Obama Lacks Courage

Look, we all wanted Barack Obama to succeed. And he has in the normal course of things, as a private citizen. He doesn't need us for that. But he needed to bring more of himself to the political fight. Early on in this run he spoke more truthfully, but now that he is closer to his goal, he lacks courage. Juan Williams:

Last March in Selma, Ala., Mr. Obama appeared on the verge of breaking away from the merchants of black grievance and victimization. At a commemoration of the 1965 Selma-to-Montgomery march for voting rights, he spoke in a King-like voice. He focused on traditions of black sacrifice, idealism and the need for taking personal responsibility for building strong black families and communities. He said black people should never "deny that its gotten better," even as the movement goes on to improve schools and provide good health care for all Americans. He then challenged black America, by saying that "government alone can't solve all those problems . . . it is not enough just to ask what the government can do for us -- it's important for us to ask what we can do for ourselves."

It was the JFK, MLK impetus. But not now:

He has stopped all mention of government's inability to create strong black families, while the black community accepts a 70% out-of-wedlock birth rate. Half of black and Hispanic children drop out of high school, but he no longer touches on the need for parents to convey a love of learning to their children. There is no mention in his speeches of the history of expensive but ineffective government programs that encourage dependency. He fails to point out the failures of too many poverty programs, given the 25% poverty rate in black America.

David Brooks remembering MLK:

The key tension in King’s life was over how to push relentlessly for change but within an existing moral structure. But by the late-’60s many felt the social structure needed to be torn down.

And Obama, with the Rev. Wright as mentor, has acquiesced in the broken social structure, has tacitly endorsed its perpetuation. If Obama, so bright, so privileged, can't speak out, who can? If Barack Obama, so charismatic, so courted, won't speak out, who will? And this is the sad thing. He has squandered his opportunity, partly because of his long association with the hate talking Rev. Wright, partly because of his short record of accomplishment. And the media bears their share of the blame, because they have helped to lift up this facile liberal with feet of clay, while ignoring and disparaging more worthy conservatives, who actually have pulled themselves up by their bootstraps, who have had the courage to tackle these issues.

UPDATE: Dan at Reverse Spin on Obama's shabby treatment of Karl Rove. Charles Krauthammer on the media's favored treatment of Obama, and morality turned on its head on the Wright issue:

Davis protested, "It's appropriate." Time magazine's Joe Klein promptly smacked Davis down with "Lanny, Lanny, you're spreading the -- you're spreading the poison right now," and then suggested that an "honorable person" would "stay away from this stuff."

Amazing. We've gone beyond moral equivalence to moral inversion. It is now dishonorable to even make note of Wright's bigotry and ask how any man -- let alone a man on the threshold of the presidency -- could associate himself for 20 years with the purveyor of such hate.

And the other part of this, which I discussed earlier-- now it is politically correct to engage in hate speech, but only for a favored few. AP on the church. They're trying to sanitize the hate speech. The Tribune has a story about the sacred space TUCC is asking us to respect. A little late when the political, calculated hate speech has already bolted out of the barn. Oh, and Michelle Obama uses the occasion of the anniversary of Dr. King's death to ask for campaign donations. Classy. Newsbusters catches the Washington Post trying to inflame the issue.

Previous posts: That Song in My Head, Doubts About Obama