So Obama, at the time a young black boy and black man-to-be, shouldn't have cringed when his grandmother expressed fear of black men, and made remarks containing invidious racial stereotypes? And this young black boy shouldn't have cringed because he should have recognized that his grandmother was perfectly reasonable in fearing black men?

I think you missed the point of the speech a little bit. He was trying to show that he has felt and understood the racial mistrust on both sides. The whole story of his grandmother and that conversation is in his first book (which is a fantastic read, by the way). I thought it was brilliant to bring it up because (as is evidenced by the posts we've seen on these boards since the Wright story broke) alot of people can relate to having a racist or at least ignorant family member. By putting Wright on that level it made it easier for a nervous audience to understand how Obama could reject the comment but not the man. Would we also expect him to reject his own grandmother as a racist? Of course not. So why can't we understand why he has forgiven Wright?

I also think that in that story his white audience is supposed to see themselves in his white grandmother - frightened of black man Wright, but absolved by Obama because while he might cringe, he understands and forgives us for it. I really thought it was a masterful rhetorical move.

If you're seeing "Tony Blair with a fabulous tan," David, you not only are trying to spin the speech into something entirely different than it was, but obviously missed the very point. Or maybe you're just not ready to rise above such unwarranted judgment. While I always disagree with your posts, but enjoy reading them for your vocabulary, this one made ME cringe.

You might need to read over it again.

First off, you probably didn't cringe when your grandma said she was afraid of black men because you're not one. If someone you loved dearly said she was terrified of all people that looked like you, it might sting a little.

"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"
He does address that the concerns of both sides are legitimate, he says that we have to stop pretending they're not in order to go anywhere. I see you're doing a great job of that.

The formal structure of the speech was full of masterful rhetorical devices. This one might have been the best.

But there were many others:

Starting with the "more perfect union" quote, which a) is immediately familiar, b) evokes the Founding Fathers myth and thus ties Obama to the proto-patriots and c) sets up the twin themes of a "union" that still needs "perfecting"; and then returning to it at key points to underline both the work that's been done and the work to come.

Making his story a microcosm of the Melting Pot myth, paralleling Kenya and Kansas, the exotic and the familiar, evoking WWII via his grandparents, and resolving the story with the "only in America" riff.

Michelle's "blood of slaves and slaveholders", implicitly rationalizing her "proud of America" comments with the same historical anger that motivated Rev Wright's sermons.

The flamboyant description of a Trinity service, almost Langston Hughes-like in evoking sights and sounds, confirming the image of a forthright and uninhibited black expression of faith that many whites might envy, and setting the scene for the rhetorical excesses that might naturally follow.

And of course the whole parallelism of black and white racial anger and distrust, again resolved with the "more perfect union" theme.

Plus the speech was written with his own vocal rhythms in mind, by a man who not only understands rhetoric but also knows how to dramatize it.

Never have I heard a politician deliver such a masterful performance - very refreshing.

Michael Gerson in the WAPO makes a big point of Wright's accusations that the US government created HIV to kill black people, I quote at length,

Take an issue that Obama did not specifically confront yesterday. In a 2003 sermon, Wright claimed, "The government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color." This accusation does not make Wright, as Obama would have it, an "occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy." It makes Wright a dangerous man. He has casually accused America of one of the most monstrous crimes in history, perpetrated by a conspiracy of medical Mengeles. If Wright believes what he said, he should urge the overthrow of the U.S. government, which he views as guilty of unspeakable evil. If I believed Wright were correct, I would join him in that cause. But Wright's accusation is batty, reflecting a sputtering, incoherent hatred for America. And his pastoral teaching may put lives at risk because the virus that causes AIDS spreads more readily in an atmosphere of denial, quack science and conspiracy theories. Obama's speech implied that these toxic views are somehow parallel to the stereotyping of black men by Obama's grandmother, which Obama said made him "cringe" -- both are the foibles of family. But while Grandma may have had some issues to work through, Wright is accusing the American government of trying to kill every member of a race. There is a difference.

Barack Obama's grandmother is going to be remembered as the grandmother of the 44th President of the United States