The resultant firestorm was not very difficult to predict and the ammunition provided to the Clinton campaign and the McCain campaign was extensive. Any politician publicly claiming that PA and Midwest voters have become bitter and as a result, cling to their guns, religion and antipathy towards others as a means to cope will undoubtedly have to deal with an extensive backlash.

What I find most interesting about the entire situation is its uncanny resemblance to the entire Rev. Jeremiah Wright episode. The core of the issue in both cases is how one group of people feels, whether rightfully or wrongfully, towards another group of people. Barack Obama didn’t state anything that thousands to millions of people don’t feel about the Midwest and Southern religious vote. In many liberal voters eyes the 2004 election was essentially based on religious morality. In short, many completely agree with his quote word for word. Much like how a number of blacks agree with the words of Rev. Jeremiah Wright or as Obama explained in his Philadelphia race speech how many whites will agree that they too foster resentment and bitterness towards blacks. The underlying message of Obama’s race speech was a need for truthfulness and honesty. The ability to publicly say, ‘yes this is how certain groups feel and these are the reasons they feel this way’ is necessary if we hope to one day move past the current racial stalemate we as a nation seem to be in.

This case is no different. Obama simply stated a fact of how one group feels about another. Are his words applicable to every single Midwest voter? Of course not, but you are kidding yourself if you don’t think that those statements don’t apply to some. But in saying what he said Obama was guilty of exactly what Rev. Jeremiah Wright was guilty of. He took the company of like minded individuals and used the inherent comfortableness of the situation to say publicly some thoughts that while they may be ugly are still most certainly held by a great number of people and can be easily legitimized. Just like the racial tensions that still exist between whites and blacks can be legitimized as Obama so eloquently put it.

Obama did err but his error wasn’t in stating what it is that he said. In some ways it was much worse than that. It was in not immediately countering that with thoughts akin to his thoughts on race. He needed to acknowledge both the grossness of those thoughts and the legitimacy of them as well and he needed to do it during the discussion in question. Unfortunately, not only didn’t he extrapolate those thoughts more concretely at that time but he subsequently backed off those statements saying, “I didn’t say it as well as I should have.” In other words he wasn’t as politically tactful as he needed to be in saying what he said. I for one find those 10 words to be exceedingly more damning to his candidacy then the entire opening quote.

What’s disheartening is that many Obama supporters, myself included, have admired his directness, truthfulness and openness in accepting certain people’s beliefs as legitimate and not concerning himself with what sounds politically appealing to the masses or what will achieve the greatest amount of hyperbole with the smallest amount of conviction. It’s his ability to speak the truths that millions hold but have to this point been afraid to say out loud, that has drawn people to him. And to say those truths confidently, without reproach, but simply as matters of facts that we as a society need to admit to if we truly hope to move forward. That’s what makes this entire ‘bitter’ situation so disappointing. It’s not what he said. It was his subsequent lack of conviction and unwillingness to stand by what he said as a legitimate truth for some and as a point to move forward. Then again, he is a politician and that makes him, in a sense, no different then the Bush’s, McCain’s and Clinton’s of the world.