Obama tackles race anger in major speech

[Thetagirl218]

Originally Posted by SECdomination

The same kind that Al Gore gave off.

Al Gore never seemed Presidential to me.....

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by EE-BO

It is a new thing in the general media with this election. Ann Coulter likes to bring up race and voting blocks all the time, but in the past this has not been a staple of general media reporting, or even among many advocates/pundits.

I share your sense of being sick and feeling my intelligence has been insulted.

At the end of the day, this is how I see the Obama situation with regards to Reverend Wright,

1. Obama made a strategic decision early in the race to focus on a very high level approach to campaigning. This avoided specifics and a degree of substance, but also kept him free to avoid getting mired in details over specific comments that in the modern media can come back to bite you. A good example is McCain and the 100 years in Iraq comment.

2. This strategy served him very well early on- and still is really. However, he came into this situation with Wright as the candidate a lot of people did not really have a good handle on. This is in part due to the fact that he deliberately took a very high level message approach in his speeches, and also due to the fact the other 2 major candidates have very long and well known public records.

3. At a certain point, he made it very clear that his church and his pastor were a major force in his life.

4. Then the Wright stuff comes out- a perfect media story full of hate and sensationalism. And then a LOT of people who don't personally identify with Obama or understand where he is coming from are going to automatically, and unfairly, associate him negatively with Rev. Wright.

I think that is the bottom line here. Race pervades this in a sense, but it is not the fundamental issue. The media making it an issue- and bringing out pundits who defend Wright in part- just makes it harder on Obama.

This is what makes the media money...not boring old issues but who is sleeping wth wh, who is a hater and so forth...like him or not, Obama says what he has to say and moves on. It's not stuff that has to linger on and on...I know what he would probably like just like a lot of us would like....rather than concentrate on what he did in Jakarta or who he fellowshipped with in Chicago or at what time he took a dump, ASK HIM about what he plans to do...

I get tired of people who keep claiming well they don't know what Obama is about...stop asking the wrong questions...stop wasting air time and money going on witch hunts...simply ask him what is his platform and we won't need a 40 minute speech addressing some BS that supposedly the US has moved past.

[shinerbock]

This whole dispute is partisan.

If you think the speech was less than brilliant and didn't do an adequate job explaining away his connections to a fearmonger, then you're an idiot conservative.

If you're falling all over yourself about how this is the most revolutionary speech every, you're a braindead and lovestruck liberal.

The fact is, it was fairly interesting and somewhat daring. It doesn't get the same acclaim (perhaps receiving negative backlash instead) if a white politician gives it, but that doesn't mean it didn't contain some valuable substance.

That said, I could care less what Obama says about race. I'm scared of what he'd do to the country, and lets not forget, this is about political posturing, not about some altruistic move to heal a racial divide (except insofar as that brings more delegates). I don't think he's evil, and I don't think he's racist. I simply disagree with the idea that he is good for America, and some liberals (not necessarily on this board) don't understand that. There seems to be a mindset that if just fixes this one thing, we'll all come around. Not quite.

[scbelle]

I so wanted to get in on this thread yesterday, but my dumb computer was acting up. Anyway, since then, I've been able to give a lot of thought to the matter, and this is what I've come up with so far:

1) The speech was brave and courageous, and things that needed to be said were said in regard to race and the path this country should take to heal old wounds.

2) In all honesty, Wright's comments didn't get under my skin. They shocked me, of course. They angered me for a flicker, but then I realized that I didn't have the full context of what his message was that day. I went to seminary and loved the study of liberation theology and social justice... I know that themes of both are frequently interwoven into messages into black churches. His message could have been along those lines, but the incendiary comments are the "sound bytes" we're stuck with.

3) I applaud Obama for not completely breaking ties with his pastor. What is that saying... oh yes, Hate the sin, but love the sinner. Obama is living his faith. It would be so easy and convenient for him to condemn the man, just as many others have done, but, even with the possibility of political suicide, Obama is remaining loyal to a man who has done so much for him. Back in the day (biblical day, that is), tax collectors were the Jeremiah Wrights of the day. They were despised and reviled because they were crooked and just the worst of human scum. Yet I remember a story of a great man who decided to eat with one. He turned the public spectrum on its head. I don't want to seem like I'm making Obama the savior or anything, but I think that part of his charm in the media is that the media has never really seen a candidate like Obama, who, in most personal cases in his life, has stood up to do the right thing.

[shinerbock]

SC, I understand what you're saying about "loving the sinner." However, if I ever use that phrase with any consistency for my pastor, I don't think I'll be staying in that church. Clergymen are fallible like all of us, but I'm not interested in seeking guidance and spiritual counsel from people who don't even strive to meet the standards I set for my own life.

[scbelle]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

SC, I understand what you're saying about "loving the sinner." However, if I ever use that phrase with any consistency for my pastor, I don't think I'll be staying in that church. Clergymen are fallible like all of us, but I'm not interested in seeking guidance and spiritual counsel from people who don't even strive to meet the standards I set for my own life.

I can understand that. Parishioners *know* their clergy people are fallible, but I believe they *desire* or *hope* that they live a little better than the average person, meaning they have less sin or something. They are seen as the "experts" in all spiritual matters. And for that reason, your post makes sense.

I have a different view, I suppose, because I am extremely close to my pastor. He, of course, says things at regular intervals that piss me off and I think are wrong. I confront him on it, and we have dialogue. I think we both come away with understanding where the other one stands. He hasn't said anything that could be fodder for news crews, mind you, but in my mind, they're offensive to my sensibilities. Of course, I could never turn my back on him, because he married my husband and me and baptized our children... and he's my dad. Perhaps that is why I can understand Obama's stance more than the average person.

[shinerbock]

SC, your situation sounds a little unique, though I guess not too much so.

I don't want a pastor who is really my friend. Don't get me wrong, I love having a friend-like relationship with my pastor, but he's a spiritual leader for me, someone more concerned with my relationship w/ the Lord then anything else. Perhaps that is the definition of the best kind of friend, but I know at some point Wright would have ceased to be any sort of spiritual leader for me, and we would only be left with friendship. It is one thing for somebody to fall, it is another for that person to attempt to lead others while making no apparent attempt to remedy or cease their mistakes.

That said, this isn't a huge issue to me. I do find it questionable, but I don't think it shows that Obama is a racist. I think it shows that he struggled to stand up for what he thought was right when it required him to object to his own community. He seems willing to do that now, but that doesn't necessarily mean overly much to me, and I think other people have reacted similarly.

[AKA_Monet]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

This whole dispute is partisan.

That said, I could care less what Obama says about race. I'm scared of what he'd do to the country, and lets not forget, this is about political posturing, not about some altruistic move to heal a racial divide (except insofar as that brings more delegates). I don't think he's evil, and I don't think he's racist. I simply disagree with the idea that he is good for America, and some liberals (not necessarily on this board) don't understand that. There seems to be a mindset that if just fixes this one thing, we'll all come around. Not quite.

I am unclear what you mean by partisan. I only saw the dems responding to it. The repubs could care less... If that isn't what you mean, help me understand?

As far as what Obama will do to the country--that I am not scared of, from my perspective it is already bad and I can only go up from this lowly point I reside now... Aside from the fact will ANYTHING get done? Really?

And I agree with you, this is ALL about politics and posturing. He is NOT going to fix a racial divide created long before there was an America, but I also am not cynical to think this will NEVER be good for America. Someday we have to heal. When will that be? After a mushroom cloud and 10,000 degrees Fahrenheit? Just asking?

[AKA_Monet]

Interesting that Huckabee say this...

On MSNBC

[shinerbock]

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

I am unclear what you mean by partisan. I only saw the dems responding to it. The repubs could care less... If that isn't what you mean, help me understand?

As far as what Obama will do to the country--that I am not scared of, from my perspective it is already bad and I can only go up from this lowly point I reside now... Aside from the fact will ANYTHING get done? Really?

And I agree with you, this is ALL about politics and posturing. He is NOT going to fix a racial divide created long before there was an America, but I also am not cynical to think this will NEVER be good for America. Someday we have to heal. When will that be? After a mushroom cloud and 10,000 degrees Fahrenheit? Just asking?

AKA, I meant partisan in that people are taking sides on here based on their political ideology. Perhaps not the best wording, but I hope that clarifies. I think people on here who are die hard GOPers won't have anything good to say about it, while people on the left see no fault in Barack. Sure, this is a generalization, but that is often the tone on this site.

I don't think things can only go up from here. I think we can abandon Iraq and leave it to fester. Combine that with a President I think would be weak on terror, and we have a disaster. Also, you could have a weakened form of capitalism in the United States, another decade preaching reliance on the government, and judges appointed which agree with those views.

I hope we do heal. I think Obama probably wants that, but this speech doesn't happen unless the people in his life are exposed through conservative media outlets. I'm sure the speech is at least somewhat authentic, I just don't think his motives are to be applauded as though this came from nowhere. This is a classic situation of a politician (yes, Obama is one) trying to turn something bad into something more palatable.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by Dane

It's clear you're an Oreo Obama hating fool!

Yes, the new Oreos with the chocolate filling are DA BIDNESS!

(See that slang? I'mblackedyblackI'mblack, ya'll!!!!)

[Senusret I]

I am so gonna shoot you for the reference. lol

I prefer the golden oreos. I guess that makes me a colorist.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by Senusret I

I am so gonna shoot you for the reference. lol

I prefer the golden oreos. I guess that makes me a colorist.

You're SOOOOOO a colorist.

Do you knoooooowwww where you're going to? Do you like the things Obama is show-ing you?

[Marie]

Originally Posted by EE-BO

This is my feeling.

Anyone- like me and many of us here- who has ever spent a significant period of time affiliated with a church knows full well that you become intimately familiar with the preacher's general position and tone.



NOT the African-American community at large since I still believe most African-Americans are just as appalled at Wright as I am

Just quickly chiming in on the two points above...

#1 As a Chicago native who is very familiar with Trinity United Church of Christ (this church has been a pillar in the community for many many years), I am positive that the general position and tone of Pastor Wright are not what people have assumed them to be based upon these few clips. Sunday services focus on spiritual issues and spiritual issues alone for what I would say is nearly 95% of the time. People have assumed that nearly every other sermon are fire and brimstone race lectures, which is simply not the case. For the most part the pastor does a wonderful job of educating his members on how to walk in the footsteps of Christ. I think that it is very possible for someone to attend his church and still feel that it is the best place to make your spiritual home, even if you were turned off by a political sermon that is given once a year (and I would say that is a high number). I have visited the church several times over the 25 years that I have lived in the city, and I have never heard him talk politics from the pulpit.

#2 What people tend to forget is that all of the racial wounds, which mar our country's history are not that long ago. There are people alive today who knew slaves ( I just recently had a conversation with an elderly gentleman who's grandmother was a slave). There are people alive today who grew up in the Jim Crow south, struggled for equal rights, fought for integration, and have seen the many injustices that our nation tend to want to believe were oh so long ago. I'm saying that b/c many ppl in the black community (Rev. Wright included) have heard these individuals stories (or lived them), and still feel all of the pain and emotion that you can imagine must be attached. Many of us see the effects of these injustices, which we are still living with today. That's not to say that Rev. Wright's comments weren't inappropriate (esp. in the Pulpit), but to say that he was expressing a frustration and inner turmoil that many African American's feel. I don't know that many of us were, in fact, appalled, but rather eager for 'the other half' to acknowledge these deep wounds so that we can finally discuss ways to make things better. Instead ppl seem to prefer living in a world where no one truly talks about these hurts, but rather continue to ignore and pretend that everyone has moved along.

What is mostly interesting to me is that ppl do not realize just how different Obama is from many members of the African American community. He didn't grow up in a Black household, and he wasn't really raised with much of that deep hurt (and general awareness of race issues) with which many Blacks were raised. If there is anyone who I could believe disagrees w/Rev. Wright's comment, then it would be him b/c his upbringing and experiences are very different.

[AKA_Monet]

Obama's Passport was breached...

State fires 2 for looking at Obama file

By ANNE GEARAN, AP Diplomatic Correspondent1 hour, 14 minutes ago

Two contract employees for the State Department have been fired and a third disciplined for inappropriately looking at Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's passport file, and the department is investigating whether political or other motives were involved, senior officials said Thursday.

Spokesman Sean McCormack said that for now it appears that nothing other than "imprudent curiosity" was involved in three separate breaches of the Illinois senator's personal information. It is not clear whether the employees saw anything other than the basic personal data such as name, citizenship, age and place of birth that is required when a person fills out a passport application.

The breaches occurred on Jan. 9, Feb. 21 and March 14, and were detected by internal State Department computer checks, McCormack said. The department's top management officer, Undersecretary Patrick Kennedy, said certain records, including those of high-profile people, are "flagged" with a computer tag that tips off supervisors when someone tries to view the records without a proper reason.

Wow!!!

Is this identity theft?