ABOUT THIS ENTRY
This page contains a single entry by Jon Frandsen
published on
March 18, 2008 1:32 PM.
Obama To Speak Out on Race Issue was the previous entry.
Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.
DEMOCRATIC CAMPAIGN
Obama Spoke, But Was He Heard?
Barack Obama launched his national political career with one speech and turbocharged his stalled campaign in Iowa with another. He gave a third compelling and deeply personal speech Tuesday to address his long association with a minister who made racially provocative comments from the pulpit. But was it enough?
That depends upon how much voters are willing to really listen.
The problem Obama faces is that his greatest strength -- using his eloquence to create a picture of an America no longer divided and pitted against each other by race, class, party, religion and geography -- is also his largest vulnerability. Except for campaign slogans such as "Yes we can!" Obama does not campaign or speak in easily digestible sound bites. Nor does he usually rely on that other common political crutch of portraying a given issue or situation in black and white terms.
Rather, he builds a case painstakenly, lacing together history, personal experience, current conflict and his personal vision of a politics of hope. That's exactly what he did Tuesday. Of course he denounced the Rev. Jeremiah Wright for comments that Obama said were offensive to whites and blacks alike. But he also used those remarks to explain the rage and fear of many in the black community -- and he used his own white grandmother to remind people that the white community had its own racial fears and anxieties.
Perhaps most striking of all, Obama used the furor over Wright's comments to illustrate and reinforce the overarching theme of his campaign -- overcoming the politics of division and partisanship -- and to issue a challenge to the country. Rather than unleash a litany of attacks and counterattacks, "at this moment, in this election, we can come together and say, 'Not this time.' This time we want to talk about the crumbling schools that are stealing the future of black children and white children and Asian children and Hispanic children and Native American children.
When Obama first made a name for himself nationally, it was when he gave the keynote address of the Democratic convention in 2004. His unique history, message and engaging speaking style energized Democrats and caught the attention of the news media. When he gave a fiery speech in Iowa that had even supporters of Hillary Clinton on their feet cheering, it revived interest in him by the Democratic stalwarts who watch politics closely. But in this speech, Obama is speaking to a national audience -- a general election audience, really, because the Wright issue is sure to be a staple of GOP attack ads.
And most voters are accustomed to getting their politics in spoonfuls of images and catch phrases crafted carefully by the campaigns and boiled down to digestible chunks by the news media. They're not accustomed to hearing and thinking through long, nuanced speeches. In fact, in a country where far more people can name the Three Stooges than the three branches of government, many are simply not accustomed to thinking much about politics at all. And if people can't really hear Obama's explanation of how he can dismiss and despise comments by Wright but cannot reject the man as a whole, Obama and the country are bound to suffer the fate he described in his speech: "We can play Reverend Wright’s sermons on every channel, every day ... and make the only question in this campaign whether or not the American people think that I somehow believe or sympathize with his most offensive words. We can pounce on some gaffe by a Hillary supporter as evidence that she's playing the race card," he said. "... "But if we do, I can tell you that in the next election, we’ll be talking about some other distraction. And then another one. And then another one."
The problem Obama faces is that his greatest strength -- using his eloquence to create a picture of an America no longer divided and pitted against each other by race, class, party, religion and geography -- is also his largest vulnerability. Except for campaign slogans such as "Yes we can!" Obama does not campaign or speak in easily digestible sound bites. Nor does he usually rely on that other common political crutch of portraying a given issue or situation in black and white terms.
Rather, he builds a case painstakenly, lacing together history, personal experience, current conflict and his personal vision of a politics of hope. That's exactly what he did Tuesday. Of course he denounced the Rev. Jeremiah Wright for comments that Obama said were offensive to whites and blacks alike. But he also used those remarks to explain the rage and fear of many in the black community -- and he used his own white grandmother to remind people that the white community had its own racial fears and anxieties.
Perhaps most striking of all, Obama used the furor over Wright's comments to illustrate and reinforce the overarching theme of his campaign -- overcoming the politics of division and partisanship -- and to issue a challenge to the country. Rather than unleash a litany of attacks and counterattacks, "at this moment, in this election, we can come together and say, 'Not this time.' This time we want to talk about the crumbling schools that are stealing the future of black children and white children and Asian children and Hispanic children and Native American children.
When Obama first made a name for himself nationally, it was when he gave the keynote address of the Democratic convention in 2004. His unique history, message and engaging speaking style energized Democrats and caught the attention of the news media. When he gave a fiery speech in Iowa that had even supporters of Hillary Clinton on their feet cheering, it revived interest in him by the Democratic stalwarts who watch politics closely. But in this speech, Obama is speaking to a national audience -- a general election audience, really, because the Wright issue is sure to be a staple of GOP attack ads.
And most voters are accustomed to getting their politics in spoonfuls of images and catch phrases crafted carefully by the campaigns and boiled down to digestible chunks by the news media. They're not accustomed to hearing and thinking through long, nuanced speeches. In fact, in a country where far more people can name the Three Stooges than the three branches of government, many are simply not accustomed to thinking much about politics at all. And if people can't really hear Obama's explanation of how he can dismiss and despise comments by Wright but cannot reject the man as a whole, Obama and the country are bound to suffer the fate he described in his speech: "We can play Reverend Wright’s sermons on every channel, every day ... and make the only question in this campaign whether or not the American people think that I somehow believe or sympathize with his most offensive words. We can pounce on some gaffe by a Hillary supporter as evidence that she's playing the race card," he said. "... "But if we do, I can tell you that in the next election, we’ll be talking about some other distraction. And then another one. And then another one."
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Obama Spoke, But Was He Heard?.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://blog.kiplinger.com/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/75
6 Comments
Leave a comment
RECENT BLOG ENTRIES
MORE POLITICAL COVERAGE FROM KIPLINGER
OUR FAVORITE SITES
- The Hotline Blog
- Political Wire
- PollingReport.com
- New York Times Election Guide 2008
- P2008 (George Washington University)
- Pollster.Com
- The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press
- FactCheck.Org
- US Politics Guide.com
- First Read (MSNBC)
- The Note (ABC News)
- Politico.com
- National Review: The Corner
- The Huffington Post
- Peggy Noonan (Wall Street Journal)
- Mark Shields
- David Brooks (New York Times)
Your statement about most voters will not actually hear Obama's entire speech is sadly very true.
It is apparent that many people already made up their mind from the video clips of Rev. Wright. It is my opinion that some people were looking for an excuse to reject Obama because they do not want to admit their own inner feelings about a man with dark skin.
Anyone who has listened to Obama speak or read his books would know he has views that are opposite of the video clips of Rev Wright.
Please spare me. Most reasonable people who reject him do so b/c he has absolutely no experience. So yet again, his apologists are injecting the victim's scream of racism into every nook and cranny that they can. The videos, Rezko, etc., just confirm that on top of the lack of experience is a good dose of hypocrisy as well and a superb, slick, calculating politician at work. I could care less what his skin color is. I do care that he has zero experience, but like a crafty snake oil salesman has a mass of crazed idiots singing his praise till death do them part.
I agree, he has already switched his story in less than a week about his views on what his pastor preached about. The real issues are he has no experience and no plan to move this country except for shouting the word "Change". The man does not even understand basic economic principles. The sheep that hang on his every word need to walk off a cliff.
I do not believe that any person can be held accountable for the speech and actions of another human being...friend, family, foe, mentor , teacher or spiritual advisor.
While our relationships with others are based upon some mutual commonality(s).. similarly felt injustices or triumphs, some similar background experiences or sharing some ideals, does not mean we share every single belief or value.
Obama has clearly demonstrated repeatedly throghuout his campaign... credibility, strength of character and his denunciation of hateful and devisive words and actions. How often and in how many ways must he prove this. Any American that is really listening knows and understands his views.
I still can't understand why people believe that being married to the president is the equal to being president. Using this flawed logic, Laura Bush, Betty Ford, Nancy Reagan, and every other living first lady should be throwing their hat in the ring and be deemed front runners. The fact is that Hillary Clinton has a few, just a few more years in the Senate than Obama and before that she held no, I repeat no, elected office. Please stop with the "No Experience" comments because it weakens the case of your own candidate.
Since we are reminded every time the poll results are released that Sen. Obama has the support of the more educated and African Americans, it should not be questioned as to whether or not he was heard. Of course! By the educated and African Americans who have the shared the same experiences.
I am a 66 year old voter, race not important, who is relying on the superdelegates to vote as they ought! They must support the candidate who gets the majority of popular votes.
This is the first election that I've actually had a choice (since JFK) and I want the only candidate who makes sense! That would be Sen. Obama. He is integrous, has played a clean game, responded to the dirt only when he had to and did so with dignity and veracity.
There is something special about him. Look into his eyes ... therein is a clear image of God. He believes in the righteousness that Jesus gifted all of us with. He understands that he must be fair and honest because his father (God) says so, if nothing more.
We need to stop propagating the hate and embrace each other in love. If our country fails, it is all of us who are responsible. We will all suffer.