Full text of Obama's speech this morning (1 Viewer)

[champ76]

I think simply Obama recognizing what, unbelievably, many people on this forum failed too, that Wright's comments were indeed "too far", divisive, and not in keeping with Obama's tone or message.

I agree. But just as attacking Sister Souljah worked for Bill Clinton politically, this may work for him. I take him at his word. I hope he means it.

 

[SaintJ]

You killed your credibility here, and you know why.

In his defense, the crime of mutilating a corpse usually carries a less stiff penalty than negilgent homicide.

At least according to Wikipedia.

 

[LSSpam]

I think most of us recognized it, and were curious to see what he'd do with it. He went a little further than Jesse's famous "repudiate the message" toss-line.

If this speech ends up carrying real weight, it stands the risk of being the first day of the shutdown of some cottage industries in race-baiting on both ends of the spectrum. I can't believe that would be a bad result for anybody.

Although some commentators might think it's the exact same thing as Nixon talking about his dog.

The only possible negative I see is a little too much "dancing in the streets" and "na-na-na-boo-boo" by Obama supporters which will lesson the impact of the speech by automatically putting independents and republicans who were critical of Wright on the defensive. I'm already seeing some of it on CNN.

It's ironic, of course, because Obama in a sense takes both sides to task. Which is precisely why it's a great speech. He doesn't say one side or the other is wrong, he acknowledges the hurt feelings and justice on both sides, but his ultimate message was "that's beside the point, those aren't the real problems".

Did a wonderful job of addressing the controversy head on, not dismissing it, and yet signaling intent to "move on".

 

[SaintJ]

I agree. But just as attacking Sister Souljah worked for Bill Clinton politically, this may work for him. I take him at his word. I hope he means it.

Champ, you seem like you generally lean pretty conservative (correct me please if I mischaracterize you). I'd be interested in your answers to a couple of questions, if you don't mind.

1. Was Obama sufficiently unequivocal and clear for you about his relationship with Wright and his ideas?

2. Strictly politics, or worthy of adding to the total weight of data one could use for insight into who this guy really is?

 

[Pasty]

In his defense, the crime of mutilating a corpse usually carries a less stiff penalty than negilgent homicide.

At least according to Wikipedia.

 

[Saint77]

So, lemme get this straight.

Dude nailed the racial divide in this country, for the most part. He outlined several historical cultural reasons for why things are the way they are. added in all kinds of extra goodness and stuff, and wrapped it all around the core issue of "I don't agree with what the reverend wright said, but hes still my boy"

It really was a great, well crafted, well performed speech, but I dont see where he actually said anything new? He seems to have brought resolving racial issues the the forefront in hopes of moving the wright issue to the background. At least, thats my impression.

Im not saying hes wrong in what he said in his speech, Im just feeling a shell game here.

 

[Pasty]

So, lemme get this straight.

Dude nailed the racial divide in this country, for the most part. He outlined several historical cultural reasons for why things are the way they are. added in all kinds of extra goodness and stuff, and wrapped it all around the core issue of "I don't agree with what the reverend wright said, but hes still my boy"

If it had been delivered without substance or flippantly, you could make that argument. He specifically likened the spiritual formation he received from Wright (who had expressed racist views in his worst moments) to the rearing he received from his white grandmother (who had expressed racist views in her worst moments). To me, that's a little more than "he's my boy." It's an admission that racism is part of all of us, and that we cannot distance ourselves from it--we can only try to heal those wounds and move forward.

 

[LSSpam]

It really was a great, well crafted, well performed speech, but I dont see where he actually said anything new?

The key points for me were

1) An excellent and clear explanation of the African-American grievance which gives rise to people like Rev. Wright.
but yet
2) An empathetic understanding of why white people bristle at that sort of rhetoric and where they are coming from emotionally

And then
3) A well crafted call to arms to move past all of this, acknowledging it exists but recognizing it's not the core problem. Which is a message of unity and lofty ideas.


Those were the elements that make this important. His explanation of himself, where he is coming from, how he is distinct from Wright but yet associated with Wright, fine, well, and good. But you're right, not new. The below however, that's as good an addressment on race relations as i've ever heard from any candidate ever.

 

[RebSaint]

So, lemme get this straight.

Dude nailed the racial divide in this country, for the most part. He outlined several historical cultural reasons for why things are the way they are. added in all kinds of extra goodness and stuff, and wrapped it all around the core issue of "I don't agree with what the reverend wright said, but hes still my boy"

It really was a great, well crafted, well performed speech, but I dont see where he actually said anything new? He seems to have brought resolving racial issues the the forefront in hopes of moving the wright issue to the background. At least, thats my impression.

Im not saying hes wrong in what he said in his speech, Im just feeling a shell game here.

He didn't say anything new and arguably it was a purely political speech--damage control, if you in light of the Wright controversy but it gave him a real opportunity to address race vis a vis larger issues such as healthcare, crime, etc.

My only problem with Obama lies in his solution to all these problems--more money and more government programs and intervention.

 

[DMaestro]

In his defense, the crime of mutilating a corpse usually carries a less stiff penalty than negilgent homicide.

Well done, sir.

The only possible negative I see is a little too much "dancing in the streets" and "na-na-na-boo-boo" by Obama supporters which will lesson the impact of the speech by automatically putting independents and republicans who were critical of Wright on the defensive.

Damned astute observation.

 

[SoonerJim]

In his defense, the crime of mutilating a corpse usually carries a less stiff penalty than negilgent homicide.

At least according to Wikipedia.

We outsourced the post-mortem business years ago; it took away from my SR.com posting time.

 

[LSSpam]

1) An excellent and clear explanation of the African-American grievance which gives rise to people like Rev. Wright.
but yet
2) An empathetic understanding of why white people bristle at that sort of rhetoric and where they are coming from emotionally

And then
3) A well crafted call to arms to move past all of this, acknowledging it exists but recognizing it's not the core problem. Which is a message of unity and lofty ideas.

I don't think people understand the importance of this yet. Few great speeches are recognized for their import when they happen.

No significant politician in my memory has ever addressed race quite so. Generally speeches on race are aimed at one demographic or another. You don't talk about race unless you want that race's vote.

If you want the black vote you talk about the struggle, the injustice, and about righting old wrongs. If you want the white vote you talk about reverse racism, affirmative action, and pulling yourself up by the bootstraps.

This sort of recognition of and validation of the emotions on both sides of the issue is rare, rare, rare. Hell even on this forum you have a hard time getting people to do it in a single post. They may do it in one thread and then play the other side in a different thread, but the natural "reaction" is to push against one side or the other at any given time.

Obama pushed against both. It was an admonishment and an olive branch. A "I understand where you are coming from, but we have bigger things to do". It was exactly the right note. You can't ask someone "to move on" without validating their feelings. And you can't validate one side of an argument and expect the otherside to be ok with it.

It was a wonderful speech and potentially could serve as a clarion call in how racial rhetoric is handled in politics. Yes, possibly that important.

 

[saintfan-n-alex]

Nice recovery, that should shut some mouths.

most of what he said was irrelevant to his past associations with the Rev. - you either attend and support a church or you dont - if you find offense in a church you should find a new one or work to fix the one you have.

i dont care what the other side of this Rev. has to offer - he is whats wrong with some in this country, in interviews of his followers they said they believe what he says - not the sort of attitude i would want from any elected official - even though some may consider this guilt by association (which i dont) i would want someone who claims his "judgment" as a selling point for his competence of office to be better than this.

 

[JimEverett]

Bring on the GOP, we got us a candidate!

 

[champ76]

Champ, you seem like you generally lean pretty conservative (correct me please if I mischaracterize you). I'd be interested in your answers to a couple of questions, if you don't mind.

1. Was Obama sufficiently unequivocal and clear for you about his relationship with Wright and his ideas?

2. Strictly politics, or worthy of adding to the total weight of data one could use for insight into who this guy really is?

He satisfactorily rebuked Wright although he didn't really address why it has taken him so long to do so. I can guess. Politics. Just like politics forced him to say something now. But the message is clear, and if repeated over and over again, just may get this country past the usual race baiting politics practiced by Sharpton, et al. These guys and gals are all politicians. It's hard to understand what they really believe. I am not going to vote for Obama but since there is a fair chance he will be our next president, I am interested in understanding him. I take him at his word that this is what he believes. If the politics of the moment made him (finally) say it, then so be it. I think a true test will be if this is his final word on the subject, or if he will make it a more central part of his campaign. He is in a unique position to do a lot for racial healing in this country, regardless of whether he wins.