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.

I think that, overall, it's about as good as could have been expected, at least within the context of the Unity Shtick, to which Obama is wedded.

Conflating Ferraro and Wright made me laugh out loud.

Not "funny" laugh, but "cynical give me a f-ckin' break" kinda laugh.

Wait for it....

wait for it...

Also said it was  courageous of Obama to stick with Wright.

Seemed Authentic.

It was a very good speech, but no one ever accused Obama of not being able to deliver great speeches. The fact is, he dissembled and dodged when he had to address the issue off the cuff, but when he's had time to write some oratory on the issue and address a friendly crowd, now he's ready to go.

His defense of Rev Wright was very nice, but how does it square with the "crazy uncle" comments? Likewise, he goes from "I wasn't at church that day" to "Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes."

I realize that his supporters will eat this up, because many of them have demonstrated a willingness to go with style over substance. I can only imagine how many blog postings we'll see about the tears that were shed while listening to the speech.

His talk about the issues around race were very well put. But it's interesting that he has waited until this late in the campaign to address the issue in depth. I understand why: he has been doing everything he can to avoid talk of race, because it doesn't help him in the election. But to my mind, that only underscores the difficulty he faces from these remarks, and the problerm isn't going to go away.

I have no doubt that Olbermann and Matthews will be wetting themsleves over this speech. Unfortunately, this isn't one of those things that can be dismissed at the whim of the media.

I won't bore you with my description of who I supported and when...Obama, tepid :), Edwards, Clinton. However, when became apparent to me that this politician who proclaimed to be a "different kind of politician" was exactly the same as all other pliticians, he lost my support.  Then when he and his campaign 1)played the race card against the Clintons, of all people, and 2) did not defend Clinton against scurilous media attacks,he lost my respect.

He addressed Wright, and race, and history, and present.  Not good enough for most of you, I understand.  Much as he is not good enough for you.    

I don't particularly care whether he personally heard Wright's remarks. It would be beyond belief that he could know the man for that long and not know his views. But whether he was sitting in the pew or not does not matter to me, unless he is shown to have been lying, and I see no evidence of that.

I have chastised people, in public, for offensive remarks.

I dislike Sen. Obama, and believe Sen. Clinton would make a better President for the problems that currently face our country.

<blockquote>

1) Begin on a personal note. Talk about family roots, a mixed/poor/immigrant/working class family that was somehow able to achieve that good old American dream. End this section with the generic, unproved, self perpetuating assumption that this phenomenon (success from nothing) is only possible in America.

2) Insert: Praise of fore fathers (extension of the "Only in America" idea), quote Declaration of Independence, or Constitution here: "All men are created equal...liberty and the pursuit of happiness" etc.

3) Message about needing good politics and there being hard work ahead (IMPORTANT: make sure this message is bipartisan).

4) Give random specific examples of hardships suffered by "Average Americans" due to poor government.* This proves you have talked to the working Joe.**
* Do not forget to mention that it does take some "pulling yourself up from your own boot straps" type hard work to get things done, emphasize personal responsibility (appeals to moderates and swing voters).
** Make sure this part is really "homey" and "feel good" mention Americana things like diners, and car factory workers.

6) Encourage the American people to be empathetic of others (this can be a good chance to mention religion, "I am my brother's keeper", but do not forget to mention you are the keeper of sisters too).

7) Now bring it up, you've been holding it back waiting for this, but you can say it, "We are ONE America", this brings back the idea of bipartisanism. Make sure to defend that idealistic notion of "one America" after the fact by decrying cynicism and praising hope and faith (again brings back in the good ole Christians).

8) Finally end speech with sentences that are structured likewise: I believe.....I believe....or try, I have faith....I have faith....or maybe even...I hope....I hope....Any way you cut it makes appropriate, safe, and lovely allusions to the ever praised never criticized, unobjectionable Dr. MLK Jr.

You guys can't let of the littlest thing.  You're so eager to throw dirt at the other person that you can't see how dirty you've become.

Your reactions and attitudes are dominated by some real or perceived slight.  You can't move forward because you are too angry about the past.

Everyone is so eager to be a victim that they can't see their own culpability.

This was supposed to be a progressive blog that focuses on crime and politics, but it has devolved into the same tit-for-tat b.s. that goes on everywhere else.

Frankly, I'm a bit embarrassed at the low level of discourse that passes for discussion here.

I have higher expectations for sites like this than to constantly have threads break down into "Clinton's mean" and "Obama's a phony" drivel.

It's too bad because I really enjoyed this site until it became TalkBad About The Other Person:  The Crime of being either Clinton or Obama

No.  It's about a Political Strategy that's been now interwoven with a Spiritual strategy.  And that spiritual strategy, black liberation theology, equates healing with damnation of the other.  Which is not really healing in my book.

What was Wright saying about Clinton back in 1998 when 7 million were being raised out of Poverty?  Was Clinton "riding" black people like he rode Lewinsky back then?

He talked about historical injustice, justifiable black anger, and white backlash.   We all know that stuff.  Kids learn it in school now, and many of us lived it for decades.  

He said nothing about the long tradition of blacks and whites working TOGETHER to end racism, poverty, and injustice.  Just ask Andrew Young what the Clintons have done for the AA community.  

A real leader would have the guts to challenge his followers even when he didn't have to.  Where was his courage to take responsibility for voluntarily choosing to stay in a church that looks to the past for inspiration rather than the future?  Why wasn't he telling us about all the times he challenged his pastor and his fellow congregants to resist the past and embrace the future, to love their neighbor even when their neighbor has turned their back on them at times?  Maybe because he never did.  Maybe because it wasn't politically expedient for him to do so when he needed their vote to get in the state senate.

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.

This is exactly where most Americans will say, Whoa. I've never in my life heard from the mouth of my spiritual leader any thing remotely as revolting as what Jeremiah Wright has said. And if I had, I would walk out of that church/temple, and never come back.

Then he does something else by taking Wright and connecting him first to himself, then to the black community, then to his family (in particular his white grandmother which is of course quite a clever choice of an example), and then to all Americans.

So now he's immunized against attack because there's unity.  He is once again the post-racial candidate.  Disowning Wright is like disowning America. We are all part of the big American conversation.  It's a cleverly crafted speech.  I wonder if it will work?  Clearly the media loves it although that is a predictable response.

Barack's father was not an African American.  He was African.  His people were not the victims of slavery in America. He came here to go to college and then left when he got what he wanted out of the situation. His family was not held back because of slavery in the USA.

Did he face racism in his lifetime?  I am very certain he did. Does that justify it from another side? Absolutely not.

He also indicates that "older Americans", both black and white are racists.  Including Wright because of when he grew up. My parents were from the same era and were not racists. It is about personal experience and not about age.

The pundits are all orgasming over the dialogue we can all now have because of him making it possible for us to talk about this.  Who hasn't been talking about this.  I talk about it daily with people of other ancestral origins because I want to know what they feel and I want them to know that I do not feel what others may direct at them.

I have literally gotten up and left family functions when inappropriate things have been said about gays, women and people of color.You can't chose your family but you can chose who you spend time with.

It is the people who raised him that have helped him achieve his dreams.  They fed him, clothed him, and guided him.  Their nurturing and exposure to higher education are what has made him who he is. It is not the church in Chicago who gave him what he has achieved.  

Anyone can stand before a crowd and deliver a written speech.  It's called a monologue.  Not a dialogue.  A dialogue is when you are forced to speak for yourself , without preparation, and only rely on your heart, mind and instincts. A person known for outstanding public speaking abilities should have no problem delivering a canned speech.

This is being compared to the "I have a dream speech"?  Uhm, no.  It isn't even close.  It was not to further a cause.  It was damage control and orchestrated.  Yes. He delivered a pre-written speach eloquently. Whose words were they?  

Did he believe throwing grandma in there was not every bit the cheap shot and just as racist. "My white grandma"? I don't ever recall using my grandma's name for gain. Especially by defaming her.

If Wright took this church from 87 people to over 8,000 people you could assume that it was because of his ideas and the people he convinced of them. People go to a church because of the message they get from the person delivering that message.

I am not encouraged by the hype surrounding a damage control speech. I cannot shake from my mind The Reverand gyrating and humping while discussing Bill and Hillary. Cursing on the alter?
Parishoner's running onto the alter and "High fiving" the Pastor for making lewd comments and gestures?

I will not invite David Duke over for dinner this evening. I won't invite Jeremiah Wright over either.

Racism is in general taught.  A Pastor standing on the alter proclaiming hateful things for 30 plus years has probably done as much damage racially as the white geezer in the Klan robe. So now, a new generation of racists exists.  Racial divides perpetuated and all behind the mask of religion and self righeousness. Seemingly justified.

This speech served to clear his conscience and to sway those who were swayable. It did nothing to address the issue of racism in the US.

He talks as though he comes from a slavery ancestry and he absolutely does not.  he is using dramatic phrasing about tears, and blood, and history but none of it is his.  

• Despite what my campaign said, I have personally heard incendiary stuff, and I have done nothing about it


• I condemn it all, but I am OK with it as well


• We have to avoid distractions like this because they are distracting


• I have strong black roots and no matter what criticisms come down I will not try to separate myself from the black community. (Note: I actually admire him for this one)


• Ferraro is just as bad for Clinton as Wright is for me.  Her being a woman who supports Hillary and has raised money and made a few comments that echo my own is clearly the same as my 20 year relationship with the guy I have called my political sounding board


• White people have it tough, too


• Wright is a community leader and I willfully overlook his offensive and hateful remarks because he does good work in the community

What was missing:

• Here is what I have done in the past to fight this kind of racism in my own church and my own community


• Here is what I will do as president to heal the racial divide in America


• I am sorry that I have not denounced these attacks (particularly the vicious personal attacks on my opponent and her husband) sooner


• Here is why millions of Americans, after seeing these remarks replayed in ads in October, will still vote for me in November

Is there anyone out there who thinks, following this speech, that the republicans can no longer run the "Damn America" ads and easily convince the vast majority of americans to vote for McCain over Obama?  Does anyone truly believe that he has now neutralized this problem?

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.

So much for the 'new' politic.  Jeralyn, I lauded your comments when you were on television.  I want to rally behind the Dem nom.  But I don't know how I could convince someone to vote for Barack considering this speech (the Ferraro refernce) and the words of his pastor, if he does win the nomination.

I'm a sales rep, I have to believe in the product I sell. He's lost me. I would never disparage Barack nor his supporters.  But the speech didn't convince me of his supposed offense to Wright's statements.  

No ground breaking speech.. a pathetic victim card at play.. we AA have been victimized 3-4 decades ago.. and you white have more to do.. don't fault us if we say something stupid... but you all watch what you say... and media just loves a person speaking on teleprompter words that are not his.. what a sham.

  Any analysis that chooses to ignore that is suspect before it goes 2 words.

  Anaylses which show such close-minded bias as to  attack, literally, a single sentence or even a couple of words without acknowledging the whole of the speech-- its purpose, its ideas, its aspiratiopns and yes its power and eloquence just show a stubborn refusal to show even a modicum of balance.

  Sure, in the end it's just a speech, but words are not just words. words do express, ideas, hopes, goals, wishes, frustrations animosities, angers, and many other things that could not be more real or more importaant.

Other than that, he again proves that he is a gifted orator.

This is pretty ugly and unfair though of Obama, to equate statements by Ferraro with Wright. Obama goes on and on about how great a person Wright is, without a single kind word about Ferraro, just rubbing it in further. I believe the campaign has reached a new low.

Yeah, he gives a good speech, but I can't see how this is enough.  He did seem to contradict his statements Friday--I can't believe the MSM, or at least Fox, won't bring that up.  

Fox's ??? not sure who she is.. Nation heard exactly what it needed to hear.

MSNBC Scarborough... white father, talking to white mother about having to drive to other schools because of quotas and subsidized programs for AAs.  

His embracing Wright and profound relationship with him is a huge huge problem for Dems. in Nov. should he be the nominee. Very serious ones.

There is nothing that he said that answers the question : will Jeremiah Wright, his pastor be
a frequent guest in an Obama's WH ?

Obama always delivers a good speech and finally this one has substance. Not exactly what I wanted to hear though.....I think he left a few things out of it. Like Wright's Hillary bashing and a personal apology for the AIDS comment.

He gives good speeches, that's his thing . . . he also writes extremely well, imo, but the question is whether he brings anything else to the table.

If he wins the nomination, how easy will it be for the other side to paint him as a mere talker?  I seem to remember that Bush gave a magnificent speech on the floor of the house right after 911, and look what happened next.

Once more for the record:  I want competence in the practice of governing the country.  I don't need to be inspired by rhetoric.  I need to know that the people in control of our resources are well-informed, motivated, progressive, hard-working, and fair.

However, relying upon the dumbest interpretation of what Ferraro said in your speech, and acting as though it has been some unknown force that makes us feel bad about race and gender, instead of both of these campaigns, is not responsible.

Then why do you go and attack Ferraro. She fought against discrimination. Did she have a track record of being called racist?

It appears the Obama campaign is of the opinion that the Wright quotes might lose them enough superdelegates to cost him the nomination, and just like 'Checkers', Rev Wright is a liability in this case, but Obama isn't going to give him up - for somewhat the same emotional reasons.