Extremely well-written opinion piece by an authority on religion in the U.S. She links out to many third-party sources to bolster her assertions.

One of the best written of pieces complaining of Warren's selection. Only 30 days to go before this too passes.

Sarah Posner writes an interesting opinion piece about Obama's selection of a right-wing evangelical preacher to give the invocation address at his inauguration. Her main point is that someone with such extreme views, which are out of touch with most of America and even more so for most of Obama's supporters, has no business in such a prominent position. Selecting someone with such extreme views could be seen by Obama's supporters as an insult to them and pandering to the right wing, rather than as an attempt to mend fences.

This story outlines some of the "problems" with Obama's choice of Warren.

This is an opinion column - the equivalent of talking-head punditry on television. Sarah Posner is essentially saying that Warren is not a good choice for the inaugural invocation because he doesn't believe what she believes - what she believes all progressives believe. So what? Obama is the President of the United States, not just his progressive supporters. Why shouldn't he choose someone to give the invocation that in all likelihood didn't vote for him? This piece takes political sides by saying that Warren's beliefs are wrong because Posner disagrees with them. Isn't that a definition of a personal attack? A more journalistically sound approach would be to examine why Warren's beliefs are troubling. Posner assumes ... More »