Letters to the Editor
red_gti2000
Published Letters: 319
-
@Uncle Fester
[Read the article: Obama's speech on race]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I see what you're saying, and I have heard Obama himself state his plan to have "open hearings", etc. It sounds very good in theory... but...
I have stated this conundrum in a previous post. American steelmakers complain that foreign competitors are "dumping" their products in the market, and that the government should impose tariffs to protect American workers. American car makers oppose that, because they need cheaper steel to make their cars more competitive. What is a government to do? In either case, someone is going to feel that their interests were not taken into account.
Now, get those two sides in a public forum and have them argue, ad infinitum. Multiply that by tens of thousands of different issues.
Imagine the consequences.
You see, it is impossible to please everybody. That is why we have elected officials for a constituency. Those officials are elected to defend the interests of their constituents. Different constituencies have different demands. Hence, compromise is required. That is our system of democracy.
Why do you think this system of "democracy" that I have just described is what has worked in this country for so long and is what most other democratic countries are using up to the present? It may not be perfect, but it is better than anything else out there.
So I hear what you are saying, but I don't believe it will work. Nice theory, though.
-
He has proven himself -- that much is evident
[Read the article: Was Obama's speech enough?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]He has been able to take what could have been a death-dealing torpedo to his political career and turn it into a political ace with his supporters. No matter what happens from here onwards he will always be a force to reckon with in national politics. Not bad for someone who several months ago wasn't even on the national radar.
The more important point to discuss is whether this speech will have any relevance in the general. I don't think that many voters tuned into the broadcast or read the text. The great majority of Americans have more pressing matters on their minds. But it certainly cements his base in the Democratic Party and probably even ensures that he gets the nomination. At the end of the day I don't think it will matter in the general. The Repubs will have their 30sec attack ads and soundbites prepared and ready for prime time. I still think they will have the advantage and will end winning.
-
There is a conflict here
[Read the article: Was Obama's speech enough?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I've only gotten through the first 3 pages and am already amazed (well... maybe not :-) at all the firebombs being thrown.
My 2 cents:
It is, for me, revelatory that Obama chose to compare his feelings for his grandmother with those of Rev. Wright. He loves both, and both love him. This is a good thing.
He speaks of how he "cringed" when he heard his grandmother say racist things, and equates it with Wright -- he also "cringed" when racist things were said, but he cannot reject them because of love. This is human.
However, he knows that his grandmother grew up in a different era, and that her prejudices were formed _by_ that era. And what makes her even more admirable is that she was _honest_ about it to her grandson, whom she loved dearly. She told him about it even though she very well knew that it would deeply hurt his feelings -- but she also knew that, by decades of words and deeds, he would never doubt how she felt about _him_. Gods, I would never want my children to have to be subjected to that kind of emotional conflict. It is a tribute to the human spirit that they both survived that test.
Rev. Wright, on the other hand, is a different story. There are two questions that have to be asked here:
1. Does Rev. Wright really believe _deep_in_his_heart_ everything he preaches?
If Rev. Wright does believe them, then there should be a deep and honest conversation about these things, and this forum would not be the place to discuss it.
However, if he does not _really_ believe _everything_ he says, then he should recognize that words _do_ count. And they _are_ hurtful. And hurtful words -- unless you are preaching to the choir -- will never get you anywhere with the other side you are trying to convince.
Even worse, if he realizes this, then he is guilty of another human failing -- pandering to the audience's prejudices to advance one's own agenda. And this is not honest. In no way, shape or form would he be able to compare to Obama's grandmother.
Which brings me to the second question:
2. Does Obama believe _deep_in_his_heart_ what he heard from Rev. Wright?
If he doesn't, then he had a moral obligation -- way back then -- to stand up to him and to convince him of the error of his ways. To allow it to pass opens him up to accusations of another very human failing -- hypocrisy. Avoiding hypocrisy is the supreme lesson to be learned from his grandmother's act of revealing her prejudices to him -- an act born out of love.
But if he does believe what he heard, then he should be honest about it to everyone and open up the debate. I believe that, by doing this, he will do much more to advance the cause of a "more perfect union" than anything else.
But, of course, he could also be succumbing to another very human failing that all politicians are guity of -- that the end justifies the means. But that would be the subject of another post.
-
@X Hutman
[Read the article: Was Obama's speech enough?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Your post in rebuttal to mine is not even worth reading. You seem to think yourself of better-than-average intelligence. You have revealed the truth -- you are mediocre.