The Great Emancipator and the junior Senator from Illinois

I find Barak Obama to be an interesting guy. He's still a political lightweight, though I suppose given the void that is Democratic leadership these days, he gets more prominence that he so far deserves.

I do think it'll be interesting to see how his career develops. He's been a bit of an opportunist and political flak so far, which is a bit disappointing, since I think it's pretty accurate to say that he's intelligent enough to know that the Pelosi/Schumer track leads nowhere but lost elections (or upward immobility more accurately, since a Democrat won't lose in Illinois sans corruption...er, massive corruption I should say...ala Rostenkowski),.

Anyway, I bring all this up because I just read Obama's quote about Abraham Lincoln. Drudge links to the article, though unfairly cuts the quote to seem more of an attack on Lincoln that the whole passage would indicate.

Drudge's excerpt: "[I] cannot swallow whole the view of Lincoln as the Great Emancipator."

The actual quote in full: "I cannot swallow whole the view of Lincoln as the Great Emancipator," Obama said. "As a law professor and civil rights lawyer and as an African-American, I am fully aware of his limited views on race. Anyone who actually reads the Emancipation Proclamation knows it was more a military document than a clarion call for justice."

As I said, I think Drudge kind of distorts the message. But he's trying to get hits, so what do you expect?

As for the quote...

Personally (and tangential to my main point), I don't see the relevance or necessity of mentioning that he's an "African-American," though I realize that even today everything runs through the prism of race/ethnicity/etc. I do think it's stupid though. When analyzing Kennedy (any of them), I don't think it necessary that I include "as an Irish-American...." Granted, the context of the quote is about Emancipation of slaves, but realistically does the color of a person's skin or their heritage really affect a person ability to analyze and understand the history of slavery? It's not as if anyone alive today --white or black-- had any involvement in the era, so who cares what color that persons skin is. But I digress...

Anyway, I agree with Obama to some degree in that I don't think it's totally accurate to say that Lincoln was an anti-slavery zealot his entire life. But both politically and personally, would it really kill him to give credit to Lincoln for moving in the right direction later in life, even if not perfectly intentioned by 'modern' standards? Contextually, Lincoln was taking the country down paths that no one else had the courage (with power) to do.

It seems to me a bit asinine to refer the Emancipation Proclamation as a 'military document,' with the intention of implying it as a meaningful criticism. Any action conducted during a state of war onto a warring populace, regardless of the subject, might be construed as a military action (and the order for it as a military document). This says nothing about the merit of the order itself in terms of its positive social impact.

Ultimately, we open up to an argument about the necessity of intention when giving credit for positive result. But regardless, in this case it seems undeniable that there was positive result in Lincoln's action. Obama approaching the subject with at least an appearance of hesitation in granting Lincoln credit for moving in a positive direction seems a bit unfair academically, and -- more certainly-- stupid politically.