OK, this speech will work for Barack. I was with him for quite a while, but he lost me at the end (I want a transcript!).
I don't want to promise that this is what he said, but this is what I heard, in outline, after denunciation of Wright and a dubious linkage of Wright and Obama's grandmother with her stray racist comments. [Hmm, did Obama choose his grandma? Or, is his point that he didn't confront his grandmother when he was ten, so he couldn't confront Wright when he was forty?]
- Black people have reasons to be angry about slavery, Jim Crow, and ongoing discrimination;
- Whites have reason to be unhappy with (pre-reform) welfare, affirmative action, busing, and being called a racist for worrying about black crime rates.
- Wright was wrong in both his racial divisiveness and his belief that American society was static, and progress was not occurring. [But is this a generational thing? Moss, the new minister, is younger than Barack (and about as charismatic) but seemingly cut from the same divisive cloth as Wright.]
.
- whites needed to do more to raise up black schools and black communities.
Wait! Did he lose a page here - what, if anything is the black community meant to do differently? [Thank you Matt Drudge - see below]
Then his conclusion left me at sea - he seemed to be saying that, as in elections past, we could ignore race except as a distraction, but that he was committed to discussing it. Huh? His new-found commitment seems to be a direct response to this Wright controversy, not something he wanted to do.
And his discussion of healing race relations seemed to be disappear into a talk about health care, jobs, and everything else. Baffling.
Still, this will slide him past the Dem primary voters. For the general, time will tell.
OH, YEAH! Obama does summon the Dem dream of working class whites and blacks (and browns and yellows) uniting against their oppressive corporate overlords.
FROM THE TRANSCRIPT (emphasis added):
For the African-American community, that path means embracing the burdens of our past without becoming victims of our past. It means continuing to insist on a full measure of justice in every aspect of American life. But it also means binding our particular grievances – for better health care, and better schools, and better jobs - to the larger aspirations of all Americans -- the white woman struggling to break the glass ceiling, the white man whose been laid off, the immigrant trying to feed his family. And it means taking full responsibility for own lives – by demanding more from our fathers, and spending more time with our children, and reading to them, and teaching them that while they may face challenges and discrimination in their own lives, they must never succumb to despair or cynicism; they must always believe that they can write their own destiny.
Ironically, this quintessentially American – and yes, conservative – notion of self-help found frequent expression in Reverend Wright’s sermons. But what my former pastor too often failed to understand is that embarking on a program of self-help also requires a belief that society can change.
Hmm, in the post-speech commentary I see that Pat Buchanan also missed that call to responsibility. Let's guess that no one will fault Barack for over-emphasizing that point.
WERE MY QUESTIONS ANSWERED? Developing...
IMAGINE MY DISAPPOINTMENT AND SURPRISE: More Victims Studies as part of the path to racial reconciliation made a brief appearance over the weekend but seems to have been dropped. And my suggested spin - Who better to speak to the Muslim youths emerging from their hate-filled mosques than a man coming from a hate-filled church - never arrived.
Obama's Modified Limited Hangout Route version 2.0 -- for the benefit of wavering white supporters, here's a bone for you:
Can't wait to see version 3.0!
Posted by: capitano | March 18, 2008 at 02:27 PM
America will fly to Paradise on the wings of Barack!
Posted by: Michael Erwine | March 18, 2008 at 02:30 PM
One thing Obama taught me today...
Not once in my conversations with him have I heard him talk about any ethnic group in derogatory terms, or treat whites with whom he interacted with anything but courtesy and respect
The question should be----What does Obama say when he is alone with the Rev. Wright or say to the other members of his congregation or how about conversations with the wife ---specifically with respect to rich white folk??Saying what people want to hear when speaking to them is not noble its just more say old same old.
Posted by: takenaway | March 18, 2008 at 02:31 PM
WOW. Go ABC
Posted by: Jane | March 18, 2008 at 02:32 PM
Good speech, but considering that he is running for President, it might have been a good idea to mention Abraham Lincoln (R). Considering his problems supporting the US military, he might have picked up some points had he mentioned that all the protests and petitions against slavery didn't end it, the Army and Navy did. He also might have mentioned that the US military integrated sooner than most of America. Also missing was the first civil rights bill, introduced by a former general Dwight D. Eisenhower (R) who was of German descent but who considered himself an American first. Of course, that isn't what he wanted to talk about.
Posted by: tyree | March 18, 2008 at 02:33 PM
Therefore the association tells us something about Obama, as boris points out. So denunciations and repudiations aside, to ask Obama why he chose this friend - and stuck with him all these years - is perfectly valid.
Are you folks telling me that you have no racist friends? Do you refuse to associate with those who you disagree with? Are you removing them from your life at the first opportunity? Are you "rejecting and denouncing" them?
Or do you choose to celebrate the good, recognize the not so good, and engage your friends in order to achieve something better?
Blessed is the man
who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked
or stand in the way of sinners
or sit in the seat of mockers.
Psalm 1.1
So said the Pharisees.
Jesus’ response?
A father who never gave up on his prodigal son.
Son, thou art ever with me, and all that I have is thine. It was meet that we should make merry, and be glad: for this thy brother was dead, and is alive again; and was lost, and is found.
A shepherd who never abandoned his lost sheep.
How think ye? if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains, and seeketh that which is gone astray? And if so be that he find it, verily I say unto you, he rejoiceth more of that sheep, than of the ninety and nine which went not astray.
A woman who never lost hope of finding her missing coin
Or what woman, having ten silver coins, if she loses one coin, does not light a lamp and sweep the house and seek diligently until she finds it? And when she has found it, she calls together her friends and neighbors, saying, ‘Rejoice with me, for I have found the coin which I had lost.' Just so, I tell you, there is joy before the angels of God over one sinner who repents.
Perhaps the views expressed by the Reverend make him a lost coin?
Posted by: TexasToast | March 18, 2008 at 02:38 PM
I imagine a lot less of Rev. Wright's sort of preaching went on this past Sunday than usual -- and if any still did, more furtive eyes than usual looked around for cell-phone cameras.
If he goes down over this, there could be a real silver lining here, and not just for race relations.
Posted by: Extraneus | March 18, 2008 at 02:40 PM
Interesting. Now ABC is playing a completely different soundbite in their bottom of the hour news brief. Maybe someone in their editorial staff realized the implications of that quote. Would love to be a fly on the wall in that office as they debate which soundbite to use.
Posted by: Ranger | March 18, 2008 at 02:40 PM
Ranger calls the abc news stance correctly. Header on the website notes that Obama is "Parsing Wright from Wrong"
Posted by: Appalled Moderate | March 18, 2008 at 02:41 PM
Time to throw a little light on the vermin...
"I read the various posts here on "The Corner," mostly pretty ho-hum or critical about Obama's speech. Then I figured I'd better read the text (I tried to find a video of it, but couldn't). I've just finished. Has any other major American politician ever made a speech on race that comes even close to this one? As far as I'm concerned, it is just plain flat out brilliant—rhetorically, but also in capturing a lot of nuance about race in America. It is so far above the standard we're used to from our pols.... But you know me. Starry-eyed Obama groupie."
Charles Murray
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MjI3MWMyOGFkNmQ2MGFjNzRhYzYwMGVhZWJhMjcyOGM
Posted by: Asinistra | March 18, 2008 at 02:43 PM
TT---what scriptures quote Jesus trying to foment hate for others?
Posted by: takenaway | March 18, 2008 at 02:44 PM
He did not have much choice. Not that many folks believed his " I sat there but didn't inhale" explanations. And he is trying to get nominated by progs, for christ sake. Its dangerous to tell them stuff that does not fit the layers and layers of dogma.
ABC has been doing Clinton's bidding on this from the start. If they keep it up, not even white guilt speech from the great one are going to give him a pass on this. He must be destroyed or else its a problem for Hill getting to 50% + 1. He will be destroyed.
Like it or lump it progs. She is your gal.
Posted by: GMax | March 18, 2008 at 02:44 PM
Are you folks telling me that you have no racist friends? Do you refuse to associate with those who you disagree with? Are you removing them from your life at the first opportunity? Are you "rejecting and denouncing" them?
They aren't my spiritual advisers. They aren't my mentors. They aren't on my campaign staff, or rather weren't on my campaign staff until it became expedient to drop them. They aren't spreading their message to thousands week in and week out...
You want me to go on? Or can you really not see the difference in friend and spiritual adviser? Mentor? Someone he cares about and listens to as much or more than his own flesh and blood?
And to answer your question about racist friends, if I have any they know enough about me to keep their opinions to themselves.
Posted by: Sue | March 18, 2008 at 02:44 PM
Also missing from the speech was any mention of the muslim international slave trade and all the guilt that the muslim community should feel from profiting from it. He could have worked in a "shores of Tripoli" reference about the US standing up to muslim slave traders in North Africa, but again, that isn't what he wants to talk about.
Posted by: tyree | March 18, 2008 at 02:45 PM
Are you folks telling me that you have no racist friends? Do you refuse to associate with those who you disagree with? Are you removing them from your life at the first opportunity? Are you "rejecting and denouncing" them?
TT, everyone has friends with whom they do not always agree. However, if I had such overtly racist friends, I would not:
1) sit in their church every Sunday listening to them preach for 15-20 years
2) bring my kids to listen to the above
3) have them baptize me and my children
4) have them officiate at my wedding
5) consult them on spiritual matters, as well as when I am making career moves
6) use a phrase from their sermon as the title of my book
7) put them on my religious outreach committee when I run for President
Etc.
Come on. This is not that hard.
Posted by: Porchlight | March 18, 2008 at 02:48 PM
Here's an interesting article via Powerline by a young Chicago reporter who has some insight on how Obama enjoyed unusual success in the Illinois legislature after six years of treading water. Obama got his break when Democrats took over the both legislative houses and the governorship:
Posted by: capitano | March 18, 2008 at 02:51 PM
And now a dose of reality from the Pittsburgh Gazette:
Sen. Clinton now leads Sen. Obama, 53 to 41 percent among likely primary voters, the poll said. This compares to a 49 to 43 percent Sen. Clinton lead in a Feb. 27 poll. In that survey, the momentum was with Sen. Obama, who had narrowed a 52 to 36 percent gap from a Feb. 14 poll.
Posted by: GMax | March 18, 2008 at 02:51 PM
This is what is so frustrating. It isn't just the words he preached. It is the front page of their damned website. Click on about us. See what their goals are. Africa is the mother country? Black values? And he doesn't mean what I thought black values would mean. I'm told they have removed that link, but I haven't gone back to see for myself. It isn't just a few words of anger. It is the church Obama chose to associate with for 20 years.
Posted by: Sue | March 18, 2008 at 02:52 PM
The deomographic breakdowns in the poll are even worse for Obama. The only group he is doing better with than previously, is blacks. So maybe racist blacks have flocked to his side.
He retains a slim lead among college educated likely voters but loses both men ( narrowly ) and women.
And this speech addresses which group that he needs to win back?
Posted by: GMax | March 18, 2008 at 02:54 PM
Dum-dum-dum-dumdy-doo-wah
Ooh-yay-yay-yay-yeah
Oh-oh-oh-oh-wah
Only the guilty
Only the guilty (dum-dum-dum-dumdy-doo-wah)
Know the way I feel tonight (ooh-yay-yay-yay-yeah)
Only the guilty (dum-dum-dum-dumdy-doo-wah)
Know this feelin aint right (dum-dum-dum-dumdy-doo-wah)
There goes my Pastor
There goes my heart
They're gone forever
So far apart
But only the guilty
Know why
I cry
Only the guilty
Posted by: PeterUK | March 18, 2008 at 02:55 PM
Porchlight,
How in the world will we ever get beyond this [insert dystopic view here] if you persist in your hardheaded trust in your lying eyes? If you really feel you must look at something, then why not gaze in wonder at He who will lead us to [insert your fantasy here]?
Posted by: Rick Ballard | March 18, 2008 at 02:56 PM
Roy Obamason
Posted by: boris | March 18, 2008 at 02:56 PM
Anybody else see some of those videos with everyone wearing costumes? Is it church or is it a thespian society? I had not seem so many dashikis since I watched an Out of Africa rerun. It sure looked pretty silly to me anyway.
Posted by: GMax | March 18, 2008 at 02:56 PM
I bet most people here don't have racist friends whose job is trafficking in racism; and that seems to be Wright's mission.
My issue with the whole mess is the victimology. I hate that stuff. We've been harmed so you have to atone
I really really really hate that stuff.
Reverend Wright encourages victimology. Obama echoed that sentiment in his speech. Yuck!
Posted by: Jane | March 18, 2008 at 02:58 PM
GMax:
Speech plays well with college educated voters and white liberals. Not hard to figure. And it is a reminder of what people like about Obama.
Everyone:
Question for all-- Why is it so important Obama not only denounce the ideas he dislikes, but cast his pastor aside like trash?
Posted by: Appalled Moderate | March 18, 2008 at 02:59 PM
Wow...only days ago Obama stated that he NEVER heard Wright make inflammatory comments in church. Today, in his speech, he confesses that he did in fact hear his pastor make "controversial remarks" while he sat in church but that he did not agree with him. Appears like Mr. O got caught in a lie to the American people! Likely not the last.
Posted by: John McTruth | March 18, 2008 at 03:00 PM
Wow...only days ago Obama stated that he NEVER heard Wright make inflammatory comments in church. Today, in his speech, he confesses that he did in fact hear his pastor make "controversial remarks" while he sat in church but that he did not agree with him. Appears like Mr. O got caught in a lie to the American people! Likely not the last.
Posted by: John McTruth | March 18, 2008 at 03:01 PM
The speech was soothing enough but it tries to deflect from the issue. Wright is not a symptom like an uncle's or grandmother's prejudice. Wright is more than divisive, those blame shifted rationalizations impair more than race relations, they impair success of their adherants and followers.
Posted by: boris | March 18, 2008 at 03:02 PM
AM--All hehad to do to regain some respect from me was to acknowledge he'd misspoken, that he did hear that stuff, did know about it, erred in not speaking out forecefully against it and, instead, supported it.
That was for me the only honest way out and he didn't take it.
Punk street organizer on the make.
Posted by: clarice | March 18, 2008 at 03:03 PM
***forcefully**
Posted by: clarice | March 18, 2008 at 03:03 PM
Rick,
All I know is that if we don't get beyond [insert dystopic view here], it will most assuredly be spun as the GOP's fault. This is the beauty of Obama as the nominee - even if Republicans win, they lose, because they'll be blamed for the failure of [insert utopian fantasy here] to materialize.
Posted by: Porchlight | March 18, 2008 at 03:04 PM
Obama may be a brilliant speaker,but he is certainly a mediocre thinker.
"the white woman struggling to break the glass ceiling, the white man whose been laid off, the immigrant trying to feed his family."
It is alright pandering to social groups but a woman trying to up her income 10-20 k is not the same as an unemployed man or a poor immigrant.Nor do the two latter have anything in common with the woman,they are at the opposite end of the spectrum.
The poor lamb just didn't read his Marx closely enough.
Posted by: PeterUK | March 18, 2008 at 03:04 PM
AM,
The issue is whether you can believe him. I don't.
I actually like that he didn't trash his pastor. And if he had called upon his pastor to stop encouraging the flock to consider themselves the victims of Whitey I might have given him some kudos.
But he didn't. So I don't believe that he's actually opposed to what Wright says.
Posted by: Jane | March 18, 2008 at 03:05 PM
Or do you choose to celebrate the good, recognize the not so good, and engage your friends in order to achieve something better?
TT- So you think Obama has actually achieved an improvement in the good Pastor Wrights ideas over the last 20 years, not the other way around? Well if this the kind of improvement that Obama has planned for Amerikka, we should all be very afraid.
Posted by: takenaway | March 18, 2008 at 03:07 PM
"remarks that could have been considered controversial..."
Oooooooooooooooooooooh, big man, big man.
In a perfect world this person would be laughed off the podium. A racial healer who actively sought out a racist church. And then has the gall to lecture other people.
Posted by: MlR | March 18, 2008 at 03:11 PM
"The issue is whether you can believe him. I don't."
If you accept the fact that we're now quibbling over 'details' of visits.
The entire church is as much the issue as the sermons.
Posted by: MlR | March 18, 2008 at 03:13 PM
not only denounce the ideas he dislikes
How is comparison of Wright to grandma a denunciation? Sounded more like a request for understanding and tolerance for views. Ignore them and their "divisiveness" is not a problem because we are no longer "offended" by them. It is up to us to nullify the divisiveness by not letting ourselves be divided.
Frak that! Being offended at that drek might be a problem for blacks, but the ideology absolutely is holding many of them back.
Posted by: boris | March 18, 2008 at 03:14 PM
Appalled Moderate:
"Question for all-- Why is it so important Obama not only denounce the ideas he dislikes, but cast his pastor aside like trash?"
Why are you so caught up in a politician trying to cover his arse with some speech rather than looking at this prior actions to determine exactly what type candidate and person he is?
Looking at :
- comments of Obama wife and her dislike of America and men.
- raising his children and having them baptized into this ideolgy and donating close to 20K for its spread.
- choice of foreign policy advisors who advocate use of the US military to force Israeli acceptance of a Palistinian state.
- friendships with known Weatherman terrorists.
tell me that Obama is a typical America-hating, anti-semetic, racist leftist in a shiny new package.
But you are persuaded to overlook 20 years of actions and associations because of a flowery speech written by Axelrod and his handlers. Please!
Posted by: LogicalSC | March 18, 2008 at 03:21 PM
Question for all-- Why is it so important Obama not only denounce the ideas he dislikes, but cast his pastor aside like trash?
Posted by: Appalled Moderate | March 18, 2008 at 02:59 PM
I don't know. Maybe for the same reason it was so important that Robert Byrd denounce the Klan and cast it asside like trash?
Or is the Klan now just a manifestation of the frustraitions of poor whites after the Civil War, an organization we may not agree with, but who's outlook we must understand?
And if you think that comparison with the Klan is over the top, remember the Rev. Wright has at least twice (that we know of) from the pulpit accused the US Goverment of a deliberate campaign of genocide against African Americans, once through deliberately developing the AIDS virus and once through the application of the criminal justice and education system.
Posted by: Ranger | March 18, 2008 at 03:21 PM
Like John Kerry who ran as a hero on his Vietnman experience, and that heroism was found to be in question, so too, Obama runs as a candidate that unites and transcends race while attending a church and praising a mentor that preaches racial hatred and division.
Chickens are coming home......to roost.
Posted by: Cindy martin | March 18, 2008 at 03:23 PM
"Anger over welfare and affirmative action helped forge the Reagan Coalition. Politicians routinely exploited fears of crime for their own electoral ends. Talk show hosts and conservative commentators built entire careers unmasking bogus claims of racism while dismissing legitimate discussions of racial injustice and inequality as mere political correctness or reverse racism." ---- Wow, that's a poke in the eye!
Posted by: Rickter | March 18, 2008 at 03:26 PM
OT
Oh dear, Joe and Val are hanging with Hill in Philly.
Pix at link under my name.
Posted by: Jane | March 18, 2008 at 03:27 PM
Yes let's talk about the members of Pastor Wrights church, I read somewhere that he has 8000 in the congregation? That's alot of hate believin' black folks, that I am sure the Obama's socialized with on many occasions, everyone of them in the pews had heard this kind of spewing many times before and worse they believed it. There was no shock on a single face, how many in the congregation did Mr Obama (demoted now from Saint) manage to lead to the white light of unity? Obviously his genteel views did not sway a single congregant---yet he will unite us all, I think not, maybe he should practice on his own church and friends for a few years, then when he has more experience, we'll talk about the presidency.
Posted by: takenaway | March 18, 2008 at 03:27 PM
Has anybody in the history of politics ever taken shots at his own grandmother in a speech? A speech about reconciliation?
Posted by: bgates | March 18, 2008 at 03:31 PM
Steve Sailer has a highly relevant new article up, Is Brown the New Black? Sailer notes that "The relationship between blacks and Latinos will become increasingly central to American life, but it’s a murky phenomenon, poorly understood by the white-dominated press." Then he goes about trying to shed some light on this murky phenomenon.
If this article were less relevant I might be tempted to quote it extensively. As it is, you'll have to follow the link if you want to educate yourself on a topic that could be central to Campaign 2008.
Posted by: anduril | March 18, 2008 at 03:31 PM
well Juan Williams was just on with Shep. He basically said this. Barack was in a box, if he trashed Wright he lost support especially among Blacks. But he put himself in another box. He basically has made himself the black candidate, instead of the guy who transcends race.
He further said, this will not help him with older white voters, hispanics and jews. All of whom he needs more of not less.
So if you want to give a speech to your campaign staff, you dont know television. As AM agrees this appealed to blacks and college educated liberals who for the most part were already Obama supporters.
Can we now have another helping of Rezko?
Posted by: GMax | March 18, 2008 at 03:31 PM
I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community
I don't want you to disown him, just call bullshit on his claim that the US government is spreading AIDS.
Or rather, I want you to have publicly disagreed with him about it at some time in the past, before it became a political problem for you. It's too late now.
Posted by: Ralph Phelan | March 18, 2008 at 03:32 PM
I didn't hear him blame anyone. He repudiated the blame game and suggested we must get past the habit of blame.
You're either illiterate or deaf.
But don't worry, you "didn't hear" it.
And that's all that counts.
Please note: the above statement from Obama is unadulterated baloney.
Posted by: The Ace | March 18, 2008 at 03:33 PM
Sorry about the ital!
Posted by: The Ace | March 18, 2008 at 03:34 PM
Barack is right. Our politics have become too much about distractions. Thanks to the opinion leaders, FOX and CNN.
Pastor Wright said some nasty things but he is no danger to Chicago let alone Illinois or the USA.
Barack did well in denouncing the speech but not the person!
I hope this author runs away from his family members who get into trouble.
Posted by: John Rawlings | March 18, 2008 at 03:34 PM
Tom asks if his questions were answered. I only see one unanswered question out of five. So, let us roll the TM/Obama press conference...
When Obama attempted to quell this on Saturday he warned us that "over the last several weeks that the forces of division have started to raise their ugly heads again."
Does Obama consider his own minister to be one of those "forces of division"?
Obama: And yet, it has only been in the last couple of weeks that the discussion of race in this campaign has taken a particularly divisive turn...On the other end, we’ve heard my former pastor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, use incendiary language to express views that have the potential not only to widen the racial divide, but views that denigrate both the greatness and the goodness of our nation; that rightly offend white and black alike.
How can he rationalize his twenty year association with this man, and how does he explain his minister's sermons to his daughters?
Obama: Like other predominantly black churches across the country, Trinity embodies the black community in its entirety – the doctor and the welfare mom, the model student and the former gang-banger. Like other black churches, Trinity’s services are full of raucous laughter and sometimes bawdy humor. They are full of dancing, clapping, screaming and shouting that may seem jarring to the untrained ear. The church contains in full the kindness and cruelty, the fierce intelligence and the shocking ignorance, the struggles and successes, the love and yes, the bitterness and bias that make up the black experience in America.
And this helps explain, perhaps, my relationship with Reverend Wright. As imperfect as he may be, he has been like family to me. He strengthened my faith, officiated my wedding, and baptized my children. Not once in my conversations with him have I heard him talk about any ethnic group in derogatory terms, or treat whites with whom he interacted with anything but courtesy and respect. He contains within him the contradictions – the good and the bad – of the community that he has served diligently for so many years.
I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community.
Again, last Saturday Obama told us that "[Our country has] got a lot of pent-up anger and bitterness and misunderstanding. But what I continue to believe in is that this country wants to move beyond these kinds of divisions."
Does Obama really believe that Wright wants to move past these divisions?
Obama:[No answer]
Has Obama had much success moving Wright past his anger?
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.
Or if not, is it only white people that are supposed to give up their anger and end their divisiveness?
For the African-American community, that path means embracing the burdens of our past without becoming victims of our past. It means continuing to insist on a full measure of justice in every aspect of American life. But it also means binding our particular grievances – for better health care, and better schools, and better jobs - to the larger aspirations of all Americans -- the white woman struggling to break the glass ceiling, the white man whose been laid off, the immigrant trying to feed his family. And it means taking full responsibility for own lives – by demanding more from our fathers, and spending more time with our children, and reading to them, and teaching them that while they may face challenges and discrimination in their own lives, they must never succumb to despair or cynicism; they must always believe that they can write their own destiny.
Posted by: Appalled Moderate | March 18, 2008 at 03:35 PM
*I Changed My Mind, Like I Did for NAFTAGATE* More Lies?
March 14, 2008:
SEN. BARACK OBAMA (D-IL), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: "Well, first of all, Anderson, you know, I strongly condemn the statements that have been shown on the tape.
I have to confess that those are not statements that I ever heard when I was sitting in the pews at this church. This is a church that I have been a member of for 20 years. This is a well-established, typical, historically African-American church in the South Side of Chicago, with a wonderful set of ministries.
And what I have been hearing and had been hearing in church was talk about Jesus and talk about faith and values and serving the poor."
[snip]
Obama Speech, March 18th, 2008:
"Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes."
[snip]
-------------------------------------------
Do I believe the Senator? No, but it doesn't really matter. What matters is what the voters who support him think. I hope they're not fooled...again.
Posted by: RomaD | March 18, 2008 at 03:40 PM
I'm guessing the Asian vote is just too small for Obama to worry about.
Posted by: MayBee | March 18, 2008 at 03:53 PM
It sounds like that "transcendental masturbation" that was all the rage four decades ago.
Posted by: PeterUK | March 18, 2008 at 03:53 PM
white grandmother ... a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street
A rational fear based on a sad statistical reality about who the perpatrators and victims of crime really are.
"I hate to admit it, but I have reached a stage in my life that if I am walking down a dark street late at night and I see that the person behind me is white, I subconsciously feel relieved."
-Jesse Jackson.
A fear even Jesse Jackson can admit too, but that Obama appareently consider shameful when his frail old grandmother shares it.
White people who are afraid of black crime are gonna break two ways over that line. Those susceptible to PC guilt over their thoughtcrimes will be ashamed, and support Obama even more strongly than they do already.
Those not susceptible to such guilt will be pissed off.
Posted by: Ralph Phelan | March 18, 2008 at 03:54 PM
RomaD,
Even here, Obama is waffling and trying to give himself some room.
"Controversial" in his March 18 statement does not necessarily mean the exact same comments he was referencing on March 14.
Perhaps "factually" correct .... but definitely PARSING.
Posted by: fdcol63 | March 18, 2008 at 04:00 PM
I wonder if Obama took his children to any of Reverend Wright's sermons.
Posted by: tp | March 18, 2008 at 04:02 PM
I only see one unanswered question out of five.
Thanks for the laugh.
This, is not the "answer" you think it is.
Why do all of you leftists have such glaring literacy problems?
Posted by: The Ace | March 18, 2008 at 04:03 PM
I didn't want to hear Obama throw Wright away like trash. It's too late for that anyway.
What I wanted to hear, and didn't, is specific addressing of a few of Wright's points. This "remarks that may have been considered controversial" nonsense is crap.
I want Obama to say the idea that the government created AIDS to kill black people is ridiculous.
I want him to point out that the Tuskegee Experiment did not involve the government infecting black men with syphilis. What they actually did is bad enough, it doesn't need extra embellishment.
He won't, of course. Because he knows a significant portion of his base believes those things.
Posted by: Mars vs Hollywood | March 18, 2008 at 04:04 PM
The speech will keep the superdelegates in a holding pattern and will give MSM the excuse to attempt to bury this story. I still don't think B_O wins the nomination. The morning after the Pennsylvania primary (which I think will be at least 60-40 for HRC) will be a reality check for the Dems.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | March 18, 2008 at 04:06 PM
I have already condemned, in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy.
In the white community, the path to a more perfect union means acknowledging that what ails the African-American community does not just exist in the minds of black people
Now, this thing about the US government spreading AIDS. Is that one of the things that "cause such controversy" or one of the ones that "does not just exist in the minds of black people"? I still don't know.
Obama's annoyingly unspecific in where exactly he disagrees with Wright. I can see two reasons for that:
(1) He's hoping most of his listeners haven't heard Wright's actual words yet, and he doesn't want his apology to reveal to them that what he's apologizing for is even worse than they had known.
(2) He's playing his usual appeal to wishful thinking double game, hoping that white part of his audience will make the widest possible assumption as to what it is he's disagreeing with, while the black part will take the narrowest one.
Posted by: Ralph Phelan | March 18, 2008 at 04:07 PM
OK, the speech is over. BO wants to have it both ways. It settled nothing.
Can we go back to Obama, Rezko, and corruption now?
Posted by: Roy E | March 18, 2008 at 04:09 PM
Anduril:
Perhaps I have a more expansive view of what's on topic.
Or perhaps you have a less developed understanding of when you're being a dick.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | March 18, 2008 at 04:11 PM
I want Obama to say the idea that the government created AIDS to kill black people is ridiculous.
I want him to point out that the Tuskegee Experiment did not involve the government infecting black men with syphilis. What they actually did is bad enough, it doesn't need extra embellishment.
He won't, of course. Because he knows a significant portion of his base believes those things.
Posted by: Mars vs Hollywood | March 18, 2008 at 04:04 PM
Yes, exactly. Some enterpriseing reporter should put together a list of the Rev. Wrights lies and ask Obama directly. Do you accept this or reject this. None of this trying to have it both ways. Rejecting for one audiance, but not specificly enough to cause a backlash in the other audiance.
Posted by: Ranger | March 18, 2008 at 04:16 PM
I'd like to know how this played with folks whose only knowledge of Wright is from the MSM - in some cases they've been kind of covering for him by paraphrasing, and/or choosing his less outrageous quotes.
That may have been Obama's real audience.
Posted by: Ralph Phelan | March 18, 2008 at 04:17 PM
Althouse draws a diverse mix of commenters. I see very liberal Obama supporters pre and post love the speech. I dont see a lot of folks changing their minds and now being for a transcendent candidate. In fact that is probably all Obama could hope for, to stop the bleeding and pray that maybe he can give an "asked and answered" response to the next dozen Rev Wright questions.
But Hill is sharpening her attacks and I think Pennsylvania may end up 55 43 or thereabouts, a trouncing.
Superdelegate Howard Dean how do you cast your vote?
Posted by: GMax | March 18, 2008 at 04:18 PM
Juxtaposed in my feedreader, the report of Obama's speech and this article:
Tiger Woods buys $65M house in Hamptons"> to go along with his $40M house in Florida, a 155' yacht and a 16,500 sq.ft. "palace" in Dubai.
All I want to know is, does Obama's speech allow me to start "hating" Britain for confiscating my ancestor's farm and hounding him out of the country and to America because he left the Church of England to become a Quaker, or how 'bout the French for killing my 13thGGrandfather and imprisoning his family for the sin of being a Huguenot?
Posted by: Sara | March 18, 2008 at 04:27 PM
That's the second time in a week that you've made my day.
Posted by: anduril | March 18, 2008 at 04:27 PM
Was it just me, or did it sound like Obama was trying to shoehorn in "black credentials" using his wife's biography instead of his own at one point?
Is it still identity politics if you try to use someone else's identity to bolster your victimhood credentials?
(And am I the only one legalistic enough to nitpick the ramifications of denoting blood as an "inheritance"?)
Posted by: The Unbeliever | March 18, 2008 at 04:32 PM
"Blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked or stand in the way of sinners or sit in the seat of mockers.
Psalm 1.1
So said the Pharisees."
See, this is the problem with liberal thinking in a nutshell. This is why their view of life is so screwed up and their thinking processes are so flawed.
It is not the Pharisees who are speaking here.
I rest my case.
Posted by: TexasIsHeaven | March 18, 2008 at 04:33 PM
Church choice is a very personal decision and mostly revolves around whether you feel comfortable with the message of the pastor and the make up of the congregation. So, despite BO's denials to the contrary, 20 years of history with Trinity Church and its pastor leads to only one conclusion: BO chose that church because it is comfortable for him and his family.
But this speech also raises another question about him. If he is planning on being an agent of change, wny did he not try to change the anti-white, anti-American commentary? Why did he not try to send it in a less "divisive" direction.
This guy is a charlatan, a no-go showboat.
Posted by: LindaK | March 18, 2008 at 04:34 PM
I think someone else mentioned it above:
Obama's safe for now, and will probably be the Dem nominee in Nov. His speech today was enough for those who already supported him and who still want to believe that he's transcendant.
Hillary and her team, as well as the rest of the DNC leadership, don't want a civil war within the Democratic Party that challenging Obama further on this issue will cause. Perhaps they'll do what's "best" for the party by somehow sharing the ticket in 2008, hoping that their joint support will be enough to defeat McCain.
But even if not, they'll only need to suffer through ONE probable term of a "maverick", "independent" McCain presidency, while they'll control both houses of Congress.
Rather than exacerbating racial tensions within the Democratic Party that would create a schism that would last for years, this may be seen as the lesser of 2 evils for them.
Posted by: fdcol63 | March 18, 2008 at 04:35 PM
If BHO or his handlers intend for "the speech" to turn the thing around, they will be disappointed. It did not nail it for the tough Pennsylvania ethnic european and hispanic traditional dems, i.e., the kind that (the sorry) John Murtha represents.
But if they intend to use it to create snippets that can be used in spot advertising appealing to this group, it might have some chance.
In either event, I don't think it turns PA around.
Flash:
Newt asks, "if he can not turn his pastor of 20 years from his errant ways, how is he going to turn around Putin, Ahmadinijad, etc., etc?"
Posted by: vnjagvet | March 18, 2008 at 04:40 PM
http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3031317&page=1>Jake Tapper at ABC is not letting this go.
Posted by: Sue | March 18, 2008 at 04:40 PM
Forget the first part where I said he wasn't letting it go. It is an April 2007 story that drudge linked to.
Posted by: Sue | March 18, 2008 at 04:41 PM
Fdcol63
You have a quite charitable view of Queen Hill. She may not want a civil war, but in my opinion she wants the nomination and thinks she has a right to it, and is not afraid to act like the monkeys at the zoo and fling poo, if that is what is required.
No Obama basically succeeded in placing a tourniquet on the wound, and will get to have his head handed to him in Pa.
Then the superdelegates real headache will begin. Who wants 11 PM phone calls from Harold Ickes and Sid Vicious?
Posted by: GMax | March 18, 2008 at 04:43 PM
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/03/analysis_obama.html>I actually read all the way to the end
Posted by: Sue | March 18, 2008 at 04:48 PM
VDO nails it pretty well from where I sit:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YWVkMThjN2RjNDU2N2EzODE1YWRmZmQwMTE0YWFkMzg=>AN Elegant Farce
Posted by: GMax | March 18, 2008 at 04:50 PM
GMax,
When I said that they might "share the ticket", I meant that she might agree to a joint ticket with her on top, Obama as VP.
I agree, she's ruthless enough to pursue her own dreams at any cost, but this incident may have given her enough cause to insist - in a deal to save the Democratic Party - that Obama take 2nd fiddle, especially since he's young enough to run later on top afterwards.
Would this satisfy Obama? I don't know. But there are many who'd settle for an African-American as VP .... for now, with the good chance that in a term or 2 Barack would be the sure nominee for P.
But perhaps I am giving Hillary and the Dems too much credit! LOL
Posted by: fdcol63 | March 18, 2008 at 04:50 PM
VDO nails it pretty well from where I sit:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YWVkMThjN2RjNDU2N2EzODE1YWRmZmQwMTE0YWFkMzg=>AN Elegant Farce
Posted by: GMax | March 18, 2008 at 04:50 PM
"What I wanted to hear, and didn't, is specific addressing of a few of Wright's points. "
Someone nailed this exactly as he didn't want those who weren't aware of his pastor's racist and anti-sementic rantings to get to here them now. Heck, people who only listen to NBC or CBS have not idea this is even an issue.
So he gets a two-fer...they tell these uniformed boobs that the "Messiah" gave a speech on race today or they can say that Obama responsed to some racist upset with his pastor's right to speech in church.
At the very most they will play the part where he is angry with America and since most liberals hate this country as much as Wright, it could win him more votes.
Posted by: LogicalSC | March 18, 2008 at 04:50 PM
Isn't MSNBC an Obama cheerleader? Say Anything has the screen shot:
MSNBC Advertises Oreos During Obama Speech
Posted by: Sara | March 18, 2008 at 04:50 PM
This wasn't the gauzy vision of diversity draped in tapestry metaphors and colored in rainbow hues: It was a nation confronting its sins and overcoming its deeply held fears and prejudices.
Why were they talking about the appointments of Secretaries Powell and Rice?
Oh wait...
Posted by: The Unbeliever | March 18, 2008 at 04:51 PM
sorry...un-informed
Posted by: LogicalSC | March 18, 2008 at 04:51 PM
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/03/obamababble.html
Posted by: clarice | March 18, 2008 at 04:54 PM
How will Obama's speech fare if,to use a technical term,the world economy goes tits up?
Who will heed this pap when the cost of building the pyramid of Pharaoh Algore starts tearing the heart out of the treasuries of the West?
When the economic crisis collides with the astronomical costs of "global warming" measures the politics of grievance will become very small beer.
The just ain't no grandeur in the man.
Posted by: PeterUK | March 18, 2008 at 04:54 PM
In case you dont click links the ending flourish of VDH which says it all:
Obama is right about one thing: We are losing yet another opportunity to talk honestly about race, to hold all Americans to the same standards of public ethics and morality, and to emphasize that no one gets a pass peddling vulgar racism, or enabling it by failing to disassociate himself from its source — not Rev. Wright, not even the eloquent, but now vapid, Barack Obama.
Posted by: GMax | March 18, 2008 at 04:57 PM
Is it just me ?? I just finished reading the entire transcript and what I see is someone that wants to be my DADDY. I am not looking for a Daddy for president, to tell me what is right and wrong or tell me I must learn to play well with others, I don't need or want him to kiss my boo boos. I want the government to get out of my way and out of my life and let me live it as I see fit. I am not a big McCain fan but at least I don't see him trying to stick his nose into every nook and cranny of my life, I do not need a nanny!
Posted by: leavemealone | March 18, 2008 at 04:59 PM
Clarice,
Yep.
Posted by: Sue | March 18, 2008 at 05:00 PM
That's a great speech (reading it; I've not seen the tape).
I know of no other American today who could give anything remotely similar to it. Of course, his own history is the great enabler for him to give such a speech.
In it are the seeds of a future post-racial America.
Posted by: SteveMG | March 18, 2008 at 05:00 PM
Has anybody in the history of politics ever taken shots at his own grandmother in a speech? A speech about reconciliation?
That kinda struck me, too.
It seems to me that Barak Hussein is supremely uncomfortable in his own skin, skin that's more arab and European than Black.
He says Grandma was afraid of Black men. Well, her and Jesse Jackson, I suppose.
Posted by: Pofarmer | March 18, 2008 at 05:01 PM
Aaaaah, Hillary is saved, saved I say:
PHOTO: PLAME/WILSON COME TO HILLARY'S AID...
Posted by: Sara | March 18, 2008 at 05:01 PM
Didn't Michelle Obama once say Barack was black enough to get shot anytime he goes to the gas station?
Posted by: MayBee | March 18, 2008 at 05:03 PM
Clarice I wish one day you would lose your calm and just really tells us what you think about Obama.
Oh wait I think you just did!
Posted by: GMax | March 18, 2008 at 05:05 PM
Overall, I was disappointed by Obama’s speech. I wanted a speech on race relations. What he delivered was a campaign speech on race.
He didn’t need to say white Americans were losing their jobs because they were being shipped overseas. And what does healthcare have to do with race? He brought “special interests” in Washington DC as a way of saying this is the thing white people would be fighting against if it weren’t for all these conservatives and talk shows talking about phony discrimination and “political correctness”. And the only reason to bring in Ashley in the end was to say white people support me too. And we need health care.
Is it just me or does anybody else see a resemblance between some of Michelle Obama’s comments (in particular the “This is the first time I have been proud of my country” comment) and Reverend Wright’s. I can easily see Reverend Wright making that exact same statement.
Posted by: RHSwan | March 18, 2008 at 05:07 PM
Has anybody in the history of politics ever taken shots at his own grandmother in a speech? A speech about reconciliation?
His grandmother who is still living, at that. I hadn't realized that she is still alive.
Posted by: Porchlight | March 18, 2008 at 05:08 PM
TexasIsHeaven
Wow! You showed me - you biblical scholar you!
Then drew near unto him all the publicans and sinners for to hear him.
And the Pharisees and scribes murmured, saying, This man receiveth sinners, and eateth with them.
Luke 15:1-2 KJV
In the tradition of
Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful.
Psalms 1:1 KJV
Note the startling difference!
So, despite BO's denials to the contrary, 20 years of history with Trinity Church and its pastor leads to only one conclusion: BO chose that church because it is comfortable for him and his family.
But this speech also raises another question about him. If he is planning on being an agent of change, wny did he not try to change the anti-white, anti-American commentary? Why did he not try to send it in a less "divisive" direction.
This guy is a charlatan, a no-go showboat.
The speaker here knows the mind of Barack Obama. There is only one conclusion. She also knows that he made no effort to “… change the anti-white anti-American commentary.” And you say liberals have a flawed thinking process? Can one detect any thinking process in the above quotation? A closed mind is a terrible thing to waste.
Posted by: TexasToast | March 18, 2008 at 05:08 PM
I know of no other American today who could give anything remotely similar to it. Of course, his own history is the great enabler for him to give such a speech.
But don't you think that is at least partially because white people have been shamed (through PC and cries of racism) out of talking about such things?
What white person is allowed to talk about black racism toward whites without being called a racist?
Posted by: MayBee | March 18, 2008 at 05:08 PM
Not once in my conversations with him have I heard him talk about any ethnic group in derogatory terms, or treat whites with whom he interacted with anything but courtesy and respect.
How many of those whites with whom he interacted were non-contributors to his church, or friends of the same?
But in the interest of healing the divide, Obama gets points from me for good grammar. Too many politicians throw out good form in the interests of slightly more effective rhetoric. Now if only his policies were as good as his delivery...
Posted by: The Unbeliever | March 18, 2008 at 05:08 PM
*wink*
Shuffle, tap, swirl and bow...tap,tap,tap.
Posted by: clarice | March 18, 2008 at 05:09 PM