The Speech and how I think Obama got it all wrong

 

I think a bit of history is needed in this great discussion Obama refers to in his pretext for discussion and the beginning of a dialogue on national racial healing. We don't even have to go that far back in time to understand the context. Obama has gotten it all wrong and he left out all the really important context. The scope of this speech was way too narrow and left out all the real necessary elements that should have been included. Politically he ignored all the context that didn't suit his purpose of getting elected, like it didn't exist or wasn't important enough to mention. Before you say it or think it though, It wasn't about TV time, as they would have given him whatever he wanted and would have let him say whatever he said. CNN and youtube would have carried a 15,000 word speech and I think it is as telling and important to see what he left out as it was to hear what was crafted into his speech. The context used by Obama and most politicians and how they pick and choose to use it is where I get lost and it is where I get pissed off about how it is used in our great political theatre dramas. Obama would have you believe this is mostly about black people and white people as major issues and that's all. 

 

If the truth could ever be told, it is nothing of the sort. He has gotten it all wrong by effectively isolating and philosophically eliminating any class who is non-white , but also not black. At his table whites are the beginning point and Blacks seem to be the only legitimate victims.

 

First, Four score and seven years ago the world started thinking about television. Experiments were under way which would later lead to the invention of the talking picture. In 1921 the Boeing company was known as a great furniture maker. A short crazy , one balled , mustachioed insane Jew hating nut job became the chairman of the Nazi party in Germany. His claim to fame is well grounded in his ability to make great rousing speeches ( to large crowds over loudspeakers) which inflamed the passions of young impressionable people who turned out in droves to hear him speak. He was a rock star in his country. In the US, the KKK rose to prominence at about this same time, marking their brief rise in acceptance ( and politics) with violence, political aspirations and sanctioned racism that invariable ended in death , destruction and corruption. The world responded to these tragedies by buying perfume. In 1921 Chanel # 5 was introduced, and was a hit world wide becoming a number one seller in many countries including Germany and the deep south of the United States.

 

The further backwards in time we go to examine events of the past, the more informed we are about just how far we seem to have moved forward and yet how little we understand about that supposed great leap.

 

Fast backward once more to 1861. Lincoln is elected President. Events of the day are full of turmoil and strife. Politics is a deadly serious business. News of the strife travels very slowly except in places where the telegraph can connect. Major and mundane news stories take months and years to fully disseminate throughout the US.  In January, 1861 -- The South Secedes. 7 states secede from the USA.  February, 1861-- The South Creates a Government and seizes federal forts in the south. March 4, 1861-- Lincoln's Inauguration. At Lincoln's inauguration the new president said he had no plans to end slavery in those states where it already existed, but he also said he would not accept secession. He hoped to resolve the national crisis without warfare. April,1861 -- Attack on Fort Sumter. The bombardment of Fort Sumter was the opening engagement of the American Civil War. On April 10, 1861, Brig. Gen. Beauregard, in command of the provisional Confederate forces at Charleston, South Carolina, demanded the surrender of the Union garrison of Fort Sumter in Charleston Harbor. The Garrison commander Anderson refused. On April 12, Confederate batteries opened fire on the fort, which was unable to reply effectively. At 2:30 p.m., April 13, Major Anderson surrendered Fort Sumter, evacuating the garrison on the following day.

 

You know what comes after.

War.

Death.

Emancipation.

Lots and lots of bloodshed.

People on both sides die in stupidly large numbers.

None of us were around to see it, but thank god for books written by those who were.

Great books written by authors of the time, who had no problem with slanting a story to support their own view. (See The Life of Franklin Pierce By Nathaniel Hawthorne, 1852), a great piece of literary trash if there ever was one.

 

In the late 1700's, white ( or just rich almost white euro trash ) rich land owning slave-owners gather in Philadelphia and crafted several documents detailing how the US should be set-up, created , run and managed. We don't have a concern about dismissing the context of the times in addressing our concerns in the modern era unless and until it affects us. All men (by definition in the Constitution) were not created equal. The Founding fathers ( in their great wisdom - yeah right !) decided that Blacks were not equal, Indians were not equal, Women were not equal, the poor were not equal and as originally crafted non-landowners were not equal. Somehow we rectified our interpretations of the founding era with our modern ideas concerning these concepts. In today's society in it unthinkable that we view women, blacks or any other American as a separate class ( unless of course you are an illegal alien -not immigrant or are openly gay , in which case you are persona non-gratis)

 

Clear through the 1960's America had no problem with a separate but equal (not really) philosophy (forget the civil war, you remember segregation?)

Fast forward to today. Even though slavery was ended by executive order more than 140 years ago (no it wasn't ever a law passed by Congress, it was one of two executive orders issued by Lincoln in 1863 ( see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emancipation_Proclamation ), yet we still talk about it in America as though we knew someone who was a slave at the time. We are approximately 8 generations or more removed from those times, and we still think about it as if it is an open unwashed sore with a band-aid on it and it was the only great blemish on our history.

We conquered the American Indian , vanquished and stuffed them into tiny miserable dusty worthless pieces of land and put them in permanent poverty and we could care less about them, and really still don't and somehow the subject is about the founding fathers ( 1700's) , the constitution and the Pre-amble to the Constitution. I wouldn't ask the Irish, the Italians or the Russian immigrants about this though, their opinions may be different. I also wouldn't ask a Japanese -American during the WWII era, they may have a totally different take on racial equity in America.  Jews in the 1940's probably have a little more to say as well, albeit theirs thoughts may be more fully qualified as a world view, which our politicians are never good at anyway. Don't ask an American born and raised Muslim American about racial equality. Flying while Muslim is now a recognized syndrome and is just as pervasive and ill advised and wrong as the offense of Driving while Black was and is in the deep south (or in present day rich mostly white neighborhoods).

Now along comes Barrack Obama, telling us that his association with a mostly black church and a demagogue preacher is equal to his up bringing in a white household. Somehow his white grandmother's cringing comments are equal to the hate and dissent from our founding through present times. Pretty words and pretty disingenuous connections. The liberals are falling down in the rush to praise him  and "The Speech" ( here is the link if you want to watch it again http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWe7wTVbLUU ) as one of the most important speeches of our time. I am stunned at the comparisons.

He has been compared to Dr. Martin Luther King, John Kennedy, Bobby Kennedy, Ronald Reagan and Lincoln.

I've watched it three or four times trying to put what he has said into context in the modern era and how his philosophy has tied together the past the present and the future.

It was a great political speech, in this context it was a great political speech and that is all it was.

It was not in the league of a famous speech given August 28th, 1963 (http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkihaveadream.htm )

and is nowhere near as memorable as one given on January 20th, 1961 ( http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/jfkinaugural.htm )

Sorry I don't see Dr. King or a Kennedy. I don't even see Jimmy Carter. He doesn't look or sound like Mandela or Tutu at all.

Heck I don't even see a Jesse ( http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/01/18/jackson.child.03/ )

or even on par with the shifty level of Al Sharpton. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tawana_Brawley )

How he earns a place at the table is because he has political muscle and political money and he gives a great political stump speech. I don't think it has much at all to do with his color, not really. If it is time for a soul searching political apology by the American people we can do much better than this lightweight nobody from Illinois. All I see is a politician , exposed as a same as everybody else, politically strategic ultra-liberal idealist , without the protection of the media at the moment struggling to save his place in the fast turning pages of history. 

He is trying desperately to get out from under a dump truck load of crap he has had to endure because someone he is/was close to objects to the history which has occurred who has a thought about why it happened. Why else craft a 5000 word speech , give it in Philadelphia, surrounded by no less than 6 huge American flags. The speech is not about dreams (King) , or care for the people or less government (Reagan), or service (Kennedy). The speech is about damage control and political salvation. It takes more than soothing words and perfected dialogue to make your mark in American politics. I don't buy it and can't believe anyone with brain cells in their head does. A load of political crap from a teleprompter. It would have been more believable if he had given that speech from the set of the Oprah Winfrey show and it probably would have had better production value.

I don't agree with either of them (Obama or Clinton), but in context I am a baby boomer and white so what do I know about race to begin with?. In this country you apparently can have no legitimate thought about slavery or race or immigration or sexual orientation unless you belong to the class affected or live in Berkeley CA. This ain't about race and it is about race all at the same time.

It is however 100 % all about trust.

Anybody who would throw their own grandmother under the bus to make a political point to save their own ass, let alone their mentor , friend and preacher and who can effectively muzzle their own wife can't be trusted in my view. If I am his Grandmother I would be royally pissed off to be embarrassed nationally like that, If I am the preacher, I would have already responded to it and not disappear to protect him and if I am his wife, well maybe I like the idea of being First Lady, but how do you hide me from the Press Corps?

Funny how you haven't heard a single word, not one single quotable printed or spoken word, from his wife Michelle Obama on the subject. If this were my family, NO WAY you could shut my wife up like he has his. She has said NOTHING AT ALL, publicly since her last embarrassing comment, about how she could finally "....Be proud of America (sic).  Love em or hate em, Bill couldn't shut Hillary up and Hillary can't shut Bill up either. Both of them piss me off too, but so did Nancy Reagan and Barbara Bush at times.

If you would like to read what the US Constitution actually says on the matter of how we were formed and what the Constitution actually says on race click the hyperlink http://answrtek.com/US%20Constitution.pdf . I've read the document numerous times and given great amounts of thought to the subject.

I doubt most politicians including Obama has ever seriously read it. No offense , but most people I talk to have never read it once they left High School.

Just humble mumblings from my WASPy , baby boomer , Protestant, milky white point of view.

 

Thankx- bigmike

 

posted from "The Rant from bigmike" at http://bigmikerant.blogspot.com/