Obama Speech: 'A More Perfect Union'

[Sammie13]

It was an excellent speech....thoughtful and, hopefully, sincere. I do wish he had not given this speech in a "campaign" format with applauding audience and some references to the political race....somewhat undermined the historical context for me anyway. Still, a compelling speech.

By saying that he had been in attendance at church when certain offensive remarks were made tells us a few things: 1) Obama has had opportunities to influence Wright's thought processes to his more contemporary thinking on world matters and race, but apparently Obama never attempted to do this or did attempt and failed and 2) Obama has clearly lied because this weekend he was saying that he had never been in attendance when Wright spoke such rubbish....now, he confesses that he has been in attendance when this vile was spewing.

My other thought is race crisis has been thrown out there. If race relations is going to now be on the front-burner, is white America really in the mood for that now? Will white America view a vote for Obama as a vote to tackle race relations? We already have a deepening economic crisis that includes a housing crisis and an oil crisis with a stock crisis and a job loss crisis looming. We have a terror crisis and a war crisis. Right now, we have more crisis than our stove has front-burners. If the Obama message is another crisis, black America rightfully may be ready to tackle this now while the oven is hot, but white America may not be in the mood...not at this time. My hunch is that this is not a campaign direction that will get much traction for Obama in 2008.

 

[CO Bob]

This man is UNIFYING and says it like it is. Well Barack will take you forward with this country DESPITE your negativity.

The man is a politician, through & through. He is telling you what you want to hear.

Change? Please! He is a tax & spend liberal that believes in bigger government, larger beaurocracies, and wants to take 1/7th of the American economy (health care), and turn it over to the government. Have you seen how well medicare is run now? Social medicine will ruin this country, and a beaurocrat with Obama's slight experience has no business in the White House.

Change? He will not change one thing in Washington. And like all politicians, will tell you exactly what you want to hear in order to be elected!

 

[CO Bob]

Excellent speech.

Whether it's Obama or Hillary, it'll be such a breath of fresh air to have a President who isn't an inarticulate bumbler.

WAAAH! I think you should look for more than a breath of air from your next President.

 

[kneelin]

There is no doubt that Obama is a great orator, both dynamic and compelling. However were these his heartfelt words and beliefs or was it a just another well-crafted speech by his crack team of political writers with him as the mouthpiece? At this time and place there is real doubt . . . much of it seemed pure expedience.

 

[kneelin]

It was an excellent speech....
By saying that he had been in attendance at church when certain offensive remarks were made tells us a few things: 1) Obama has had opportunities to influence Wright's thought processes to his more contemporary thinking on world matters and race, but apparently Obama never attempted to do this or did attempt and failed and 2) Obama has clearly lied because this weekend he was saying that he had never been in attendance when Wright spoke such rubbish....now, he confesses that he has been in attendance when this vile was spewing.

You nailed that; it will be interesting to see if he is called on that.

 

[construct]

It's a terrific speech in that it appeals to the best in our characters on the basis of commonalities of experience. It points us in a common direction toward shared goals and a faith that our society is amenable of improvement. It begins with race and it moves beyond race without transcending race. Recognizing the differences in our stories it moves to the shared values and goals which derive from the particularities of those stories.

I like his outlook. I like his philosophy. I like his method. I voted right.

Thanks, Txgoodoldboy, for posting the speech.

 

[syntax]

The suggestion that America is in a racial crisis is pretty much like the mythic Kennedy Missile Crisis. Kennedy claimed falsely that America was behind the USSR in missiles and blamed the previous administration. Obama has invented a racial crisis that did not exist a few months ago and offers himself as the remedy. Apparently Teddy and Reverend Wright have taught him well.

Oh and it wasn't the "Kennedy missile crisis", it was called the "Cuban missile crisis." Anyone knowing anything about politics and history should at least know that.

This is off-topic but for the sake of clarity (and in defense of Iman):

There are two issues at play here. In the 1960 campaign against Nixon, Kennedy declared (wrongly) that there was a "missile gap" between the Soviet Union and the United States - in favor of the Soviets. It was an attempt to portray the Eisenhower administration, in which Nixon was the VP, as soft on defense.

The Cuban Missile Crisis occurred while Kennedy was President in Oct. 1962. It was very real and Kennedy handled the adeptly.

On topic: I read the speech and like many people it brought me to the verge of tears. Of course, it was a political calculation. This is a political campaign. Maybe it will pay off, maybe not. I only wish that Sen. Obama had delivered it months ago, when he, his campaign and many of his supporters were saying, "It's not about race."

 

[Kulindahr]

I thought it was brilliant and could (in an ideal world) help to re-frame the way in which we speak about race in this country; it was subtle, fair, complex, direct and truthful. (Whether it'll blunt the Wright controversy remains to be seen...). As I watched it I kept thinking, "I don't think I've ever heard a politician speak this way before." I'm not a Hillary hater in the least, but I do think that his way of re-framing the campaign arena makes her way of campaigning look old, nakedly mechanical, old fashioned and petty.

I don't think I have, either. It comes close to Reagan, but... at times he reminded me of some very, very good professors I had in college.

I watched the speech too and thought it was great. I was watching Hardball just now and Chris Matthews had on 3 other people, I didn't get their names. 2 African Amer and 1 Cauc. They all compared the speech to MLKs I have a dream speech.

Uh... no: it's not up to MLK's. It requires his to even get going, because Obama's building on MLK. But it might be worth a comparison like this: that the plow MLK set his shoulder to has gotten neglected as people pursued their own agendas, and Obama is saying, "See that plow? Let's get our shoulders to it!"

SORRY OBAMA NOT BUYING IT
Reasons:
1. Had Mr. Wright never made this statement you wouldn't be up here now trying to do damage control, because he told the truth as he saw it and of your association with him.

The speech covered Wright only briefly. You're speculating, and given how little a part Wright played in the speech, odds are -- speaking as one who's been a public speaker -- the speech was already planned and the material about Wright was worked in where it fit.

2. For years you have attend a church that has a message of seperate but equal. Not Unity, but Seperataion, and you want to know say his message is divisive. It always been.

I call BULLSHIT on this one. If you're going to make claims this contrary to what's been plainly visible in the clips of Wright, give some sources. For the moment...
Have you read the history of that church? Do you know what denomination it's a part of? Have you checked out its web site?

3. Now because you disagree with his message, you want to distance yourself from him. Why now? His message was no suprise to you, you admit you knew what he was about, and yet still attended his church and is an attactive member.
4. He has now because a issue for him because he is running for president.

More BULLSHIT. Again, check your history: Obama had already distanced himself from Wright, and had told Wright that more would be coming.

5. If he didn't like the message or find some core of belief in it, he could have chose to leave, but he chose to stay.

You're another person who doesn't grasp what a (real) church is about: it's not a smorgasbord, or a fast food joint, or even a newspaper subscription: you don't switch because you get irritated, you only switch if something is taught that's dangerous to salvation. As people from the black community have been saying in "on the street" interviews on the air tonight, Barack Obama showed loyalty that should be admired. It's loyalty that in a Christian should be expected; spirituality isn't about finding something that makes you feel good.

It is smoke and mirrors and I am not buying it. Or drinking the kool-aide.

I'd say you already did -- you just skipped the red [STRIKE]pill[/STRIKE] koolaide and took the blue one.

Those are the words that have needed to be said for so long in this country

for those who have been consumed by hate and wrath these past months, nothing will suffice

Yeah.
He showed very nicely that he's not making use of the race card; he's rejecting it: he acknowledges the different points of view, the different complaints, the different sufferings, of people on both sides the divide. He affirms the pain of people wronged on both sides of that divide. He argues that the status quo does not have to the the status semper, that indeed it is the status quo because it has been maintained by forces on both sides. He makes clear that people from both sides must work together to reduce the divide, to alter the status quo.

Over against Hillary, he's arguing for doing things differently, while she proclaims she's just the one to keep doing things the same.


Quite impressive.

 

[Kulindahr]

Obama's speech that you say "re-frames the campaign arena" inspires you ("not a Hillary hater in the least") to immediately personally denigrate his opponent -- not her policies, not her positions, not her plans if she's elected President, but her way of campaigning.

When someone says something contrary to the plain words in front of all of us, we call that a lie.
You just did one, Nick: there was no comment about Hillary personally, whatsoever, in what you quoted.

If Obama failed to inspire his supporters --the ones who call his speech "brilliant"-- to stop their personal denigration of opponents, he failed to demonstrate he can inspire change.

This is called "using the lie you just made to advance a smokescreen".

I thought parts of the speech were glorious. But it was also a political speech and that's a shame, a lost opportunity.

Get real, Nick -- of course it was a political speech. At this point in his life, he can't make a speech and not have it be political, any more than he can run for office without race being an issue. He could have been talking to the Pope about America, and it would be a political speech!

There is a forthright conversation we need in this country between blacks and whites. As Obama boldly and rightly pointed out, we have too many secrets and we pretend too much with each other.

This speech was Obama's opportunity to inspire that conversation. But I haven't heard people doing that.

Maybe you should listen harder?
This wasn't a Martin Luther King sort of speech that sends people marching out, eager to do things. This was the sort of speech that gives you food for thought, and let's people sift through it for a while. It had words that are going to make people want to hear it again, so it;s not going away, it's not going to be forgotten. I think he did inspire that conversation, he just didn't provoke the sort of reaction you've set up in your Hillary's-pre-approved system for deciding if someone else measures up -- which is to say, ethereal, so you don't have to face the possibility that someone else might even be in the ballpark.

I think that's because the speech was more political expediency than leadership in a new direction. In fact, judging by the zero talk about race and all the talk about rating his speech and how it will impact the campaign, I give him a failing grade. It demonstrates that Obama lacks the leadership (or the authentic will?) to get the conversation started and to guide it. He can say things well enough (in five or ten years he could be incredible) but he didn't come close to leading the way today.

That's an interesting system of grading: don't judge someone on the content and substance of his effort, but on your perceptions of how others respond to it.

You guys are making me think that the Hillary Clinton campaign song is "A man sees want he wants to see, and disregards the rest".

 

[JackFTwist]

Kulindahr: thank you

 

[Kulindahr]

I didn't see where Iman said that America has gotten over our racial issues, and that they don't exist. They do exist and will always exist. It is part of our nature to fear and degrade what we don't understand.

The reality is that racism will always exist, in one form or another.

Did you actually listen to the speech?
I ask, because you just declared that you're part of the problem, and plan on continuing to be part of the problem. You've taken a position right there with Rev. Wright: there's a racial divide, and we're enemies here.

Of course we have race issues. We have been addressing them for many years and we have an African American running for the Presidency. What I resent is Obama, who has been trading on race, telling the country that only he represents racial salvation for the US.

Race has become the Obama raison d'etre and I reject that. Obama could have been a race neutral candidate but chose not to be and instead has repeatedly injected race into the election and that is unfortunate.

Lie 1: he didn't say that.

Lie 2: Race is what Hillary and other Obama opponents are trying to pretend this is about -- a race about race.

If Obama's "trading on race" -- well, read my posts elsewhere; there's no way he can not have race as an issue in his campaign.

 

[Kulindahr]

Wednesday's NY Times editorial on the speech, titled "Mr. Obama's Profile in Courage." And btw, they support Hillary and endorsed her.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/19/opinion/19wed1.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

Excellent article.

Of course people who love Bush wouldn't understand it; they think that religion should be the government, not just mix with it. It's nice to see a potential president who honors the distinction, isn't it?

 

[byro]

All this back and forth is so sad and almost beside the point. Love him or hate him, the speech was epochal. If people as diverse as Pat Buchanan and Pat Robertson and Joe Biden and Chris Matthews can see that, why can't the begrudging Hillary supporters here see that even if you don't want him to be the nominee, he's spoken in a manner that does all Democrats proud. OK, so don't support him, but at least recognize that this was a major speech that will go down in history regardless of how the campaign plays out.

 

[ImperaTodd]

The speech was great and under any other context it would have been more than it is. In reality though this was a reply to a series of videos that are politically damaging, we need to keep that in mind. Before this came to light I wasn't sure who I was going to support or vote for, now I am certain and it isn't Mr. Obama. The reason behind this change is simple: I do not want a bigot, or one who makes excuses for a bigot in the white house.

Lets be honest we all have our preconceived notions, either through ignorance or due to experience and we are all at least a little racist. The key to improving our nation is fighting those notions and looking at the person, not their clothing, skin, or sex life and certainly not by defending blatant bigotry. We must fight ourselves, and treat one another as people, as we wish to be treated. Race won't be solved in a decade or 4. The change is one from within, not exhibiting hate in any form so that we may not infect the next generation with our failings. One doesn't heal by digging a wound, by accusing others, one heals by discussing the present, past and how it can be dealt with. Asking God to damn some one never heals. This doesn't mean we leave the past to be forgotten, we teach it. We teach the facts so that our children do better from the mistakes of our parents, as hopefully we have. Hate and history are not the same. We can talk about civil rights without the hate or resentment, to be hateful is selfish. When we spread hate we aren't thinking about the future just now, but the present is fleeting, the effect we have isn't so transitory. This lesson has been lost on Mr. Obama, and sadly I thought he would be the first to know it.

My paragraphs aren't meant to dismiss the genuine feelings of anger and frustration that many African Americans feel. These feelings are justified. Spreading hate and infecting the next generation with anger that well may not be fostered otherwise is unfair. Be angry, vent, heal but don't wound the innocent because I will do everything I can not to inflict others with my failing. The race issue isn't a white issue alone.

 

[David DeVour]

This is the first time in my life I've heard a black man acknowledge white angst against affirmative action without being condescending. I know three poor or working class whites who've been told they were the wrong color for Pell Grants.

Plus he acknowledges that we don't feel any responsibilty (and justifiably so ) for black slavery or southern segregation. He's proven that he isn't going to blame all whites for the past.

Thank God, because part of me was worried that I'd have to get guilt trips I don't deserve in presidential speeches. I've heard enough of that in my years. Talk about NOW. There's enough racial profiling and job descrimination going on to correct. Everyone knows that blacks have to be careful when driving down certain streets to avoid police harrassment. Sing about that and I'll join the chorus.
Talk about 200 years ago and my ears will shut off.

 

[Centexfarmer]

Wow! I didn't watch the speech this morning, but I just checked it out on YouTube. Damn, it is great. The length is over 37 minutes, but well worth it. I think, whether pro-Obama, or not, it is worth the watch.

Brilliant speech.

It's as if the events leading up to this moment in time conspired to give Senator Obama an oppurtunity to "rise above it."

This speech illustrated that not only has he risen above it, he's attempted to carry as many people up with him as possible; supporters and critics alike.

He addressed virtually every issue dividing our country that I can think of.

What he lacks in experience, he's either making up with confidence, or passion in the American Dream for everyone.

Barrack Obama IS America, in all of our contradictions, if he believes in his own words.

I cannot know another person's heart, except through their actions.

He wants to our President, and what other way can someone honor what it means to be an American, than the desire to lead our country. Not for political gain, or ideaology, but appeal to our "better angels."

It's his speaking style, and the images that he paints within his speeches that first got America's attention.

His words are the words that Politics and Presidents are made of.

Closer to home, it's ashame that many of his most ardent supporters in this forum don't follow these same principles, in regard to their fellow members here; at least in their support for him.

Call me old school, call me anything that you want except late for supper, but my vote for Hillary Clinton still stands.

If she were not still in the race, I doubt that we'd have seen such a response from Senator Obama in light of the events that have transpired over the past week.

Once again; brilliant.

This speech illustrates yet another reason why, as a Democrat, that I can enthusiastically support him as the candidate for my Party once he's won the nomination.

 

[NickCole]

When someone says something contrary to the plain words in front of all of us, we call that a lie.
You just did one, Nick: there was no comment about Hillary personally, whatsoever, in what you quoted.

Saying that "her way of campaigning is ... petty" is personal.

That's not a comment on her ideology or her policy proposals or her plans for America, it's a comment on her, her style. An individual's style is as personal as it gets. It's what's called the politics of personal destruction. And that's what Obama inspires in his supporters.

Get real, Nick -- of course it was a political speech. At this point in his life, he can't make a speech and not have it be political, any more than he can run for office without race being an issue. He could have been talking to the Pope about America, and it would be a political speech!

If he can't make a speech that isn't political then he's not the agent of change he claims to be.

Maybe you should listen harder?
This wasn't a Martin Luther King sort of speech that sends people marching out, eager to do things.

You're right it wasn't a Martin Luther King sort of speech.

It was a political speech.

He hasn't changed anything. And if he can't --given the incredible opportunity the Wright bruhaha created-- change our conversation about race, even for a few hours, he is clearly incapable of leading change.

This was the sort of speech that gives you food for thought, and let's people sift through it for a while.

Nobody is talking about race in a new way as a result of that speech, nobody's even trying to. And that's not going to change in the days, weeks, months, years that follow. Obama delivered nothing more than a political speech with a nice use of words. Just words.

It had words that are going to make people want to hear it again, so it;s not going away, it's not going to be forgotten. I think he did inspire that conversation, he just didn't provoke the sort of reaction you've set up in your Hillary's-pre-approved system for deciding if someone else measures up -- which is to say, ethereal, so you don't have to face the possibility that someone else might even be in the ballpark.

I'm placing on it the responsibility to meet the expectation his supporters placed on it. It failed on that score. It was a political speech.

That's an interesting system of grading: don't judge someone on the content and substance of his effort, but on your perceptions of how others respond to it.

Yes, it's an old fashioned system of grading. My generation grades on results. 20/30 somethings grade on effort.

We were awarded prizes for winning, which is result; 20/30 somethings were given prizes simply for playing, which is effort. "You didn't win but GOOD JOB!"

Effort is wonderful, and sustained effort is commendable, but change is a result not merely an effort.

 

[LaloGS]

It was an excellent speech....thoughtful and, hopefully, sincere. I do wish he had not given this speech in a "campaign" format with applauding audience and some references to the political race....somewhat undermined the historical context for me anyway. Still, a compelling speech.

By saying that he had been in attendance at church when certain offensive remarks were made tells us a few things: 1) Obama has had opportunities to influence Wright's thought processes to his more contemporary thinking on world matters and race, but apparently Obama never attempted to do this or did attempt and failed and 2) Obama has clearly lied because this weekend he was saying that he had never been in attendance when Wright spoke such rubbish....now, he confesses that he has been in attendance when this vile was spewing.

My other thought is race crisis has been thrown out there. If race relations is going to now be on the front-burner, is white America really in the mood for that now? Will white America view a vote for Obama as a vote to tackle race relations? We already have a deepening economic crisis that includes a housing crisis and an oil crisis with a stock crisis and a job loss crisis looming. We have a terror crisis and a war crisis. Right now, we have more crisis than our stove has front-burners. If the Obama message is another crisis, black America rightfully may be ready to tackle this now while the oven is hot, but white America may not be in the mood...not at this time. My hunch is that this is not a campaign direction that will get much traction for Obama in 2008.

Thanks for this Sam. Very insightful into the problems we face.

I would add, that the number of political speeches in our history as a country that have had "turn around" significance," has been miniscule if they exist at all. Personally, I find Obama a magnificent speaker, and generally like everything he says, but I totally agree with your assessment of the situation we are in, as a people, at this point in time. If anything, this speech is likely to backfire. While change would be good, certain things, like dispelling ignorant hatreds like racism, while making progress, take time. Generations infected by hate teaching have to die out before the ignorance dies out all together. We haven't had enough generations teaching hate die off since the civil War to accomplish this. Witness the Repuglican and Religious Right Theocracy of hate.

Obama is just one aspect of the move toward a rational and less ignorant country. However, the inclination to racial hatred is seemingly insurmountable in a country like ours that seems to pride itself for being better than every other nation on earth. The hatred is deeper than mere skin color, but skin color is the easiest to rally the flag around, because of white guilt that still lingers from slavery. Not a single thinking person has ever thought that what was done to Africans was right. But now that it has been done, we all suffer the consequences.

The issue of racism is so interwoven into the fabric of capitalism, that more than likely it will never be expunged totally. Since we are a capitalist society, there may not be any hope beyond legally enforced tolerance. Even the fine words in the Bill of Rights, have only been applied with the two faces of Janus when ever possible. While our racism is seemingly less violent today, the violence is still simmering just beneath the surface, as we have seen in multiple acts of racial violence since Civil Rights legislation has become the law of the land.

 

[White Eagle]

--snip--
Uh... no: it's not up to MLK's. It requires his to even get going, because Obama's building on MLK. But it might be worth a comparison like this: that the plow MLK set his shoulder to has gotten neglected as people pursued their own agendas, and Obama is saying, "See that plow? Let's get our shoulders to it!"
--snip--

I wish now that I would have put in my impression of the speech, I loved it and am at awe about it. I don't think it is comparable to MLKs because "I have a dream" brings chills and tears. This speech is just great and something that is needed at this time.
I'm not going to respond to the negative posts because if they don't get it by now, they never will. They will be the ones that keep racism alive.

 

[LaloGS]

This is the first time in my life I've heard a black man acknowledge white angst against affirmative action without being condescending. I know three poor or working class whites who've been told they were the wrong color for Pell Grants.

Plus he acknowledges that we don't feel any responsibilty (and justifiably so ) for black slavery or southern segregation. He's proven that he isn't going to blame all whites for the past.

Thank God, because part of me was worried that I'd have to get guilt trips I don't deserve in presidential speeches. I've heard enough of that in my years. Talk about NOW. There's enough racial profiling and job descrimination going on to correct. Everyone knows that blacks have to be careful when driving down certain streets to avoid police harrassment. Sing about that and I'll join the chorus.
Talk about 200 years ago and my ears will shut off.

Well David, shutting your ears to the past, has never been prudent. The roots of affirmative action, are deeply embedded in the rancid soil of guilt incurred in the dim dark past. Until we address the wrongs that causes the guilt, we will never overcome the problems.

The fact that our educations didn't address the guilt of past wrongs, does not make it easy for us to even understand from which well our guilt is drawn. Showing the horror of conditions slaves were subject to, the sardine can transport ships, in which only a moderate number survived, the separation from family in Africa, the mixing of traditional enemy clans, the breeding programs for improved stock, the legally enforced withholding of education, the terrorizing of blacks seeking freedom in the land that had declared them to be equal and deserving of the same rights of all men, and then after they were freed by proclamation and promised 40 acres and a mule, nothing was forth coming but third class citizenship, and economically except another form of survival slavery, only partially provides the truth.

After one of the most deadly wars in history and the only war fought on the soil of this land, the blood of millions, only sufficed to fan the flames of hatred and terror. Generations thought it proper and right that men and women of color should should be taxed to vote, and be pleased to ride in the back of buses, and drink from different fountains and shit in different toilets, and be marginally educated in rundown schools, segregated (still in my lifetime) from us whites. So your blinders to the past, are in fact, not for something that happened 200 years ago (although that number is a wholly inadequate time frame) but things that have happened within living memory of a majority of Americans.

So your position is one of ignorance to say the least. You ought to crack a history book, or failing that, Google or Wikipedia some time frame information before you put your blinders to the past on permanently.