Commentary Magazine


Contentions

That’s It?

Just before the Monday evening news, Barack Obama issued the meekest possible comment on Reverend Wright, saying the man doesn’t speak for him and that Obama understands how folks might be offended. (He spoke for only six minutes and took three questions, five less than he permitted at his “you had eight questions” Rezko presser earlier in the year.) Weak tea of this kind seems to be the campaign’s chosen approach, not merely a filler to get through the first news cycle.

There is evidently nothing Wright can say that would cause Obama to break, once and for all, with him. And no explanation comes to mind to help us understand how Wright concealed his world view from Obama for so long.

But the dilemma is not one easily resolved. If Obama took advice from an unlikely source and denounced Wright, what would be the explanation for the delay? What did he learn since the Philadelphia speech that changed his mind? And all those folks who demanded that Obama stand up to the trouble-making media and Vast Right Wing Conspiracy would be none too pleased.

Indeed, this is a problem entirely of Obama’s own making. By sticking with Wright and declining the first opportunity, which is always the best opportunity, to reject the hate-mongering preacher, he placed his bet that voters could be wowed and cowed by a high-minded speech on racial unity. That speech garnered some gushing reviews. But it may have turned out to be a fatally flawed strategy.

Even liberal pundits recognize the impact:

For Senator Obama, the re-emergence of Rev. Wright has been devastating. The senator has been trying desperately to bolster his standing with skeptical and even hostile white working-class voters. When the story line of the campaign shifts almost entirely to the race-in-your-face antics of someone like Mr. Wright, Mr. Obama’s chances can only suffer.Beyond that, the apparent helplessness of the Obama campaign in the face of the Wright onslaught contributes to the growing perception of the candidate as weak, as someone who is unwilling or unable to fight aggressively on his own behalf.

Who could have possibly guessed that that in the age of digital media everyone would be able to put all the pieces together and conclude that Obama’s post-racial rhetoric is utterly at odds with his experience in Wright’s church? Looks like the “21st century candidate” (Donna Brazile’s term) is turning out to be hopelessly 20th century.



Join the discussion…

Are you a subscriber? Log in to comment »

Not a subscriber? Join the discussion today, subscribe to Commentary »





Welcome to Commentary Magazine.
We hope you enjoy your visit.
As a visitor to our site, you are allowed 8 free articles this month.
This is your first of 8 free articles.

If you are already a digital subscriber, log in here »

Print subscriber? For free access to the website and iPad, register here »

To subscribe, click here to see our subscription offers »

Please note this is an advertisement skip this ad
Clearly, you have a passion for ideas.
Subscribe today for unlimited digital access to the publication that shapes the minds of the people who shape our world.
Get for just
YOU HAVE READ OF 8 FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
FOR JUST
YOU HAVE READ OF 8 FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
FOR JUST
Welcome to Commentary Magazine.
We hope you enjoy your visit.
As a visitor, you are allowed 8 free articles.
This is your first article.
You have read of 8 free articles this month.
YOU HAVE READ 8 OF 8
FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
for full access to
CommentaryMagazine.com
INCLUDES FULL ACCESS TO:
Digital subscriber?
Print subscriber? Get free access »
Call to subscribe: 1-800-829-6270
You can also subscribe
on your computer at
CommentaryMagazine.com.
LOG IN WITH YOUR
COMMENTARY MAGAZINE ID
Don't have a CommentaryMagazine.com log in?
CREATE A COMMENTARY
LOG IN ID
Enter you email address and password below. A confirmation email will be sent to the email address that you provide.