Rink slam-dunks again!

And I agree with every word.

But I also thought the speech was a rocky road in between padding white fears of blacks and explaining the "anger" in black communities due to white racism. And in the end, Obama's means undercut his ends.

Yes, the speech was a triumph, but it also promoted the very isolationism--Obama leaving his church--that he preaches against in local and global policy making.

Obama says he'll sit down with the president of Iran and Cuba. But how so if he can't even continue to break bread with an Angry Black Man he used to call pastor!? And especially when Obama holds such abject views on problems in conflict regions.

For example, in his speech, Obama railed against Islam as the cause of the Palestinian/Israel conflict or broadly, trouble in the vast Middle East. This thinking is just not acceptable. It smacks of the worse, global racist paradigm--the denial of white colonial empire in the region where radical Islam has provided a popular alternative to. Obama's rebuke of extreme Islam, however just, exploits American's fear of Islam, making it a racist rallying point for divided Americans. I’m not suggesting we let violent Islam off the hook, rather, I’m for identifying also radical European and American democracy’s habit of dropping bombs and enforcing civil wars between people in their homelands.

Further, if Obama is to be president, I think he's got to find a way to challenge the comments of leading men of color without quitting their church or denying their endorsement, like in the case of Farrakhan. Because no matter the degree of offense, when it comes to race, we absolutely need those "Crash" moments, aggressive comments or people, who can bust open this egg-shelled race discourse. And Obama has to find a way to support these leaders' freedom of expression, while opening a space where they can be engaged not "denounced" and "rejected." After all, these men want health care and the war to end too. Their brute spokesmanship does not dissolve their role at the American table, why should they at Obama's?

Most painful, Obama's lack of audacity to stick to his pastor runs counter to the vision of unity, growth, change and hope he touts. While Obama believes the country can change and therefore forgives the impunities of baked-in racism, he holds little faith that these black men will change or that their opinions matter. Ultimately, Obama time track, turning his candidacy into a slave master's squirship, where he does the whipping of other slaves. Meanwhile, the master can sleep at night, knowing his power is collected.

Needless to say, I think we can do better....
Malena

The question we have to ask ourselves is this: What do we expect from an American president? By that I mean, what is possible in a national campaign for the presidency? A true racial justice radical could not run a competitive race in the current political system (she would probably not be caught dead running for a political office anyway). The problem is systemic, not individual. Consequently, how much can we realistically expect of Obama?

Were there multiple holes and hypocrisies in his speech? Undoubtedly. Did he illogically disown Reverend Wright's statements? Of course. (I would actually like to have a national conversation about how racism is NOT endemic in America as Reverend Wright argues). But a person with such beliefs or convictions could not run for president of the United States in either major party.

In those regards, I find it difficult not to applaud his effort, because he said things that his campaign has largely been unwilling to say, and what Democrats for decades have been too craven to say. Has it suddenly waved a magical policy wand over the ills in this country? No, but I've never expected any elected official to do anything without being forced. The power is in changing the system, not aggrieving our choices within that system.

On point! Thanks.

As I understand it, Obama did not leave his church. He remains a member of the church which is now led by Rev. Moss, a change in the works for a year and only accidently coincident with the controversy about Rev. Wright. What follows is a link to Obama's website concerning his relationship to the church.

http://www.barackobama.com/2008/03/14/on_my_faith_and_my_church.php

Needless to say, I think we can do better....

That's the question: can we? That is, given the history of US racism, the way electoral politics is structured, etc. etc. (there are a lot of etc.'s), is Barack Obama the best "electable" candidate we can hope for? If so, does that mean we should grit our teeth and work for his election, or does it mean we should give up on Presidential politics if in fact we can't do better? i honestly don't know; I'm wavering between these two options, both of which make a kind of despairing sense to me. Realistically, I know his election (by itself) won't bring the troops home ASAP, or end US support of Israel's occupation of Palestine, or enact single payer, or open US borders to immigration, or bring labor law reform; equally realistically, I know that no other "electable" Presidential candidate will do those things either. I've sat out (or voted for fringe candidates in) most Presidential elections since I cast my first vote in 1964; living in California, which will almost certainly go Democratic anyway, I can afford the luxury of writing in Dizzy Gillespie, as I did in 1964 despite my fear of Goldwater. This time, in spite of everything, I find myself drawn to the idea of voting for Obama--even for Clinton, if she's the nominee, just to see the white male grip on the White House broken before I die. It's a conundrum, for sure.

I feel Barak stance shows that there is still some men out there bold enough to go against popular and special interest(TriLateral Commission)groups...We have to realize that no one man has all the answers and we will not all see eye to eye on subjects of Religion( I am Pro-Isreal as wellas as a Judeao-Christian) Politics (Democrate/Independant depending on who is representing my thoughts or music(neo-soul, old school hip hop)..but diversity is what keeps interest in this life...Barak is taking a chance going against the norm of politics and that is what makes him special and phenomenal in his own rights...We as African Americans hold a prejudice towards our own successfuls. I mean he had to take the Louis Farrakhan litmus test for African and Euro Americans, now he's being sought after because his former pastor made some questionable remarks, to that i say the man has his own mind and just because Barak knows him does'nt mean he sides with the issue, we as everyday people encounter that type of scenario all the day long with friends and family...and lastly i believe his head is in the right direction of sitting down and talking to dictators and religious zealots to see or offer a solution and if one cannot be made it will be said that at least he sought after them as humans first not hunt them down as animals because they dont comply or believe in American propaganda.....so i will continue to support the free thinker and the one who marches to a different drum...because he has become American History in the making

i think the commentary by Rinku Sen is generally on point. hwvr, i also find that Obama's speech betrays the core weakness in current understanding of racial politics in America. conflating the socio-historical institution of Whiteness (and all that has come to mean) w/ the behaviors/attitudes of individuals of Euroethnic stock, he asserts a flawed equivalence btw "black anger" and "white resentment." he conveniently ignores the first rule for analyzing public policy: who benefits? who decides? who derived the most benefit from affirmative action? whose children were bused? who families are most vulnerable to disaster (natural and manmade)? and who has the right to determine the content, direction and pace of social change?
inexplicably, Obama moved from Faulner's famous line describing the Old South that "The past isn't dead and buried. In fact, it isn't even past," to admonish his pastor for speaking "as if our society was static...[and] still irrevocably bound to a tragic past." he asks us to embrace his Vision for a perfected future free of "division, and conflict, and cynicism" -- a vision lacking any tangible foundation in the present. and while i applaud his goal, it's clear that the price for support from much of the white electorate is Jeremiah Wright's head on a pole. i think the honeymoon's over. -- tdp

I only heard some parts of the speech. To me Obama is trying to appease and accommodate. It is not correct to say that someone who got off the boat (and I am an immigrant) is not responsible for racism against black people. If you benefit from a system of inequity and do not stand against it, you are an accomplice. White people need to know they are absolutely responsible for what is going on, since they benefit.
Losman

Malena, I don't mean to be rude, but did you actually read or hear all of Sen. Obama's speech? You call him out for his "lack of audacity to stick to his pastor," when so far as I can tell, every single other person on the planet thought that the very centerpiece of the speech was his statement that "I can no more disown [Rev Wright] than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother."

So, I have to ask, did you even read or hear the speech in its entirety? Or did you rely on half-reading some of the incomplete news coverage of the event? Your ignorance and lack of comprehension is embarrassing. It's as though you went to the March on Washington and left thinking that Dr King was asking you to take a nap.

I just read a good deal of misleading information on your blog about Obama's response to the incident involving remarks made by the former pastor of his church. I offer the following correction to this information.
1. Obama stated on Larry King Live that he has not left his church nor has he made any indication that he will not meet with is former pastor.
2. He also stated on Larry King Live that his former pastor is now retired from the church and is out of the country. Obama stated that he expects to meet with his former pastor in the future.
3. Obama has made it clear at every opportunity that his former pastor remains a friend even though he could not support his narrow comments on Black/White relations.
4.As usual when people assessed this set of events as outsiders without understanding of context (Black Liberation Theology and the formating of African American sermons) it is easy to understand the sense of confusion, misinterpretation and purpose of the pastor's statements during the sermon.
Americans have a long way to go when comes to dialoguing about race, oppression, liberation, theology and rhetoric in general. We tend to choose divisiveness over compassion and a concerted effort to understand one another. I for one grow weary of this choice of behavior. There is another path to walk and I think that Obama is taking the risk to do so. We need change. But do we really want it? Sometimes I think we really don't. Most times I think we just like complaining and dissing one another.
Delorme: A mature African American woman who has lived long and seen enough of the world to have gained a modicum of wisdom on human relations.
San Jose

Thanks for the feedback.
So Obama didn't leave the church, but his relationship with the pastor, once defined by brotherhood and mentorship, has clearly turned into an unfortunate media sacrifice, used to rally Americans around anti-Islamic sentiments and justifications for our race-based hatreds...