It's up on Drudge and probably elsewhere - I can't link to it on this computer but will update this post later on. [Link]
My first guess -- he may have saved his campaign. More soon!
My first guess -- he may have saved his campaign. More soon!
*****
Okay, it's now several hours later and a lot of reviews are in. Not surprisingly, the starboard side of the blogosphere has ripped Obama a new one. Here's a site with a boatload of links.
My take remains the same -- Obama probably saved his campaign today. Here's why:
My take remains the same -- Obama probably saved his campaign today. Here's why:
- He didn't take the bait on repudiating his pastor. As hateful as Jeremiah Wright appears to be, Obama can probably finesse a lot of that with the audience he needs to reach right now, the remaining Democratic primary electorate. If Obama had tossed Wright overboard completely, which is what I thought he was doing, it would have hurt Obama more than it would have helped him. My friend Rich cautioned me about this in the comments to that post. At this point, it would appear that Rich is correct and I was wrong.
- Of course conservatives don't believe Obama. In this case, that doesn't matter. Again, this speech wasn't for conservative consumption, even if my fellow conservatives did consume it and lay waste to the logic, reasoning and import of the speech. The scrutiny our side offers isn't going to matter to the people who will decide Obama's fate in the short term.
- The focus will be on Obama's eloquence. You have to give him the nod -- he's probably the best orator we've seen since Reagan. For all of Bill Clinton's mastery of the political process, oratory was hardly his strong suit. It's worth remembering that his initial appearance on the national stage at the 1988 Democratic convention, in a speech on behalf of Michael Dukakis, was a long-winded disaster. Mario Cuomo was good, too, but Obama blows him away.
- Race is still a huge issue and Americans do need to have an honest conversation. I'm hardly convinced that Obama is the guy to lead that conversation but I'd be hard pressed to think of anyone else right now who is as well-positioned to talk about the issues than Obama. In a better world, someone like Thomas Sowell or Walter Williams would be that person. We don't live in that world.
- The speech doesn't take the issue of Rev. Wright off the table, but it does kick it down the road. And the longer Obama stays on the road, the more likely it is that he will outlast Mrs. Clinton.
Earlier this year I expressed my view that big changes are in the offing, but that the changes don't necessarily have anything to do with the Obama campaign. I still have that sense.
10 comments:
Obama may have extended his run, but I think this speech may be his downfall in the long haul. In less than a week he has gone from "never heard the hate speech" to "heard it and disagree with it", all captured on video for future YouTube glory. MS-NBC referred to this as a "recalibration".
The Clintons are not going to just concede and will do anything they can to steal the nomination if they can't win it. The recalibration plus not totally severing his ties with the racist Rev may be just the excuse some of the super delegates with ties to the Clintons are looking for to justify giving the nod to the Ice Queen.
Obama was really caught between a rock and a hard place and probably did what he had to at this time - better to stay alive and look for an out later than to crash and burn now. What he needs now is some Clinton scandal or gaff of a similar or greater magnitude to break.
As far as comparisons to Reagan as a communicator, it isn't even close. Obama is almost too slick to the point of being plastic. Reagan combined smoothness with substance, conviction, and a sincerity that Obama lacks.
I agree with pretty much everything you're saying, RH, especially about the Clintons. Having said that, I still feel that the speech was effective as a tactical move and potentially as a strategic move. The Clintons won't be able to attack him directly about it, at least for a while.
In the general election, the speech becomes more problematic. This is why you've seen so many lefty pundits trying to make the Hagee endorsement of McCain a bigger deal than it really is.
And yes, of course Reagan was better. Obama is very, very good, though -- if he weren't, Hillary would have dispatched him a long time ago. Speeches alone won't get you elected; ask President William Jennings Bryan. But a good speech can get you a nomination.
The thing that's the most frustrating about Obama is that he is just as much a promoter and benefactor of the racism industry as is Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Calypso Louie, et al.
The only difference between him and the others is the packaging and promotion, and I think Americans are finding a small cellophane window in the otherwise opaque packaging that is allowing us to see what we are being asked to buy: a man who habitually surrounds himself with America-haters and others of questionable character, in addition to being utterly unqualified for the position he seeks.
Hopefully the country doesn't end up with buyer's remorse a few months after the election.
Equating the incendiary comments of his pastor to the confessions and ephithets of his white grandmother! I have to say that, starts to make believe that Obama has thoughts that make him a reverse racist. That may play to get him nominated, but how's that going to play when he tries to get the mainstream moderate voters? He may win the battle, but between his warped moral equalivalencies, and the fact that he essentially lied about hearing what was said in the first place, it denfitintely puts a cloud of doubt around him....
All of that and Tony Rezko...Hillary must be glowing!!!!
Uncle Rush today brilliantly pointed out with the aid of audio evidence Obama's hypocracy and willing to adapt to the political situation that best serves him at the moment.
It seems that Obama was a vocal critic of Don Imus's "nappy headed hos" comments and advocated his removal from the air. Ostensibly Obama's big concern, as documented by audio clips from the time, was he did not want his daughters influenced by Imus's "hate speech".
Rush pointed out that Obama's daughters were willingly, intentionally, and repeatedly exposed to Reverend Racebaiter's hate speech their entire lives with Obama and his wife sitting right beside them in the pew.
I wonder if granny ever joined the family for Sunday services. Throwing granny under the bus to duck the consequences of his actions and decisions also really showed a lot of class.
RH and anonymous,
Thanks for your comments. It's going to be interesting to see if these sorts of criticisms gain any traction. Rush certainly has a large audience and remains quite influential (I don't get to hear him much these days but I'm sure he's still vigilant about such matters). I note that the Powerline guys (from the right) and Mickey Kaus (from the center/left) viewed Obama's treatment of his grandmother with something of a gimlet eye.
At this point I'm probably more curious to see what Hillary does next; from what I can tell, she's sitting back and watching the show like the rest of us. That's probably the right strategy now.
Back to work - much more on this later.
I think you should trust your instincts that this was a rather remarkable speach, Mark, and not give in to the Hitler Youth chorus that would parrot Rush Limbaugh or seek to define Obama as a racist toward whites, or a candidate who can be equated to Al Sharpton, which is absurd.
You can disagree with Obama on his politics, question his experience, or his judgment for letting Tony Rezko do him favors, but I frankly cannot think of any major candidate for public office in this country who has given a speach which so powerfully interwove a recitation of the fundamental precepts and vision of the Founding Fathers, the historical and all too human failure to always live up to the best ideals, and a vivid personal statement of how that failure has continuing consequences for how some white Americans and black Americans view each other to this day. I fully understood his comment on his grandmother. I too have had family members that make racial comments that make me cringe, and I don't think he was selling grandma out by making this comment.
I'm a white Lutheran, and don't have a Reverend Wright in my life, which, judging by the incendiary excerpts I have seen from his sermons, is fine with me. Obama was trying to say that he has had emotional ties to people who are on both sides of the racial divide, because these feelings exist in America whether we like it or not, but that these emotional ties do not mean that he feels that one must choose a side, which is the common refrain of white and black bigots. I know many in my little hometown who are proudly and defiantly racist, and cannot fathom how anyone could feel otherwise. I never could quite figure how people could go to church, and feel that way, and still can't. I have over the years concluded that for most people of this view, excepting those who burn crosses on people's front yards or drag people in chains behind pickups, this is less of a moral issue, and more of an inability to feel empathy for people who do not look like them, fostered by a profound lack of curiosity and imagination.
It's just a guess, but I would suspect that Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and the other Great Men of the right who would save us from a purported black racist president have not had a lot of experience developing emotional ties to people who are not of their racial and idealogical persuasion, apart from whatever tenuous attachments Rush was forming with prostitutes on his trip to the third world with his bottle of Viagra. I think that people of good will and intellectual honesty can recognize Obama's talent, and the contribution he can offer to the public dialogue in this country, regardless of whether you think he should be president. I am rather despairing over whether we have a capacity for public dialogue, good will or intellectual honesty in this country. The left can turn to MSNBC and watch Olberman berate Bush, and the right wing can turn on Fox and watch Sean Hannity play another clip from the Reverend Wright, and each side can send out their little missives of venom on blogs which are not going to change any one's mind, but simply garner accolades from those who already feel the same. Pissing in the wind.
A. Truck Driver
Truck Driver, you show the classic liberal response. Liberals can make salty or controversial points and say that it's free speech, when a conservative speaks, nothing short of hanging is justified. It may play for you, but as a reminder, it's the soccer moms and others with considerably less political savvy that will decide the "race." Playing the "race" card both ways is a flawed strategy, and the guess here is that combined with a little dose of corrupt Chicago polictics will be enough to case enough doubt in enough people that Mr. Change/Mr. Unity/Mr. Liar (as we now now he's very capable to doing) is in for a long ride. He's still got an overall wave of sentiment working in his favor, but I think "Change for the sake fo change" with this guy will remind people of the last time we voted for "Change" Stagflation anyone!!!
Truck Driver -
Obama's slickly worded speech was about as far from the founding father's ideals as one can get. His thinly veiled "blame America first" message that he wants to create "a more just, more equal, more free, more caring and more prosperous America" is, in my view, a self-serving message intended to have it both ways: keep his creds with "black America" and still be palatable to "white America".
The presentation and execution is slicker and the play is more subtle, but he is playing the race card right off of the bottom of the deck for the purposes of self promotion. He is no Clarence Thomas, Walter Williams, or Thomas Sewell when it comes to great Americans (note the lack of the "African-" prefix) who happen to be black. These gentlemen all grew up in a time, as Dr.Williams puts it, "when it wasn't fashionable for white folks to be nice to black folks". Yet all grabbed the opportunity this great country offered them and self-made their successful careers. They didn't need affirmative action, Jesse Jackson boycotts, or other nonsense the race industry sells.
Obama's proposed policies, the few he has owned up to and actually articulated, are not a whole lot different than Hillary's. Both are socialists who believe in an all powerful, all things to all people government which is the exact opposite of the views of our founders.
Existing government policies of the types advocated by Obama and Clinton are far more responsible for the high rates of poverty, poor education, illigitamacy, and dependece on the welfare state among blacks than slavery, which was ended over a century and a half ago.
We can learn from a historical perspective about the terrible practice of slavery, but race industry entrepeneurs like Obama need to get over it! He and his wife have done pretty well for themselves with degrees from elite colleges, large salaries, and a seat in the US Senate. This would not be possible if the US was as racist a society as the Obama, Sharpton, Jackson crowd maintains. Yes, some pockets of racisms still exist (as they do in all societies) but it is not endemic in American society.
Obama is dangerous to the future of this country not because of his race, but because of his dangereous ideas of a socialist society and unilateral disaramament and obvious flaws in his character.
Truck Driver:
You "cannot think of any major candidate for public office in this country who has given a speach which so powerfully interwove a recitation of the fundamental precepts and vision of the Founding Fathers..."?
I'll help you out. His name was Ronald Reagan and he did it many times. From his '64 speech endorsing Goldwater, to his first inaugural address, to his farewell speech when he left office (http://www.reaganfoundation.org/reagan/speeches/farewell.asp).
Obama gives well delivered speeches. Reagan gave well delivered speeches that actually said and stood for something.
Post a Comment