Clinton thread
- Started
- Last post
- 442 Responses
- ********0
"Character as Destiny: The Clintonian Narcissism of 2008
There is something stomach-turning about the Clintonian strategy for winning the nomination. Underneath that which is so disgusting, however, there are little passion plays playing out -- about the state of the nation, and the state of its soul-sick psyche. While there is no overt reason to conclude that they are racists, (if that sentence seems luke-warm, take a look at Hillary's own concession that Obama is not a Muslim), there is every possible reason to label the Clintons opportunists of the very first order. Bill Clinton was not a racist when he mouthed off in South Carolina; he was a desperate power-monger, flailing. Bob Johnson from BET doesn't really think Obama is a drug fiend -- it was just "an opportunity". Albeit a rather disgusting one. Howard Wolfson doesn't really think that Obama is like Ken Starr; it was just the sort of blind ad hominem news-cycle nonsense likely to distract from the actual, the real, the true; in other words -- it was opportunism. That is their true, true heartfelt religion. "Campaign" in Florida and then deny it? Fine: It's all fair game. Or the cynical suggestion by Senator Clinton that Obama would be a fine VP while at the same time declaring how unready he is seems to me precisely the sort of cynical paranoid post-modern solipsism of people who will say anything whatsoever to get what they want and then act stung when called on it. It borders on sociopathy. And like all opportunists, those in Camp Clinton have reached the conclusion that even a scorched earth campaign which devastates the party, vulgarizes the discourse even more than it already is vulgarized, and alienates millions of people who actually have come to hope for real change in this country, is worth the cost of a possible win. Personally, I find it far more likely that the only beneficiary of the Clintonian ugliness will of course be none other than that half-mad proponent of hundred-year wars, John McCain of Arizona, swooping in to the circular firing squad after the smoke and blood have cleared, so as to snatch a victory because the Dems cleverly snatched defeat.
Speaking of half-mad, speaking of snatching defeat -- the Clinton surrogacy of Geraldine Ferraro devolved in to an angry whine on the Today Show this morning. Ms Ferraro seems to think that Senator Obama has been the beneficiary of some sort of post-radical-chic "free-ride", a notion so laughable that it flies in the face of every last bit of information we have about what it means to not be white in America. Every single bit. She doesn't seem like a racist either, actually; merely an embittered ex-candidate and an old school feminist warrior whose legitimate passion has hardened into blindness and bile. (How did the Obama camp play "the race card" when it was she who launched into a dismissal of Senator Obama as "lucky" to be African-American.) I found myself telling the TV that Obama is where he is today in spite of being African-American. Still, Hillary Clinton's campaign seems to tap into something very real in this country -- the anger that many women carry over the costs incurred in the fight for gender equality for the last forty years.Every day, one is struck by the (one-sided) viciousness in this fight. Six bloody weeks of it to go? Six weeks of coarsening opportunistic soulless nastiness. And the effect? Hillary Clinton's unfavorable rating amongst Obama supporters continues to rise according to the Wall Street Journal/MSNBC poll released tonight. The reverse is not true. And her coalition of white women and white blue-collar workers is unlikely to surge the way that young people and African-Americans are surging towards Obama. Those Americans -- the African-Americans who have been turned off by politics as usual and by total exclusion, the young who have been so disgusted by war-mongering and corruption so evident in the smug faces of those in power -- finally see in Obama something of the best in themselves, and something to aspire to: Idealism, dignity, hope, matched by strength and stoicism. Matched by a very keen sense of how to work the system.
In the meantime, the country itself needs to be repaired from inside out. Anti-intellectual, increasingly amoral, broke, and self-obsessed, a land of crumbling roads, crumbling dreams, and crumbling visions of how to care for the needy. A nation filled with invective and rudeness. (Have you ever seen how unmannerly the comments on HuffPost can be? If that is a reflection of how people are brought up today, then what is the point?) At the heart of how to repair a nation -- there is one essential ingredient to examine; and that, of course, is character. Over the next six weeks until Pennsylvania, we must think about that; the character of our leaders, of our nation. Because as Heraclites stated with total clarity -- character IS destiny."
- ********0
"Clinton's "discredit Obama and the process" strategy
by kosAt this point we know that 1) Obama will end the contest with the most pledged delegates, 2) Obama will likely end the contest with the popular vote tally, 3) Obama will end the contest with the most money and greatest fundraising potential, 4) Obama will end the contest with the most states, 5) Obama will end the contest with the best poll numbers against McCain, and 6) Obama will end the contest with the most primary state victories and caucus state victories.
So what's left for Team Clinton? She has to convince a majority of the super delegates to cast their vote for her, so how does she get those supers to ignore all of the above Obama advantages in order to cast their ballot for the candidate who is losing?
Apparently, it's a two-pronged strategy.
The first is what we've been seeing this week -- tear down a candidate who has inspired and given hope to millions by appealing to white resentment and turning him into the "black candidate". It's ugly and revolting, but the Clinton campaign is banking on it scaring people away from Obama. And by "people", I mean "super delegates".
So the Clinton campaign is left arguing that Obama, because of his lack of "experience" and his blackness can't win the nomination, flying in the face of all evidence to the contrary, evidence that suggests that Obama, unlike Clinton, will be a map changer. Clinton, on the other hand, is already fighting last cycle's battle (which in turn -- as Jerome Armstrong and I mocked in Crashing the Gate, was an effort to refight the 2000 battle).
The second is to discredit the process of the campaign. You see this over at MyDD, were Jerome refers to the Obama campaign as the "process-powered candidate". Clever, I'll grant. But it's odd to suggest that playing by the rules is supposed to be a bad thing.
That the primary system needs reform is obvious. It would've been nice to have Team Clinton's support in the last few years as I railed against the caucus system. But you don't change the rules mid-game. You change them after the election.
Still, the Clinton campaign is desperate, in "Hail Mary" territory, thus they're reduced to disparaging any state that didn't vote for her and minimizing the importance of its delegates -- whether they be small states, or red states, or states with black people, or states with coffee shops in them. In fact, Clinton herself makes a curious distinction:
There are elected delegates, caucus delegates and superdelegates, all for different reasons, and they're all equal in their ability to cast their vote for whomever they choose.
Why differentiate between "caucus delegates" and "elected delegates"? They are all pledged delegates, and they are all "elected". It may be subtle, but the implication is clear -- delegates elected at caucuses aren't "elected". They are ... something less.
Remember, Clinton can't win based on the math. The rules -- the "process" -- are her enemy. The only way she can win is by having the super delegates ignore all of Obama's clear advantages -- a coup by super delegate. And the way that coup is by tearing Obama down and discrediting the process that gave Obama those advantages.
But here's the rub -- the "process that gave Obama those advantages" includes latte drinkers, and black people, and young people, and red state Democrats, and small state Democrats, and blue states that voted for Obama.
So it's a sort of Catch-22 -- she needs the super delegates to abandon the winner for her loser campaign, but the way she's trying to win them over is by insulting their very states and constituencies. Harry Reid, for one, is tired of her antics.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on Wednesday defended his state’s January caucus, saying it created a "tremendous sea change on how politics are looked at in Nevada."
His comments came as the campaign for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) has increasingly criticized the caucus system, which has favored Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) in the two senators’ quest for their party’s presidential nomination. Clinton won the popular vote in the Nevada caucus, but she has fallen short on a number of other caucuses, including Saturday’s in Wyoming.
And as Democrats around the country see Clinton insulting their states and constituencies, don't think they're not taking that into consideration as they mull their own votes. And don't think the matter of coattails -- witness IL-14 -- is going unnoticed.
Rep. David Scott (D-Ga.), who at first endorsed Clinton but then switched to Obama, said he thought Obama would do more to help Democratic candidates in his state by boosting Democratic turnout. He said the nominee’s influence on other races "is a general thrust of the conversation" in the House between Obama supporters and lawmakers on the fence.
That argument has proved persuasive with many red-state superdelegates, whose votes would go toward determining the party nominee at a brokered convention. Obama has won a slew of endorsements from Democrats representing solidly Republican states and districts. Obama has picked up congressional endorsements from Georgia, Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Alabama, North and South Dakota, Mississippi, Kentucky, and West Virginia. Clinton has not collected congressional endorsements from any of these states, according to a tally kept by The Hill.
Former Sen. Tom Daschle (D-S.D.), an Obama booster, touted the disparity during a recent appearance on NBC’s "Meet the Press."
"You ask any elected official, virtually any elected official west of the Mississippi, and they say, without equivocation, ‘We want Barack Obama at the top of the ticket.’ They’ll say that privately," said Daschle.
Several Democratic governors from Western states that Bush won have endorsed Obama, including Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas and Janet Napolitano of Arizona.
Clinton is in a bad place. She is behind in every metric that matters, and has been relegated to trashing our likely nominee and entire Democratic Party constituencies and states in order to make the case that she's somehow "more electable" despite all evidence to the contrary. Unfortunately for her, the super delegates aren't all cloistered in New York or in DC.
They represent the United States of America. And outside of Clinton's Blue bastions, her insults aren't winning any new converts."
- ********0
"Geraldine Ferraro, a pioneer and trailblazer in American history, has done more to ruin a sterling reputation in the past few days than anybody but Eliot Spitzer. By claiming, I think falsely, that Obama would not be where he is if he were white or a woman, I think she totally overlooks the impact of his charisma, eloquence, demeanor, message, use of the Internet, focus on caucus states, and his refusal to take special interest money as factors in his sudden rise. She betrays a stunning inability to look more than skin deep for reasons for his success.
But this begs the real question: Ferraro is no racist. Her entire career speaks to the contrary. So why is she now so unable to peer into the deeper reasons for Obama's success and stopping at skin level?
The blunt fact is that Geraldine Ferraro would not make a statement like this one without at least the tacit knowledge and acquiescence of the Clintons and their campaign. Ferraro is an old pro and would know enough not to shoot off her mouth without making it part of a carefully conceived strategy to discredit Obama based on race.
As such, her comments need to be seen as a piece with the attacks on Obama's minister and his endorsement by Farrakhan. With Hillary now almost totally dependent on older voters, the race card may be the only way to produce the kinds of margins she needs in the future primaries to offset Obama's large and widening lead among elected delegates.
The fact is that Obama cannot and should not be held accountable for the ranting and raving of his minister, unless he fails to disavow these remarks. He has done all he needs to do in distancing himself from the likes of Farrakhan. And is success is due to his imaginative use of the political process to achieve what he has earned.
Obama out-organized Hillary by focusing on the small caucus states in February, by which time Hillary confidently expected the race to be over.
Obama out-messaged Hillary by refusing special interest PAC or lobbyist money, giving him a way to paint Hillary as the candidate of the Washington establishment.
Obama out-fund raised Hillary by understanding the potential of the Internet to raise quick and clean money and to permit reloading quickly.
Obama out-positioned Hillary by using her claim to experience (faux as it was) to paint her as just another cycle in the oscillation between Bushes and Clintons which has dominated our politics for two decades now.
Obama out-spoke Hillary by showing and eloquence and elegance that she cannot hope to match.
Obama out-targeted Hillary by focusing on young voters and grasping the amazing insight that in an election with a black and a woman, that age would be the decisive variable.
And now Hillary is trying, through her surrogate Ferraro, to make it appear that all Obama had to do was show up, show some skin and win.
Even for the Clintons, this is a new low."- he should be held accountable for his comments. He is a part of Obama's campaign, and is also an important figure in his personal life.DUKIE0822
- Obama out-messaged Hillary by refusing special interest PAC...this is false
http://www.politifac…
DUKIE0822 - Obama out-targeted Hillary by focusing on young voters..you really mean the young and uninformedDUKIE0822
- Obama out-spoke Hillary...by using the words of other people and becoming a master at twisting the factsDUKIE0822
"I come not to bring peace, but to bring a sword"
Matthew 10:34********
- DUKIE08220
I like this inspirational message from Obama's spiritual advisor. I am also glad his church gave their man of the year award to Louis Farrakhan, another inspirational religious figure.
- The vid where he said Bill Clinton was "riding dirty" cracked me up.ukit
- So the US hasn't been run by rich white men? I'm not sure where this is factually wrong///TheBlueOne
- the problem is people need to stop living in the past, and start building a new futureDUKIE0822
- harping on the roadblocks of the past does nothing to further the progress of todayDUKIE0822
- ********0
all religious leaders are charlatons and some are more entertaining then others but since can prove anything they claim about the theory of Jesus, the theory of orginal sin etc one more fabulist lie or less hardly matters.
A blowhard.
- ********0
"It's hard out there for a surrogate. Especially for a Clinton surrogate being asked why Hillary Clinton has not released the last eight years of her tax returns. As Congresswoman and Clinton surrogate Nita Lowey made clear on Meet The Press yesterday, the reason it's so hard to give a good answer to "Why hasn't Clinton released her returns?" is because there is no good answer.
Lowry gave it a shot, but it wasn't pretty -- or particularly intelligible. When Tim Russert asked about the returns, she opened with the main talking point the Clinton campaign has been using for weeks: "It's my understanding that there are 20 years of tax returns in the public view from both Bill and Hillary Clinton."
And she's exactly right. There are 20 years worth of returns that have been released. What's missing are the last 8 years -- years in which Bill Clinton has been making money hand over fist, and involving himself in all kinds of interesting financial deals (see Ron Burkle, Yucaipa, and the ruler of Dubai).
Lowry then quickly pivoted away from tax returns (clearly the 20 year line, as lame as it is, was the only arrow in her quiver) to make points about earmarks and the terrific work Bill Clinton's foundation has done on HIV/AIDS in Africa -- neither of which Russert had asked her about or have anything to do with tax returns.
Now, Nita Lowey is no slouch. She's smart and accomplished. But when you are sent into battle armed with little more than nonsensical blather, you are not going to end up looking very good. And Lowry didn't. And she seemed to know it -- her eyes belied a classic case of surrogatancholy.
Hillary Clinton has repeatedly paired herself with John McCain as of late, making the case that they are candidates with a "lifetime of experience," so it seems appropriate that her refusal to release her tax returns is another thing they have in common.
While Clinton has been tossing verbal bouquets to McCain and attacking Obama for not being "vetted," Obama has been living up to his promises about making government more transparent. Not only did he release his latest tax returns in April 2007, he also just made public his list of earmarks, and sat down at the end of last week with the Chicago Tribune and Sun Times to answer all their questions about Tony Rezko. The conclusion of the Tribune?
"When we endorsed Obama for the Democratic presidential nomination Jan. 27, we said we had formed our opinions of him during 12 years of scrutiny. We concluded that the professional judgment and personal decency with which he has managed himself and his ambition distinguish him. Nothing Obama said in our editorial board room Friday diminishes that verdict... Barack Obama now has spoken about his ties to Tony Rezko in uncommon detail. That's a standard for candor by which other presidential candidates facing serious inquiries now can be judged."
It's a standard not being met by either McCain or Clinton.As Sheila Krumholz of the nonprofit Center for Responsive Politics said of Clinton not releasing her tax returns: "What is the holdup? She hasn't exactly made it clear as to what process is making it so cumbersome to just release them."
Or as John Aravosis summed it up: "People with nothing to hide don't usually hide."
The main excuse we've gotten so far is that Hillary Clinton just has too much on her plate. "I'm a little busy right now," she said during the Ohio debate. "I hardly have time to sleep. But I will certainly work toward releasing, and we will get that done and in the public domain."
That was three weeks ago. Two weeks ago, Howard Wolfson promised the returns would be released "on or around April 15." But weren't the returns completed and filed a long time ago? Doesn't Clinton's accountant have time to print them out and make some copies (note to Clinton's accountant: many Kinko's are open 24 hours).
As Andrew Sullivan notes, "Did they file an extension for the past few years? If they didn't, the forms are available now."
And it's not as if the Clintons have attempted to make a reasoned argument as to why the returns shouldn't be released -- something about there being too much scrutiny of public officials. Instead they've gone with Classic Clintonism: envelope themselves in lofty, good-guy rhetoric while utterly failing to follow-through. And then smearing their opponents, such as their absurd attack on Obama's campaign for "imitating Ken Starr."
The Clintons have obviously done very well during the Bush years -- well enough that she was able to loan her campaign $5 million at a critical moment. Is it really Ken Starr-like to want to know where that money came from? Or to ask for a list of the donors who have contributed $500 million to her husband's library? Or to ask what her policy as president would be regarding the transparency of huge donations from foreign interests to her husband's charitable fund (see the $31.3 million donation and additional $100 pledge to Bill Clinton's foundation after he helped a Canadian mining mogul secure a massive uranium deal with Kazakhstan)?
As a New York Times editorial put it:
"As a former president, Bill Clinton has been making millions annually giving speeches and traveling the globe. What is publicly known about his business dealings is sketchy, and clearer disclosure of them is required to reassure voters that Mrs. Clinton's candidacy is unencumbered by hidden entanglements."
In short, it's well past time for Hillary Clinton to be as "vetted" as she claims to already be -- and to have this vetting done now by Democratic voters rather than later by GOP hit squads. She needs to live up to the standard she laid out for Rick Lazio, the opponent in her 2000 Senate race. At that time, she said it was "frankly disturbing" that Lazio was holding back on releasing his tax returns.What a difference eight years -- and tens of millions of dollars (some of them from questionable deals) -- can make."
- ********0
Its fair time to regulate the free market bailouts!
- ********0
Remarks of Senator Barack Obama
"A More Perfect Union"
Constitution Center
Tuesday, March 18th, 2008
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
"We the people, in order to form a more perfect union."
Two hundred and twenty one years ago, in a hall that still stands across the street, a group of men gathered and, with these simple words, launched America's improbable experiment in democracy. Farmers and scholars; statesmen and patriots who had traveled across an ocean to escape tyranny and persecution finally made real their declaration of independence at a Philadelphia convention that lasted through the spring of 1787.
The document they produced was eventually signed but ultimately unfinished. It was stained by this nation's original sin of slavery, a question that divided the colonies and brought the convention to a stalemate until the founders chose to allow the slave trade to continue for at least twenty more years, and to leave any final resolution to future generations.
Of course, the answer to the slavery question was already embedded within our Constitution – a Constitution that had at is very core the ideal of equal citizenship under the law; a Constitution that promised its people liberty, and justice, and a union that could be and should be perfected over time.
And yet words on a parchment would not be enough to deliver slaves from bondage, or provide men and women of every color and creed their full rights and obligations as citizens of the United States. What would be needed were Americans in successive generations who were willing to do their part – through protests and struggle, on the streets and in the courts, through a civil war and civil disobedience and always at great risk - to narrow that gap between the promise of our ideals and the reality of their time.
::
This was one of the tasks we set forth at the beginning of this campaign – to continue the long march of those who came before us, a march for a more just, more equal, more free, more caring and more prosperous America. I chose to run for the presidency at this moment in history because I believe deeply that we cannot solve the challenges of our time unless we solve them together – unless we perfect our union by understanding that we may have different stories, but we hold common hopes; that we may not look the same and we may not have come from the same place, but we all want to move in the same direction – towards a better future for of children and our grandchildren.This belief comes from my unyielding faith in the decency and generosity of the American people. But it also comes from my own American story.
I am the son of a black man from Kenya and a white woman from Kansas. I was raised with the help of a white grandfather who survived a Depression to serve in Patton's Army during World War II and a white grandmother who worked on a bomber assembly line at Fort Leavenworth while he was overseas. I've gone to some of the best schools in America and lived in one of the world's poorest nations. I am married to a black American who carries within her the blood of slaves and slaveowners – an inheritance we pass on to our two precious daughters. I have brothers, sisters, nieces, nephews, uncles and cousins, of every race and every hue, scattered across three continents, and for as long as I live, I will never forget that in no other country on Earth is my story even possible.
It's a story that hasn't made me the most conventional candidate. But it is a story that has seared into my genetic makeup the idea that this nation is more than the sum of its parts – that out of many, we are truly one.
Throughout the first year of this campaign, against all predictions to the contrary, we saw how hungry the American people were for this message of unity. Despite the temptation to view my candidacy through a purely racial lens, we won commanding victories in states with some of the whitest populations in the country. In South Carolina, where the Confederate Flag still flies, we built a powerful coalition of African Americans and white Americans.
This is not to say that race has not been an issue in the campaign. At various stages in the campaign, some commentators have deemed me either "too black" or "not black enough." We saw racial tensions bubble to the surface during the week before the South Carolina primary. The press has scoured every exit poll for the latest evidence of racial polarization, not just in terms of white and black, but black and brown as well.
And yet, it has only been in the last couple of weeks that the discussion of race in this campaign has taken a particularly divisive turn.
On one end of the spectrum, we've heard the implication that my candidacy is somehow an exercise in affirmative action; that it's based solely on the desire of wide-eyed liberals to purchase racial reconciliation on the cheap. On the other end, we've heard my former pastor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, use incendiary language to express views that have the potential not only to widen the racial divide, but views that denigrate both the greatness and the goodness of our nation; that rightly offend white and black alike.
I have already condemned, in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy. For some, nagging questions remain. Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely – just as I'm sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed.
But the remarks that have caused this recent firestorm weren't simply controversial. They weren't simply a religious leader's effort to speak out against perceived injustice. Instead, they expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country – a view that sees white racism as endemic, and that elevates what is wrong with America above all that we know is right with America; a view that sees 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.
As such, Reverend Wright's comments were not only wrong but divisive, divisive at a time when we need unity; racially charged at a time when we need to come together to solve a set of monumental problems – two wars, a terrorist threat, a falling economy, a chronic health care crisis and potentially devastating climate change; problems that are neither black or white or Latino or Asian, but rather problems that confront us all.
Given my background, my politics, and my professed values and ideals, there will no doubt be those for whom my statements of condemnation are not enough. Why associate myself with Reverend Wright in the first place, they may ask? Why not join another church? And I confess that if all that I knew of Reverend Wright were the snippets of those sermons that have run in an endless loop on the television and You Tube, or if Trinity United Church of Christ conformed to the caricatures being peddled by some commentators, there is no doubt that I would react in much the same way
But the truth is, that isn't all that I know of the man. The man I met more than twenty years ago is a man who helped introduce me to my Christian faith, a man who spoke to me about our obligations to love one another; to care for the sick and lift up the poor. He is a man who served his country as a U.S. Marine; who has studied and lectured at some of the finest universities and seminaries in the country, and who for over thirty years led a church that serves the community by doing God's work here on Earth – by housing the homeless, ministering to the needy, providing day care services and scholarships and prison ministries, and reaching out to those suffering from HIV/AIDS.
In my first book, Dreams From My Father, I described the experience of my first service at Trinity:
"People began to shout, to rise from their seats and clap and cry out, a forceful wind carrying the reverend's voice up into the rafters....And in that single note – hope! – I heard something else; at the foot of that cross, inside the thousands of churches across the city, I imagined the stories of ordinary black people merging with the stories of David and Goliath, Moses and Pharaoh, the Christians in the lion's den, Ezekiel's field of dry bones. Those stories – of survival, and freedom, and hope – became our story, my story; the blood that had spilled was our blood, the tears our tears; until this black church, on this bright day, seemed once more a vessel carrying the story of a people into future generations and into a larger world. Our trials and triumphs became at once unique and universal, black and more than black; in chronicling our journey, the stories and songs gave us a means to reclaim memories that we didn't need to feel shame about...memories that all people might study and cherish – and with which we could start to rebuild."
That has been my experience at Trinity. Like other predominantly black churches across the country, Trinity embodies the black community in its entirety – the doctor and the welfare mom, the model student and the former gang-banger. Like other black churches, Trinity's services are full of raucous laughter and sometimes bawdy humor. They are full of dancing, clapping, screaming and shouting that may seem jarring to the untrained ear. The church contains in full the kindness and cruelty, the fierce intelligence and the shocking ignorance, the struggles and successes, the love and yes, the bitterness and bias that make up the black experience in America.
And this helps explain, perhaps, my relationship with Reverend Wright. As imperfect as he may be, he has been like family to me. He strengthened my faith, officiated my wedding, and baptized my children. Not once in my conversations with him have I heard him talk about any ethnic group in derogatory terms, or treat whites with whom he interacted with anything but courtesy and respect. He contains within him the contradictions – the good and the bad – of the community that he has served diligently for so many years.
I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother – a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe.
These people are a part of me. And they are a part of America, this country that I love.
Some will see this as an attempt to justify or excuse comments that are simply inexcusable. I can assure you it is not. I suppose the politically safe thing would be to move on from this episode and just hope that it fades into the woodwork. We can dismiss Reverend Wright as a crank or a demagogue, just as some have dismissed Geraldine Ferraro, in the aftermath of her recent statements, as harboring some deep-seated racial bias.
But race is an issue that I believe this nation cannot afford to ignore right now. We would be making the same mistake that Reverend Wright made in his offending sermons about America – to simplify and stereotype and amplify the negative to the point that it distorts reality.
The fact is that the comments that have been made and the issues that have surfaced over the last few weeks reflect the complexities of race in this country that we've never really worked through – a part of our union that we have yet to perfect. And if we walk away now, if we simply retreat into our respective corners, we will never be able to come together and solve challenges like health care, or education, or the need to find good jobs for every American.
Understanding this reality requires a reminder of how we arrived at this point. As William Faulkner once wrote, "The past isn't dead and buried. In fact, it isn't even past." We do not need to recite here the history of racial injustice in this country. But we do need to remind ourselves that so many of the disparities that exist in the African-American community today can be directly traced to inequalities passed on from an earlier generation that suffered under the brutal legacy of slavery and Jim Crow.
Segregated schools were, and are, inferior schools; we still haven't fixed them, fifty years after Brown v. Board of Education, and the inferior education they provided, then and now, helps explain the pervasive achievement gap between today's black and white students.
Legalized discrimination - where blacks were prevented, often through violence, from owning property, or loans were not granted to African-American business owners, or black homeowners could not access FHA mortgages, or blacks were excluded from unions, or the police force, or fire departments – meant that black families could not amass any meaningful wealth to bequeath to future generations. That history helps explain the wealth and income gap between black and white, and the concentrated pockets of poverty that persists in so many of today's urban and rural communities.
A lack of economic opportunity among black men, and the shame and frustration that came from not being able to provide for one's family, contributed to the erosion of black families – a problem that welfare policies for many years may have worsened. And the lack of basic services in so many urban black neighborhoods – parks for kids to play in, police walking the beat, regular garbage pick-up and building code enforcement – all helped create a cycle of violence, blight and neglect that continue to haunt us.
This is the reality in which Reverend Wright and other African-Americans of his generation grew up. They came of age in the late fifties and early sixties, a time when segregation was still the law of the land and opportunity was systematically constricted. What's remarkable is not how many failed in the face of discrimination, but rather how many men and women overcame the odds; how many were able to make a way out of no way for those like me who would come after them.
But for all those who scratched and clawed their way to get a piece of the American Dream, there were many who didn't make it – those who were ultimately defeated, in one way or another, by discrimination. That legacy of defeat was passed on to future generations – those young men and increasingly young women who we see standing on street corners or languishing in our prisons, without hope or prospects for the future. Even for those blacks who did make it, questions of race, and racism, continue to define their worldview in fundamental ways. For the men and women of Reverend Wright's generation, the memories of humiliation and doubt and fear have not gone away; nor has the anger and the bitterness of those years. That anger may not get expressed in public, in front of white co-workers or white friends. But it does find voice in the barbershop or around the kitchen table. At times, that anger is exploited by politicians, to gin up votes along racial lines, or to make up for a politician's own failings.
And occasionally it finds voice in the church on Sunday morning, in the pulpit and in the pews. The fact that so many people are surprised to hear that anger in some of Reverend Wright's sermons simply reminds us of the old truism that the most segregated hour in American life occurs on Sunday morning. That anger is not always productive; indeed, all too often it distracts attention from solving real problems; it keeps us from squarely facing our own complicity in our condition, and prevents the African-American community from forging the alliances it needs to bring about real change. But the anger is real; it is powerful; and to simply wish it away, to condemn it without understanding its roots, only serves to widen the chasm of misunderstanding that exists between the races.
In fact, a similar anger exists within segments of the white community. Most working- and middle-class white Americans don't feel that they have been particularly privileged by their race. Their experience is the immigrant experience – as far as they're concerned, no one's handed them anything, they've built it from scratch. They've worked hard all their lives, many times only to see their jobs shipped overseas or their pension dumped after a lifetime of labor. They are anxious about their futures, and feel their dreams slipping away; in an era of stagnant wages and global competition, opportunity comes to be seen as a zero sum game, in which your dreams come at my expense. So when they are told to bus their children to a school across town; when they hear that an African American is getting an advantage in landing a good job or a spot in a good college because of an injustice that they themselves never committed; when they're told that their fears about crime in urban neighborhoods are somehow prejudiced, resentment builds over time.
Like the anger within the black community, these resentments aren't always expressed in polite company. But they have helped shape the political landscape for at least a generation. Anger over welfare and affirmative action helped forge the Reagan Coalition. Politicians routinely exploited fears of crime for their own electoral ends. Talk show hosts and conservative commentators built entire careers unmasking bogus claims of racism while dismissing legitimate discussions of racial injustice and inequality as mere political correctness or reverse racism.
Just as black anger often proved counterproductive, so have these 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; a Washington dominated by lobbyists and special interests; economic policies that favor the few over the many. And yet, to wish away the resentments of white Americans, to label them as misguided or even racist, without recognizing they are grounded in legitimate concerns – this too widens the racial divide, and blocks the path to understanding.
This is where we are right now. It's a racial stalemate we've been stuck in for years. Contrary to the claims of some of my critics, black and white, I have never been so naïve as to believe that we can get beyond our racial divisions in a single election cycle, or with a single candidacy – particularly a candidacy as imperfect as my own.
But I have asserted a firm conviction – a conviction rooted in my faith in God and my faith in the American people – that working together we can move beyond some of our old racial wounds, and that in fact we have no choice is we are to continue on the path of a more perfect union.
For the African-American community, that path means embracing the burdens of our past without becoming victims of our past. It means continuing to insist on a full measure of justice in every aspect of American life. But it also means binding our particular grievances – for better health care, and better schools, and better jobs - to the larger aspirations of all Americans -- the white woman struggling to break the glass ceiling, the white man whose been laid off, the immigrant trying to feed his family. And it means taking full responsibility for own lives – by demanding more from our fathers, and spending more time with our children, and reading to them, and teaching them that while they may face challenges and discrimination in their own lives, they must never succumb to despair or cynicism; they must always believe that they can write their own destiny.
Ironically, this quintessentially American – and yes, conservative – notion of self-help found frequent expression in Reverend Wright's sermons. But what my former pastor too often failed to understand is that embarking on a program of self-help also requires a belief that society can change.
The profound mistake of Reverend Wright's sermons is not that he spoke about racism in our society. It's that he spoke as if our society was static; as if no progress has been made; as if this country – a country that has made it possible for one of his own members to run for the highest office in the land and build a coalition of white and black; Latino and Asian, rich and poor, young and old -- is still irrevocably bound to a tragic past. But what we know -- what we have seen – is that America can change. That is true genius of this nation. What we have already achieved gives us hope – the audacity to hope – for what we can and must achieve tomorrow.
In the white community, the path to a more perfect union means acknowledging that what ails the African-American community does not just exist in the minds of black people; that the legacy of discrimination - and current incidents of discrimination, while less overt than in the past - are real and must be addressed. Not just with words, but with deeds – by investing in our schools and our communities; by enforcing our civil rights laws and ensuring fairness in our criminal justice system; by providing this generation with ladders of opportunity that were unavailable for previous generations. It requires all Americans to realize that your dreams do not have to come at the expense of my dreams; that investing in the health, welfare, and education of black and brown and white children will ultimately help all of America prosper.
In the end, then, what is called for is nothing more, and nothing less, than what all the world's great religions demand – that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. Let us be our brother's keeper, Scripture tells us. Let us be our sister's keeper. Let us find that common stake we all have in one another, and let our politics reflect that spirit as well.
For we have a choice in this country. We can accept a politics that breeds division, and conflict, and cynicism. We can tackle race only as spectacle – as we did in the OJ trial – or in the wake of tragedy, as we did in the aftermath of Katrina - or as fodder for the nightly news. We can play Reverend Wright's sermons on every channel, every day and talk about them from now until the election, and make the only question in this campaign whether or not the American people think that I somehow believe or sympathize with his most offensive words. We can pounce on some gaffe by a Hillary supporter as evidence that she's playing the race card, or we can speculate on whether white men will all flock to John McCain in the general election regardless of his policies.
We can do that.
But if we do, I can tell you that in the next election, we'll be talking about some other distraction. And then another one. And then another one. And nothing will change.
That is one option. Or, at this moment, in this election, we can come together and say, "Not this time." This time we want to talk about the crumbling schools that are stealing the future of black children and white children and Asian children and Hispanic children and Native American children. This time we want to reject the cynicism that tells us that these kids can't learn; that those kids who don't look like us are somebody else's problem. The children of America are not those kids, they are our kids, and we will not let them fall behind in a 21st century economy. Not this time.
This time we want to talk about how the lines in the Emergency Room are filled with whites and blacks and Hispanics who do not have health care; who don't have the power on their own to overcome the special interests in Washington, but who can take them on if we do it together.
This time we want to talk about the shuttered mills that once provided a decent life for men and women of every race, and the homes for sale that once belonged to Americans from every religion, every region, every walk of life. This time we want to talk about the fact that the real problem is not that someone who doesn't look like you might take your job; it's that the corporation you work for will ship it overseas for nothing more than a profit.
This time we want to talk about the men and women of every color and creed who serve together, and fight together, and bleed together under the same proud flag. We want to talk about how to bring them home from a war that never should've been authorized and never should've been waged, and we want to talk about how we'll show our patriotism by caring for them, and their families, and giving them the benefits they have earned.
I would not be running for President if I didn't believe with all my heart that this is what the vast majority of Americans want for this country. This union may never be perfect, but generation after generation has shown that it can always be perfected. And today, whenever I find myself feeling doubtful or cynical about this possibility, what gives me the most hope is the next generation – the young people whose attitudes and beliefs and openness to change have already made history in this election.
There is one story in particularly that I'd like to leave you with today – a story I told when I had the great honor of speaking on Dr. King's birthday at his home church, Ebenezer Baptist, in Atlanta.
There is a young, twenty-three year old white woman named Ashley Baia who organized for our campaign in Florence, South Carolina. She had been working to organize a mostly African-American community since the beginning of this campaign, and one day she was at a roundtable discussion where everyone went around telling their story and why they were there.
And Ashley said that when she was nine years old, her mother got cancer. And because she had to miss days of work, she was let go and lost her health care. They had to file for bankruptcy, and that's when Ashley decided that she had to do something to help her mom.
She knew that food was one of their most expensive costs, and so Ashley convinced her mother that what she really liked and really wanted to eat more than anything else was mustard and relish sandwiches. Because that was the cheapest way to eat.
She did this for a year until her mom got better, and she told everyone at the roundtable that the reason she joined our campaign was so that she could help the millions of other children in the country who want and need to help their parents too.
Now Ashley might have made a different choice. Perhaps somebody told her along the way that the source of her mother's problems were blacks who were on welfare and too lazy to work, or Hispanics who were coming into the country illegally. But she didn't. She sought out allies in her fight against injustice.
Anyway, Ashley finishes her story and then goes around the room and asks everyone else why they're supporting the campaign. They all have different stories and reasons. Many bring up a specific issue. And finally they come to this elderly black man who's been sitting there quietly the entire time. And Ashley asks him why he's there. And he does not bring up a specific issue. He does not say health care or the economy. He does not say education or the war. He does not say that he was there because of Barack Obama. He simply says to everyone in the room, "I am here because of Ashley."
"I'm here because of Ashley." By itself, that single moment of recognition between that young white girl and that old black man is not enough. It is not enough to give health care to the sick, or jobs to the jobless, or education to our children.
But it is where we start. It is where our union grows stronger. And as so many generations have come to realize over the course of the two-hundred and twenty one years since a band of patriots signed that document in Philadelphia, that is where the perfection begins.
- ********0
Amen. brother
- for Obama speech; meets the problem and doesn't squirm or spin.********
- for Obama speech; meets the problem and doesn't squirm or spin.
- ********0
he has greatness in him. isn't time we that in a leader?
- ********0
"Today we saw and heard a preview of our brightest possible American future in Senator Barack Obama's glorious speech. This, then, is what it means to be presidential. To be moral. To have a real center. To speak honestly, from the heart, for the benefit of all. If there was any doubt about what we have missed in the anti-intellectual, ruthlessly incurious Bush years, and even the slippery Clinton ones (the years of "what is is"), those doubts were laid to rest by Barack Obama's magisterial speech today. A speech in which he distanced himself from a flawed father figure, Reverend Wright, and did so with almost Shakespearian dignity and honor.
"This is it, it's here," I thought while watching Senator Obama lay it on the line. We are finally talking about race. Slavery, Jim Crow, economic enslavement, no FHA loans, the failure of affirmative action, busing, offended whites who match offended blacks in rage and fear. Obama shined a light on the conservative talk show hosts who fan white resentments, and at the same time, did not dismiss the reasons for the resentments. He reminded us that the dreams of black America do not come at the expense of white America.
Someone running for the highest office in the land finally talked about it -- the dark and secret swamp that we Americans dodge at every possible opportunity. As he finished the searing truth telling, I realized that this was not so much a speech but rather a unifying call to arms, an insistence that American people act on change. This was an order and a prayer from someone worthy of being called Commander in Chief -- an order that as a bruised and bloodied nation we finally discuss that what unites us, as well as that which divides us. So we can grow, together as a people.
Barack Obama's speech, perhaps one of the most important in modern political history pushed us as a people to move beyond race and gender, beyond Democrat and Republican, beyond politics and into reviving the spirit of the nation itself. To talk, to talk at home, at work, at the dinner table. To really finally talk. What a great day, and where else in the world but in the United States? Today I am very proud to be an American."
- ha! see my note in the other thread. You guys are lucky to have this opportunitykelpie
- ********0
"The Reverend Wright homilies were very disturbing, no question.
I thought Barack Obama's speech, which finished just minutes ago, was brilliant, nuanced, healing and shows him to be incredibly worthy as a candidate. I hope America is interested enough in progress to embrace this man. We would be lucky, very lucky, to have him as a president. If you didn't see the speech, please seek it out.
His speech was brave, and touched on the minister and race in general with real wisdom, and hope for healing. He condemned the minister's words again; but he explained what he valued in him, and you have to be rigid and unbending not to understand what he said (and which he compared to his white grandmother, whom he loves greatly, but who sometimes has made racially divisive comments). He spoke of whites with racial resentments with empathy, and kept moving on to the need to find progress for all. (And his anti-corporation thoughts are pretty relevant, I'd say, right now? Are you sick of having your money disappear in value due to banks and financial houses using the money they invest as insane, addictive gambling adventures; and when the games then blow up in all our faces, the people who did the unwise gambling for short term profits then get 100 million dollar "parachutes"? Are we sick of that yet?)
I'm sorry -- I don't often get moved and inspired listening to a speaker. I think Barack Obama is brilliant, and he is a genuine healer. If we don't take our chances with him, we are doomed to more of this endless, idiot, non-constructive bickering deadlock that passes for governance in our stuck, stalled political landscape.
Can't write more. Off to the bus for my teaching job. I am grateful to have a job. (And I can't leave it if I want to keep my health insurance, can I?)
Bravo to the senator from Illinois."
- DUKIE08220
Oh please this "spiritual leader" seeks to further expand the racial barriers that exist in this country. Obama knew about this man's goals and ideals; he attended his sermons, was married by this man, his children were baptized by this man- and you mean to tell me he didn't realize what he stood for.
Give me a break! The only reason why he is breaking ranks is because the mass media has forced his hand. But once again th American public will continue to purchase Obama's twisting of the facts without focusing on what he has done behind the scenes.
A powerful voice does not make a man great, it his actions that make him great. Yet no one can point to his actions and say this is why I am voting for Barack Obama.- daviddukie, ruinous actions not greater than inspiring words. Words are actions. He is not a pretender.********
- you obviously haven't looked at his kickbacks that he has recieved from big buisness..DUKIE0822
- kickbacks...I meant campaign contributionsDUKIE0822
- show me his actions then...I read your words...but I lack the evidenceDUKIE0822
- daviddukie, ruinous actions not greater than inspiring words. Words are actions. He is not a pretender.
- monkeyshine0
I like Obama...who wouldn't....but I still don't see how his gift extends beyond being a charismatic speaker able to rile the liberal masses. In a general election, I am not convinced that he can beat McCain. I fear we are all so beaten down by Bush's stupidity that we are losing our heads over someone with an eloquent command of the English language.
Speaking of the English language, will someone please make Michelle Obama stop inserting the word "like" between every third word. Like, really. It's embarrassing.
- I give up********
- I love the small of mind in the morning.
********
- I give up
- Jaline0
You guys should probably mention that Obama doesn't completely write all of his speeches. Most people don't.
- You don't write anything yourself, your a programmed retard.********
- You don't write anything yourself, your a programmed retard.
- ********0
I give up
- It's not worth spending your time, these idiots will never understand.********
- It's not worth spending your time, these idiots will never understand.
- ********0
you deserve the bullshit you live within
- All you have to do, is read their history. I'm not sure who their trying to convince anymore?********
- All you have to do, is read their history. I'm not sure who their trying to convince anymore?
- Jaline0
I'm not saying I don't support him. But with fans like AlphaOmega, you have to wonder...
- You know what Jaline? Instead of that acid bath I originally prepared for you?********
- As you are gasping for the last breath of air with that filthy rag in your mouth...********
- I'm going to take a signed Wayne Gretzky Hockey stick and chop you in the throat.********
- Just so you don't get that last breath.********
- are you 12?********
- You know what Jaline? Instead of that acid bath I originally prepared for you?
