I find it interesting that no one’s mentioned this. While Obama does cite statistics on black families in the beginning of his speech he never once uses the terms “black fathers”, “black mothers”, “black families”, etc. Perhaps its just my “whitey” naivety but I took the speech as addressing fathers and familial issues of every color of person in America. To me it’s a bit egocentric that a black man can take such offense at a speech that, on reading the text of the speech, applies to everyone equally. Father’s no matter their color need to step up and family, no matter the background, need to raise the bar. Statistically the problem may be more evident in the black community but that’s a far cry from it being absent in every other community.
As a vehement anti-Obaman this is one attack I can’t get on board with. If anything I thought Obama was indicting absentee fathers, not black fathers.
For example, “But if we are honest with ourselves, we’ll admit that what too many fathers also are is missing – missing from too many lives and too many homes. They have abandoned their responsibilities, acting like boys instead of men. And the foundations of our families are weaker because of it.” – I believe this applies to any absent father and any broken home.
Some may point to follow up the the previous quote: “You and I know how true this is in the African-American community.” But again, I don’t think Obama meant to single out the black community as a target for the entire speech only to relate that, although this is true everywhere, we in the black community (or I as a black man) know first hand. Had he cited statistics about Latino fathers, or said something like poor white folk know how true this is and cited those statistics the racial backlash would have been unbelievable.
It really is unreal that someone can assume he’s addressing solely the black community. Talk about looking for ways to be offended. C’mon people, the indictment was on absent fathers, not on black families specifically. Again though maybe my whiteness makes me naive.
As another example I’ll offer this quote. Obama is talking about single mother’s and the hard work that they (many at least) do to raise a child. He says “So many of these women are doing a heroic job, but they need support. They need another parent. Their children need another parent. That’s what keeps their foundation strong. It’s what keeps the foundation of our country strong.” As a white guy am I to assume that Obama thinks that only BLACK two parent families keep America’s foundations strong. No I assume that he means stable families as a whole. Earlier he says “We need to help all the mothers out there who are raising these kids by themselves.” Am I to assume he thinks we only need to help single BLACK mothers? One can’t assume he’s only addressing Black families for portions of his speech but families in general in other parts of his speech.
A more intelligent title would be, Obama, Lay Off Fathers. No need to “color” an issue with racism that wasn’t there. Because of it I’m forced to put the author in the same category as Wright, Farrakhan, Jackson, etc. A man who has imagined a racial slight where none existed. So sad and below par for PJM.
Transcript of speech so you can read it for yourself (as much as I hate to link to NYT): http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/15/us/politics/15text-obama.html?ref=politics
