[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Above is the link to Obama’s recent statement on race and his pastor.
Quotes;
"I have already condemned, in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy. For some, nagging questions remain. Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely - just as I’m sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed.
But the remarks that have caused this recent firestorm weren’t simply controversial. They weren’t simply a religious leader’s effort to speak out against perceived injustice. Instead, they expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country - a view that sees white racism as endemic, and that elevates what is wrong with America above all that we know is right with America; a view that sees the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam.
As such, Reverend Wright’s comments were not only wrong but divisive, divisive at a time when we need unity; racially charged at a time when we need to come together to solve a set of monumental problems - two wars, a terrorist threat, a falling economy, a chronic health care crisis and potentially devastating climate change; problems that are neither black or white or Latino or Asian, but rather problems that confront us all."[/quote]
My political take:
The first part of his speech, and the stuff on his background, was pretty good - delivered well, but that was a given.
His overall take on race in America was pretty nuanced - though I don’t think that helps him much with blue-collar white Democrats. And I think, in fact, it may have hurt him with some of them - except for maybe some of them who disliked him because they thought he was Muslim. However, I don’t think this was aimed at them - I think it was aimed squarely at the educated independents for whom he expects to compete with John McCain, and for them it probably worked. He said he disagreed with Wright, and they want to like him - liking him makes them feel good about themselves. He talked in vague positives, which is what he’s been doing - very well - all along.
Still, it’s tougher now for him to be the “post-racial” candidate when he has been forced to address the issue. But if he can continue to come across as someone who isn’t “anti-white” (a la Jesse and Al), he’ll compete well with McCain for the educated Independent vote. He definitely mitigated the damage from this - didn’t eliminate it, but mitigated it - particularly with the base of voters he needs to continue to win in order to beat Hillary (the educated Independents he needs to vote in the primaries, as well as the upper-class professional Dems).
My personal take:
He didn’t really address the issue - and in fact, he essentially pivoted his stance from emphasizing, “I wasn’t in the pews for these speeches” to “I disagree with anything the press has found so far that offended people.”
The more I read about the particulars of Pastor Wright’s religious theory - the stuff from his conversation with Hannity, and particularly his major influences, the more it seems to me that this stuff was endemic to his preaching. Obama said as much in his speech with the line about Wright being a fierce critic of the U.S. I find it difficult to believe that the only times Wright happened to say stuff that went over the line were in the few instances ABC could find in the small set of tapes it purchased.
If he disagreed with Wright so much, and this “fierce critique” stuff is central to black liberation theology, which was the basis of Wright’s religious teachings and of the church’s theology, why was Wright his go-to spiritual adviser and mentor? Weren’t there other black churches in the area offering a gospel of helping the poor and oppressed without the “fierce critique” part? These questions weren’t addressed.
So, for me, I’m supposed to give Obama a pass on this - this being what seem to me to be anti-white and anti-American tenants of black liberation theology - because I am supposed to assume he’s insincere about this religion? That’s the “Obama as opportunist” theory, and I think it’s actually not only plausible, but probable. But that undercuts the whole “Obama as Messiah of Change” thing.
Also, some of the stuff was just typical Obamaian political nothing: Enforce our civil rights laws - which ones aren’t being enforced? Invest in our schools - whose schools? DC and Detroit have some of the highest per-pupil expenditures in the country. More money doesn’t fix schools if the underlying problems aren’t addressed. But we don’t wish to offend the powerful teachers’ unions. What are the new “ladders of opportunity” for this generation? Affirmative action has been in place for two generations now. The solution is to address the underlying problems - but you can’t tell what he means.
Of course, at the end of the day, I wasn’t going to vote for him anyway if he is for immediate pull out of Iraq, raising taxes and universal health care - but those are issues, and as such have no place on this thread… =-)
