No need to get too deep into the weeds--either he'll admit he fudged the truth or spin like a new Maytag. Based on actions to date the second choice looks more probable, matter of fact it wouldn't be surprising to hear him say Wright was merely offering him some Mentos (the freshmaker) when he mistook it for an offer to be his mentor (don't blame me, I'm just trying to follow the story):
An adviser said that Obama wants to contain the Wright story. He worries that the 1960s-to-1980s prism of race is what everyone has read into it, and Obama wants to move the discussion forward..Here's an alternate explanation--people are just pissed or perplexed.
If he uses the speech to make a veiled accusation against those who got upset that his friend Jeremiah calls Jesus black, America a land of racist murderers, and Louis Farrakhan a hero his boat will be on the bottom in record time. But if he fesses up to his little fib then explains the black choiwch experience followed by an immediate return to the future he might be able to repair the teflon cloak he's been wrapped in during the entire election and keep the subject far off limits the rest of the way.
Whatever the case it's clear the good ship Obama is listing hard to port (or would it be starboard?). The captain has no choice but to pull hard on the boat anchor known as Wright lest it keep dragging him down to the bottom or show up on a 527 commercial for McCain (which the Maverick will criticize even though he's partially responsible for 527s). It could go either way, but never underestimate a professional orator and a forgiving public.
Everyone keeps accusing Obama of talking out of both sides of his mouth when he says he wants to heal the racial divide yet took years to realize the divisiveness of his own preacher. But has anyone ever quizzed Barack about his exact cure? Surely Reverend Wright also has a few ideas about how to heal the divide. Perhaps someone should ask the candidate how their solutions might differ.
Barack admitted to telling a fib in a sort of Clintonesque word-parsing way. He didn't apologize. And he didn't impress.
From what I gather he now admits to an awareness of Wright's controversial views he didn't have this past Friday night, yet his pastor remains an inspiring figure in a benevolent cranky uncle kind of way. We didn't get an explanation of what constitutes his idea of "controversial". Will he be asked to explain? Are we to assume the few clips we've seen of Wright represent the complete library of his worst pop-offs or will Obama have more denials coming up should a few more spring forth from the woodwork?
Overall, the speech lacked the passion of his normal speeches, evident in tone of voice and body language. The attempt to drive the issue into a racial debate, with a subtle assertion that angry Americans are just killing the messenger represents politics as usual, plain and simple. Sure, we still have issues with race but Obama is living proof things have improved. He touched on that in the speech, probably not with the goal of solving or healing but of muddying the waters. Such represents the crux.
He continues to tout his judgment on Iraq but heck, every liberal I know was against going into Iraq and none of them should ever get near the Oval Office. This was a chance to spotlight his wares to a mass audience and all we saw were fibbing, parsing and deflecting. He's promising, he's good, but he's not ready yet.
Maybe I should have called this post "Barack to the future". Alright, OK, I'm no professional writer/blogger! But this guy is...and he basically nails it for me.