Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Obama's race speech: hypocritical?
It was a great speech, and movingly delivered. The only problem, in my view, is that it's hypocritical.
Look at these quotes from it:
"We can dismiss Reverend Wright as a crank or a demoagogue, just as some have dismissed Geraldine Ferraro, in the aftermath of her recent statements, as harboring some deep-seated racial bias"
and
"We can pounce on some gaffe by a Hillary supporter as evidence that she's playing the race card... We can do that... And nothing will change."
Makes a lot of sense to me, BUT it was *Obama's* campaign who was pushing the Ferraro incident, demanding she resign. Just as it was Obama's campaign releasing pages of talking points to the press in South Carolina over a gaffe by Hillary over MLK.
This "let's get above the fray" attitude is, in my view, the correct one to take, but it isn't how he's been running his campaign. The race card has come back to bite him in the arse, and he's given a great speech to try and remedy it, but it doesn't change the hypocrisy of the man (as right as the message may be).
Just to summarise here - I think the speech was great, and more importantly correct, on many issues. But to me it feels like a preacher proseletyzing on Christian morals, but on the sly cottaging in public toilets every Friday night.
Thoughts?
Comments (11)
It might be hypocritical.
Or he might have been saying, "sheesh, we just spent 2 weeks arguing over Powers, Ferraro and Wright... enough!"
In which case it's not hyporitical but is more of a lament about where things had gone and where they might go.
It'd be a fair question if somebody wanted to ask him about it. If they did and he were to say something like, "Well, but it was different when we did it," then hypocrisy would be an issue.
If his answer is something like, "Well, that never should have happened" then it's not.
March 19, 2008 12:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
That was my interpretation as well. He's being self-critical as well as criticizing the media and others. We're just not used to politicians doing that. (Not that I'm saying he's perfect in that regard. He's not.)
March 19, 2008 2:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think that's a fair comment - I guess I took away less of the reflective lament, and more of the "MSM is bad" message. When he was called out during a Democratic debate on releasing those talking points in South Carolina, he said that his campaign would be different "going forward", so it really annoyed me how much fervour they whipped up over Ferraro (there're still a lot of people here on TPM calling Hillary, and her supporters, racist).
But if this represents a genuine acceptance of where parts of his campaign had sunk to, and a true (not just politically expedient) desire to stop it across the board, then good on him!
March 19, 2008 2:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama in his speech dismissed race-baiting intent in the Clinton campaign and in Ferraro's statements, in spite of all the evidence pointed out by Olberman. That has a name. It is called taking the high road.
March 19, 2008 1:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
I watched it and I didn't have major problems with it except for one: I was expecting Obama to explain why during this friendship with Wright he never told him the same thing he told us in that speech. Or if he did, then to say so.
March 19, 2008 1:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's an excellent question. I do think he's written somewhere that he never thought it was his place to try to change Wright. But one of the Obama scholars around here will know more.
March 19, 2008 1:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe. That would raise an even bigger question about the message though. How can you plan to change America when you haven't even tried to reason with your friend of 20 years?
March 19, 2008 1:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
I noticed the same hypocrisy, and even an Obama supporter must admit that this contrast of prior action with words.
Incidentally, if the goal is "unity' then perhaps it's better not to wage witch hunts against long-time human rights advocates such as Ferraro.
He could have handled that MUCH better and his statement in the speech about her is absolutely a case of hypocrisy.
March 19, 2008 2:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
It was a very clever speech, designed to change the subject from patriotism to race. His base and many msm pundits swallowed it hook, line and sinker. The eight flags in the background should have tipped them to the real nature of the speech. But he got away with it -- for a while at least -- at the expense of labeling himself as the black candidate. The funny thing is, I think he believes a lot of this stuff that he says about himself. She's 26 points up in PA now by one poll. We'll see if the speech helps him close that gap.
March 19, 2008 2:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
OK, I'm confused... So is Obama in your opinion a cynical politician capable of using every opportunity to his advantage or is he a naive believer?
And how was this ever a discussion on patriotism? Aren't you confusing spread-eagleism with patriotism here?
March 19, 2008 3:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why is there not even one video showing the Rev. Wright saying something about unity or even getting along with white America? I mean there should be at least one after 20 years, right? I know a lot of fellow "zebras" who found it too hard to fit into both races in this world and chose the easier path of aligning themselves with a minority group and going along with whatever hate speech and world view they shared just to belong. I suspect Obama is one of them and long ago shunned white America until he needed them to get elected.
March 19, 2008 3:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment