Obama Speech: ‘A More Perfect Union’
It’s a long speech but well worth watching. Obama shows why he’s the superior candidate to Clinton; he understands nuance and is brave enough to express it. Even in a dirty campaign like this one.
Update: Apparently, Clinton never saw it or read the transcript. Yeah right.
Unfortunately Barack wants to both have his cake and eat it. It’s good that he wants America to rise above race and religion, but he does not want anyone to look at the non-race aspect of his personal THEOLOGY. See:
http://miraclesdaily.blogspot.com/
Inspired!
He had to come out fighting, and he did.
This guy is the real deal.
Obama has poor judgement. His relationship to Rev. Wright demonstates that.
Comaparing his gran’s private lapses to Wright’s hatemongering sermons?
The sermons that he, erm, know nothing about, that is…
“This guy is the real deal.”
The “real deal”?
Is everyone turning into an American?!
CJ and Salman
What planet are you two on? What Obama said (and the way he said it) was one of the most comprehensive appraisals of the issue of race in the US, I’ve heard in the last ten years. His argument was never going to convince everyone, not even me. It wasn’t meant to. What Obama wanted and succeeded in doing was opening up the debate and shining a light on some very dark corners. What I really like about Obama is (contrary to his inclusive message) that is he NOT all things to all men. He is no ones puppet. Even though I may serious disagree with some of his reasoning, I forever respect him for his courage in airing them to public scrutiny. That is the measure of the man, he doesn’t fear debate.
I think that Obama’s speech is the most eloquent, incisive political philosophy he has read since MLK. How could you not want someone like him as president?
“What Obama wanted and succeeded in doing was opening up the debate and shining a light on some very dark corners.”
What he wanted was to “move on” from Wright.
That, and only that, was his priority in this speech.
“I think that Obama’s speech is the most eloquent, incisive political philosophy he has read since MLK. How could you not want someone like him as president?”
Exactly. He could have just shredded the pastor and moved on – ala McCain or Clinton. But no, he wants to use events to open up debate and to have a serious conversation with Amercia. All power to him for being so courageous in a country with a poisonous political environment.
Go Obama and Best of Luck!
cjcjc,
That was a speech that no, repeat no, UK politician would have had the bottle to make. You sir, are an awful cynic, and I sir, am someone who would not set foot in the land of the free and the home of the brave. At least until such times as they sort out their stupid government.
Though if I had a vote, you know who’d get it.
I agree with Sid, that was the best speech on race from anyone with the publics’ ear since MLK.
Odd how people focus on what Obama’s pastor said but yet the news and people in the USA are quiet on what McCain’s Pastor said.
Fox is going nuts about it but in the past statements by pastors linked to Reagen, Bush and Bambi Bush have been as controversial but no one said anything.
Pastor Hagee has endorsed McCain and he has said:
Hagee on Women
“Do you know the difference between a woman with PMS and a snarling Doberman pinscher? The answer is lipstick. Do you know the difference between a terrorist and a woman with PMS? You can negotiate with a terrorist.”
Hagee on Catholicism
“Most readers will be shocked by the clear record of history linking Adolf Hitler and the Roman Catholic Church in a conspiracy to exterminate the Jews.”
Hagee on Hurricane Katrina “All hurricanes are acts of God because God controls the heavens. I believe that New Orleans had a level of sin that was offensive to God and they were recipients of the judgment of God for that.”
McCain – “all I can tell you is that I am very proud to have Pastor John Hagee’s support.”
Yet you don’t see the Sun or Fox or Melanie complaining about extremism here!
Is Hagee McCain’s personal pastor?
You see, my problem is how Obama sat through 20 years of Wright’s hatemongering without either challenging it or (alternatively – though there is no evidence for it) challenging it and failing.
BTW Douglas – have you really never been to the US?
I’ll simply reiterate what I said on a previous post on Obama.
#6 & 7
I agree he is very eloquent. And I can see how he is trying to change the paradigm for politics in the U.S.
However, I also find him disingenuous about his explanation for associating with Rev. Wright, a firebrand nutcase.
For instance, if he disagrees so strongly with his views why did he continue to sit through them?
The inverse of this situation is if George W. Bush admitted to associating with a pastor with white supremacist views, he would be skewered in the press.
#11
Hagee isn’t McCain’s pastor.
You have to admit it…. That joke about a woman with PMS and a terrorist was funny!
Anyway I agree with Avi Cohen on this one. There seems to be one rule for a Black pastor supporting a Black candidate and another rule (ie; see no evil, hear no evil) for white pastors supporting whoever. In either case I’ve got no problem with either pastor saying it like it is to their congregation. That is their job and more power to them. What Obama is not going to do is jettison a man he has known for 20 years just to satisfy the whims of the politically correct. The same applies to his grand mother however much I may cringe.
I’ll repeat myself…..
What Obama is not going to do is jettison a man, Rev Wright, he has known for 20 years just to satisfy the whims of the white politically correct. The same applies to his grand mother however much I (as a active member of the black community) may cringe.
Why does the majority on this board, presumably mostly south asians, like Obama so much?
South asians in the U.S. seem to be more in favor of Hillary. The Jackson Heights section of Queens in NYC, a South asian hood, is predominantly in favor of Hillary.
So what is the difference between American south asians and British south asians such that Americans prefer Hillary and Brits prefer Obama?
It would be interesting if McCain chooses Bobby Jindal, south asian governor of Louisiana as his VP. Where would everyone land on that one?
Look this is sheer nonsense – Franklin Graham is George W. Bush’s friend and delivered the invocation at Bambi Bush’s inauguration.
Franklin spouts lots of hate and noone questions whether Bambi Bush challenges it.
So why the different standard for Obama?
John McCain:
“… But I think the number one issue people should make [in the] selection of the President of the United States is, ‘Will this person carry on in the Judeo Christian principled tradition that has made this nation the greatest experiment in the history of mankind?”
No one challenged hiom on this statement.
We have not only a Hindu prayer being offered in the Senate, we have a Muslim member of the House of Representatives now, Keith Ellison from Minnesota. Those are changes and they are not what was envisioned by the Founding Fathers.
–U.S. Rep. Bill Sali (R-Idaho) in the August 8, 2007
Barely reported.
The idea that somehow we can move to multi-culturalism and still remain the same I think that�s a little dangerous too. From my standpoint, I believe the Founding Fathers were overwhelmingly Christian and the God they were talking about is the God of the Bible.
–U.S. Rep. Bill Sali (R-Idaho), in The Idaho Statesman
Barely reported.
Franklin Graham:
“The God of Islam is not the same God. He’s not the son of God of the Christian or Judeo-Christian faith. It’s a different God, and I believe it is a very evil and wicked religion.”
So tell me was George Bush asked if he challenged this hate statement?
Why why the double standard?
“the whims of the white politically correct”
Indeed – he seems happy to compare his gran’s private failings with Wright’s public hatemongering.
I don’t think it is just the “white politically correct” who are calling Obama on this.
Do only the “wpc” obect to Wright’s awarding a “lifetime achievement” award to the charming Louis Farrakhan.
Do only the “wpc” object to the preaching of bizarre HIV conspiracy theories?
Obama’s loyalty may do him credit.
The object of his loyalty unfortunately does him no credit whatsoever.
“Franklin spouts lots of hate and noone questions whether Bambi Bush challenges it.”
Give us some examples and you’ll find plenty of questions.
No-one is holding Bush up as a great example are they?
Is that the best Obama’s fans can now say for him on this matter?
That he’s the same as Bush?
Great.
No cjcjc the point is that you are applying different standards to Obama and white politicians.
Why is there not a similar clamour for McCain or Bush to disassociate remarks made by their supporting pastors?
“Give us some examples and you’ll find plenty of questions.”
Who from Bush, Chenney, McCain? Noooooo.
I think the speech kinda reinforces the accusation from Clinton that Obama is all speech no substance. He should concentrate on policy areas that distinguish him from clinton mkII (if any).
Oh cjcjc,
Please give me a list of forums that you have been spouting out this nonsense.
I have already pointed out how pathetic you analysis actually is, err, here:
This is me:
or this, which is cjcjc:
My mentally ill relatives couldn’t have hurt a fly. They were, how do I put this? Somewhat disengaged. Which is where cjcjc ought to be.
But isn’t.
what Obama said is this
“Rev Wright was wrong, but his offensive words is merely a symptom of what’s wrong with the body politic. There is a cancer in it that needs to be rooted out, but you can only achieve that successfully by operating on that cancer with the right skills, with care, love for (and understanding of) the body – because you hate the cancer, not the body it infests.”
Now, I wonder – why have I read Obama’s great speech so differently to SalmanRish and cjcjc? Iz eet becoz i’em bleek?
No, its because I am (and most of world actually) are cleverer than these dunderheads
Ashik – where is the substance from Clinton? She says she has experience – when? Is she really claiming she helped Bill? Come on.
What are Clinton’s outstanding achievements in the Senate? She voted for the Iraq War – yeap genius.
Can you really tell what Clinton is? She is blowing bubbles by saying she has experience so where is the substance of that experience.
Obama may not be great but he is better than what is on offer from all the rest. For the rest of the world at least he is willing to engage in issues and problems. Clinton’s substance is she won’t talk to people she doesn’t like. This isn’t a school yard excerise it is running a major country and involves talking to people they don’t like to solve major global issues.
So her whole statement is nonsense. Lets take a look at the results of this bluster. For many decades now the USA won’t talk to Cuba – oh yeah that achieved a whole lot, brilliant decision.
This stupid bluster logic of being selective about who you talk to in a global world is meaningless.
Avi – I can’t stand Bush, and if McCain is associating with equivalent nutters then I condemn him too.
(NB Wright is much more than a “supporting pastor”.)
Douglas – you are deliberately misunderstanding.
You equated Wright to your disengaged relatives.
Unfortunately Wright was the opposite of disengaged.
He was actively *engaged* in spreading hate from his pulpit.
And Obama appears to have sat passively and listened to it for 20 years.
My simple question is: do we not expect something more from a presidential candidate?
Sadly, clearly not.
Sorry if this sounds either “pathetic” or “dunderheaded”.
cjcjzzzz
Read our type: you are a little person with zero analytical abilities and we know that because of the way you inarticulate your views.
In your sad little mind, any anglican who may have disagreed with the ignorant views of their priest (or archbishop) must be as ignorant as he/she is if they did not denounce them publicly or rejected the church.
Ramie,
Last time I looked in the mirror, I was what you’d describe as white. Wrinked, right enough.
But I, too, thought it was a majestic speech.
Which makes you and me a conference based on ideas, rather than ‘coz I’m black’.
Which I’m not. And, in a sense, neither are you. You just say it the way you think it, which, to me at least, is how we should all address each other.
“Read our type: you are a little person with zero analytical abilities and we know that because of the way you inarticulate your views.”
How charming. So sorry to have offended you.
“In your sad little mind, any anglican who may have disagreed with the ignorant views of their priest (or archbishop) must be as ignorant as he/she is if they did not denounce them publicly or rejected the church.”
I think it might just depend on the views.
If my priest decided to give a “lifetime award” (other than one for hatemongering) to Louis Farrakhan then I would certainly denounce him.
Especially if I happened to be a *senator* and *presidential candidate*.
“Rev Wright was wrong, but his offensive words is merely a symptom of what’s wrong with the body politic. There is a cancer in it that needs to be rooted out, but you can only achieve that successfully by operating on that cancer with the right skills, with care, love for (and understanding of) the body – because you hate the cancer, not the body it infests.”
This is perhaps the best summary I’ve read of the speech. You’re mostly a nutcase Ramiee, but you have your occasional flashes of sense.
Obama’s speech places the US where it belongs – at the crossroads.
Obama has gone much further than just challengeing Pastor Wright, he has wonderfully explained to the country and the world through his Pastor to realise that this moment is a rare one and the way ahead is the only one that is going to deliver America from its other self.
Yes I too would compare the moment to MLK and JFK, but better. We have a world which has seen the emperor’s clothes, and it is now for Obama to show his people what we have seen.
This speech does it incisively. He tackles race and class and he does so with much passion and clarity.
To use modern-speak he smacked down Clinton I and II, he challenged the black community to break out, he reminded the white community their historical role and he seeks to empower the poor and disenfranchised. All of which places McCain on notice – its a movement for change.
Who would have thought class would be the battleground in classless America.
cjcjc,
To just try to take your analysis forward. Assuming it is analysis.
What say you to not giving up on your friends? Mad though they may be? Is that a positive or a negative? Is standing up to the moral consensus of Fox News a good thing or a bad thing? You tell us.
You, unfortunately will vote for Mr McCain, no matter how stupid we prove you to be….
I fancy Obama.
I think his politics are great too.
At last a political leader I can lust over.
Been waiting to hear something like this for YEARS!
Britain will never have a Black, Asian or Mixed Race Prime Minister.
But if Obama wins it will be like an inspiration to ethnic minorities in Britain too. It’ll prove that America is in some ways a more progressive place than the UK. As well as being able to prove they are able elect a sexy president.
Douglas – I was always taught that ad hominems were a sure sign of weakness.
“What say you to not giving up on your friends? Mad though they may be? Is that a positive or a negative? Is standing up to the moral consensus of Fox News a good thing or a bad thing? You tell us.”
Yes, of course, not giving up on your friends is a good thing.
But you might try to put your friends right where you thought they were going wrong?
Is that not friendship?
So either Obama didn’t try very hard with his close friend, or he didn’t get very far.
“Been waiting to hear something like this for YEARS!”
Apparently you would have heard something like it in 1968.
http://fallbackbelmont.blogspot.com/2008/03/deja-vu-all-over-again.html
Obama’s honey-tongued words merely covers up the fact that his policies are against anyone or any group who has accumulated wealth in the U.S. in the last 20 years.
#25 Ramiie
I have a different read on the speech because I can read the subtext and you can’t.
The truth is that Obama’s candidacy is a vessel for liberal policy orthodoxy — raise taxes, “invest” more in social programs, restrict trade.
His honey-tongued speech serves to cover up the truth.
SalmanRush
‘Obama’s honey-tongued words merely covers up the fact that his policies are against anyone or any group who has accumulated wealth in the U.S. in the last 20 years.’
For far longer the flow of money has been from the poor to the eternally rich. Remember Clinton I’s workfare programmes?
cjcjc,
If I’d been guilty of an an ‘ad hominem’ attack I’d apologise.
Your ideas, which I happen to find abhorrent, is another thing entirely. Open to the scorn and abuse that I point in your general diriction.
“Apparently you would have heard something like it in 1968.
http://fallbackbelmont.blogspot.com/2008/03/deja-vu-all-over-again.html”
I heard both speeches. I think Obama’s has infinitely more meat. The two speeches touch on common ground but they don’t seem as close as people are suggesting. Obama’s assessment on the hostility that breeds from ignorance is 100% spot on in my opinion. It is refreshing to hear his words and the fact that they have been aired openly is wonderful and much needed.
I don’t know whether he is an honest man – the Blair experience has (almost) completely jaded my view of politicians. But one thing I am certain of is that we certainly need alternatives to the current brigade that dominate world politics (yes, they are mostly white and their token cronies).
I’m impressed by the way Obama hasn’t turned his back on a long time associate for politically correct reasons and his assessment of where the pastor went wrong (assuming a society is static), shows he did not absorb the pastors words without critical analysis.
As someone put it earlier – he has shone some light onto very dark areas. Either we have these debates and resolve them or one day be at each others throats over them.
Douglas – don’t worry about it (I’m sure you won’t)!
Listen, I might even have voted for Obama before I found out more about Wright. I don’t know about McCain, but I certainly would not have voted for any of the other GOP clowns.
I understand your pain over the Wright issue, and why you and many others are in denial.
Yet, as others have more originally observed, as Obama ceases to be a tabula rasa onto which you can paint whatever image your (wrinkled white) guilt demands, and as we learn more about who he actually is, the disillusion is bound to set in.
How can it not?
Cynically yours.
Listen, I might even have voted for Obama before I found out more about Wright.
yeah right
*smirks*
You’ve been cursing him long before this speech, no? Look, people have unsurprisingly read into the speech along partisan lines. And that’s fine – people will fit events into their own prejudices.
But I think the fundamental point here still stands. Conflict seems to arise when one group doesn’t understand the other because its trying to judge their experiences on their own standards. So the fact is, you don’t know what its like to face racism as a black person in the USA. There is deep seated (and justified) anger with many Black Americans, given that 40 years after the civil rights movement many of them are still discriminated against. You don’t think that deserves some empathy?
Finally – you’re supporting McCain, despite him embracing Hagee?
You can’t really compare a some readers on here with millions of Americans like that…
It will happen (most likely a mixed race one if you ask me due to demographics and something like the Obama effect). It wasn’t that long ago people couldn’t imagine having a woman PM.
In the US it was inconceivable only a couple of decades ago they could have a Black President…Martin Luther King was right, imo, the moral universe is long but it does bend toward justice.
http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/2008/03/20/will-mccain-and-conservatives-disown-this-bigot/
#46
So what’s the big deal? McCain disowned the racist comments from Hagee, its in his quote. Also, the comparison of McCain-Hagee and Obama-Wright is not an apples to apples comparison. McCain does not have a deep relationship with Hagee like Obama has with Wright whom Obama calls a “family member.”
a yank opinion here:
“his policies are against anyone or any group who has accumulated wealth in the U.S. in the last 20 years.”
the republicans have been telling us that the “trickle-down economics” will work….no, it hasn’t. all it’s done is breed more GREED.
———————–
Sen Obama’s speech needed to be said. i recently moved from a very liberal area to a very “Bush-can-do-no-wrong” part of the country.
the racism is so overt, “I” can see it (i’m white). and the poor (black & white) in the rural areas are very poor. the poor white feel superior because they’re not black — many are “separatists.”
our laws have kept the poor, poor and the blacks seem so down-trodden that they don’t care anymore — here is what i hear: “what’s the point…i’ll never get ahead, so “f%ck” it.”
the religious-right pass laws that affect the black youth — for example: there are areas of our country, where wearing baggy pants is either against the law (as in Atlanta, Georgia) or on the books to make it so.
the fine to get caught with powder cocaine (mainly a white crime) is far less than those who are caught with crack cocaine (mainly a black crime).
the fastest growing business in the US is the privatized prisons.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8289
i guess we gotta fill ‘em. (sarcasm)
i volunteer with black teens; they are struggling with the educational system. (”no child left behind” left a lot of kids BEHIND. plus, our schools don’t teach civics anymore — how our government works.)
there is NO enthusiasm to learn. they feel that every teacher is against them, so they “act out.”
i have been able to reach several to “suck it up” (since they’ll never have to see that teacher again) and get their education so that they can get involved and help change the system. (they now show me their school grades so i can see how they are improving.)
Sen Obama said exactly what needed to be said. the preacher (Wright) lived in a different time, born in 1941; look up the “Civil Rights Act of 1964″ — so his words should be taken in that context.
#48
Yes, I agree the social problems in the u.s. are immense and getting worse.
But Obama has not described, specifically, how he will reverse this course. So he is no better than a trickle down Republican in that regard.
FYI I’ve never said a word (good or bad) about Obama before now, let alone “cursing”.
The only thing I recall posting would be that it would be worth seeing Obama in the White House just in order to be able to read Gary Younge’s piece in the Guardian the following day arguing why the election of a black president just proved how racist the US was!
cjcjcj wrote (post 20)
cjcjc — on 19th March, 2008 at 5:09 pm
“the whims of the white politically correct”
“Indeed – he seems happy to compare his gran’s private failings with Wright’s public hatemongering.”
Well, well…one rule for one and one rule for the other. I don’t hear any clamour from anywhere within the black community for Obama to disown his own grandmother. Alas the private failings of a white woman weren’t so private in the presence of her black grand son. Maybe Obama’s mistake was to not record her comments on black society and then broadcast them on You-Tube, for the world to see. I fear CJCJCJ that for you, ignorence is indeed bliss.
Obama’s speech was the real deal. He directly confronted the wingnuts, who are too used in defining the narrative of patriotism, and democrats until now have been too cowardly to counter-attack. He also made a speech that emphasises that social issues are well… complex, and we either tackle them as adults, or we keep on within the same cycle fueled by yellow and superficial media.
I have come to realise that he might lose the election to McCain, because let’s face it: these are the people that voted Bush twice. Who know the economy and the war is damaging America, but God forbid anyone who does not wear a flag lapel pin. Change cannot happen overnight. But Obama has broken a glass ceiling – not just the race barrier, but also has given opportunity for a new breed of politicians.
“But Obama has broken a glass ceiling – not just the race barrier, but also has given opportunity for a new breed of politicians.”
Really? A new breed of politicians?
Y’all have gone nuts over this guy.
Meanwhile recall that we have had a black armed services chief and a black secretary of state – both previously touted as presidential candidates (Condi might still be).
“Meanwhile recall that we have had a black armed services chief and a black secretary of state – both previously touted as presidential candidates (Condi might still be).”
Ha ha ha!
These people are not interested in anything other than sucking up to those in power for their own progress. How you can tout a bitch that followed a dimwitted nutjob into a bullshit war as some sort of positive for black people is mind blowing. But maybe I shouldn’t be surprised. Morons usually thrust their token cronies in our face to distract us.
‘How you can tout a bitch’
Can we not stoop so low with trashy and wholly misogynist terms like ‘bitch’ in order to make our point !
I am making no comment about Condi’s politics.
Merely pointing out that she broke a glass ceiling too, as did General Powell.
“I am making no comment about Condi’s politics.
Merely pointing out that she broke a glass ceiling too, as did General Powell.”
Err..no they didn’t. They just reinforced the concept of having to sell your soul to the devil to get ahead. They never took on the mantle for the oppressed or downtrodden.
You need to get this in your head. For an ethnic person to get ahead in a white dominated system, there is an easy route. That is to become a poster boy/girl and know your place. That, I believe, is what Powell and Condi did. When you do this, you will find that often you will be promoted and patronised by those in charge. This is plain old tokenism.
Obama, however, has opened a debate that many would like to see stifled. So what seems to be going down is that supremiscists will use the few exceptions like Condi and Powell as a tool to negate and undermine feelings of resentment and frustration felt by a infinitely larger group of people from that persons ethnic background. The blacks in America have genuine concerns and issues. Like the problems of most communities, some will be of their own making whilst some will be the result of the impact of external forces. One of these external forces is the continuing and historical apathy and even antipathy many white people feel towards blacks and perhaps all people of colour. This subject, which effects the lives of so many, has never been opened up in societies wider debates. Often people who try and highlight it are swiftly labelled cranks or marginalised. Personally, I think it really does need to be discussed and resolved. Not just in America but in other countries like Britain too.
They were appointed, not elected.
The blog racialicious has a great perspective on Wright’s rhetoric.