Senator Barack Obama delivered a speech/sermon Sunday at the Ebenezer Baptist Church where Martin Luther King once presided. The speech was a call to unity in the face of injustice, for closing what Obama called the "empathy deficit," and equally important, for self awareness. The contrast between this speech and Obama's recent comments on Ronald Reagan and Republican "ideas" is striking.
Obama first lays out his main premise:
Unity is the great need of the hour - the great need of this hour. Not because it sounds pleasant or because it makes us feel good, but because it's the only way we can overcome the essential deficit that exists in this country.
I'm not talking about a budget deficit . . . a trade deficit . . . a deficit of good ideas or new plans.
I'm talking about a moral deficit. I'm talking about an empathy deficit. I'm taking about an inability to recognize ourselves in one another; to understand that we are our brother's keeper; we are our sister's keeper; that, in the words of Dr. King, we are all tied together in a single garment of destiny.
We have an empathy deficit when we're still sending our children down corridors of shame - schools in the forgotten corners of America where the color of your skin still affects the content of your education.
We have a deficit when CEOs are making more in ten minutes than some workers make in ten months; when families lose their homes so that lenders make a profit; when mothers can't afford a doctor when their children get sick.
We have a deficit in this country when there is Scooter Libby justice for some and Jena justice for others; when our children see nooses hanging from a schoolyard tree today, in the present, in the twenty-first century.
We have a deficit when homeless veterans sleep on the streets of our cities; when innocents are slaughtered in the deserts of Darfur; when young Americans serve tour after tour of duty in a war that should've never been authorized and never been waged.
And we have a deficit when it takes a breach in our levees to reveal a breach in our compassion; when it takes a terrible storm to reveal the hungry that God calls on us to feed; the sick He calls on us to care for; the least of these He commands that we treat as our own.
So we have a deficit to close. We have walls - barriers to justice and equality - that must come down. And to do this, we know that unity is the great need of this hour.
Having laid this foundation, note, as Pam Spaulding does, where he takes his audience:
For most of this country's history, we in the African-American community have been at the receiving end of man's inhumanity to man. And all of us understand intimately the insidious role that race still sometimes plays - on the job, in the schools, in our health care system, and in our criminal justice system.
And yet, if we are honest with ourselves, we must admit that none of our hands are entirely clean. If we're honest with ourselves, we'll acknowledge that our own community has not always been true to King's vision of a beloved community.
We have scorned our gay brothers and sisters instead of embracing them. The scourge of anti-Semitism has, at times, revealed itself in our community. For too long, some of us have seen immigrants as competitors for jobs instead of companions in the fight for opportunity.
Every day, our politics fuels and exploits this kind of division across all races and regions; across gender and party. It is played out on television. It is sensationalized by the media. . . .
So let us say that on this day of all days, each of us carries with us the task of changing our hearts and minds. The division, the stereotypes, the scape-goating, the ease with which we blame our plight on others - all of this distracts us from the common challenges we face - war and poverty; injustice and inequality. We can no longer afford to build ourselves up by tearing someone else down. We can no longer afford to traffic in lies or fear or hate. It is the poison that we must purge from our politics; the wall that we must tear down before the hour grows too late.
What must Americans do?
But if changing our hearts and minds is the first critical step, we cannot stop there. It is not enough to bemoan the plight of poor children in this country and remain unwilling to push our elected officials to provide the resources to fix our schools. It is not enough to decry the disparities of health care and yet allow the insurance companies and the drug companies to block much-needed reforms. It is not enough for us to abhor the costs of a misguided war, and yet allow ourselves to be driven by a politics of fear that sees the threat of attack as way to scare up votes instead of a call to come together around a common effort.
I'm not sure what to make of the last sentence -- it sounds like a dodge. But this is definitely not Ronald Reagan or Republican ideas. The unity Obama is calling for does not sound like DLC centrism; it's more like a precursor to struggle, not only against our own weaker instincts but against powerful beliefs, institutions and interests. You can read it as class struggle, even ideological struggle.
Does he mean it? Can he deliver? Of course, those have been the real questions about Obama all along: is he real, or are we so hungry for leadership we're willing to read whatever we want into his rhetoric?
Update: Paul Krugman's take on Obama's comments on Ronald Reagan's legacy.
Update 2: Here's the video of Obama's speech.
Login Here
Share This
Spotlight
I have a dream that freedom will ring on Jan 20, 2009.
ZED! and…ah….Go Giants!
I just do not get the impression that he really understand DC and what he would be up against. That could be very very dangerous…
or he understands it too well.
Actions have more meaning than word and when it came doing something about
homophobia –Obama’s record is not that good
I read the last sentence as a call to stand and fight against those who use the specter of September 11 as a rationale to torture and eavesdrop without a warrant and suppress dissent.
It’s an impressive speech. Thanks.
I got to see a good portion of that speech last night and I too noticed the striking difference between his comments in “the Reagan interview” and the rhetoric he was using in the speech. It’s an incredible contrast and I’m not entirely clear on what to make of it. I hope the speech was genuine, because if it was, this could turn out to be a very different race than I’d believe it was.
Good morning Scarecrow!
Man, with grammar like that, I should run for president.
For the first time in years, I heard the entire MLK I Have a Dream speech in its entirety, on the Imus show. In the annals of our national history only a handful of speeches resonate thru the ages.
In other years, the I Have a Dream resonated most with me. Now it’s the We Cannot be Satisfied….
twc1@6 — yes, I think that’s what he might have meant, but we have to read that into it — why not be clearer, when we know those issues are at stake.
Good morning everyone.
Barack Obama’s speech was a fitting tribute to the late Dr. King.
This morning I found myself thinking about the first time I came to know of Dr. Martin Luther King. I had arrived in the early Sixties as a young Irishman in Bible Belt country (North Louisiana). One of the first things I noticed was the large roadside billboards claiming to show King attending a meeting of the Communist Party.
It would be difficult for people who are not familiar with what was happening at that time in the Deep South to fully understand the hatred and bigotry directed towards Dr. King. I was not one bit surprised when I heard that he had been shot in Memphis, Tennessee.
I can well understand why the African American community would be defensive about any statement that seemed to diminish the contribution of Dr.King…even if that statement came from someone who is considered a friend of the African American community. Put simply, Dr King put his life on the line.
Again, Barack Obama’s speech in Atlanta yesterday morning was a fitting tribute to an extraordinary man.
Good morning, Scarecrow. A lot of “I hopes” & “if he means thats” attach themselves to Obama’s rhetoric. Frankly, I’m never sure what his words are in aid of except getting the nom, be it the speech quoted above or his Reagan praise. Still want John Edwards to stay in as long as he can to guide the frontrunners…
In honor of Dr. King on his commemoration day:
MLK Jr.’s Last Speech
Good Morning Scarecrow
Scareccrow, I wish you could answer your questions.
Forgive me for this in advance, but other than the fine sentiment, doesn’t the following statement sound a bit, um, packaged?:
Let’s see, Florida has it’s primary on Jan.29. How to reach the South Beach boys, the Friedman’s of St. Pete and the landscapers of Miami. Hmmmm. I Know! A speech for MLK day. That’s bound to get attention.
Yeah, yeah, they all do it. It’s just surprising that it’s so unartful and obvious.
Kirk did some research and posted a comment on the Obama foreign policy team.
The team blue approach is looking like a “kinder gentler” team red team approach.
Pam Spaulding’s take on that issue:
I don’t think you can accuse Obama of pandering to one group when he’s chastising another whose support he also needs in every state.
I think with Obama making this speech while previously praising Reagan, who instituted policies that hurt blacks, women, and the poor, while enhancing the rich just doesn’t ring true. Considering that he’s indebted to the Insurance industry, Securities and Interest, the Pharmaceutical industry, and the Oil & Gas industries, I have a hard time believing that he is for the “common folk”.
And ditto that for Hillary Clinton. She’s no Shirley Chisholm.
Thanks for that link, tw3k. I’m backreading FDL catching up this a.m. & missed it while skimming.
Obama’s oratorical skills are powerful. We all know that. But, I still think he’s blinded by this vision of unity to see how powerful, amoral, and determined the other side is. He believes his own rhetoric. ‘Let’s just show them the fairness of our proposal and they’ll be convinced’ seems to be his viewpoint. It doesn’t work like that. Hillary knows it. John Edwards knows it. Obama does not.
I am not against Obama. If he is the nominee, I will work my tail off to get him elected. But his speeches are the only thing he has going for him. His remarks during debates and in media interviews do not inspire me.
You make a good point about his rhetoric allowing us to read what we want into it. But I do hunger for our leadership to come out and say hatred is killing us (literally) and hatred is creating rings in our noses so that we can be led around by those willing to exploit the worst in human nature.
Hatred is for losers. Hatred never built, never succeeded other than created whole lakes of blood baths. I applaud Obama for coming out with this speech even though it might seem a bit timid, a bit tepid, it is 100 degrees warmer than the majority of our leadership including the idiot dems in power in dc.
as we’ve watched the Democratic debates, to me Obama got smaller with each one.
Obama is indeed all thigns to all men. He’s a Liberal AND a regan Democrat. He’s a homophobe AND he opposes homophobia. He’s black AND he’s white (check out the speechwriter.)
There is only one thing I wish to hear from him:
“I am a false prophet and God is a superstition!”
Meanwhile. . . Krugman Kicks Obama in the Cojones!
I’m sorry if I wasn’t clearer. He does have to mend fences and homophobia and anti-semitism in the black community do need to be addressed.
It’s just that the combination of all of three issues in one sentence stands out like a big neon sign. His speech is bound to get attention because of the occasion and so why not campaign at the same time? I don’t see it as pandering so much as announcing who his target groups are going to be. These are the groups he needs to win over in Florida. He’s already gotten off to a bad start in the gay community, retired Jews are probably Hillary voters and the Nevada caucuses show where the immigrant population is headed. Unfortunately for Obama, Florida is chock full of these three groups.
I have this feeling that Obama is in real trouble in Florida and he just admitted to it.
I’ve never seen any indication that Obama is homophobic. I’ve seen indications that he’s not as *bothered* by homophobia as I would like, but I’ve never gotten the slightest indication that he, himself, is homophobic.
Sure! I already posted this link to today but kirk’s comment makes a good segue for this article on US foreign policy.
I am so with you on this. I will work my ass off to get him elected if nominated. But he doesn’t inspire me at all. And some of his supporters remind me of that throng who followed Brian around in Life of Brian, worshipping his gourd and following his example of walking around with one shoe on.
I read Krugman’s article, and I have much respect for him. What he says here is Obama’s point:
“Well, I’d say that the great failure of the Clinton administration — more important even than its failure to achieve health care reform, though the two failures were closely related — was the fact that it didn’t change the narrative, a fact demonstrated by the way Republicans are still claiming to be the next Ronald Reagan.” Obama wasn’t praising Reagan’s ideas; he was talking about his skill at changing the narrative. That’s what Dems need to do.
He was opposed to the AUMF and to both bankruptcy bills, unlike Clinton. Edwards voted for the bankruptcy bill.
Good morning Scarecrow
I don’t see how having Reverend Donnie McClurkin at one of your events embraces me as a gay male. Yes I do know he’s distanced himself from all of that so in other words, he called the ambulance after he threw me under the bus. Thanks.
He plays the Reagan card while talking to a conservative newspaper editorial board for endorsement, yes I know that politicans have to suck up and do that (suck up that is). His calculation going in there was to invoke St. Ronnie of the right. At his level of campaigning his remarks should have been prepared. And if not, that’s even a worse case.
He ducks a vote (one of many) and criticizes Hillary for voting the wrong way, all those present votes, and he ducked campaining for Lamont, THE anitwar candidate of 2006, embraces the warmongering Liberman, and positions himself as being antiwar.
I know how Hillary calculates and operates. As she says “look at my record.” And now I’m seeing how Obama calculates.
He’s a smart, calculating man, looks good on TV, produces great sound bites. A true modern politician. He seems to be drawing a lot of young people into the party and building the ranks. That is something new and very fortunate for Democrats. I hope he has the ability to keep them, not alienate them.
I will vote for him as the candidate, despite the tire mark on my back because of the Supreme Court appointments.
After being the target of hate and bigotry all my life, including physical violence, the thought of having more right wing appointments is enough to make me vote for someone who isn’t my first choice. It’s my hope that will be a firewall against any future erosion of right in this country.
I think that is for me the very bottom line. It doesn’t matter who the Democrat is versus who the Republican is.
It will boil down to a choice of another Ruth Bader Ginsberg or Stepehen Bryer replacing Justice Stevens or another Alito, Roberts or Scalia or Thomas.
It is that simple.
-G
Obama campaigned with a virulent “ex-gay” singer Donnie McGurkin.
This is some fine rhetoric, but given past actions by Obama, it’s just words. So far, anyway.
and that takes us to that sage advice “Always look on the bright side of life < insert whistling here >“
which I’m working very hard to do these days.
you make a powerful statement, MM
Another great link, tw3k. Thanx.
your welcome!
Sorry for the OT, but I had to share. According to cnn.com, ‘Gen. Butt Naked’ says he caused 20,000 deaths. Seems he gassed them.
Dr. King would have never voted ”present” and would’ve never campaigned for that dixiecrat in connecticut….the content of his character indeed.
I can’t trust him on the homophobia issue. The man not only continues to refuse to denounce the support of McClurkin, but now he has a homophobic bigot campaigning on his behalf in SC.
Rev. Caldwell runs Metonia Ministry:
http://www.kingdombuilders.com.....PID=236324
Caldwell will campaign on Obama’s behalf in SC:
http://www.chron.com/disp/stor.....69706.html
That’s going to make the Decider jealous.
CORRECTION:
Caldwell will campaign on Obama’s behalf, whether it’s in SC or not I don’t know.
“Unity is the great need of the hour - the great need of this hour. Not because it sounds pleasant or because it makes us feel good, but because it’s the only way we can overcome the essential deficit that exists in this country.”
Obama is either an idiot or an agent of evil. How do you achieve unity with a group that is adamant about impoverishing most of the country while enriching themselves and their benefactors? Republicans DO NOT compromise, they pillage, rape, and demand or coerce allegiance. Contemplating unity with them is deeply evil.
I felt that Obama, in the heat of the campaign allowed, campaign supporters too much leeway. He should have been quicker and more forceful in disassociating his campaign from homophobic remarks by a supporter.
I agree whitebeard, not that Obama is an agent of evil, but that he just doesnt get it.
Oh the human species, what a treacherous lot. That is one of the most disturbing news items I’ve ever read.
-G
The video of Obama’s speech is also available.
I am of two minds about these remarks by Obama. Before getting into that, let me say that I have only read them, not viewed the event — and that’s a huge difference in how one receives what Obama said.
OK . . .
First, the man can speak. After 8 years of a president who can’t string two sentences together, I am longing for one who can speak like this. Wow.
Second, though, and more troubling, is this: As I read this speech, it had the feel to me that Obama was setting himself OUTSIDE of his own remarks. That is, it appeared to me Obama’s message was all one-way: that what he was saying didn’t apply to him. As a preacher, if I tried that, I’d get tossed out on my ear — and I’d deserve it.
In fact, Obama’s words seem to conflict with the way he has functioned as a US Senator:
There was a bill last fall — one of the war-related bills, IIRC — where there was all kinds of speculation about which way both Obama and HRC would vote. The clerk called the roll, and the first group of Senators who were already in the chamber cast their votes. As always happens, other senators came in from their offices and committee meetings, and cast their votes. Standing in the well were Obama and Clinton. I don’t know if they were waiting to see how the other voted, or which way the final bill would go, but both waited until the very end to jump in with their vote.
Driven by the politics of fear. I don’t know which it was — fear of the GOP or fear of their Dem opponent — by they were driven by fear.
“Tinkering at the edges” is what comes to mind when I think of Obama’s performance in the Senate. When I think of Senators who speak their minds, who stand up and say what needs to be said, who are concerned with more than tinkering around the edges, Obama’s name does not appear on that list.
Dodd and FISA. Feingold and Warrantless Wiretapping. Leahy. Whitehouse. On the House side, there’s Henry Waxman.
If Obama wants my vote, he’s going to have to back these words up with deeds and speeches in the Senate and votes there as well. As I said, I’m of two minds with regard to that speech. It’s up to Obama as to which mind ultimately gets my vote.
…and ehr.. @ 24, thanks for the link. Krugman said it well.
Many thanks! I can’t take the time for it now, but finding that was on my “to do” list for today.
“empathy deficit” is a nice idea - very true - but it will resonate with so few voters its more likely to be a detraction than anything that helps him or the country.
This highlights a fundmental, disconcerting element of Obama. He says and does all kinds of things, some good, some bad. His wild swings such as from praising reagan - the ultimate empathy debtor, to identify the “empathy deficit” of America leads one to suspect that he neither knows the meaning of what he says nor believes in it.
.
I just noticed John Voight on the dais with Rudy Giuliani at an event in Florida.
Damn liberal Hollywood.
-G
The ‘workhorse/showhorse’ analogy that HRC used is appropriate. She did not characterized Obama in any way, she said she was strictly talking about herself being a workhorse. Well, we’ll see how the FISA debate plays out. I’m hoping Hillary shows up (and I think she will). I don’t think Obama will. One of his oratorical masterpieces against warrantless wiretapping/telecon immunity would be such a boost to Dodd, but I don’t think he’ll even join the debate. I hope I’m wrong. I would love to be enthusiastic about Obama.
Kudos to Obama for mentioning “Scooter Libby justice” in such a high profile speech!
This Raygun comment obsession here is getting tiresome. Anyone who keeps mentioning that must not be voting for anyone of the “leading” three Dem candidates, since Edwards and Clinton have said much more complimentary things about St. Ronnie than what Obama said.
Obama can do no right apparently while Edwards is the great Liberal saviour, or so it seems. Edwards’ tough talk appeals to me and seems necessary, but there’s a lot that he’s said and done that would allow me to vote for my second choice - Obama. I was especially interested in Russ Feingold’s comments:
http://www.postcrescent.com/ap.....70560/1036
And, he once said something positive about Raygun (no time to find link). Gasp!
let me post the rest of his speech on ML King that hasn’t been posted in the article, but is on Obama’s website:
[Mod Note; Edited by Mod for length. To help keep the FDL servers running smoothly, please do not post entire articles — include a link instead. Thank you. ]
Amen. Fabulous post Raven.
Yep. Actions speak louder than words and for all the pretty words, very few actions in support of them.
See @ 39..Rev Caldwell was with McClurkin on the SC campaign tour.
I will only vote for him if he stands in front of me and everyone else and says out loud that he will prosecute those who have committed treason against our country during the bushco administration. If his vision does not include accountability. He’s lost me. Our integrity is at stake. Our democracy has been beaten. It’s time to get a protection order, not make up. If he tells me he will hold them accountable and does not dodge this question. He’s got my vote.
That speech…at least what I’ve read of it….ranks right up there with some of the great speeches in the days of the movement…
and yes….the question hangs heavy over Senator Obama’s head (especially in light of his recent comments) “does he really mean it?”. Where will he take it?
I’m not ready to relinquish my skepicism yet…..I need a longer courtship with truth before I yield “the chastity of the intellect” (per Santayana) to Mr Obama.
hizzhoner
Obama’s speech writer followed instructions…coopt Hillary and John’s talking points…add MLK’s legacy and give your supporters munition. It doen’t have to be rational he is going after the sucker vote.
All things to everone is being nothing to noone. It is not a stance it is a mouth full of …non promises that will not be kept and it is not a progressive agenda…it is more feel good speech. Aside from that he does honor to the King legacy and holds firm on the goals of equality. He is a good politician. I would like to see unity on the campaign trail for openers.
Elliott, goldberry, Ehrenstein (or others): How much do you think the current Jewish opposition to Obama is based on the Haaratz/Israeli war issue? how much to the post-60s antagonism between Jews and African Americans over 1) black opposition to Israeli continued support for the South African apartheid government; 2) African-American support for Palestinians? In the Civil Rights era, part of the real momentum was the coming together of both groups - and others (among these churches). Do you see any way of bringing us back together.
Obama is the finest political orator of this generation.
He is an agent of Evil.
Does this mean you will not vote for Hillary either?
i remain a John Edwards supporter. as long as he is still in the race i’m supporting him. that said,
some people seem to forget that Obama is really new as a practicing, national politician. he’s not going to be able to control everything that goes on in his campaign. he’s not going to be able to see every thing that he needs to do and how to do it. he’s not going to be able to react to every mistake he makes and rectify them in a less than awkward way. we know the style and tone that he uses. there will be no major changes. his style of campaigning is based on keeping his hand close to his vest. he, obviously, doesn’t want to make specific promises. there’s nothing new in running a campaign this way
the thing i would like to know is who is behind him? on who does he rely besides his wife? of whom will his staff be composed? his cabinet? we probably won’t find that out either but if we could it would reveal far more than the rhetoric of his speeches.
Alas, she has become a shill for Clinton, so I don’t read her anymore.
No, that’s not it, it’s just when you mention Scooter Libby justice I can’t help but recall that Robert Bauer, general counsel to Obama’s campaign, argued for pardoning Scooter Libby.
http://blog.washingtonpost.com.....t_145.html
I haven’t seen him lead the troops against the right on any legislative issue. Instead, he either defers to the establishment or goes to the right. The fact that it took him so long to finally refuse to give Bush a blank check on the war left me cold with him. He has the same voting record on Iraq as Clinton and yet his entire campaign is based on him being different and “hope we can believe in.” I want actions, not just nice speeches.
Calling out any group of one’s peers as homophobic and anti-Semitic IS a big deal - and important for all of us!
No.
Togetherness is overrated. I don’t wish to be “together” with my sworn enemies. I don’t wish to be “together” with people who want me dead.
I’ve come to the painful conclusion that in order to run a successful campaign for POTUS you have to attempt to be all things to all people. It’s just a fact. Until we have meaningful campaign finance reform that’s the state of it.
We are in desperate need of moral leadership, but it’s not going to come from our government. There has to be a righteous cause, a leader like Dr. King, and the people behind it. Sadly, I don’t see any of the many crises facing our nation to be righteous enough, in the eyes of the average American, to start a movement for change.
Do you consider American blacks to be your sworn enemies? When/where did they swear this enemy perspective? Why are you so angry?
Then tell him to come back once he’s taken the training wheels off.
That was for Ehrenstein47 just above.
agreed, this is the Presidency.
One thing some folks seem to forget is that Dr King, while using wonderful words in speeches such as the “I Have A Dream” speech, had already backed those words with many leadership actions. He had the actions supporting the words before he spoke so eloquently.
So far, Senator Obama has only the words without the actions to make the words meaningful. Leadership is far more than words.
Wow. Kirk Murphy certainly did his research on that. I’ve quit reading The Nation for the same reason I quit Huffington. They hate Hillary.
Dr. King was LOATHED in his time by great numbers of his own people. This fact has been obscured by the Legend of Dr. King which has transformed him from a “dangerous radical” that J. Edgar Closet Queen wanted dead (and there’s evidence to suggest that he allowed the assassination to happen) and the Parade Float we now worship like secular saint.
Why aren’t you?!!!!
Beautiful words. But who wrote them?
That is not a condemnation!
As has been stated by others, the real problem is dealing with the snakes that are now in power. Like all psychopaths, they can’t be trusted to be partners in compromise, they have no problem with pretending to go along until your back is turned or they re-gain the advantage. And when they are losing a point; they project and accuse you of not compromising.
Anyone who was married to a hardcore alcoholic (like I was) knows these tactics well.
You can lead sincere but mis-informed people by example, doing the same with the Repug “we deserve it all” type is just naive and dangerous. You can show a kid that there is no reason to fight if you can talk about it, but the bully will pretend to learn and then sucker punch you once you let your guard down. The Russians proved that to us time after time during the last half century.
In short, as much as I loved the speech and agree with the philosophy, it is dangerous to assume that the psychopathic repugs are going to be impressed or can be trusted to compromise, even from a minority position.
If that is Obama, we need someone a little more street smart.
And you think Clinton’s backing of the Flag bill and lack of leadership in countering the Bush administration is leadership? OK then, you can have her.
A speech commemorating the legacy of King is probably not the best occasion to voice support of specific legislation. So, what’s he doing today? Or tomorrow?
MLK’s Letter from Birmingham jail:
http://www.historicaltextarchi.....8;artid=40
People are all too tempted to dismiss the tremendous fight King waged on behalf of justice when others told him to wait, assuming racists would listen to reason. Read the rest of his letter. King was most livid with “white moderates,” whom he felt were complicit with the brutal injustice of the status quo.
Ehrenstein47 January 21st, 2008 at 6:54 am 72
“some people seem to forget that Obama is really new as a practicing, national politician. he’s not going to be able to control everything that goes on in his campaign. he’s not going to be able to see every thing that he needs to do and how to do it. he’s not going to be able to react to every mistake he makes and rectify them in a less than awkward way.”
Then tell him to come back once he’s taken the training wheels off.
___________________
barring acts of god/nature we will have either Hillary or Obama to vote for, unless you decide to go for McCain or Huckabee. who will it be for you?
i will vote for Obama or Hillary. i won’t like it very much but i will do it.
Anger without thought and desire for a better outcome that benefits all of his does NOT help to bring about a resolution.
This can go on forever. Obama addressed the Libby conviction at the time:
http://tpmelectioncentral.com/.....pardon.php
Did you know an Edwards adviser, “Mudcat” Saunders said the same stuff?
http://firedoglake.com/2007/06.....ouldnt-be/
You can find things like this about any candidate.
From my vantage that might have looked trite - like he was trying to milk the King legacy. Far more powerful (and difficult) to speak from the pulpit.
Yes he did and I appreciate it. As far as I’m concerned if you dislike one candidate you should dislike them all. They vary very little in detail.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyo.....14339/3667
Did I say that it didn’t?
Yes. I think people forget that King was holding america accountable to it’s constitituon and ideals. He fought and fought hard. He brought us together on what america stands for and showed how the fight was for all of us. If Obama can do that he has me, but he has shown no fight. (yet)
As to will I vote for Hillary. Hell yes. I know that she and Bill have been waiting for the moment of accountability for this vast right wing conspiracy. They have haunted them for 20 years. Her tears, when she said it was personal were all about that as far as I am concerned. I think both she and Bill are afraid to show their hand. And they have earned that fear. Now, I admit this is supposition. This is based on my knowledge of what that vast righ wing conspiracy did to them in regard to white water, and many other issues. She will fight back. I have no doubt about that.
Martin Luther King Jr. was a great man and a great leader but he never ran for elective office or served in Congress. whether or not he would have remained consistent and without blemish in that pit of vipers is something we will never know.
being a politician requires that one makes all sorts of compromises. it is not possible to be a politician with making compromises. all of our candidates have done so. there is not one politician in this country who has not made many compromises.
“One thing some folks seem to forget is that Dr King, while using wonderful words in speeches such as the “I Have A Dream” speech, had already backed those words with many leadership actions. He had the actions supporting the words before he spoke so eloquently.
So far, Senator Obama has only the words without the actions to make the words meaningful. Leadership is far more than words.”
So whose leadership do you find more compelling? Who are you supporting?
I think Obama’s decade of organizing was critical in leadership and other terms. Alas, and sadly, the reason the Republicans have been in office all this time is because they knew the importance of organizing - and did it well. This is also behind Dean’s 50 state strategy (which Clinton and the DCC opposed). It is also the strategy behind Act Blue and so much we do here.
i’m supporting John Edwards. he’s far from perfect but he’s the best thing we’ve got.
those words and $5 will get you a shitty cup of coffee at S**rbuck’S.
None of the candidates will stand up and promise to go after the evil-doers in the current administration. You have to be able to read between the lines to see who really understands the problem, and wants to deal with it. I don’t think Obama understands, the unity stuff argues against him on this point. I like Edwards, because I think he gets it, and maybe HRC does as well. Maybe we’ll learn more when we have a candidate.
I wish I’d gotten to this thread earlier. Here is a game: count the direct and close Biblical references in the Obama speech. They feel pretty natural, and it is certainly appropriate in this setting, but there are a whole bunch.
Hate to tell you but I’m not all that big a fan of Edwards and a lot of his positions anymore than I am of Obama or Clinton, so using Edwards’ positions as a baseline for comparison does not particularly move me.
I will hold my nose and vote for any of them as the Democratic Party nominee in November 2008 and pray that their actions as President are more progressive than their words and actions to date.
What I will not do is sit blindly by and accept as gospel all the words of praise without any snese of actions.
Obama has had an opportunity to show leadership by standing up with Senator Dodd on the FISA issue and decided that campaigning is more important.
During his tenure as an Illinois State Senator he had too many times when he ducked controversial votes by voting “Present”. I don’t care if he did have permission of the leadership, it is an act of cowardice.
What I see in Obama is a politician out of the Chicago machine and nothing more. As I say, if he is the Presidential candidate of my party, he will have my vote but I quit giving my love to politicians decades ago. All that does is give me a broken heart.
Compromis/dealmaking is not moving across the aisle to the right. At some point the Dem party has to have a