Hey, when you're the Madonna of politics, and constantly reinventing yourself, the past doesn't matter.

I know my favorite will be the "Don't tell me they're just words!" series.

Heaven help us if the Democratic "leadership" decides to commit seppuku.

just saw this comment at Ezra Klein--worth a read--

http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/ezrak...

"... Obama has made his "spirituality" a central issue of his campaign and his life story for fifteen years. His whole notion of "transcending race" is linked in large part to his spirituality, of learning to move beyond his anger at white America for being black.

In this story, Wright was the entire impetus for his transformation into a spiritual person, for his willingness to let go of anger and transcend race, ..."

that story doesn't cite a source. It may be mere speculation....

nor does it make sense. Given his multicultural background, any "anger" that Obama felt would have been related to being treated as a black man, and Wright's role was probably more about getting Obama to embrace his identity as a black man than to transcend it -- something that anyone with political ambitions in the South Side of Chicago would need to do.

that just doesn't read right to me at all. gets the concept of race (as black and nonwhites understand it) all wrong.

After repeating Ezra's question: Does anyone believe that Barack Obama shares Jeremiah Wright's political views?

"Cal" the commentator answers:

About AIDS? No.

About white and black America? About 9/11? Probably. He has little real personality of his own, and just soaks up the views of those around him. So he was a combination of classic liberal pap, coupled with black anger. After two years pretending to be a centrist, he probably has swallowed his own story.

But it doesn't make much difference whether he believes it or not.

Amber, can you spot the raw racism that comment betrays? Obama is a combination of "liberal pap, coupled with black anger." Both of which are presented as contrary to being an actual mainstream American.

I can tell you for sure, Amber, that "Cal" hasn't read "Dreams From My Father."

Cal continues, quoting Ezra again: For those who want to make this into a huge issue, they should have to explain why it's a huge issue.

Cal's answer:

No, they don't. American voters can do whatever they want, and they don't have to explain a single thing. However, here's why it's a huge issue:

That comment ushers in Cal's conception of the role of "spirituality" in Obama's "life story," part of which you quote.

I assume, then, that you accept this description of Reverend Wright:

Then Wright, the soul of his spiritual conversion, is revealed to be diametrically opposed to transcending race, to be an ugly merchant of hate and lies, a man who loathes white America and seeks to convince blacks to reject it.

In my view, Obama simply can't answer this paradox. There is no answer. It is quite clear that Obama's entire story of a transformation is a lie. As such, he can't disavow it and can't recover from it.

He can only hope that Americans forget it. This is an unlikely hope.

In fact, Obama has written entire book on the subject, and I don't mean the Audacity Of Hope, which I didn't much like, but his own memoir, which I think is likely to become a classic contribution to Americasn letters. Just the bare bones of Obama's biography argue against Cal's assumptions. Barack Obama is half white; his black father left the family, and Obama was raised by a white mother and white grandparents. Surely, they had at least as much influence on him as Reverend Wright. Plus the fact that his appearance guaranteed that he would be perceived as a black man.

The description of Wright is a racist description in and of itself, and not based on any research that "Cal" has done. Just the notion that to be Afro-centric means being anti-white is nonsense.

I just heard Senator Obama give an extraordinary speech on race, racism, his relationship to it and to Reverend Wright. Frankly, the speech puts this post and aspects of this thread to shame; not talking about Paul or CD.

Guys, what we've seen for a week now is real American racism, aimed, once again, at a Democratic candidate for public office, which puts to shame, to critique Obama's campaign now, their insistence that the Clinton campaign was making a deliberate effort to appeal to white racism.

Couldn't we take a quick break from cheap shot posts like this one, to do a little analysis of that kind of racism we're seeing directed at the Obama campaign. If liberals can't come together around this issue, I'm tempted to say we might as well give up.

I owe BDBlue a better explanation for my "cheap shot" label: look, I understand what you are getting at, and I admire that you've included links with every assertion, but look at your frame. Whatever else you say about Obama, he isn't dumb. I know, that is partly your point, he claims smarts, but when its convenient, doesn't mind playing dumb, or some such thing. But frankly, the argument in the links are either weak, or portray a more complex reality than your summary of it. This is exactly the approach that too many Obama fans take toward Senator Clinton. I'll try to speak to this in more detail in an actual post.

Now is not the time for any measure of Schadenfreude about the impact that rightwing racism is having on Obama's campaign right now, not even an iota of an iota.

But his spokesman's statement that he didn't know what "decriminalization" meant sent me over the edge last night. I know Obama isn't dumb, but I'm sick and tired of his campaign treating me like I am.

If not, it's bullshit.

Having played the race card in this campaign originally, as Sean Wilentz points out in exhaustive detail, Obama has made his bed. Of course, he doesn't want to lie in it now, but that's hardly my problem.

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.