Despite the resignation of the Obamas from their church it is clear that it will be a large part of the 2008 presidential campaign.
Obama needs to take responsibility for acting late.
The following question has been asked before and will be continuously asked till November:
Can Obama credibly claim the mantle of reconciliation on anything if for 20 years he attended a church where inflammatory remarks frequently prevail?
Clearly the Obama campaign understands how critical it is that their central theme of reconciliation remains intact and not swiftboated. Lets remember Kerry strongest point was his Vietnam service. Similarly republicans will go after Obama's strongest suit.
It will come up in debates and townhall meetings and ads.
Obama should state
- that he takes responsibility for his actions and knows that this issue is rightfully in people's minds.
- that while the majority of the people and preaching of that church were positive and inclusive it was his mistake to ignore and not challenge the controversial statements by pastors from time to time.
- that as a result of continuous inflammatory, offensive and divisive statements he has resigned from the church and will seek a new church in which he can pray
- that while he cannot ask of voters to ignore it as an event, he also wants them to understand that throughout his entire life from Harvard Law Review to his work as a community organizer, to his work in the state legislature and his work in the US Senate he has successfully brought people holding diametrically opposing views to agree on common sense solutions.
This way he can take responsibility for his error in judgment AND pivot away from this negative story to start talking about his strong suits.
Agree or Disagree?