Barack Obama | Democratic Party | News

Barack Obama to Give 'Major Race Speech' Tomorrow

On religion too, apparently. Politico reports:

Obama"Barack Obama will give a major speech on 'the larger issue of race in this campaign,' he told reporters in Monaca, PA just now. He was pressed there, as he has been at recent appearances, on statements by his former pastor, Jeremiah Wright. 'I am going to be talking about not just Reverend Wright, but the larger issue of race in this campaign,' he said. He added that he would 'talk about how some of these issues are perceived from within the black church issue for example,' he said."

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. ADAM -

    Actually, I was raised in a Baptist church from the age of 5 until about 20. And I was very involved in church, as was and is my family. So, I understand how it works just fine, thank you.

    You ask if you are responsible for your brother's words...hmmm...sounds a lot like Genesis 4:9 "...Am I my brother's keeper?". But I'll digress on that point.

    Rev.Wright is not in Senator Obama's life as a father or brother or uncle. He is a spiritual adviser and mentor of his. His relationship to him is completely ELECTIVE. Of his own free will and accord.

    You are certainly not responsible for their actions, yet when you are a candidate for president of the United States of America and you have chosen advise, friendship and mentoring from a man who's divisive and racially charged ideals differ from the ones of unity and inclusiveness that you run your campaign on, and you knowingly keep the man on as a part of your campaign, are we not then able to question his judgment on this?

    We are only to pay attention to his message of unity and hope but not question his actions to the contrary by repeatedly associating himself with people (McClurking, Wright) that are in their rhetoric and stance of the opposite spectrum of what you claim to stand for?! Please! Give me a break.

    Posted by: silverskreen | Mar 17, 2008 7:05:55 PM

  2. Adam and Jeff, thanks for injecting a little sanity into this nonsense parade. I am currently in graduate school in Chicago's south side at a UCC-affiliated seminary. I grew up in a not-particularly color-blind part of the midwest, and have struggled with statements much like Rev. Wright's from my professors and fellow students, sometimes feeling the urge to chalk the rhetoric up to reverse-racism. However. I have learned to remind myself what it's like to be a minority (gay) in this country, and how easily we ourselves fall into the "logic of mistrust" of our fellow citizens-who-happen-to- be-straight. While not always valid, these assumptions at times help to keep us safe, physically and psychically. We should be more understanding when our black friends do the same.

    Posted by: Acolyte | Mar 17, 2008 7:07:16 PM

  3. checkers.

    Posted by: titus | Mar 17, 2008 7:30:02 PM

  4. Wow. The Dixiecrats of 08 are coming out in full force. They're saying that what Wright said was appalling but they're not pointing to anything specific. Not to say he didn't say anything looney, but no one's chastising Bill for going on the Rush Limbaugh and then strangely enough, Rush gets his dittoheads to vote for Hillary.

    This is a non issue and you all know it. Either that or your white and never been to a black church. Non of you don't know about Obama's church but your willing to take a couple of clips to heart and your hearts burn for it. Many of you Hillary supporters hate him enough to vote for McCain. Never before has Republicans and Democrats sounded so alike (hence Dixiecrats). If it weren't Obama's pastor, we as liberals, dissenters who question the establishment, would be shrugging. Some of you are growing sorry by the second.

    If the words of a pastor can get McBush elected, then Hillary stands now change in November. America stands now change in November.

    Goddamn America indeed.

    Posted by: astonedtemple | Mar 17, 2008 7:31:01 PM

  5. Edit: now = no.

    P.S. Some of the posters on this thread write exactly the same. Think about it.

    Posted by: astonedtemple | Mar 17, 2008 7:36:18 PM

  6. Yeah, step gently into the time machine and meet 2008.

    This year marks the 40th anniversary of Martin Luther King's assassination. The tenor of his rhetoric fit the tenor of another time. AND AT ITS MOST "EXTREME" NEVER had the "blame Whitey" separatist shill and center of Wright's ranting and raving which is nothing but a slightly updated variation on "black nationalism" and "Black Power" with all the bluster and none of the balls.

    IN FACT, King said in 1966 that "America must be made a nation in which its multi-racial people are partners in power" in response to the disruptive efforts of Stokely Carmichael, SNCC, CORE, and Malcolm X combined to derail the progress that Dr. King had been making, fracturing the movement into factions from which it never fully recovered. Fortunately, the King side had succeeded in getting the 1964 and 65 Civil Rights Acts passed before the country literally exploded into riots.

    Wright's church has released a statement comparing him to King but the only thing that trumps its absurdity is its arrogance.

    Contrast "all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics"


    "Hillary ain't never been called a nigger!"

    Posted by: Michael Bedwell | Mar 17, 2008 7:37:47 PM

  7. Damnit, another Edit




    Posted by: astonedtemple | Mar 17, 2008 7:43:45 PM

  8. "Racially-charged ideals."

    For those of us who aren't white, I guess all of our ideals are "racially charged" now.

    I venture that as "out-there" as Wright's words were, he has twenty years of words that you'd get behind 100 percent. Certainly some of those are going to be bombastic and critical. To think otherwise is to deny the experience of our non-white citizens and the rhetoric that comes with it all.

    I guess I agree with Jeff that I think a lot of what Wright says isn't all that divisive. I don't see calling out America as unpatriotic--even though that's not P.C. to say nowadays. Some of the stuff Wright says is divisive, though, and I think Obama has done a fine job of repudiating that.

    I see what you're saying about the apparent difference between a man who preaches unity and inclusiveness and the campaign ideals, but I think you're looking for a litmus test. Maybe that's what candidates need to do to so they don't trip anyone's wires, but I prefer to be a little more rational about it.

    I think Wright's probably a good person with a lot of good things to say. I think he's wrong a several issues. So are my parents and grandparents, so are a lot of my friends. They're still good people, and I seek advice from them all the time--just on different things. I didn't seek advice from my conservative friends on what I should think about abortion or gay rights. Likewise, I didn't ask my grandparents on their thoughts on iPhone vs. BlackBerry. I doubt Obama's asking Wright for his advice on the gays or racial rhetoric.

    I imagine Wright gave a lot of advice, and I think Obama took what he thought was good and left what he didn't. But Wright's gone now. When you talk about him "repeatedly" associating himself with people like McClurkin and Wright, I think you're leaving off the boatload of other people who are good. I think the good outweighs the bad in this case, and I think to hold up these two guys as the sole criteria on which to base the value of Obama's judgment is a little histrionic.

    Posted by: Adam | Mar 17, 2008 7:47:21 PM

  9. hola.. quiero conocer amigos de todas partes ...para de todo ..agregarme al msn

    Posted by: juan cifuentes | Mar 17, 2008 8:02:20 PM

  10. Why can't Sen Obama answer the question?
    Other candidates respond to reporters' questions - but not Obama. It will be 'in his speech' this how he plans to run the country? "Don't ask me now - listen for an answer when I get up on the pulpit on give a speech - I am such a great orator."
    Answer the question Senator!
    If you can't answer a direct question, a) what are you hiding, and b) who is writing your speeches? Will it be spin? We need his thoughts, not someone else's that can take the time to water down a response.
    Answer the question Senator. Not in a speech. Now.

    Posted by: TR | Mar 17, 2008 8:15:02 PM

  11. ADAM -

    I'm not white, my friend.

    Again, you bring up the argument about your friends and family as if you are a politician and your friends and family have a pulpit or platform on which they openly display and speak of their views and values. Unless they do, I don't see how making this argument works for you.

    For that matter you at least know where their opinions lie. He claims to have known someone for twenty years and not know that he speaks this way. That's absurd. He can repudiate all he wants, but he should've done so as soon as he knew the information, not more than a year after he was made aware of the facts and knowingly kept the mans council. And then not only does he do that but he waits to repudiate anything he says until DAYS later. Not immediately...DAYS. First he "distanced" himself from it and asked us to dismiss it as one would an unruly uncle. HA!

    Listen, this isn't even about Wright or the church. The man is free to say what he wants and to whomever he wants - more power to him.

    But don't expect me to just believe everything out of Senator Obama's mouth simply because it's what I might want to believe. His actions, in my opinion, don't back up his rhetoric. Simple as that.

    He positions himself as if he's above it all and when he's called on it and things to the contrary are brought into light, we are not supposed to question, but instead suspend our disbelief and follow blindly.
    Well, not I.

    Posted by: Silverskreen | Mar 17, 2008 8:18:13 PM

  12. What question are you talking TR? You mean "why won't you release your tax returns?".

    The more this race goes on, the Clinton supporters on the net just get more mean and vicious. At least the Obama supporters actually point out to legitimate problems instead of parroting Right-Wing talking points. Then again, Hillary did endorse McCain. Maybe thats what shes trying to do. Get you to hate Barry Bama so much you go red.

    Posted by: astonedtemple | Mar 17, 2008 8:44:44 PM

  13. I am extremely dissapointed with Obama. Are you trying to tell us that after all these years you have never heard Wright making racial comments? PLEASE!!! SHAME SHAME SHAME

    Posted by: Eric | Mar 17, 2008 8:55:21 PM

  14. Hillary has no way of winning the nomination, and she's doing now is damaging Obama for the general election. Who cares what some crazy black preacher has to say?

    silverskreen, what do you want, Obama to publicly denounce every racist person he's ever met with or talk to? My college roommate once called someone a dyke, just wanted to make sure you knew in case it somehow came up in the future, even though it totally has nothing to do with anything now! Christ!

    Hillary is SLEEPING with the man who signed DOMA and Don't Ask Don't Tell. Why do you think she won't sell us down the road when she gets in there, because she has a vag? It all sounds like "just words" to me. Just keep the money coming to her campaign and everything will be alright!

    Go ahead and vote for the Wal-Mart candidate. Hope you like your jobs bartending cause there ain't gonna be any others unless you're named Chan and live in Shanghai. Or you can go work for a defense contractors, because we're gonna need shitloads a bombs under Johnny McCain. God damn Democrats for throwing away elections and God damn you all for buying into it.

    Posted by: Pat | Mar 17, 2008 9:50:14 PM

  15. Adam, you're kidding right. My grandparents or your grandparents are blood relatives. Nice try at making the "crazy uncle" comparison. Wright wasn't a relative he was someone Obama chose to visit. Chose. Big difference. Not a relative. He chose him to marry him. He chose him to baptize his children. He chose his title for his book. Choice.

    He chose to sit in the church. He chose to donate thousands of dollars. He sat by while Louise Farahkahn was honored. These facts in light of Obama's statement on American flag lapel pins and his wife's comments on being proud of America for the first time paint an interesting portrait.

    The American people are upset by this. It is not a smear by any other candidate or party.

    Posted by: Chris | Mar 17, 2008 10:18:45 PM

  16. PAT,

    You are part and parcel of the problem.

    Posted by: nic | Mar 17, 2008 10:22:20 PM

  17. It is a damn shame though, isn't it Pat? Back on November 4, I thought this country couldn't be in its right mind to vote Bush back in. At the time I was going through a libertarian phase and when I got to the booth, I voted for Kerry, not because I agreed with him on the issues, but because I knew I wouldn't be able to sleep at night knowing that I would contribute to the mess we see now.

    The biggest reason why I dislike Hillary Clinton is her attempt to wipe Obama off the face of the earth by scorching it. Obama has repeatedly told the public how great she is and how good of a president she'd be if she won. She could never return the compliment, although she could to John McCain. That didn't go unnoticed. The Old Guard dems saw it too, despite the Clinton supporters defense that Hillary was only talking about Obama's disadvantage when it comes to foreign experience. They say it and now they're pissed! I wouldn't be surprised if Dean, Pelosi, Kennedy, Kerry, Edwards and Co, are calling her a traitor behind closed doors.

    And if you look at the Obama's Team battle plan that leaked a couple of months ago, you'd see they never thought they'd get this far.

    Obama is the last hope (at least for a very long while) at shifting this country to the left. And yes, despite Wright's crap. Democrats running all over the U.S are parroting the call for change, and they're winning. Sorry Bill, but it ain't a fairy tale. In Red Woodlands, Texas, they're holding neighborhood Obama rallys, tearing off they're Bush/Cheney bumperstickers and putting up Obama stickers. Hillary could never, ever bring that out in people.

    Neither did Hillary. So its looking like she's going to stay in the game so she'll make sure Obama is so stainted and unwelcomed that either he'll lose the general or he'll be limping into the white house.

    But watching Obama lately and how despite his dip in the polls (hes still favored by a majority of Democrats and hes still within the margin of error of beating McCain) he continues to hold the upperhand in the conversation is amazing.

    I just feel for Hillary because she has done a lot of good. But if Obama wins and we enjoy an amazing 8 years without her, Hillary will go down in U.S history as a villian.

    Posted by: astonedtemple | Mar 17, 2008 10:43:55 PM

  18. Like I read somewhere, and I'm paraphrasing:

    "OK Obama went from being a Muslim, to now being a CHRISTIAN and responsible to every word that his pastor says.

    What's next?

    We find out Obama is really a hindu and he was caught many times eating a McDonald's burger"

    Fact is: all this is simply a way to attack Obama because the mainstream media WHORES want McCrazyCain. The MSM knows they can beat Clinton, Obama on the other hand is a lot more difficult. And guess what they are finding out?

    Obama fights back!

    He WILL be US President, just you watch.
    Living it and loving it!

    Posted by: FunMe | Mar 17, 2008 10:47:45 PM

  19. And I'm just lovin how the Hillary supporters are becoming such proud Americans who no longer criticizes their country to make it better but now criticize the critics just so their candidate will win the democratic nomination. (Which is now impossible without bribing the super-delegates). Her only role now is to destroy Obama and allow a once reasonable, now fanatical republican to destroy the country.

    The second reason why I'm disappointed in Clinton. She's moving this country to the right.

    Posted by: astonedtemple | Mar 17, 2008 10:55:11 PM

  20. i don't get it. what exactly is racist or inappropriate with what wright said? from what i heard, he said nothing particularly controversial or factually incorrect. black folk *do* face a lot more discrimination in this country than white women. um, duh..... the msm response to this manufactured "controversy" just underscores the truth of what wright said, as does the fact that obama had to renounce wright's words to remain a viable candidate. it's a shame we can't have an honest discussion of racism in this country without the defensive, reactionary whiplash from the privileged chatterboxes on tv to silence "divisiveness."

    Posted by: jason | Mar 17, 2008 11:24:27 PM

  21. At last you finally have a "reason" not to vote for him - guess you're off the hook. Phew!!!

    Posted by: Giovanni | Mar 17, 2008 11:59:08 PM

  22. Pat -

    Just like Adam, you're missing the point. He doesn't need to denounce every person in his life that has said something like that(although it is interesting that you think it IS racist. But I digress on that). Hell, he doesn't even have to denounce Wright at all, if he agrees with him (which in all fairness, he claims he does not).
    Your comparison doesn't hold water,however, because unless you are actively running for president and your room mate is a part of your campaign, then I think you have nothing to worry about. Wright isn't someone who just happens to support the Senator once...he's been an adviser for YEARS. A close one at that. And the American public is supposed to believe that in that length of time he NEVER once heard him say anything like that or knew that he had those inclinations. Not even when he was handing Louis Farrakhan an award. Guess he doesn't watch the news or read the paper or talk to anyone associated with the church.
    This is a man who's main campaign, or one of them, issues is about unity and he is receiving spiritual advice from someone who's beliefs are so divisive. However true they might be to him.

    Senator Obama is running for President of The United States of America. Not for President of his fan club. Not for President of 26 out of 50 (plus Puerto Rico and the U.S Virgin Islands). Not for President of African Americans. Not for President of Latinos. Not for President of anything other than America as a whole, and as such, he should be able to be scrutinized by the people he will be governing for.

    You may not have a problem with it - that's fine. But I have one and I'd like it all answered and explained.

    You think you're in the right and I'm wrong. Fine. But I, and others that feel the same way, need some more answers, and it's his job to provide them if he's to have my vote.
    Simple as that.

    Oh, and you wanna talk about WalMart do ya? How about Michelle Obama being (Was) on the board of TreeHouse Foods, one of WalMart's bigges Vendors. I wonder if Senator Obama disagreed with her association with WalMart then? I'm sure he probably didn't know she worked there and if he had,he'd just denounce it.

    Oh and then there was Obama requested a $1 million earmark for the construction of a new pavilion at the University of Chicago Hospital in 2006. So what?

    Michelle Obama is (or was) the vice president of community affairs at the University of Chicago Hospital.

    In 2005, when her husband became senator, her salary was raised by 160 percent from $121,910 to $316,952. The following year the hospital gets a $1 million gift of taxpayer money.

    Does that sound like he's the last hope for America? Please. He's another politician, just like the rest of them...yes, even Hillary. And frankly, I prefer her to him. He's a liar and pretends otherwise.

    Granted, anything is better than McCain.

    Yeah I'm sure you'll come out with a list of "Hillary did this, and Billary did that..."
    The thing about that is - I already know. And so does pretty much everyone else.
    Do a little homework on your own candidate and then come talk to me. Stop with the "he's our last hope"...get a grip.
    (mind you, that was not for Pat. Just anyone that's said it. ;) )

    Posted by: Silverskreen | Mar 18, 2008 1:09:40 AM


    let me know what it is you guys are smoking or ingesting, because i don't want any part of it.

    personally, i am eager, but not anxious, to hear what obama says tomorrow. it will have to be a doozy of a speech requiring all the bluster he learned from the rev. wright.

    how will he explain away the ex-gay, anti-gay minister; the bigoted spiritual ad visor of two decades; and the wife who said she had never in her adult life been proud of the u.s.?
    i might, otherwise, be waiting with bated breath, but i am so sick of the hypercritical perception of sen. clinton and pres. clinton and their perceived connivance and duplicity, that i am finding my magnanimity waning.

    what happened to intellectual honesty? what makes it ok for a racist in religious drag (black or german) to besmirch and defame good people. why is it ok to spread the lie that jesus was black and that africa was the cradle of civilization? jesus was a jew born in nazareth, not africa. the cradle of civilization was mesopotamia, not africa. cleopatra was ptolemaic, not egyptian. if we wish to be fair, mitochondrial DNA strongly suggests that africa was probably the womb of civilization, but the cradle!? hardly.

    if that mitochondrial evidence suggests anything, it is that we are, all of us, the human race. the changes in skin pigmentation, eye shape and color, hair color and texture is purely incidental -- a consequence of our environment. the sooner we accept it, the better. no one of us is smarter or more beautiful by virtue of our ethnicity.

    give me a fucking break! whom does it serve to manufacture shit out of whole cloth? yet that is exactly what mr. wright with all his righteous indignation is doing. langston hughes wrote about this type of bloviating before, and wondered how that might help us to get along?

    i am not black; i am brown. i can trade horror stories with you black folk tit for tat. sometimes, i think that you think you hold the monopoly on suffering and pain. of minorities in this country; i give you the indigenous, the mexicans, the japanese, the chinese, the jews, the africans, the poor whites, the women, the gays and transgendered. which among you dares to say "god damn" you to another?

    Posted by: nic | Mar 18, 2008 1:15:38 AM

  24. Every other week is poor judgment week for Obama. How can anyone think he deserve the key to the White House? They guy seems to have some serious daddy issue with this "black-liberation" (more like black supremist) demagogue. He was all ready to go wink, wink and hide Wright from the American public during the election, but now is forced to reject him and wax poetic about it. Give me a break. If he couldn't see something wrong in Wright for 20 years, he's deaf and blind by his own volition. Even senile McCain would be a better choice than a this nonsensical boy wonder.

    Posted by: ken | Mar 18, 2008 3:13:39 AM

  25. better catch up!! I watch all of the polls on a daily basis, and I mean ALL of them. Not only has McCain moved ahead of both Clinton and Obama, but Obama dropped a total of 11 points against Clinton overall since Friday in all of the daily tracking polls.
    Whats even more important is that McCain is now ahead of Obama in New Jersey, Florida, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconson, Minnisota, Colorado, Pa., and Washington state. Unheard of for a Republican this early in the process in almost 20 years.
    As of right now, Clinton is the strongest candidate against McCain according to all of the last 6 days polls.
    I'm not talking about those crappy ABC News or CNN, or CBS polls, but the real, accurate daily tracking polls.

    Go to a site called, they have ALL of the polls on a daily baasis and just about everything you could ever want to know about polls in the states etc. If your really interested in the election, you should like this site. It's a completely non-partisin site. It has daily news stories and posts by well known political reporters as well as any and all polls. It's really a cool site.

    Posted by: Joshua | Mar 18, 2008 3:25:01 AM

  26. « | 1 2 3 »

Post a comment


« «Ryan Seacrest Could Potentially be a Heterosexual« «