Here's my wish. STFU about race. Start talking about the financial meltdown that's accelerating and that's about 1000x more important to the future, near- and long-term, of the American Republic than race is now.

Yup. This is exactly what's needed. And I doubt that anyone could do it any better.

This seems to me like a seminal moment in his campaign.  Many of us (assuming I'm not alone out here) have felt a little bit leery of putting too much support behind his candidacy, fearing that he is untested and being reluctant to vote based largely upon faith that his rhetoric will be matched by his competence as a chief executive.  Admittedly, this is a bind in which his rhetorical skills will once again prove to be the most important asset.  Nevertheless, this is the biggest hurdle (IMHO) his campaign has yet faced, and if he can pull through with grace, particularly with regard to such a terribly difficult subject, then it will be very reassuring to those of us who are concerned about his hat/cattle ratio.

Could we please, please put aside these pissfests and focus on first order issues? We're losing the war in Afghanistan. The dollar's in free fall. Major banks and investment firms-- pillars of the financial system-- no longer command any confidence in the global markets.

And we're talking about "middleclassness"?  Banana republic time.

If Obama truly is a leader, then he needs to get _on topic_  -- not again, but for the first time. Enough with the Lani Guinier redux stuff. Talk about NATO, the dollar, China, oil prices. Assuming you really are the post-racial messiah that your excitable advocates tell us you are.

"Here's my wish. STFU about race"

Tep -

I think that's exactly what this speech is going to be about. But more eloquent, of course.

Thsi also is a great chance for Obama to talk about his Christian faith.

I hope you're right, VAC. But I'll reserve judgment until I hear BHO start talking a LOT MORE about financial and f-p matters than about non-financial, non-fp matters.

At some point the gas has to start diminishing and hard talk about hard issues-- crises, really, big nasty burning ones-- has to start dominating the man's message. Otherwise, he's going to get sucked into the identity-politics, just-another-pol vortex.

tep, I hear you when it comes to substance.  I'm waiting for it, too.  

tep,

You are just at of luck.  What you want to hear politicians talk about and what most of the Americans want to hear are just in two different universes.

If teplukhin had a talk show and Oprah had a talk show, who's show do you think people would watch?

It's a politician's job to know how to speak to people and on what subjects.  If they were doing what you want, they would be crummy politicians.  Your gripe is with American political culture, not with Obama.  Bush got elected talking about "compassionate conservatism."  That was about all he said, "compassionate conservatism," no content, no nothing.  Kerry had a program for everything and got his butt kicked.

Give it up.

Well let's keep the fingers crossed so that *this* issue can be put to bed for the majority of Americans out there. I know BHO's speech won't do much for those anti-mecegenationists out there but maybe it will for those who are ready to get past the identity and gender politics and on to the pressing issues of financial collapse or Tep will have that aneurysm he's been threatening to have. :)

"Here's my wish. STFU about race"

Race isn't an important topic in America?

Obama needs to deal with race, get it on the table, and dispose of it so that he can tell us how he would deal with vastly more important issues facing the nation right now.

We are about to lose the war in Afghanistan. Which means that NATO has fallen on its face, which means it's finished, which means that "the West" as a coherent player in this century no longer exists.

We are witnessing a meltdown in our financial markets, accompanied by the free fall of the dollar, which means rampant inflation, in fact, stagflation, and an end to US global leadership, plus a serious diminution in our standard of living for many years to come. IOW the worst economic challenge we've seen in this country since... Jimmy Carter. Remember him?

Go ahead, keep believing that US racial politics are more important than the above. Perhaps you're right.

Me, I'll stick with my hunch that the voters in PA and elsewhere see these twin storms clearly and are hungry for real leadership now.

I am very glad to hear he is taking this on, perfect - talk about it openly and move on.  Like I said, the only way Obama wins this thing is by being 100% himself, bowing to no one and keeping with his own vision.  The minute he starts dancing to the tune of his enemies, he's represents nothing and he's done - he's Hillary in a nice suit.  Stay yourself Obama, don't go wobbly now.  

I think you're right too Tep. but you can't get to the other side of the river without dealing with the crocodile in the middle.

Sorry tep, but what you said is that race is not at all an important topic. It's not a zero-sum game: we can talk financial crises, we can talk Afghanistan, we can talk Iraq, and we can also talk about race. Good for Obama for getting it out on the table, and perhaps getting rid of the Negro bogeyman that others would like to make him out to be.

I trust Noam's instincts on this one.  Net plus for Barry to give a race speech right now.  If he comes out of this stronger, he can boast that he's tested, ironically, by the very people (Team Billary) who have argued that he's untested.

Let's see if he can explain why he has taken a bigoted, hate-mongering, wacko who believes that AIDs is part of a campaign of racial genocide conducted by whites, as a "spiritual mentor" and "sounding board."  

Let's see if he can explain his minister's love of Louis Farrakhan and why his wife, prospective first lady believes the U.S. is a hateful place of which she was never proud of despite the opportunities that both of them have achieved until the personality cult arose around her husband.

Let's see if he can explain and apologize for the hateful outburst and rant against Hillary Clinton for her whiteness and gender.  

I'm a nonbeliever but I would be damned if I would attend a church which gave a "life time" achievement award to a true Islamic fascist, Holocaust denying, utterly worthless excuse for a human being in Louis Farrakhan.

Spin it how you will in an effort to deny what this says about Obama, but it says a lot and raises even more questions about his fitness to lead this country and be the commander in chief.    

With a background like this we hardly need a collection of Swift Boat liars to undermine a campaign all they have to do is point to the truth and play these videos in September and October.  And play them they will.  Thanks a lot Obama, great judgment, wonderful choices in human friendship you have made.  I overlooked Wright as long as a could, but others won't and neither will I any longer.

I suspect he'll expand the extraordinary speech he gave at the MLK memorial groundbreaking ceremony. If so, and if he nails it, many of his naysayers (those who say this issue has boiled his candidacy) are in for yet another eye-opener. Time will tell.

Contrary to Tep and those who agree with him, I don't think this is small potatoes. Yes, the president must lead overseas and steer the economy. But he/she must also, somehow, give voice to and make sense of America's cultural complexities.

It's a legitimate issue. The people howling for a souljah right now have every reason to be upset at Obama's close relationship to his "spiritual mentor" or whatever he calls this clown.

My point is that Obama needs to show real skill at addressing these concerns, knocking the issue down, changing the subject, and then start doing the really heavy lifting that we expect our next leader to do. The faster the better. If he can do that. he's got my vote, but the longer this kerfuffle drags out, the less confidence I have in his ability to, y'know, LEAD the nation.

As opposed to being blindsided, backpedalling, struggling to respond, avoiding substantive messages on major issues.

An analogy: he's like the new CEO of a company whose stock is falling, and now there's a product safety issue. He needs to nail this (admittedly important but distracting side) issue, kill it, get it out of sight, and then get back to telling his customers, employees, partners competitors and the press specifically how he's going to turn around his company's stock price.

Advice to BHO: Throw the guy under the bus. You're running for leader of the free world, and you owe this guy nothing. Show us some steel.

For once.

You lose me here Tep - he looks like a craven weasal and loses all if he does that - steel means NOT doing that, showing spine by not cowering - he has nothing to apologize for.  

He doesn't have to do an either/or thing  - look for a professorial shtick, which I think is perfect.

Wandrey - there are only two explanations for Obama's close association with this goof. (Disclaimer: we're all adults here, and I doubt any of us has a problem with a local pol who has to appeal to a south side Chicago constituency standing alongside Wright. Ditto for a right-wing nut in the flat-earth belt and a goofball conspiracist preacher.)

Now, it must be the case that Obama either 1) believes in the man's "ministry" and "spiritual message" or whatever he calls it, or 2) is just using the guy for political purposes. Because I'm a sentient adult who understands how ambitious pols behave, and because I'm convinced that Obama knows Wright's patter is utter horsesh*t, I believe that #2 completely sums up the source of Wright's appeal and usefulness to Obama.  

So if Obama adopted Wright for his usefulness to Obama's political ascent, it stands to reason-- again, using the simple logic of the cold hard _political_ calculus-- that Obama must cast off Wright now that Wright is a major liability to Obama's continued ascent. ESPECIALLY now that Obama is trying to appeal to a NATIONAL constituency, the vast majority of whom find Wright's wrants utterly bizarre, not to mention retarded.

Speaking of retards, Clinton _executed_ a _retarded teenager_ who was completely at the mercy of the state in order to win cred on crime-fighting with yahoos and win the presidency. Whereas Jeremiah Wright's status following and personal wealth will likely INCREASE if he's souljah'ed. If Obama doesn't have the guts and ruthlessness to jettison a man who was almost certainly just a political convenience for him when Obama was a small-time local pol, what does it say about the man's guts and ruthlessness when he's forced to confront far, far greater challenges?  What does Obama owe him?

Strong leaders of great nations are called on repeatedly to throw people to the wolves, rhetorically speaking, including close friends and supporters. It's precisely because I believe this man and his rhetoric are such crap that I'm mystified as to why someone hungering after the presidency doesn't have the cojones needed to cut Wright loose.

tep is 3/4 right.

1/4 right:  He's right that Obama has to put a wall between himself and Wright.  It can be a Sister Souljah moment.

1/4 wrong: But he can't throw Wright under the bus.  He has to somehow thread the needle of admitting how much he (Obama) owes him (Wright) while making it clear that Wright's anger has no place in the campaign and is an anger that African Americans must move beyond, even if Wright can't.

Bill Clinton could diss Sister Souljah, after all, because he was white.  Obama has a connection that renders such a sacrifice of the object of scorn (Wright) impossible, while Obama can nevertheless denounce and reject the angry, conspiratorial mindset that makes the subject of race so toxic and racial healing in the country so difficult.

1/2 right:  Obama should begin and and his speech with a reference to Bear Stearns, etc., and make it clear that a war in which both black and white Americans are dying, and a financial crisis in which both black and white Americans are losing their homes, are the immediate crises for which divisions of race only hinder solutions.  Race is one of the ingredients in the stew that the right cooks up every election season in order to prevent real progress in health care and equitable sharing in the goods of the nation.

Tep, which is it? STFU or "get it on the table, and dispose of it so that he can tell us how he would deal with vastly more important issues facing the nation right now."

??

It sounds to me as though he's been doing the former, but now is about to do the latter so he can go back to doing the former, and here you are yelling at him again.

And I agree with Wandrey about the inadvisibility of throwing the dude under the bus, and disagree with you about Wright's status as "certainly just a political convenience for him".  

He has said, consistently and often, that he admires a lot about Wright, and particularly what the church has done in the community to actually help people and not just preach. And he disagrees vehemently with Wright on the whole "God Damn America" schtick. He understands where the anger comes from, but disagrees with the counterproductive grudge-nursing flamethrowing approach and wants to move past it. Has moved past it himself. How is this inconceivable to you? This is not contradictory. But that's the intellectual bit.

Politically, it would also be stupid to trash Wright: First off, the timing. If Wright were so very wretched, the time to trash him would have been long past. To do it now would just be an extreme and obvious pander.  But those youtubes are not representative of his whole preaching thing, so no, Wright is not Satan. I know there are those who called him evil on this thread but I'm not even going to argue that. It's a given for my argument that this is a baby-bathwater situation.

In fact to cut Wright loose to please the scaredy cats would be the opposite of cojones-y. Cutting him loose from the campaign ok, done, but refusing to repudiate the man takes much more cojones and is totally the Christian way. Christians will get this, and so will decent rational people [ok the categories might overlap, don't freak] - you condemn the sin, not the sinner, blah blah blah.

But he absolutely needs to talk about why Wright DOESN'T appear like evil on wheels to him, the way he does to eighty something percent of those polled by Rassmussen. Because regardless of what Obama does now, he's sat in the pew for 20 years, so of course people want to know what's up with this. Time for a, sigh, conversation. This is completely necessary and not evidence that Obama's some kind of lightweight on economics.

I saw timteeter's post just after clicking "submit" and I'd say it's about 4/4 right.

Another thing - I went to Obama's site to try and find out WHEN he's giving this speech [no luck - does anybody know?], and what's on the front page?

www.barackobama.com/index.php

"Senator Obama on the State of the Economy"

Enjoy, tep!

If Obama throws Wright under the bus, then he's the guy who trashed his personal friendships for the sake of political advancement. He'd prove there's no meaning to his candidacy. If you hold him to his word, everything he's said has been to the effect that you can disagree with someone without smearing them---if you take that away, the post-partisanship rhetoric falls apart, the hackishness sets in, political expedience trumps pragmatism, and there really is no reason to prefer him over Clinton. Maybe he'd save his presidential bid, but he'd lose his movement.

Then I can tune out the rest of the presidential campaign, because I've already seen "The Candidate."

I honeslty dont know why Americans are AFRAID to talk about race. Good grief the sky isnt going to fall if you talk about it. I firmly believe that Americans want to talk about it because they want to get past it. When economic times are tough is when these division rears their heads thats why they NEED to be addressed. Obama is right about one thing. If we dont find a way to come together to work together to fix this country NOTHING is going to change. We all have a stake in this from the people at Wall Street to the people on main street to the people in poorest of poor neigborhoods.

Carol

Many of you in these threads pooh poohed those who though the Rev Wright conflagration was a big deal.  Tempest in a teapot you said.

Apparently Obama believes the tempest has spilled over its vessel.

He is going to attempt give his Checkers Speech, after all

timteeter, I've heard the Sister Soulja analog a buncha times in regard to this.

But, it was easy as hell for Clinton to diss the sister.  It was just a drive-by shooting of a stranger.  He didn't have a twenty year history sith Sister Soulja, spiritual guide, mentor and Auntie S.

No question this is a seminal moment in this campaign and - I think- will tell us a lot about whether Barack Obama is going to be our next President. I think people who say he should shut up about race and just talk about the economy and jobs, etc, miss the point. Barack has staked his candidacy - indeed his whole life in public service, on the notion of bringing people together. Essentially of being someone who can bridge differences between people of different views, different cultures. His detractors have mocked it as empty rhetoric and platitudes, but in fact, I think it is the story of  his life - of who he is.

The discussions about whether Obama can/should throw his pastor under the proverbial bus, or distance himself from Trinity, etc, miss the point. He can't/won't do that. Indeed if he did it would undermine the rationale for his candidacy.  

What I think people fail to understand is that Rev. Wright (despite the admittedly inflammatory rhetoric that's been in the news this weekend) is not a wingnut.  Indeed as Donna Brazile pointed out on "This Week" yesterday, you could go to 1000 black churches around the country on a regular basis and find guys more provocative in some respects than him.  I'd point folks to this excellent piece on the history of Wright and Trinity in Newsweek.  

www.newsweek.com/.../123604

Basically, the point is that, Obama can and has disavowed Wright's inflammatory rhetoric - and fairly so. That isnt' his story and it isn't his approach. But to dissavow the man entirely would not only be dishonest to who Obama is, it would be to throw the whole notion that is is a uniter - a bridge builder under the bus with it.

Instead, I think what Obama will do in this speech is use the opportunity to share with the American people more of his story. About how he has lived, in some respects with one foot in the africaan american community and one foot not within that community. I think he'll try to show people how the Trinity community has fought for justice, for fairness for african americans (these are economic issues). ANd in doing so, I think he'll use this opportunity to fill out the picture of who he is and how he'd try to bring people together.

Are there risks to this? Sure. But face it. This whole candidacy has been built on risks. And if he's successful - and I think he's got the skills to do it - he may just set the foundation upon which to seal the nomination and ultimately the presidency.

THere is no question  but that he'll have the attention and the audience. This past weekend ensured that.

"timteeter, I've heard the Sister Soulja analog a buncha times in regard to this.

But, it was easy as hell for Clinton to diss the sister.  It was just a drive-by shooting of a stranger.  He didn't have a twenty year history sith Sister Soulja, spiritual guide, mentor and Auntie S."

Which was my point, thank you.  Obama has a difficulty needle to thread---disowning Wright's statements while acknowledging his debt to the man---but if he can do it successfully, he will have done himself (and the nation) a favor.

Of course, nothing Obama says, and I mean nothing, will stop Obama haters, who are by now just as legion and just as vicious as Hillary-haters, from declaring him a huckster, etc.  Just look at the comments that typically accompany ANY posting on Ben Smith's blog.  But if he can speak beyond his base of support to undecideds in middle America, then he'll be alright.

Wright can't really be the Sister Souljah to Obama's Clinton any more than he can be the Bob Prendergast to Obama's Truman, but there is some limited value in the comparison nonetheless.

tep, I'm late to this thread and I haven't written everything you've written, but your "substance on the economy, NATO, Asia..." line is starting to seem as repetitious and naive as your early obsession with Joe Biden.

You need to face up to the fact that Obama, like the rest of the candidates is in the midst of an ELECTION CAMPAIGN and that his brief within the context of said ELECTION CAMPAIGN is to WIN, not to satisfy your entirely valid concerns about the financial meltdown, the dollar, and China.  You, being the farsighted, savvy fellow that you are, understand that such nuts and bolts issues are what's really going to bite us in the ass, but show me the evidence that any significant proportion to the electorate shares your interest in such topics?  Right now it seems as if more people are concerned about Obama's racial identification and the whacko opinions of Jeremiah Wright, and Obama must address those concerns if he is to WIN.  At the present moment, asking him to stop talking about race to talk about his plans for boosting the greenback is like asking to put a gun to his head.

Is our political culture imperfect?  You betchya.  Would it be better if we bandoned all questions regarding candidates' religious, ethnic, social and sexual affiliations and instead hammered them with probing questions on how precisely they intend to handle problems like the mortgage crisis and NATO's impending collapse in Afghanistan?  Yup.  But in the present context, asking a candidate to go against the grain and focus like a laser on the hard-as-shit problems that you've outlined, is  tantamount to asking him to throw in the towel on electoral victory.

...haven't READ everything you've written, I meant to say.

Good stuff guys (and girls)....I particularly like what tjlinko had to say.

It kind of feels like tomorrow is his test.  If he doesn't pull it off, he may not get past it.  We will see what Barack Obama is made of.   The trick is to explain his black half to his white half, reconcile the two and get them to move forward together.  That's been what he's been promising to do since he first showed up.  How well he threads that needle, and what he sews with it, might determine whether we continue this journey with him.  

And he can't throw anybody under the bus.  Everybody gets to ride the Obama bus, or the bus won't get there.

Chan,

No one said that Wright was not a problem that Obama has to deal with successfully.  Some here argue that this is already fatal to Obama's nomination regardless of what Obama does or says.  That seems to me to be nothing so much as wishful thinking as the nomination is already out of reach for Hillary barring a collapse for Obama in the polls that is quite unlikely.

Others think that this fatal to Obama'e prospects in the general because there is no way for Obama to separate himself from Obama or argue that there own disenchantment with Obama -- usually if not always in the case of someone who was already supporting HIllary -- must be taken as evidence of Obama's new unelectability.  I think the evidence is that people are more than willing not to attribute guild by association if you can convincingly distance yourself from  the other's views  I think that Obama has the tools and bio with which to do that successfully.  

I have always said this is a moment of danger for Obama's campaign.  I have been equally confident that he can deal with it and that those who say he cannot are expressing their own desire that he fail rather than any cold-eyed analysis of the electorate or the election.

We shall see soon.

"Others think that this is fatal to Obama's prospects in the general because there is no way for Obama to separate himself from Wright, or they argue that their own disenchantment with Obama -- usually if not always in the case of someone who was already supporting Hillary -- must be taken as evidence of Obama's new unelectability"

If I would plead with the TNR web-masters for anything it would be that we get a larger space in which to type and one in which the typeface is not so bloody tiny.  I have great difficulty in seeing the text that I am writing.  If a thought backtracks or runs of the rail, or I make a ridiculous typo, drop a letter, or make a word substitution, I cannot see it as I type and correct.  Even when I try to proofread, it is very hard to see this tiny type.

roid re your technical problem here, "...I would plead with the TNR web-masters for anything it would be that we get a larger space in which to type and one in which the typeface is not so bloody tiny.  I have great difficulty in seeing the text that I am writing."

On my computer and browser at least (MacBook Pro + Safari) if you hit the Command key and the plus key at the same time, it makes the type larger.  Using the command and minus key makes the type smaller.

I believe this works on a Windows based computer and with any other browser as well.

Chan,

One problem. Window's based machines don't HAVE a Command key.  There may be a key that accomplishes what you suggest, but I don't know what it is.

And what about html formatting options too? -- they [i]used[/i] to be there, back in the Garden.

tjlinko, I use Windows only if I must.  But, I believe the to make type large in a browser you hit Control and +

Anyway, a little experimenting with the avaialble keys-- control, option, the Windows symbol, whatever-- does the trick.