Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes

I only had the opportunity to hear a few snippets from the Obama speech yesterday and a little analysis on NPR.  I was working, in my car, parked in a Home Depot parking lot in a working class neighborhood in Detroit.  
I am a white woman, in my sixties, a "Clintonista" perhaps not all that different in some respects from Obama's grandmother.  Until yesterday I would not have voted for Obama for a number of reasons, the Wright flap just the latest.  But something moved in me yesterday.  Obama is changing my mind and opening my eyes.

Few people outside of Michigan realize it is the most racially segregated state in the country; if you are black in Michigan there is a 99% chance you live south of Eight Mile, in Detroit proper or in one of her inner "black" suburbs, or within the  confines of Saginaw, Flint, Benton Harbor or another economically ravaged industrial city in the south.  If you are white you almost certainly live anyplace but.  You may live in a rural area or a small town, a northern city or most likely in one of the white suburbs that range in affluence and ring each black crumbled urban core.
If you are black you no doubt live somewhere with few jobs, poor schools, abandoned buildings, overgrown parks, few places to shop and a decimated infrastructure.  The shuttered factories are in your neighborhood; the "high-tech" opportunities are in places you cannot reach on public transportation.  Integration never happened in Michigan, save for precious few neighborhoods in a college town or two, and racial tensions are palable whereever integration exists without affluence.

I grew up in Detroit when the city was 70% white although carved up cleanly into white and black neighborhoods. In 1967 from my white front porch we watched black Detroit burn on the near horizon while my father laid out garden hoses and my brother loaded his shotgun.   My father took our family and fled post-haste to a white suburb just ahead of the wave of real estate "block busting" that left Detroit 99% black and struggling.  When the white people left the stores soon followed, then the jobs and with them the tax base and city services.  

Detroit and Michigan had it's own "old uncle" -- Coleman Young, the first black mayor of Detroit, an old Tuskegee Airman who for two decades as mayor did as much to divide the races and promote racial distrust as the white backlash from the summer of 1967.  He gloried in thumbing his nose at white convention and blaming the white man.  When he died white people shook their heads and snickered; Detroiters lined up around three city blocks five times in the rain to view his casket.

My own immigrant father was not bashful in his racism and I grew up with my more comparitively humanistic mother warning me about the "boogie man."  The only blacks I saw until high school were the garbage men, the people who cleaned the tables in Hudsons, the people who smelled funny (of pomade and cleaning agents) when they passed me on their way to the back of the DSR bus and the people I saw out the window of the bus as it passed through Herman Gardens, the nearest "project".  No doctors, no policemen, no professionals of color; even the bus drivers, in their limited authority, were white men to the man.

I dispised my father's attitudes from the first minute I recognized them for what they were and internally raged at him.  I felt safe only in visibly rebelling by withholding my laughter from his racist jokes.  I vowed long before puberty never to be like him -- much easier vowed than done.

Regardless of how much I might wish for different psychological software, I still am not myself around black people, but not in the ways black people might think.  Yes, black men set off a fear in me I can't abort,  they make me more conscious of my purse and my surroundings, but within a flash more so they set off an internal tirade against myself damning my automatic responses.  I constantly fight painfilled self consciousness around black people -- am I being friendly enough?  too friendly? Will some stupid comment escape from my mouth before I can stop it?   will my next social faux pas be racist?   Can you see how I was raised behind my earnest attempts to overcome and hate me for it?

And thanks to Obama I now feel safe in saying black people have not been making these struggles all that easy for me.  I've been called out I don't know how many damn times for some truly innocent remark that if anything came from ignorance or a misspoken word blown up beyond reason.  I've been accused of racism for criticizing a black boss and a black dean that truly deserved it, for failing a few black students who no one in their right mind could pass and after my best efforts to prevent it, for living out in the country when it really is about birdies and trees and not white flight.

If I am stained with the sins of my father and my mind is trained to first racially stereotype, does it matter at all how doggedly determined I've been all my life to change myself?  Does it matter how consciencious I've been not to pass any diseased thinking onto my children?  Does it matter that I have dedicated myself to working in social justice to atone for who I was programmed to be?

And then I saw it, in a parking lot.  Obama opened my eyes, not for the first time certainly,  but to a much deeper place.   I recognized the black people around me, getting in and out of their cars, struggling with carts, dodging the rain, hurried, relaxed, casual, over-burdened, families and handymen,  as at once no different from me and yet so profoundly unlike me in how they are ghettoized and marginalized.  Compared to my local store the vehicles were older and less impressive, the carts were not as full, the voices were louder and perhaps more urgent.  Being black in Detroit is to always be walking upstream.

It hit me as I sat there that in this neighborhood in particular few of these folks had jobs outside of the service sector, money had to be tighter, opportunities had to be fewer.  And of course yes the aspirations were the same -- to do the best for the children, to care well for the loved ones, to create a safe and pleasant home, to earn and watch money and have some time left at the end of the day to relax -- but against a torrent of obstacles moving against you.

Yesterday Obama the man spoke about the obvious and the unspeakable,  and Obama the phenomenon moved something in me and perhaps in many others black and white.  Here in Detroit, in my limited observation, the tension seemed ratcheted down more than a little.  The smiles across the racial divide seemed more genuine, the struggles just a little more shared.  With one foot planted on either side of the division, refusing to deny either, Obama asks us all to honor our old uncles and intolerant fathers while opening our eyes to each other.

That said, Hillary Clinton is speaking in downtown Detroit this morning.  I thought about driving downtown to see her but instead took the time to write this.  I still think her better qualified, I still long for a female president, I still don't appreciate the vitriole coming from the Obama camp at times.  I still struggle with which of them is more electable.

But I appreciate Obama the man and the healer much more and thank him for opening my eyes.  And I would ask my fellow "Clintonistas" and all "Obamatons" to search their own hearts before typing.  We are actually blessed to have one another.  Lay down the swords.  Open your eyes.  

 



Display:


Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 9)

Thank you.  Recommended.


But in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope.
by thezzyzx on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 09:21:22 AM EST

it's a shame Obama waited till he was running (1.25 / 4)

for president to deal with the issue of race, when he had 20 years to speak and influence Jeremiah Wright, and never bothered.


by earthoat on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:12:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: it's a shame Obama waited till he was running (2.00 / 4)

How do you know so much about Obama?

It's amazing! I didn't realize that the classes that he taught on race didn't actually deal with race!

Please tell us how you know so much!


by luckymortal on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:23:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Campbell Brown and Jack Cafferty told me (1.00 / 3)


by earthoat on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:33:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 15)

Wonderful post. It gives me hope that most Clinton fans will be able to see the general election like you do at the convention when Obama is most likely named the nominee. Recommended.


by Cheebs on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 09:26:19 AM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 9)

I'm a Hillary supporter myself-- and plan on supporting Obama if he wins the nomination, and will urge my fellow Hillary-ites to actively support him, or at least vote for him in the general election.  I hope our Obama breathren will do the same, if Hillary becomes our nominee instead.


by Sieglinde on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 10:53:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

a great comment - anonymous (1.72 / 11)

>>>>Barack Obama needed to create a positive story and as usual used a speech, his greatest strength. Who would trash a speech on race relations? So this morning we wake to almost unanimous adulation for the speech.

However, he didn't use the speech to distance himself from Rev Wright and his hateful rhetoric. Rather, he used the issue of race to try to silence his critics. The whole idea of the controversy, I think, is that Barack Obama associates himself with Rev Wright. We'll have many opinions about Rev Wright on here, but the UPS driver in Indiana will only hear "God damn America." I don't think this will go away with his speech. Nothing short of cutting off all ties with the controversial figure will satisfy. This is universal truth when it comes to politics, but the novice Barack Obama does not seem to know this.

The NYTimes brought up an interesting point about this speech. Barack Obama is asking us to take Rev Wright's fiery rhetoric and to put it in context with his entire life, to put it in perspective. We are not supposed to judge the man based on these "few" anti-American speeches. Overall, Obama says, Rev Wright is a good man. Yet when it comes to his political opponent, Hillary Clinton, we are supposed to focus on one thing: her "bad" judgment on Iraq. We are to ignore the context of her life, or the bigger perspective. It seems as if he's guilty of doing the same thing people may already have done with Rev Wright. This is politics as usual, nothing new, nothing fresh. Just politics.


Hillary/Obama08
by annefrank on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:02:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a great comment - anonymous (2.00 / 7)

"Rather, he used the issue of race to try to silence his critics"

That's a pretty cynical way of looking at it.


by Sinbad Sinbad on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:16:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a great comment - anonymous (2.00 / 4)

I don't think see it as being all that cynical.
He did the speech because he needed to try and stop the bleeding from the Wright story, its not like he has been pushing race as a focal point of his campaign or anything.
by big poppa smurf on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:29:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Not quite accurate. (2.00 / 8)

I was surprised to hear that Obama eventually intended to make a speech like this no matter what (probably after becoming the nominee), but pushed his plans forward, indeed, to stop the 24 hour droning of Wright on TV.

He's not trying to "silence his critics," he's trying to re-align the debate in a way that he always intended to, but found necessary to do right away because of the tenor of the campaigns.

You can, if you wish, attribute everything he does as being calculatingly political, but that's a lens that you'll have to focus on all presidential nominees.  You don't become a presidential nominee without first being able to see problems and react to them.

"How dare he defend himself?" is pretty weak criticism.


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:56:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Not quite accurate. (2.00 / 3)

Yeah, I thought the line was that Obama was too weak to stand up to the Republican attack machine.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:35:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The line is that his speech writers are (1.14 / 7)

doing their thing, his handlers are doing theirs, and he is a first rate actor, and fine commercial product.
I still wonder why it is considered enlightening for a Harvard grad to take  his daughters to worship with a hater.

by earthoat on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:31:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The line is that his speech writers are (2.00 / 1)

What's enlightening is that some people still think that "hate" is all an important and controvercial American ever was.


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:46:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The line is that his speech writers are (2.00 / 5)

again you prove your ignorance: it has been widely reported that this speech was written in Obama's own hand.


Oh Mammy Dear, we're all mad over here livin' in America
by JDF on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:50:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The line is that his speech writers are (2.00 / 2)

This speech was written entirely by Obama.


by mady on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 04:32:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Then why (2.00 / 1)

Did the speech contain zero policy content?  Or even policy recommendations?  Or even recommendations to folks about how to act?

What is the follow-up plan?

Obama is very gifted with words.  There's no doubt at all about that.  But that is not enough.


by Trickster on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:53:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Sure, policy. Right. (2.00 / 5)

What policy do you suggest is helpful in discussing race in a political campaign?  Should we put a tax on hate speech?  $1 goes into the "hate jar" for each insensitive remark?

This isn't about policy, it's about reframing the debate.

Obama's never obfuscated his policies on how to tackle racial issues: he believes that we need to fix the economic and social problems, and that will begin to make things better.

So, again, what "policy" would make a problem with discussing race in a presidential campaign would be helpful?


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:08:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Ok (none / 0)

First, there are some policies involved.  For example, what is Senator Obama's position on Affirmative Action?  Maybe I just don't know where to look, but I don't find it listed on the "Issues" page of his website, either as a separate issue or under "Civil Rights."  At any rate, regardless of whether I know where to look, I have been listening, all year, and I don't know his position on this subject.

Second, if it's about reframing the debate, where is he going to go with this message from here?  When is his next speech on race scheduled?  What will he be saying about race in his stump speech next week?  And why hasn't he been speaking about it before?  To the extent that some of these questions are as yet unanswered, I may be surprised and find that Obama really is speaking about race next week--I just don't expect it.

If he really wanted a debate, why didn't he encourage Ferraro to speak out, or at least address the substance of her comments, instead of having his campaign call on her to be silenced?

Obama senior adviser David Axelrod said Ferraro should be removed from her position with the Clinton campaign because of her comments.

"The bottom line is this, when you wink and nod at offensive statements, you're really sending a signal to your supporters that anything goes," Axelrod said in a conference call with reporters on Tuesday.

"There's no other way to send a serious signal that you want to police the tone of this campaign," he added. "And if you don't do those things then you are simply adding to the growing compendium of evidence that you really are encouraging that."

Axelrod said Clinton has encountered problems because people view her as a "divisive and polarizing force."

"The best way to address those concerns is to not allow divisiveness and negativity to flourish among your supporters," he said. "And this is an opportunity for her to address that."

How does those words play out against yesterday's speech?  "Reframing the debate?"


by Trickster on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 03:43:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

10 seconds (2.00 / 2)

It took me 10 seconds on Google to determine that Obama mostly supports Affirmative Action, but is more in favor of AA based on income than race.

This is probably why you had trouble finding it on his website.  He is concerned more with the base causes that require AA than AA itself.

Looking at his website, I'm shocked that you didn't see the big nice section reading "Civil Rights."

The Problem
Pay Inequity Continues: For every $1.00 earned by a man, the average woman receives only 77 cents, while African American women only get 67 cents and Latinas receive only 57 cents.

Hate Crimes on the Rise: The number of hate crimes increased nearly 8 percent to 7,700 incidents in 2006.

Efforts Continue to Suppress the Vote: A recent study discovered numerous organized efforts to intimidate, mislead and suppress minority voters.

Disparities Continue to Plague Criminal Justice System: African Americans and Hispanics are more than twice as likely as whites to be searched, arrested, or subdued with force when stopped by police. Disparities in drug sentencing laws, like the differential treatment of crack as opposed to powder cocaine, are unfair.

Barack Obama's Plan
Strengthen Civil Rights Enforcement
Obama will reverse the politicization that has occurred in the Bush Administration's Department of Justice. He will put an end to the ideological litmus tests used to fill positions within the Civil Rights Division.

Combat Employment Discrimination
Obama will work to overturn the Supreme Court's recent ruling that curtails racial minorities' and women's ability to challenge pay discrimination. Obama will also pass the Fair Pay Act to ensure that women receive equal pay for equal work.

Expand Hate Crimes Statutes
Obama will strengthen federal hate crimes legislation and reinvigorate enforcement at the Department of Justice's Criminal Section.

End Deceptive Voting Practices
Obama will sign into law his legislation that establishes harsh penalties for those who have engaged in voter fraud and provides voters who have been misinformed with accurate and full information so they can vote.

End Racial Profiling
Obama will ban racial profiling by federal law enforcement agencies and provide federal incentives to state and local police departments to prohibit the practice.

Reduce Crime Recidivism by Providing Ex-Offender Support
Obama will provide job training, substance abuse and mental health counseling to ex-offenders, so that they are successfully re-integrated into society. Obama will also create a prison-to-work incentive program to improve ex-offender employment and job retention rates.

Eliminate Sentencing Disparities
Obama believes the disparity between sentencing crack and powder-based cocaine is wrong and should be completely eliminated.

Expand Use of Drug Courts
Obama will give first-time, non-violent offenders a chance to serve their sentence, where appropriate, in the type of drug rehabilitation programs that have proven to work better than a prison term in changing bad behavior.

Barack Obama's Record
Record of Advocacy: Obama has worked to promote civil rights and fairness in the criminal justice system throughout his career. As a community organizer, Obama helped 150,000 African Americans register to vote. As a civil rights lawyer, Obama litigated employment discrimination, housing discrimination, and voting rights cases. As a State Senator, Obama passed one of the country's first racial profiling laws and helped reform a broken death penalty system. And in the U.S. Senate, Obama has been a leading advocate for protecting the right to vote, helping to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act and leading the opposition against discriminatory barriers to voting.


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 04:03:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Maybe you'd be less shocked (none / 0)

If you read my post, including the part where I mentioned I didn't find anything about AA in the Civil Rights section.

I'm sure Obama has answered a question about AA at some point in time.  But if he doesn't campaign on it and doesn't put it on his website, why am I to think he is committed to it?

It seems to me more like one of those general-election issues that he is still trying to keep his distance from.


by Trickster on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 04:14:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Maybe you'd be less shocked (none / 0)

Er, sorry.  I'm at work and doing three things at once.  My mistake.


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 04:22:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Thank you (none / 0)

Respect for owning up to mistake > disrespect for making original mistake.

And I think we've both made our points here.


by Trickster on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 04:55:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Roger that. (none / 0)

Not a problem.


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 05:02:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

But let me add something (none / 0)

From Craig Crawford:

Obama won deserved praise for his race-conscious speech on Tuesday, particularly for how he balanced much of his rhetoric between the plight of black Americans facing racism and the resentment of whites against affirmative action programs. Beyond the rhetoric, how would he translate that balancing act into policy?

Good luck getting answers. Media inquiries to the Obama campaign about affirmative action specifics produce responses that are at least as vague as the candidate's speeches. The Boston Globe this week made the latest run at obtaining affirmative details and got this written response:

Affirmative action programs "can open up opportunities otherwise closed to qualified minorities" without harming whites. Yet, "we shouldn't ignore that race continues to matter" in American society, Obama said; to suggest otherwise "turns a blind eye to both our history and our experience - and relieves us of the responsibility to make things right."

-- Obama campaign statement, Boston Globe (3/18)

The Globe's request to a spokesperson for more concrete answers got no response. It is politically smart to steer clear of race policy specifics in a campaign, but not so easy once you are in the White House.

That's consistent with my observations of the campaign.


by Trickster on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 12:00:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Not quite accurate. (none / 0)

I look at all politicians with a cynical eye because they are, well pliticians.
It would be nice if others would make the same realization and stop putting politicians on lofty pedastals that they don't deserve to be on.
Onama did what any politician would do in this situation. It was done for his own survival and not as part of some idealistic goal to "turn the mirror on America" or anything else so ridiculously naive.
by big poppa smurf on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 03:24:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a great comment - anonymous (2.00 / 5)

Actually, in a diary written by one of his students, I learned that much of what he talked about in this speech, he taught in his class.  That was in private, no cameras and he wasn't running for anything.  The former University of Chicago student dragged out his old notes and shared his experiences.  

Don't be so quick to assume that he is a different person than what he portrays in his speeches.

P.S. I'd give you a link to the diary but it's on the evil DKos and I know you guys are boycotting that site.


That One is the Right One for 2008.
by GFORD on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:54:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a great comment - anonymous (2.00 / 4)

As usual he used a speech ...  can you suggest a better way of addressing the issue?


by interestedbystander on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:20:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

just watch (2.00 / 1)

they are gonna suggest he should have dropped out.


-- be excellent to each other
by kindthoughts on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:07:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Policy proposals? (2.00 / 1)

A speech with no policy proposals coming in response to a campaign firestorm doesn't convince me that he's serious about racial reconciliation.

If he was serious, why didn't he initiate a dialogue with Geraldine Ferraro instead of just demanding that she shut up?


by Trickster on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:55:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Policy proposals? (2.00 / 1)

Can you please cite where he demanded she should shut up?


by interestedbystander on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 04:55:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a great comment - anonymous (2.00 / 4)

It's a good thing I read mydd so I've been properly edjumacated on the candidates.

You wouldn't believe it, but if you left this site, you'd see that there are a lot of people who don't know that all Obama ever did in his life was give a bunch of speeches!

You know, some folks got this idea that he worked as a community organizer in poor black areas and organized a massive voter registration campaign to empower black voters in Chicago and taught classes on race and law and worked as a lawyer on discrimination cases and on and on.

But of course, I read mydd, so I know that he must not have done any of those things! He just gave a bunch of speeches...


by luckymortal on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:59:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

and has a million dollar mansion to prove it (1.25 / 4)


by earthoat on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:03:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: and has a million dollar mansion to prove it (2.00 / 5)

The million dollar mansion came from having a sweet book deal, not his speeches.

It's Bill Clinton that made upwards of $30-50 million giving speeches.


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:09:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: and has a million dollar mansion to prove it (2.00 / 2)

Yeah, I know first hand how you make the big bucks organizing for state PIRGs and ACORN!

Yep, he turned down the high-prestige legal petitions traditionally given to the president of the Harvard review and went into organizing because THAT'S where the money's at baby!


by luckymortal on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:33:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I thought the hundreds of thousands of dollars (1.00 / 4)

he got from Rezko and the Nuclear Power people he was supposed to be protecting hid district from was cash.


by earthoat on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:51:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I thought the hundreds of thousands of dollars (2.00 / 3)

If you have evidence regarding these accusations I'd certainly like you to share it.

So far, I've seen nothing beyond the kind of accusations Clinton faced with whitewater. Utter nonsense.

I'm open to the truth if you have anything beyond innuendo.


by luckymortal on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 03:00:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a great comment - anonymous (2.00 / 5)

It's very clear to anyone who has read more than 3 diaries on MyDD.  You are an uber Clinton partisan, who cannot simply look at an astounding moment in American political history and appreciate the sentiment.

I have no doubt that if the exact same speech had been given by Hillary, you would be here now extolling the bravery and insight of Hillary. It's really a shame you are so stuck in your shallow sad world, unable to see past your own opinions.


Hillary Clinton is not a monster,....as far as I know.. We are all Hussein JUNIOR.. ///.. FEINGOLD/BOXER 2016
by Its Like Herding Cats on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:42:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a great comment - anonymous (2.00 / 1)

Hillary would never throw her grandma under the bus. Seriously, the speech wasn't bad, but the timing of it is highly suspect, not to mention politically expedient. I question the sincerity of a candidate who constantly claims that his candidacy transcends race (while at the same time crying racist every other day about his opponent) and then jumps in with both feet the minute he gets in real trouble.


If Hillary walked on water, she would be criticized for not swimming and if Obama swam, he would be lauded for being able to do what Hillary could not do.
by portia9 on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:24:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Silly season (2.00 / 5)

There was no grandma-throwing involved.  Telling a deeply personal story and suggesting we get beyond people's flaws is not throwing someone you love under a bus.


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:51:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Silly season (2.00 / 2)

I really don't get the "grandma throwing" charge.  Maybe it seemed that way to those who are lucky enough to have lived a life devoid of contact with racism.

But for those of us who have encountered it, as I have, that part of his speech really hit home.  I know plenty of people who are like that grandmother, or worse, some of whom call themselves Democrats.  Not all racism is the same.  It comes in varying degrees, and levels of intent.  But it's rarely very hard to find.


Torture me once, shame on you; torture me and get away with it, shame on us all.
by freedom78 on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 05:35:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Silly season (2.00 / 2)

I just read an article by Michael Medved that said that it was "wretched" to say such things about her because it compared her to Wright.

I don't think Obama talked about degrees of problematic behavior in the speech, he just pointed out where there were issues.

What a lot of the critics don't understand is that the story was in his first book over a decade ago, and theoretically his grandmother doesn't care.

None of these people are Stalin, I don't see why we have to go into degrees of hate.


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 05:50:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a great comment - anonymous (2.00 / 4)

I don't view his bringing up his Grandma or Ferraro as throwing either of them under the bus. He used personal experience and a personal story to make a point. I am amazed that some people (Clintonites) are so offended by this.


Oh Mammy Dear, we're all mad over here livin' in America
by JDF on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:52:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a great comment - anonymous (2.00 / 2)

Well, I don't think that anyone is really offended by this.

But I understand using it as just more punch in the kitchen sink.

The funny thing is that I wrote and published a piece a few years ago that did just about the same thing.

It admitted that my traditional white American upbringing was essentially an at least mildly racist one.

I was moved by how many people told me they had the same experience. Racial tensions are a fact of our history folks. Obama is a brave man for admitting that instead of relying on the polite fiction that we've already overcome that.

I just can't see the logic in condemning Obama on this front.

Truly, he gave his grandmother great respect and his country great respect by accepting them for what they really are, unconditionally.

To do otherwise is just bullshit lies folks, and that's the very shit that causes the cancer.


by luckymortal on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:23:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a great comment - anonymous (none / 0)

how is the timing suspect.

the man's defending himself.


"Don't let it end this way; tell them I said something." -the last words of Pancho Villa
by shef on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 03:46:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a great comment - anonymous (none / 0)

Context, comprehension.  They are fundamental to understanding.


Hillary Clinton is not a monster,....as far as I know.. We are all Hussein JUNIOR.. ///.. FEINGOLD/BOXER 2016
by Its Like Herding Cats on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 04:39:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a great comment - anonymous (none / 0)

Just curious which world you are in? The one where light comes from behind?

Wanna see a world which can highlight the lack of character and judgement someone named Barack Obama shows?

If you want to discuss, let me know. Otherwise, I dont want to scare you out of your world:-)


by Sandeep on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:52:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a great comment - anonymous (2.00 / 2)

I've challenged you to "discuss" numerous times before and all you where able to say was stuff like"

"look it up for yourself"

"Hillary is the only Democrat"

"Obama can't win"

I'm just biding my time until the day after the convention when I won't have to be bothered with your blather anymore.


Hillary Clinton is not a monster,....as far as I know.. We are all Hussein JUNIOR.. ///.. FEINGOLD/BOXER 2016
by Its Like Herding Cats on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 04:37:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a great comment - anonymous (2.00 / 7)

Cynical.  You know, I think back to how angry I was (and frankly, still am) when Bush was elected the first time.  

What did I say about America?  

What did I say the second time the man I belived was a criminal ascended to the oval office?

What did I say about insurace companies when the medical bills not covered by our pitiful insurance rolled in after my girlfriend had a lump removed from her breast?

What have I said about Bush and republican cronies picking part the constitution?  Habeas corpus?

What did I say when our leaders decided to invade Iraq, despite my lack of "clairivoyance"?

What did I say each and every time dems failed to stand up to fight FISA?

Well, I'll tell you, I've said some pretty colorful things in my anger and disappointment.  Honestly, they wouldn't sound all that much different than "God damn America" for allowing this shit to happen.

Will the UPS driver in Indiana be incapable of understanding how a minority might be angry?  Will they be able look around their town or at their own life without finding something to be angry about? Perhaps the direction the country is moving?  About their nephew serving in Irag?

Why are we so frightened of "angry black people"?  

You say that Obama is using race to "silence his critics"?  Are you mad?  His speech calls us all to account for the way in which we view the world and demands that we do better, accept one another, and work together.

Sorry, but that is unusual.  It is new and fresh in american politics (since the 60s anyway).


I'm as strong as a bull moose, and you can use me to the limit. - Teddy Roosevelt
by fogiv on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:04:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a great comment - anonymous (none / 0)

Indeed...why do we all act like we've never been angry with this country, in one way or another.  Whether we get angry at a few voters in Florida who screwed up their ballots, or the 50+ million who voted for Bush AFTER he was proven to be a waste of air, or just American in general, sometimes anger is justified.

P.S. - hope everything is ok with your girlfriend.  


Torture me once, shame on you; torture me and get away with it, shame on us all.
by freedom78 on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 05:40:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Frustrating, isn't it (2.00 / 1)

He gave a speech! And people liked it! The nerve. It's so unfair. How does he get away with it?

But woah - hey, how did you get to type that comment? Aren't you supposed to be silenced? Guess the speech didn't work like that devious Obama planned.


I rock knobs
by Etchasketchist on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 04:00:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a great comment - anonymous (none / 0)

The NYTimes brought up an interesting point about this speech. Barack Obama is asking us to take Rev Wright's fiery rhetoric and to put it in context with his entire life, to put it in perspective. We are not supposed to judge the man based on these "few" anti-American speeches. Overall, Obama says, Rev Wright is a good man. Yet when it comes to his political opponent, Hillary Clinton, we are supposed to focus on one thing: her "bad" judgment on Iraq. We are to ignore the context of her life, or the bigger perspective. It seems as if he's guilty of doing the same thing people may already have done with Rev Wright.

Interesting point.  

But there's a difference between how we treat Hillary and Wright.  Hillary is using her experience to run for higher office.  Wright is not.  I don't think most (won't say "any" because some people take everything too far) Obama supporters would decry Hillary Clinton as being generally bad for America (or Arkansas, or New York).  I certainly know that I wouldn't.  She's done a lot of good, certainly more good than bad, and should be applauded for it.  But for those who think of Iraq as the biggest issue, she's a candidate running for (among the other roles of the President) Commander in Chief.  In that respect, that vote looks like a giant mark of red ink on an otherwise well written term paper (sorry...college teacher...I'm contractually obligated to use education related similes and metaphors).

Wright, on the other hand, is retired.  Were he running for some office, this WOULD and SHOULD be an important criterion in judging him.  But, since he is not, we don't have to shine a harsh light on his mistakes as part of the process of judging his suitability.  


Torture me once, shame on you; torture me and get away with it, shame on us all.
by freedom78 on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 05:27:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I am very sure they would (none / 0)

I for do not have a second thought about that.


-- be excellent to each other
by kindthoughts on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:09:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 1)

That's nice to hear.  It's often hard to find reasonable calls to unite and win over all the shouting.

And, yes, I'll be voting for Hillary, if she's the nominee.  

Why?

The Supreme Court
Iran
Healthcare
Education
A responsible foreign policy
...the list goes on.  


Torture me once, shame on you; torture me and get away with it, shame on us all.
by freedom78 on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 05:18:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 2)

And do you intend to vote for Clinton, should she be nominated?  Because it is entirely possible that will occur.


by Montague on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:27:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Thanks for ... (2.00 / 4)

... engaging in this all-important discussion, in an  honest and reasonable manner.


What's the Point?
by Vermonter on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 09:33:39 AM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 11)

I grew up near 6 mile and Telegraph road during the 60's.  My dad was a Detroit Fireman.  So your diary really brought back some memories.  I remember the white flight that took place just after the race riots there in 1967.  There is a nice blog written by Michael Happy at the Detroit news about his neighborhood growing up and how time has changed it, and what he is doing to try and help the current residents.  It's an area right around City Airport.  I am very familiar with the area because I worked for a few years during the 1980 on E. Davidisno near Van Dyke.

I have shed many tears reading it.  I hope anyone who takes a look enjoys it as much as I have.

http://community.detnews.com/blogs/index .php/neighborhood/2007/08/

You can look at archives by clicking on the links in the right hand column.


by Dave B on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 09:38:04 AM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 2)

I have considered many times writing a Diary and calling attention to Michael Happy's blog at Daily Kos.  But as it stands now, I won't go back to that place.


by Dave B on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 09:40:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 1)

I wish I had posted these multimedia clips from Michael J. Happy of the Detroit News in my first post...  It's truly heart wrenching...

http://download.gannett.edgesuite.net/de tnews/2007/news/0721dobelstreet/index.ht ml

http://download.gannett.edgesuite.net/de tnews/2007/news/0911playground/index.htm l

What the world needs is a few more people like Michael Happy!


by Dave B on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:06:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 7)

Thanks for the diary. There is no reason we can't all be civil.

Definite rec.


by Zorro the Greek on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 09:46:31 AM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 7)

Thank you.  I appreciate your insights about racism in your family, something I would think is true for most families. I certainly have some of those folks in mine.  

Your response shows how Obama talking about his grandmother was a moment of rare honesty that touches us and forces us to think.  Lest anyone think that this was an act of political expediency (i.e., throwing his grandmother under a bus), they might also want to consider that he wrote about this a number of years ago and in some depth.  Obama recounted this in his first book.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 09:50:11 AM EST

Recommended (2.00 / 11)

Like you I remain a Sen. Clinton supporter but see no reason to despise Sen. Obama and found the speech remarkably perceptive about race relations if a little flat in delivery, though I understand why calm was the best approach.


"We live entangled in webs of endless deceit, often self-deceit, but with a little honest effort, it is possible to extricate ourselves from them". -- NC
by Trond Jacobsen on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 09:55:25 AM EST

Re: Recommended (none / 0)

As an Obama supporter, I found it to be a little flat, too.  Maybe I'm just used to the more grand approach, in an auditorium packed with screaming supporters.  But this was just a room (not sure of the size) with what seemed to be some supporters and a lot of press.  I suppose it's probably a more appropriate venue, since it's less of a stump speech at a campaign rally, but it left me feeling that it wasn't the best speaking he's done, even if it was perhaps the most important material he's dealt with.  

But I DO like what he had to say.


Torture me once, shame on you; torture me and get away with it, shame on us all.
by freedom78 on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 05:46:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 10)

thank you for your diary. As a Clinton supporter, I agree with you, his speech was very good.

I can pick apart points within the speech, I can point to some inconsistencies.

but, that's not the point of the speech.

The essence of the speech, the tone of the speech worked and was a good speech


by nikkid on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 10:05:12 AM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 2)

there are always points of contention and inconsistency in speeches. I am glad that you are able to look past them.

It seems to me that is a bigger issue than we are willing to discuss here at MYDD. An inability to look at the whole picture when dealing with the "other candidate," we always seem to look to the flaws, inflate them and use them to ridicule both the candidate and their supporters. It is nice to see some of us moving past that.


Oh Mammy Dear, we're all mad over here livin' in America
by JDF on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:56:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 9)

Good diary.  Talking about race is difficult, for anyone, and especially when you risk being personal.  Puting aside agreement or disagreement with the specific, I give you all the credit in the word for writing something so personal and thoughtful.  


by HSTruman on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 10:06:15 AM EST

It's not just about 2008 (2.00 / 8)

...this primary has exposed, as it always would have to, deep wounds from the past.

It's not just about Obama's speech either. It's about the personal space it opens up for others to confront, confess, address the fears and stereotypes inside their own head.

You've done that bravely, brilliantly. Whatever happens in the primaries, whatever happens in the GE, discussions like this are the only way to begin to heal those deep deep wounds. It hurts to expose them. But after the pain, left to breathe, comes the healing.

Thankyou


Moose Juice; debate without hate
by brit on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 10:13:52 AM EST

It was a good speech, but not so (2.00 / 2)

different from one Bill Clinton gave in 1995, NOT under duress to cover up a bad personal association and NOT to extricate himself from a tight spot, but rather from the heart.   And Obama finds it in his heart to smear this man and his wife as racists?

Abraham Lincoln reminded us that a house divided against itself cannot stand. When divisions have threatened to bring our house down, somehow we have always moved together to shore it up. My fellow Americans, our house is the greatest democracy in all human history. And with all its racial and ethnic diversity, it has beaten the odds of human history. But we know that divisions remain, and we still have work to do. (Applause.)

The two worlds we see now each contain both truth and distortion. Both black and white Americans must face this, for honesty is the only gateway to the many acts of reconciliation that will unite our worlds at last into one America.

White America must understand and acknowledge the roots of black pain. It began with unequal treatment first in law and later in fact. African Americans indeed have lived too long with a justice system that in too many cases has been and continues to be less than just. (Applause.) The record of abuses extends from lynchings and trumped up charges to false arrests and police brutality. The tragedies of Emmett Till and Rodney King are bloody markers on the very same road.

Still today too many of our police officers play by the rules of the bad old days. It is beyond wrong when law-abiding black parents have to tell their law-abiding children to fear the police whose salaries are paid by their own taxes. (Applause.)

And blacks are right to think something is terribly wrong when African American men are many times more likely to be victims of homicide than any other group in this country; when there are more African American men in our corrections system than in our colleges; when almost one in three African American men in their 20s are either in jail, on parole or otherwise under the supervision of the criminal justice system -- nearly one in three. And that is a disproportionate percentage in comparison to the percentage of blacks who use drugs in our society. Now, I would like every white person here and in America to take a moment to think how he or she would feel if one in three white men were in similar circumstances.

And there is still unacceptable economic disparity between blacks and whites. It is so fashionable to talk today about African Americans as if they have been some sort of protected class. Many whites think blacks are getting more than their fair share in terms of jobs and promotions. That is not true. That is not true. (Applause.)

The truth is that African Americans still make on average about 60 percent of what white people do; that more than half of African American children live in poverty. And at the very time our young Americans need access to college more than ever before, black college enrollment is dropping in America.

On the other hand, blacks must understand and acknowledge the roots of white fear in America. There is a legitimate fear of the violence that is too prevalent in our urban areas; and often by experience or at least what people see on the news at night, violence for those white people too often has a black face.

It isn't racist for a parent to pull his or her child close when walking through a high-crime neighborhood, or to wish to stay away from neighborhoods where innocent children can be shot in school or standing at bus stops by thugs driving by with assault weapons or toting handguns like old west desperados. (Applause.)

It isn't racist for parents to recoil in disgust when they read about a national survey of gang members saying that two-thirds of them feel justified in shooting someone simply for showing them disrespect. It isn't racist for whites to say they don't understand why people put up with gangs on the corner or in the projects, or with drugs being sold in the schools or in the open. It's not racist for whites to assert that the culture of welfare dependency, out-of-wedlock pregnancy and absent fatherhood cannot be broken by social programs unless there is first more personal responsibility. (Applause.)

The great potential for this march today, beyond the black community, is that whites will come to see a larger truth -- that blacks share their fears and embrace their convictions; openly assert that without changes in the black community and within individuals, real change for our society will not come.


Reasonable people can disagree.
by mnicholson0220 on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 10:14:55 AM EST

Re: It was a good speech, but not so (2.00 / 5)

It's best to "blockquote" speech exerpts like that, so there's no confusion between your text and the quoted text.  Also, linking is good.

You were making a find point until you had to blow it with:

 And Obama finds it in his heart to smear this man and his wife as racists?

Irrespective of the value of that claim, do you not see it goes entirely against the grain of this thread?


by corph on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 10:30:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It was a good speech, but not so (2.00 / 6)

Agreed. If there's been playing of the race card on one side (and you can argue that back and forth) then it's been on both. May have been, may not have been. You've got things you see as impolitic, and so do we.

We can fight about them forever or we can agree to disagree.

I don't think Bill and Hillary Clinton are racists. I don't think Barack Obama is a racist. I don't think Barack Obama thinks Bill and Hillary Clinton are racists, and I don't think they think he is.

Things have been said on both sides. Apologies have been made. Obama was very gracious towards Ferraro yesterday. We all can be too.


No Way. No How. No McCain-Palin!
by Texas Gray Wolf on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:31:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It was a good speech, but not so (2.00 / 3)

That was a great speech too. Both were. Leave out the crap about smearing some man and his wife as racists (who are you even talking about here)?


by elrod on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:06:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It was a good speech, but not so (2.00 / 4)

"Irrespective of the value of that claim, do you not see it goes entirely against the grain of this thread?"

People deserve to have the chance to present their views in proper context, and simply approving a positive statement doesn't reflect the dichotomy far too many of us have experienced in dealing with Barack Obama. Why is it that the same gentle context he extends toward Reverend Wright he does not extend to others, like the Clintons, and Geraldine Ferraro, who may not be supporting him to be president? I don't see anything transcendent about loving people who you see as like you and are supporting you and are part of your extended family. We all do that.

I grew up in New Jersey and one of my earliest experiences in the racial divide was as a cadet first responder in the Newark riots, when I saw people dying for their anger. The pain they suffered lasted far longer than any catharsis. A frightened society tossed them a bare bone - welfare. It was a subsistence pittance, and an insult.

My take on Barack Obama's speech was that it was an eloquent as usual speech that attempts to hide the fact that Barack Obama sat silently while a huge swath of Americans were vilified and damned by his pastor in front of him for at least 17 years. That's not a "profile in courage" as the New York Times would have it, it is an act of cowardice and irresponsibility. Courage dictates standing up to hate speech and racism wherever it raises it's ugly head. However he justifies his silence, I grieve the loss of what could have been.

Barack Obama has a history of an inordinate number of votes "present" on controversial issues, where others have taken the tough road and gone on record to take a stand. Barack Obama's actions have been to sit quietly and vote "present" when faced with virulent hate speech, for 17 years. Yes, I am sure there were additional better things that happened there as well.

In the family in which I was raised anyone who expressed racism or bigotry against  any race, ethnicity, disability, or sexual orientation or identity was immediately shown the door and told not to return until they had abandoned those prejudices. Confronting bigotry and letting bigots know it is not acceptable is what has changed hearts and minds to the extent that we have successfully changed our society over the past 40 years. Bigots need to hear that other people do not agree with their unjust prejudices. Silence is tacit approval, and if you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem. Painting a grand picture doesn't allay my squirming discomfort with 17 years of going along with hate speech. I heard too much rationalizing. We are all victims of victims. That is the human condition. There have been many enslavements and many genocides in human history. We are all one, that is a fact.

Elocution may distract people temporarily from the facts, but the rock bottom line is that cowardice when courage is called for won't win votes, not when we need a real leader in the White House, not someone who votes "present" when the chips are down. No matter how eloquently he can explain it away.

You may hear this as a harsh evaluation compared to the positive one this diarist prefers, but I want to honor people who take real risks, and have the courage to go against the grain, and who use the opportunities life offers them to make a difference.

How many lives would have been shaped differently had Barack Obama the courage to confront his pastor long ago, so that instead of hearing a repeating litany of untruth and hatred, a more compassionate, constructive message could be given? That's what leadership is about. You can still name the anger, and acknowledge the legitimacy of the rage, without adding the distortions that keep the blame and hatred going beyond all reason. Demagoguery doesn't help, or heal, anyone. It provides an illusory rush of self righteousness, a seduction, not a truth. Like empty calories, they add only weight, and not strength, a non-nourishing diet of lies.

And it's time as well to move beyond talk into creating the answers to racial and economic inequality, which is where Hillary Clinton excels. Young people don't realize that we have already been going through all this for a very long time. She is already on part two, and that's essentially respectful of all.


by 07rescue on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:31:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It was a good speech, but not so (2.00 / 2)

Obama was very gracious towards Ferraro yesterday; I'm trying to be the same way. He acknowledged that she didn't harbor any deep-seated racism, which I agree with. I still have disagreements there, but enough of it; move on. Obama was very gracious towards her; I can be too.

I agree and disagree with your last sentence. It is time to move on. I agree that Hillary Clinton is strong in this area, but by implication you see to be saying that she's at part two and Obama's at part one. I disagree. I think they're both well into part two. Both of them excel at this. Both of them are creating the answers.

But yesterday was a much better job of really doing phase one than has been done before. I've read and heard Bill Clinton's speeches before; they're good too. But yesterday's was an entirely different animal, as far as I'm concerned (and an extremely large number of reviewers, pundits, editorial boards, etc) agree. We've heard reports from all over about people mesmerized, standing and staring and watching a speech about race for over half an hour. For whatever reason -- maybe the situation, maybe how deeply personal it was, maybe the stakes, maybe the difference a decade makes -- this speech reached out and touched people to a degree that others haven't in a very long time.

And we needed that. Because we can talk about phase one and phase two as much as we want, but phase one isn't done, and it does matter that we get it done too.

Both Obama and Clinton will do a great job with phase two.


No Way. No How. No McCain-Palin!
by Texas Gray Wolf on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:40:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It was a good speech, but not so (2.00 / 1)

"Because we can talk about phase one and phase two as much as we want, but phase one isn't done, and it does matter that we get it done too."

As long as there are young people coming into this world, which I hope there will be for many more generations, there will always be people at phase one, clearly. And there are new wounds sown every day, all I need do is exit the door of my NYC apartment to witness many of them, to talk about.

My point is that the ongoing national conversation about racism, which in so many places is a regular concern, does not need to take center stage when we need action, concrete, effective action, to supplement the talk.

The older among us are tired of the consciousness raising done in the absence of putting our money where our mouth is. Black eleven year olds like Diamonte Driver dying from an abscessed tooth that could have been remedied by an $80.00 extraction, because Medicaid churning turned him out of health care at the wrong moment, are a horror story. I watch these things going on every single day as a health care provider. On top of unnecessary disability and death there is the degradation and humiliation of helplessness and poverty that results from the unaffordability of health care alone, as only one issue in a plethora of evils, that need to be addressed, yesterday. I don't know about everyone else, but I feel urgency to achieve these things, and I know Clinton will get the job done.

Go ahead and talk about it all, to your hearts content (I don't mean that as snark, I mean it sincerely,  I'm just frustrated), but let's elect someone who can get the job done. We really are on the same side, but some of us need to get the action up and running already. The 8 year hiatus and entropy on all things constructive in this country has to end.


by 07rescue on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:26:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It was a good speech, but not so (none / 0)

Oh, I completely agree with you. That's what Obama was saying too -- that this is the wrong focus. He made that very clear. He stressed that the real issues are the real issues: the war, the economy, health care, the courts, corporatism, corruption, and so forth.

I feel the same sense of urgency you do. I just believe that Obama has a much better chance of getting them done, because I believe that Clinton will have a far harder time building the coalitions needed to make progress, based on the intractable hatred the other side has for her, and that she'll run more poorly as a national candidate and there will be narrower Democratic majorities in the House and Senate than with Obama.

Obviously you disagree, and that's fine. Those are real points on which to debate whose candidate is a better nominee. They're not all the nonsense and nonissues we've been subjected to since mid-February.

And either of them will get those things done far, far better than McCain. One or the other's going to be our nominee. We all have some responsibility to make sure we're not the ones enabling McCain to win.


No Way. No How. No McCain-Palin!
by Texas Gray Wolf on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:57:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It was a good speech, but not so (2.00 / 1)

"I just believe that Obama has a much better chance of getting them done, because I believe that Clinton will have a far harder time building the coalitions needed to make progress, based on the intractable hatred the other side has for her, and that she'll run more poorly as a national candidate and there will be narrower Democratic majorities in the House and Senate than with Obama."

This is where my personal familiarity with Clinton's effectiveness in NY (I volunteered in her Manhattan district office after 9-11 sickened me too much to continue to work) has convinced me that she can be far more effective as a bridge builder than the common regard for her allows, and is the precise aspect of her talents that have never been adequately portrayed by her campaign (I blame Mark Penn, Mandy Grunwald would have build her up accurately, they fight about it and he wins too often). I would have all her grateful and heart felt Republican supporters in upstate New York talking about how great it is to have a fighter like her working on their behalf. They were so astounded when she kept all her campaign promises and immediately started in on the economic development projects she helped envision with them. They were blown away.

She is extraordinary in her tenaciousness and will to get things done. She also cares deeply about people. No BS. She shows up. She works so hard she gets the respect of the Republicans , both in NY state and in the Senate. She has built bridges already.

These are the things that make her supporters as passionate as they are for her.

It's almost weird how her personal warmth and care simply do not translate into TV and other big public appearances, and her campaign has never effectively found a way to bring who she is forward.


by 07rescue on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:44:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It was a good speech, but not so (2.00 / 1)

I blame Mark Penn

In the Obama-centric group that I used to frequent, we considered Penn to be much more of a "monster" than Clinton.  I've heard lots of second-hand stories about Clinton being personable, but all I've heard about Penn makes him repellant.

He acts and speaks like the worst Republican sleaze-merchant, and I can't imagine why Clinton chooses to retain him.

I don't think much of Wolfson, either, but he doesn't make my gorge rise as much as Penn does.  Perhaps I'm reaching too much when I note that McCain's campaign takes a lot of the same strategies as Clinton's does, and Penn is in the same PR firm as McCain's top dogs.

Why do they still retain this guy when his strategies are so transparently disasterous for Clinton (and perhaps the Democratic party) in the long run?


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 03:02:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It was a good speech, but not so (2.00 / 2)

"He acts and speaks like the worst Republican sleaze-merchant, and I can't imagine why Clinton chooses to retain him."

I venture to guess that 99.999% of Clinton supporters agree with you on this. I have to allow for one strong point that, while odious to me personally (I place Mark Penn farther on the scale of "bad actors" than I even place George Bush), I do understand that having one right winger on your staff to balance the otherwise overwhelming preponderance of liberal/progressive voices does make sense. He has some skills to make him more valuable, as well.

Her philosophy is to try to hire the best (questionable in Penn's case, we all agree) with a variety of viewpoints, and let them hone the campaign's approach, rather than letting homogeneity dull the edge. In theory I agree. In practice I think the stalement it has engendered has hobbled the campaign, and there has been a loss of accuracy in how Clinton has been presented as a candidate. It's deadly, and shouldn't continue. In some ways I think she has "learned her lesson" about taking other people's opinions into consideration, a lesson that has been beaten into her from the health care issue, and misapplied it here. I do wish her campaign were more about who she is, because that is something the voters need to know to trust her.

Often campaigns will turn on where the strategy offered meets the candidate's character, and I think it is very difficult for Clinton to place herself out in the public eye in a personal fashion. Mark Penn's emphasis on going with the issues alone meets Clintons' personal need to keep the focus off who she is.

Personally, had I gone through 1/10,000th what she has been through in terms of being personally attacked and unjustly reviled, I would have curled up into a little ball and told the world to go do something to themselves. I would be outta there fast. She has hung in, I don't know how, but she has, and I give her immense credit for that. The process has taken it's toll, however, and politics has not gotten any gentler.

Maybe the very intensity of this battle will bring out who Hillary Clinton is at an opportune time. It seemed to during the Ohio/Texas primaries, when her tenor changed and she simply fought, undefended. I think that works for her. Her sincerity comes through to people in that circumstance. No one mistakes her for poll driven then, and all the Mark Penns in the world cannot hide who she is. Not a charismatic rock star, we agree, but the real deal, and a real asset to our country. The frank populist you see appear, no teleprompter, no parsed phraseology, no calculated carefulness, is what is most essential, and most congruent, with who she is. Of course there are the layers of "how" that conflate every political person and issue, but if you need to know the underlying goal, and basically  the "why" of who she is, that basic fairness, empathy, and need to see the least of us prosper and be healed is what she is about.

Some people are hard on the outside and soft on the inside. Others are soft on the outside, and hard as rock on the inside. I want the former, and that is who Hillary Clinton is.


by 07rescue on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 01:33:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

You are a credit to your candidate (none / 0)

Thank you for that, 07rescue.  As an Obama supporter, I sometimes have a hard time understanding some Clinton supporters who act like they hate Obama more than they love Clinton; a stance that I cannot mesh with my own feelings for my candidate.

But your position, I can definitely relate to.  

Great post.


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 09:14:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It was a good speech, but not so (none / 0)

I agree. I strongly dislike Mark Penn, and I dislike the microtrends school of politics (but then of course I would, I'm in a state his theories say is unimportant to his candidate, and in any case it's pretty much the opposite of the 50-state strategy).

I would still most likely be a strong Obama supporter either way, but at least I wouldn't feel like Clinton's campaign staff is a big part of the problem.


No Way. No How. No McCain-Palin!
by Texas Gray Wolf on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 03:37:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It was a good speech, but not so (none / 0)

"but at least I wouldn't feel like Clinton's campaign staff is a big part of the problem."

It was the presence of Mark Penn that kept me away from her campaign up until February, and I have always supported her otherwise. I didn't contribute any money until then, either, and I am a lifelong contributor to Democratic candidates. But for me his presence is not enough to totally deny her my support, it is a hurdle I had to clear, however, and it remains a worry.

While he may serve a purpose for the campaign, I personally do not believe such a bad actor belongs so close to her, and I will always wish she would get rid of him. I honestly believe she would get a burst of increased support if he were gone, it would relieve many people's misgivings that currently act as a brake on their willingness to contribute. It would be a large net gain of support for her to get rid of him.


by 07rescue on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 05:18:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It was a good speech, but not so (none / 0)

different from one Bill Clinton gave in 1995, NOT under duress to cover up a bad personal association and NOT to extricate himself from a tight spot, but rather from the heart.

What makes you think that one can't both defend oneself andspeak from the heart?


"Don't let it end this way; tell them I said something." -the last words of Pancho Villa
by shef on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 06:06:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: As if Bill was the first one to try to talk (none / 0)

As a progressive, I will speak out against hate anytime I see it regardless of consequences. All racism is evil.


by JFK464 on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:24:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 3)

i thank obama too, for openly saying that white and black racism exist side by side, and each contribute to the standoff. what i didn't hear is what obama's going to do about it. straddling this issue is perpetuating the problem.


by campskunk on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 10:16:30 AM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 3)

I don't think it is up to Mr. Obama to tell us what to do.  I think he's asking us to search our own hearts, find our most noble self and, if we listen to it, we will KNOW the right thing to do about it - each in our own way.


No Quacks, please.
by noquacks on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 10:22:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

he can do that from the senate. (2.00 / 1)

as much as the obama camp hates to admit it, lyndon johnson spent every last dime of his political capital getting the civil rights bill through congress in 1964. now THAT is leadership.

show me something, obama.


by campskunk on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:01:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: he can do that from the senate. (2.00 / 2)

Taking such a deeply personal risk with a speech like he did yesterday is leadership. Being willing to talk about the problem so openly, while running for President, is leadership.

And there is no easy fix to this problem. It requires heart, conversations, soul searching. This is not a problem laws can fix. It is not a problem new guidelines or political correctness can fix. It isn't a problem a Senator can fix or a President can fix. It is not a problem that anyone person can fix simply by telling us how to be.

It is however a problem that Obama showed great leadership on yesterday. And if we all follow his lead maybe, as a nation, we can fix it.  


Oh Mammy Dear, we're all mad over here livin' in America
by JDF on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:02:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

HIS LEAD?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? (none / 0)

He didn't start and won't be the last to make efforts to heal racism. His lead. Bah. A politically expedient speech -- a speech he HAD to make. You think he ever would have made it had his back not been up against a wall? crickets


by Soitgoes on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 04:53:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Follow his lead? (none / 0)

I don't see any leadership on this issue. How can he lead the country when he couldn't even exert any influence over his close friend Rev Wright to help him get past his hate and divisiveness?

Since he has a only thin record and speeches show where has he shown any leadershipm on racism or any other controversial issue. I can't find it.

I hear lofty rhetoric that ignores the elephant in the room-results matter-if he is such a leader, an inspirational, transformative figure where is the evidence from the world he inhabited to prove it? He belonged to a church for 20 years that is essentially a segregated platform for racial anger and conspiracy theories against the country he wants to lead. Where was his transformational ability in his own community, with his own pastor? Non-existent. I see no evidence of action to back up his rhetoric.


berkshiretrueblue Commited to helping elect a Democrat as President "Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo" Ambroise Bierce
by berkshiretrueblue on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 09:43:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 2)

This is what confuses me about some reactions to the speech. I see a bunch of people telling me that Obama said he was "the answer to racism". He never said that. Then you say that he didn't give us any answer. I don't think that's right either.

I think the previous comment mostly nailed it. There is no "the answer". The answer is everyone being aware of it. The answer is a lot of people making personal changes. The answer is policies that treat people equally and provide opportunity to the disadvantaged. The answer is not resenting people because they, or people like them, were helped by one of those policies.

The answer is a whole lot of things. And the first part of the answer is being aware of things that we just do not talk about. And that's what we maybe started doing, a bit more, yesterday.


No Way. No How. No McCain-Palin!
by Texas Gray Wolf on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:45:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 8)

What a well-spoken and well-reasoned diary.  And thank you for the painful honesty.  Your confession of knee-jerk nervousness followed by self-loathing is something I recognize in myself.

The single best thing about the speech, in my mind, is the nuance.  When was the last time we had a national politician capable of courageous and nuanced stands?  Who didn't cave to the lowest common denominator of small words and simplistic condemnations?  


by bwitte on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 10:19:06 AM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 2)

"Your confession of knee-jerk nervousness followed by self-loathing is something I recognize in myself"

Heh. Well put! Me too.


by Sinbad Sinbad on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:21:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 4)

Your post is almost as inspiring as Obama's speech.  You've moved me with this sensitive and honest diary.  With Mr. Obama, we find our most noble selves.  I am wishing this for the entire country for what I hope to be, the next 8 years.


No Quacks, please.
by noquacks on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 10:21:16 AM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 2)

"With Mr. Obama, we find our most noble selves."

Huh. Speak for yourself, please. He certainly does NOT inspire me to do anything but stop him. I can respect that others experience better sentiments, however, and I'm appreciative of this well written diary.


by Soitgoes on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 10:33:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 5)

"He certainly does NOT inspire me to do anything but stop him"

YES. STOP HIM BEFORE HE CRUSHES US ALL.

Let's all calm down. HRC/BHO are great human beings.


by Sinbad Sinbad on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:22:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Being human beings aside... (1.50 / 6)

I don't agree that Obama is great other than that he has great oratory skills. Ehtical? Not so much. Presidential. Not so much. Great manipulator? Sure. Great big ego? No question. Deep understanding of policy? Uh, no. Great handlers? Sure, and devious too.

In short, I do believe this nice enough but egotistical, pandering, and ultimately not ready to be president human, who gives pretty speeches, needs to be stopped before the GOP does it.


by Soitgoes on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:48:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Being human beings aside... (2.00 / 4)

Such a nice diary, and then this.

Obama is a very ethical person. You may disagree; that's your right. He made a mistake with Rezko; he agrees. Nothing unethical ever transpired, according to everyone who's investigated it. Nothing illegal.

Presidential? Very much so. That's been a very common comment about him, not just yesterday but many times: just how presidential he is.

Great manipulator and great big ego? With the possible exception of Jimmy Carter, who was kinda humble, there hasn't been a President in my lifetime, and probably my parents' lifetime (and they're kids of the Depression) who wasn't a great manipulator and had a great big ego. And there won't be after this election either. Goes with the territory. If you're not a great manipulator and have a great big ego, you're not qualified for the office and you'll never get there.

Deep understanding of politics? Of course he has a deep understanding of politics. The man was magna cum laude at Harvard Law. He was a grassroots organizer for years. He has more elected experience than Hillary Clinton. He has far more political experience than Bill Clinton did when he was elected. He's taught Constitutional Law.

Argue that your candidate is more experienced. That's fine. Argue that the relatively slight differences matter. That's fine. But claim that someone who's a United States Senator with his background has no deep understanding of his chosen profession? On what basis? If you're going to produce evidence that some of his resume is fabricated, go ahead.

Great handlers, and devious? Again, no one who gets to be President doesn't have those. One can argue the relative greatness, but you need that. All three candidates in this election qualify.

Obviously I disagree with your last sentence as well. There's not much difference between Obama and Clinton on ego. They've both pandered at times, to pretty much the same extent. Both are far more ready to be President than Bill Clinton did, and I'll agree that he did a pretty good job if you will.

Neither of them will be stopped by the GOP any more easily than the other will.


No Way. No How. No McCain-Palin!
by Texas Gray Wolf on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:57:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 3)

"If I am stained with the sins of my father and my mind is trained to first racially stereotype, does it matter at all how doggedly determined I've been all my life change myself?  Does it matter how consciencious I've been not to pass any diseased thinking onto my children?  Does it matter that I have dedicated myself to working in social justice to atone for who I was programmed to be?"

Yes, it matters.  It matters a lot.

I just posted a diary to explain the point that opened my own eyes this year; when I first sat and listened to an entire Obama speech at Ebeneezer Church on Martin Luter King, Jr. Day.  I appreciate your words even more considering what I have been brought to recall this morning.

Thank you for sharing your story.


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 10:27:21 AM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 4)

Great Diary....  It got me a little emotional....  The amazing thing is that if we all open our eyes...we are really one people...  I'm a 35 African American male, and an Obama suporter..  Thanks for sharing it was a remarkable diary.


by IntownATLDem on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 10:29:59 AM EST

Though I am not changing my mind, (2.00 / 4)

I have always been impressed with Barak Obama.

However, at this time I think Clinton is more qualified and don't appreciate the incivility of many of Obama's supporters in the blogs.  

The commonality of the charge of "racism" coming from bloggers is astounding.

I have not personally been called a racist, but I have seen many comment threads on Kos and HuffPo degenerate without due cause into a racist accusation.
I understand that many of his supporters are enthusiastic about him. So much so that they can't imagine NOT supporting him.  Therefore, there must be some insidious reason OTHER than experience, history, policy, etc. that would lead a person to such a perverse position as supporting Clinton.

Must be racism, right?

Cry Wolf.


by Al Depansu on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 10:44:24 AM EST

Re: Though I am not changing my mind, (2.00 / 3)

Chalk another person up as completely missing the point. Thanks for posting.


by amiches on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:16:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Though I am not changing my mind, (2.00 / 2)

And thank you for commenting on my post.

Glad to know you are here to protect me from the errors of my thoughts.

This situation is a public one, and one framing does not reality make.


by Al Depansu on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:26:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Though I am not changing my mind, (2.00 / 1)

I think you, Obama, and I (among many others) think that the charges of racism are getting out of hand.

I hope we can all get out of "silly season" together and relatively unscathed.


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:00:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Though I am not changing my mind, (2.00 / 1)

There's been a lot of incivility on both sides. Being an Obama supporter, my eyes see more on the Clinton side, but I think it's way out of hand on both sides.

Some people cry racism at the drop of a hat. It's silly.

Some people cry sexism at the drop of a hat. It's silly.

Mirroring your sentence: I understand that many of hers upporters are enthusiastic about her. So much so that they can't imagine NOT supporting him.  Therefore, there must be some insidious reason OTHER than experience, history, policy, etc. that would lead a person to such a perverse position as supporting Obama. Must be sexism, right?

I've certainly seen discussions that go that way. There was one the other day in which a poster, who I'd previously seen be pretty levelheaded and reasonable, suddenly essentially accused all Obama supporters of being sexist, on the basis that any result other than Clinton fighting this down to the last delegate on the floor would apparently mean she'd been the victim of sexism.

There are good reasons to support Clinton. She has somewhat more experience (we can differ as to how much more), good policies, good ideas, she's a good leader.

There are good reasons to support Obama. He's got plenty of experience (much more than Bill did), he's got good policies and ideas, he's a great leader and motivator, and he's running on a political philosophy (the 50-state model, an inclusive campaign, largely deprecating lobbyists and special interests) that I find more compelling.

But there are good reasons to support either one. A whole lot of good people, either way, are going to have their dreams crushed. But hopefully they're going to understand it was never about tearing down their candidate, it was about building up a candidate even more people thought was at least a bit better.


No Way. No How. No McCain-Palin!
by Texas Gray Wolf on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:07:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Though I am not changing my mind, (none / 0)

Living through the 90s pretty much exhausted my "defending Bill Clinton" reserves, so I'm not posting this to be argumentative, but... it seems unfair to say that Obama has "much more experience than Bill did." Bill's experience as a governor shouldn't be dismissed. Although you could argue that Obama has greater foreign policy experience than Bill did. I think I agree with your basic point, that Obama is sufficiently qualified to do the job. I just thought your comparison to Bill could use some more supporting detail - it's not self evident to me.


by Mobar on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:38:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Though I am not changing my mind, (none / 0)

I'm not dismissing Bill's experience as a governor. I do think it was worthwhile and that he did great things as a governor, and it's arguable that governor is closer to President than Senator.

But I'm still inclined to view Obama's experience as the greater, though you might convince me to drop the 'much' off that comment. It really depends on how you weigh qualifications. Governors do a lot more budget-y things and such than do Senators at either level. US Senators in particular pick up a lot more Washington and foreign policy experience.

I'll go with qualified enough; that's fair. Certainly wasn't intended as a slam of Bill; he clearly had the experience he needed to be a solid President.

And either one of them have much more experience than GWB had (of course, look how that turned out).


No Way. No How. No McCain-Palin!
by Texas Gray Wolf on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 03:47:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Though I am not changing my mind, (none / 0)

I don't see it that way.

I expect the same level of misogyny that I see in daily life, no surprises there.

Equating the ridiculous with the ridiculous doesn't minimize the offense.

I am not uninformed about Obama, I just don't prefer him.  

My comment is specifically about baseless accusations, which certainly qualifies as "tearing down" a candidate. That IS what it is about.


by Al Depansu on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 01:57:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Though I am not changing my mind, (none / 0)

I so often hear about the incivility of Obama supporters in the blogosphere. But just look upthread in this diary. Look at earthoat's posts. Look back into old comments. It has not just been Obama supporters who are uncivil so why is it that only their incivility raises your ire?


Oh Mammy Dear, we're all mad over here livin' in America
by JDF on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:07:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 5)

No offense intended to Hillary supporters here, but what we witnessed on the podium yesterday, was a president.  The president to be inaugurated in January, 2009?  Perhaps.  Perhaps not.

But a president, nonetheless.  

If y'all can just stop, look and listen, I'm sure that everyone here that watched the entire speech, can agree with at least that?  No?

So, if we indeed have two qualified, talented, strong candidates from the Democratic Party, running for president.........what is it exactly that we're fighting about?

I've said before that if Hillary got the nomination, after what I've witnessed from her campaign, that I would stay home on election day.  But only because I disapprove of her campaign's tactics, which I won't go into now.

But in deference to Obama's speech yesterday, I promise that whoever the National Convention chooses as our nominee, I will not only vote, but I will work my big hairy ass off for them.

I hope we can all do the same.


by AlyoshaKaramazov on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 10:45:07 AM EST

No. (2.00 / 0)

"If y'all can just stop, look and listen, I'm sure that everyone here that watched the entire speech, can agree with at least that?  No?"

And Clinton's campaign tactics?!?!?!?!? Look in your candidate's own backyard, please.


by Soitgoes on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 10:53:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No. (2.00 / 2)

I think followers of both campaigns see far more negatives in the tactics of their opposition then in themselves.

I know a lot of Clinton supporters think that Obama supporters have played the race card at times when it wasn't justified. I think there are some occasions that may be questionable on both sides. Apologies have been made on both sides. I don't think that's one-sided in any way.

I know a lot of Obama supporters believe that the 3AM ad was reprehensible fear-mongering, that the "CiC threshold" was ludicrous, particularly in praising McCain, and that there have been a number of other inappropriate non-substantive attacks from the Clinton side (NAFTAgate, anyone? sexism?).

These things happen. We're not electing saints, and bare-knuckle attacks happen.

You see more nastiness from Obama's side than Clinton's. I see just the opposite. Both views are somewhat legitimate; both are somewhat flawed.


No Way. No How. No McCain-Palin!
by Texas Gray Wolf on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:18:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 1)

Too much information.


by XoFalconXo on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:01:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Actually (none / 0)

I'm not saying speechmaking is unimportant to a President, but I am saying it's down the list of important qualities a bit.  Most of what makes a President either great or ineffective occurs behind closed doors.

You can learn how to give a great speech at school.  I'm pretty good at it myself.  I have a knack for voice modulation and timing, for reading the room, and I've had plenty of small crowds eating out of the palm of my hand even when speaking extemporaneously.

I don't think you'd want to elect me President.


by Trickster on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:06:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 2)

Thank you for your diary. I hope all of us, whether Clinton or Obama supporters, will read and/or listen to the entire speech. Most people, I suspect, will only hear the clips that the media chooses to play. To really understand the scope of it you need to read or hear the whole thing. So please share it with others, even if you ultimately plan to vote for Senator Clinton.


by Beekeeper on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 10:50:00 AM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 1)

excellent diary.


What would LBJ do?
by Socks The Cat on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 10:58:17 AM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 1)

One of the best diaries I have ever read on a political blog.

Many, many thanks.


by johnnygunn on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:01:59 AM EST

Wow, that was incredibly touching. (2.00 / 8)

And it stirred something in me -- probably due to similar experiences of racism in my family; but admittedly, never from my parents. Living in a city that's over 50% black, with a large (and growing) Hispanic population, I can attest to the devastating effects of "white flight". Not nearly as bad as your description of Detroit, but still terrible in places. Whites flee eastward at a remarkable pace, and when they go, stores and restaurants and entire malls die. Those areas become "ghettos" or ghost towns. African Americans still work and shop all over the city, and I've never known anyone to shy away or resent their presence; but still, you can tell the difference in the neighborhoods. AAs may work on the east side of town, but few live there.

I myself live in the most western part of mid-town -- in a heavily overlapping area which is better integrated than any other part of the city. And it's my favorite part of the city; the diversity makes it unique, and there's an odd sort of kinship among its residents. The poor are sprinkled amongst the rich -- the rich in this area are "old money" who just refuse to leave their homes, regardless of who moves in beside them. And white though I am, I'm pretty financially strapped. It's an odd part of town -- less than 5-10 miles away from a group of extremely "rough" neighborhoods -- and the soccer moms and private school kids have a lot of trouble understanding why the people who live here love it so much. But we do.

This diary is beautiful work. Highly rec'd.

by sricki on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:07:35 AM EST

Wonderful diary (2.00 / 3)

I lived in Albion, MI last year and was around much of the same kind of bitterness and resentment. Albion has a lot of interracial marriage by this point, however, And I think some of the inner Detroit suburbs like Romulus have undergone a similar sort of shift.

I don't think Michigan is as racially polarized as it was in the 1970s mostly because the next generation has grown up after white flight and now sees things in more class terms. But on the borders of 8 mile those tensions are still there. And Obama spoke to both those tensions - and the ways people are reaching beyond them - in ways nobody has ever done before.


by elrod on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:10:15 AM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (1.66 / 6)

Excellent diary!

Well, perhaps, now at the final hour, both Clinton and Obama supporters have realized that we are going to need each other, no matter who wins the nomination.  Let's have a fair, cordial, "fight" to the nomination, and then let's all get behind the candidate who gets the nomination.  Yes?


by PittsburghPete on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:12:49 AM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 2)

I agree.

Obama and Clinton are both agents of the change America needs so much.

After the primaries are over, everyone should do what they can to make sure that America has its first woman President or its first black President.


by liberalj on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:36:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

No sale (1.42 / 7)

"Yesterday Obama the man spoke about the obvious and the unspeakable. . ."

Obvious? yes; unspeakable? hardly. Everything Obama said has been said before, and better, by Bill Clinton, and others.

Wright was and is a racist. His church is a racist institution. End of story. Obama should have cut his ties with this institution, and his formal ties with Wright, long ago. He should have admitted his error for failing to do so, and apologized for this failure.

Instead, Obama:

(1) Made a long winded speech pointing out the obvious and not unspeakable facts that you mentioned;

(2) Brought up Ferraro in an obvious and totally unconvincing attempt to tar Hillary with the same brush that he has been tarred with;

(3) Despite his own 2 decade long participation in, and financial support of, a racist institution, had the "audacity" to lecture the rest of us about racism and suggest that, unless we vote for him, we are doomed to "racial stalemate;"

(4) Refused to repudiate Wright as a racist, even though he and his campaign has found "racism" in the most innocuous comments of Clinton supporters for the last 2 months, and sternly demanded that they repudiate the alleged racist every time;

(5) Hid behind the totally phony "family" dodge to excuse his refusal to repudiate Wright;

(6) Failed to explain how, even if Wright is "family" to him, that justifies belonging and contributing to Wright's racist church, naming Wright to his campaign committee, and his other formal ties to Wright; and

(7) Tried to have it both ways--to some African Americans, who agree with Wright, Obama is still on board; to the rest of the country, Obama has distanced himself from the most "controversial" of Wright's statements.

Obama did everything but address the real issue--which is not the history of racism in the US or how we move forward and away from that--but HIS, OBAMA'S, connections to a racist man and his racist church. Obama is the one who screwed up. He is the one who, through a 20 year failure to act, has allowed his message of post racial unity to be undermined by his membership in a racist institution.


by freemansfarm on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:32:11 AM EST

Your bigotry is showing (1.80 / 5)


Take your fear and shove it, it ain't workin' on us no more.
by Quicklund on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:49:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Your bigotry is showing (2.00 / 1)

WTF? MY bigotry? Do you have anything at all to back that up, or do specialize in totally unsupported conclusory and inflammatory accusations?


by freemansfarm on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:52:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Your bigotry is showing (2.00 / 1)

Your essential position is that when black people note that white people are often racist, it is black people that are being racist.

Notwithstanding the truth of the statement.

So by your own logic, because you called some black people racist, you are also racist.

Regardless of the truth of the statement.

It's your own logic. A solipsistic cycle of racism.


by Gimmeliberty on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:01:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Your bigotry is showing (1.00 / 1)

Nonsense. Wright is a racist. That is not even open to question. He thinks that white people created AIDS to hurt and kill Black people. Wright's church is racially segragagtionalist, separatist, and supremacist. These are just facts. It does not make me a "racist" for pointing this out. Your attempt at circular reasoning is absurd. Under your theory, no Black person could ever be a racist, no matter what they said about white people.

The whole thing is absolutely amazing. The prophet of post racialism is found to be a paying member of a racist instituion, run by a racist claimed by the prophet as his "spiritual advisor." Yet, if I, or anyone else, points out the hypocricy of this situation, and refuses to be put off by flowery rhetoric, unnecessary history lessons, self-valorization, and gross double standards, somehow, that makes us the racists.


by freemansfarm on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:50:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Did you really listen to Obama's speech? (2.00 / 1)

Or read the above diary?

Obama didn't call anyone a racist... People (like his Gran, Ferraro, Wright) can make racist remarks without being dyed in the wool racists all the time. It's nuanced, complex, real, and obviously completely over your head.

I would say thick head, but that would be inflammatory. I'm sure you're very smart. But not about this.


Moose Juice; debate without hate
by brit on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:26:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Did you really listen to Obama's speech? (1.50 / 2)

Classic Obama supporter argument: disagree with me and/or Obama and you are too stupid to get the nuance.

It's really funny here, as you are the one who doesn't understand the purpose of including Ferraro in the speech. I explain this "nuance" downthread, but here's hint: it wasn't to exonerate Ferraro from the charges of racism.

As to Obama "not calling anyone a racist," yes, now that his mentor is being called one, he's not levelling any new charges either. How "complex." How "completely over my head." Duh, the shoe is on the other foot NOW, so charges of racism are disfavored, if not ruled out entirely. But for the last two months, when it was to Obama's political advantage, charges of "racism" (often based on nothing at all) were being lobbed by Obama's wife, surrogates, and supporters on a daily basis at the Clintons and their supporters. Where was Obama and his nuance and complexities then? Sleeping?


by freemansfarm on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:37:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

This is great fun to watch (none / 0)

I wasn't asking you to agree. I was asking you to look beyond the binary categories of your thinking. I was asking you to separate a racist (of either colour) from people who make racist remarks.

For example: I'm convinced that Bill Clinton is not at all racist, but he can slip into racist remarks. So can everyone. Wright might fit in the same category.

Instead of actually considering this, you jump to conclusions, tie your thoughts up in knots (because they're not thoughts really, just cheap debating points) and then you jump to a conclusion, hanging yourself with your own rhetorical rope. I need argue no more with myself. I should have added to epithet 'thick' to head.


Moose Juice; debate without hate
by brit on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:52:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is great fun to watch (none / 0)

Instead of lecturing me about my failigs, why don't you apply some of your good advise to yourself?

Let's take the Bill Clinton example.When he made his arguably racist comment about Jesse Jackson and the SC primary, Obama's wife, his surrogates, and his supporters accused him of racism in no uncertain terms. Well, where was Obama then? Where was his concern for the "whole person?" Where was his vaunted "nuanced understanding" that a person can make a racist comment and not be a racist, or, even if he is a racist, he still might have other values and good attributes? Where was Obama and all that then? Nowhere to be seen. Why?

Because, obviously, at that time, the charges of racism were to Obama's political advantage. Now that charges of racism have been made against his mentor, they are not to his political advantage. So, now, and only now, such charges are to be closely examined, with all the extenuating and excusing circumstances, all the nuance, all the complexities to be given full play.

The double standard is glaringly obvious, but Obama supporters either can't or won't see it. Obama is a politician running for office. He is not the prophet of a post racial future. When playing the "race card" is to his advantage, he plays it; when saying "why can't we all get along" is to his advantage, he will say that instead. It's really not to hard to figure out. It requires no tying up in knots, no "cheap debating points," no jumping to conclusions.

You can insult me, but you can't prove me wrong.


by freemansfarm on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 03:05:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Howabout I prove you wrong... (none / 0)

...by quoting what he said about Ferraro, saying she was also a victim of these tensions? Obama also spoke about recent immigrants and white people who feel they are tarnished by racist accusations when asked to pay for affirmative action. He spoke clearly and eloquently about racial tension on BOTH SIDES.

You say he timed the speech because of the Wright affair. He had to. Dozens of people on this site said he had to. But that doesn't invalidate his analysis of racial tension.

And you really are boneheaded if you don't see the knots you're tying yourself up in with such vigour. On posts here you have accused Obama of

1. Adhering to racists and racist institutions
2. Being naively post racial

I think your reason is confounded because of your emotions. I don't know where all this anger comes from - especially given the mild and open minded nature of this diary. I don't even want to speculate. Hopefully others can see the irrationality and venom in your words


Moose Juice; debate without hate
by brit on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 03:16:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Howabout I prove you wrong... (none / 0)

Obama spoke eloquently about racism from "both sides" because he is now the one under seige for his relationship with a racist. When the Clinton campaign was being tarred for "racism" (most of it imaginary, by the way) Obama did not give a speech about looking at things from both sides, and needing to judge the whole person and context and nuance and complexities and so forth. No, from NH to a week ago, racism was racism, and was to be condemned tout courte. Repudiations were required, or the non-repudiator was herself a racist. It is only now, when the shoe is on the other foot, that Obama has discovered (or rediscovered) all of the extenuations, excuses, contextualities, and complexities of racism and racists. How convenient.

I have never accused Obama of being "naively post racial" or naively anything at all. Obama is a skilled politician. When it was necessary for him to play the race card, and be "the Black candidate," he did so, and did it well. Now that it is necessary for him to emphasize universalist, post racial themes (as damage control over the Wright affair), he does so and does that quite well too. Nothing naive about Obama at all. Quite the contrary, Obama is very sophisticated in varying his themes (or, one might say less charitably, contradicting himself) as the occasion demands.

As to other accusation, while it is clear that Obama himself is not a racist, his adherence to a racist and to a racist institution is now simply a matter of fact, not opinion.

And, finally, while I don't agree with anything you say, I appreciate that you meet my arguments with those of your own.


by freemansfarm on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 07:21:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Howabout I prove you wrong... (none / 0)

I can agree with you on his political astuteness. Perhaps we can also agree Obama is contradictory on his stance while playing, rather than calling it the race card, his own blackness.

He of course is mixed race, and has to try to keep two constituencies with him. This contradiction however is not a false pivoting or masquerade, it's a core part of his identity. And yes he uses it.

But don't underestimate what a difficult thing he has too navigate - being too black, not being black enough. And let us all remember it's the first time an non white American has got this close to nomination and a possible presidency. It's an unprecedented thing.

Thanks for ending on a note of respect. We may not agree with each other on most things, but it is good to remain civil in dispute.


Moose Juice; debate without hate
by brit on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 08:40:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Howabout I prove you wrong... (none / 0)

To me, the core of the issue is that Obama is the "Black candidate" when it is advantitous to be that (the Clintons are "racists," "white politicians" are trying to "bamboozle" you), and the post racial, why-can't-we-all-get-along, racists-are-people-too, candidate when that is to his favor.

I think it would have very little to do with his biracial heritage, if he would play it straight and consistently. If for example, when JJ Jr made the Katrina "tears" comment, Obama had said, "No, that is not what I am all about. Hillary Clinton is NOT a racist, she has worked for and with African Americans her whole political life, and I refuse to countenance anyone in my campaign saying or implying anything to the contrary. And, furthermore, while I understand that the hopes and dreams of many African Americans are riding on my candidacy (just as the hopes of many women are riding on Hillary's), I refuse to be the "Black candidate," I am the candidate for all the people. . . " And, if Obama had said similar things when any of the fake "racist" allegations against the Clintons had been raised by his wife, surrogates and supporters, then, now, I could take his "complexity," "nuance," "context," etc. defense of his relationship with Wright seriously.

Frankly, I don't think this is too much to ask. Obama has not been subjected to racism in the Democratic nomination process. That is to the credit of our party, and, to some extent, of our country, including the MSM. But Hillary has been subjected to extensive misogyny and chauvanism, from the MSM, but also, more disturbingly, from the so-called grassroots, netroots, "creative class" and "high information" voters." Yet she has never taken the low road. She has never played the "gender card." Unfortunately, the same cannot be said about Obama when it comes to the "race card."

Obama did not need to play this card to "navigate" anything. He did so to avail himself of an electoral advantage in the Deep South states where African Americans make up a large percentage of Democratic primary voters. He can't undo this now. Nor can he now, when the chickens have come home to roost (as it were), re-claim the mantle of the post racial candidate. He turned himself into the "Black candidate," with his campaign crying "racism" at every turn like the little boy who cried "wolf." Now he is stuck with it. Just like he is stuck with the strict definition of "racism" and guilt by association with racism that he and his campaign endorsed before, and which is now being applied to him. Sorry, Barrack, but turnabout IS fair play.

Finally, let me say that I appreciate your last paragraph, and believe there is no reason why our exchanges need be anything but civil and respectful.


by freemansfarm on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 09:21:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

and where is clinton now? (none / 0)


BHO/HRC 08
by omar little on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 01:55:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: and where is clinton now? (none / 0)

Where should he be? Rushing to Obama's and Wright's defense?


by freemansfarm on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 02:17:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is great fun to watch (none / 0)

You compared Clinton and Wright? You've lost all credibility.

Your man's campaign is collapsing because he showed a lack of character by not denouncing evil comments completely and made excuses for Wright's unacceptable words.


by JFK464 on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:23:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No sale (1.83 / 6)

Such an utter failure, no, refusal to see the issue on your part is astounding.  Please save your spiteful remarks for people who deserve them.

This diary was a brave and thoughtful diary, and your comment to it was not only ignorant but actually appalling in it's vindictiveness.


Hillary Clinton is not a monster,....as far as I know.. We are all Hussein JUNIOR.. ///.. FEINGOLD/BOXER 2016
by Its Like Herding Cats on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:54:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No sale (1.50 / 2)

Oh, boo hoo. I said nothing to insult the diarist. I simply disagree with his conculsion that Obama said anything new or "unspeakable."


by freemansfarm on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:56:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No sale (1.66 / 3)

Thank you once again, for proving my point.

Such an utter failure, no, refusal to see the issue on your part is astounding


Hillary Clinton is not a monster,....as far as I know.. We are all Hussein JUNIOR.. ///.. FEINGOLD/BOXER 2016
by Its Like Herding Cats on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:17:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No sale (none / 0)

Whatever. I responded to the diary in a reasonable manner. I disagree with the diarist's conclusions and presented a substantive critique of Obama's speech. Stop quoting your own posts and either respond in kind or let it go. But, please, spare me anymore of your faux outrage. I have already had a bellyful of it from Obama and his supporters.


by freemansfarm on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:53:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No sale (2.00 / 2)

I do not have a problem with your position on Obama...however, the manner in which you display it is nowhere near reasonable. I doubt you even listened to the speech with anything approaching an objective ear and I doubt Obama could do ANYTHING other than drop out of the race that you would approve of.

Am I outraged? I am barely even surprised.


Oh Mammy Dear, we're all mad over here livin' in America
by JDF on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:13:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No sale (none / 0)

What is unreasonable in what I have said? I presented a point by point critique of his speech. I did not call him names.

And, whatever I say, if it is critical of Obama and his speech, there will be those who say I am not being "objective." Do you not see what an empty and meaningless argument this is? I can say this just as easily about Obama supporters who are gushing over the speech. It's a logical fallacy called "poisoning the well." Attack my critique head on, but don't attack my motives, as they are irrelevant anyway.


by freemansfarm on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:22:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What critique? (none / 0)


Moose Juice; debate without hate
by brit on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:28:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What critique? (none / 0)

For your convenience, I numbered them 1 through 7 in my first post on this thread.


by freemansfarm on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:45:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What critique? (2.00 / 1)

Numbers do not a critique make.


Moose Juice; debate without hate
by brit on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:56:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What critique? (none / 0)

One, unique number precedes each individual critique, and, as I said, provides a convenient way for you to locate and keep discrete the various critiques.

Perhaps, now that you seem to have spotted the numbers, you might want to read the critiques and present whatever objections to them that you have. Or, on the other hand, we can just keep up this snide back and forth until one of us gets tired of it.


by freemansfarm on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 07:25:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

nothing he could have said (2.00 / 2)

or done would have pleased you. You just want to him disappear.

And I love the "said before argument". But that tally everything anyone could ever say has to be unique. Hell probably using the same alphabet is problem, cause you know its been used before.


-- be excellent to each other
by kindthoughts on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:18:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: nothing he could have said (none / 0)

And anything he said, no matter how trite or repetitive, would have been hailed by his supporters and the MSM as profound. Your accusation concerning my presuppositions is worth nothing, and applies just as much to any Obama supporter as it does to me.

And, yes, repetetiveness is a fair criticism of a speech that is being hailed as Lincolnesque and, so we have been told, will be read in the history books 50 years from now.

Obama trod the well worn path of Clinton and others in an attempt to make a "big speech" and divert attention from the real issue: his association with racists and racist institutions.


by freemansfarm on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:58:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Racist institutions? (2.00 / 1)

Name them...

His church?
Harvard?
The Senate?
The Democrat Party?

Stand the world on it's head, call black white, and white black, where did you pull that assertion from? You claim to write a critique, and your end up mouthing arrant nonsense.

This diary, from a Hillary supporter, makes you look like a small minded republican


Moose Juice; debate without hate
by brit on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:32:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Racist institutions? (none / 0)

His church, obviously. Sorry about the misplaced pluraliztion. I guess that invalidates everything
I wrote and makes me a Republican.
by freemansfarm on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:47:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

A type doesn't invalidate your argument.. (2.00 / 2)

...but hyperbole might. From what I've heard the church IS predominantly black. Obviously there are some sermons preached there which insult other people. But to then conclude it's a 'racist' institution. I mean - does that make an all black basketball team racist?

I think you've gone too far, so far that you sound like a (far right) republican in this one instance. I'm not accusing you of being one, I'm accusing you of sounding like one, which is different, and also I think the main point of Obama's speech


Moose Juice; debate without hate
by brit on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 03:00:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A type doesn't invalidate your argument.. (none / 0)

The church is not merely
"predominantly Black," is  racially segregationalist, separatist, and supremacist. It is a racist church.
by freemansfarm on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 07:28:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Now your prejudice is showing (none / 0)

Moments of reason, destroyed by unsupported opinion. Despite the incendiary biblical wrath Jeremiah Wright has heaped on the US, the Clinton campaign, and 'rich white folks', I have read nothing and seen nothing that indicates that the whole Trinity United Church of Christ is racists, separatist, segregationalist. From the church's website: The Pastor as well as the membership of Trinity United Church of Christ is committed to a 10-point Vision: 1. A congregation committed to ADORATION. 2. A congregation preaching SALVATION. 3. A congregation actively seeking RECONCILIATION. 4. A congregation with a non-negotiable COMMITMENT TO AFRICA. 5. A congregation committed to BIBLICAL EDUCATION. 6. A congregation committed to CULTURAL EDUCATION. 7. A congregation committed to the HISTORICAL EDUCATION OF AFRICAN PEOPLE IN DIASPORA. 8. A congregation committed to LIBERATION. 9. A congregation committed to RESTORATION. 10. A congregation working towards ECONOMIC PARITY. Where is the racist statement in that? Is a demand for justice racist? No doubt the church is predominantly black - didn't Obama say himself that Sunday mornings are one of the most segregated moments in American life. But to then say that its policies are racist... That is inflammatory. In the UK it would be libellous and defamatory without recourse to proof. And to compare it to a government controlled and officially sanctioned policy like segregation, displays a complete blindness to power, and the power of majorities. I know Bosnia quite well. There were racist Serbs, Croats and Bosnians - but the Serbs held the guns. You cannot equate racist feelings with racist power structures and institutions. You're smart. You know that. And still you willingly push this right wing talking point about Obama having racist connections. You're too smart for that. I'm tempted to think this all just character assassination. If it's just slime, I don't want to be pulled any more into this mud pit
Moose Juice; debate without hate
by brit on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 08:57:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Now your prejudice is showing (none / 0)

Wright is clearly a racist. That is not even open for debate.

The church is racially segregationalist, separatist, and suprematist. So, it too is clearly racist. Its home page has been recently "cleansed" of some of the more glaringly obvious racist statements, but, if you dig around, you can find them. Also, any church that has Wright as its pastor for decades and allows him to say things like white people created AIDS to give it Black people so as to harm and kill them is per se racist, whatever it might say on its website.


by freemansfarm on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 09:25:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No more slime (none / 0)

You provide no links to your assertions about the church. I think I win that one. And even your comments about one member of that church are incorrect. Jeremiah Wright DID NOT SAY white people infected the African American population with AIDS - he said the Government did. It's a crazy form of conspiracy theory, like the idea that the CIA deliberately imported heroine and crack into Black communities, but it's clearly not racist.

The only potentially racist comment I have seen cited, despite the whole media trawling through every videotape and sermon, is the line about 'rich white folks'. Even that is tempered by a classic underdog complaint about the rich, which was Edwardes stock in trade and hardly explosive.

No evidence. No finesse. No argument.


Moose Juice; debate without hate
by brit on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 09:35:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No more slime (none / 0)

I don't need to provide links. It's too late in the thread, and all the info is out there if you want to take the trouble to look for it. I'm not going to do it for you. If you think that means you "win," good for you. But, if you think Wright employs the same "stock in trade" as Edwards, you need to re-examine your data.

In any event, you have no answer to the argument that any institution that allows Wright to be its top person for decades is per se racist. As for the AIDS thing, Wright has made it quite clear that he thinks that "white people" run the US government. So, in his mind, the government and white people are synonimous.

At some level, I have a hard time believing we are even having this conversation. Listen to what you are saying. Wright is not a racist because he believes in a nutjob, absurd, preposterous conspiracy theory implicating the government, and not "white people" as such. That's where you're gonna hang your hat? That's the hill you want to die defending? The guy has long since gone off the deep end, no matter how you cut it. If it wasn't for the fact that Obama claims this whackjob as his "spiritual advisor," you, and everyone else here, would hold Wright in the same contempt as Hagee and Falwell are held in.

The double standards and double talk, the absolute refusal to look at reality square in the face, when it comes to Obama astounds me.


by freemansfarm on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 10:16:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

We're talking about Wright.. (none / 0)

...and whether he's a dyed in the wool racist. No double standards here, mate. I don't think Ferraro is a dyed in the wool racist either. Get over yourself. And I've looked and can't find anything 'racist' about that church. So I win on points


Moose Juice; debate without hate
by brit on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 10:56:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: We're talking about Wright.. (none / 0)

The church is all about "Black nationalism" and "Black christianity." It is racist on its face. If you can't see that, you are not looking very hard. And, once again, you have no answer to my argument that any institution that has a racist in charge for decades cannot help but be racist itself. Nor for the argument that Wright preached his racist bile fromt the pulpit of this church. Again, if you can't or won't see this and, therefore, you think you "win," good for you. Maybe you need to "get over" looking at these things in terms of winning and losing.

I couldn't care less what you or Obama think about Ferraro. Bringing her up is a dodge, an equivocation, and an attempt to change the subject. She has nothing to do with it. She is not Hillary's "spiritual advisor," Hillary did not dedicate her book to her, or quote her for its title, or send her child to listen to her every week.

Wright is clearly an out and out racist. I simply refuse to debate this point with you any further. Again, if you think this means you "win," then enjoy your "victory."


by freemansfarm on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:07:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Unsubstantiated assertions = lies (none / 0)

I see you've given up on this debate, basically because you can't prove Trinity is a supremacist, racist, segregationalist church. That's because it isn't true. Obama addressed this, in the absence of all evidence, SMEAR on ABC a couple of days ago.

link: http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/Vote2008 /Story?id=4480133&page=2

MORAN: Well, let me press you on that. If I went to a church where white supremacy was preached, what would you think of me?

OBAMA: Well, but, see, I disagree with you, though, Terry. That's not what's preached at Trinity. And that, I think, that is an easy equivalence that is not at all what is taking place there.

If you look at the sermons, even the most offensive ones that are at issue, he is condemning white racism, as he defines it, but he is not condemning the white race. He is not suggesting that blacks are superior. What he's saying is, is that this -- that white racism is endemic in the society.

Now, that's something that I disagree with and I said in this speech today. And it's reflective of, I think, an anger and bitterness that is part of the black community's experience. It is a legacy of our past that isn't going away anytime soon. But in each successive generation, it hopefully lessens its grip. "

Get back to me when you've finished lying.

I won't hold my breath.


Moose Juice; debate without hate
by brit on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:58:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Unsubstantiated assertions = lies (none / 0)

Wright is a crackpot racist who thinks white people invented AIDS to infect people of color  as a deliberate  act of genocide. The spurious invention of "crimes" and the false attribution of them to a particular race is one of the hallmarks of racism. Wright is the founder and the decades long pastor of the church in question.

You can go on and on until the cows come home about how the church isn't racist because (1) it doesn't say on its website "We Are a Racist Church," and (2) because Obama says so. You find that persuasive. I find the facts listed above to be more so. That doesn't make me a "liar." It makes you either an Obama stooge who will defend the indefensible or a dupe.

Have a nice day.


by freemansfarm on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 05:27:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No sale (2.00 / 2)

If such a speech had been made before, the editorial boards of virtually every newspaper, most political columnists, and a majority of pundits wouldn't be saying exactly the opposite. The speechwriter of one of the Clinton speeches you reference wouldn't be saying the opposite.

Obama's speech went much farther than Clinton's speeches, as good as they were (and they were good). He delved much deeper into the real issues. There's virtual unanimity on that point, except from some people who for some reason all seem to be either Clinton die-hards or McCain supporters.

Obama was very gracious to Ferraro. I don't know how anyone could see what he said as an attack; it was as clearly as possible a repudiation of the idea that Ferraro is a deep-seated racist. It was gracious and well beyond what he needed to do.

I disagree categorically with the rest of your points. I think Obama did an excellent job of pointing out the complexities of any relationship. He made it clear that the Wright of the tapes is not the Wright he knew personally, and that the real Wright is not a racist nor full of hatred. He (and many others) have made it extremely clear that TUCC is not a racist institution. He's made it abundantly clear that he rejects and repudiates Wright's statements. Etc, etc.

You see what you want to see. I can't make you see it any differently. It's all very clear in the speech; it's easy to find point-by-point Obama doing exactly the things you don't see him doing.

But Ferraro is enough to prove the point. Obama was gracious and forgiving to someone who absolutely and unquestionably, in by far the least ambiguous example from this campaign, used the race card. That you can in any way see it as an attack makes it clear that you didn't see the speech Obama gave, you saw the speech you believe he gave.

The one he actually did give is quite a bit better.


No Way. No How. No McCain-Palin!
by Texas Gray Wolf on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:29:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No sale (1.00 / 1)

The MSM would have hailed Obama if he had drooled on himself. His supporters applaud him for blowing his nose. So, all of their acclaim proves nothing.

The whole speech was simply an attempt to divert attention from the real issue, Obama's connection to a racist and his membership in a racist (racially segregated, separatist, and supremacist) church. And, despite what you claim, it has all been said before, and better, anyway.

As for Ferraro, you are, in the argot of Obama supporters, missing the "nuance" (or, should I say, the subterfuge). Why did he bring her up at all? What does she have to do with Wright? Nothing. But she is associated with Hillary, so, by mentioning her, Obama was dragging Hillary into the speech, and implying that she has a similar problem to his. But she doesn't. Ferraro is not Hillary's mentor. And Ferraro made one arguably racist comment; she hasn't made the creation and sustaining of a racist institution her life's work. There is simply no equivalence here at all. But, by lumping Ferraro in, Obama sends out the message that there is. Your are naive if you don't understand that.

As for the "complexities" of Wright, why didn't Obama concern himself with the "complexities" when his wife and his surrogates were accusing  the Clintons and their supporters (Cuomo, Shaheen, Bob Kerry, etc.) of racism
(and I might add, with little or no evidence). No complexities then, no. No grand, flowery speeches recounting the history of racism, about judging people in their totality, about not seeing only the worst in people, about not repudiating the whole person for one flaw. No, at that time, when it was useful in the heavily African American electorate in the Deep South states, any statement made by anyone in favor of Clinton was "racist," and Hillary had better repudiate that person root and branch, and be quick about it, or she herself was a "racist" too.  Now, that there aren't anymore such states, and that Obama is on the other side of racist by association accusations, it's suddenly all about post racialism again.

Obama is as transparent as glass and as phony as a three dollar bill. But, you are the one who can't see what's right in front of you.


by freemansfarm on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:16:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No sale (2.00 / 1)

He brought her up to be gracious to her and attempt to heal division. You are both closed to logic and devoid in reading comprehension if you think otherwise. He easily could have slapped at her, or dismissed her as someone from another era with racist views, or ascribed other motives to her. He explicitly stated she didn't have racist views. So, by your odd version of logic, if she were tied to Clinton, that would mean that he said that Clinton didn't have racist views. Isn't that a good thing for him to say?

The MSM has been extremely harsh on Obama the past month. You might be correct in claiming the MSM was biased against Clinton for the first month or so of 2008, and sporadically during 2007, but since mid-February it's swung around entirely the other way. The press slammed Obama for holding rallies, echoing Clinton's line; it started using phrases like cult-like; it went entirely nuts on the NAFTAgate "issue", buying into it completely, even though it turns out to have been entirely a fabrication. It jumped all over Power.

Three days before the speech, the MSM was gleefully trumpeting that it was over for Obama.

The day before it, they were all describing as make-or-break, with their implied emphasis on break.

I can't find any reason at all for the idea that they were just waiting to praise it. If anything, I think it was dragged out of them kicking and screaming.

And I find this particularly funny:

The whole speech was simply an attempt to divert attention from the real issue

The whole Wright "issue" is an attempt to divert attention from the real issues. It was clear before the speech that Obama's not a racist or a bigot or anything of the sort. It was clear before it that TUCC is not a racist church. That information's been out there for months. Anyone with any inclination to do even basic research knew that (yes, I'm not including low information voters, who are the only people this "issue" ever mattered to).

It's obvious that Obama loves America. It's obvious that he's not a (reverse-)racist. He's written two books which get deep into what he believes. He's covered race issues before, with other well-done speeches (less comprehensive than yesterday's).

All this has done is keep the debate on yet another piece of nonsense that has nothing to do with the war, or the economy, or health care, or the environment, or corruption and ethics reform, or corporatism, or taxes, or anything else that's actually a real issue that really matters to the lives of real people.

I'm sure you're honest in seeing the race card playing to be one-sided. That's fine. I'm just as honest in seeing it to have been anything but one-sided. There are occasions where an Obama surrogate said things that may (or may not) have been playing the race care intentionally. There occasions where Clinton surrogates who are not named Ferraro have done similar things.

Here in my state, we had two different Clinton surrogates busily telling us that Latinos will "never vote for blacks" because "blacks never do anything to help Latinos". Really? Tell that to a number of black state officials who got large number of votes from Latino constituencies. It was a clear attempt to play the race card with Latino voters and play on real or perceived resentments between the two groups. There was never an apology for this; Clinton dismissed it as just a "historic fact" (interestingly enough, almost the same dismissal used for the ridiculous charge that Obama's campaign was "just like Ken Starr" in demanding exactly the same thing that Clinton demanded of Lazio).

So I see the race card being played in more places and more ways than you do, and I don't find it at all convincing that there weren't deliberate attempts made to win over white voters in Virginia, in South Carolina, in Mississippi, and ongoing in Pennsylvania on the basis of resentment and bigotry against "the black candidate". We're already hearing another attempt at this, with the ridiculous spin that Obama's speech yesterday somehow now makes him "the black candidate". A speech in which he very much rejected the idea of being "the black candidate" and, indeed, the entire notion of there being such a thing. But if Obama can be marginalized as being "the black candidate", guess who wins? In this case I'm not blaming the Clinton campaign nor Clinton for it; I don't know where the spin started, but it's certainly all through the blogs. And it's patently ridiculous.


No Way. No How. No McCain-Palin!
by Texas Gray Wolf on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 04:08:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No sale (none / 0)

You are childishly naive if you don't understand why Obama brought up Ferraro. He had no reason to, except to drag Hillary into the equation. If he had wanted to be "gracious" to her, he could have, in a one sentence statement or answer, in a news conference separate from The Grand Speech, have absolved or forgiven her for her comment. But Ferraro, in Obama's speech, played the role of Hillary's Wright. And, by being "gracious" to her, Obama was calling for a "gracious" response to Wright. Yes, this, as you say, exhonerates Hillary, but the important thing, to Obama, is that it also exhonerates himself, and it equates him and Hillary on this issue. But, as already pointed out, Ferraro is no Wright, and her relationship with Hillary is nothing like Wright's relationship with Obama. Obama skillfully (notice the "nuance") created a false equivalence between himself and Hillary when it comes to having a close relationship with a racist. Yes, he was "gracious" to all and exonerated everyone, including, most importantly, himself.

But that was not his call to make. Ferraro and Hillary have nothing to do with his 20 year relationship with a racist, which he did not repudiate or apologize for.

The MSM has kissed Obama's butt from the get go. What you call harsh treatment over the last month is a late-in-the-day attempt by the media to create at least the impression of some kind of equal treatmentof the two candidates. In addition, the media loves a good performer (like Obama or Reagan) and like to create the false drama of saying that one of them has to hit a "home run" or else, and then, lo and behold, reporting that he has hit said home run. Throw in some flowery rhetoric and an obvious attempt at being "historic" and the rave reviews were a foreordained conclusion. I doubt the public, or history, will think the Great Speech is such a big deal.

It's odd that you find it "funny" that I wrote that the whole speech was an attempt to avoid the real issue (Obama's relationship with a racist, since that's exactly what it was. Obama gave the speech specifically in response to this scandal. How can you possibly maintain otherwise? While you may think it overblown or even completely false, the Wright issue was clearly what motivated the speech. Nobody was calling on Obama to prevent his grand thesis on the history, present state, and future of race relations in the US, rather, they were calling on him to explain his close ties to Wright. That was the issue, and that is what dodged with his "family" nonsense, his "complexity" double standard, his dragging in of Ferraro (and therefore Hillary), his flowery rhetoric, his granny, and his self valorization.

As for Wright and his church, contrary to what you say, they are both clearly racist. Wright thinks white people invented AIDS and gave it to Black people to hurt and kill them. His church preaches Black separatism and supremacy. While it is true that all or most of this was already out there in written form, some people (and the media) need audio-visual evidence, like the Wright YouTube snippets, to make something real.

As for the "race card," whether Clinton has played it or not (and I say not), makes no difference to my argument that Obama was happy to play it from NH on, and to profit from allegations of racism against Clinton and her camp infinitely more baseless than the claim against Wright and his church. Obama had no concern for nuance, complexity, judging the whole person, history, etc., etc., when the Clintons and their supporters were being tarred by Obama, his wife, his surrogates, and supporters as racists. It is only now, when Obama's mentor is on the other end of allegations of racism, that he raises all of these extenuating, excusing, minimizing, and contextualizing concerns. But you can't see the hypocracy of that. .

I never said Obama was a racist, or that he doesn't love the US. So please don't put words in my mouth. And, by the way, thanks for the "low information voter" dig, it really helps built your case.

Finally, let me say that I find arguing with Obama voters to be extremely frustrating. They are so in love with their candidate that they find it impossible to accept that he might have ulterior, political motives for what he says and does. I'm not saying that Obama is a monster, or a racist. I'm saying that he is a politician running for office. He does not have utopian motives when he gives a speech. This particular speech was designed as damage control for the Wright issue. Maybe it worked, maybe it didn't. But it will not bring about a post racial utopia, whatever Obama supporters might think.


by freemansfarm on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 07:04:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I posted this (none / 0)

on my blog. I hope that's OK. I gave you credit. Brilliant.

http://noratings.blogspot.com/


by JFK464 on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:34:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I posted this (none / 0)

Wow, thank you so much. Sure it's OK with me.


by freemansfarm on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:38:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No sale (none / 0)

I have been trying to find other speeches on this issue.  You mentioned that Bill Clinton gave one on this topic.  Could you give me a reference point so I can look it up?  Thanks.


by smoker1 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 05:00:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No sale (none / 0)

Here is the speech Clinton gave in 1995 on the occasion of the Million Man March:

http://www.afn.org/~dks/race/clinton-e6. html


by freemansfarm on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 05:19:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No sale (none / 0)

Thank you.


by smoker1 on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 02:17:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No sale (none / 0)

You're welcome.


by freemansfarm on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 03:44:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Fabulous diary (2.00 / 3)

Instrospection and self-honesty can be hard, even to those inclined to be open-minded.  Thanks for writing this powerful diary.  And bless you for being a thinking, caring person.  I lift my coffee cup in salute.


Take your fear and shove it, it ain't workin' on us no more.
by Quicklund on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:47:43 AM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 2)

What a compelling diary, well written, thoughtful and full of the sentiment of true progressive belief.  Thank you for sharing your experiences with us.  It is always a good thing to know your neighbor.

There is always a reason why we are where we are, and there is always a way forward out of the morass.  Some see the path and ignore it, some consider it and remain motionless, others condemn it outright. The people who want to find their way out, take bold steps and begin the journey.  It may not take us all the way to our destination, but it takes us away from the place we were stuck.


Hillary Clinton is not a monster,....as far as I know.. We are all Hussein JUNIOR.. ///.. FEINGOLD/BOXER 2016
by Its Like Herding Cats on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:49:42 AM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (1.14 / 7)

Yes, we need a man who willfully maintained a 20 year relationship with a racist, who donated money to and belonged to a racist institution for decades, to lead us on the "path" out of the "morass" of racism.

What a crock! Flowery language does not make Obama persuasive, but at least he is good at it. In your case, however, the lack of content is matched by the lack of felicity.


by freemansfarm on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:59:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 3)

Thank you for proving my point that some people are just plain stuck.  The sagacity you displayed in responding to my comment was sadly misplaced, as you see, I was commenting on the experience and sentiment of the author of this diary, not Obama, not Clinton and not Rev. Wright.

At least I was able to comprehend the diary and comment I was responding to, what's your excuse?


Hillary Clinton is not a monster,....as far as I know.. We are all Hussein JUNIOR.. ///.. FEINGOLD/BOXER 2016
by Its Like Herding Cats on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:13:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 1)

Labeling the entire church and its works as a "racist institution" is both unfair and inappropriate. However, that is your opinion. On the other hand, that last line of yours is not even an opinion, it's just a rude, insulting comment directed at the commenter.


by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:19:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (none / 0)

I don't think that there is any evidence of it being a "racist church", or that Wright is a "racist" per se.

He is definitely tapping into some anger over the racism that he/our people has/do/will experience, and maybe going over the line on occasion, but that is an awfully broad brush stroke there, friend.


Hell yeah we did.
by Darknesse on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:53:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What about Wright's congregation? (2.00 / 1)

I'm appalled by Wright's comments on the pulpit, but  probably more surprised by the reaction of the congregation present in his church.

Everyone has got an "uncle" like this, but no family gives him a standing ovation when this uncle says really stupid things.

It seems to me that in examining this issue, we must also address why it's OK in black company, even in a church setting, to diss America (or what America has become) with such venom.  The chasm between the races, it seems to me, isn't only because whites are racist, or that Latinos don't like blacks, or Jews don't trust blacks (stereotypes of course, but rooted in anecdotal evidence).  It may also be because the America that the African-American community sees is no longer the America of promise, of opportunity, of justice.

On the other hand, perhaps Wright's congregation are just all nuts.


by Sieglinde on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:50:03 AM EST

Re: What about Wright's congregation? (none / 0)

I think you're exactly right, except that you say "no longer", while I think for many of them, the America that the African-American community sees has never been the America of promise, of opportunity, of justice. That's a lot of what Obama's speech was out.

I don't think the venom is directed at America, despite Wright's specific language. I think it's directed at American hypocrisy. It's directed at people who see this as the greatest country in the world (which in potential it may well be, and even in reality it's pretty good -- but not for everyone) and don't see that for some black people it's not all that great. It's directed at the ineffective government response to Katrina (which, remember, hurt a lot of white people too, but is perceived as being almost directed at black people, largely because so many things really have been). It's directed at a society in which we talk of equal rights, but people cross streets to avoid black people habitually, where anyone who wants to make up a crime blames it on a black person. None of that is right either, even if there's a statistical basis for the stereotypes behind them.

I'm not much on white guilt -- I didn't do any of that, my parents didn't, theirs didn't, and theirs didn't either. But I also acknowledge that, collectively, it's been done. There are reasons that blacks are highly overrepresented in prisons, and it's not because they're in any way morally inferior. It's because of poverty and culture, and also because the justice system isn't entirely colorblind.

It's not about Wright's congregation; that just marginalizes a real problem (I realize you were joking, mind you). It's a lot of black churches, all over the place.

And it's missing the point, and trivializing the issues, to just say they're a bunch of (reverse-)racist churches or people. They're not. There are very legitimate observations being made.

Yes, we've come a long way. Obama acknowledges that in a lot of places. But we've still got a long ways to go. Things can, should, and need to get a lot better.

But at least maybe the wounds are open and can stop festering a bit. Black people can look at white people and get a sense that maybe there's a little understanding, a little less condemnation and stereotyping, and be less angry at individuals who aren't themselves the cause of the problem. White people can look at black people and understand that some of the anger is legitimate, and that it's not directed at them.


No Way. No How. No McCain-Palin!
by Texas Gray Wolf on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:48:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What about Wright's congregation? (2.00 / 0)

it is okay to "diss America" because there is a lot about America that people would have good reason to diss. It is also okay because, thankfully, one of the things about American that there is no good reason to diss is the first amendment.

Maybe I am just unpatriotic, but in my mind (and in the minds of most others) we are not there yet and blindly singing the praises of this country doesn't get us there.

Did Wright cross the line? Of course he did. But sometimes that is what we all do in the heat of the moment when we get emotional and are trying to make a point.


Oh Mammy Dear, we're all mad over here livin' in America
by JDF on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:21:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (1.80 / 5)

Interesting diary. But I have a completely different reaction.

I too grew up with a parent making racist remarks. In my case it was my mother who is still alive and still making them.

Now I am in my fifties and have my entire life been a liberal activist. I have enthusiatically defended such liberal policies as affirmative action hiring policies, preferential admissions to colleges, universities, law schools, medical schools, welfare programs, diversity education programs and the like. I have given a large part of my life to working for and trying to elect liberals who shared these views to office.

Now all this time my mother has not changed her views. She is my mother and I love her but I do not compromise my principals even for my mother. So whenever she has made any racially derisive remark I have ALWAYS corrected her. I do this because we have a huge family and I am never with her without at least six or more other family members, mostly young kids being present. I don't want them to believe that gramdma's views on race are to be accepted without question.

At work I have engaged my fellow workers in discussions concerning the advantages blacks get in promotion and hiring decisions always trying to defend them in general but not trying to defend any specific choice if we all know the person was truly not really qualified for the job but was promoted/hired to meet a quota. It is not easy but I always tried my best. I do not think I ever changed a single mind.

The price I paid for all of this was a lot of hard feelings between family members, a lot of scorn heaped upon me by co-workers as a bleeding heart liberal and some romances that ended due to political disagreement.

In short, I am not a racist and I do not tolerate racism.

So now I find out that for the last twenty years as I am arguing with my mother trying to get her to soften her views Barack Obama has been sitting in church listening to his close friend and pastor demean white people and did NOTHING.

I am honestly outraged. I feel like I've been stabbed in the back.


by Caliman on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:01:54 PM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 1)

I honestly don't get all of this outrage. If you are THAT outraged by the racism at TUCC, then it should be very easy for you to pull up so quotes.

Show me, please, the exact phrases and passages that fuel your outrage and that prove that Wright, and the entire congregation of TUCC, are racist.


www.thingsyoungerthanmccain.com
by LandStander on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:13:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 2)

This is exactly my question. What was so racist about Reverend Wright's remarks?

I mean, this is the closest that I could find: "We are deeply involved in the importing of drugs, the exporting of guns and the training of professional killers. ... We believe in white supremacy and black inferiority and believe it more than we believe in God. ... We conducted radiation experiments on our own people. ... We care nothing about human life if the ends justify the means.
And ... And ... And! God! Has got! To be sick! Of this sh*t!"

"Fact number one: We've got more black men in prison than there are in college. ... Fact number two: Racism is how this country was founded and how this country is still run."

Now, frankly, this stuff is pretty clearly true, if stated a bit bombastically. The United States is a massively racist country.

And if you don't believe that's true, then why the hell did you devote your life, as you say, to fighting racism?


by Gimmeliberty on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:27:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

erm, (1.00 / 1)

but you still did not throw your mother under the proverbial "bus", right?


-- be excellent to each other
by kindthoughts on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:21:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: erm, (1.25 / 4)

One does not pick ones parents. So no I would never disown my mother.

But one is rightly judged by the company they keep. Obama has shown poor judgement in his choice of pastors to befriend. If he was not asking for our votes and running for president I would not feel so angered at him.

But while I have been challenging white racism all my life he has been embracing black racism.

And now he expects my vote?

Barack Obama should have walked away from that church twenty years ago and found another church where he could worship God. I would have respected that. He should have fired Jesse Jackson Jr when he played the race card on Hillary Clinton. I would have respected that.

But giving a speech is not enough. Not when I know what it takes to actually walk the walk instead of just talking the talk on racial matters.

I don't expect to change any minds but that is my opinion and I feel so betrayed I don't think I could ever support or vote for him now.


by Caliman on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:37:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

ok (none / 0)

About the ever voting for him (in case he is teh nominee), I'd like you to remind you about Hater like Hagee who McCain sought out for endorsements.


-- be excellent to each other
by kindthoughts on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:04:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: erm, (2.00 / 3)

Obama has been talking about his grandmother for years. The story is in his first book, which was published 13 years ago.  So the idea that he brought this out all of a sudden is just not true.

For a lot of people, including the diarist and me, his discussion of his white grandmother really touched something inside of ourselves.

I hear you don't have the same response, but please respect that other people view the remark in very, very terms than you do.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:39:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: erm, (1.00 / 1)

Good lord, that woman has been taking a beating for years!  I feel sorry for her.

Has Obama himself NEVER had a racist (or sexist or homophobic or...) thought?  Could he not have used HIMSELF as the example?  Shee-it.


by Montague on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:40:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

His solutions aren't yours. (2.00 / 1)

How can you say that Obama has done nothing, when he has taken such careful note of the issue and brought it up at a national (perhaps world) stage and made even most of his biggest detractors step back and say, "the man has a point?"

How can you say that Obama has done nothing, when he has worked for years to defend people's Constitutional rights and fight poverty, which he believes are at the core of the race issue?

How can you say that he has done nothing, when he has, for 17 years, set a sterling counter-example in the TUCC of a leader who does not have such racist views as the pastor?

Obama does not share your beliefs that affirmative action and minority preferential college placement are the keys to solving the problem.  He does not believe what you believe, even though he is on the same side of the issue in wanting equality.  Interestingly enough, it's possible for people with different views to work together, as he did with Wright.  As he will with you and people like you, if you give him a chance.

Your family situation is a very poignant example of how the original sin of racism continues to affect us, and I appreciate how you might feel betrayed... but I don't think that you were.


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:13:48 PM EST

(bah) (none / 0)

(that was a response to Caliman)


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:14:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: His solutions aren't yours. (1.00 / 1)

He did nothing to confront the black racism promoted by his friend and pastor. He actually supported it by taking his family there and by substantial monetary donations over the years.

I know how I have reacted when I hear racism. I cannot accept someone who would willingly endorse those views for twenty years and only condemn them when it is politically required.

That is not a man of principal, in my opinion.


by Caliman on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:47:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: His solutions aren't yours. (2.00 / 2)

What part of "he didn't express those views to me in private, nor did I hear them in a sermon" didn't you comprehend?

He says, and I have to give him the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise, that he had a relationship with a pastor in which he didn't agree with everything that was said.  This has been stated over and over again.

The YouTube stuff was cherry picked as the worst in his 30+ year.  It wasn't every Sunday.

It's Christian to embrace the sinner, not the sin.  If he had given up on his faith because one man was imperfect, he wouldn't be so much a man of principle as you seem to suggest.


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:35:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: His solutions aren't yours. (none / 0)

Obama is lying if he says he was unaware of what his pastor was saying.


by Caliman on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:08:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: His solutions aren't yours. (1.66 / 3)

You should really go to the government with your Extra-Sensory Perception abilities.  They could really put your powers to use when interrogating terror suspects.

If the ability to read minds and see into people's souls is available to us, it will save us a lot of waterboarding.

You know, I'm a little disappointed that Obama is such a liar, but I'm enthusiastic about the era of freedom from terrorism that you're going to usher in for us.


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:45:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 1)

"...white resentments distracted attention from the real culprits of the middle class squeeze - a corporate culture rife with inside dealing, questionable accounting practices, and short-term greed..." - Barack Obama

Watch the speech.
http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/h isownwords/


www.thingsyoungerthanmccain.com
by LandStander on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:15:03 PM EST

Good God, man... (2.00 / 4)

The reason the subject was race was because that was what needed to be talked about at this time.

Look at the anger you're spewing here.  It comes from pain, right?  The kind of pain that others don't understand, right?

That's what Obama was trying to address.  That Rev. Wright has HIS anger, because of HIS own pain.  He alluded as well to class concerns, and corporatism, and other ills that have contributed to the pain and anger we feel.  And all he asked is that we acknowledge our own difficulties recognizing what makes those OTHER people angry, no matter who we are, so we can unite in common cause.

I'm not negating your pain by asking you to understand others' pain as well.  Obama's asking ALL of us to understand other people's pain and resultant anger, so that we can all come together as a people to solve our problems--which is the only way that they will EVER be solved.  


by paul minot on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:24:13 PM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 3)

Excellent analysis.  I'm so glad you are willing to look at Obama, the man and Obama, the candidate without filtering the view through the sometimes over-zealous comments of his supporters.  He is so much better than we respresent him and if we are turning people away from him, it's our bad not his.

A personal note:

My grandson was always an Obama supporter but I flirted with Kucinich (Dept of Peace?), switched to Biden (most experienced) and then when both dropped out I was left with a choice between the frontrunners.  I liked Edwards but he was trailing so far behind that I didn't think he had a chance.  I flip-flopped (horrors!) between Clinton and Obama for awhile and finally chose Obama to support.  Since then, while still having respect for Clinton (loved her in the 90's), I haven't regretted that decision.  My soft Obama support has firmed up the more I've seen of him.

So while many (on this site particularly) will call Obama supporters 'Obamabots' etc., as if we are just blindly following him, the truth is alot of his supporters gravitated towards him over time.


That One is the Right One for 2008.
by GFORD on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:41:31 PM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 2)

Imagine President Kucinich.

That would be a majorly wacky four years.

Don't get me wrong, he's the candidate that shares my policies most closely, but I'm afraid that I would barely notice all the great liberal stuff he was doing because I'd be following his wife around like a cyber stalker.

Er, I've said too much.

Mojo it is!


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:48:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

NPR - Don't miss this story: (2.00 / 1)

A Closer Look at Black Liberation Theology

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story .php?storyId=88512189

Hopkins attends Trinity United Church of Christ, where Rev. Wright just retired as pastor. In the now-famous sermon from 2003, Wright said black people's troubles are a result of racism that still exists in America, crying out, "No, no, no, not God bless America! God damn America -- that's in the Bible -- for killing innocent people."

According to Hopkins, that was theological wordplay -- because the word "damn" is straight out of the Bible and has a specific meaning in the original Hebrew.

"It means a sacred condemnation by God to a wayward nation who has strayed from issues of justice, strayed from issues of peace, strayed from issues of reconciliation," Hopkins says.


by Satya on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:47:36 PM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 2)

Wow!  You are part of the group that Obama addressed directly in his speech.  He talked about white men who feel that they have succeeded without any help from others.  Who feel as if they are being unfairly disadvantaged.

He is not a black man you know -- he is both a white and a black man.  As such he understands the feelings of both.  

You definitely will want to listen to his speech.  


That One is the Right One for 2008.
by GFORD on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:48:01 PM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 1)

With all due respect, as nice a diary as this is, it suddenly dawned on you that there's racism in this country?!


by texasdextrous on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:15:34 PM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (none / 0)

"And then I saw it.  Obama opened my eyes, not for the first time certainly,  but to a much deeper place. "


Sexism is real.
by grassrootsorganizer on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 03:47:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (1.60 / 5)

Sorry... His speech (in my hometown, BTW) neither changed my mind or opened my eyes. Draped around 8 American flags, looking all presidential but won't wear "that lapel pin" or put his hand over his heart during the National Anthem... He lied and was caught in that lie--- "I don't remember/I do remember hearing Wright speak that way;" he used this speech only for its political expediency to stop his free-fall; he is a hypocrite---google his comments about Imus's "joke" about the Women's BB team at Rutgers. Wright is his mentor, spiritual advisor, pastor of 20 yrs. This speech was about quelling the outrage over BO's talking out of both sides of his mouth. He is no more interested in bringing ALL people together than he is the modern MLK. He is interested in VOTES. Period. And I for one ain't givin' him mine. Not now, not in the GE. He is a pol and a devisive one at that. Been using that race card since NH and hasn't moved it from his sleeve since so it's easily accessible to pull out when needed.


Take it to the Convention! Hillary '08"
by JHL on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:26:01 PM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 2)

You realize that you're parrotting Republican talking points, right?  

Lapel pin?  Seriously?  National anthem?  Are you kidding?  Are these minor displays a replacement for real patriotism?  I sincerely hope not.

You're being distracted by Fox News or some other person telling you what's important.  Decide for yourself.  If you look at the issues and the candidates and decide on what YOU think is important, then you will come to a more honest understanding, I hope.


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:39:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (1.00 / 5)

Not Repug parroting at all. I am and have always been a Dem. BO is a disgrace and uses symbolism when convenient. He is a LIAR, spins when needed and associates with a racist, anti-Jewish, anti-American pastor who had a "laud" day for Farrakan. He conveniently slipped some politically-advantageous comment in his "race" speech about Israel; He associated with anti-gay pastors until he needed to court the GLBT community... I could go on and on. Just because this guy can turn a speech doesn't make him a leader. He has turned me farther and farther off the more the primaries have continued. I see BO for what he is---A phony and a liar. Not the qualities or character I want in the President of the United States.


Take it to the Convention! Hillary '08"
by JHL on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:01:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (1.50 / 2)

They're called "Republicans," not "Repugs."

I know some Republicans call us the "Democrat Party," but there's no need to slip to their level.

So... I'm not too keen on arguing with you if you have such disrespect for an entire party while echoing their most specious attacks.


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 03:11:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Thanks (2.00 / 2)

I too appreciate Obama's candor on racial issues in this country. As I think Hillary Clinton would be the better, more prepared President I must still support her as long as she's still in it, but Obama has earned newfound respect from me.

The speech may not have had as prefound an effect on me as it did you. Nothing in it to me was particularly surprising. But it brings up the issue of racial divide that most people know about to some extent, but few people talk about. That's improtant to discuss, not only for him should he be the nominee of the Democratic party for President, but for the American people whomever the next President is.


by Christopher Lib on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:27:05 PM EST

Two days in a row (2.00 / 4)

This is two days in a row that the MyDD rec list has been topped by the fine sort of discussion I expect of this place.

Well done.

I'm not saying that because this diary lauds Obama - I'm saying it because I think it's a really well-written, honest discussion.

This is NOT a "SEE, SEE!! You should all back OBAMA NOW!!!" comment - godspeed and best wishes to anyone that continues to back another fine candidate, democrat, public servant, and human being in Hillary Clinton.

It's the beginning of titling this race back to the realm of family having a reasonable disagreement.  I've made many of the same comments at Kos - this speech was intended just as much for Obama supporters...

I'm no saint.  Few of us are.  For every time I scoffed at an Obama relying on Drudge -- I also was quite willing to jump onto the bandwagon and attack Ferraro for comments that, yes, were MUCH TAMER than those of Wright... but the lesson is the same.  The speech was not just about race - but our discourse on both it AND politics.

We need not abandon our principles or candidates to move towards a more civil debate on the matter.

I thought Obama's speech was a great one.

I think this diary paces it step for step.

Thanks for brightening my lunchtime.


by zonk on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:29:44 PM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 1)

Hear, hear, Linfar.  The identity politics focus (practiced by the Bush crowd, as well, I might add) entirely misses the real issue: class.  Race is just one of many attributes that affect class status.  
I believe the preeminent job of government to prevent misery and fear, conditions intensely exacerbated by class status.  A single mother, coming home in the middle of the night after an hour's bus ride  from her second back-breaking job, being afraid to be laid off, her home in foreclosure, unable to pay for her child's needed surgery, unable to pay for her heart medication.  

I am so weary of Barack's self-serving oratory and shell game about race, and the adulation he gets from the upper upper class pundits I could cry.
 


On to the Convention Floor!
by oh puhleeze on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:35:02 PM EST

Obama didn't move me (1.60 / 5)

I'm glad that he made the speech and I can only hope he is learning new things himself.  Unfortunately, I've never seen any indication from him that he does learn new things.  His ego is simply too big, preventing him from seeing where he fails.  Yes, he says he makes mistakes, but in a faux-humble way.  Until he lists some specific, detailed failures of his own (rather than detailing those of his grandmother, e.g., and not including crap like his desk is messy), I will remain unimpressed.

Because of this and because of his association with Wright, he is simply the wrong person for true healing.  Indeed, no one person is, or can be.  That's too big a burden.  Yet people like MLK and Shirley Chisholm managed to do amazing things, and they always struck me as being 100% sincere.  

To talk about healing our racial, gender, sexuality and other divides, I believe sincerity is incredibly important.  Sincerity is what Obama lacks.  He is too clearly in it for himself.


by Montague on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:36:34 PM EST

Re: Obama didn't move me (2.00 / 1)

If Obama's career was only about himself, I somehow doubt that he'd have dropped out of the lawyer race to be a community organizer.  I imagine that he would have waited until he was more "experienced" before running for president, too.  

Sometimes I lament that Clinton didn't buck conventional wisdom and run for president in 2004, because we needed her then, dearly.  Imagine George Bush vs. Hillary Clinton in the most important race of our time... do you think that she would have let herself be swift-boated?  

For whatever reason, she chose to wait until she thought that she had a better chance.  Another pity by then it was probably too late.


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:44:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama didn't move me (2.00 / 1)

I think you have it backwards.  He did the community organizer thing in order to GET into local Chicago politics.  He didn't wait till he was more experienced to run for president because he thought he could do an end-run around a female candidate by playing race against gender.  I'm sorry, but male privilege still beats white privilege in this country.

Hillary could not have gotten the nom in 2004.  In addition, she promised her constituents not to do that immediately after entering the Senate.  Obama said the same thing to his constituents and then went back on it.

What I'm hoping for at the convention is Al Gore to become our nominee.  It's the only thing that can save us now.  Anyway, Gore won in 2000 and he deserves to serve his term.


by Montague on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 04:17:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama didn't move me (2.00 / 0)

Ah... because doing community service is a much easier way to get into politics for a Harvard Law graduate than operating in a prestigious law firm or the DA's office first.

"End-run around a female candidate?"  If male privledge beats white privledge, wouldn't white male privledge beat both?  Why isn't Edwards still in the game?  By your logic, Edwards should be running against Obama right now, Clinton having been forced out before Super Tuesday.  It doesn't make any sense.

Obama didn't plan on running for president right away, but he felt that circumstances dictated that he needed to.  I wish Clinton had changed her mind in 2004, too.  I think she would've won.


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 09:33:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

It's a different struggle... (2.00 / 2)

The point isn't that Obama is Martin Luther King Jr reincarnated, the point is that he's mixed race, and from his dual heritage can understand and address both sides of the divide. You may call this 'insincere' but when you say Obama is just 'in it for himself' - well - apart from that being the weakest critique of any and all politicians - this self he analyses, presents and criticises, is a much more diverse and interesting self than you've seen in US politics for decades.

Whether it moved you or not is another thing. Whether he should be the nominee or not is really another thing. What you could at least address, as this diary brilliantly does, is the space it allows us all to question ourselves.

I've seen other posts from you which are self questioning and not just tub thumping. It's a shame that your obvious intelligence wasn't deployed here. You don't have to be an Obama supporter to take the questions raised a little more seriously.


Moose Juice; debate without hate
by brit on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:42:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

His genetic makeup has NOTHING to do (none / 0)

with his insincerity.  It's a completely separate discussion from issues of race.  Everything he does in this campaign is about winning, and no, I don't blame any candidate for trying to win.  What's the point, otherwise?  Obama also does not have to bear the burden of being the black candidate, he just has to bear the burden of being his own lousy candidate.  I am continually amazed by how people are won over by a person like him.  

It's not that I think Hillary is all that amazing, either, but I do think she is better suited to be president.

The reason I don't deploy my "obvious intelligence" in each situation is that I am getting frikkin sick and tired of everyone yapping constantly about Obama.  I can't wait until I don't have to see or hear from him again.


by Montague on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 04:37:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

One more small yap... (none / 0)

I didn't say his genetic makeup, I said his heritage, which is a historical and social thing. The sincerity comes - in my opinion - from the way he handles this. But I'm not trying to convince you of his sincerity, I'm asking you to think about the questions he opened up.

If you're tired of hearing about Obama, why not talk about the substance (in this case race - though gender, religion and above all POWER are just as important).

And if you're tired of yapping about those, then the question begs itself: why log on to a progressive political blog?

But I'll shut up now you've told me to


Moose Juice; debate without hate
by brit on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 09:14:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 1)

very moving

thanks


by wrb on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:53:00 PM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (none / 0)

The Germans suffered after WWI. That's didn't justify the holocaust.

No amount of rationalization makes Wright's comments OK.

All racism is evil.

Obama choses his company poorly, showing a breath-taking lack of judgment.


by JFK464 on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:09:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 1)

Great post.  Couldn't say it better.  The one thing I'd ask people to think about is that leadership is about helping people change their minds to see things in a different way.  If Hillary is the nominee, she will get my enthusiastic support against McCain.  No doubt about that.  Obama, I think, is more unknown, but at the same time he has done some amazing things in this election, helping people to see the world differently.  That's leadership, not just words.  This is not adulation or a robotic response.  The junior senator from Illinois has challenged us in a different way than we've seen in Democratic politics for many years.  Yesterday's speech, made at a moment of extreme pressure and adversity, showed that.  Preferring him, or Hillary, should not yield hatred among fellow Democrats.  The biggest message I got from yesterday's speech is we need to talk honestly with each other, and try to heal wounds, not open new ones or make old wounds worse.  This post was a great reminder of that too, whether you prefer HRC or BHO.


by dge on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:58:10 PM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (none / 0)

---The one thing I'd ask people to think about is that leadership is about helping people change their minds to see things in a different way.

Yes, Der Sturmer made people see Jews in a different way -- an evil way. Wright's words are pure evil. Obama's 20 years in his church shows his lack of judgment. If Obama gets the nomination, God forbid, I will do everything I can to make sure he loses. Racial politics has no place in American life.


by JFK464 on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:17:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 1)

Obama is a good man who doesn't care about skin color.  He would make a fine president.

I also think that Hillary has a terrific record on civil right and children issues.


by bigdavefromqueens on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:02:34 PM EST

except Obama has effectively got her (1.00 / 3)

pinned as a racist.


by earthoat on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:04:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 1)

Great heartfelt diary.  I can only hope that supporters of both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama can maintain this type of open mind when the nominee is finally chosen.  I feel like the only reason things have gotten so heated to begin with is because we've got two amazing candidates and we're forced to choose one over the other.  Anyway, thanks again for the thoughtful piece.


And so, may evil beware and may good dress warmly and eat lots of fresh vegetables.
by thatpurplestuff on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:08:11 PM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (1.50 / 2)

The problem is that his speeches do not match his campaign's behavior.  He has used race-baiting as a tactic throughout.  We all know he can come up with good speeches.  The problem is the difference between his rhetoric and his behavior.

It's sad that so many people are moved by the words but ignore the behavior.  But that's how demagogues get power.  Or maybe he thinks the means justify the ends.  When the means include race-baiting, I cannot agree.


by PlainWords on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 03:20:52 PM EST

Throwing grandma under the bus (1.50 / 2)

did it for you? You didn't see the spectacular ineptness of loyalty to the woman who raised you, who you could not choose, with the pastor and church you could choose or not choose in your late 20s, and despite whose racist rhetoric you put your children under the profound influence of?


We can no longer afford to worship the god of hate or bow before the altar of retaliation. Martin Luther King Jr.
by fairleft on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 03:25:07 PM EST

Black racism is an evil (none / 0)

that needs to be recognized and opposed. I don't equate black racism with African-Americans, but apparently you do? That's the only way your comment avoids being completely incoherent.


We can no longer afford to worship the god of hate or bow before the altar of retaliation. Martin Luther King Jr.
by fairleft on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 09:27:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ah another big fuck you to us black folks eh? (none / 0)

All racism is evil. I don't care what your excuse is.

We lost the South because of race. If we lose blacks because of race, so be it. Race has no place in American politics. Obama's frightening use of racial politics in SC & MS, coupled with Michelle Obama's disrespect for this country and Wright's evil words has forever made me anti-Obama. I will do whatever I can to make sure a racialist like Obama never gets to the presidency, and I'm a dedicated progressive. All racism is evil.


by JFK464 on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:15:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hold on... (none / 0)

You can repeat the mantra that all racism is evil, but what is really evil is racism WITH POWER.

I know Kenya well - a lot of 'racial' antipathy between Luo, Kikuyu, Masai and other tribes. But because, until recently, none had the upper hand, there was no violence, little tribal or racial repression. Until recently.

In Bosnia, there were probably quite a few Serb, Croat, and Bosnian racists - but the Serbs had the guns.

All racism may be evil, but it's quite quite clear from American history in which racial the power, money, guns and whips were held. All racism is evil. But many many more racist acts have been inflicted on African Americans than have been committed by them. Morally, any racist behaviour is abhorrent. Historically, there is no equivalence between white and black racism in America. Acknowledge that and it will be easier to defuse racism in general


Moose Juice; debate without hate
by brit on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:31:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hold on... (none / 0)

That argument over power is typical moral relativism. Either Wright's words
are wrong or they're not. Either Obama has incredibly bad judgment or not.
A Harvard educated attorney and US Senator isn't exactly underprivileged, regardless
of color. Belonging to a hate church reflects terribly on his character.
by JFK464 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 01:51:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No. Moral relativism is... (none / 0)

...equating words with actions. It makes an anti German Rabbi as bad as a member of the SS. People say hateful things, but doing hateful things is a different category of moral responsibility.
Moose Juice; debate without hate
by brit on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 03:25:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No. Moral relativism is... (none / 0)

Just words....


by JFK464 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 04:31:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

To Understand Hate (1.50 / 2)

To understand Hate, you cannot run from it.

Obama perhaps knew some of the animosity boiling beneath the surface of Rev Wright, but he took the time to understand the man and why he felt the way he did.

Obama understands why Wright feels the way he does because it was able to get close to him.


by Pissoff on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 03:29:26 PM EST

Re: To Understand Hate (2.00 / 1)

If Obama is so all-fired understanding, how come he mocks women?  To suggest a female candidate takes certain actions  when she is "feeling down" ("periodically," no less) is about as classy as suggesting a black candidate is being "uppity" about something.

I actually understand much of Wright's anger.  Indeed, I prefer his honest anger to Obama's slick methods.


by Montague on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 04:42:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: To Understand Hate (none / 0)

Why was this post given a troll rating by Earthoat?  


This administration is not sinking. This administration is soaring! If anything, they are rearranging the deck chairs on the Hindenburg!
by venavena on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 04:45:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (none / 0)

I think some of putting it in a larger context might go over some people's heads.  He spoke to society as though they all behaved like mature adults, which is the appropriate way to handle such a quandary, but as we all know not everyone is this way.  I think it's great to see that some people are actually giving thought to what he said and how it plays a role in their life.


This administration is not sinking. This administration is soaring! If anything, they are rearranging the deck chairs on the Hindenburg!
by venavena on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 03:56:35 PM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 0)

Thanks for this thoughtful diary.
I am a democrat and I am saddened by the strife we find ourselves involved in ..

I truly believe that Hillary Clinton is a fine human being who does not have a racist bone in her being and would not hesitate to support and vote for her in November.

The same applies to Barack Obama. The key here is that one of these two democrats must win in November.
As Obama said yesterday, I am sick of having elections hi-jacked due to some silly distraction rather than get down to the real business of electing a candidate based on real issue stances and solutions offered.

Lower the heat,dems. Fight fair, and know we have two canididates light years better than McCain/Bush.


by hawkjt on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 03:57:41 PM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (none / 0)

spot on


by wrb on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 05:08:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 2)

Hey All... I know some folks are interested in learning more about Cone and other Black Theologians in the wake of the Wright comments.  Dr. Paris is a Christian Ethics prof at Princeton.  The interview will be tomorrow from 10:00 to 11:00 a.m. on WHYY Philadelphia 90.9 FM - http://www.whyy.org/91FM/radiotimes.html

Dr. Paris is a leading Black Theologian... I suggest, if you are able, you give it a listen.


Bring Back MyDD - Just say No to Rec'ing Candidate Diaries.
by CardBoard on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 04:31:55 PM EST

Welcome Young Republicans (2.00 / 1)

I would say in reading through these comments (thanks to new comrades for their kind words) certain posters seem to jump right out at you as Young Republicans posting on internet blogs on their break between Business Management 201 and The O'Reilly Factor.  Please, use the break instead more productively and spend more time under the sheets deeply enjoying your Ann Coulter poster.  

Your divisive manure spreading doesn't work anymore here.


Sexism is real.
by grassrootsorganizer on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 05:01:17 PM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (none / 0)

Color me impressed.  Let's continue to argue about policy and forge ahead as a progressive party together, and call out when we're letting our emotions blind us to the actual issues.


by shalca on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 05:24:45 PM EST

I like Obama too but he's too inexperienced and (none / 0)

has handed to Republicans far too many weapons to attack him with.

He would be a great V.P. candidate and then a great president. But he cannot get elected president now. He will get routed badly. The tapes of his mentor and pastor of 20 years is a treasure-trove for the gop.


by mmorang on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 06:01:24 PM EST

erm, (none / 0)

you do not know Republican freaking hate Clinton right? Irrationally. Her being on the ballot will drive a lot of republicans to turn out.


-- be excellent to each other
by kindthoughts on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 12:00:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (none / 0)

Obama's speech was a attempt to explain 20 years of being mentored by an  anti-American, anti-Semitic, racist. Nothing but a complete
repudiation of Wright was acceptable. No amount grievances, past or present,
justify Wright's comments. He's words are horrible and hateful and repugnant.
Obama has a lot more of explaining, particularly on he mis-led the public
on what he actually heard Wright say.

http://noratings.blogspot.com/


by JFK464 on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 06:17:26 PM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (none / 0)

However, he lied/flip-flopped within the space of about two days re: his knowing about Wright's words/being there to hear them.

Fancy words don't erase that FACT...which the GOP will not forget.

He's a phony trying to save his neck politically after months of his own playing of the race card.  He didn't offer any uniting speech on this subject until forced to.  He is still a cipher...


by Gloria on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 09:14:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (none / 0)

That's right. Just words....


by JFK464 on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:07:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 2)

A college professor can open your eyes and change your mind, so can a guest speaker.  That's fine that he is opening your eyes, but this is a presidential election, not a church gathering, or a college class.  It's not a good book that you can't put down.  It's a repulican smear machine that has been revving up for decades and aimed straight for us in the fall. They won't let it go in the fall.  They won't ever let it go.  The republicans will run with this and bring us all down if Obama wins the nomination.  We have to have a long vision, and realize what will be used against us in the GE.  THis whole situation has so many elements in it that are dear to people's hearts.  Patriotism is one of the biggest of all things dear to the hearts of American people in that vast wide open land of voters.  The memory of Obamas 20 year mentorship with someone who said America should be damned, will live for years in peoples minds.  We are headed toward another decade of republican rule, if Obama wins the nomination.


by Scotch on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 06:56:07 PM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 0)

And if Hillary is the nominee, they'll manufacture another distraction. It's time to move past that.


by amiches on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 07:48:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 2)

Thanks for writing this and sharing your thoughts.  I found myself amazed that someone running for president would speak such plain truth about the hopes and fears of us all.


by vbdietz on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 07:53:03 PM EST

'You don't know what you're doing.' (none / 0)

"Don't trust your own feelings."

That's the tone of many of the comments in this thread.

I love that paternalism being displayed by a few Clinton backers. It has been par for the course since Iowa.


by Bob Johnson on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 09:13:36 PM EST

Re: 'You don't know what you're doing.' (none / 0)

Germans after WWI felt angry. That didn't justify the holocaust. Wright's comments are pure evil and Obama's defense of those words, particularly after playing the race card is beyond the pale. I once considered Obama an acceptable choice. Now I will do everything in my power to make sure that racial politics doesn't work in America. Obama is collapsing nationally, and you feel moved? Excuse me while I vomit.


by JFK464 on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:12:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

"Obama's defense of thsoe words..." (2.00 / 1)

When you're finished lying, let me know.


by Bob Johnson on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:29:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

sweet (none / 0)

hitler and holocaust references.


-- be excellent to each other
by kindthoughts on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:58:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Blacks = nazis (none / 0)

Whites=jews This isn't a history lesson. This is more like psychotherapy. You obviously FEAR some kind of terrifying retributive venom from Wright. That explains the over-reaction to his words. Guilt and fear are closely allied, and the (from this side of the Atlantic) ridiculous response to a few angry over-the-top remarks speaks more about White Guilt, White Flight and White Fear than anything to do with history
Moose Juice; debate without hate
by brit on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 12:43:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Blacks = nazis (none / 0)

Wright's words don't scare you? That's a scary thought. He said: The US created AIDS to kill blacks, 9/11 was the chickens coming home to roost, Hillary has never been called an N-word.

The hate, real hate, not just words about injustice is what's frightening. And that you can be blase about this hate is also scary.

20 years sitting there absorbing this hate. Scary. That's 1,000 Sundays of hate.


by JFK464 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 06:33:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What scares me... (none / 0)

...is your inflammatory overreaction. Check out Andrew Sullivan's blog to see how Wright helped Gay men, check out what Obama says about the way he always treated individuals white or black decently, check out your own extreme intolerance that equated blacks with nazis.

You scare me much more than Wright


Moose Juice; debate without hate
by brit on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 02:58:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It's the combination of racism and power ... (2.00 / 1)

...which is deadly. I know Kenya well - my sister in law is Kikuyu - and until recently, the obviously tribalism across all the groups (especially Luo and Masai) was balanced because no one group held all the power.

In Bosnia, which I also know quite well, there were definitely racist Serb, Croat and Bosnian nationalists (though in 1992 a majority defined themselves as Yugoslav). There may have even been an equal number of racists on either side, I don't know, but what is indisputable was that THE SERBS HAD ALL THE GUNS.

It has always shocked me in the times I've studied and worked and lived in the US how the racial divide when it comes to African Americans also collides with a huge class and economic disparity. I went to a Boston High School in the early 80s for almost a year until one day I took a train through Roxborough/Roxbury? and saw a completely different world, completely sealed off from my nice white middle class suburb. I saw the same in the Bronx later, and then Georgia a few years ago. This level of ghettoisation staggers Europeans, and I don't think you can really address the economic and class issues before you look at this profound flaw in the American dream

The American dream welcomes voluntary immigrants, promises mobility, freedom, equality before the law, opportunity. But at its foundation had economic success built on the back of involuntary migrants (slaves) whose descendants had to fight for equality before the law in living memory, and who still do not have equal opportunities.

So the race issue, and specifically the Black American experience, is the worm in the apple of the American dream. It vitiates the whole structure of US cities, it creates a massive burden of policing and prison costs, it tells visitors that this promise that you can remake yourself, escape the hierarchies of the european past or repressive regimes, even dream of become becoming president, is a lie.

For good or bad, whether he makes it or not, Obama has come so close because of his talents and his intelligence, to reinvigorating that dream. From that, other forms of equality and justice might follow


Moose Juice; debate without hate
by brit on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 09:27:10 PM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 3)

The conversation on race needs to continue. it will at first be halting ans some, both back,white,and in between will be uncomfortable, but eventually we will develop a deeper understanding of each other.


"The Bumble Bee flies because it thinks it can."
by LadyEagle on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 09:38:31 PM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (2.00 / 1)

A really beautiful diary. Leagues above the run of stuff I've seen on here. Thank you.

So I take it that if you're looking down on the fist, you're in the (laughably named) Ren Cen? I used to work there...frightening building. Now I'm about a mile up the river from you. So, howdy neighbor.


by rabidnation on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 12:01:41 AM EST

Wow! I really appreciate the depth of your diary. (2.00 / 2)

Thank you.


by Jenai on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 12:49:29 AM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (1.00 / 2)

stupid and laughable.


by prisonbreak on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 01:10:18 AM EST

yes, yes (none / 0)

the thoughtful, calm, weighted and wise response I've come to expect from Hillary supporters.


-- be excellent to each other
by kindthoughts on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:57:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: yes, yes (none / 0)

In fairness, I'm a Clinton supporter.  I really doubt the above commentor is, if you read his diary and comment history.  


Sexism is real.
by grassrootsorganizer on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:56:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Things get really wierd down thread - (2.00 / 3)

so I wanted to take the opportunity to second your attaboy.  I too think it was a very nice, thoughtful diary.  When I clicked on this - I was hoping for a good discussion.  You know - beginning to talk about those points in Senator Obama's diary that really made sense.  I have to say, I still support Senator Clinton's nomination (for a myriad of reasons) - but I think Senator Obama touched on some very salient points - especially regarding how most every-day Americans view the subject.  In fact - I would say this was where the Senator was the most successful - his pinpointing how both sides of his heritage look at race.  It merits discussion - not diatribes.  So my thanks to the diarist as well.  Even if the discussion did get off-line - you opened up the door to discussing Obama's speech on its merits.  That's a very good thing.  


by The Fat Lady Sings on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 02:11:42 AM EST

A lot of free ...and an idea for healing (none / 0)

    I have to say-Obama sure has been getting a lot of FREE airtime out of this hasn't he? Or am I the only who has noticed?
     But on the deeper issue of healing-his explanation has left myself and others still angry-it seems that he who has done so little for the blacks in his own area is lashing out at those who have and continue to do so much more in their day to day lives.
     Just everyone take stock of how it is you treat everyone you come in contact with-do you open the door for each other regardless of color-gender etc...Do you smile and at the very least nod in recognition of each other regardless of race or gender-my guess is "yes" you do.                      
   Where I have the problem with hi is that it made me feel that there continues be a resonation of entitlement coming from the black community and that there is not enough being done from the white community-but I ask this-
    For any of those who feel that there is not enough being done from the white community, when was the last time you walked up to anyone from any organization and said:
                "How can I help you to move us forward?"

   This is what MR. Obama could have said if he really wanted to move out of the past and begin to work towards a brighter future for all, and that would have been the mark of a Leader.
   Instead what we have witnessed is just a man lashing out at others for his own inadequacies to serve plain and simple.  

namaste.


by artsykr on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 03:46:03 AM EST

Why would he need free airtime? (none / 0)

Jeremiah Wright was getting a lot of free airtime, too.  It's not like Obama planned to have this controversy blow up beyond all rational proportion.

Besides, why does he need free airtime?  His campaign is loaded.  He opens his mouth and gold coins spew out.

How could you possibly say that he's done little for the blacks in his area?  This man who worked to get poor people, black and white, jobs.  This man who goes to and donates to a black church that is so much more than one bitter pastor's occasional racist remark?  This man who is was a civil rights attorney?  This man who is running for president on a platform of equality for all?

Obama's not asking you to do anything.  When a black man says the white man owes him something, the white man gets rightfully resentful.  Obama is opening the door; it's your choice as to whether you want to step through or not.  

Leadership should be from the bottom up, not the top down.  


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 09:44:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I appreciate this a lot (2.00 / 1)

I know it took a lot to put this sort of thing out there.  It was well-written and very pleasant to read.

I was also kind of interesting for me to read it, from the perspective of someone who once lived in Detroit.  I haven't been in Detroit for a few decades, but I used to know it well, and you've described a lot of areas I recognize and remember.  It was a neat little trip down memory lane.


I'm only a click away
by juliewolf on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 04:20:21 AM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (none / 0)

you do realise that his slam of his Gmother was apparantly a LIE? In his book he describes one incidence of her being afraid of a black man - ONE. It wasn't as he depicted in his speech but rather the guy was threatening, not just sitting there with her walking by. Hmmmmm,  how would YOU react if threatened? And she only mentioned he was black, the real feature was his threatening behaviour.

that he would throw older women off the train in public - she is still living! - is disgusting.   what if your grandson twisted some single event in your life for his own political benefit and then broadcast it to the world?


by swissffun on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:11:26 AM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (none / 0)

Maybe you should ask his grandmother if it's inaccurate or if she minds that her grandson is talking so earnestly about their life together before jumping to conclusions.

I don't see how Grams is hurt by this.


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 09:48:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]

you are sooooo (none / 0)

off the deep end.


-- be excellent to each other
by kindthoughts on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:55:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Please (none / 0)

Enlighten me on my insanity.


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:58:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I was responding to (none / 0)

swissffun not you. Look at the comment indentation.I agree with you my friend.


-- be excellent to each other
by kindthoughts on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 12:07:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I need to clean my contacts. (none / 0)

Hah, whoops.  Still new to the site.


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 12:36:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (none / 0)

Your comment is very cynical, and makes assumptions about Obama's grandmother as if you had the facts. Please realize you don't. Your comment and viewpoint reflects strong anti-Obama sentiments. Too bad. We could use some restraint.


by wolff109 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 03:54:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (none / 0)


by swissffun on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:11:39 AM EST

Re: Obama: changing my mind, opening my eyes (none / 0)

Thanks for the open, honest assessment of your thoughts and feelings. Although we may come to different conclusions, you set a good example.


by wolff109 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 03:50:54 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.