“I personally would want to see our tragic history, or the tragic elements of our history, acknowledged,” the Democratic presidential hopeful said.
So is our history itself tragic or is it a history with the tragic elements that all national epics have? Which one is it, Senator?
I'm pretty sure what Obama actually thinks (apparently Michelle was speaking for both Obamas). I'm pretty sure what he'd say if asked directly. I'm pretty sure that his campaign tries to screen out anyone who might ask him.
And isn't part of American exceptionalism the opportunity to transcend those tragic elements? While that's small comfort to the casualties of history, it should not be allowed to blot out the big picture.
The Star Bulletin's Obama quote continues:
"I consistently believe that when it comes to whether it's Native Americans or African-American issues or reparations, the most important thing for the U.S. government to do is not just offer words, but offer deeds."Reparations, eh? By all means let's have an election about reparations.
I felt uneasy back when 'equal opportunity' morphed into 'affirmative action', and am aghast at government sponsorship of 'diversity'. Unfortunately, just because we're approaching a reductio ad absurdum doesn't mean the craziness will stop.
Addendum. Obama has come out against reparations. As is commonplace these days when a politician takes a position, his supporters and his opponents and people on both sides of the issue question whether he means what he says.
To not jump all over Obama's apparent endorsement of reparations was the right move by the McCain campaign. They're not going to win the independent vote by looking like 'mean-spirited' kneejerk obsessives. It's Obama's overall credibility that they have to bring into question. By preemptively addressing the matter, Obama probably made his best available move too. Nevertheless, another flip-flop is on tape, and the McCain campaign can use it as they choose.