Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 48

Thread: Obama Gives a Presidential Speech About Race

  1. #1

    Obama Gives a Presidential Speech About Race

    [B][SIZE="4"]Obama Gives a Presidential Speech About Race[/SIZE][/B]

    Assuming Barack Obama goes on to claim the Democratic nomination, there is little doubt that voters, particularly white voters in swing states, will by the end of the fall campaign know the name Jeremiah Wright like they once knew Willie Horton. The vaunted “Republican attack machine” will see to that—if Mr. Obama’s own foes within the Democratic Party don’t first do so.

    But just because his enemies try to undermine Mr. Obama by linking him to his former minister’s inflammatory words doesn’t mean they will succeed. And Mr. Obama’s speech on race on Tuesday, carried live by all of the cable news channels and sure to dominate evening newscasts and morning newspapers, has made it far less likely that they will.

    For one thing, he delivered an address that was specific in its condemnation of Mr. Wright’s well-publicized sermon and also sophisticated in its exploration of America’s racial journey and the contradictions it has fostered within people. Accordingly, Mr. Obama managed to insert some distance between himself and the caricature of Mr. Wright that has emerged while also avoiding any charges that he was simply engaged in damage control and pandering.

    But the bigger and more basic reason the speech was a success is that Mr. Obama, like Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan before him, has something powerful and rather rare working in his favor: Most Americans instinctively like him and want to give him the benefit of the doubt. And Mr. Obama delivered for them on Tuesday.

    The threat of the Wright controversy, of course, has been that it might strip Mr. Obama of his status as a racially transformative leader, a black man with the ability to win in non-black areas, something that general-election polls show him doing against John McCain. Past black presidential candidates, most notably Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, never demonstrated this potential, because—fair or not—most white voters believed (and still believe) that they were and are excessively focused on race and too quick to cry racism.

    The Jeremiah Wright that the masses were introduced to through the YouTube clip that will forever define him seems, to the average white voter, like another polarizing black leader of the Jackson and Sharpton mold. Thus it was necessary for Mr. Obama to reassure, in unequivocal terms, the white voters who have been so receptive to him from the start of his campaign that they have been correct in not tuning him out the way they’ve tuned out past black candidates.

    He certainly tried.

    Mr. Obama, in his speech, said that the Wright the public had met harbored “views that denigrate both the greatness and the goodness of our nation—that rightly offend white and black alike” and that could “widen the racial divide.” He also said that Mr. Wright had 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.”

    More than that, he charged that Mr. Wright’s comments reflected an ignorance of or a refusal to accept America’s racial progress. “He spoke,” Obama said, “as if our society was static … 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.”

    Those who listen to or read about a speech like this will invariably hear and see what they want to. But that’s likely to be good news for Mr. Obama, because many Americans—and, certainly, most Democrats—want to like him and want to believe in him. Most of those Americans, upon being introduced to Mr. Wright through his YouTube clip, reacted with reflexive hostility. But Mr. Obama, with his speech, gave them reason to believe that he reacted the exact same way—that he is, therefore, exactly the kind of person they have long believed him to be.

    Just hours before he gave his speech, a new Gallup poll was released that found that 62 percent of Americans have a favorable opinion of Mr. Obama, with only 33 percent viewing him unfavorably. (By comparison, the spread for Hillary Clinton was 53 to 44 percent.) Other data also confirms the unusual personal goodwill of most Americans toward Obama: An NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll earlier this week found that Mr. Obama scored significantly higher marks than Mrs. Clinton in areas like “honesty and straightforwardness” and on whether he has “high personal standards that set the proper moral tone for the country.”

    Because of their experiences in most recent elections, there is an inherent pessimism among Democrats about the fall campaign. The “Republican Attack Machine,” they have come to believe, can and will carve up anyone their party puts up. Not surprisingly, the Clinton campaign has been exploiting this insecurity. Whether they say it or not, they clearly hope Democrats will treat the Wright episode as reason to fret over Mr. Obama’s general-election durability.

    But what Democrats forget too often is how easy they’ve made the Republicans’ job in past elections. Neither John Kerry nor Al Gore nor Michael Dukakis nor Walter Mondale nor Jimmy Carter (the 1980 version) ever inspired any kind of personal affection from the electorate, the kind that would win them the benefit of the doubt when the mud started flying. But Mr. Obama does. And it’s why his response to the Wright matter, risky though it may have been by conventional standards, was a powerful one.

    [url]http://www.observer.com/print/66668/full[/url]

  2. #2
    [QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;2441458][B][SIZE="4"]Obama Gives a Presidential Speech About Race[/SIZE][/B]

    Assuming Barack Obama goes on to claim the Democratic nomination, there is little doubt that voters, particularly white voters in swing states, will by the end of the fall campaign know the name Jeremiah Wright like they once knew Willie Horton. The vaunted “Republican attack machine” will see to that—if Mr. Obama’s own foes within the Democratic Party don’t first do so.

    But just because his enemies try to undermine Mr. Obama by linking him to his former minister’s inflammatory words doesn’t mean they will succeed. And Mr. Obama’s speech on race on Tuesday, carried live by all of the cable news channels and sure to dominate evening newscasts and morning newspapers, has made it far less likely that they will.

    For one thing, he delivered an address that was specific in its condemnation of Mr. Wright’s well-publicized sermon and also sophisticated in its exploration of America’s racial journey and the contradictions it has fostered within people. Accordingly, Mr. Obama managed to insert some distance between himself and the caricature of Mr. Wright that has emerged while also avoiding any charges that he was simply engaged in damage control and pandering.

    But the bigger and more basic reason the speech was a success is that Mr. Obama, like Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan before him, has something powerful and rather rare working in his favor: Most Americans instinctively like him and want to give him the benefit of the doubt. And Mr. Obama delivered for them on Tuesday.

    The threat of the Wright controversy, of course, has been that it might strip Mr. Obama of his status as a racially transformative leader, a black man with the ability to win in non-black areas, something that general-election polls show him doing against John McCain. Past black presidential candidates, most notably Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, never demonstrated this potential, because—fair or not—most white voters believed (and still believe) that they were and are excessively focused on race and too quick to cry racism.

    The Jeremiah Wright that the masses were introduced to through the YouTube clip that will forever define him seems, to the average white voter, like another polarizing black leader of the Jackson and Sharpton mold. Thus it was necessary for Mr. Obama to reassure, in unequivocal terms, the white voters who have been so receptive to him from the start of his campaign that they have been correct in not tuning him out the way they’ve tuned out past black candidates.

    He certainly tried.

    Mr. Obama, in his speech, said that the Wright the public had met harbored “views that denigrate both the greatness and the goodness of our nation—that rightly offend white and black alike” and that could “widen the racial divide.” He also said that Mr. Wright had 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.”

    More than that, he charged that Mr. Wright’s comments reflected an ignorance of or a refusal to accept America’s racial progress. “He spoke,” Obama said, “as if our society was static … 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.”

    Those who listen to or read about a speech like this will invariably hear and see what they want to. But that’s likely to be good news for Mr. Obama, because many Americans—and, certainly, most Democrats—want to like him and want to believe in him. Most of those Americans, upon being introduced to Mr. Wright through his YouTube clip, reacted with reflexive hostility. But Mr. Obama, with his speech, gave them reason to believe that he reacted the exact same way—that he is, therefore, exactly the kind of person they have long believed him to be.

    Just hours before he gave his speech, a new Gallup poll was released that found that 62 percent of Americans have a favorable opinion of Mr. Obama, with only 33 percent viewing him unfavorably. (By comparison, the spread for Hillary Clinton was 53 to 44 percent.) Other data also confirms the unusual personal goodwill of most Americans toward Obama: An NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll earlier this week found that Mr. Obama scored significantly higher marks than Mrs. Clinton in areas like “honesty and straightforwardness” and on whether he has “high personal standards that set the proper moral tone for the country.”

    Because of their experiences in most recent elections, there is an inherent pessimism among Democrats about the fall campaign. The “Republican Attack Machine,” they have come to believe, can and will carve up anyone their party puts up. Not surprisingly, the Clinton campaign has been exploiting this insecurity. Whether they say it or not, they clearly hope Democrats will treat the Wright episode as reason to fret over Mr. Obama’s general-election durability.

    But what Democrats forget too often is how easy they’ve made the Republicans’ job in past elections. Neither John Kerry nor Al Gore nor Michael Dukakis nor Walter Mondale nor Jimmy Carter (the 1980 version) ever inspired any kind of personal affection from the electorate, the kind that would win them the benefit of the doubt when the mud started flying. But Mr. Obama does. And it’s why his response to the Wright matter, risky though it may have been by conventional standards, was a powerful one.

    [url]http://www.observer.com/print/66668/full[/url][/QUOTE]

    it is truly a shame to see how low many of these attack machines will go to assassinate someones character. The dems and republicans are both at fault.
    Last edited by intelligentjetsfan; 03-19-2008 at 04:51 PM.

  3. #3
    [QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;2441487]it is truly ashame to see how low many of these attack machines will go to assassinate someones character. The dems and republicans are both at fault.[/QUOTE]

    Yes, it's a shame, and yes both parties are responsible.

    But I still think it's an oversimplication to say this isn't an issue.

    He was there 20 years and thought nothing of it. I'm not saying he's racist, but even his "denouncements" are full of excuses and rationalizations about why the situation isn't as horrible as it seems, and attempts to point the finger back at "white America".

    If you're telling me that I have nothing to worry about as a middle class white man who makes over $50 K, then great, I hope you're right.

    But I don't think my apprehension is COMPLETELY unwarranted.

  4. #4
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Long Island & Section 337
    Posts
    4,859
    Did this really need another thread? There is a thread of more than 400 posts on the same topic. You are becoming the SBIII of the politics board.

  5. #5
    [QUOTE=HDCentStOhio;2441616]Did this really need another thread? There is a thread of more than 400 posts on the same topic. You are becoming the SBIII of the politics board.[/QUOTE]

    except that many of the threads concerning the Obama-wright speech have been started by the likes of [B]Come Back to Earth[/B], Company Man, etc. A little bit of variety of articles is nice too. ;)

  6. #6
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    greenwich village, NYC
    Posts
    8,169
    I thought the speech was quite eloquent and on-point overall... a very good performance....except for one thing. He trashed his grandma for political gain. That's going to rub a few people the wrong way. It did me.

  7. #7
    Concerning Rev. Wright, check out this site and post your thoughts!

    [url=www.tucc.org] Trinity [/url]

  8. #8
    [QUOTE=asuusa;2442136]Concerning Rev. Wright, check out this site and post your thoughts!

    [url=www.tucc.org] Trinity [/url][/QUOTE]

    Good find.

    The intro was a little bit overwhelming in my opinion, the website looks pretty normal. I don't really care for Rev. Wright that much.

  9. #9
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fairfield County, CT
    Posts
    6,870
    Obama has sat in Reverand Wright's pews for 20 years.

    Reverand Wright has been speaking in this "suddenly" controversial fashion for years.

    Can anyone provide a link (or at least an anecdote) of any denunciations of Reverand Wright by Obama [U]prior[/U] to his running for President ??

  10. #10
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Not bababooey and I resent the implication
    Posts
    21,029
    [QUOTE=long island leprechaun;2441653]I thought the speech was quite eloquent and on-point overall... a very good performance....except for one thing. He trashed his grandma for political gain. That's going to rub a few people the wrong way. It did me.[/QUOTE]

    Really? I don't think he trashed his grandma..

    My grandfather is one of the greatest men I know personally, and he was a bigot. Some things are just generational things..

  11. #11
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Not bababooey and I resent the implication
    Posts
    21,029
    [QUOTE=Phoenixx;2442186]Obama has sat in Reverand Wright's pews for 20 years.

    Reverand Wright has been speaking in this "suddenly" controversial fashion for years.

    Can anyone provide a link (or at least an anecdote) of any denunciations of Reverand Wright by Obama [U]prior[/U] to his running for President ??[/QUOTE]

    Who cares...

  12. #12
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fairfield County, CT
    Posts
    6,870
    [QUOTE=CTM;2442192]Who cares...[/QUOTE]

    I do....That's why I asked the question.

    Do you really need that explained to you ??:rolleyes:

  13. #13
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Not bababooey and I resent the implication
    Posts
    21,029
    [QUOTE=Phoenixx;2442196]I do....That's why I asked the question.

    Do you really need that explained to you ??:rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

    Why do you care?

    Are you surprised that Obama is associated with some angry older black man? It's such a rare thing afterall...

    Serious, what does it matter to you? Do you think Obama is going to get in and declare martial law with the black panthers presiding over it or something?

  14. #14
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fairfield County, CT
    Posts
    6,870
    [QUOTE=CTM;2442199]Why do you care?

    [/QUOTE]

    Why do you care if I care ??

  15. #15
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Not bababooey and I resent the implication
    Posts
    21,029
    [QUOTE=Phoenixx;2442206]Why do you care if I care ??[/QUOTE]

    I was asking sincerely. I don't understand why this is a big deal..

  16. #16
    [QUOTE=Carthage;2442161]Good find.

    The intro was a little bit overwhelming in my opinion, the website looks pretty normal. I don't really care for Rev. Wright that much.[/QUOTE]


    The thing about the intro that immediately caught my eye was the end where the name of the church was super-imposed over a map of Africa.

    Also this:

    [QUOTE]We are a congregation which is Unashamedly Black and Unapologetically Christian... Our roots in the Black religious experience and tradition are deep, lasting and permanent. We are an African people, and remain "true to our native land," the mother continent, the cradle of civilization. [/QUOTE]

    So far I've found nothing about them being Americans!

    Also, it appears they've disabled the link to past sermons....at least I couldn't get it to work...hmmmm!

  17. #17
    [QUOTE=CTM;2442199]Why do you care?

    Are you surprised that Obama is associated with some angry older black man? It's such a rare thing afterall...

    Serious, what does it matter to you? Do you think Obama is going to get in and declare martial law with the black panthers presiding over it or something?[/QUOTE]

    We are being told by BLACK people that this kind of rhetoric is "mainstream" in black churches.

    You don't think Obama is going to have any expectations placed on him if he becomes president? That there will be TONS of people expecting him to put minorities first, as opposed to AMERICANS first (regardless of color)??

    No, I don't expect "martial law". But he preaches so much about "CHANGE", and I don't see why we're not allowed to question exactly what kind of change he has in mind . . .

    EDIT: To be fair, people will say that he has not shown such tendencies during his political career so far, and I cannot debate that, as I have not followed his career that closely. As I've said before, I hope I'm wrong. It's just driving me nuts that many posters here seem to think it's not even a cause for concern, which I think is VERY close-minded . . .
    Last edited by OCCH; 03-19-2008 at 10:40 PM.

  18. #18
    [QUOTE=Phoenixx;2442186]Obama has sat in Reverand Wright's pews for 20 years.

    Reverand Wright has been speaking in this "suddenly" controversial fashion for years.

    Can anyone provide a link (or at least an anecdote) of any denunciations of Reverand Wright by Obama [U]prior[/U] to his running for President ??[/QUOTE]

    can you provide a link stating that Obama was sitting in a pew while Wright spoke these types of words?

    Is it anywhere? Maybe a transcript of one of Wrights sermons while Obama was in attendance?

  19. #19
    [QUOTE=piney;2442289]can you provide a link stating that Obama was sitting in a pew while Wright spoke these types of words?

    Is it anywhere? Maybe a transcript of one of Wrights sermons while Obama was in attendance?[/QUOTE]

    You guys can't have it both ways. On the one hand, we're expected to sympathize with Obama's situation, b/c this man is like an "uncle" to him, someone he can't just part ways with b/c he's "part of the family". He married them, he baptized his kids, he's his pastor of TWENTY YEARS.

    But then this happens, and we're expected to believe he was unaware of the man's personal beliefs b/c we can't PROVE he was in the pew when those words were spoken.

    It's irrelevant anyway, b/c Obama HAS admitted knowing Wright's opinion on these matters. But still, a little objectivity would be appreciated . . .:rolleyes:

  20. #20
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Not bababooey and I resent the implication
    Posts
    21,029
    [QUOTE=OCCH;2442271]We are being told by BLACK people that this kind of rhetoric is "mainstream" in black churches.

    You don't think Obama is going to have any expectations placed on him if he becomes president? That there will be TONS of people expecting him to put minorities first, as opposed to AMERICANS first (regardless of color)??

    No, I don't expect "martial law". But he preaches so much about "CHANGE", and I don't see why we're not allowed to question exactly what kind of change he has in mind . . .[/QUOTE]

    My best friend routinely participates in anti corporate and anti WTO, NAFTA and Govt type demonstrations. I talk to him at least once a week yet I don't agree at all with any of his politics. Another friend is so apologetic that the concept of personal responsibility is completely lost on him. My father is more or less a bigot yet I've avoided adopting his stance. My wifes mother believes in some of the most absurd fundamental catholic beliefs yet I'm not influenced.

    Imo, I don't think you can always accurately paint a man based on the company he keeps, particularly when you are trying to do so based on ideas. For one reason or another I find value in each of the relationships above, yet I strongly disagree with things they say or beliefs they hold.

    Truth be told, I admire Obama because he stood by his pastor, even though it was potential political suicide. I'll never vote for him based on his stance on this issues, but I don't need to tear him down in order to make that decision..

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us