Barack Obama‟s election campaign was undoubtedly aided by his unquestionable talent for speech making. Whereas oratory is said to be „always a declining art‟ (MacArthur, 1999) where political speechmakers of today are always compared unfavourably to the political giants of the past, Obama‟s „race speech‟ of the 18th March 2008 has been widely hailed as a speech for our times. As the first ever black presidential candidate, Obama‟s avoidance of race as a political issue had been notable, its omission from his campaign an intentional point made about the unimportance of colour in the 21st century. Comments made by Obama’s childhood pastor, Jeremiah Wright, however, forced him to address the issue head on. Talking at the Constitution Centre in Philadelphia, PA, Obama‟s 38 minute speech reaffirmed the strength of his already historic candidacy.
Since his inauguration, constructing unity, building bridges, and manufacturing shared understanding has seemed to typify the Obama administration. Looking back at his campaign, we see that this has always been Obama‟s approach, and one could argue, the not-so-secret secret of his success.
The “A More Perfect Union Speech”1 is key example of how Obama engaged with one of the most deeply divisive and sensitive issues in US history and politics, in the process laying a tentative foundation from which to heal the wounds inflicted on American society under the skin-colour that still exist within American society. Mobilising the unique history of an immigrant founded America, the imagery of the melting pot and the land of opportunity, Obama‟s greatest move in this speech was to place himself squarely at the centre of that vision; himself an organic product of this great mixing bowl. With his very presence at the lectern embodying the balance of integrity and charisma, the audience, in that hall, and worldwide via YouTube, is captivated by the subtle coalescence of Obama and America itself. But despite demonstrating an extraordinary rhetorical ability, and resolute bravery in engaging with such a divisive issue, the speech had one subtle but alarming flaw. In his attempt to unify the Black/White/Hispanic divide, the President, unconsciously or otherwise, mobilised the discourse of the „Other‟ through the notable omission of Muslims and Arabs in his vision for a racially unified American. By challenging one indefensible division, the sub-text was a re-entrenchment of the most recent and pervasive divide, between the imagined community of America, and the dangerous and unknown “Other‟, in this case, so-called Islamic fundamentalists.
This speech came at the same time as Obama faced what was perceived as a significant test of his presidential capabilities, could he stand up to the bullies and tyrants of the Middle East? Hard-line comments on Iran‟s nuclear programme ensured that he passed this electoral test. In his defence, Obama‟s recent (April 2009) comments on the rich history and culture of the Middle East and Iran in particular is certainly a break from the rhetoric he often employed during his campaign, during which his very middle name seemed to be enough for some Americans to distrust him. Such comments coming alongside drastic foreign policy moves with regards the “Pirates of the Caribbean‟ including Cuba and Venezuela (T. Ali, 2006) certainly indicate that Obama‟s presidency, unlike some elements of his campaign, will not ignore the major divisions - far beyond skin colour and ethnicity - that affect the entire world.
Speech in Full from: http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-ObamaCloud08-18.html