Reflections On Obama's Speech

If you're watching this speech in the suburbs of Philadelphia and are an undecided voter... please let me know what you thought.

For a biracial candidate living at the cusp of a postmodern era, Barack Obama's identity has been remarkably coherent and well-contained. Rev. Jeremiah Wright's discordant rhetoric poses the first real existential threat to the "Barack Obama" who has captured the hearts and minds of so many Democratic voters -- and, perhaps more importantly, piqued the curious admiration of non-Democrats.

In his speech today, instead of casting Wright out, throwing him overboard, trying to write him off, Obama did the opposite: he incorporated Wright into Barack Obama, LLC. Wright's evolution becomes part of America's evolution, which is part of Obama's story.

In no uncertain terms did Obama renounce -- morally condemn -- the hateful, anti-Semitic, anti-American and just plain bizarre rants of his pastor -- "former pastor," as Obama now calls him. But he did not reject him. He refused to reject him. He is daring, in essence, his white liberal supporters to accept what Wright's anger represents -- a legacy of oppression -- and daring the rest of white supporters to take a leap of faith him... and asking them to expand their minds a bit and see that Wright is preaching in a tradition that has a context that is directly related to the material and spiritual conditions of all Americans.

The sell will be easier for white liberals, I think. The speech was magnificently written. It was internally consistent with Obama apparently believes.

How it plays will determine how it plays. If the media focuses more on the Wright defense-by-renouncements and then juxtaposes them with clips of Wright's comments, then I think the trouble remains. The seeds of doubt about who this guy really is may be nourished. I know that Obama believes that a discussion about race plays to his benefit, no matter what people think about white working class voters and their latent feelings. Perhaps this is the beginning of his opportunity to lift the veil and get everyone -- not just himself and the media -- to talk openly.

Problem is... so far, this is a one way conversation. It's ... well, the tiny media scrum debating Rev. Wright... and Obama preaching to the country. There's no give. There's go back and forth. A one way conversation is a lecture.

CW tells us that white voters tend to become nervous when Democrats and liberals lecture to them -- even when they lecture eloquently and respectfully -- about race. Will they, this time? What do you think?

Comments

I'm sorry, what were Wright's anti-semitic statements? Can you provide a link or a citation, Marc?

Posted by Alex F | March 18, 2008 11:35 AM

I think that if Obama really believed any of what he said he would never have launched the racial attacks against the Clintons and he would have fired Jesse Jackson Jr.

Obama is all talk. He is the most cynical manipulator of peoples hopes and desires that I have ever seen in my life.

Posted by ken | March 18, 2008 11:36 AM

I think that if Obama really believed any of what he said he would never have launched the racial attacks against the Clintons and he would have fired Jesse Jackson Jr.

Obama is all talk. He is the most cynical manipulator of peoples hopes and desires that I have ever seen in my life.

Posted by ken | March 18, 2008 11:36 AM

I think that Ken is a troll. What do you think?

Posted by Steve LaBonne | March 18, 2008 11:38 AM

I for one believe that it was an excellent speech, well written and well delivered, and (as Marc here just said) entirely consistent with Obama's beliefs about race, religion, and this great nation.

As for the media, they have a choice here: will they continue to focus of sideshows and distractions, or will they take the opportunity provided by Obama to engage in a more profound discussion of race in this country? The choice is entirely theirs (and yours, Marc) to make.

Posted by DaveWoo | March 18, 2008 11:38 AM

Actually the suburbs are where the people with college degrees live; you need to ask what people living in Scranton or white ethnic enclaves of Philly proper thought.

Posted by Nicholas Beaudrot | March 18, 2008 11:38 AM

Still not sure what this will do. Wright's comments are still out there - as well as the fact that Obama stood by his pastor for twenty years. The common voter won't be impacted by this.

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by matt | March 18, 2008 11:39 AM

I'm all for staying above the fray but I dont think this does it.

This just creates an impasse.

Posted by Kim | March 18, 2008 11:40 AM

Interestingly enough, most people at the Corner who had gotten themselves in a frenzy over Wright seem to begrudgingly acknowledge it was a good speech.
For all it is worth ...
They certainly will keep on trying to make the details of the Wright connection stick but I think they will have more trouble arguing this says anything about Obama's views on race

Posted by Benjamin | March 18, 2008 11:40 AM

America's Original Sin of Slavery?

Obama is now toast. Bring out the Thomas English Muffins.

Posted by Robert | March 18, 2008 11:41 AM

What Nicholas said.

Posted by Kim | March 18, 2008 11:42 AM

DaveWoo:
The TradMed can start by focusing on McCain's idiocy as shown by Marc's fellow Atlantic blogger, Big Media Matt Yglesias. It can also focus on real issues. Iraq. The Economy. Stuff like that.

Posted by Joe Klein's conscience | March 18, 2008 11:43 AM

Let's look at this in historical context.

Republicans become very respectable people. Think of what His Majesty's government must have though of these secessionists who had the audacity to create their own country --- the United States.

Similarly, terrorists become very respectable too. Look at Menachim Begin --- who bombed the King David Hotel.

By not denying the history, OBammBamm gives us a perspective, and a better way to go beyond it.

Would you rather have the entire history suppressed? Discussions off limits?

Some places use that method. Try having a discussion about Japanese war crimes and guilt in Japan.

I am more comfortable that he has acknowledged the past, and reminded us that we have now moved beyond it.

Posted by D | March 18, 2008 11:43 AM

yeah, Obama is toast. slavery was awesome!!!

Posted by the bipolar bear | March 18, 2008 11:44 AM

It was the most honest assessment of race relations I've ever heard - and yes, Ken is a troll.

Posted by Brian | March 18, 2008 11:44 AM

Jeremiah Wright's anti-semitic remarks.

And the hits keep coming.

http://minx.cc/?post=257959

Posted by Mitch | March 18, 2008 11:44 AM

Perhaps one of the greatest speeches I have heard on any topic. Once again, Obama assumes that the American people are smart. Once again he calls us to act on principles. And once again, he is calm, compassionate, measured, and fair. He does not rise to fear. This is as good a leader as we have ever had or can hope to have. As for the two-way conversation on race, religion, etc., that's the one the American people have to have. Obama is not afraid of it.

P

Posted by PBurns | March 18, 2008 11:44 AM

That was the most amazing speech i have ever heard in my life!!!!

Posted by Ronald | March 18, 2008 11:45 AM

Steve: Yup.

I see the conundrum of lecturing on race but not a way out of it. People can juxtapose Obama's words with the rest of what they're hearing--the constant loops of Wright are their own lecturing on race, after all, from another direction. Hopefully (and I see signs of it) most people are tired of this by now and hope someone can produce a fix for the economy.

Posted by Deborah | March 18, 2008 11:47 AM

I think he hit it out of the park. He didn't just state that blacks have a right to be angry and try to pass it off like that, he mentioned how whites have a right to be upset with the state of race issues as well and he framed both sides of the issue. He truly understands this issue, more than probably any politician in America today. As far as how it affects the electorate? Only time can tell, but it surely didn't make matters any worse and I think it could help a great deal.

Posted by Steve | March 18, 2008 11:48 AM

Best part - Obama's acknowledgement of white resentment

So when they are told to bus their children to a school across town; when they hear that an African American is getting an advantage in landing a good job or a spot in a good college because of an injustice that they themselves never committed; when they’re told that their fears about crime in urban neighborhoods are somehow prejudiced, resentment builds over time.

He's the only one who can do a Nixon-to-China on affirmative action. If it's successful - if he can convince blacks and white liberals that discrimination is discrimation, even if its in "reverse" - there's your next president.

Posted by John Q. Public | March 18, 2008 11:49 AM

This is the best speech on race that I have seen in my lifetime (27 years). It's daring, it asks us to go where most of us don't want to go--understanding why we might be, just a bit, racist and how we might be able to move, ever so slowly, towards something better. Unlike Mitt Romney who gave us platitudes about Mormonism (and only mentioned being Mormon once)--Senator Obama dealt with the race question, and that or Reverend Wright, head on. Like a real leader. The main question I still have is whether the whole of America is ready for such a leader. I know that I am.

Posted by Kishore | March 18, 2008 11:49 AM

What gives Barack Obama to lecture us on racism and hatred? Obama chose to join an Afro-Centric Church where his own mother would feel unwelcome.

And Obama put his blinders on and said nothing about Jeremiah Wright's evils until ABC News and Fox got their hands on the videotapes!

See No Evil should be Obama's new campaign slogan.

Posted by Mitch | March 18, 2008 11:50 AM

I agree vehemently and enthusiasitcally with Mr.LaBonne.

Posted by LBA | March 18, 2008 11:51 AM

I agree vehemently and enthusiasitcally with Mr.LaBonne.

Posted by LBA | March 18, 2008 11:51 AM

I think it fell flat. As the parade of African American pastors on the networks this morning have indicated, Wright's sermons lie outside the mainstream of many black churches around the country. Rather than trying to fit a discussion of Wright's comments into the context of "the African American Church," he would have been better to castigate Wright and take him on for the anti-American idealogy, which is the bigger issue here. The anti-American issue feeds directly into the Republican email campaign and the general anti-Democrat fear campaigns for the last 40 years. This speech did nothing to put that to rest, or answer the underlying questions about his candidacy that that feeds, and if he's the nominee, that issue will come back with a vengeance. I think it's likely that this issue will remain and will be a killer in the general election.

Posted by CharlieV | March 18, 2008 11:51 AM

Duh. We all know what the speech is going to be hailed as. "It's the turning point in the campaign." That's a self-fulfilling prophecy that the press has been collectively making for the past 24 hours.

It is, in fact, the best speech given by any politican this cycle, but even if it were just pretty good, it would have exceeded expectations. It's a speech by Barack Obama. he writes and delivers great speeches. What was he going to do, write and deliver a Hillary Clinton speech, or a John McCain speech? The media couldn't have possibly done Obama a bigger favor by hyping this speech up. Now, they get to tell us how they just KNEW it was going to be a great, important speech. They literally told Obama the kind of speech he had to give, and he gave it. And now they're pleased. This stuff isn't rocket science.

Jeez. You'd think the commenters here would be a little more savvy to the cycles of the press narrative by this point in the campaign.

Posted by Joe Drymala | March 18, 2008 11:53 AM

I think Obama was talking about political journalists as yourself who have an obsession with what divides us than the common challenges we face.

Marc, you sound a ton like Pat Buchanan on MSNBC right now...you have this grudging respect for the speech, but seem to hope that the country is too racist to take Obama's path.

The mistake of Rev. Wright and Marc Ambinder: that America is static.

Posted by RKA | March 18, 2008 11:54 AM

I think Obama is an exceptional candidate, but this "lecturing", reminding us of America's "sins" are not going to fly with Regan Democrats in OH, WV and PA.

If Democrats embrace him, McCain is our President, if they abandon him, blacks create a revolt. Welcome to Democratic Party Revolution!

I talked to some of the uncommitted Democrats in PA, living in Lehigh Valley and many of them fail to understand the continued affection of Wright from Obama; they are really turned off by that. Per my personal count, 5 Obama leaning supporters are now Clinton or McCain supporters now. 1 stuck with him (college student) and 3 were still lukewarm.

Posted by American | March 18, 2008 11:55 AM

I'm going to have to second Alex's comment: I haven't heard Rev. Wright say any anti-Semitic comments. The clip Mitch helpfully provides is controversial, admittedly, but anti-Jew? Hardly.

If Marc wants to follow the AIPAC line that any comment suggesting the Israel-Palestinian issue is in any way connected to 9/11 or any other extremist terrorism is anti-Semitic, that's fine. But he shouldn't make mischaracterizations about Wright's language or contribute to the false thinking that Blacks are anti-Semitic.

Posted by Steve W. | March 18, 2008 11:55 AM

The great irony regarding this Wright flap is that Obama makes so many of us proud to be Americans again. This speech is Exhibit A.

How will it play, you ask? The opposition architecture is already built, so in a way it's a silly question. It'll play along predictable lines (just watch your comments section). But that doesn't mean that the Obama campaign - win or lose - will not become part of the quest for racial harmony in the history books. Consequently, this speech was not only significant, it was historic.

Posted by nepat | March 18, 2008 11:55 AM

I've been the proverbial spook that sat by the door my entire career, watching those who didn't deserve it get the promotions because of their ethnicity, while I did the real work.. This speech may not win the election, but it is something I've been waiting my entire life to hear someone speak about.

You can spin it how you want, but the truth is hard to fight.

Preach on my brother, preach on!

Posted by Alvin | March 18, 2008 11:55 AM

The problem for someone like me - white, independent, undecided, familiar with Wright's more bizarre comments - is that I don't see how this speech moves the ball forward. What is there in this speech that we didn't already know yesterday?

There also seems to be an admission that Obama was indeed in the audience when Wright made some incendiary remarks. If that is the case, why did Obama not state this on Friday? Instead he parsed his words very carefully.

This battle can't be won by claiming there is truth to what Wright has said - I think Marc is acknowledging that. White middle America is not going to vote for someone who attends a church founded by an influential black liberationist.

The new pastor has not rejected Wright's incendiary sermons, and Obama still goes to the church. That's really the problem - it's not a question of whether we can all 'transcend' race. White America would be more inclined to elect an atheist. Unfortunately.

Posted by sbj | March 18, 2008 11:55 AM

I think Obama is an exceptional candidate, but this "lecturing", reminding us of America's "sins" are not going to fly with Regan Democrats in OH, WV and PA.

If Democrats embrace him, McCain is our President, if they abandon him, blacks create a revolt. Welcome to Democratic Party Revolution!

I talked to some of the uncommitted Democrats in PA, living in Lehigh Valley and many of them fail to understand the continued affection of Wright from Obama; they are really turned off by that. Per my personal count, 5 Obama leaning supporters are now Clinton or McCain supporters now. 1 stuck with him (college student) and 3 were still lukewarm.

Posted by American | March 18, 2008 11:55 AM

An excellent speech, as one would have expected. If one reads it rather than watches it, of course, the emotional impact is muted -- perhaps a reason why those of us who watch no television remain somewhat immune to Senator Obama. Interestingly, he now acknowledges that he heard some controversial statements from the pews of Trinity UCC, and that he knew Wright was a sometimes overly fierce critic of the U.S. The devil is in the details, Marc. He seems to be contradicting his prior statement on HuffPo -- or perhaps in that statement he was restricting himself, in a legalistic way, to the statements Wright made in the clips all over YouTube. Either way, he is not being entirely forthright, choosing instead to incorporate Wright into Barack Obama, LLC, as Marc puts it -- and indicting his white grandmother for racism at the same time. She must love that.

In the end, I tend to go with Shelby Steele's insightful analysis of Senator Obama and his success: "Mr. Obama's run at the presidency is based more on the manipulation of white guilt than on substance." Senator Obama is superbly able to play on emotion, among whites and blacks alike. Again there is some immunity, this time among Latinos and Asians who are left out of the black-white crucible. This speech does not convince me; as Marc says, it is Obama's core supporters who will be most convinced, and I'm sure they will continue to rise to his defense. The essential problems remain: judgment and "post-racial" unity are Obama's main selling points, and the long, intimate association with Wright challenges both. In the end, we are all better served -- particularly Andrew Sullivan, who seems to project onto Senator Obama in a remarkably transparent fashion -- by looking at how our own narcissistic needs are met when Obama shines his incredibly bright light upon us and makes us feel like the center of the universe (or at least like the center of a movement). Much is made of the Clintons' narcissism, but in a clinical sense only Bill Clinton is a narcissist. Senator Clinton is made of rather different stuff. But Senator Obama, on the other hand, is a classic narcissist. No one else can make you feel quite so special and important. This speech simply plays on that psychological truth in a masterful way.

Posted by ezr | March 18, 2008 11:56 AM

For me, hearing this speech is one of those moments I'll cherish to my grave. I sat in my car in a parking lot on the edge of Lake Michigan. The weather is foggy.

Marc, you essentially make the case that choristers like me don't need preaching to. Maybe, and I can't speak for the demographic you're curious about. But I disagree. There are those few who need to be the salt, the leaven. To use a militaristic analogy that's dissonant with Obama's rhetoric, to be the tip of the spear. The Wright affair had the possibility to take the fight out of us. Not this time.

Also, recall that this is shifting to a superdelegate fight. Polls be damned, Obama beats Clinton in pledged delegates. You can be sure that the party elders heard this speech, and see a man who can rise from a firestorm that would engulf any other candidate.

Posted by Tungsten | March 18, 2008 11:56 AM

Once again, Obama calls on us to acknowledge the better angels of our nature. Part of healing is speaking the truth -- and it is about time that American start to have a real dialogue about our past. And yes -- slavery was this nation's original sin - how can it not be? Even many of the founders felt this, but compromised on the issue for another 80 or so years to hold the union together.

America has a choice now - the same choice I think that the Obama campaign has called on us to make since the beginning. To rise to the challenge to embrace a more united, positive future, or to continue in the squabbling and divisive finger pointing that will only leave us with a trashed environment, a trashed geopolitical situation, a trashed economy. We cannot afford that given the real crises we face. For me, Obama's candidacy has never been about race (but then I'm a white female Gen Xer). It's been about possibility and healing the red/blue divide. But of course -- there is a much greater rift that divides us -- that everyone is afraid to talk about. And perhaps his candidacy will launch this dialogue. The media (bloggers included) can rise to the challenge and keep the discussion productive. It is their choice. And it is our choice in how we interact with those we encounter daily - our friends who support another candidate, or don't see eye to eye with us. Can we be courteous, positive, hear them out, acknowledge their viewpoint while speaking constructively of our own. In short, can we outgrow this collective national adolescence and act like true adults in a democracy?

Posted by EFWalsh | March 18, 2008 11:56 AM

Sorry for the length - got carried away.

Marc - you say: "Problem is... so far, this is a one way conversation. It's ... well, the tiny media scrum debating Rev. Wright... and Obama preaching to the country. There's no give. There's go back and forth. A one way conversation is a lecture."

"the tiny media scrum debating Rev. Wright"? Is that what the media is doing Marc? A debate, to me, implies rational thought, arguments and counterarguments, intellectual honesty even. What I see are edited clips, lacking nuance and any semblance of context. What I see are white pundits pontificating on the deeper meaning of race in America (obviously their strength), conservative pundits pontificating on the impact this will undoubtedly have on the voter (obviously their strength) and a surfeit of mainstream, sanitized Beltway pundits, offering cliches and soundbites.

Marc - you describe two roads running in parallel, going nowhere - Obama "lecturing" the voter and the media holding a "debate" about race. But I see a more complex back and forth with many layers that excludes the media. Conversations around dinner tables, at work and school. Debates between uncommitted voters and Hillary supporters and Barack supporters. It is dialogue between the candidates and their staff, and the power brokers. It happens on this blog, in the comments section, and in thousands of other blogs.

The media, opining endlessly and in uniformed circles, has been removed from this equation. It offers nothing that the voter cannot find more completely online, or amongst friends. As our mainstream media continues its slow swirl down the drain into oblivion, this is but one more example of its uselessness and unhelpfulness. It could add a welcome voice to this debate...but instead it chooses to edit clips, invite pundits and debate about whether or not this will sway superdelegates.

Barack tried the media way last week - going on all the shows, giving lengthy print interviews. His answers were thoughtful and cogent. The media ignored all of these efforts and continued the same tired one-way monologue. In this speech, Barack has chosen to try and cut the media out of the equation - and speak directly to the voter, knowing his speech will be posted on youtube and watched by millions. Punditry and editing excised.

Posted by Steve Jones | March 18, 2008 11:57 AM

Phenomenal speech -- home run. I hope we deserve this guy and I'll walk on nails to help get him elected.

Posted by cb | March 18, 2008 11:57 AM

Fundamentally, IMO we may at some point, even Nov 2008, elect an African American president, but we wont ever elect a Black president.

Posted by Kim | March 18, 2008 11:57 AM

Joe may have written the next Colbert report: Obama will give a Clinton speech, Clinton will give a McCain speech, and McCain will give an Obama speech. Among the demographic who follow political blogs, people would pay money to see this.

No PA readers in here?

Posted by Deborah | March 18, 2008 11:57 AM

Sorry for the length - got carried away.

Marc - you say: "Problem is... so far, this is a one way conversation. It's ... well, the tiny media scrum debating Rev. Wright... and Obama preaching to the country. There's no give. There's go back and forth. A one way conversation is a lecture."

"the tiny media scrum debating Rev. Wright"? Is that what the media is doing Marc? A debate, to me, implies rational thought, arguments and counterarguments, intellectual honesty even. What I see are edited clips, lacking nuance and any semblance of context. What I see are white pundits pontificating on the deeper meaning of race in America (obviously their strength), conservative pundits pontificating on the impact this will undoubtedly have on the voter (obviously their strength) and a surfeit of mainstream, sanitized Beltway pundits, offering cliches and soundbites.

Marc - you describe two roads running in parallel, going nowhere - Obama "lecturing" the voter and the media holding a "debate" about race. But I see a more complex back and forth with many layers that excludes the media. Conversations around dinner tables, at work and school. Debates between uncommitted voters and Hillary supporters and Barack supporters. It is dialogue between the candidates and their staff, and the power brokers. It happens on this blog, in the comments section, and in thousands of other blogs.

The media, opining endlessly and in uniformed circles, has been removed from this equation. It offers nothing that the voter cannot find more completely online, or amongst friends. As our mainstream media continues its slow swirl down the drain into oblivion, this is but one more example of its uselessness and unhelpfulness. It could add a welcome voice to this debate...but instead it chooses to edit clips, invite pundits and debate about whether or not this will sway superdelegates.

Barack tried the media way last week - going on all the shows, giving lengthy print interviews. His answers were thoughtful and cogent. The media ignored all of these efforts and continued the same tired one-way monologue. In this speech, Barack has chosen to try and cut the media out of the equation - and speak directly to the voter, knowing his speech will be posted on youtube and watched by millions. Punditry and editing excised.

Posted by Steve Jones | March 18, 2008 11:58 AM

Perfect. As I said before and as Obama said today, in order to be a Christain you have to act a Christain. You denounce the sin not the sinner. And I believe his words that he could not denounce the man Wright who is like a father to him any more than he could denounce his Grandmother who probably had some of Geraldine Ferarrors views on race. Obama is all pieces of America, he can not deny the white mother who bore him and the white community that raise him nor can he deny the color of his skin.

Posted by sonya | March 18, 2008 11:58 AM

It was a well-crafted and clever speech. It will play very well with Democratic primary voters and caucus-goers. It will probably persuade more than a few super-delegates. Howvever, it was an egghead speech, written and delivered by an egghead that will succeed wildly with other eggheads. That is the key weakness.

I don't think this will be enough to convince millions of working-class and rural whites. Part of Obama's problem is the contrast between his calm, elequent speech and the visceral anger of Wright's rantings. If people have only read Wright's sermons then this speech would probably be the end of the story. But to see and hear Wright is a different matter. His grandmother may have admitted her fear of black men but she did scream about black violence in front of thousands of other whites on a routine basis.

Also his line about people disagreeing with their pastor will not hit home with Catholics like it does with Protestants. Catholic priests do not 'take the stage' and preach for an hour at a time. They certainly do not scream and gesticulate as does Rev. Wright. Nor are they allowed to express such radical opinions. Most Catholics, unlike Mr. Obama, would not sit in the pews for 20 years. I suspect this controversy and this speech will only deepen his troubles with Catholic voters.

Overall, while this speech may pause the Wright scandal for the duration of the Democratic nominating contest and help assure Obama the nomination (ultimately), it will not be enough for the general election.

Posted by Thomas the Wraith | March 18, 2008 11:58 AM

Sure Obama can give a good speach. No one has ever doubted that.

Now, look at his campaign in relationship to the words he just spoke.

Does he live up to the them? NO

If he did he would have fired Jesse Jackson Jr. long ago.

Posted by ken | March 18, 2008 11:59 AM

Sure Obama can give a good speach. No one has ever doubted that.

Now, look at his campaign in relationship to the words he just spoke.

Does he live up to the them? NO

If he did he would have fired Jesse Jackson Jr. long ago.

Posted by ken | March 18, 2008 12:00 PM

Sure Obama can give a good speach. No one has ever doubted that.

Now, look at his campaign in relationship to the words he just spoke.

Does he live up to the them? NO

If he did he would have fired Jesse Jackson Jr. long ago.

Posted by ken | March 18, 2008 12:00 PM

Post it 3 more times, ken. People still aren't paying attention.

Posted by Joe Drymala | March 18, 2008 12:01 PM

Echoing Alex F, where did Wright make an anti-Semitic statement? Please substantiate this allegation (smear) or delete it.

Posted by Paleo | March 18, 2008 12:02 PM

I think Nicholas is wrong. Philly suburbs matter. These people are college educated, but are not your upscale urban liberals. Many of them vote Republican, particularly in parts of Delaware and Chester counties. This is swing country, and if Obama can't convince them, he loses the state big.

Posted by Naveen | March 18, 2008 12:03 PM

Also - dudes. Come on. The question of how it will play among voters is irrelevant. The target audience wasn't voters. The target audience was the press. The press ginned up these years-old comments and made them into a controversy, and only the press can change the subject.

The voters will follow whatever the press tells them is important. Twas ever thus.

Posted by Joe Drymala | March 18, 2008 12:05 PM

Thomas the Wraith doesn't think this will be enough to convince millions of working-class and rural whites.

Maybe so. That's where Obama's big gamble is - he's treating "working-class and rural whites" as thinking, feeling human beings. He's gambling that, not only is this approach intellectually honest but it's also politically smart. He says that Americans are fundamentally good and capable of change - and he's putting his money where his mouth is.

Posted by John Q. Public | March 18, 2008 12:10 PM

The speech was an excellent blend of themes and issues that orbit around the question of race in this country. Regardless of whether you are an Obama supporter, it would seem that at the very least one would have to give him immense credit for not dodging the bullet, but rather addressing it head on. Of course, in a campaign speech, not all nuances can be addressed and explored, but this speech effectively described the playing field, which, with a good deal of luck, could expand the level of racial discourse in this country.

That said, as many of the folks posting here demonstrate, the urge to dismiss the speech will be strong. The cynics and the mainstream media will engage in ad hominem attacks and cherry picking because it grabs attention.

The headline on CNN directly after the speech is a case in point. Basically, they picked the slavery "taint" on the Constitution comment. Infotainment continues to degrade the level of discourse in this country. Unfortunately, there are no quick fixes to this problem.

Posted by Scott Carlson | March 18, 2008 12:11 PM

The French have a saying: To understand all is to forgive all.

What's different about Obama is that he doesn't come from one side of an argument or represent just one group. No knee-jerk responses. He listens. He understands.

As a result, people don't get 'ginned up', but think. And then they talk. Calmly. With everyone. That's how we get solutions, and that's why we want Obama to be our leader. Because he already is.

Posted by Tom J | March 18, 2008 12:14 PM

quite honestly one of the weakest dishonest
speeches of all time

Posted by bob | March 18, 2008 12:16 PM

quite honestly one of the weakest dishonest
speeches of all time

Posted by bob | March 18, 2008 12:16 PM

SERMON
The Audacity to Hope
Jeremiah Wright
http://tinyurl.com/yp5xqm

READ IT

It's not hard to find audio and transcripts of entire sermons on of Rev Wright the web. I've read and listened to them. They aren't racist, anti-American at all. Sometimes Wright talks about oppression and pain, usually with reference to the history of racism in this country.

Don't base your whole assessment of his preaching on the 45 seconds of clips shown on TV, and some vague sense that there are "hours" more.
I'm telling you now, I'm not seeing those other hours, and I've looked pretty hard. Everything else I've seen or read has been pretty focused on Jesus, and applying the lessons of Jesus to daily life.

Posted by Fred | March 18, 2008 12:17 PM

Excellent speech! About time some one said it out loud! I am Black. I was raised by my grandmother, who was born in 1917. She was a cleaning woman and greatly prejudiced. I listened to her tales of white racism, something I didn't experience and I empathized, but did not endoctrinate her views into mine. I lived in a different time. I went to a predominately white school. I didn't judge people by color like she did! But I understood. A lot of people have adopted the ideology of their parent's time, and can't get passed it. Barack is saying, let's acknowledge people's pain and let's get past it. In another generation or at the most two, a person's color will not be an issue. My granddaughter may have an Asian/American female U.S President and that sure would be nice!

Posted by Shaaronie | March 18, 2008 12:17 PM

I am a 29 white woman who grew up in Idaho, incredibly naive about racial difference and the legacy of racism. After college, I spent 3 years in rural Mississippi teaching at an all black high school in one of the most impoverished parts of the nation.

I have lived and worked on both sides of the racial divide and have learned along the way how complicated issues of race, justice, & economic disparity intersect. I have seen fear, mistrust, and racism in the white community as well as fear, mistrust, & racism in the black community.

Obama presents some of the most honest & difficult truths I have ever heard from a politician with candor, humility, & grace.

He is not a perfect man — but he has enormous insight & wisdom. This was a courageous moment in American politics. I can’t conceive of voting for anyone else. Even if his campaign should somehow fail, I consider myself lucky to have heard this speech today & to be part of the generation that has witnessed & worked for his campaign.

Posted by Elena | March 18, 2008 12:18 PM

I am a 29 white woman who grew up in Idaho, incredibly naive about racial difference and the legacy of racism. After college, I spent 3 years in rural Mississippi teaching at an all black high school in one of the most impoverished parts of the nation.

I have lived and worked on both sides of the racial divide and have learned along the way how complicated issues of race, justice, & economic disparity intersect. I have seen fear, mistrust, and racism in the white community as well as fear, mistrust, & racism in the black community.

Obama presents some of the most honest & difficult truths I have ever heard from a politician with candor, humility, & grace.

He is not a perfect man — but he has enormous insight & wisdom. This was a courageous moment in American politics. I can’t conceive of voting for anyone else. Even if his campaign should somehow fail, I consider myself lucky to have heard this speech today & to be part of the generation that has witnessed & worked for his campaign.

Posted by Elena | March 18, 2008 12:18 PM

The fact is still that Wright is antiamerican. Obama lied yesterday saying he never heard wrights comments. Today he said he had!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by jim t | March 18, 2008 12:20 PM

The flaw in Obama’s character and approach might be that, despite his immaculate political astuteness, he does not have the the experience, intellect or the emotional sincerity, and I mean inner core emotional sincerity (not public) needed for the job. His denunciation of Farrakhan and Wright was never real and all expedited in order for him to establish the bar “the firstness” if you will. Suffice to read the recent declarations of NY Lieutenant Governor, David Peterson, and his sincere, mind-boggling declaration of extramarital affairs (of both equally he and his wife) to observe in effect an outright sincere, uncompromising future president of the United States. Obama cannot start to fill Mr. Peterson’s shoes. There the stuff presidents are made of. Ultimately, here what I consider Mr. Obama irrevocable shortcoming. If he wanted to change this nation why he couldn’t change his pastor and church? Why he never confronted his pastor on this issue until it came up in youtube? If this was such an important issue why he did not schedule this speech until the hateful rhetoric of his mentor was exposed? Convenient indeed. Convenient since he now accepts he had witnessed Pastor’s Wright hateful rhetoric.

Posted by Kelvin Alejandro | March 18, 2008 12:20 PM

The fact is still that Wright is antiamerican. Obama lied yesterday saying he never heard wrights comments. Today he said he had!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by jim t | March 18, 2008 12:20 PM

The fact is still that Wright is antiamerican. Obama lied yesterday saying he never heard wrights comments. Today he said he had!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by jim t | March 18, 2008 12:20 PM

I haven't been able to hear the speech yet, but from your summary it sounds like Obama did everything I hoped and expected he would do. You are right that Obama has been remarkably consistent in his message and in his identity. As I'm already a supporter, this justs reaffirms my support for him. Maybe it won't sway folks who have already made their choice or made up their minds about the Wright affair, but among the undecideds and open-minded I think it will help. As for how the media will cover it, I have no idea, I've given up trying to predict their bipolar behavior. But I don't think the national media narrative has had much of an impact on the actual reality of the race on the ground yet, so I don't know how much I should care.

Posted by former deaniac | March 18, 2008 12:22 PM

As Obama delivered this speech I was struck by the fact that I have never before witnessed a speech of this caliber in my lifetime (I am 50). He has a gift, a gift of understanding, a gift of verbalizing his thoughts, and a gift of bringing people together. I am inspired by his tenacity, encouraged by his strength, and overwhelmed by his brilliance. He has a vision unlike any politician in my lifetime. I will be proud to call him: President.

Posted by LH Texas | March 18, 2008 12:24 PM

As Obama delivered this speech I was struck by the fact that I have never before witnessed a speech of this caliber in my lifetime (I am 50). He has a gift, a gift of understanding, a gift of verbalizing his thoughts, and a gift of bringing people together. I am inspired by his tenacity, encouraged by his strength, and overwhelmed by his brilliance. He has a vision unlike any politician in my lifetime. I will be proud to call him: President.

Posted by LH Texas | March 18, 2008 12:24 PM

This was a very amazing speech. I'm still in awe.
I felt that the entire subject was unapproachable and he showed that it is not.

Posted by Dub | March 18, 2008 12:24 PM

Obama's ability to view both sides of such a sensitive issue as race is what makes him such a transformative politician. His faith that Americans can do the same thing is what makes him such a great leader.

Posted by Roman | March 18, 2008 12:26 PM

Nice try, Barack. Great speech.
But I have started to read the reports of the media and they are already cherry picking parts of the speech out of context. Unfortunately, it will be hard to get the majority of people to read or watch the entire speech, and it will fail to gain it's full impact.

Posted by Bill | March 18, 2008 12:30 PM

When Senator Obama's preacher thundered about racism and injustice Obama suffered smear-by-association. But when Religious Right leader Francis Schaeffer -- denounced America and even called for the violent overthrow of the US government, he was invited to lunch with presidents Ford, Reagan and Bush, Sr.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/frank-schaeffer/obamas-minister-committe_b_91774.html

Posted by Roberta Tracewell | March 18, 2008 12:31 PM

MR. OBAMA IS NOT THE RACIST, KEN THE TROLL IS. KEN LOVES REV. J. WRIGHT TOO, DEEP DOWN WANTS TO BE A MEMBER OF TRINITY

Posted by RICK | March 18, 2008 12:32 PM

MR. OBAMA IS NOT THE RACIST, KEN THE TROLL IS. KEN LOVES REV. J. WRIGHT TOO, DEEP DOWN WANTS TO BE A MEMBER OF TRINITY

Posted by RICK | March 18, 2008 12:33 PM

OBAMA did not make these comments. Rev. Wright did. I would't want to be held accountable for everything my friends and relatives said. I don't throw them away because I don't agree with them. Give the man a break. I'm a 73 year old white woman and Barack Obama is the hope of the future. Don't let your fears and kneejerk reactions blind you to that. I have no doubt that the world will be a better place with Barack Obama in the White House.

God be with you, Mr. Obama.

Posted by Joan | March 18, 2008 12:33 PM

MR. OBAMA IS NOT THE RACIST, KEN THE TROLL IS. KEN LOVES REV. J. WRIGHT TOO, DEEP DOWN WANTS TO BE A MEMBER OF TRINITY

Posted by RICK | March 18, 2008 12:33 PM

One of the best speeches I have ever heard. Gave me chills. This will be the speech that wins him the Presidency. I'm definitely voting for him as a 32 year old white American from Pittsburgh living in Manhattan at the moment.

Posted by wallstreet | March 18, 2008 12:33 PM

I don't think this is good news at all from Obama. The liberals naturally will embrace this because they want this controversy. He's on defense big time. If we think that this is going to help him, I really battle to see this.

Posted by Steve | March 18, 2008 12:35 PM

I am a white, formerly conservative female from the west. My views in general and political views in particular have been evolving over the years. I thought that Obama's speech was briliant and evocative and......true. Within each of us we have our shadow selves. We might think that we harbor no prejudices, but if we delve deep enough, can we honestly admit to ourselves that this is the case? Just like he said. This is not openly discussed in polite conversation. Prejudices have been subtlety simmering under the 'radar' for years, even centuries. I would stand and say that I am not prejudiced, yet, if I am honest, like his grandmother, I have felt fear upon crossing paths with a black man walking alone. My father's ancestors fled France upon persecution from the Catholics in the late 1600's. My grandfather was raised in South Carolina and instilled prejudices against blacks and Catholics in my father. I think that acknowledging that these prejudices exist and are a reality for Black America is a start. The problem has to be brought out into the open and discussed for it to begin to be solved. Like he said, for those who lived in the time of segregation, it is not so easy to forgive and forget. The hope is with the next generation. The elimination of prejudices will not happen overnight, but it has to start somewhere. For that reason, I would vote for Obama in November. I would not cast that same vote for Hillary Clinton.

Posted by Pam | March 18, 2008 12:36 PM

I am a white, formerly conservative female from the west. My views in general and political views in particular have been evolving over the years. I thought that Obama's speech was briliant and evocative and......true. Within each of us we have our shadow selves. We might think that we harbor no prejudices, but if we delve deep enough, can we honestly admit to ourselves that this is the case? Just like he said. This is not openly discussed in polite conversation. Prejudices have been subtlety simmering under the 'radar' for years, even centuries. I would stand and say that I am not prejudiced, yet, if I am honest, like his grandmother, I have felt fear upon crossing paths with a black man walking alone. My father's ancestors fled France upon persecution from the Catholics in the late 1600's. My grandfather was raised in South Carolina and instilled prejudices against blacks and Catholics in my father. I think that acknowledging that these prejudices exist and are a reality for Black America is a start. The problem has to be brought out into the open and discussed for it to begin to be solved. Like he said, for those who lived in the time of segregation, it is not so easy to forgive and forget. The hope is with the next generation. The elimination of prejudices will not happen overnight, but it has to start somewhere. For that reason, I would vote for Obama in November. I would not cast that same vote for Hillary Clinton.

Posted by Pam | March 18, 2008 12:37 PM

Racial prejudice is perpetuated by our politicians and press more so than general population.

Time is slowly healing past and current sins... however, the need to sell a story, or win the favor of a private interest group make this time longer than necessary.

For informational purposes ... slavery is NOT a sin unique to America... in fact it has been practiced throughout time.... it was unconcionable 3,000 years ago, as it was a few hundred years ago.

Posted by Peter Cholakis | March 18, 2008 12:37 PM

Racial prejudice is perpetuated by our politicians and press more so than general population.

Time is slowly healing past and current sins... however, the need to sell a story, or win the favor of a private interest group make this time longer than necessary.

For informational purposes ... slavery is NOT a sin unique to America... in fact it has been practiced throughout time.... it was unconcionable 3,000 years ago, as it was a few hundred years ago.

Posted by Peter Cholakis | March 18, 2008 12:37 PM

Racial prejudice is perpetuated by our politicians and press more so than general population.

Time is slowly healing past and current sins... however, the need to sell a story, or win the favor of a private interest group make this time longer than necessary.

For informational purposes ... slavery is NOT a sin unique to America... in fact it has been practiced throughout time.... it was unconcionable 3,000 years ago, as it was a few hundred years ago.

Posted by Peter Cholakis | March 18, 2008 12:37 PM

Why did Barack Obama have to give this speech about Jeremiah Wright? (No, it was not about racism. It was about saving his campaign).

Because he is a typical politician who realized that his less-than-truthful comments about Wright were threatening to derail his campaign.

Case in point. Last week, Obama steadfastly denied hearing inflammatory comments from Wright in the pews, yet in his speech today he said, "did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes."

Why did Obama wait until last week to dump Wright from his African American Religious Leadership Committee a mere three months after being tapped as a board member?

Because Obama is a typical politician who worried that Wright was damaging his campaign.

Why will Obama lose in November if he even gets the nomination?

Because Americans will not vote for a candidate who portrays himself as an idealistic unifier when - in fact - is just another typical politician.

Posted by john lannert | March 18, 2008 12:38 PM

I am white and 57. My father used the N word a lot. But, I never saw my father ever treat any person of color disrespectflully. I saw his actions speak louder than his words. I too struggle with the unfamiliar, I too struggle with the racism of the past being hammered into me. But I realize it is my struggle and not that any other person is less than me or as such deserves less respect than I want for myself. We are all in one country and need to be on one team to succeed as a nation. Obama is right and many of the rest of us are wrong. Whether he is elected or not, does not tarnish the truth of his message which is simple, "put past devisive issues aside and work for a better and more united future where opportunity is available to all."

Posted by Dean | March 18, 2008 12:39 PM

I am a white, formerly conservative female from the west. My views in general and political views in particular have been evolving over the years. I thought that Obama's speech was briliant and evocative and......true. Within each of us we have our shadow selves. We might think that we harbor no prejudices, but if we delve deep enough, can we honestly admit to ourselves that this is the case? Just like he said. This is not openly discussed in polite conversation. Prejudices have been subtlety simmering under the 'radar' for years, even centuries. I would stand and say that I am not prejudiced, yet, if I am honest, like his grandmother, I have felt fear upon crossing paths with a black man walking alone. My father's ancestors fled France upon persecution from the Catholics in the late 1600's. My grandfather was raised in South Carolina and instilled prejudices against blacks and Catholics in my father. I think that acknowledging that these prejudices exist and are a reality for Black America is a start. The problem has to be brought out into the open and discussed for it to begin to be solved. Like he said, for those who lived in the time of segregation, it is not so easy to forgive and forget. The hope is with the next generation. The elimination of prejudices will not happen overnight, but it has to start somewhere. For that reason, I would vote for Obama in November. I would not cast that same vote for Hillary Clinton.

Posted by Pam | March 18, 2008 12:40 PM

This is how one can use adversity to one's advantage. Brilliantly authentic!

Posted by bil | March 18, 2008 12:40 PM

I am a white, formerly conservative female from the west. My views in general and political views in particular have been evolving over the years. I thought that Obama's speech was briliant and evocative and......true. Within each of us we have our shadow selves. We might think that we harbor no prejudices, but if we delve deep enough, can we honestly admit to ourselves that this is the case? Just like he said. This is not openly discussed in polite conversation. Prejudices have been subtlety simmering under the 'radar' for years, even centuries. I would stand and say that I am not prejudiced, yet, if I am honest, like his grandmother, I have felt fear upon crossing paths with a black man walking alone. My father's ancestors fled France upon persecution from the Catholics in the late 1600's. My grandfather was raised in South Carolina and instilled prejudices against blacks and Catholics in my father. I think that acknowledging that these prejudices exist and are a reality for Black America is a start. The problem has to be brought out into the open and discussed for it to begin to be solved. Like he said, for those who lived in the time of segregation, it is not so easy to forgive and forget. The hope is with the next generation. The elimination of prejudices will not happen overnight, but it has to start somewhere. For that reason, I would vote for Obama in November. I would not cast that same vote for Hillary Clinton.

Posted by Pam | March 18, 2008 12:40 PM

ezr "In the end, I tend to go with Shelby Steele's insightful analysis of Senator Obama and his success: "Mr. Obama's run at the presidency is based more on