« Sure Road to Success - Stick it to Labor | Ramona's Blog | The Mainstreaming of Hate: That's Entertainment! »
Obama's "I Have a Dream" speech
I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal."
I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia, the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.
I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.
I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.
MLK, August 28, 1963, Lincoln Memorial.
I watched President Obama's speech this morning--this intelligent, thoughtful cry for justice, tolerance and peace given in front of an intelligent, hopeful audience of young people who hold the future of their worlds in their hands-- and as I listened, I realized that this was Barack Obama's "I have a dream" speech.
When Martin Luther King gave his impassioned speech that sizzling day in Washington in 1963 there were no illusions that it was the speech that was going to change the world. It gained resonance and built power and ultimately became the battle cry and the triumph of the civil rights movement because of MLK's eloquent observations of simple truths. We could no longer defend the notion that a nation as strong as ours could go on denying a segment of our population equal rights under the law. We were a better people than that.
Over time we either forgot or ignored those lessons--that we can only function as a whole when we all have the same opportunities to rise above--and it cost us. But today our president, Barack Hussein Obama, reminded us that we are citizens of the world. He reminded us that other cultures, other religions, other beliefs live side by side with us here in America. He reminded us that we as a people, as a nation, have an obligation to ourselves to do the right thing.
It was a brave speech. He talked openly about Muslims and their place in the world, knowing that the hatemongers would barely wait for the speech to be over before they would begin their attack. He talked about what we as Americans would do to help bring peace to a tattered Middle East, but there were no
promises that
we would provide the solutions.There was loud cheering whenever Obama talked about Muslims and their rights, but noticeable silence when he talked about peace in Israel. There is still a long way to go, but there was no question but that Obama sees himself as a citizen of the world. He comes to it naturally, given his background, and he has allowed himself to see the world from all viewpoints.
As he was talking (reading from his prompters, if you must) I thought about our last "president" giving a speech of that magnitude and how it would have gone over. The best speechwriters on the planet couldn't have given GWB the power, the presence, the authority to handle it. It wouldn't have been seen as anything even close to genuine. Nor would it have held up over time, as Obama's speech surely will.
But I happened to be watching MSNBC during the speech and so when it was over, it was Joe Scarborough who was there to give the commentary. This is what Joe said minutes into his own speechifying:
"I found it fascinating that he didn't move away from George W. Bush's belief in democracy and the rights of women."No, it's true. He really said that. Then, moments later, he brought in Liz Cheney to dissect Obama's speech and give her take on what it all means. He really did.
And moments after that I changed the channel to CNN, where intelligence reigned and people from all sides and other cultures discussed the speech at length.
I have no illusions about Barack Obama's power to make changes. I don't see him as a diety. I don't always agree with everything he does. I don't see an end to Muslim extremism.
But at this moment, on this day, I give thanks that he's where he is and that he's who he is. I'm proud of our president. I haven't been able to say that in a very long time.
Ramona
(Cross-posted at Ramona's Voices)
Advertisement
Wonderful post, Ramona. I thought the worst that the media could do with this speech was what I heard on radio. I'm ever so glad that Scarborough didn't spoil my day.
What we need is a radio version of C-Span for events like this. I wonder if it was on the TV version? I was still crawling out of dreamland and not near the television.
June 4, 2009 9:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, amike. I didn't switch over to C-span until later, and by that time "Washington Journal" was on. I wanted to write about it before I wallowed in too much of the media rhetoric. I did want to see how "Morning Joe" handled it because. . .because I love a good train wreck, I guess. But it was over the top, even for them. Interesting, too, that it wasn't their main topic this morning. They went on to Sotomayor, for instance, as if there were more important things.
Had some other things to do this AM, but in between, I'll start to read what's being said about it. Should be interesting.
June 4, 2009 10:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
I have not yet seen any right wing attack on our President for this speech. I guess we can just ignore the radio fascists.
Pat Buchanan praised the speech. Weird.
The conclusion on 30 second cable is, of course, speeches do not really matter. Although they are all so very courteous as they conclude.
Jughead on Mornin Joke by the way is spending as much time as possible attempting to sell his book.
Personally I would rather read Aquinas, and I really do not like Aquinas.
I did find a great read on our New President however:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/07/magazine/07congress-t.html?pagewanted=7&_r=1&hp
It kind of does in 7 short pages what Brian Williams was attempting to do in his 2 hour
epic that I could not bring myself to watch. I am sure they will replay it. But this NYT Magazine article is worth the read Ramona.
June 4, 2009 10:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Personally I would rather read Aquinas, and I really do not like Aquinas."
To me, this is the funniest line I will read all die. But I am sleep deprived.
June 4, 2009 1:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yup. Absolutely brilliant, Dick. I've giving you one of those awards you hand out. Never mind the peanut butter on it, it'll wash off.
June 4, 2009 3:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the link, DD. Looks really interesting. I'll read it when I've got some time to really savor it.
I want to see what Pat Buchanan had to say, too. I'm guessing his take is that Obama isn't placating Israel. The old anti-semite would grasp at any straw in that direction.
June 4, 2009 1:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ramona, Thanks for this.
So agree with your last two paragraphs.
Because of time zone here, I missed it and now on CNN it's Sotomayor time.
Rec'd.
June 4, 2009 10:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
You can watch it here or read the transcript:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/NewBeginning/
June 4, 2009 3:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Appreciate. I have now been able to watch and access the text. Well worth the time and effort.
June 4, 2009 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great post, Ramona. Thanks!
June 4, 2009 11:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
You should stay away from Morning Blow--it's better for your peace of mind.
The only thing worse than Joe Blow is whoever's on Fox at the same time--where they were discussing that Obama has only quoted from the Bible three times since being inaugurated. ??
Anyway, about the "I have a dream speech" analogy:
Link to reaction posted on Al Jazeera
June 4, 2009 12:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Uh oh. . .hmmm. Thanks for sharing--I think. Actually I was pleased to see that al Jazeera's coverage was professional and even-handed.
I'm sure others will see a parallel between Obama's speech and MLK's, just as I did. I think for me it was the combination of eloquence and simple truths. Very compelling.
June 4, 2009 1:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
That Obama guy. He really knows how to campaign. He is recruiting the Middle East to have the courage to embrace the US and Israel. It strikes me that maybe the anti-American attitude is like racism in the South. There are more open-minded people then care to openly admit it. It also strikes me that there are peope who just do not like to hug or be hugged. Sad people, those. But I respect their right to be left alone. I just resent their demand no one else hug anyone. To borrow a phrase, they can go f&ck themselves.
June 4, 2009 12:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
He really knows how to campaign
You said it.
He's going directly to the people. And maybe, just maybe, by doing so, giving leaders some breathing room to move in a more productive direction?
June 4, 2009 12:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
What a great line! Sixteen words of absolute perfection! Thank you.
June 4, 2009 2:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, unfortunately, you have to wade through bad typing and rabid ranting to get to some good stuff, but there's always something good hidden in my writing. sometimes even better then that! :-{)>
Thank you, CT and Ramona.
June 4, 2009 2:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't sell yourself short, Gregor. I always find what you have to say interesting. Ranting is good--as long as I agree with you!
June 4, 2009 2:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes wholeheartedly!
I agree with every word.
June 4, 2009 1:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
When you wrote of how bush43's words might have been received, "It wouldn't have been seen as anything even close to genuine". I reflect back on all the times I've heard bush address the press with his frat-boy cum cornpone, back-on-the-ranch homilies, and I would pull my hair out in disbelief anf frustration that the press and the American people could be so obtuse as to not recognize his overwhelming disingenuousness. It is good to have someone with credibility hold the office after 8 years of an ugly cartoon posing as CIC.
June 4, 2009 1:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hate to think of how much credibility we lost worldwide over the past eight years. I STILL hate to think about GWB being CIC for those eight years.
I can't think of anyone other than Obama who might bring our good reputation back at such a pace. Watching him this morning, I just have to believe he's perfect for the job.
June 4, 2009 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thoughts:
1. I'm not sure how much mileage you can really get just by telling the truth, but for some reason it floored me that the President of the United States used the word "colonialism". (In the second paragraph of the speech!) Or that he outright said "unlike Afghanistan, Iraq was a war of choice". I don't know if these words have the same resonance the same thing in the Muslim world as they do to me? For the moment, I'm dazzled.
2. Did anyone else find it interesting what pieces of the speech got applause? I only read the transcript, but that had marks whereever the speech was interrupted by applause. Some of the places were not what I would have predicted ahead of time. The "Innovation of the Muslim World" line. The Darfur line. The place where he quoted the Koran to denounce terrorism. The line where he pledged not to say one thing in public and another in private to the Israelis (made me think of Bush's "secret agreement" on settlements...). Probably I should watch the video but I want to treat the applause lines as saying something about the priorities of the audience (students?).
3. India totally gets gypped in terms of recognition over the development of Algebra. They were like Xerox PARC to the Islamic world's Apple.
June 4, 2009 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Dazzled" is a good word for it. Now if we could just get him to use his power and authority to address the very real domestic issues here at home: Jobs, wages, education and health care. It's time to shift gears and tackle those very real problems. Now.
June 4, 2009 3:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
He is a brilliant man and I am sooooooo grateful that he is at the helm right now. It sucks for him but I don't want to consider what things would look like right now if he weren't in charge.
As to Morning Joe... Scarborough and his entire crew belong on Fox News. They royally suck and if I had my superpowers of impeccable descrimination and the ability to silence extreme ignorance... I'd have my chance to save the day.
June 4, 2009 2:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Synchro--keep working on those superpowers. We need them!
I think Scarborough is just frantic that MSNBC's prime time lineup is so damned liberal. He's doing all he can to swing that pendulum but it won't work because he's not nearly as smart or articulate as he thinks he is. Mika is no help, either. Nodding, shaking her head, and pursing her lips is about all she's capable of that early in the morning.
I wish Fox would make him an offer he couldn't refuse. All they would have to do is stroke his already towering ego and he would be all theirs.
(They could put Lawrence O'Donnell in his place and make me the happiest of happy.)
June 4, 2009 2:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great post, Ramona.
I need sound to sleep so I have an earphone with CSPAN. 3am here, applause woke me, I got to hear the whole speech live, what a thrill.
June 4, 2009 3:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Steve, I felt the same way. It WAS a thrill. The huge problems in this country have thrown me lately, but today I was uplifted. Felt good.
June 4, 2009 3:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
"where intelligence reigned and people from all sides and other cultures discussed the speech at length."
Wonderful post, Ramona. I wish your statement above applied to more and more discussions.
There will no doubt be fierce opposition to that--powers that will do almost anything to prevent a full throttled all inclusive and intelligent dialogue, but I'm optimistic.
June 4, 2009 3:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm optimistic, too, but I see they're giving Rush his usual barking time slot. Nearly every day now we're treated to his rant against anything Obama. Why? How are we ever going to render him irrelevant when the media does everything possible to feed that raging ego?
I've seen Liz Cheney on TV twice today. What could she possibly offer in terms of judging Obama's speech? Is she the new voice of the Republicans? She has even fewer credentials than Sarah Palin. I would say the Republicans are pathetic these days, but I watched them take over this country with the likes of GWB at the helm and very nearly destroy us. Scary stuff.
But I'm optimistic. . .or trying to be.
June 4, 2009 4:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
I look at the over-saturation of coverage of Rush and Beck and Newt and others in that pro-hate universe and think two things.
One, that it's dangerous to broadcast that bile.
Two, I wonder how many independents and so-called moderates they are chasing away with every comment they utter. Will it reach a tipping point where more and more Republicans have the intestinal fortitude to publicly disown the carnival barkers and attract support that far outnumbers dittoheads.
June 4, 2009 4:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well-said. There are fewer people willing to self-identify as Republicans these days. Maybe the hate-mongers will just push along the Republican party's self-destruction. We can hope.
June 4, 2009 9:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great post, Ramona. And have you read elsewhere that the republicans are holding a panel of some kind to investigate the leftward bias of the media? Wonder of wonders, they announced it on fn.
June 4, 2009 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Republicans investigating. . ." Why doesn't that strike fear in my heart? Oh, yes--Republicans. Who are they,again?
(Even THEY don't know.)
June 4, 2009 5:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I believe that Obama broke new ground with his speech today for an acting President. Primarily in publicly talking about Israeli settlements, and using "Palestine," and "colonialism" as mentioned above. He even said that Iran should have access to nuclear power. I think all of these are issues that offer to reach out to Muslims and the region. How eager folks will be to reach back is a wait and see proposition.
The speech seemed to be generally well received by his audience, which may or may not be indicative of broader public opinion.
I believe that one thing folks will watch very carefully is what President Obama and the United States DO - not just what is said.
Martin Luther King was an orator beyond repute, but he was also an outsider leading millions of people towards justice. This generated pressure on the government to change laws. President Obama is not in that situation, and he is not calling on the people to provide the pressure on government to change here. Instead he counsels conciliation and "let bygones be bygones." I truly don't think that is an effective approach in the U.S., and it is unlikely to be one in the Middle East.
However, I think that there are areas of common ground, and he may be able to nurture that. The stance that the U.S. takes will be critical to our credibility. My guess is that the speech was less well received in Israel than in Cairo.
If however, President Obama can move our government to act in ways that are consistent with his speech, then there is an opportunity to make progress towards the resolution of a number of conflicts in that region.
We can all hold a dream of that. Perhaps if enough of us dream of peace and justice it will take shape. For sure if enough of us (people of the planet) actively work towards peace and justice it can happen. And that is where history proves the power of Martin Luther King's "dream." It moved people to act - not just cheer.
June 4, 2009 8:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
I made sure I did NOT have Morning Joe w/Buchanan on my television. I watched it on CNN and they showed it all the way through without commercial or any butting in.
It was a great speech that not only tied together all the religions and world problems, but it placed everyone in on the fix, to correct those problems.
It wasn't just a one sided or one country way to fix things. We're ALL in this together.
June 4, 2009 8:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Given the actions of his government as expressions of his leadership, I think that it would be best to weigh his deeds, not his words.
June 5, 2009 12:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
OT, but you probably want to know about this.
The 7th District US Court of Appeals handed down a appellate ruling on a 2nd Amendment case filed by the NRA post-Heller. The case is NRA v. City of Chicago, and the ruling found that Chicago's restrictions on private gun ownership did not violate the 2nd Amendment, because the 2nd Amendment is not incorporated by the 14th Amendment as a bar against individual state and municipalities. It only restricts Federal Actions.
This is in direct conflict with the case I noted earlier, Nordyke v King, handed down by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The conflicting decisions will soon be headed to the Supreme Court for resolution.
NRA v Chicago also takes a great deal of wind out of the sails for the anti-Sotomayor faction, because one of their primary complaints about her questionable jurisprudence was another post-Heller case, which did not bind the State of New Your to the 2nd Amendment, Maloney v. Cuomo. The criticism is kind of lame to begin with though, because Sotomayor did not write the opinion, only joined it.
See: Andrew M. Harris, "Chicago Law Banning Handguns in City Upheld by Court (Update3)", Bloomberg, June 2, 2009
June 5, 2009 8:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, Pseudo. Why don't you blog this? Then we can get a discussion going.
June 5, 2009 11:41 AM | Reply | Permalink