Obama: "A More Perfect Union"

Barack Obama gave his much-anticipated speech on race this morning. If you haven't read or seen it, you should. The performance is a little less than 40 minutes, and if you can take the time I recommend it strongly.

Transcript and audio are available at http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=88481254.
Video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWe7wTVbLUU.

I expected something along these lines: a repudiation of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's comments without actually denouncing the man himself. It was understood that was what he had to do in order to handle this issue plausibly. The man is nothing if not a master rhetoritician, so I expected nothing less.

And yet we got so much more. It is absolutely a stunning, riveting speech, the likes of which I do not think I have heard given in my lifetime. According to the Atlantic Monthly's Marc Ambinder, he wrote it entirely by himself in the last two days. I am honestly not sure whether to believe that without knowing Ambinder's source --- it is extraordinary in this day and age for a politician to write such a crucial speech on such a pivotal issue without significant input from their communications specialists. But Obama is an extraordinary candidate (and I do not think you have to support him in order to agree with that).

It mystifies me to hear people say that while he's a great public speaker, that doesn't prove he's up to the job of President. A speech like this is not about his ability to implement policy; it's about his ability to communicate very sensitive and personal issues of faith, in the tense and sensitive context of racial demagoguery. It's about his ability to navigate the treacherous landscape of racial conflict in a country where that is arguably the defining cultural milestone. This speech only presents more evidence that Obama is better equipped to do that than anyone we have seen in a generation.

Are our national leaders not supposed to be expert communicators, persuaders, and negotiators? I think that they are. Not for nothing was Ronald Reagan called "The Great Communicator" (and while I am no fan of Ronald Reagan I can hardly deny that the label was deserved). And not for nothing have people been calling Obama the Democrats' Ronald Reagan.

This address is still ringing in my ears. I wonder if, years from now, people will be talking about the "Ashley speech" as a turning point in American politics.

S	M	T	W	T	F	S
		1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31

Most Popular Tags

akamai - 27 uses
baitcon - 4 uses
beth - 27 uses
bike - 150 uses
birthday - 8 uses
books - 11 uses
crash - 13 uses
disney world - 15 uses
doctor who - 4 uses
family - 68 uses
food - 29 uses
funny - 83 uses
geeky - 85 uses
harebrained schemes - 17 uses
health - 17 uses
house - 23 uses
iphone - 4 uses
keyne - 25 uses
kids - 199 uses
life - 161 uses
maine - 9 uses
meme - 62 uses
meta - 5 uses
morgan - 17 uses
mosaic - 43 uses
movies - 55 uses
moving - 11 uses
music - 15 uses
obama - 25 uses
omgwtf - 14 uses
outriders - 54 uses
photography - 19 uses
pix - 451 uses
politics - 115 uses
polls - 9 uses
project forty - 23 uses
questions - 5 uses
quinn - 18 uses
rants - 19 uses
recipes - 5 uses
relationships - 14 uses
rnk - 9 uses
sex - 6 uses
tgiving - 11 uses
the damndest things - 9 uses
triathlon - 4 uses
tv - 5 uses
via ljapp - 86 uses
work - 41 uses
xmas - 8 uses

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

From:

innerdoggie.livejournal.com

I'm curious about how this is playing to non-Obama people.

mr-niggle.livejournal.com

I was playing as boring. Fell asleep about twenty minutes in.

I usually just read speeches rather than listen/watch them, because things move a lot faster that way. So I can't comment on the delivery.

lhn.livejournal.com

AFAICT, it's widely acknowledged to have been an eloquent and effective speech in that segment of the blogosphere that I frequent. The reactions to the substance, you could pretty much predict beforehand based people's politics going in. The Obama voters (Megan McArdle (http://meganmcardle.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/03/speech_speech.php), Armed Liberal (http://www.windsofchange.net/archives/obamas_great_speech.php)) mostly loved it with minor reservations. The ones who weren't going to vote for Obama (McQ at qando.net (http://qando.net/details.aspx?Entry=8130), Mickey Kaus (http://www.slate.com/id/2186845/)) have problems with, e.g., its vagueness about what Wright actually said that Obama is repudiating, and its implicit equating of, e.g., Wright's promoting conspiracy theories about AIDS and 9/11 and damning the US to his congregation with Obama's grandmother's being personally nervous about encountering young black men on the street.

But of course it's not pundits with already-formed positions that Obama's speech needs to win over. It's clearly succeeded on one front by energizing his base and making him look presidential (especially important given the unusual circumstances of this election's Democratic contest). Whether it also won over swing voters will have to wait for the poll data-- I'm not sure I know anyone whose vote I'd expect to hinge on something like this.

Likewise, I don't know whether there are Democratic fence-sitters for whom this will help them decide between Clinton and Obama or not. And if so, which way-- confronting the race issue head on may help there, or it may dent Obama's image as a candidate for who race is or should be incidental. Not that he could necessarily avoid that problem at this stage, but then that's probably what the Clinton campaign has been hoping for.

(I've been back and forth over my own expectations as to who's going to be the nominee-- before Super Tuesday I was certain it would be Clinton, soon afterwards I thought for sure Obama, now I think probably Obama... but I'm not counting Clinton out.)

Edited Date: 2008-03-19 09:42 pm (UTC)

Well, now that I've had some caffeine and woken up, I read the text of the speech. It's the delivery of the first 20 minutes that were killing me. Opinion aside (people are generally wrong), it was not well delivered. It was dull as hell. The final forty minutes were rhetorically much more powerful, and I can see why people are excited. Certainly I agree with the content of the speech -- but I'm generally happy with Obama's content. (It's too vague, but generally unassailable.)

Thank you! I'll read up.

quigleydoor.livejournal.com

Interesting comments by Mike Huckabee, who complements Obama and says he can relate to Jeremiah Wright in sermons' context.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/03/huckabee-defend.html

qwrrty.livejournal.com

Isn't that just the nuttiest? I can't wait to read that in detail.

I didn't see it as nutty as all. He was speaking from experience, since he himself has been a preacher, so he knows what goes on in sermons.

Huckabee needs a TV show.

Oh, I didn't see the content as nutty at all -- just the fact that it was coming from Huckabee, who I would not have expected to have any sympathy for Wright at all, preacher or no.

Well, Huckabee is a social conservative, but he's not a racist. He's old enough to remember the badness of the Jim Crow days, and to his credit (and maybe because he's a religious guy) he has sympathy.

Summary on openDemocracy.net:

http://www.opendemocracy.net/blog/kanishk_tharoor/us_right_wrong_on_obama

That's a nice roundup of how the conservative media have been struggling to respond to Obama's speech. What I thought

innerdoggie was asking is how this is playing to jes' folks who aren't currently favorable to Obama. (Maybe I'm just projecting because that's what I'm curious about.)

It looks as if he has not lost any ground overall, though at that point it may have as much to do with his speech as with Richardson's endorsement, which occurred after I posted this). (http://www.gallup.com/poll/105529/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Edges-Ahead-Clinton.aspx)

topaz

|