The Blogosphere's Obvious Reaction to the Obama Speech

Maybe it is a sign of my own neurosis that I actually studied the reaction of the blogosphere to the speech. After all, isn't it obvious? The left blogosphere loved it and right blogosphere hated it. The problem is how pointless it all is. The blogosphere grew out of an extension of the belief that the MSM was failing to do its job. The bloggers decided that citizen journalists would do it better. For the most part, these citizen journalists aren't really any better. There are just some that have a different political ideology than the MSM. The problem is that if a media's perspective is obvious and pre determined, then its existence is only for vanity and preaching to a choir that already believes what the media is feeding it. That media accomplishes no function in moving a debate forward.

Let's look at some samples. Here is Erick Erickson of Redstate...

It was a typical Obama speech -- soaring rhetoric, allusions to Martin Luther King, Jr., and probably a few fainters in the audience. It was a ballsy speech to be sure. But it was still bull.

Obama wants to be both the black candidate and the candidate above race. He wants to embrace race and move beyond race. He tries to have his cake and eat it too. He wants us to do the same. I for one threw up.

Let's be clear on one thing. Obama would not be here but for being outmaneuvered by Camp Clinton. Obama never made this campaign about race. The Clintons made it about race. Obama has tried his best to avoid race -- to be a black man transcendent of race -- and he largely succeeded until Jeremiah Wright made it to YouTube.

Here is another one from Redstate...

Wright's "profoundly distorted" views are reminiscent of the maniacal rants spouted by radical Islam clerics, and just as wrong.
Read on, there's more.
Wright is wrong when he calls on God to "damn America":
"The government gives them [African Americans] the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing 'God Bless America.' No, no, no, God damn America, that's in the Bible for killing innocent people. God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme."
Wright is wrong when he preaches that we support state terrorism against the Palestinians:
After September 11, 2001, he said: "We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back into our own front yards. America's chickens are coming home to roost."
Wright is wrong when he says we invented HIV:

Here is Little Green Footballs...

Everyone wants to talk about Barack Obama’s speech; here’s the video, so we have everything completely in context. I doubt this is going to end the controversy, because we still don’t know where Obama stands on any of the very specific issues raised by Rev. Wright and his hate speech.

Obama believes he can get away with vaguely calling Wright’s statements “fierce criticism of US policy,” and I don’t think that’s going to fly with the majority of Americans.

And please note that Obama admits he was lying when he said he never heard Rev. Wright utter these “fierce criticisms.” Are we supposed to just glide right past that?

Just for the record...Obama may in fact have been lying but that was NOT proven by the speech. Obama said he never heard any of the fiery rhetoric that has come out in the last few days before. He never said he was totally unfamiliar with any fiery rhetoric. This may all be word games and I frankly lean toward that but facts are facts.

Here is fellow conservative blogger Michelle Malkin...

We know how his wife and his pastor feel about America. It’s finally dawned on Barack Obama that they have been undermining his glow of HopeNChange.

...

Here we go with the moral equivalence card and pointing the finger at “conservative commentators…”

...

Obama’s bottom line: Everyone’s a victim. You’re part of the problem if you keep talking about Jeremiah Wright. Everyone’s churches have crazy demagogues. Schools need more money. Leave illegal aliens alone. Never mind all the black grievance-mongers who have built careers sowing seeds of divisions. Look at all the talk show hosts and conservative commentators! Elect Obama. Fixer of souls.

Now, let's see how the left covered it. Here is one...

Many of you are very aware I am not, and have not been a supporter of Barack Obama.This is not because I support Hillary Clinton - in fact, I like/dislike Hillary and Barack equally, for very different reasons.

My goal for 2008 is to see a Democrat in the White House. I felt there were problems with both of the remaining candidates being elected. I supported John Edwards, in part because I felt he was the most electable in the general election. We can see where that went.

...

Senator Obama addressed the racial divide without casting blame. He shut down the black vs. white argument that has been threatening to take over this Presidential election. Blame for fueling a divide was put where it belongs - the Rush Limbaughs, the Sean Hannitys, the conservative coalition, the corporate whores who have used racial divides for their financial gain.

Obama's speech was inclusive, rather than divisive. All minorities were included in those who have suffered discrimination - not just black, but poor, women, hispanics, migrants of all ethnic backgrounds.

As a non-supporter going into this speech, and a white Catholic woman who figured I wasn't involved in this issue other than as a worried Democrat, I felt included. I felt like I mattered, even in a speech who's main topic was supposed to be a United Church of Christ preacher and his inflammatory remarks.


This speech, in my view, is the most important one of his career, as it determines where his political career is going in the near term. He hit it out of the park.Bravo. And for that, Senator Obama, you have gained one more supporter

This blogger was brought to tears...

He didn't cross some stupid "CIC threshold" that somehow validates his ability to bomb people on the other side of the planet. He crossed 3 much more difficult and a much more important thresholds. He crossed the threshold of vision, the threshold of leadership, and the threshold of common citizenship.

At the Huffington Post, we have similar fawning...

I thought Barack Obama's speech, which finished just minutes ago, was brilliant, nuanced, healing and shows him to be incredibly worthy as a candidate. I hope America is interested enough in progress to embrace this man. We would be lucky, very lucky, to have him as a president. If you didn't see the speech, please seek it out.

His speech was brave, and touched on the minister and race in general with real wisdom, and hope for healing. He condemned the minister's words again; but he explained what he valued in him, and you have to be rigid and unbending not to understand what he said (and which he compared to his white grandmother, whom he loves greatly, but who sometimes has made racially divisive comments). He spoke of whites with racial resentments with empathy, and kept moving on to the need to find progress for all. (And his anti-corporation thoughts are pretty...

I can go on but what is the point. The one thing I try not to be is obvious. Yet, the blogosphere is nothing if it isn't obvious. Over and over again, they have an opportunity to be better than the MSM and all they can be is predictable. The only thing we have here is cynicism, contempt, and accusations from his opponents, and fawning adoration from his supporters. Once this speech or anything is viewed from such powerful ideological prisms then all perspective is lost. I tried to make own analysis as balanced and fair as possible and hopefully I succeeded. I was well aware that I was a partisan analyzing his speech and I tried leave that partisanship at the door. The rest of the blogosphere tried to do the exact opposite.

If the blogosphere insists on being the preacher to a choir that already believes in the sermon, then its purpose will be limited if anything at all. There is no point to preaching to the converted. You serve no purpose in any debate if your only function is to tell people what they already believe. I try to live up to the name of my blog, the Provocateur, and provoke thought. I try not to be obvious and I try to be aware of what my own partisanship can create in any piece. I believe that the blogosphere has found its niche as nothing more than a mouthpiece of partisanship to the converted. If that is so, its use will be limited to the marginal.