Percentages of color are meaningless depending on the audience (as in “Too Black, or Too White”). The real problem that is being missed here is the pattern of response Mr Obama has revealed. Through debate and his responses to small crises he has drawn a picture of someone loathe to respond to anything but the most obvious threat, and then that response begins very passively. In one of the debates he was asked how he would respond to another 9/11 situation; (I paraphrase) first he would make sure the responders had all they needed, Hillary said she would hunt down the perpetrators . . . Passive vs Active.
Mrs Clinton was right in the O’Reilly interview when she said he “waited too long”, I would illuminate that still further by saying his terms (though strong) were not decisive enough. Diplomacy is great when you deal with opponents with intelligence and commitment to good faith, useless when dealing with the absolute self absorbed and the implacable. Mr. Obama should not just disavow/disown/expunge Mr. Wright, he should say the same for any who buy into this purveyor of blood libel’s line, as in: “And if you believe the distortions, and lies Mr. Wright espouses . . . I don’t want or need your support” either.
But he is not strong enough.
