Obama Speech at Selma Mediocre, at best

[alcibiades_mystery]

OK. I tuned in, wanting to love it. Luckily, I tuned in early, and got to see both Bishop Kirkland and Rev. Joseph Lowery, both of whom gave speeches that far outpaced Obama's in terms of oratorical skill. Obama even acknowledged as much. Kirkland, for his part, set up a beautiful arrangement with parallel structure (You show me X, and I'll show you Y). It was skillful, and brilliantly delivered. Lowery fooled you into thinking he was a ranting old man, until he started in on the substance of it. It was a formidable display, fully in the great African American sermonic tradition. Obama was, on the other hand, far too "systematic," with really only one rousing line in the whole speech, coming halfway through (I belong to Selma, too, etc.).

His speech was halting, and read. In fact, he read it like a first-year speech comm student who's been warned to look up from the text. He meandered, missed many of his good lines, and ended weakly. The Joshua Generation stuff was trite as metaphor, and presumptuous in its unstated allusions to Dr. King's last speech.

But this was also Obama's "Sistah Soljah" moment, though heavily coded as such for white audiences. The arrangement said it all: Why I'm black like that (and cool like that); what the civil rights generation taught us about struggle; and - finally - what the civil rights generation teaches us - us blacks - about our own faults. The last part - our own faults - is the kicker. Yes, of course, this self-reflection on "Us" is part and parcel of the black sermonic tradition. Hell, even Ice Cube at his most radical engages in it. But that's "Don't put your business in the street" stuff. It's not CSPAN, national audience material. But Obama made it so. Why?

Because that's precisely what white America wants to hear. Obama was walking a tight rhetorical rope between what black folks know and what white folks think they know about black folks. The speech (at fucking Selma!) was designed to go out to both, but the real audience was white folks, to wink at their secret belief that it is really deadbeat dads (rather than systematic social breakdown), really bad parents and the "non-coolness" of learning (rather than systematic underfunding of schools), really bling-bling (and not the depredations of consumer capital among the poor) that cause the continuing problems for black America.

It was one of the most cynical performances I've ever witnessed, and it wasn't even well delivered.

[zulchzulu]

1. Opinions are like a*&holes...everybody's got one

I thought the speech was excellent, thoughtful and an inspiration to those that were there...

I think you may have read way too into it or are doing the work of another candidate who was there...who by the way was a Goldwater Girl...and since Goldwater was against the Civil Rights Act of 1964, that would certainly make one wonder...

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[brentspeak]

2. I just think it's ridiculous that Obama is running for President at this time

What does he have? Two years as a senator and a talented way with delivering substance-less speeches. I'd kind of like for him to actually be a (gasp) senator, for once. We sort of need him to concentrate in that role, especially since the Democrats in the Senate are having trouble getting anything done with their too-slim majority. (And Hillary is just wasting a lot of money and time, likewise).

[alcibiades_mystery]

4. I'm perfectly happy for him to run

We need new blood. It's a good thing.

That speech, on the other hand, was remarkably cynical in its approach to race in America. That, not so crazy about.

[zulchzulu]

31. Abe Lincoln had the same amount of experience, so your theory...

...is not historically accurate...and since you already think his speeches are "substance-less", I suggest you learn more about him as well as check out American history when you get a chance.

[brentspeak]

32. I already know quite a bit about American history; I know that Obama is no Abe Lincoln

[jefferson_dem]

You're right. He's not and he would never claim to be.

What he is, however, is what America needs right now just as America needed Lincoln in 1860.

More time in the troughs of DC is exactly the sort of "experience" we've had enough of.

[Selatius]

5. Was I the only one who felt that all these politicians in Selma really seemed crass?

I felt like Selma was being used as a political prop. Maybe that's just me, though.

[alcibiades_mystery]

6. A politician at Selma is not a bad thing

Politicians are - in theory, anyway - representatives of the people, and I see no reason why they shouldn't be involved in commemorations. My problem was that Obama's speech WAS crass, even though it didn't have to be. Rather than commemorating the event, he was sending a message about his take on race issues to white America - at the expense of black America. That's what was crass about it.

[Erika]

9. Probably just you. n/t

[Connie_Corleone]

30. Obama was INVITED weeks ago to speak in Selma.

Hillary Clinton just followed him down there.

[IChing]

7. Does anyone have a link to the text of his speech and hers?

Because if he mentioned that walk across that bridge
and the bridge where people were shot at and killed for trying to get out of New Orleans that would of really rocked.

http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/today/mar07.html

[Erika]

8. Notice how there were no Republicans there?

Does that say something?

[Southsideirish]

10. I instantly came to the same conclusion - his " Sistah Soljah" speech!

[tomreedtoon]

11. So Obama may not be ready for President. But...

...wouldn't he make a good Veep? Or deserve an important cabinet post?

Yes, he will go to the convention fighting the other candidates. And if he doesn't get the nomination, he will most likely stand for the "unity photo" where all the also-rans hug the candidate. But the curious fact about politics is that these people are almost never tapped to work in the winner's administration should he win.

I know they were in contention, but unless they happen to hate each other tooth and nail, shouldn't they be a great resource for the administration? The Vice President post is usually picked by the Presidential candidate, but it's almost never one of the people he defeated.

(Just saw Chris Rock in "Head of State" last night. It would be good to see a candidate getting a crowd to cheer "It just ain't right!" Even if it did seem close to Howard Dean's career-destroying yelp.)

[hfojvt]

42. the veep is almost never one of the people he defeated?

Kerry/Edwards ; Reagan/Bush ; Clinton/Gore (I am not sure if Gore ran in 1992, that was over pretty quick, but he ran in 1988)

I think the Veep is quite often one of the defeated candidates, although there are probably a few counter-examples - Ford/Dole ; Dukakis/Bentsen; Gore/Lieberman. To me, the 2nd example stands out though. I was a Jackson supporter in 1988, and felt that a white candidate who had done as well as Jackson would have been part of the ticket. If Jesse was white, it would have been Dukakis/Jackson.

As for the other, I think that a Senate seat is at least as useful and as powerful as a cabinet position. I cannot think of a single example of somebody who left the Senate to work in the Cabinet, not in the last 30 years anyway. I cannot even think of anyone who left the House to work in the Cabinet. Maybe Les Aspin, but I am not sure, and can remember no others.

[Clarkie1]

12. I thought the speech was superb. nt

[kid a]

13. I think it was a very good speech - well delivered.

best of the day!

[lligrd]

14. I Watched Both Of Their Speeches

and found them both inspiring. Especially considering what the other-side has to offer. Oops, they weren't even there. The Civil Rights struggle was a struggle for human rights for everyone and everyone should celebrate the movement and its accomplishments and acknowledge the sacrifices made for it.

[BeyondGeography]

15. When he took blacks to task in his speech the room exploded in applause

and it wasn't white people applauding.

Which may suggest there is a hunger for Obama's brand of leadership in the black community that you are completely missing.

Your summary of the speech misses another basic point: His call for discipline among blacks was preceded by an acknowledgement that discipline was at the heart of the success of the civil rights movement. It took unrelenting courage and, at the same time, restraint, for the marchers of Selma and their predecessors to change America. The fruits of their labor can not be fully realized solely through MLK birthday celebrations and Black History Month; an everyday commitment to progress is necessary. All of this was said before he took Cousin Pookie to task for not voting and Uncle Jethro for watching too much Sports Center. By that time, the room was rocking, and those in attendance gave every impression of finding the speech anything but cynical.

[alcibiades_mystery]

17. I did not miss that point at all

These sorts of speeches are a commonplace in the black oratorical tradition. I even gave another example. Only someone who knows nothing about black oratory would have found the call for discipline stuff original or even interesting. It's a frequently used trope, which is why it garnered the usual - if lukewarm - applause ("exploded in applause" is laughable). The difference is in the occasion. This trope is usually invoked in closed session, i.e., not to an audience of white folks. It is self-criticism usually reserved for in-group occasions (like, say, a black church, or a barber shop). Obama's cynicism lies here: he used the trope at it is usually used (in a black church), but with the full knowledge that this wasn't a closed session. In that way, black folks could read it the way they usually do (as a trope of self-criticism), while white folks (and I include white liberals) could read it a different way altogether (which is to say, as an absolution). That's why the move was ultimately cynical. Obama leveraged a common trope in the black oratorical tradition in order to score political points with the wider white audience. That's rotten.

[BeyondGeography]

23. What he did was appeal to the greatness that black Americans have shown in the past

as a guide to how they can improve the present, which resulted in the loudest applause of the day.

Only a hopeless cynic would find that to be cynical and rotten.

Your "lukewarm applause" analysis just doesn't square with the facts. From the NY Times, but you can find the same type of account everywhere today:

“I know if cousin Pookie would vote, if brother Jethro would get off the couch and stop watching Sports- Center and go register some folks and go to the polls, we’d have a different kind of politics,” Mr. Obama said, the crowd rising to its feet. “Kick off your bedroom slippers, put on your marching shoes!”

To your other point about white folks using Pookie and Jethro as a source of absolution, this is is definitely a risk, but it's not as if Obama never takes the broader culture to task, particularly for being dumbed down and intellectually lazy. There are elements of this in his other speeches and writings. If you listen carefully enough, he's telling the whole country to turn off the TV and the Play Station, which is what I find to be most compelling about him.

[cali]

16. I agree with you- in the main.

I thought the speech was indeed mediocre. The Joshua generation stuff left me cold. I'm not sure I agree with you about the "Sista Soljah" stuff, but the speech was uninspired and the delivery was halting and flat.

What gets me is all the raving for the speech that went on here. I felt like it was an Emperor's new clothes thing.

And let me add that I really like Obama, and would have no problem whatsoever with him being the nominee.

[quinnox]

18. I saw a clip, it seemed ok I guess

but I did not see the brilliance and "another gettysburg address" that some on Du were claiming.

I agree with the one up above who is puzzled about Obama running for president.

What has he accomplished in his youngish life to make him qualified?

When I saw the clip of his speech and he was talking about standing on the shoulders of giants it just reminded that Obama's record in civil rights or on black issues seems to pale when compared to other blacks like Sharpton or Jessie Jackson.

I don't think Obama has the goods right now to be president, but in ten years or so then he might have the experience and be ready for the presidency.

[alcibiades_mystery]

19. Anyone who called it "another Gettysburg address" is ignorant. Period.

That's just silly.

[ShortnFiery]

20. I loved Obama's speech! HRC has no greater experience. He has my vote. n/t

[cali]

22. I think his experience is sufficient, but she

undoubtedly has greater experience than he does. However, experience is only one issue as to qualification.

[ShortnFiery]

26. Why? Being married to a person in power doesn't fly on a resume.

That's what irritates me about HRC. My husband is a retired Marine Officer, but I never mention or wear "his rank" on my person or in any way, in my behavior. It's very disconcerting that I was one of The Few Officer's wives who showed up to greet HRC when she was First Lady with my "I'm a member of the Hillary Fan Club" to now see her turn into a woman who I do NOT admire.

I love my retired jarhead :P husband of almost 25 years, but I've always forged my own identity completely separate from his. There is nothing LIBERATING about HRC mentioning "my husband" repeatedly during her stump speeches. That's not why I had to be twice as good as the men as women were integrated into the Regular Army during the late 1970s.

All the sexual harassment I brushed off. All the snide remarks and tests of courage I was subjected to was worth it so my beloved daughter and others do not have to pay the same price as myself.

However, that's pushed back when women like HRC have changed and become ambitious for power at any expense. Referencing her husband, left and right, just reminds me of some of the General Officer's wives who loved to boss around the rest of us at those little coffee clutch Command performances that I had to endure while my husband was on active duty.

Other than functioning as Bill's spouse, tell me what MORE political experience does HRC have over Obama?

[cooolandrew]

21. I think you need to listen to far more than one speech to discover the real obama.....

... I am black and I know very well Obama is NOT going to run a campaign that is all about african american issues. He will be a president to all America and he has to make that clear to be elected that's a reality. I wouldn't expect him to run his campaign any other way.

[alcibiades_mystery]

28. That's all well and good

I'm talking about THIS speech, however. And it was cynical. I certainly expect him to be the President to all America, but that doesn't mean you cynically double-talk black America in order to appeal to white America. That's the point. Unless you don't think that the two are separate still, in many ways?

[Odin2005]

24. I thoght his speech was pretty good.

The reference to Moses and Joshua needed to sound a bit less corny, though.

[Skidmore]

25. I think he addressed the audience appropriately.

[KharmaTrain]

27. Joe Lowery Was There...His Passion Was With The Memory Of Those Who Were There

This wasn't a campaign rally...and shame on those who tried to make it into such. I remember the 1965 Selma march...the shooting of James Meredith...the scenes on my TV of the cops with dogs and firehoses...Lowery's memory was far more direct than that. Barak was a toddler when this was going on...how could he ever match the intensity of those speaker.

As far as "fucking Selma"...you obviously lost what this whole event was about. This white American will have plenty of time to hear my Junior Senator in the YEAR to go until the first primary. Shameful that we even have to grade speeches in light of the bigger picture.

[Connie_Corleone]

29. "Fucking Selma"??

Anyway, I loved the speech. My aunt called me up after it and she loved it too. There was no Sista Souljah moment. He said what needed to be said. He wasn't speaking to white people.

The whole Joshua reference was for those at the church. Church folks get the whole meaning of the Joshua generation.

The speech wasn't meant for the politicos who happened to be watching C-Span critiquing every move he made and every word he spoke.

[alcibiades_mystery]

33. No kidding?

The Joshua stuff was for church folk? Get outta here! Who could have known?

:sarcasm:

Of course the Joshua stuff was for the church. Obviously. That's not the point. That he was simultaneously speaking to and insulting those church folks with his double meanings is the point. Sistah Soljah, writ large.

[Connie_Corleone]

34. He didn't insult them. They stood up and cheered.

There's no need for a sarcastic response to my opinion. I could've responded to your original post in a sarcastic manner but I chose to stay civil. Apparently, you only value your own opinion and those who agree with you.

Have a nice day.

[alcibiades_mystery]

38. I value a diversity of opinions

Especially when they involve teaching me something that I didn't know when I woke up this morning. :-)

[Connie_Corleone]

40. I think you're still asleep.

[alcibiades_mystery]

41. Zzzzzing

:rofl:

[BL611]

35. That cultural dysfunction

caused not as much by systematic breakdown as historical systematic discrimination (you can't "breakdown" what never existed)is a major cause of continuing problems in the black community is every bit if not (as a matter of fact almost certainly so) evident in the black community as among whites.It was very well received by the audience, was it horribly original? No. It was a good speech intended for its audience; a southern black church, on how he was affected by the civil rights movement. The only thing cynical is your interpretation of the speech.

[alcibiades_mystery]

36. But that was only part of the audience, and Obama damn well knew that

You act as if the speech wasn't explicitly designed for BOTH the black church on a Sunday morning in Selma AND the entire American political world, both of whom were "in attendance." That's the point. If he gave this speech exclusively in a black church, without the extra cameras and attention, there would be nothing wrong with it at all. Such speeches are commonplace in black churches, and black folks understand them in a particular way because of their conventional nature in African American culture (hence, the cheering). Hell, that's as old as uplift narratives. Nothing new, and sure to draw some applause. But that wasn't - IN REALITY - the only audience, and Obama knew that. The other audience was white folks watching the speech on TV, and reading about it in the papers - and that audience understands African American self-criticism in a wholly different way.

My beef with Obama is that he exploited a common trope in the black church, knowing that its meaning circulates differently in the wider political audience. Black folks hear constructive self-criticism (because the problems ARE very real); a large segment of white folks hear political absolution (if only those people could get their act together: you're right, Obama!). It is that shift in meaning - present in the different audiences - that makes the speech cynical. Obama played the occasion for political points on both sides; this might be viewed as remarkably skillful, but I saw it as bordering on the unethical.

[BL611]

43. Barack Obama is running for President

There are camera's in his face (taking footage that will be shown to white people) every second of the day until the election and will be still be in his face when he (hopefully)becomes President, its absurd to think he should not be able to talk frankly about the problems facing African Americans to an African American audience simply because of that fact.Obama has always stressed gov't intervention and structural reform ALONG with black self help as the solution to the problems facing the black community. If some white people have selective hearing and take it as a confirmation of views they obviously ALREADY have, who cares. At the very least it may help shape some white peoples perspective positively by seeing a black audience trump personal responsibility, which many white people (completely erroneously) do not think happens. To censor an obvious truth out of concern for how SOME people MAY interpret it, is one of the main reasons for the backlash against inner city gov't spending in the first place (When you refuse to acknowledge the obvious role of culture in inner city problems, you leave fertile ground for the Charles Murray's of the world to inhabit with their crap.). What you call "playing for political points on both sides" other people would look at as building consensus that is necessary for reform. Again, it seems to me that the cynical one is you, not Obama.

[alcibiades_mystery]

44. Oh please

Obama calculated every fucking second of it. You must be joking.

[BL611]

45. Of course he caculated it

Again, he's RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT! What does that have to do with anything?

[spanone]

37. Can't hit a home run every time at bat!

[alcibiades_mystery]

39. True dat

...

[never cry wolf]

46. I agree partially, not his best

I disagree with you on the content, I thought the content was appropriate but the delivery was not up to his standard. I am an Obama supporter and though there were a couple of moments that brought tears I expected more. He was somewhat halting and he was reading, which is unusual for him. It may be that he has been giving his usual stump speech so often that he did not have enough time to practice what had to be a very different speech. I also thing that he had a hell of a tough act to follow. Bishop Kirkland was brilliant as was Rev. Lowery, who Dr. King called the best preacher he had ever heard.

As someone upthread said, you can't hit a homer every time up.