inauguration (why is a religious element a part of a matter of state, anyway?). I care about the policy positions of the guy being sworn in. And although I think we need to be taking nothing for granted and hold Obama's feet to the fire, this whole controversy is a sideshow. Not the main event.