Obama Speech Aims to End Race Row with Bold Plea for Harmony
PHILADELPHIA — In a breathtaking speech, delivered before a backdrop of American flags, Barack Obama attempted yesterday to lance the boil of the ugly racial row that threatens to destroy his campaign for the presidency.
Delivering what one commentator described as the most personal and extensive discussion of the legacy of slavery made by any major American politician in memory, he said it was time for Americans to “move beyond some of our old racial wounds”.
Commentators were quick to describe the unconventional speech, which Obama finished writing at 3am yesterday, as the most audacious and politically risky gambit of his career.
Saying he was “married to a black American who carries within her the blood of slaves and slaveowners - an inheritance we pass on to our two precious daughters,” he implicitly rebuked those who question his wife Michelle’s patriotism, after she recently said “for the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country”.
Mr Obama said: “I have brothers, sisters, nieces, nephews, uncles and cousins, of every race and every hue, scattered across three continents, and for as long as I live,” he said, “I will never forget that in no other country on earth is my story even possible.”
Speaking near the spot where the US Declaration of Independence was written in the spring of 1787, Mr Obama took his theme from that iconic document, saying he wanted to transform the divisiveness of the race row into a quest for “a more perfect union”.
In so doing, he unambiguously condemned the racially incendiary remarks of his Chicago pastor, the Rev Jeremiah Wright, saying they were “not only wrong, but divisive; divisive at a time when we need unity”.
Snippets of some sermons are being endlessly looped on American television and on YouTube, showing Mr Wright describing the US as a racist country with a murderous foreign policy and a corrupt government.
The two most damaging video clips show Mr Wright claiming that the US brought the 9/11 attacks on itself and that blacks should sing “God Damn” not “God Bless America”.
Mr Obama, frequently interrupted by applause, provided his most complete explanation of his long association with Mr Wright, the pastor who married him and baptised his children, despite his fiery rhetoric. “Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes.
“Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely - just as I’m sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed.”
But even as he condemned the remarks of his friend and spiritual adviser, the Illinois senator delivered some home truths about race relations in America.
Throughout the election Mr Obama has tried to avoid embroiling his campaign in America’s fractious racial debate, despite the efforts of his opponents to do so. In South Carolina at the beginning of the year, Bill Clinton was widely criticised for casting Obama as no more than a black candidate, popular in a state with a heavily black electorate but not a serious contender for the presidency.
And, earlier this month, Geraldine Ferraro, the 1984 Vice-Presidential nominee, was forced to leave Clinton’s finance committee after saying that Obama was front-runner because as a black man he was enjoying political favouritism.
But yesterday - facing the Wright furore deemed by some advisers to be the greatest challenge of his candidacy for the presidency - Mr Obama tackled the issue of racial politics head on, an approach normally guaranteed to clear a room or destroy a budding political career.
“I suppose the politically safe thing would be to move on from this episode and just hope that it fades into the woodwork,” he said, adding that “race is an issue that I believe this nation cannot afford to ignore right now.” As the son of a black man from Kenya and a white woman from Kansas, Mr Obama has personally juggled racial divisions and seen first-hand that they can be overcome. “I can no more disown him [Wright] than I can disown my white grandmother … a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe.”
Speaking of America’s “racial stalemate”, he said: “I have asserted a firm conviction - a conviction rooted in my faith in God and my faith in the American people - that working together we can move beyond some of our old racial wounds,” he said. He talked about the anger among African-Africans that could be heard at the barbers or the beauty parlour, a hangover from the days of segregation. But he was also swift to acknowledge what he called “the resentments of white Americans” that should not be dismissed as misguided or racist.
The complexities of race were something the United States had not yet made perfect, Mr Obama said. “And if we walk away now, if we simply retreat into our respective corners, we will never be able to come together and solve challenges like health care or education or the need to find good jobs for every American.”
He expressed exasperation with the media for scouring every exit poll during the tight Democratic race for signs of racial polarisation when his campaign message of unity had led to commanding victories in overwhelmingly white states. The election had recently taken on, what he said was “a particularly divisive turn”, which was a political risk to his campaign ahead of the Pennsylvania primary on 22 April where white votes will play a key role.
“We can play Reverend Wright’s sermons on every channel, every day and talk about them from now until the election, and make the only question in this campaign whether or not the American people think that I somehow believe or sympathise with his most offensive words,” he said. “We can pounce on some gaffe by a Hillary supporter as evidence that she’s playing the race card, or we can speculate on whether white men will all flock to John McCain in the general election regardless of his policies.
“That is one option,” Mr Obama said. “Or, at this moment, in this election, we can come together and say, ‘Not this time’.”
For rolling comment on the US election visit: independent.co.uk/campaign08
Search Query: Independent.co.uk The Web Go Advanced search
©independent.co.uk
Sad thing is that Wright was right.
Shouldnt have to apologize for someone who speaks the truth.
I’m not an Obama fanatic but I was genuinely surprised, it was a really effective and wise speech. He’s by far, the most capable person in the presidential race. And by the way, Wright’s discussion about chicken’s coming home to roost, regarding 911, whats the big whoop? Chalmers Johnson said the same thing in his book “Blow Back” but he’s white, my bad. Also, indicting US support of Israel as a problem, another big whoop. There is no floor effect to the stupidity of the US electorate, so who knows how this will play out.
Reverend Wright’s comments shouldn’t be the real story, rather John McCain’s spiritual adviser Reverend Rod Parsley’s should.
“Senator John McCain hailed as a spiritual adviser an Ohio megachurch pastor who has called upon Christians to wage a ‘war’ against the ‘false religion’ of Islam with the aim of destroying it.”
http://www.motherjones.com/washington_dispatch/2008/03/john-mccain-rod-parsley-spiritual-guide.html
John McCain seeked the endorsement of a man who believes America was founded to destory Islam. Why is this not in the news?
I read the speech, and I also read an AP story about it yesterday. The AP story was much better than this one, and the quotes from the speech were powerful and made me want to read the speech. This story manages to bring to my mind the word “insipid”. Now, why is that?
kathyodat
typ, McCain’s minister isn’t criticizing America. That’s a big N0-No.
kathydoat
I think this speech was directed at the news media more than any other group. There was a sense that the media was pulling a “Howard Dean screech” on Obama. It’s truly amazing how often the cable news shows were showing the short clips of Rev. Wright’s sermons and the pictures of the two standing together. I think Obama challenged them to rise above the distractions and divisions and focus on the issues. Time will tell if it worked.
I heard the speech while driving in the car - heard much of it again last night on cspan. VERY impressive and what Americans should really listen to. I still don’t believe Obama is presidential material. I listen to Hillary and I hear knowledge-based commentary, facts, solutions, and as she said - she KNOWS the world leaders the next president will need to sit down with. I believe she’s brilliant. Obama is highly intelligent - but as an extremely well read, well educated friend of mine (also a liberal) says, he’s “preacher lite.” I agree.
As for McCain - still can’t get it out of my head that he once said, publicly, that Chelsea Clinton (age 13 at the time) was ugly because ‘her father is Janet Reno.’ That’s plain mean. (A few months ago McCain’s daughter praised Chelsea for her composure and other qualities.)
McCain lacks even the smallest amount of class and gentility (not to mention intelligence) that I want to see in MY White House.
BeForKids March 19th, 2008 11:53 am:
“…the quotes from the speech were powerful and made me want to read the speech”
I agree, this was an authoritative speech. It was different than the previous snippets of Obama that I have heard. Usually he is channelling the persona of a pastor, whipping the crowd into a frenzy. This speech was more of a “racial/immigrant politics for dummies” lecture. He has shown that he understands the chasm of fear and hate that separates the opposing sides.
I think the speech was a good one. But, we already knew that Obama can deliver great speeches. I like Obama.
This issue is for him a disaster. I saw it coming months ago when I visited the website of his church. I am familiar with the worst of Black liberation theology and this stuff is getting there. Is there some truth to it? Sure. Is it what we want in a president? I think not. Even Obama thinks not… apparently… publicly.
However, the great unanswered questions are these: Why would Obama spend 20 years under such preaching? Why would he subject his daughters to it? Why confront it only now? These are questions of judgment, courage, and candor. They remain unanswered. We are left to wonder.
A disaster.
Juliann,
Hillary seems to me to be “Bush Lite”. She’s corporate, and Obama’s the people. Look at the two campaigns. She gets money from lobbyists and PACs, and he gets most of his from over a million small contributors. His campaign has been very well run, and is energized by grass roots volunteers. Hers has been a disaster. She’s had to loan herself money, and still can’t compete in the small states. This should tell you something about how they will run the white house.
I agree, It was a skillful speech that said the right things to defuse the whole brouhaha without sounding like a waffler.
But I wish Obama could have foud a way to gently remind the US citizenry that Wright’s roosting chicken sermon was largely a truthful account of the karma of US foreign policy.
I also wish Obam could have left out the “stalwart ally Israel” and “it’s all caused by Islamic extremism” remarks. Surely he must understand the rage of someone who has had their land robbed, home bulldozed, and family members killed (or does he?)
But as far as the upcoming primary in my home state, Sorry, but I just don’t see substantiative differences between the two, except for one -Hillary is older. Normally I wouldn’t put much weight on seniority, but in this case, it means that Hillary remembers and was politically active (on the Eugene McCarthy campaign) during the brief period when the US was moving in the right direction.
Obama on the other hand was just a toddler during this period, and his entire political memory only begins with Ronald Reagan. He’s referred to this period of progress as an era of “excesses” - which sudggests he largely only retains unflattering stereotypes of this era. So, can we trust Obama to even know what social progress even looks like?
Obama said this early in the speech:
“But the remarks that have caused this recent firestorm weren’t simply controversial. They weren’t simply a religious leader’s effort to speak out against perceived injustice. Instead, they expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country – a view that sees white racism as endemic, and that elevates what is wrong with America above all that we know is right with America; a view that sees the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam.”
Clicked it off right there. Based on this, Obama has a profoundly distorted view of Middle East history, its religion and cultural conflicts, and the US’s role in them. “Stalwart allies like Israel” are code words for more par for the course Israel cheerleading and un-evenhanded involvement in the region. The world needs much better than this now.
If you can look past some of this significant content, the Obama speech seems to have, typically, more stirring oratory. Where is the policy substance?
Johnny Mo,
Speak for yourself.
I would LOVE to have a president informed by either the black-Protestant, or the Catholic versions of liberation theology.
Such a theology is rooted in a pretty damn accurate analysis of US history and it’s imperialist foreign policy.
yohocoma,
Agreed, you said it better than I tried to do.
And I don’t know about where you all live, but in my home town of Pittsburgh, “endemic” would pretty accurately describe the white racism I see here.
But, at the risk of sounding like I’m defending Obama, the objectionable paragraph you quoted was only a small part of the speech.
USAn,
That may be. I would disagree.
None the less, Obama disagreed with you. In fact he rather clearly distanced himself from Rev. Wright’s teachings, and espoused the sort of stuff quoted above by yohocoma. Either Obama believes what he says he does now… or he believes what Rev. Wright teaches on these things, and yet is not saying so. Therefore he is either a liar or a coward… or both. Unless you can think of another explanation.
Johnny Mo, I have friends I love. I don’t agree with everything they believe but I still love them. In your mind does that make me a liar or coward?
Juliann, why dont you go to the following link and read about Hillary’s past and present Blackwater positions and then talk about her veracity and worthiness to be President? Pay attention to the dates of her statements of what she knew and when.
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/03/19/7773/
kathyodat
BeForKids, “I have friends I love. I don’t agree with everything they believe but I still love them. In your mind does that make me a liar or coward?”
No.
However, that is not the current situation. I am not asking why Obama continues to love Rev. Wright. Not at all. I just wonder why someone who disagrees with his pastor so vehemently would spend 20 years under his teaching… with his wife and daughters… providing financial support… and say nothing publicly.
Surely he did not think that these ideas are unimportant… or not formative. Does he secretly agree with Rev. Wright but just lacks the guts to say so? I just don’t know, and his speech only exacerbated the wondering.
As is always, always, always the problem, the ones who bother listening to a speech like that are not the ones who need to hear it. And it was a beautiful speech, full of heart. In my young life, I’ve never seen a guy as human as Obama get this close to the presidency.
However, in sharp, ugly contrast, I held down my vomit and checked in with Sean Hannity on Faux last night to get his take. Though he seemed desperate and pathetic to keep the fires hot in regards to the Reverand’s emotional words, he did it for the whole damn hour. A headline somewhere yesterday said the election may pivot on the fickle votes of white males. Question is, are more of them listening to Obama’s speech or Hannity’s smut?
Obama is in trouble and more for than just this black theology spectacle and yesterday’s followup therapy session on trauma(politically, a desperate defence wrapped up in the American flag). What about his out and out two-faced lies to the working people of Ohio re:NAFTA? (Of course, what’s most telling here, is the lack of political experience trusting former Canadian “Reform” party and former Ontario Harrisites to not let the juicy goose out of the bag)… or are we speaking again of 911 chickens and foxes! And then there was the all dressed-up private Islamo/public split personae -is it all out of the closet? A Republican/Clinton dream… did you catch the atavistic Obama-Hillary dreamteam throwback picture on CNN last night??
Wonder which way the Democratic Superdelegates will vote anybody??
Johnny Mo,
I should have pointed out that I am under NO illusion that Obama is an anti-imperialist or believed in liberation theology. I was referring to a hypothetical president taking such positions.
USAn,
I think honesty in any sane president would be refreshing. It would be wonderful to have a leader who really believed in something other than himself… or herself.
Truly the best speech by a U.S. politician on the subject of race since Robert Kennedy 40 years ago. Astonishing how adult straight talk is so vastly different from the normal crap we get on TV news & talk shows. Jarring. Refreshing. And the public (most of it) will appreciate this, in contrast to the usual fare. Needless to say the TV pundits didn’t get it, wondering out loud if Obama was taking a “big risk,” if the speech wasn’t “aiming too high” for the American public. They’re so used to aiming for the lowest common denominator, they actually believe the public wants the junk they feed them just because they watch it (or not).
So, whatever his shortcomings, we have here a candidate who might just be the kind of president that attracts people back into politics for the best reasons –including, very importantly, the young– and a candidate who will attract problem solvers into government, people who believe government can be used constructively. Sure Hillary sounds more like a policy wonk, which she is, but you don’t need a policy wonk for President. You need an inspiring leader, and hopefully (unlike Reagan), one who inspired people in ways that brings out their political best. If he makes it, it’ll be up to all of us to hold him accountable.
I look forward to his two Iraq speeches.
The fix is in. Clinton will get her way. Clinton is in bed with McCain, they’ll probably make room for one another whichever one wins. You know McCain is famous for reaching across the aisle. I figured this out when Clinton said only McCain and I are qualified to lead this country. Now the proposal has come up to let the super delegates have a primary and get it over with. Clinton leads with the super delegates. McCain is already over in Iraq, I don’t know how many times. Probably making deals as if he has already won the Presidency. I call this election cycle the “screw you” America “vote.”
CanadatoImperium, sounds like you fell for the Clinton-Harper setup of Obama, which was done just in time for the Ohio primary. Even though the setup was exposed, it didn’t get any media mileage - now why would that be?
Obama is too populist for the taste of the corporate media. I’m suspecting that they thought supporting him would doom the Democrats, but when he showed broad popular appeal, transcending racial barriers, they changed tactics. So we know who’s really pulling the strings of the American electorate puppets who will vote in whatever direction the corporations choose for them.
kathyodat
The” Harper setup” marks a new low in my opinion of my government and points to sinister connections across our borders, connections we are expected to politely ignore. And probably will.
Wake up people! We’re being farmed!!
In what way was it a setup?
No one is dusputing that the Obama aide said his comments about renegotiating NAFTA were just some BS being fed the electorate.
Shortly after this statement, he also effectively said that his promises about getting out of Iraq is juat some optimistic scenario for public consumption and shouldnt be taken seriously.
Are you not concerned that you are being lied to?
And straight talk or not, Obama’s speech seemed express a profound, typically-American, ignorance of Palestine and the middle east, as well as the day to day realities of poor African Americans.
Reverend Wright was right. End of story. It saddens me in Obama’s speech that he blamed the Palestinians for their own suffering. Audacity of hopelessness.
USAn, first, it wasn’t an Obama aide but an economic advisor, not on his staff. Second, the advisor was contacted by the Canadian consul in Chicago and told that what Obama had been saying about renegotiating NAFTA to be more fair to American workers mainly referred to Mexico was correct. This information was forwarded to the Canadian government, and Harpers’ chief of staff spoke to reporters about Clinton reassuring the Canadians that NAFTA talk was campaign rhetoric. This is confirmed information. The story line that went out on the wires switched the name from Clinton to Obama. Also confirmed information. Then a memo was “leaked” from the Canadian administration about Obama saying it was campaign rhetoric which the Clinton administration wallpapered all over Ohio. Harper belatedly (after the Ohio primary) apologized for interfering in US political processes. That’s why I called it a setup. Where are you getting your information from?
kathyodat
Kathyodat,
I don’t care where the information came from, just the veracity of the information. Of course both Obama and Hillary lie to the voters.
One cannot make special terms regarding the NAFTA treaty that only apply to Mexico, so I doubt anyone said that. Mexico isn’t the problem anyway, what needs to be renegotiated is the Chapter 11 agreements that give investors effective sovereignty over local labor, public onwership, and environmental laws. This is the part Harper’s big-business buddys were worrying about, and the part Obama, and Clinton too, reassured them about.
I thought Obama’s speech was brilliant, inspiring, and moving, and my opinion of him increased tenfold after hearing it. I thought he handled a very difficult subject and this whole controversy extremely well, and I believe he was/is sincere. He reached out to whites, blacks, Latinos, Asians and Native Americans, and recognized their feelings and anger and struggles. This is the kind of leader we need, and he is in a unique position, because of his mixed race background, to be a voice for healing in this country. while I don’t agree with Obama’s positions on many issues, he has strengths that my candidate of choice, Dennis Kucinich, doesn’t have (and it’s a moot point, since Kucinich is out of the race).
Obama is the same age as me. But I think he is older, wiser and more mature than his chronological age reflects. I don’t care if he doesn’t have the same amount of experience as say, John McCain does. As has been said many times, experience and judgment/wisdom are two different things.
Yesterday, John McCain - the man with all the experience - gave a speech in Jordan in which he said that Iran is training Al Qaeda and then sending them back into Iraq. Only after Joe Lieberman whispered in McCain’s ear (just pathetic) did McCain correct himself, apologize, and say that Iran was sending “extremists” into Iraq, not Al Qaeda. (McCain apparently was unaware that Iran is backing the shiites in Iraq, not the Sunni-affiliated Al Qaeda.)
So I’ll take character, judgment, wisdom, insight, courage, and empathy over “experience” any day.
I believe Obama is the right leader for this country, given where we’re at, and that this country would be lucky to have him as President.
Riverman: At 1:08 you sent the same exact post above to the story about “The Left was Right”.
Neither story was about John Edwards. What is your point in sending in this stuff?
I saw the speech today and thought it was, by the standards of normal American political discourse, great. That is, it was reasonably intelligent and nuanced, rather than just a series of empty soundbites or incoherent rambling like George W. He seemed to really try to challenge and educate people, as opposed to manipulate them. Which means he probably doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in Hell of actually becoming president.
As far as Wright’s remark go, I don’t see what all the fuss is. Then again, I’m a white guy who worked for an African American newspaper for five years. Those kind of opinions appeared on the op-ed page all the time (lest white folks get too upset, opinions condemning the behavior of gangsta rappers appeared all the time too. Nobody goes harder on the African American community than African Americans themselves.). It’s a sign of how out of touch your average white person is with the African American community that anyone would find these remarks surprising. Of course racism still exists in this country. Of course our foreign policy alienates and oppresses people around the world, leading some of them to want to strike back. Of course African Americans would see a connection between the treatment of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza and blacks in South Africa. The good reverend has nothing to apologize for, as some have suggested.
It was by far, the best and most inspiring speech I have ever heard or seen a person give, and he had it down pat, without having to read it. It was magnficent and soul searching. If Obama is as good a man as he appeared and sounded, he is a true ’statesman’ and perhaps the finest person who ever ran for the office of the presidency of the United States. I do hope that indeed he is.
I did and I do however have a serious question. ___ Obama stated that his white grandmother, who helped to raise him and who loved him, had at times made racial comments which made him cringe.
However, Obama then stated, that he had NEVER, EVER, heard his pastor in private, ever say ANYTHING anti-white, or speak out ANY racial comments. __ NEVER! ___ Is that so? ___ How strange, the man was his mentor and a very close friend and advisor for the past twenty years, a minister who has been making anti-white, racial remarks and speeches and sermons ever since he began his ministry. The type of speeches and commments which are not healing, but instead are hateful, revengful and devisive.
I found that comment by Obama to be difficult to believe, as are his comments that he has always been against the war and occupation of Iraq. ___ Which is just not so, as proven by his voting record as a US Senator.
I do hope that Obama is as good as his speech, for he has an excellent chance of being our next president. I hope if so, that he is not just a brilliant, highly intelligent orator.
“It saddens me in Obama’s speech that he blamed the Palestinians for their own suffering. Audacity of hopelessness.”
I am a member of AAI (Arab American Institute), I received their voter guide in the mail yesterday, they picked Barak Obama.
Early last year I deceided to support Obama and I have sent him money 3 times. He passed my test. He went to the anual AIPAC (obligatory or die) meeting and said just enough to keep the attack machine at bay.
This meant he will be able to run as a non-threating candiate. If he didn’t play along he never would have made it to first base. Look at Kucinich, they destroy you.
From everything thing he has said in the past I do beleive he will help the Palestinians. Also the co-founder of the “Palestine Human Rights Campaign” is one of his foreign policy advisors.
There is Hope.
“Everything he has said in the PAST” ~Maggie~
Isn’t Obama a very close supporter of Joe Lieberman and his policies?
Hope is often just that, without honest action, hope is hope. When I vote, I try not to think of it as buying a lottery ticket. Of course it has often turned out that way.
It was so refreshing to hear something that wasn’t PC…I suspect this will go down as one of the great speeches of the 21st century. It was the speech of a leader…now there’s a concept.
Obama is Borg. That is the reality. Be mature and face the facts.
A leader needs to be able to do FAR MORE than give a good and inspiring speech. His was an EXCELLENT speech. Racism is 2-way (my uncle was the 3rd white man in his neighborhood to be murdered by 3 black teenagers - 1977 - the teens’ goal was to eradicate all the whites in the neighborhood).
I like Obama but he’s not presidential material. Maybe in 8 years - I would hope! - and he’d get my vote if that were to happen.
But now - he’s preacher-lite.
Everything he has said in the PAST” ~Maggie~
Isn’t Obama a very close supporter of Joe Lieberman and his policies? ” Kem
Every freshman Senator (or congressman) is assigned a mentor. Assigned, they do not get to pick. Obama was assigned Lieberman. During that period he went to Connecticut to campaign for him. When his adjustment period was over he campaigned for Ned Lamont.
Selective memory, or ignorance of facts is what makes the MSM spin so easy. It’s amazing how so many people can hold on to rummors, untruth’s and personal belief’s even when the truth is presented to them, or so easy to look up.
Kem, this was the first time I’ve seen you say anything kind about Obama, I was shocked, but you did have to end it with the usual misstatements. I understand you wanted Edwards, but it always amazed me how you couldn’t recall his actions during the 2004 Presidential campaign. he switched tactics with every revue he got. His let’s place nice only last until he’s really losing, his populist program this time did not jive with his private sector life. did you ever research Edwards?
Kathodat,
Does Austan Goolsbee exist or not? Is he an Obama Economic Advisor?? As far as I understand it, he does not deny meeting Mr. Brodee, advisor to our Canadian Prime Minister, Mr. Harper. He simply states that Mr Brodee misunderstood his comments or took his comments out of context or whatever.
Of course, we’ll never know what was truly said or see the infamous memo. And of course, Obama obfuscates like a typical politician. In short Obama goofed.
What is Borg, KARLOF1?
after obama’s wonderful speech, i was sure his supporters could tone down their irrational hatred of hillary clinton, but maybe even ghandi couldn’t get his followers to keep to a nonviolent plan.
if you admire the man enough to want him for president, can you admire him enough to emulate the biracial understanding?
The best analysis of this situation can be found here:
http://www.counterpunch.com/wise03182008.html
and here:
http://www.counterpunch.com/wise03182008.html
kem, the borg are a fictional hive mind from star trek next generation and subsequent spinoffs.
i agree that obama is a nice young man whose vision is excellent. in four or eight years, maybe he will be as ready to govern as he is today to give a speech. if he becomes our president soon, i wish him all the best.
If we are goimg to hold Obama to account for what the minister of his church said, should we not hold Hilllary Clinton to account for what her husband DID?
Her schedule released today shows that SHE WAS IN WHITEHOUSE almost every time Bill and Monica went at it…the only explanation that I can think of is…THREESOME
Aanyway…Mr Wright described the US as “a racist country with a murderous foreign policy and a corrupt government.”
before we hang Obama out to dry for something someone else said….CAN ANYONE HERE ARGUE AGAINST HIS WORDS?
IS AMERICA NOT RACIST?
IS AMERICA’s FOREIGN POLICY NOT MURDEROUS?
IS GOVERNMENT NOT CORRUPT?
USAn, we’re not talking about special terms. The terms presently do not provide environmental and worker safeguards which really have little impact on Canada because they already have them. Mexico does not, which is why our jobs initially fled to Mexico, not Canada.
mary lou, did you read about Hillary’s lies about Blackwater? In Nov 0f 2007 it came as a big surprise to her that Blackwater was immune from criminal prosecution, although Obama had presented a bill to the US Senate in Feb of 2007 to hold them accountable for crimes and she refused to sign on to it. Explain that, please. And I can well understand her not wanting to release her tax returns. What a conversation that would start.
What a drag for Obama, getting stuck with Lieberman as a mentor. Especially as Lieberman technically and certainly in spirit isn’t even a Democrat.
I think we have an opportunity in Obama to choose greatness for President. Or we can go with McCain, who appears to be starting to dodder, or DLC Republican-lite Hillary, and end up with the same old - same old. Corporations first, people last.
kathyodat
“Snippets of some sermons are being endlessly looped on American television and on YouTube, showing Mr Wright describing the US as a racist country with a murderous foreign policy and a corrupt government.”
While politically dangerous this statement is none the less true!
kathodat: “Or we can go with McCain, who appears to be starting to dodder”
Starting? McCain is a doddering old fool who has lost all credibility, and yet he still has a better than 50% shot at the presidency thanks to the choices of candidates presented to us by the Democrats.
This business with Wright would have no pull if it weren’t for three words: “God damn America.” However, I was pretty upset to hear about him writing off the vicious murders of 9/11/01 as chickens coming home to roost. Whatever white America’s sins against dark-skinned people within our borders or against other nations, the victims of 9/11 did not deserve to die for them, any more than Iraqis have deserved to die for Saddam Hussein. Wright’s remarks reminded me strongly of the ones by Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson. They too blamed America for 9/11, just picking different sins.
I apologize if someone has already said this–but in any case, I think it is worth saying again–
In answer to the question “Why would Obama sit in that church and listen to this preacher he disagreed with?”
–Maybe a church of 8,000 members has more than one preacher and more than one service, so maybe Rev. Wright wasn’t the only teacher.
–Maybe Rev. Wright had a lot of good things to say as well.
–Maybe Rev. Wright was not wrong in his thinking, but wrong only in his delivery, so it would be possible to glean something good from his words.
–Maybe Obama honed his ability to see through the lies and biases rampant in the political world, and learned how to effectively heal that kind of polarizing thinking precisely because he was exposed to Rev. Wright’s extremism.
–Maybe Obama is REALLY a secret Christian, and believes that we can love the sinner AND hate the sin– like Jesus told us to.
–Maybe Jesus did the same thing when he stayed with Judaism in spite of its corruption.
–Maybe we all do the same thing when our preachers, priests and rabbis tell us to hate gays or bomb abortion clinics, or that if we marry unbelievers our children are bastards. Do we listen to them? Maybe not. Do we leave the church? I hope not. Churches are full of fallen people. That’s what churches are for.
Hi ~MAGGIE~, Even if Obama is no longer assigned to his side, he still supports Liberman’s Mid East policies, in spit of his campaign speeches. Check out his votes and what he has said in repsect to the Bush policies on Iraq, Iran and Afganastan and what he has said about Joe Liberman and his stands on those very important issues during the past two years.
I have always said I believe Obama is a fine man, ___ always. I have always said I don’t believe his campaign speeches are in line with his votes, because they are not. By saying that, I have been attacked by many here and accused of being a Hillary lover etc. Which I am not. I have also stated repeatedly, that I intend to vote for whichever of them is the Demo candidate.
You berate me for my final paragraphs of my first blog. __ Why? __ I questioned Obama’s words, they were spoken by HIM. I question them because they don’t make sense to ME. I am not attacking him, or saying he lied for I don’t know that he did. But if a person is a close friend of another and has been for twenty years and states he never heard the person speak the way in private, that he does in his church sermons, it just does not make good sense to me.
I’m not sayng anything nasty about Obama by stating the rather obvious. It’s a bit like someone saying they smoked weed for twenty years, but they never inhaled. Perhaps you would reply to that issue and enlighten me if you agree that everything he said in his speech was credible. That was the only thing he said I disagreed with. But it is an important thing fo rone who wishes to lead our country. ___ Thank you.____Kem.
You got a lot of MAYBES there ~MY2CENTS~. MAYBE the dog would have caught the rabbit if he hadn’t stopped to poop.
If I ever attended a chuch service and the preacher was preaching hate, I would walk out, FOREVER. Any preacher could address the racial problems we STILL have in abundance in America, without preaching hateful comments. This guy has been doing that off and on for over 20 years. What the white race has done to the black race here is deplorable, but there are two sides to every coin and it’s a two way issue now. We are all the same, every human on this God’s Earth and we must do as Obama suggested in his wonderful speech. His suggestions were timely and spoken in a manner which should touch any decent person’s soul.
My2sense, as usual, your 2 cents make a lot of sense.
Juliann,
Which current world leaders, in particular, does Hillary “know”? The same ones she ‘met’ and then had tea with their wives over a decade ago? How many of those ‘wive’s’ husbands are still in power? Or, do you mean other ‘negotiators’ she knows, like Sinbad? Or maybe the ones she perhaps met while standing by ‘her man’ while he gave us NAFTA? Hmmm, not likely, as she is NOW against NAFTA and disavows any complicity in supporting it in the past. But, help me here, she did say she was “part of the administration”, when Bill was President. Wow, maybe those big fights she and Bill had over NAFTA contributed to Monica’s charms. But wait, does that mean Bill would be “part of the administration”, if Hillary were President. Oh my.
It’s strange, I listen to Hillary and I hear half truths and outright lies, spin, and divisive language. She mocks the idea of hope. If that is “brilliant”, we’ve ‘got a long way to go, baby’, as they say.
And one final question for your “well read” and “well educated” “friend”;
Exactly, what the hell is “preacher lite”? I’ll tell ya, it’s divisive labeling that sinks the awareness to a hollow and empty level of stupidity. It’s one of those discussion ending epithets that does no one any good. Sounds like something Hillary would have said. Are you sure your friend thought of that label himself?
My2sense,
Thanks. I hope Obama reads your post. It might be his only way out of this. He’s got to give people some understanding for why a peace loving guy would stay with his family under such teaching. Frankly, I expect that Obama found some of Rev. Wright’s teaching edifying and excellent… if so he’s got to point out what it was so that we can understand. Speeches won’t do it. We need facts. An answer to the “Why?”
“Maybe Rev. Wright had a lot of good things to say as well.”
Yes, I think this might be true. What are they? As of yet, we don’t know.
I would be helped if Obama said something like “I ought to have confronted Rev. Wright on the hateful stuff a long time ago. I’m sorry I didn’t.” Of course, such an admission might doom him politically.
More and more I am reminded of George Clooney’s assessment of President Bush to Rolling Stone: The man can’t read a room. He has no understanding of the moment whatsoever.
Barack Obama can read a room.
He doesn’t just have finesse. He has finesse when undertaking the thorniest subjects. Up to and including times when they threaten his success. This could only serve him well when dealing with world leaders.
And when the moment requires it of him, Obama can knock speeches like this out of the park.
Ladies and gentlemen,
I give you The Un-Bush.
all politicans have ther shortcomings…..but if obama’s speech on race (rev wright) comments does not convince everyone,who SHOULD BE THE NEXT PRESIDENT OF THIS COUNTRY THEN WE ARE ALL DOOMED !!
jlover, you are so right.
RE: - I’m not an Obama fanatic but I was genuinely surprised, it was a really effective and wise speech.
The best one I’ve ever seen Obama deliver - and one with an important message.
RE: - she KNOWS the world leaders the next president will need to sit down with.
Is this in reference to an earlier debate where Obama said that he would sit down with the “President” of Canada and the President of Mexico to renegotiate NAFTA?
David Wilkins did not know anything about Canada either when he became American Ambassador to Canada - his first meeting was with The Council of the Federation and they filled him in quite nicely. Wilkins once said that what he liked about visiting the Arctic was that no one there mentioned Softwood lumber - no trees!
World Leaders (and their State and Provincial counterparts) will go out of their way to fill Obama in on what their issues and interests are. Obama will listen, and will then do what he thinks is in the best interest of America. This latest speech is the best indication yet what Obama considers to be in the best interest of America - noting the contradictions which exist in every community and every person.
RE: - Reverend Wright’s comments shouldn’t be the real story, rather John McCain’s spiritual adviser Reverend Rod Parsley’s should. / John McCain seeked the endorsement of a man who believes America was founded to destory Islam. Why is this not in the news?
The story is not Wright or Madelyn Dunham (Obama’s grandmother) but the very likelihood that Ayaan Hirsi Ali is backing McCain.
I am sure, though, that if McCain alludes to Wright, that Obama will find a way of saying that it doesn’t matter what Rod Parsley thinks - only what John McCain thinks - all the while drawing comparisons between the two. You know I’m right. :evil
RE: - This story manages to bring to my mind the word “insipid”. Now, why is that?
To answer a rhetorical question - because this story seems designed to make the speech less than it is. The entire speech is up on video - anyone here have a link to it?
RE: - I agree, It was a skillful speech that said the right things to defuse the whole brouhaha without sounding like a waffler.
Ok, that was one of the purposes behind the timing of it - but was that really what the speech was about?
Unum Cum Virtute Multorum
(One With the Strength of Many)
RE: - I also wish Obam could have left out the “stalwart ally Israel” and “it’s all caused by Islamic extremism” remarks. Surely he must understand the rage of someone who has had their land robbed, home bulldozed, and family members killed (or does he?)
Might as well provide us with the quote so we can judge for ourselves. Was Obama trying to dispel the notion of anti-semiticism or was he saying that Palestinian children are fair game? That was the issue you just brought up.
RE: - Either Obama believes what he says he does now… or he believes what Rev. Wright teaches on these things, and yet is not saying so.
Or Obama was so used to hearing racism directed at both parts of himself, that he really and truly doesn’t pay attention to it any more. My guess is that Obama figured that grandma’s and reverend’s comments together were the lesson in the way either separately wouldn’t be. The other lesson was that neither his grandmother’s nor his reverend’s inappropriateness preventing them from loving the other - only from trusting the other.
Was reading Shock Doctrine and there was a pristine hospital in New Orleans which did not take black or poor patients. It was fairly empty and, because of that, service was quick. In this case, racism prevented the doctor in the hospital from treating the poor or those who administrated the hospital from opening up it’s doors to save lives.
To work together, though, we have to trust the other.
>Whatever white America’s sins against dark-skinned people within our borders or against other nations, the victims of 9/11 did not deserve to die for them, any more than Iraqis have deserved to die for Saddam Hussein.<
Did two million Vietnamese civilians deserve to die during our war on Vietnam? We dropped a greater tonnage of bombs on that nation then all the air forces in World War II dropped combined. What about the activists, intellectuals and union organizers who “disappeared” in the various countries whose governments we overthrew and replaced with friendly right-wing dictatorships? My point is that when you use violence to achieve your ends, particularly against nations who have never threatened you in the first place, you can’t really criticize others who also find it a useful tool. As a Christian preacher, it’s Wright’s job to point out the log in his own society’s eye, rather than the speck in Osama bin Laden’s.
Wow, the dog fight is really on. Or, maybe it’s just politics as usual.
Anyway, what really bothers me is that I have enough doubt about all three remaining candidates to be seriously worried. The first strike against all three is that they are either Democrats or Republicans - which makes them Corpocrats. Another is that they are either short on experience, or long on the wrong kind of experience. Finally, and most importantly, is that they are all out of their minds for wanting to be president in the first place. What kind of person would want that job?
So, I’m worried about their experience and realize that none of the three candidates is the embodiment of Christ, Albert Schweitzer, or Mother Theresa. What’s a poor slob to do? This poor slob is doing what he’s always done: I’m whittling the field down by a process of elimination.
John McCain is…well, John McCain. “Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb bomb Iran” is closer to his persona than he cares to admit. Hillary Clinton, is a Clinton. We have had a dynasty of Bush’s and while dynasties are fun in football, they don’t play well in the democratic arena. A vote for Hillary truly is a vote for Bill, and most of us have had enough of Bill. That leaves me with Barack Obama. The same smooth-talking skinny mulatto (who at least admits to inhaling) who seems to be able to draw out a modicum of hope from thousands of young people of all colors and genders. The same man who has little worldly experience, as did many other great leaders who started with one thing that many people seem to lack: Passion.
I am not an Obama-ite any more than I am a Nader-ite or any more than I am a Kucinich-ite. I am merely one poor slob who has whittled down his choice to one, and who realizes that sometimes all we’re left with is a choice. Sometimes, what we get is what we have.
That is not what I wrote Riverman. But not surprised to see you twist my words, that’s your style.
You have no idea of how pleased I am that a person such as you disagrees with everything I ever wrote here.
Wright is right in his comments. It’s the corporate media that should be drawn over the coals.
Lord Trigo … you say it like it is mah man. Unfortunately Obama has a snowballs chance in hell of making it to the top. There is no way an average white man in the USA will vote for a black man. It has a lot to do with male ego, pride and a host of other male-centric issues. Obama had the courage to not completely disown Wright and thats saying something but after this speech … forget it … its like handing him a long rope !! Farewell my brother … you tried !
The fry job being administered by CNN and others has carried over to PBS. The PBS analysis on McNeil-Leher last night was the least apt, most biased piece I’ve ever seen on that channel.
If this speech gets negligible air time and doesn’t have it’s impact completely diminished by the twisted media… I’ll be shocked and encouraged.
Wright is right… almost 100%. Obama was deft and moral in his speech.
Regarding his softness on our historical neo-liberalism and unflinching support of Israel, I can almost forgive Obama. After all, where would he be otherwise?
Their control is extreme. Those are the realities of political life here now. Just look at how mildly progressive and centrist Obama is… now compare that with the high warbling, dean screaming the corporate media and Clinton camps are issuing. This isn’t a power grab by Clinton… it’s THE power refusing to loosen it’s stranglehold even ONE IOTA.
gyptian, where do you live that you don’t know any average White guys that would vote for Obama?
Or I should ask, where have you been? White guys put him in the lead.
The racial divide, even in Mississippi is completely overblown because 25% of Clinton’s white vote there was Limbaugh Republican crossover.
Hell, average White guys from MISSISSIPPI will even vote for him…
I give you Idaho, and THUS, I refute you.
wishful thinking on your part maybe?
Here’s a link to the Obama speech.
http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/hisownwords
kathyodat
cranky_chatter i live under a rock .. out here in the left coast … we have our own mobile republic … lots of white, black and colored people !! I do agree withyou about Idaho and yeah white democratic males will probably consider Obama after Clinton but in a general election with ‘wright-like’ smears happening every week they will crush him. I hope you are right but im a friggin cynic.
NOTE that I haven’t listened to or viewed the video yet, so I don’t know what it says; only knowing that what’s quoted below and from the ‘about’ information for the video tells me that I want to view and [listen] to this recording. If it bears words of the reverend as BBC quoted (a little) in a very recent article, last week I believe, then yep, I will be interested. Good speaker, and [thinker], the reverend [is]; from what I’ve gathered so far.
Also note that I have no affiliation with the person or group that posted the video below.
YouTube: “Jeremiah Wright - Obama’s mentor - Hate speech” (03:11)
QUOTE:
From: DemocratsHateTheUS
…
About This Video
“Just words?”
-The Obama campaign said in a statement, “Senator Obama is proud of his pastor and his church.”
-Mr. Wright, who has long prided himself on criticizing the establishment, said he knew that he may not play well in Mr. Obama’s audition for the ultimate establishment job.
“If Barack gets past the primary, he might have to publicly distance himself from me,” Mr. Wright said with a shrug. “I said it to Barack personally, and he said yeah, that might have to happen.”
-”If you want to understand where Barack gets his feeling and rhetoric from,” says the Rev. Jim Wallis, a leader of the religious left, “just look at Jeremiah Wright.”
-Obama has said valuing Wright’s “day-to-day political advice”
-In 2006 Obama & wife gave $60,307 to charity and the largest single amount of that was to Trinity United Church of Christ for $22,500 (less)
Added: March 13, 2008
END QUOTE.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdJB-qkfUHc
Additionally note that I believe it’s been reported that Obama has said, contrary to what’s quoted above from the video page, that he doesn’t rely on Rev. Wright for political advice at all. Iow, there may be some blatant lies in what’s quoted above from the video page.
And DemocratsHateTheUS?
Ha ha ha ha ha ….! Well, sure, I’m democrat in terms of being for democracy (NOT the U.S. DParty), and I, as well as any true and therefore unbiased, fair democrats with the same view, have grounds for hating the US, for we’re told that the U.S. is a democracy, meaning a real one, while this is a LIE. But putting that “bit” of reality aside, RepublicansAlsoHateTheUS too!
Any questions about that? If so, then see Scott Ritter’s article of yesterday.
“Published on Tuesday, March 18, 2008 by TruthDig.com
Dinner With Ahmed
by Scott Ritter”
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/03/18/7738
That SHOULD BE READ by everyone who hasn’t yet read it, and irrelevant to the purpose of this post and page. It should be considered a must.
Anyway, and like Tim Wise writes in the CounterPunch article someone posted a link for further above, it’s not the words of people like Rev. Wright that are a problem, but the ugly and tragic fact that too many “Americans”, i.e., USA’ns, refuse to ADMIT and live up to the TRUTH.
Rev. Wright “blew my mind” with his great words, and they immediately reminded me of great words of Rev. MLK Jr decades ago. This is saying a lot about his words, given I, so far, know very few of them; but assuming he’s quite integral, I’ll thereupon say that he reminds me of Rev. MLK Jr.
Then comes along monsieur establishment Obama, messing everything up all over [again]. Not fully, but pretty well stated was his speech; however, carefully listening to it, and considering it along with his senatorial track record so far, NO WONDER he can legitimately be referred to as being of or aiming to be of The Establishment.
Elect him, sure, for neither McCain nor Billary should be, but if and when elected, his voters better make sure to not be idle; they’re going to need to be energetically active about LEADING him in the right directions.
Reverend Wright is a person of PASSION and compassion, and righteous at that. Obama … [boring], let’s say.
When I heard the news about Rev. Wright I was devasted. I only know too well the injustice that has been taking place within our government. At 18 I was obligated to serve jury duty for a month. Since I was young and curvy officers and the pool officer displayed their worst. I saw money change hands. The jury pool officer used to get his kicks holding out my pool number so that he could sit and look at me. Towards the end of my obligation he actually offered me money for services. This left a impression I would never foget. I knew if I were to ever to get into trouble I better head to Canada without any money.
I understood your reasoning for your initial explanation but I was disappointed for I knew it wasn’t the truth. I also understood your reasoning for the denial. You knew there are people that would not be able to understand. To be honest I think the only thing you demonstrated with your speech is that you have the ability to be diplomatic in difficult circumstances. Those that have condemned you for associating with this preacher are going to continue to condemn you for associating with this preacher. Nothing is going to change their mind, as far as they are concerned what was said is treason. They are too self-alienated to understand where you are coming from. They are learning this self-alienation in our public school system. If everyone wasn’t so brainwashed you might have been able to get through to them but unfortunately they will continue to live in denial. Students end up graduating being dependant on corporate america and manipulated by the media. It is not going to change Barrak until our public education changes. It is going to take several generations before change can truly start taking place in this country.
I was hoping people would learn from the experiences we have had in the past 7 years, but now I am beginning to fear the cycle will continue and this country will keep gaining at the expense of others until it completely destroys itself inside out. It absolutely breaks my heart this is something my grandson is likely going to have to face in his future.
I am hoping people “want” the change you spoke of in your speech. I don’t feel there is much time left before this country is going to get what they “don’t want” by continuing the direction this country is going.
After denying that he knew his long-term pastor’s rhetoric could be viewed by many as bordering on the incendiary, Obama had to give this speech. It was hardly a mark of courage, but only an act of necessity. Few in this country deny that racism exists. That isn’t the issue. What this whole incident points to is Obama’s judgment in having a close, 20-year relationship with a pastor who uses his pulpit and position of authority to express his views in terms that many find objectionable. Since Obama has made his judgment and his desire to “heal” divisions his major qualifications for the presidency, this presents a real problem for him.
As to the Harper/NAFTA controversy, Austan Goolsbee, who did meet with Canadian officials, is the chief economic advisor for the Obama 2008 campaign and has been Obama’s senior advisor since Obama’s Senate run. In that position, he essentially “speaks” for what Obama will do in the Senate and would do as president. Goolsbee is also Senior Economist to the Democratic Leadership Council. Saying that Goolsbee is “not on his staff” is disingenuous. Obama is a centrist, not a populist, and someone who is dedicated to free trade policies. If Hillary is Republican-lite on economic policies, then so is Obama.
“Hillary seems to me to be “Bush Lite”. She’s corporate, and Obama’s the people. Look at the two campaigns. She gets money from lobbyists and PACs, and he gets most of his from over a million small contributors.”
Oh, if only this were true.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/08/09/pacs_and_lobbyists_aided_obamas_rise/
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2006/11/0081275
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/select.asp?Ind=F03
And, after all of this, I would still take Clinton or Obama over McCain. Definitely not my first choices, though.
madcow March 19th, 2008 12:27 pm :
“Obama’s the people.”
His wording seems to strike a note of authenticity seldom heard from glib politicians. He seems to believe what he says he does; whether he would be able to deliver or enact policies is another matter. But, so far, in my eyes, he’s the millennial JFK.
My thoughts on Mr. Obama’s speech:
In light of the media-driven furor over comments from some of Mrs. Clinton’s supporters and Rev. Wright’s words, I was immensely interested in hearing what Mr. Obama had to say. I was impressed by the thoughtful, intelligent and honest way that he discussed his views on race and on Rev. Wright and his inflammatory words. I felt that Mr. Obama showed himself to be a person with a deep understanding of both the issue of race relations in America, and how that issue has evolved throughout our history. He was wise to point out that there are generational as well as experiential differences in the way that Americans view race and racism. My experiences are clearly different than those of my parents and grandparents, and are equally different from those of my daughter. They are obviously different than those of people of color from all generations. This is an inescapable truth, and yet rarely have we heard it expressed in such a frank and articulate manner.
I grew up in Detroit in the midst of the Civil Rights movement, my father served as a police officer during the riots, and we experienced busing first hand. My school chums were both black and white. We eventually left Detroit for northern Michigan. One of my best friends throughout high school, roommate in college and friend for the years since is a white woman that had grown up in northern Michigan. On the few occasions that we discussed racial issues, she expressed a deep fear of the people she called “burr heads,” and would sometimes make racial jokes about blacks, hispanics, asians and people from all sorts of ethnicities. I found her fears ludicrous and ignorant, since the number of non-white people she had actually met in her lifetime could be counted on one hand. I found her racist jokes and remarks offensive in the extreme, and I told her so. Yet I loved her dearly and do to this day. Although we are from the same generation, our experiences and understanding of people of other colors are very different, and those differences shaped our views.
Some of the media pundits and posters here at CD wonder why Mr. Obama would not have long ago disavowed himself from Rev. Wright, especially when he uttered comments and opinions that Mr. Obama says he does not share. Folks could wonder the same of me and my friend. The answer is that I know her, and I realize that her prejudices do not reflect the sum of who she is, but rather her world view as shaped by ignorance and her own experiences and upbringing. Although we have disagreed, often vehemently, and will likely never see eye-to-eye on this issue, she has many other qualities I admire and opinions with which I do agree, and I will always cherish her friendship. The people in my life come in a wide variety of shapes, colors, ages and each with their own unique view of the world. I like it that way. Folks with Christian beliefs might do well to recall that Jesus surrounded himself with a group of men and women from all walks of life, some of them with views and opinions he did not share. Perhaps the lesson here is not that it is our duty to spurn those whose views we disagree with, but rather to embrace them for their better qualities and by example hope to show them a better way.
Although I am disappointed to see the primary season take this turn, it does not surprise me. In an election where the three remaining contenders are a white man, a black man and a woman, I suppose it would be naive to think that issues of gender and race would not eventually surface. As Mr. Obama said, what better time for us to take an honest look not only at where we have been as a country, but how far we have come? I am interested in hearing what all the candidates have to say about this issue, as well as the other critical issues facing our people. It is important. It is a festering wound in our common, American experience. But I also remember that I am not voting for Reverend Wright, or Geraldine Ferraro, or Bill Clinton, or Reverend Parsly. I am more concerned about the views of the candidates themselves, and I have to measure what THEY say against what I know of their respective political histories, voting records, platforms, etc., and determine for myself whether what they say is credible.
IMO, it is unfair to take a few statements made by Rev. Wright (awful as they may be) out of thousands of sermons and assume that those divisive words alone present us with a clear picture of the man, his church and all of the people who make up his congregation. It is equally unfair to take one or two statements made by Geraldine Ferraro (awful as they may be) and ignore all the positive words and accomplishments of her years in public life. Were any of us to have every remark we have ever made used as a yardstick to define who we really are, I doubt that any of us would emerge from such scrutiny looking very saint-like. Even less so, were the yardstick to include not only our own words and deeds, but those of all the various people in our lives, both past and present.
If I surrounded myself only with a homogenous group of friends and family who agree with me on everything, my life would be not only extremely boring, it also be very, very lonely.
Lynching is a true and tried american technique when it comes to dealing with blacks. A sort of high-tech lynching if you will. What the Rev. J said was for the most part true. However there are people in high palces who lied and innocent people died.
grumpyoldlady, right on the money. Thanks for posting a thoughful comment. I agree. We all have our “Jeremiah’s” in our lives, people who utter hateful words here and there (in their moments of weakness, for the most part), but at the same time have a lot of good and noble within them. I was pleased to see that Obama was able to clearly explain why he disagrees with Mr. Wright’s view of the world, while at the same time refusing to reject him as a person. He was both corageous and correct. With this speech, Obama really hit a homerun.
militantliberal,
Rev. Wright _never_ said anyone “deserved” the Sept 11 terrorist actions. This is not what the saying “chickens coming home to roost” means. He said that they were - consequences - of out actions.
“Consequequences.” “Deserved.” These are two entirely different concepts! The conflation of these two concepts seems to ba a peculiar to USAns, borne of their Puritanical roots.
And, sorry to say, but if one genuinely believes in democracy, than it is certainly arguable that we all bear collective culpability for the actons of our collective leaders. Maybe this is my Catholic upbringing, but I certainly regard my soul as stained with the sins of my fellow citizens and so-called leaders. I have done and can do penance by speaking out and participating in protest actions, cut my oil usage to a bare minimum, but, like all mortal sins the stain will remain.
cicero,
And Rev. Wrights “view of the world” notably US foreign policy is wrong how?
It is “hateful” how?
Those thst call Rev. Wrights sermon “hateful” are clinging to an American-exceptionalist mythology that will be our downfall.
No douby you would also call Rev Kings Riverside Church sermon as “hateful” as well.
Until the US people learn to engage in national honesty and national self-criticism, we do not deserve to be called a “democracy” in any way.
USAn, I wrote ‘world’ thinking more ’society’. I wasn’t referring to the international arena, since obviously no criticism of US foreign policy can be harsh enough.
Here’s the excerpt I had in mind (from Obama’s speech):
“The profound mistake of Reverend Wright’s sermons is not that he spoke about racism in our society. It’s that he spoke as if our society was static; as if no progress has been made; as if this country - a country that has made it possible for one of his own members to run for the highest office in the land and build a coalition of white and black; Latino and Asian, rich and poor, young and old - is still irrevocably bound to a tragic past. But what we know - what we have seen - is that America can change. That is true genius of this nation.”
I know a few Jeremiah’s in my immediate surroundings. They may be white, and their racist views may be anti-black rather than anti-white, but in a fundamental way they share the same static view of this country that Obama mentions in his criticism of Jeremiah Wright.
So I’m going to start referring to any person who is stuck in America’s tragic past, as a “Jeremiah”. You see, I’m always looking for ways to expand my vocabulary.
I believe the foreign policy’s are having a direct impact on the domestic; which is why I see this country rotting from the inside out. This country can’t keep on supporting these foreign blunders. Yeah sure, the rich are getting richer but at the expense of the middle class and the poor.
Education, health care, economy not to mention the environment or our aging infrastructure is going right down the drain. So perhaps I am a “Jeramiah” stuck in America’s tragic past for I have remained financially stagnant my entire life.
What is the answer? Do I move from where I currently live to get away from it. Is that how I help my situation heal?
Oh yeah, where does a disabled person move to have a better quality of life? I am open for any and all suggestions. “Jeremiah” wants out, tired of being stuck in America’s tragic past.
Katyodat, thanks for the video!
Iammyself - nodding in agreement.
Riverman101 - Edwards is still the best person for President and don’t tarnish his good name by comparing him to Hillary “I see Imaginary People” Clinton. How do you explain away Clinton’s response to Michael John Hamdani. Oh yes, I forgot, you can’t.
How can you trust Clinton to do right by us (or even right by you) if the polls say the people want blood.
I will leave you with the Official Motto for Greater Winnipeg:
Unum Cum Virtute Multorum
(One With the Strength of Many)
RE: - –Maybe Rev. Wright had a lot of good things to say as well.
Of course! In Obama’s words, Wright just gets distracted once in a while. Would you prefer a leader who sees people as either all good or all bad or someone who can see the good and bad in everyone?
RE: - many of these anti obams are people with low logic and keep showing hypocrisy
You were saying the same thing about the pro-Edwards people way back. Go swim with the catfish if you are going to engage in personal attacks and I promise to throw you a minnow.
RE: - Whatever white America’s sins against dark-skinned people within our borders or against other nations, the victims of 9/11 did not deserve to die for them,
First of all, all people of all ethnic and racial backgrounds died on 9/11 so don’t consider it a crime just against white people. Secondly, more American soldiers have died during the Iraq war than died during the 9/11 attacks. Thirdly, the number of Iraqi civilians who have died since the beginning of the Iraqi war is way off the charts. Forthy, even those Iraqis who hate Hussain’s guts figured that they were better off with him in charge than with the Americans in charge - which the Americans should find quite unflattering being called even worse than Saddam.
Finally, you are dealing with organized crime with Bin Laden. Do you think that Canada should bomb the United States just because the States harbors the Mafia and Hells Angels?
RE: - My point is that when you use violence to achieve your ends, particularly against nations who have never threatened you in the first place, you can’t really criticize others who also find it a useful tool.
Actually you can, as Bush does over and over again, it is just that you are not credible. Btw - did you see the first 10 minutes of The Hour last night - George was making fun of Bush’s speech:
http://www.cbc.ca/thehour/video.php?id=1073
RE: - What the white race has done to the black race here is deplorable, but
Where does the “but” come in, Kem!
What Americans have done to the people of Iraq is deplorable.
What your government has done to its soldiers and its veterans is deplorable.
What NAFTA has done to ordinary working people is deplorable.
I see a pattern here.
Blacks, like whites, have been soldiers, and veterans and working folk. You have something in common.
Ok, this is what you meant, basically, I know, but still needed to make the point. Rabbit ducking as dog raises leg.
RE: - When I heard the news about Rev. Wright I was devasted. I only know too well the injustice that has been taking place within our government.
I only heard the clips that were dug up and they seemed fairly reflective of what I know of America and the treatment of blacks - and the comments concerning whites seem tamer to be that what George Jefferson used to spout. The dirt poor white boy may not feel all that privileged, but on the whole, we whites tend to be.
RE: - As to the Harper/NAFTA controversy, Austan Goolsbee, who did meet with Canadian officials, is the chief economic advisor for the Obama 2008 campaign and has been Obama’s senior advisor since Obama’s Senate run.
We don’t have a transcript of what was said. What we have is Goolsbee being approached by those who were trying to get him to say (or come close enough to saying) something that can be used later against Obama. What Goolsbee admits to saying fleetingly was that he was more concerned with Mexico than Canada - which means that what was put in the memo is likely a “convenient misunderstanding” of the conversation. There was no attempt to get Goolsbee to clarify what he meant.
Harper and his department has been caught a few times recently not being completely honest about a variety of issue. It is at the point where, if asked who I believe more out of Harper or Bush, I would have to give the slight edge to Bush.
That said, Obama had two choices: Obama could either distance himself from the NAFTA issue as a means of making NAFTA-gate go away or he can up the risk and jump more whole heartily into the NAFTA issue - which means that he has more to lose if he doesn’t deliver.
RE: - Although we have disagreed, often vehemently, and will likely never see eye-to-eye on this issue, she has many other qualities I admire and opinions with which I do agree, and I will always cherish her friendship.
I can see that. A few weeks ago I would not believe that there was anything Jack Layton and Lou Dobbs could agree on.
Jack Layton on Lou Dobbs
http://youtube.com/watch?v=N_MR7tL7tWs
Jack Layton’s wife on the topic of Immigration:
NDP challenges immigration changes
TORONTO – NDP Immigration Critic Olivia Chow (Trinity-Spadina) joined with national human right groups to condemn and map out strategies to defeat the Conservative government’s sweeping changes to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. …
http://www.ndp.ca/page/6291
Move to where MA? I seriously doubt at this time in history, that Americans are very welcome anyplace else. The very rich of course are welcome almost anyplace. I see our V/P Cheney spent the weekend on the leader of Oman’s yacht, __ fishing. That’s much safer than hunting birds.
The buuutttt, comes in prior to the rest of the sentence Vaudree, you trying to start somethng again? ___Shove it.
Kem, if it were not for my immediate family I would consider Norway.
It seems to me that they are better educated, better health care system and they treat disabled people with some dignity and respect.
For the life of me, I can’t figure out why this Jeremiah Wright thing is such a big deal. What’s wrong with a little constructive criticism, America? Are you afraid to face it, the horrors we’ve caused in the world?
John McCain’s cozying up the the right wing religous fruitcakes like Hagee is WAY more scary. After all, these guys want to bring on Armagedon NOW! Let loose the nukes! People should be asking McCain if he really believes this nonsense and hold him accountable. And if he believes that Islam is the enemy and that all Muslims should be annihilated. Why is he getting away with this?
cicero,
Your points are correct.
but I would disagree with you, and Obama, on the degree that the concerns of Rev. Wright are “past”.
Like “roosting chcikens”, there is a word for this - “sweeping it under a rug”.
Certainly Wright’s observations on US exceptionalist arogance toward other lands and peoples are not “past”, and based on what I see in my home town, his views on domestic racism and poverty are not “past” either.
And, I find this whole “quit your complaining - that was the past” to be a pretty frightening rehtorical tool to quash dissent.
When Obama takes office, I can assume, then, that he will brand demonstrators against the Iraq occupation (which he will be continuing with minor changes) and US imperial foreign policy and it’s war machine (which he has no intention on changing) with “quit complaining - you are living in the 1960’s”! And, as we all know, there is no quicker way to quash dissent from a bourgeois liberal than to accuse them of being unfashionable.
Drink that Obama kool-aid up, dear liberals! While you engage in your blogospheric-lovefest, we’ll be in the streets.
Finally, you are dealing with organized crime with Bin Laden. Do you think that Canada should bomb the United States just because the States harbors the Mafia and Hells Angels?
This is funny but not funny, the people in this country are so naive. I don’t think the Mafia exists anymore….I believe there has been a Corporate merge.
USAn, our disagreement may be more in degree than in kind. There’s been enough progress on racial issues to justify an embrace of Obama’s optimistic outlook. At the same time, we are sufficiently far from perfection to also justify, at least in some moments of hopelessness, screaming like a desperate Jeremiah.
I think Obama is, right now, doing the job he is supposed to do. While acknowledging we have problems, he invites us to join him in taking things to the next level. In the context of an election and the need to attract votes, an optimistic outlook is likely to be more productive.
A few restatements of relevant remarks:
“I categorically denounce any statement that disparages our great country or serves to divide us from our allies.”
Obama, in the Huffington Post
Then, in his speech:
“But the remarks that have caused this recent firestorm weren’t simply controversial. They weren’t simply a religious leader’s [Rev. Wright’s]effort to speak out against perceived injustice. Instead, they expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country – a view that sees white racism as endemic…”
[”Endemic” seems to be a pretty good description of what I see.]
“and that elevates what is wrong with America above all that we know is right with America;…”
[This is just so much rhetoric that says nothing. Even a mass murderer has a lot of right things about them - but the wrong things are doozys!]
” - a view that sees the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam.”
If Obama genuinely believes that this even faintly reflects reality in the Middle East, and Palestine in particular, he is frighteningly off in a fantasy-land.
Well ~BIG STINKY~, Obama thought the reverand’s words were appalling, so did the vast majority of Americans, so that’s the BIG deal. The preacher’s words were not constructive criticism, or an attempt to heal our racial problems. Instead they are the type of words that in-flame hatred and racial discord. Race in American is a two way street now and we ALL have to work to stop prejudice, look to the future, remeber the past and attempt to not allow that to ever happen again. That was what Obama was saying and he said it very well.
Well ~MA~, you may consider Greenland. I see that actually is going to be a greenland now with all of their ice melting. Maybe the Danes will allow home-steading there. It’s very quiet there, not horribly polluted and the Northern Light’s displays are awesome. Start a cattle ranch, or grow cotton or raise sheep. If ten families settle, someone will start a chuch and pretty soon you’ll have an atomc power plant, a drag strip, a McDonalds and a Wal-Mart. ___ Finally, drive by shootings.
“There’s been enough progress on racial issues to justify an embrace of Obama’s optimistic outlook.”
Your remark may be true among the bourgeois circles in which Obama moves.
but here, and now, in 2008, in Pittsburgh,there is overt, flagrant racist discrimination in most of the kinds of jobs and housing that keep most black poeple, particulrly black men, dirt poor, and justifiably embittered - and I doubt Pittsburgh is all that unique.
1. I have seen, first hand, overt discussions among my neighbors, to keep black people from purchasing homes on our street when a house goes on themarket. There are even “good” real estate agents who people know that can trust to keep blacks out of the neighborhood.
but, then showed no ojection to a series of derilict heroin addict white women renting a fled-to-the burb’s slumlord’s house on the street, causing considerable probelms.
2. On construction projects, I have seen, first hand a complete lockout of blacks from the construction trade unions - even the Laborers International. Such living-wage jobs are inaccesable to them.
3. My brother worked as a cemetary groundskeeper for a couple Catholic cemetaries in the city. The racism, and raciist slurs and jokes among his co-workers was aboslute. No black will be working for the reasonably well-paying and unionized Catholic Cemetary Association anytime soon (yes, they hire protestants). It was ultimately the last straw that led him to emigrate to Canada. He is now gainfully employed as a wage-earner in Toronto.
4. I have seen numerous cases of police stopping and harassing black people for nothing more than walking down the sidewalk - the only way to avoid it is to dress twice as smartly than any white person has to. I have yet to see the police stop any of the thousands of publicly drunk, loud, public-uninating white suburban kids poeple that fill a street near me every Friday and Saturday nght.
5. Black enrollment has visibly plummeted in the the major State Universities I have attended or visited since graduating with my first degree in 1980.
6. There have been a nunber of police killings of unarmed black people - including a 12 year old kid - over the past decade. But never any whites.
7. In a liberal hipster bar on the southern “front of gentrification” in the previously black East Liberty neighborhood I saw an elderly black man ejected from the bar for nothing more than “acting excessively black” (i.e “cutting up” etc…)
I’m out of time for more examples…
USAn , there is no doubt rascism is alive and well. My father told me if I didn’t end a relationship of mine the family was going to repudiate me. I repudiated myself from my family. Now that this campaign has gotten heated I hear the rascist slurs “every single day’ double since this preacher ordeal has made the press. It is horrible.
RE: - The buuutttt, comes in prior to the rest of the sentence Vaudree
We both know that Kem. It is not that there was anything wrong with what you meant to say. It is just that we should all get out of the habit of putting a “but” there because it makes it look like (though I concede it was definitely not your intention) that we are dismissing that history.
You of all people should know how easy it is to fly off the handle over something that even remotely appears to be a slight!
It is like Israel telling Palestine “Ok, we killed innocent Palestinian children but that was past history, let’s be friends” (or the other way around) rather than “There have been enough deaths and it has to end for both our sakes. Let’s work together for peace.” The former is divisive and dismissive and the latter is both sides looking for common ground to move forward.
RE: - we ALL have to work to stop prejudice, look to the future, remeber the past and attempt to not allow that to ever happen again. That was what Obama was saying and he said it very well.
See, I knew that was what you meant.
Strange that both the Irish and the Ukrainians had Potato famines which basically turned into genocides. The English (in the case of the Irish) and the Russians (in the case of the Ukrainians) refused to let them keep enough potatoes to survive. What were a few dead Ukrainians or Irish when potatoes were selling for a premium price!
And then there is the Chicago School boys of Milton Freeman - which is the true ideology behind all the things we need to remember.
RE: - When Obama takes office, I can assume, then, that he will brand demonstrators against the Iraq occupation (which he will be continuing with minor changes) and US imperial foreign policy and it’s war machine (which he has no intention on changing) with “quit complaining
Not if he wants a second term. Obama is no John Edwards, but he’s the best we got. Bush may be a liar and a cheat, but he never promised before he was elected to be any different. He said debating Kerry that the US should not be beholden to the UN and actually scored points for that disgusting comment.
RE: - This is funny but not funny, the people in this country are so naive. I don’t think the Mafia exists anymore….I believe there has been a Corporate merge.
I know the French Mafia in Quebec still exists.
MA_Matriarch, agree that one thing Bush did was legalize some forms of organized crime and that the line between organized crime and the practices of some corporations were often blurred. Both use schmiergelder to influence the electoral process and conduct business.
RE: -Instead, they expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country – a view that sees white racism as endemic…” - [”Endemic” seems to be a pretty good description of what I see.]
There was nothing in Obama’s speech to indicate that racism, in some shape and form, isn’t endemic - he seems to feel that it is endemic from all sides, though.
Though I concede that no politician in their right mind will quit as long as they still have a chance, the Repugs do benefit from a prolonged battle between Clinton and Obama. As long as they (and their supporters) keep fighting each other, neither are going after McCain.
That is how Obama sees racism something that keeps us fighting each other instead of focusing on fighting everything McCain represents - and, despite compassionate conservative image, McCain is the real enemy.
RE: - It was ultimately the last straw that led him to emigrate to Canada. He is now gainfully employed as a wage-earner in Toronto.
Ok, it is not as extreme in Toronto, but it still exists.
“And, sorry to say, but if one genuinely believes in democracy, than it is certainly arguable that we all bear collective culpability for the actons of our collective leaders.”
USAn,
I agree, and am doing some of the same things as you to right some of my wrongs. We may see some things differently, but I think our hearts are in the same place. Seems like most of us are having this struggle. It’s good to know I’m not alone.
Peace.
Thank you for the lessons ~Vaud~, this KID needs all the help he can get. I write like I speak, that’s how it is.
“I’m out of time for more examples…”
USAn, your examples are very educational for many of us. (keep bringing them on). Your larger point is…what exactly? That racism still exist? I don’t think too many here in CD will argue with that. I don’t think Obama will disagree either. Can you concede that there has been significant progress in the arena of racial harmony?
We are free to focus on either side of the question. We can bitch endlessly about the lack of sufficient progress (and we would be right to do so), or we can acknowledge that some progress has been made (and we would also be right). All I’m saying is that, as a political strategy, Obama is focusing on the most productive side of this equation. He knows things are far from perfect, but he also has a very sharp instinct for what needs to be emphasized in a national election. He could be a “very principled” candidate and just run to make a strong symbolic point. But apparently he has decided to go for the whole enchillada, and that requires speaking to a larger audience.
So, tell me, are you criticizing Obama’s goal, or the methods he is using to reach his goal?