George Rebane
There is very little of Obama’s written record save his two presumptive autobiographies. There he makes some statements which are outlandish to conservative ears, yet cause no discomfort to the liberal. An example of these statements is found in a well-balanced entry in snopes.com here. Clearly, the circulating emails containing the Obama quotes have been subject to some doctoring.
For a perspective from an astute and educated liberal, I asked my friend Dick Dickenson (former Washington Post political editor) to comment how these statements might influence his take on the Senator from Illinois given that Obama could have followed the more measured example of the late MLK in making his case. With his permission, his response (minus salutations and closings) follows -
I think when these quotes are put in context they are a pretty clean slate. The context is his effort growing up as a boy and young man to sort out his place in a society that tragically had, and still has, a large element of racism. Blacks were, and are in many cases, defined by their race.
You'll recall that at the beginning of his presidential campaign he was hit by the absurd charge, from the African-American community, that he wasn't "black enough." That sets some context for his statement about the pressure of proving loyalty to which side i.e. loyalty to the black race. One thing I take from his campaign is that he doesn't want to, and probably doesn't think it's American, to declare loyalty to one race or another. Declare loyalty to your citizenship as an American.
His statement about a "pervasive sense of grievance" and effort to "ingratiate himself with whites" can be read in the same context--a young man working out his identity in a multi-racial and often racist--again tragically--society.
As for "standing with Muslims" I read that as a declaration that he would do what I would do, defend Muslims against bigotry and attacks arising from 9/11 and the fear of terrorism--a McCarthyite guilt by association, by the way.
As for Martin Luther King putting his case a different way. Yes, he did, as a different person coming from a different background and operating in a profoundly different society and context.
I see nothing racist or threatening about Obama. Quite the contrary--I support him because I'm convinced that he wants to draw people together, that he wants this country to enter a post-racist era.
To answer your question, I think considering these statements in making one's decision is relevant. To consider them out of context that reverses their meaning is not.
Dick’s response makes clear the liberal’s perspective, while at the same time providing little to enlighten the conservative trying to achieve some level of comfort with the man who most likely will be our next President. The contexts outlined above, that seem to come so naturally to Dick, are to me (and perhaps other libertarians/conservatives) still troubling at worst and ambiguous at best, given the man's performance on the campaign trail. It seems that were I to attempt to work the context analysis machinery, so effortlessly in Dick’s command, I would fashion a plausible alternative context that most likely will bolster the face value of Obama’s strong words.
This illustrates the dilemma of our traumatically split electorate – much of the right minority is still criticizing its candidate’s stand on issues, while the left majority can find no wrong in any utterance of their candidate. The right interprets Obama's every statement in a broader context that includes all the spotty background containing his experiences with the Ayers and Wrights and the sleazy Chicago politics. In doing this, the right tries to fill in Obama's considerable blanks with plausible interpretations that yield a consistent and coherent picture of an inexperienced politician who wants to lead America in a radically new and dangerous direction. Yet taking each allegation by itself, they can all be contextualized away if we don't look at the man in the large. He survives whole and mightier than before. Has the long-prophesized man on the white horse finally arrived in America to lead us to his vision of state-mediated glory?
Comments