Barack Obama & Race Relations: Blame it on Wall St & Lobbyists
By now, we’ve all seen the PR disaster created by Senator Obama’s pastor, Rev. Wright of Chicago’s Trinity United Church of Christ. His separatist sermons are divisive and throw-backs to a time when our country did itself a great disservice by not embracing all our citizens, regardless of their color.
But times have changed for the better. Everyone I know lives in a multi-racial neighborhood and gets alongĀ fine with their neighbors (excluding arguments about who parked in who’s space during a snowstorm and that has no bearing on the neighbor’s race…that’s just New England at its finest
Today’s Wall Street Journal has an interesting thought piece on the subject, as follow up to Obama’s big speech about race:
So yesterday Mr. Obama sought to rehabilitate his image by distancing himself from Mr. Wright’s race-paranoia. He talked about his own multiracial background — son of a white mother and Kenyan father — and said, “I will never forget that in no other country on Earth is my story even possible.”
Mr. Wright’s remarks “expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country,” Mr. Obama continued, and are “not only wrong but divisive, divisive at a time when we need unity” — his way of broadening out the discussion to include his political message.
Less uplifting was his attempt to pair Mr. Wright’s extremism with Geraldine Ferraro’s recent remarks as “the other end” of the spectrum on race. Mr. Wright’s sermons are rooted in a racial separatism and black liberation theology that is a distinct minority even among African-Americans. Ms. Ferraro was, at worst, saying that Mr. Obama is helped because many Americans want to vote for someone who is black.
It is also notable that Mr. Obama situated Mr. Wright within what the Senator sees as the continuing black-white conflict and the worst excesses of racial injustice like Jim Crow. He dwelled on a lack of funding for inner-city schools and a general “lack of economic opportunity.” But Mr. Obama neglected the massive failures of the government programs that were supposed to address these problems, as well as the culture of dependency they ingrained. A genuine message of racial healing would also have given more credit to the real racial gains in American society over the last 40 years.
The Senator noted that the anger of his pastor “is real; it is powerful,” and in fact it is mirrored in “white resentments.” He then laid down a litany of American woe: “the white woman struggling to break the glass ceiling, the white man who has been laid off,” the “shuttered mill,” those “without health care,” the soldiers who have fought in “a war that never should have been authorized and never should’ve been waged,” etc. Thus Mr. Obama’s message is we “need unity” because all Americans are victims, racial and otherwise; he even mentioned working for change by “binding our particular grievances.”
And the cause of all this human misery? Why, “a corporate culture rife with inside dealing, questionable accounting practices, and short-term greed; a Washington dominated by lobbyists and special interests; economic policies that favor the few over the many.” Mr. Obama’s villains, in other words, are the standard-issue populist straw men of Wall Street and the GOP, and his candidacy is a vessel for liberal policy orthodoxy — raise taxes, “invest” more in social programs, restrict trade, retreat from Iraq.
Needless to say, this is not an agenda rooted in bipartisanship or even one that has captured a national Presidential majority in more than 40 years. It would be unfortunate if Mr. Obama’s candidacy were toppled by racial neuroses, and his speech yesterday may have prevented that. But it also revealed the extent to which his ideas are neither new nor transcendent.
For the record, not everyone considers themselves a victim, even those who are not white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant males. I’m female, French-Canadian, and Catholic. And I believe inĀ freedom, personal responsibility, the strength of free markets, and a less intrusive government. Sadly, all of these appear to be at direct odds with Senator Obama’s beliefs.
Hi Sharilee,
An almost reasonably good cross analysis of his speech by the WSJ. Years ago they would have done even better and confuse the heck out of you with their dual thinkings and analysis. Now Days it seems the WSJ is opinionated which is too bad for such a former great paper..
I used to read the analysis columns in the WSJ starting on page:1 and say wow they really understood complexity and wondered what should be my position on a particular financial or world situation. They had a couple of columns each day devoted to fair analysis that stretched ones mind.
If you heard Barack’s entire speech he did OK in my view yet he missed a beat that will cause him future harm. It is great to be analytical as to past or current wrongs yet ONE has to stand above the chaos and STAND for something stonger. He missed that stronger beat.
Barack instead came off supporting Black Church divisive rhetoric as acceptable behavior. This causes problems for most americans including hispanics who aren’t black and are in a greater majority than blacks.
He is still attractive in a Lincoln way so he might weather this storm and any GOP attacks.
Yet Sharilee it would be interesting to read some of these attacks.
On a separate point, I don’t know if anyone else noticed yet the entire Geraldine F situation and removal from the Clinton campaign smacks of Clinton public political manipulation. It was like she was a minnow being fed for a political purpose. Hopefully G.F. isn’t so stupid as to really think that Barack’s attraction is only a Black thing. SO I really expect G.F. was set up for a fall by choice by the Clinton campaign.
GOP69Dave
Comment by GOP69Dave — March 20, 2008 @ 12:59 am
I suspect you’re right on the Geraldine Ferraro situation, Dave. Sadly. She’s been out of view too long. Odd to have her crop up, say something mean, then be hung for it by her own people. I expect this isn’t the last we’ll see of sacrificial animals to help campaigns in this primary.
Comment by sharilee — March 20, 2008 @ 8:23 am