SeattlePi:

"A New York Times news story called it "an extraordinary moment" and "what may be the most significant public discussion of race in decades."

The Washington Post called it "an extraordinary moment of truth-telling." A Boston Globe editorial said, "Obama took the opportunity to engage the question of race in America, starting a bold, uncomfortably honest conversation."

Our front-page headline in the P-I soberly and matter-of-factly stated, "Obama confronts nation's racial issues."

But the overall tone of media coverage and commentary, both print and broadcast, was giddy and euphoric, with a few dissenting voices that wanted Obama to issue a stronger denunciation and to further distance himself from his former pastor and his church.

Like many others, I was inspired by Obama's speech and found joy and admiration in his words and delivery. If it starts a national conversation that begins to address and heal all that defines our racial divide, I'll be thrilled to say I underestimated its potential."

The writer then goes on to recite all his misgivings. His argument is that campaign speeches rarely provide really historic fodder.

PErhaps he has forgotten the Gettysburg address, spoken during Lincoln's second campaign.

I am continuously surprised by how badly the American blogosphere, and the media in general, miss the point of that speech. Either they are dull-witted, or too ignorant to see where it scales the span of American history, or they are informed by second hand soundbites without context. THey carp at him for mentioning his grandmother, for not decapitating the pastor, and for myriad other faults, real or imagined, while ignoring the bag of gold dust he has just laid before them. It is shameful.


A


A