The Meanings of Obama's Speech

I watched Barack Obama's speech yesterday morning intently. The "pre-game show" of cable commentators predicted a somewhat grim outcome. What could Obama say that could possibly overcome his association with the words of his pastor, Jeremiah Wright? Would he throw his pastor on the train tracks? And even if he did, would he still suffer from guilt by association?

But then, for 45 minutes, I saw a man who for days had appeared somewhat at sea, buffeted by waves that relentlessly pushed him off course, seem to find his compass and chart a course directly into the eye of the storm. I saw a man with the inner confidence, and the steadiness of a captain who knew he was sailing on uncharted waters but needed to go there anyway, take the nation with him and land them safely on the shore.

The pundits were clearly stunned. They knew they had witnessed something extraordinary, a moment when time seemed to stand still and a politician in the midst of a withering electoral storm did the unspeakable: he spoke the truth. The unspoken, unspeakable truth. He told the nation that he understood what was happening in white barber shops and black barber shops, around white water coolers and black water coolers, and that we are neither free from our prejudices nor merely prejudiced in our respective grievances, and that in both our prejudices and our grievances, we have more in common than we know.

With the exception of commentators who pride themselves on their bigotry, the speech drew immediate, nearly universal acclaim, and I suspect that its lasting impact will mirror its initial impact. But as the great French sociologist Emil Durkheim described it, we live our lives in the realm of the profane, punctuated by moments of sanctity, only to return again to everyday life. And by nightfall, as I listened to reports of the speech on television, many of the talking heads had returned to the realm of the literal, the crass, and the profane: Did he distance himself enough from Reverend Wright? Did he condemn his former pastor enough to reassure white voters?

But the speech wasn't about Reverend Wright, even though the controversy surrounding pieces of his sermons was the impetus for it. Obama delivered a message that spoke to the conflicts and contradictions around race that have existed since the earliest days of this nation, and he delivered it in a personal way that spoke to his own history and his own complex response to his pastor's messages over many years. The speech brought to mind a passage written by the psychoanalyst Erik Erikson a half century ago in his psychobiography of Martin Luther, which could just as easily have been written last night. Erikson was describing that ineffable quality we call charisma, and the way an individual life history sometimes converges with the historical moment: "Now and again," Erikson wrote, "an individual is called upon (called upon by whom, only theologians claim to know, and by what only bad psychologists)," to lift his personal conflicts to the level of cultural conflicts, "and to try to solve for all what he could not solve for himself alone."

Obama clearly hadn't wanted to make this election about race. But the events of the last week led him to do what the nation has long needed to do: to have the kind of open conversation about race that Republicans have avoided because they've preferred to exploit it and Democrats have avoided because they've tended to fear it. We can't solve problems we can't talk about, and our better angels on race tend to be our conscious values. As numerous commentators described it, Obama led us to our better angels.

But from a political standpoint, at least as important as the primary message of his speech was a series of meta-messages he conveyed as much through his actions as his words. Obama's speech was in many respects a rejoinder to a number of questions raised about him over the last few weeks that contributed to defeats in Ohio and Texas.

Is he a moving orator who speaks pretty lines but lacks substance? No one can seriously ask that question today, after Obama offered the most eloquent, intellectually penetrating, and most moving description of the complexities of race in America of any politician in recent history. But he did more than talk about race. He began to build a progressive narrative that Democrats, and the progressive movement more broadly, have had difficulty developing. He offered a progressive vision of patriotism, integrating a more traditional view -- referring to his grandfather's service under General Patton, and the military service of Reverend Wright -- with the notion that love of country is not blind love, that forming a more perfect union -- the essence of progressivism -- is part of what it means to love one's country.

Does he have the courage, capacity, and cojones to lead? Yesterday, he led us as a nation, and he showed a firm, steady, and unflinching hand. Not only did he utter words most Democratic politicians don't speak in polite company but should have spoken years ago, but he refused to take the low road -- to denounce and cast aside someone who clearly matters dearly to him simply because he had become a political liability -- displaying both courage and conviction.

Is he really a Muslim, not just foreign but an "Islamo-fascist" in sheep's clothing? No one listening to his speech could come away with anything but the message that he is not only a Christian but a person who takes his faith seriously. He spoke of how Reverend Wright had "helped introduce me to my Christian faith" and baptized his children, and how he had preached about the importance of "doing God's work here on earth." Yet he condemned his former pastor for seeing "the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam."

And time will tell if he answered one last question: Can he win the respect, and ultimately the votes, of white males, and particularly working class males, in states like Ohio and Pennsylvania? I suspect his speech may have reopened a dialog with, if not the minds of, the kinds of voters he had won over in states like Wisconsin but began to lose for a number of reasons: Hillary Clinton's obvious command of economic issues in a time of increasing economic desperation, the fact that voters associate the Clinton name with eight years of economic growth between two disastrous Bushes, and Obama's resistance to swinging back when his opponent was throwing punches, which voters (particularly male voters) tend to take as a sign of weakness. But the meaning of Obama's loyalty to his pastor in the face of enormous pressure to cast him aside is not likely to be lost on white males who value strength, courage, honor, and loyalty. Nor is an aspect of his life story many Americans may not have known, about the role played by his two white working-class grandparents in his upbringing; or his criticism of the failures of fatherhood in the inner cities; or his willingness to speak openly about the seething resentments of the millions of white men who punch a time card every day, feel increasingly unable to provide for their families as the price of gas skyrockets and heath care moves beyond their reach, and who don't view themselves as all that privileged.

Drew Westen professor of psychology and psychiatry at Emory University and founder of Westen Strategies. He is the author of The Political Brain: The Role of Emotion in Deciding the Fate of the Nation.

Read more HuffPost coverage and reaction to Obama's speech

Comments

[PracticalMagic]

You've missed the real point here. In the game of politics, if you cannot fight the charges, then use misdirection and distraction to bury them amongst a lot of rhetoric that sounds good, but is only tangentially refers to the issue. The larger issue of race was used to appeal to our "higher angels" and to try to obfuscate the real problem for Obama - his 20 year association with the pastor and the fact that he lied about his knowledge of and actual presence during some of the incendiary sermons. Just by reading the posts here, I believe the Obama supporters are more than willing to be party to being hoodwinked to save their fantastical ideal of who Obama is. But, unfortunately, for them and Obama, the press is not kind when there is blood in the water. They smell something foul and have gone after it. Under no circumstances should anyone by tolerant of the anti-American hate-filled vitriol that a pastor - a pastor has preached. Although it is his right to say anything he likes, you don't have to sit there, and by your silence, and continued association, lend credence to the fact that you condone the speech of this man. By not removing himself and his family from this pastor's influence, Barack Obama has tacitly condoned the language as if he had said it himself. And, I would say the same of any right-wing nutjobs that stick with a preacher that preached hate - let alone anti-Americanism, whatever the reason. This has killed Obama's chances in the GE, even though he might still get the nomination.

[Knowledgeseeker]

great comment about Obama speech....

[blondesprite]

"No man or woman working in this country should be poor"~~~Barack Obama, 2008
Enough said.

[kato1]

I was inspired and grateful to hear Barack Obama's amazing speech the other day. For the first time, I thought, someone has spoken a truth that others have feared to utter.

As an Asian American woman, born in Chicago, I have always known that my "American experience" has differed from that of your average white citizen. Where many unquestionably wave the flag on holidays, I never have. It isn't that I don't love my country, I do, but I see it through less than rose colored glasses. For non-whites, patriotism isn't so cut and dried. We have lived prejudice and intolerance based on the color of our skin or the slant of our eyes. It's not so simple to say "my country, right or wrong".

When Michelle Obama made her statement about being proud of her country for the first time, it didn't upset me. I understood what she was saying and why. It's not because she doesn't love this country, I'm sure she does. But it's a love that comes in spite of its undeniable shortcomings, she loves it warts and all. Her statement spoke to her pride in knowing that the issue of race had not deterred her husband's achievements and progress in the race to the White House. It speaks well of this country and of its citizens.

When Barack spoke of his grandmother's fear of black men, I thought, "boy, I relate. I'm afraid of redneck men!" because I have never been so afraid as I have been in their company. I have been in large groups of black folks and of white without fear for my safety but rednecks, now, that's another thing entirely. I must admit, there have been times I've wanted to cross the street when faced with groups of young white men. All I'm trying to say is that we all have our own prejudices based on our own experiences. White, black, yellow, red - it is unfortunate that so many of our experiences are predicated on our color or nationality. Intellectually, I know it's not rational to believe all groups of young white men pose a threat, but I can't stop the knee jerk reaction - the lead in my stomach.

Commentators are fond of speculating on whether his fine speech will win the hearts of the undecided. Let's just face the fact that there are those who will never, under any circumstances, vote for a person of color. There is nothing he can say or do to change that. Joe Scarborough cited a family of 65 democrats who said that in an Obama/McCain contest, they, to a man (and woman) would vote for McCain. I don't know for a fact, but I'd guess they are an example of people for whom race is a big factor. Of course, Joe didn't mention that as a possible reason for their mass defection to McCain.

The democratic party lost a lot of the party in the '60's after LBJ signed civil rights legislation - with a signature, most of the south was lost. Segregationists became republicans overnight. Personally, I think it was the best way to cull the herd - so to speak. Who wants or needs such destructive baggage? Should Barack Obama become our 44th president, I'm sure the republican ranks will swell by at least 65.

[WillBFair]

I only heard clips, and they were enough to show that he's still using rhetoric like a snake oil salesmen, and that his 'educated' supporters still have no clue.
Compare Wright to grandma? (A grotesque analogy. We don’t choose our grandparents. And no grandmother would condemn others to hell. No Christian would either. Luke 6:37). Mention race and Katrina (play the victim card). Mention race and O.J. (Change the subject again but with something so unrelated and trivial it makes the whole issue seem ridiculous). Invent a racial gaff for the Clinton team (Imply for the umpteenth time this week that the Clintons are racist, the most disgusting, ongoing smear of the season, only possible with help from an amoral media and supporters too ignorant for words). Position the attack at the end of a section (Leave the public with the disgusting falsehood hanging in the air). Keep the arrogant tone to intimidate anyone who might notice that you've adopted Clinton policies of healthcare reform, fiscal restraint, and bipartisanship; laugh at your far left fanatsies like wanting to meet with dictators; or object to you shocking lack of qualifications.

[SickOfSpin]

HuffPost's Pick

WillBFair--quite the screen name...Will Be Fair...You make allegations that are transparently preconceived prior to Obama's speech. You had no need to pretend to hear the speech because you had no intention of having your mind changed. All you needed was to extrapolate phrases out of the speech and you were ready to go. It's a pity that someone who is attempting to reach out and breach the chasm that we live with in our country seems to be such a threat to you--that you rail at the arrogance of it, that you are offended by some similarities in platform with Hillary Clinton, that you quake at Obama's "shocking" lack of qualifications (which other than not having slept with Bill Clinton in the White House and performing as First Lady, Obama holds more elected office experience and certainly equal in terms of life experience) but the richest, and absent, issue that you were not able to mention is Barack Obama's foresight relative to the debacle in Iraq and Hillary's counterpoint position of political expediency. Face it, you had your mind made up long before Rev. Wright's clips were sent out over the airwaves...You've just hung your anger on the latest attempt to halt Barack Obama's rise into America's history books as a true leader with vision and integrity.

[Pquid]

I'm not a psychologist but I am the mother of a successful, well-adjusted bi-racial son who was raised with love and who has never felt the need to align himself with one side or the other the way Obama seems to have done. Maybe this is why I stopped cold at Obama's comments about his grandmother. She was a major influence in his life and yet according to him she "on more than one occasion made him cringe" with her racial remarks about being afraid of black men. It must have been devastating to Obama's self-image to be spoken to like that during his formative years and most likely left him conflicted and angered. Perhaps that is why as an adult he allows his own children to be influenced, even baptized, by someone who is the polar opposite of his grandmother. But do two wrongs make a right?

Obama's grandmother's remarks, wrong and abusive as they were, were said in private. In all probability she did not mean for her words to go beyond the room they were in and she'd be ashamed that the entire world heard them. On the other hand, Wright's sermon was a public testament intended to influence any and all who heard. Why else record and make it available to anyone? The mission of the minister of a church, after all, is to influence his followers. But I wonder how many children, white or otherwise, cringed when they heard it. I believe Obama's choice to defend Wright was unfortunate and showed poor judgement on his part.

[nomadic]

I get so tired of reading self righteous nonsense like the evoking of a racial epithet is something more than a tasteless form of ignorance. I'm a mostly white guy and my mystery meat is due to lies in our family. I readily admit them to anyone. It's not disrespect, it's part of my life story. Finding out that everyone is not what others assume is great way to open dialogue, dialogue denied is a secret that festers. Barack Obama stated facts about some comments his grandmother made regarding people of a different skin hue than her own. Stating this experience is not a confessional but a fact of his young life, a formative event he endured. Talking about it is not his lack of tact or disrespectful to his grandmother.
He was being candid when so many other people hide their histories. In this case it clarified real life in the USA, the great racial divide. I'm glad he copped to the facts of life. Would that everyone else did.
When Bill Clinton was impeached the first thing that came to mind was why he didn't just admit he was carrying one with his intern once he knew the cretins who hounded him were going to expose him? We cannot move forward if we do not recognize the problems, pretending everything is all right as long as we keep our secrets. BS!
Thank you, Barack Obama. Thank you for your candor. I'm only sorry you have to endure frightened white people who want to pretend everything is peachy keen so long as denial is easier than facing the truth about life in the real America.
You've managed to dispel some of my long acquired cynicism. I'm not happy with this election or the process but I am very encouraged by your honesty.

[ibivi]

Yesterday Mr Obama elevated political discourse. Now if only the MSM would do the same.

[Marline]

I always thought Obama was a fantastic speaker and I did listen to Obama's 38 minute speech. I will always give the man credit for being a fantastic speaker. He has charisma also but that's as far as it goes. The speech in my view was a very intelligent and beautiful way to try to end the turmoil surrounding his friend, mentor and pastor, Rev. Jeremiah a. Wright Jr. but that is all it was to me. Yes, It was a very brilliant strategic written speech however, before this speech, Obama had been asked the question by news interviews and stumbled badly in giving them his answer regarding Rev. Wright. He, Obama at that time did not have his master mind speech writer handy. Yes some issues were addressed in his speech that I know we need to also address but I say that Obama's speech even though a beautiful well delivered speech was just that nothing more. You can't take 20 plus years and wipe them off the map with one fantastic speech and that's just how I feel about it.

There are other issues in addition to Rev. Wright such as The Weathermen Underground and Tony Resko. So, Obama, even though your speech was master minded and delivered very eloquently you still can't fool me. It will take many years of delivering the same tone of a speech and with that said I have an idea for you Obama. Seeing that Rev. Wright is retiring why not take his position at his, your church and walk and talk that speech you delivered to all of us to your church and it's members. Stick with the same type of speech and I bet you can do wonders for the congregation of your church in all due time.

Marline Downs
Sumter, SC

[kato1]

Obviously, Marline, you're a Hillary person...

I wonder if Ms. Clinton has it in her to even imagine or envision the America that Barack Obama does - I doubt it, she's a continuation of the same old, same old. Her tactics smack of Karl Rove and she plays fast and loose with the truth. The "red phone" ad was Rovian fear baiting to the max. Her "rules don't apply to me" attitude reminds me of "W" and her inability to simply abide by her own agreement (Florida, Michigan) in order to better herself is just another example of her rampant dishonesty and total lack of integrity. And where are those financial statements anyway? She claims to be "the most transparent...." but that's just another Rovian lie. The Clintons are as secretive as the Bushes.

As far as her experience goes, well, just because she says she has it, doesn't mean she does (another "W" trick). Geraldine Ferraro got into some hot water because she said Obama was only in this position because he is black. Here's one for you - Hill is only in this position because of a man named Bill. There are more qualified, better women who really do have the experience she keeps saying she has (and does not) such as Jane Harmon, Louise Slaughter, Diane Feinstein. They are more qualified but they didn't have Bill. I'd vote for any of them in a heartbeat. It's time for a woman in the White House, just not this one. "W" in a yellow pantsuit is not what this country needs.

Come election day, if it's Hill or McCain, Ralph Nader might finally get my vote.

[SusanMaine]

Where are Obama's supporters and elders???? Where is John Kerry supporting Obama and
testifying to his good heart, his good mind and his value to all of us?
Where is Claire McKaskell ? Where is Chris Dodd??? They know this Rev. Wright stuff
is just political opportunism from the Clinton camp and the Republican right.
Where are they??????? Barack Obama needs them NOW front and center on the
television and speaking out against this demonizing. ARE THEY AFRAID??????
HE IS OUT THERE ALL ALONE AS FAR AS I CAN SEE. That's terrible. He deserves
our testimony and our support. Courage, America. Look into the heart of this man.
He is the best person in the field by a cosmic mile.

[mojomagic]

SusanMaine....
The original response from Obama to his 20 year association with his mentor Rev. Wright was to lie about not hearing him make hateful "racist" statement toward America and "Whitey". He jumped on the Rev. Wright issue quickly (he isn't going to be "swift boated") by going on the Cable shows, CNN, MSNBC, FOX posted his explanation on HuffPost, in all arenas he said he had never heard Rev. Wright say those things being showed on TV. The audience did not buy it and questioned his integrity in many of 60+ comments to his HuffPost article. They weren't buying it. SO in spite of all the accolades the MSM have said.....that it was an historic, courageous , a profile in courage, a much needed comment on the necessity of having a racial dialogue in America; it should be called what it was:. a desperate attempt to save his candidacy and restore his claim of integrity and playing a different kind of politics.

One can only wait to see if it was effective in the long run, but it is unfortunate that this race has caused more divisiveness among Americans than there has been in years. It has brought veiled threats of violence in the streets if he isn't the nominee....that the blacks will stay home if he is "cheated" out of the nomination. Well, we don't know who will get the nomination at this point. We don't know how disenfranchising the Florida and Michigan voters will effect the general election. We don't know much effect this campaign for the nominee will have on the country for years to come.

That is what makes this whole election very scary.

[scriznik]

HuffPost's Pick

This episode has convinced me of one major fact, we need to focus on educating our electorate a good deal more effectively in this country.

By this, I mean, to a certain extent, high school and college education, but much more so, the return of the fairness doctrine, stricter laws governing monopolization of media and an emphasis media responsibility towards public education and civic service (while using the publicly owned airwaves).

Why, and what does this have to do with this current incident.

Jon Turley on Morning Joe stated that he felt this speech probably played well with Barack's better educated base, people who had the ability to process an understanding a socio-economic context for Wright's statements and what Barack was trying to see, which he quickly followed up by saying was not an attempt to call blue collar voters uneducated, but it probably would not connect with them on a "gut" level.

I think that this is fairly accurate, and this is too heavy a price for us to pay as a democracy.

The fact is, if you do not have a fair background in history, sociology, psychology, economics, political science, even statistics (which teaches us the ability to understand concepts such as risk/probability)., you are very ill equipped to begin to be able to place what an angry black minister says into any context. You would not have the capacity to understand how those statements are not in fact appalling racism, but are, in fact, a rational response to economic, political, and social injustice (a point we need to stop conceding, this man's statements were anything but unacceptable, impolitic yes, but not by any means unacceptable).

Furthermore, we have grown content having the majority of our population use their "gut" when making political decisions for too long. Stephen Colbert made this fact an object of derision a long time ago. When we allow the electorate to use their "guts" as opposed to their brains, that empty gut is easily filled with rhetoric stemming from media encouraging resentment by creating the sense (primarily in working class white americans) of racial injustice/moral outrage (the classic white resentment for welfare queens), social and political moral outrage (hippies, liberal elite), and economic ambivalence (free market, low tax system that benefits only the wealthy).

We now have our intellectual chickens coming home to roost. There could not be a clearer display of the price we have payed: the utterly ignorant, racist, misguided response to this episode.

Am i saying that if you perceive this episode as evidence of racism against white folk: yes, absolutely. There is no room here for moral equivocation, your inability to place the comments of the Reverend into the context of black america historically, politically, socially, and economically coupled with the effect of a media the fosters racial/social strife towards the end of aiming the discontent of the electorate inward as opposed to allowing it to move towards the main injustice in this country which is political and economic is the reason you see racism, it is your ignorance. Does it mean you are racist? Not necessarily, but ignorant: most definitely.

This episode should be a national embarrassment, on display to the entire world. It could clearly cost us the opportunity to have a valuable leader in a time of potential national crisis. This is the importance of keeping our democracy healthy by maintaining the vitality of a healthy political discourse by educating our electorate well and maintaining a well functioning media serves its purpose for the electorate.

We have failed on most counts, and you can read the result on blogs throughout the internet, you can hear the result from pundits on the news, you can read it in multiple papers.

Finally, I think that this is also the reason so many intelligent people found BO's speech so exciting, in a toxic information environment, when we so rarely get the chance to hear sincerity and truth, someone, with little to gain by approaching us in such an honest and mature way (clearly political expediency warranted a full rejection and no comment on race relations), did just that, but we all may actually lose the opportunity for that kind of leadership as a result of it. I am, as an American, ashamed of my countrymen.


FYI: just to load your guns for you: I am in fact a Manhattan progressive liberal, but I do not drink latte's or drive a Prius. But you can box me away with intellectual ease like Rush and Joe Scarborough told you to.

[frustratedinohio]

This is exactly what turns me off about Obama and his supporters. I have a college degree. I graduated in the top 1% of my class. I earn more than $50,000/year. I am a Hillary supporter. The trend which was seen early on in this primary process has diminished and college graduates earning more than $50,000/year are split practically equally between the two candidates now. In fact, just watch how that group will flock to Hillary now. Most of you so-called "intelligent" Obama supporters think he has won this race already and you haven't even noticed that Obama's momentum has vanished. Quit insulting Hillary supporters and take a close look at your candidate.

[scriznik]

this is in no way a criticism of HRC supporters, but rather of those who cannot understand the comments of Wright in a context that places them outside of the category of racist diatribe. In fact, I would say that my comment has nothing to do with HRC at all. Sorry to inadvertently offend you.

[SickOfSpin]

frustrated­inohio--my goodness, how did you determine that scriznik's post was an affront to Hillary's supporters? There was absolutely nothing in it to suggest that it was intended to insult Hillary's supporters. But I think you're wrong...the people who you are referring to, the college educated, higher-income earners are not going to flock to Hillary, particularly when she continues to use deceptive tactics and aligns herself with the republican candidate that will be running against whichever democrat ultimately wins the nomination. Where are her tax records? And where are the White House records that will actually reveal what she actually did as the wife of the president? She refers frequently to Barack Obama's speeches as 'just speeches' but when is it that she's going to support her claim that she is experienced and ready to begin on Day 1 and to answer that phone at 3am? I would suggest that you also might want to "take a close look at your candidate" as we take a close look at ours.

[DavidK08]

I am not part of any church or any faith.

That said, why should Obama have to be any harder on the former pastor than he already has?

How many Catholics left their church when the priests were raping little boys??????????

I don't care what your faith is, those priests were by far, more vile than what a black preacher says to his audience on sunday. Who is throwing the first stone here???????

Grow up!!!

[Pquid]

Seven Catholic schools and two Catholic churches closed just in in the Rochester, NY diocese within the last month.

Get informed!!!

[Gdebs]

I have to laugh at people who can't believe Obama sat in a church for 20 years listening to Rev. Wright say some angry things while they sat in a church listening to 1000s of child molesters. I think buggering little boys is worse than god damning America. Take your choice.

[Didi47]

Gdebs:

You say we should make a choice between Obama's Rev. Wright and priests who have molested little boys. Well here's my choice... I choose neither. They're both disgusting.

[Obama08Supporter]

This was the most awesome speech I have ever heard from anyone, political or not. We needed this speech long time ago. I do not understand why we can't reach deep within our selves and pull together as one America. Think of what this would mean to those around the world looking to us for leadership.

No matter what comes up in the future, I am resolved to vote Obama. I realize that we all have made mistakes in life, even Hillary and Bill, so I am willing to stick through whatever mistakes may come up with regards to Obama. I find him sincere, honest, not perfect, but striving toward perfection. Lastly, there is no other candidate that have the heart to care about the people of America like Obama. All other candidates are in this for themselves, not necessarily for the people.

Obama has call us as Americans to work together to build our Country and I am end it too win it, until the end.

Mr. President Barack Hussein Obama, a name and character to be proud of, Yes We Can!

[LiberalMathProfessor]

I appear to be nearly alone on this (as is sometimes the case). The Rev. was correct: The race problem in America was, is, and will continue to be White Racism. The Rev. was damning in classic form what White Racist American has dealt out and will continue to deal out. I see no problem with his sermon and his passion, no problem at all. Obama should, instead, have condemned the insertion of religion into politics all together, and if he agreed with the Rev., in whole or in part (which any correct analysis would produce) then he should have said so. I say that Obama, as neat and eloquent as his speech may have been, showed some cowardice and lack of vision, too. He dissppointed me, whereas the Rev. shocked and angered me not one bit.

[ElderZinger]

LiberalMat­hProfessor­, I would suggest that in the interest of reality you stick to math. It doesn't matter how far into the darkness a mathematician sticks his head. Where is it that you profess? Somewhere down south? Perhaps in a school that teaches Intelligent Design?

[LiberalMathProfessor]

So, EZ, I'd better be a specialist, as you must be, in order to join the debate. Well, I can see that there is no debate. The Rev is guilty, but of what I cannot tell, at least from his comments about how America (White Racist America) is guilty of a continuing crime against some of us here. I can't see,in the several retorts, any arguments against what I have asserted; just more declarations that the Rev is guilty, but of what, I cannot tell. Simply calling him a racist or a reverse racist is not to prove his guilt. Prove it for me; show me, in what he said, that he was lying in order to advance an illegitimate goal. By the way, EZ, what are your specialties that so qualify you to speak on the topic, and where can I sign up for such training myself, so that I can be approved for the exercise of free speech? You disapprove of me as you disapprove of the Rev., but without benefit of offering argument to support your general thrust about either the Rev or me. Do I sense in you a general talent for insult? If so, no wonder you lack an interest in the making of argument in support of your assertions.

[JanP]

Non-White racism is no more excusable than white racism. No one should get a pass on it.

Of course religion will be injected. it is part of what people are and we are entitloed to know what people running for elected office think.

We also ahve an obligation to know what the people we support really stand for.

[Cbag]

So the liberal math professor has no problem with the Pastor remarks? This sort of trash talking hate speech masquerading as religious gospel has no place in a church or anywhere else for that matter. As long as black ministers continue to spread hate and fear of our government and white people by accusing them of spreading AIDs, drugs and anything else to explain the economic, social and cultural failures of the black community, Obama’s chatter of a closing the racial divide and breaking the racial stalemate is pure liberal drivel. The change he so eloquently speaks of starts with him. He is the one who has attended a black church for over 20 years that blasphemies and denounces our country while spreading crackpot lies and racist views. Obama is the one who has through his participation and acquiescence perpetuated the very racial intolerance he lectures us we must reject. I suggest Obama start healing the wounds of racism by denouncing Pastor Wright and the church that supports his inflammatory orations. If Obama truly wants to make change in this country, then he must start by cleaning up his own racial intolerant backyard before he lectures America to clean up ours.

[Choicelady]

What Pastor Wright has said is not racist - there is no capacity for anyone who is a minority to BE racist which involves systemic an systematic discrimination. Being angry - furious - at the nation's hypocrisy and persistent discrimination is perfectly understandable. But is that ALL he is? I seriously doubt it. Otherwise you'd have not had him to the White House with the Clintons, and you'd have heard much more about him as you have Farrakhan.

I am a white, middle-class, middle-aged woman who lives with the privilege of knowing I can go anywhere and be most anything I want. I don't fear the police, I don't worry my doctor will do less than his or her best for me, and I don't have to worry that my voting precinct will be 'caged'. Very few people of color can claim the same peace of presence.

I see and hear bigotry from white people most every day because it is presumed I, as a white person, will agree. I have also been privileged to be included within minority communities in full, frank, and yes occasionally very angry discussions, but I've NEVER been harmed or discriminated against by a person of color, though I have been done some major dirt by some fellow white people.

I am deeply moved by Senator Obama's soaring understanding of both his racial worlds and the power of this speech to build bridges, to heal, to show us a better way to co-exist.,

[mheister]

Had you studied history, professor, you would readily recognize the role religion has played in the history of these United States, from the time the first European religious refugees landed on these shores. There would have been no need to address the issue of the separation of church and state if the churches weren't so keen on significant involvement in, if not control of, the state. As the churches have not foresworn involvement in politics, the people face this issue on a continual basis.

To the extent that the churches call us to our better angels, to the extent they exert a positive moral influence, the argument may be fairly made that they have a place in American political discourse. Citizens with religious convictions have the same rights as other citizens.

[LiberalMathProfessor]

MH, I agree with your analysis, but I don't get the anchor to what I said. I never mentioned separation of church and state, and I never confessed to having no knowledge of history. May I refer you to the Huffpost's Pick posted by scriznik, for an erudite version of what I might have said if I had given deeper thought to the topic, and had a better grasp of sociology, religion, and history, I suppose. At least scriznik provides support for my skeptism about the presumedly horrific and arcane essense of the Rev's statements. By the way, I am utterly and unalterably opposed to permitting religion and government to comingle, but how to keep them apart is a mystery to me, other than to teach civics and hope that young citizens will embrace the teachings, so that we will eventually see candidates such as Bush, Huckabee, and Romney, or any others who say that God sent them, a thing of the past and a shameful taint on our history.

[Johnz52]

Senator Obama's "More Perfect Union" speech was dead on mark. Being a white middle-aged male I can understand where nearly any African American has the right to say "I'm black and I'm mad as hell." Senator Obama's words were eloquent and heartfelt. Yet once again the media and America expect a black man to go far further than any white person would every be expected to. No one has ever demanded Diane Feinstein or Barbara Boxer disavow the ADL because of the reactionary rhetoric of Abe Foxman towards the Palestinians and anyone critical of Israel's apartheid policies. It took John McCain weeks to merely distance himself from John Hagee's hate mongering and just as long for Hillary to fire Ferraro over her racist statements. Neither had to step up to the plate and directly address these issues in front of an audience. Senator Obama has more than proven that he is not a racist with a hidden agenda. It is time for the media and Democrats to move on and focus on real issues like how to end an illegal war, get Americans insured and our schools back on track, instead of getting down in the muck and making a mountain out of one little known minister's mole hill.

[saami]

Excellent point! If you really want to drag up some dirt, most of those in public life and most of us in private life have some relationships that could be thrown in our faces as evidence of prejudice or hate mongering. My mother-in-law once tried to explain to her non-Catholic grand daughters why she believed they were going to hell because they weren't Catholic. They couldn't believe that she could believe such nonsense. What a hateful thing, but that is what her religion taught her. Although not a Christian, I rather like “judge not lest ye be judged.”

[SickOfSpin]

Johnz52--You are absolutely right--Highlights for us that the bar has been set MUCH higher for Barack Obama. He has indeed proven that he is not a racist and he is as patriotic as an American can be. He has attempted to address the issues regarding Rev. Wright head-on so now, could we please move on to what matters to America? The war in Iraq, the economy, healthcare and education? It has gotten so old, and tiresome, to continue to read posts filled with hate and sanctimonious judgment.

[Didi47]

Johnz52:

Please show me where Obama has proven he is not a racist with a hidden agenda, His speech was given under duress because his 20 year relationship with Rev. Wright's racist preachings was exposed. Yes Obama's speech was good. It had to be! It did not though... address the question that is on everyone's mind: What on earth possessed Obama to take this man as his mentor?
And lumping Ferraro's misspeak into the Wright's category - only goes to show... that the race card can be exaggerated and exploited to its ugliest extreme ... if it's source is a white person. If that wasn't making a mountain out of a mole hill I don't know what is! But for some reason, that was just fine with the Obama camp and had the hell exploited out of it. And yet, you say Rev. Wright's disgusting undeniable racist preachings are a little mole hill? Give us all a break and stop with the nonsense.