Spelling Out the Cost of Selling Out

First, here's info on black liberation theology's negative reception.

Now, as we're all aware Obama gave a big speech a few nights ago. That most obvious lie encountered amidst the platitudes aside, Ed Morrissey notes the narrowness of Barack's intended audience and Allahpundit offers his own original viewpoint, upon which Ace comments while gathering other opinions. Paul Mirengoff presents the central dilemma of the liberal mentality:

By peddling a mind-set of victimization and by failing to support meaningful education reform out of deference to teachers’ unions, the Obamas, like nearly all modern-day liberals, represent the problem, not the solution.

Paul additionally notes it's up to voters whether they can stomach the Obama-Wright package, and asserts this association is problematic for Obama.

Jim Hoft has, meanwhile, approached a number of angles. He takes down the apologists, notes Obama's shameful grasp of history and later shock at the reaction and his ever-changing opinions of Wright, and finally learns the media on fair coverage.

Of course, there's so much criticism to offer here, so I'll do my best. Jim Geraghty wonders why Obama knew of Wright's rhetoric and still brought his daughters. Charles Krauthammer calls the speech fraudulent. Shelby Steele calls the speech another part of the "Obama Bargain" and Limbaugh claims it was a Rorschach test designed to intimidated the media. To IBD, Obama used the speech to change the subject, while to Scott Ott Obama was calling for racial unity to overcome capitalism. What confuses some is Obama's cluelessness concerning Rezko simultaneous with his willingness to embrace Wright. Some say we should be suspicious of Obama's mentality, others say of his past, and still others of his authenticity. The latter is truly a sticking point for some.

Still others were unhappy about Obama's comments and later follow-up regarding his grandmother.

And yet, quite unfortunately, commentary wasn't devoid of raves.