Discussions
Obama's Race Speech
Posted by Manictastic • 3/19/08 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Watch it here in full: www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWe7wTVbLUU
So what did you think of this speech? Did you think Obama did a good job? Did it divide America, or did it help in the unifying process? Is this a speech that will be remembered for decades to come? Is this speech a turning point in this political race?
User Comments
-
Thanks for the link.
People were discussing this same thing yesterday on this thread:
www.blogcatalog.com/discuss/entry/1-reason-why-i-support-obama
and also here:
www.blogcatalog.com/discuss/entry/are-your-parents-racist -
I just finished watching it and it was a delicious piece of a political speech. He started out good, had a though time with the reverend part, and finished with a bang. The story about Ashley and how he interpreted why the US needs a social security system is just great oratory. It definitely fits in with all the other great American speeches.
-
There is no doubt that Obama is a phenomenal orator--very polished and eloquent. He has a very charasmatic and dynamic personality. Just by the very nature of his personality and presence, people are drawn to him. He seems to have the majority of Americans in some sort of trance, and people are incredibly enamored of him.
I will just say, for me, that words are cheap, and actions speak louder than words.-
You raise a valid point, but actions mostly only appear after words. McCain and Clinton might have "experience", but you never know how someone is going to act once elected. I think many people who voted for Bush the first, and second time, did not really expect him to turn out to be this kind of president. Actions speak louder than words, but unfortunately words precede actions (in political sense).
-
That's my gal
-
Well, in this case, words have followed 20+ years of action.
-
I agree with you, and if Obama disagreed with this preacher then he would have distanced himself from him years ago. Instead he has taken spiritual counsel from him his entire life.
That's some action for you.
-
-
Just a question for those who liked the speech. Was that speech prepared by himself or by his elite team???-
I've heard he wrote it himself. I'm not sure, though, but it's believable.
-
-
Right now I am downloading the video from youtube.
Taking cue from this thread www.blogcatalog.com/discuss/entry/1-reason-why-i-support-obama where people are impressed by so called 'most powerful' statement.
Also after referring fifth comment by 'MarkPogue' should we conclude that in his personal life he thinks 'God damn America' but in his political life he thinks 'God Bless America'??-
No. The speech should clear it all up for you. It's long, and he does not pull punches.
-
-
Obama's speech impressed me on a couple different levels. Besides delivering important content, it seems to me that making a speech like that in this country took a great amount of courage.
-
Courage was brought up in a few conversations I had yesterday. Good stuff. He did have to back pedal a bit with the whole pastor association thing. At one point before this speech he said he did not hear any of that hate from the pews...then, in the speech he admitted that he had heard some of it. Which is OK...at least he fessed up in a matter of days. So, he's got a loony "uncle" (pastor)...it's not the first time a presidential candidate has had sketchy associations.
Obama seems to be a man of character...and character just may win out this election. -
And don't forget the timing and place where he did it.
-
Ah, yes...the timing and place--things that his campaign strategists thought out very well. I'm glad it impressed you, since that's what they're paid for.
Regarding the pastor being the loony "uncle"--or comparing him to Obama's grandmother, which Obama did in his speech...that seems like a ridiculous comparison to me.
None of us CHOOSE our family. I don't recall being able to choose my parents, my siblings, my grandparents, or even my crazy racist uncles. Nope, I got who I got, and I'm stuck with them, like it or not.
On the other hand, we DO choose our spiritual leaders. We Christians have a choice regarding whose spiritual authority we choose to place ourselves under. And when we are in a church where we have very fundamental differences with the leader(s), we find another church. Nobody made Obama stay there. This church isn't a cult, where he was forbidden to leave. No...he CHOSE to stay there and place himself under the spiritual leadership of Rev. Wright. He also chose to involve Rev. Wright in some very major decisions in his life, including seeking counsel from Rev. Wright before running for Congress, and again before running for president. To brush off that relationship as something akin to a relationship with a crazy uncle is foolish and naive. -
Obama did say he didn't agree with everything Rev. Wright said. He also stressed there is another side which hasn't been highlighted by the media to the Reverend. I can imagine having friends with whom I don't agree for a full 100% but do stay friends with because on some points I do agree. Obama stayed vague on which points he agreed upon with the reverend, but that is his right.
Now, as a Roman catholic, I have no idea if Obama is, you cannot -or could not- chose your own priest. That's what the whole protestantism thing was for. Just to say, since christian sounds a bit too large for me personally. -
From what I've seen of your previous comments, Kristi, I think a Democrat would have to walk on water to impress you. I just don't think you're going there. In some ways the Obama speech is about the primary still, that is, it's about Democrats choosing their candidate. Still, if he gets the nomination, it also puts him in a good position for the next battle, the one for the presidency itself.
Edit: Regarding the matter of his family analogy, it works for me. Arguing about it is a bit difficult though, because it is a highly personal matter. Obama made a forthright effort to say where he was coming from. Up to voters to decide if they believe him. I do. -
Walk on water? No...although that would be impressive.
I just have serious concerns about Obama choosing to place himself under the spiritual leadership of this man for over 20 years. And I don't know how he could rationalize the fact that his church, under the leadership of Rev. Wright, chose to honor and give and award to Louis Farrakhan, a man who said that "white people are unevolved", and who called Judaism a "gutter religion", and who said that he was pleased to be compared to Hitler because "Hitler was a good man."
On another note, I see Obama as having a double standard...holding others to a higher standard than he holds himself. When Don Imus made the crazy comments that he made, which WERE terrible, and for which he definitely should have been reprimanded, Obama was one of the first to call for his firing. He said, "I understand MSNBC has suspended Mr. Imus, but I would also say that there's nobody on my staff who would still be working for me if they made a comment like that about anybody of any ethnic group. And I would hope that NBC ends up having that same attitude." Double standard? I think so. Don Imus was forced to apologize. Why wasn't Obama? Instead, he rationalized, made excuses, and compared his pastor to his grandmother. -
Kristilinauer - the comparison between his grandmother and the Rev. was more about the fact that they have both made racial statements he didn't agree with. In my eyes the point was that society was expecting him to dismiss the Rev for his racist comments so, should he dismiss his grandmother over hers? The point was that she helped raise and guide him and that it might be compared to the way the Rev. guides him spiritually. So, he could no sooner dismiss the Rev. for his stupid comments than he could his grandmother's stupid comments.
We don't always agree with everything the people who lead and guide us say or do but we still love and follow the good things they teach us. Yes, the churches we attend and the pastor we follow are a choice but I've yet to hear a minister or pastor I agree with completely but the 90% I follow and hear outweights the 10% I may not. I assume from what Obama is saying that this is the case with him too. I can understand that. -
And if that rationalization is fine with you, then you should certainly hold to it and believe it.
It's not fine with me. If my church chose to honor a known KKK leader who thought that blacks were "unevolved" and called another religion a "gutter religion" and was honored to be compared to Hitler because "Hitler is a good man", I would be out of there in a hurry, and I would be finding a different church.
Beliefs that are that fundamental cannot be glossed over. We're not talking about differences like "are spiritual gifts still used today" or "is dancing right or wrong" or "is it okay for Christians to drink alcohol". We're talking about MAJOR issues which teach that another race is of less value than another, or that another religion (and those who follow it) are basically trash.
-
-
It was courageous though I believe he was forced to make that speech, in part, by the way Clinton is campaigning. -
I did a post on it:
fistfullofmarbles.blogspot.com/2008/03/obamas-speech-re-rev-jeremiah-wright...
If anyone was listening the best point he made was that he could no sooner dismiss the Rev. than he could his white grandmother who was also guilty of making racist comments. It seems the media keeps cutting the speech before he gets to that. Typical of the media to portray what they want to portray.
There is a difference between what the media is showing he said and the entirety of what he actually said.
I like Obama because I see in him something I haven't seen in a president or a presidential candidate since John Kennedy. When was the last time we had someone in office whose speeches will go down in history and not as a joke? When was the last time America was this riled up and excited about a candidate for president? We can't do busines as usual and Hilary's tactics during the later part of this campaign has showed me that under a little pressure she's going to be dirty business as usual.-
Yes, the way he paired those two people is crucial. The mainstream media might be mangling it, but the full text and video is out there. If people really care, and claim to be able to think for themselves, they'll search these out.
-
I think many are watching the video, Stoneman. Already 1.2 million people have watched it on Youtube which in my eyes has never been achieved before to get so many viewers in one day for a video which is larger than 5 minutes and isn't about Britney.
-
Thanks for sharing that, Mani. That is heartening. Let's hope enough of those 1.2 million are registered voters in the U.S.
-
Most will be the younger generation. They are really into Obama and I fear that if Obama like doesn't make it, many will turn away from politics for the rest of their lives. It's so hard these days to inspire the young. Obama does ti with ease and you can see it all over the internet.
-
-
I keep hearing and reading so much about it - maybe I should actually watch it.
-
I wonder if it has anything to do with the recent southern primaries which demonstrated overwhelming black support and little white support in those states.
-
It's part of it, yea Kevin. Obama is having a though time and he has quite a while before Pa. is setting out to vote. He's gently building up traction. Obama is a bit of a diesel in way of getting his operation going and stuff.
-
I have watched about ten minutes of it. I think he is doing a fine job, a necessary job. One thing I have to ask – is this man going to the Black mans president or is he going to be my president, Americas president? That’s a rhetorical question rather than actual – but one that needed to be tackled and I think that is one thing he is doing. Obviously he is dealing with some specifics but he is doing a good job tackling the generalities in speaking of the specifics.
-
-
@Kristi..re: To brush off that relationship as something akin to a relationship with a crazy uncle is foolish and naive.
What is foolish and naive, is to attack Obama NOW for a 20-year association with the reverend. What is getting the Republicans and conservatives in trouble is striking at Obama in a self-righteous way. Obama also said the reverend played a big part in leading him to Christ...and I believe him!
Blacks, in many cases, have the right to be pointing fingers at an oppressive white society. However, this right should not give them carte blanche to behave the way this reverend does. I believe the reverend's ego got the best of him and he began to rant up the wrong tree.
As far as Obama, people change, they grow and move past erroneous beliefs, such as the reverands. Obama will survive this, despite a blinding racism still existing in this country...and despite a Republican party that has mostly stood on the correct side of morality, but now has the gross perception of self righteousness. I am a registered Republican and I am embarrassed at the way many Republicans are behaving. Obama just may be the morally better choice despite his party affiliation...or sick uncle! -
Excellent point to compliment our discussion here (I have no affliation with this article...I just read it!):
Double standard on Obama, preachers
www.communitytimes.com/default.asp?sourceid=&smenu=67&twindow=Default&mad=N...-
I consider myself fortunate to be Catholic – Liturgy rarely goes into interpretation.
-
-
It's odd how people will make excuses for their own candidate while condemning the other guy for the same things.
If this were Bush and he had an association with a pastor that was involved with the KKK then most of left leaners would be in an uproar.
When it's Obama...you want to elect him president.
I stand firm that an IQ test should be required to vote. It would solve a lot of our problems I think.
:-)-
Have you read or heard the speech? Obama had strong words for Wright. I would expect the same of any candidate, no matter what their politics was.
-
-
Stoneman, you said that you think a Democrat would have to walk on water in order to impress me, but it seems to me that you're determined to be impressed with Obama regardless of his actions.
Can you honestly tell me that "very strong words for Wright" in one speech erases the actions of the last 20 years?
In addition to all of the things I've already pointed out (and no body has yet to offer any reasoning, much less GOOD reasoning regarding Obama's church honoring Louis Farrakhan)...anyway, in addition to those things, why in the world did it take until March 14th for Obama to fire Rev. Wright from serving on his campaign's African American Religious Leadership Committee?-
"actions of the last 20 years"?
What evil deeds are you speaking of? -
I think this discussion is futile.
People who are enamored of Obama will continue to support him, regardless of any evidence of racism and hypocrisy.
People who are fed up with Obama will continue to dislike him regardless of his stern words to Rev. Wright and his other flowery remarks made during a 38 minute speech.
-
-
After one day it has gathered 1.6 million viewers on Youtube. That's incredible.
-
It was incredible enough to make the national news this morning.
-
-
"Obama had strong words for Wright"
Not as strong as he had for Imus when he had the same kind (actually, less hateful) of remarks. Funny how that works.-
I do not see how Imus' and Wright's remarks are even comparable, but the fact that they have been compared by at least two people here underlines the need for the kind of dialog that Obama is fostering.
-
-
Stoneman I totally agree. In fact I just can't believe that people make that comparison or in fact that they are off the chart against the minister. Hundreds of years of slavery, lynchings, Jim Crow , ongoing bigotry, Selma, Nixon and his southern strategy, Reagan and his "states' rights" - hell it was just in the 60s that the voting rights act was put in place, and now because there has been some progress in the last few years all the anger should just go away. Obama was right on in his appraisal of what is going on. He was right on in his criticism that the problem with Wright's comments were not that they came out of anger but rather that he didn't see the changes that had come and the possibilities that were out there. He was also right on with his statements that blacks have to take more responsibility for themselves as Cosby and Williams have said. He wasn't just passing the buck.
And what is this spiritual leadership stuff? The hypocrisy of the right is phenomenal.There's no doubt about it that Farrakhan is a piece of work. He has done some good things but his attitudes about the Jews is totally nuts. His anger has turned him into a hateful person. But he's not running for President. And from all I've read Obama has a lot of support from the Jewish community. Bush probably would be able to pass the right's test for having a good minister. And look at what he and the people he associates with have done,which is what you are screaming at Obama. What do you want? Do you want Obama to drop out? A person who finally offers a choice. Do you want things to stay the same? All of the issues we have in this country and you want to spend time with Rev. Wright. and talk of Obama's racism? Please. -
There is a huge difference between Imus calling Rutgers female basketball players nappy ho's to Reverend Wrights ideological rhetoric.
Two hundred years of oppression is bound to turn any particular group of people a little inward, it is bound to fuel hateful rhetoric, I'm not sure I see how a old white man, just because he has done a couple of good things in his life and just because he can, has the same credentials to spew racial hatred at a group of young woman he doesn't know in order to make his living. That so many find noting wrong with this is a symptom of what is really going on.
One thing about Bill Cosby though, he did have a mentor, a couple of huge mentors who kicked his ass from what I recall reading. Not all African Americans have that, due to the family situations of many African Americans - an indirect result of the years of oppression. -
Obama will be the next US president and Hillary his deputy -
'kristilinauer'@: The reason some people are reluctant to accept the things is they might have voted for him.
-
I think the huge misconception many people have is they are the only ones who do research and base their voting decisions on reason and logic, as well as ideological preferences.
-
I've noticed that too.
-
I think the issue is that people have different ideological preferences.
-
I was fascinated by some intelligent discussion on NPR yesterday, "To the Point," I believe. Different people were reading this stuff so differently. They had studied all the facts and were working off those, not mere hunches or slander from any mainstream news jockey. And they came to such different conclusions. Some of these were ideological, but others were due to age and experience (generation and biography), not ideology.
-
I do think age and life experiences definitely shape a person, and the way they view the goings-on of the world.
I think ideology is the main basis for decisions regarding candidates. If we all had the same ideology--the same thoughts regarding how to make this nation great, strong, prosperous, etc.--there would be no need for several candidates.
When discussing political issues, I definitely don't come from the viewpoint of "I have studied and researched, and I'm applying logic and reason, while those who disagree with me are ignorant fools." (Well, there are some times that it's obvious I'm talking to a fool. I think we've all had that experience. But generally, that is not the case here on BC.)
Sometimes at my most frustrated, I may come across like that, but the truth is, I know I'm engaging in conversation with some very smart, intelligent, well-studied people. And while we could discuss issues all day long, we would probably never agree--no matter how well-studied each of us is. And the reason isn't because one of us is stupid. It's because our most fundamental beliefs and ideals are vastly different.
Even so, I enjoy engaging in conversations like this, because it challenges me, and I enjoy being challenged and learning. -
Kristi, in our case ideology is a pretty significant factor. I agree. I just brought up the other factors, because without them we cannot make much sense of the competition between Obama and Clinton, who in ideological terms are fairly close.
-
-
My choice is McCain though I think Obama is an excellent candidate. I would prefer to support my candidate by addressing his strengths rather than the opponent’s weaknesses or supposed weaknesses.
I think Obama said what he had to say. It was great speech and probably a historical speech. There is no excuse that gives right for racism be it white against black or black against white. I think Obama was very clear sighted in this and in addressing the reasons for it. He can be excused for his long associations with the reverend. He is very much aware of the larger world, and he has stepped into it and into a greater responsibility.
I am grateful for his position and for his speech. I see it as a demonstration of responsibility and the deliverance of a message that can do a lot of good in coming to terms with racial mentalities amongst Americans. Obama can be criticized for his association but certainly not for his speech or his current position and we should applaud him right now for the good he is doing.-
I hope McCain also just relies on his strengths, but we'll have to wait and see. This is the land of mud slinging . . .
-
I tell you what – I would damn near give my life to a candidate or party that could keep it above the waste.
You would think the majority of Americans would be sick or immune to it. I recently read in a communications text book the reasons why political ad hominem is so effective.
I doubt we’ll see the end of it but I would think a campaign could be based against it – a smear the smear campaign.
-
-
What is funny about the entire thing is he had a pastor like this and he never knew about it for 20 years.
If you are not a good judge of people, how can you run this country when you have to deal with people all over the world?-
That's not what he said, Mike. He also explained the context of his relationship. You might visit some NPR archives for some of the shows yesterday and today that are discussing the cultural gap that is making it hard for some to understand the kind of church he went to. Maybe I'm thinking of yesterday's "To the Point" again. Not sure.
-
He absolutely did not say that he wasn't aware of it. His speech clearly defined his views, I was very impressed. -
I think he was high from celebrating holy week. -
It was interesting to hear him say that the most segregated time in America is on Sundays.
-
I think that's so true, Kevin. My own pastor has said that several times before.
-
It also reinforced my own views of how I felt much of black America thinks and feels about white people, yet I can forgive them given our incredibly cruel and racist history toward them.
Personally, I would feel differently if Clinton attended a church run by white racists. It would be completely inexcusable and you can't even begin to compare the two.
-
-
I think he is a closet pot head, so he is coolio
-
I think Hippychick is sitting on top of a black pyramid ultra focused on a microdot
-
its sooooooooooo cool too!
Tell me you cant see him with a big ol fatty. Politics get so much better when you high! -
I wonder if Clinton has ever inhaled?
-
-
thats why the stain went on the dress man, he inhaled too much
-
I was talking about the Mrs.
-
-
ahhh, yeah well she is probably more of an X popper. Cant really see her with the bong
-
She does kind of look like a pill popper. I had a dream once that George Bush tried to get me to smoke a joint with him. When I asked him how he gets it he said secret service insist on supplying it.
-
dang all the government officials get the good stuff!
-
-
Honestly, this whole thing would be much less of an issue with me if Louis Farrakhan weren't a factor. If the only thing we were dealing with was a pastor making some crazy remarks, it would be a lot easier for me to swallow. I'm not saying it wouldn't make me stop and think, but it would just be easier.
I just can't get past the fact that Obama is a member of a church that honored and gave an award Louis Farrakhan, saying that he was a man who "truly epitomizes greatness." Farrakhan is one of the most openly racist men in America, spewing hatred toward whites and Jews, and towards America as a whole, and yet Obama's church honored him in 2007. That, in my mind, is not something to be taken lightly.-
Farrakhan isn't a factor. Be ugly if he were.
-
-
The Reverend Wright's church has a HUGH following. If the polarizing sound bites we're hearing on talk radio and TV were the norm for his three-times-a-week-for-twenty-years sermons then how has he been able to maintain such a high attendance among black Chicagoans? The answer is they weren't the norm. The fact is there is racist talk on both side of the color line and most of us turn a deaf ear when we hear it in our daily lives, no matter who it comes from. How many of us speak up when a racist joke is told at a party? How many of us speak up with someone is the victim of a racist attitude in our daily lives or walk out on a relative talking that crap? Obama is the right person at the right time in history to be the president. No one else in modern times has been willing and able to take this topic straight on the way he did in that speech. He deserves respect for that. -
I've just finished reading an interesting comparison by a reporter who ived both in Washington DC and Brussels. It notes that perhaps the anger of the African-American community is actually partially a socio-economic anger which occurs all over the world. It's well worth the read: www.economist.com/blogs/certainideasofeurope/2008/03/race_or_socioeconomics...
-
There's a lot of overlap in DC between class and race. I've seen the same mutual disdain between black rich customer and black poor cashier as I have seen between white rich customer and black poor cashier, but the latter case is more common where I live, because many parts of the city are still segregated. Of course, I can still point to African Americans and other ethnic groups in my neighborhood, but the overall impression is white. Go to the minimum-wage-paying stores, though, and the picture is reversed. Go the the especially awful local drug store, CVS, and the antipathy becomes clearer, but only when the most arrogant of customers are involved. Unfortunately, we've got quite a few of those around here.
Actually, I'd have to say that classism is much stronger in this city than any racism. But the correspondence of class with race confuses the issue, as the author of that article notices. -
Poverty and lack of opportunities does cause anger and frustration, it is true that due to 200 years of oppression the economic forecast for many African Americans was set partially in stone, so why their anger may be partially due to their economic situation, in this country at least the socio-economic problems which are a direct result of that oppression and of racism – and in so many cases the unwillingness of white American to listen to their arguments or see they are valid, and admit that racism has never gone away because if it had we'd be in D.C. Making sure those pathetic schools were not falling down and full of mold, and likewise we'd be in Baltimore, Detroit, Atlanta making sure that at the very least the inner city population had schools in which they could actually learn.
-
-
Well, if this debacle has done nothing else, at the very least it got people to stop calling Obama a Muslim extremist waiting in the wings to take over the US and turn it into a fundamentalist nation where all women wear burkas (burquas?) and stonings will ensue and freedoms will be eradicated....and whatever else people had been saying about him.
Now, it's just something else to bash him on.
I'm with Kevin Goodman - vote for strengths NOT mudslinging attempts at exposing weaknesses. And I will be quite honest here for a moment - I don't give a rat's ass if he is a racist - so long as his track record of policy making does not reflect his personal views with this regard, and works to the betterment of the US, then I say who cares?-
He's not. If he were, it would matter to me. Besides the morals of the issue, we've got civil rights laws on the books that need enforcing, and then there's that whole power to appoint judges. This issue matters, or it would, if it were real.
-
Right, which is why I said that if his voting record, and his actions AREN'T a reflection of his bigotry, personal bias or any other personal character flaw then what does it matter?
What if he is a racist? But one who separates his personal beliefs from that of which is best of his constituents. Kind of like what we require by separating church and state.
A person may have been raised in a religion that demands the abolishment of abortion, gay marriages, birth control and whatever else - but if the candidate at hand has a proven track record of working for the people, and not for his/her religion then what's the problem?
-
-
Anok, I agree with you. It's possible for a person to recognize racism in themselves BUT still recognize racism as a negative thing they don't want to pass on to the next generation. Voting records and actions count. Doing the right thing for the right reasons counts---regardless of personal bias.
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
