Mar 18 2008
What Obama’s speech meant
Obama’s speech may seem to have been the holy writ of unity but in reality it answered nothing and raised even more questions.
Where we had questions about his proximity to Wright despite his repudiation, now we see him rationalize and justify him and his hate speech, and create a whole new class of victim: Old black people whose lives were so shitty that they cannot help but speak out in the most negative of terms, see racism behind every tree, distrust whites, refuse to see any progress, entertain absurd conspiracy theories and preach this from the same pulpits where they would normally preach about the love and saving grace of Jesus.
Wright, according to Obama, is a product of his generation, one that saw the end of the last forms of institutional racism in the country. You would think they more than most could say with authority that things had changed, but to them, nothing has.
They carry their hate in their heart to the extent that they can see nothing else. It is a legacy of hate and failure at the hands of evil whites.
What would Jesus do? Would he foment hatred, division and discord, or would he preach love and unity?
Regardless, Obama not only excuses such behavior, even as he pays lip service to denouncing it, he also plays moral equivalency with it. Those people are no worse then middle class whites who fought their whole lives to succeed only to see blacks take jobs via affirmative action. So is whites feel resentment at affirmitive action, they have to accept that they are just as bad as Wright is, except he can’t help it.
He likens it to a racial stalemate.
The only stalemate I see is his refusal renounce the teachings of people like Wright in favor of the half hearted sophistry in his speech.
His stalemate is in talking a good program and refusing to stand against what is not popular. He claims to want racial healing but he offers none in the environment most personal to him: His Church.



