I haven't watched it yet, but just reading it brought tears to my eyes. I'm an Obama supporter, so I don't fully trust my own judgment. But I believe that he has taken a situation that might have sunk any other candidate and turned it into an affirmative statement reinforcing why he should be our next president.

I didn't see the whole speech, but I have got to say this. If I heard a "sermon" like that, I would have taken my children out of that church and gone to one that preaches the bible, preaches loving one another. I had no idea that this is the kind of message that the black community has been getting for two generations now, since civil rights was enacted. It is no wonder that there is still a divide. LONG ago, my mother taught me that we are all the same. Like Obama's grandmother, my mother was afraid too, but she got over it! The bigotry and hatred spouted by that minister is sickening and although I am happy that Obama has denounced the remarks, I am not happy with Obama and what he has opened his childrens minds to.. Really this racial stuff has to end somewhere.

Regardless of what this speech does or does not do for his campaign, it was important for him to give and for us to hear as a nation. We needed to hear it.

It is interesting that what started as a" by the book" political attack has led Obama to deliver this speech.

The reason that Obama did not leave his church over controversial or incendiary statements by Rev. Wright is not "black or white", as the media and political punditocracy like to frame everything.

The reason is complex, and required a nuanced response. That was Obama's challenge. To explain the cultural heritage, the social conditions, and the prejudices that lead to anger and bitterness in a community of people. Not just in the black community, but the white community as well. The anger is not always helpful and is often divisive, but it is real, and can not be ignored or dismissed.

The politically expedient thing to do would have been to throw Rev. Wright and Trinity under the bus. But that would not have been the honest thing to do, nor would it have been the right thing to do.

Obama did the right thing. While acknowledging the real divides that exist in our society, he has appealed to our better nature, spoken to us intelligently and honestly.

Like a clear voice in a cacophony.

Regardless of what happens here on out in this election, Obama deserves a lot of respect for the courage and leadership he has shown.

Really this racial stuff has to end somewhere.

Indeed, it does. And the beginning of that end can only come about if we drop the pearl-clutching and the oh-so-offended preening and the rhetorical orthodoxy that insists: How dare they say that about us!

It will come when we develop the constitution to hear things that might actually upset us, and actually listen to what "they" are saying. Not agreeing, necessarily; but at least listening.

It will come, just as Obama suggests in today's speech, when we learn to act like grownups and stop allowing ourselves to be enslaved by an outdated, destructive, dead-end narrative.

Remember when Tiger Woods said "I didn't bring my 'A-game' today" I submit to you that Tiger is like Barack in this instance....

Tiger's B-game will pretty much beat anyone out there, while his A-game transcends...

Barack's A-game in speeches are (dare I say it) legendary - 2004 Democratic Convention for starters, the New Hampshire concession speech (Yes We Can) for another... But his B-game is still far and away above the other two candidates still left in the race.

"way that skill"

SHOULD HAVE READ

"way to teach that skill"

Your post is your preview ;-)

He wrote the speech himself. By HIMSELF.

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/03/speechwriter_of_one.php

I agree with you and Josh. What did David Kurtz expect? Did he want him to go out with a big smile and start yelling 'Si Se Puede?'

It was an incredible speech and despite the media going around saying that Senator Obama was up until 2 a.m. writing it, I suspect that he's been working on it for a year, maybe longer, and only added the final touches this morning. I think he's a super intelligent man, perhaps I'm not giving him enough credit, I don't know.

Fox News and the people who already hate Obama are not going to change their view of him or keep them from attacking, but I have to admit that even I, horrified as I was by Wright's words, was a bit nervous about the repercussions to Obama's campaign. This powerful speech put my mind at ease, and hit home in so many ways (good God, if you heard some of the racist crazy things coming out of my grama's mouth).

More than anything as I got a bit misty listening to it, I wondered if Chris Matthews got another chill up his leg.

But, people, as Obama said today, he is our one and only hope.
I can understand the black vote going for him,80%,should be 99%, He is their messiah.

I can understand the less educated white vote, they hear $1000 here, $2700 there, $4000 somewhere
else and that spells big $$$$ to them.

And, young white women all seem to swoon at rock stars

But what I can't understand, is the higher wage, more educated white man's support. (taking exit polls at their word.

Obama seemed eager to talk about race in order to keep us from noticing that he wasn't addressing the anti-American tirades of his Pastor. He didn't want to talk about the, almost gleeful, comments from Pastor Wright regarding the "chickens coming home to roost". Pastor Wright was referring of course to his belief that we deserved the 911 attacks, and that any Americans that died were small potatoes compared to Hiroshima.....

Rev. Wright is wrong, of course. The Rev. Jerry Falwell explained it:

...throwing God out of the public square, out of the schools, the abortionists have got to bear some burden for this because God will not be mocked and when we destroy 40 million little innocent babies, we make God mad...I really believe that the pagans and the abortionists and the feminists and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People for the American Way, all of them who try to secularize America...I point the thing in their face and say you helped this happen.

Which is more offensive? When will John McCain be asked to explain his pandering to Rev. Falwell?

I understand that Rev Wright has read a lot of someone's books, and supposedly written several as well, has 4 earned degrees, numerous unearned,and some say he is the most educated man in America (possibly th world), but the fact remains that he is just an angry old man.

After studying at Wrights knee for so many years,some of this must have stuck. When I look at him (Obama) I see an angry young man.

If they had not put the muzzle on M. Obama, I think we would have heard a lot more of Wright's influence

It's important for those with the privilege of internet access and time in their hands to reach out to the people less fortunate. Poverty is the other factor that seems to divide this country. Poverty transcends race, gender and ethnicity and should be tackled with a sense of urgency. Of all the remaining candidates, Obama has the experience as a community organizer to tackle this growing problem. Both Clinton and McCain are more tuned to the rich and powerful.

"If they had not put the muzzle on M. Obama, I think we would have heard a lot more of Wright's influence"

Man, you must live in a very special place, if you think it takes a preacher to teach people they are discriminated against.

And you've been living in a different country than I have for the last eight years, if a little piece of you didn't agree with her.

Fact is an awful lot of people live lives that you don't. Give them a little room for their own experience and history. We don't all have to put yellow ribbons on our car to love this country.

You should not be so surprised. There is a long history of white defensiveness about their relationship to black people. White people have feared black people. White people are surprised to find out that black people are angry. This does not add up. To be surprised that black people are angry is to think that black people should not be angry. But if black people do not have any good reason to be angry, why are white people afraid of them? If black people are dangerous, the implication is that black people must be bad, because white people couldn't possibly be bad. What is missing is a recognition by white people that black people have something to be angry about. This is blaming the victim. It is a classic psychological defense mechanism, the purpose of which is to hide from white people their own complicity in the suffering of black people. The tricky thing about defense mechanisms is not that they are completely delusional, but that they select their facts to hide other facts. In this case, white people fear black anger without being able to recognize the existence of black anger. Yes, there is crime in the ghetto, but why is there this inability to deal with legitimate black anger? There is a disconnect. The fear is not entirely rational. This element of irrationality is a clue that some of the fear is a projection of ones own guilt feelings.

Any white person who has seriously been paying attention ought to be aware that there is good reason for black anger.

One other take on the speech.

I, like many others, thought it was a tremendous speech. But the speech itself, particularly the topic it covered, was seismic in its own right and it pretty much guarantees front-page coverage of Obama for the coming days and possibly weeks.

Hillary problem is less about picking apart a speech that has gone down very well - her spinmeisters can probably find a seam to exploit and keep attacking the Wright issue - it is about getting headline coverage again. It's going to be all Barack all the the time thru Easter, and that's half the game here.

Then again, it was all Barack all the time after Iowa, and we know how that ended in New Hampshire. But I feel this is different. Winning Iowa was yeah-whatever in the grand scheme of things; every four years, someone wins Iowa. Speeches like yesterday's sure don't.

His books are pretty amazing...thoughtful, well-written, deeply considered, a rarity in an age of poll-driven political discourse--my opinion as a highly educated, intelligent woman. That might be one reason that "educated" people, men and women, are drawn to him, having nothing to do with resentments in the workplace.

One more point and then back to work..Talk IS cheap. What Hillary has been saying all along is that it costs nothing to deliver great speeches. If Obama followers can't turn the speech into reality, can't over come the anger, don't listen to him, then it is just another speech isn't it? Do I want half the angry citizens of the United States representing their hate in the White House? I prefer someone who isn't mired in that hate, someone who has worked for every color citizen, someone with an agenda for everyone. I offer no apologies for voting for Hillary, my once republican husband voted for her, my republican child will vote for her. I even still love the other two who will vote for Obama because I walked the walk, no racial divide in this house.