I don't think we've reached the stage where the Imprimatur Of Ta-Nehisi Coates means much, but if it did I'd offer that imprimatur to Obsidian Wings. What a great blog. Somehow I missed this beautiful post form Publius analyzing the implicit racism of the phrase "Sista Souljah moment":
Remember that Obama didn’t even say anything – the “moment” was created entirely by Jackson. Obama had nothing to do with it. But there were a bunch of black people involved, so let's call it Sister Souljah.
But anyway, the larger point is that the use of Sister Souljah here strikes me as a tad racist. Again, what idea exactly is Obama distancing himself from – castration? No, there’s nothing substantive here. The only thing that Obama is distancing himself from is Jesse Jackson – a black man who lots of white people (and the press) dislike and caricature unfairly.
If you dig a bit deeper though, something else is going on -- something that goes well beyond Jackson. I mean, maybe Jesse Jackson remains a central figure in Democratic politics, but that would be news to me. No, what’s really going on is more depressing. When I hear many people talk about what good politics all this is for Obama, what they are really saying is that “it’s good politics to be distanced from black people.”
That’s a pretty disgusting concept, so it gets dressed up as a “Sister Souljah moment,” which links it to a safe and more bland political science concept. Using the same label for both concepts masks the uglier aspects of its use. Hell, even if we’re talking solely about the benign concept, the relentless use of the name “Sister Souljah” to describe it probably subconsciously reinforces the notion that black people are a group that savvy candidates must distance themselves from.
Basically. I think this is what's at the root of the way the press covers Obama's interactions with African-Americans. Basically, they're just waiting for him to kic the folks to the curb. Some think Obama subtly plays on that. I'm not sure. Either way, this is why you hear about "Chastising" Bernie Mac or "Rebuking" black fathers. Implicit is a kind of cynical Dick Morris logic that holds you can't actually be close to black people and get white voters.
The Beautiful Struggle: A Father, Two Sons, and an Unlikely Road to Manhood 
"What they are really saying is that “it’s good politics to be distanced from black people.”
Well if you consider the termm "black people" to only include black people who happened to say:
● “You can’t trust the Jews. I never have trusted those people.”
"Jews are “not willing to share power.”
● “I’m sick and tired of hearing about the Holocaust.”
That he spit into the food of white customers when he worked as a waiter because “[It] gave me a psychological gratification.”
● that President Nixon’s policies were harsh on the poor because, of Nixon’s top aides, “four out of five of them are German Jews.” Someone forgot to tell him that Erlichman and Haldeman were not “Hymies.”
I, for one, don't consider people who make such comments "black people." I call them misinformed bigots who may or may not happen to be black, but whose race is irrelevant to their bigoted views. I think it's a bit of an insult to African-Americans to say that this creep is the embodiment of "black people" and that any criticism of him can be construed as a general statement about his race.
"Implicit is a kind of cynical Dick Morris logic that holds you can't actually be close to black people and get white voters."
Hmmm. I agree that this is not really true.
But I do think the impulse to say such things comes from a sense by many non-whites (and some people of color) that "black interests" are in stark opposition to "white interests." The fear that this is true is real and should be respected, but not overstated. I'm wit you on that.
That said, what's missing often in conversations about "how political Obama is" is a real discussion about what it is about Obama that appeals to white folks. That he isn't like the "average Black person" is often not unpacked sufficiently. I think the perception that he's not captured by the establishment black left does make people happy. I don't necessarily think that's a bad thing, but black folks should be concerned about it like any other thing about Obama.
I also think we live in a historical moment where we (black folks) feel like our politicians are no different from white politicians, that we have not gotten what we need (however you choose to define it). As such, I think there's something to be said for healthy suspicion and interrogation of every step Obama makes.
I also think that Obama is as calculating a politician as any other. And I don't necessarily think that is a bad thing.
But we should understand that having a Black president like Obama may not be what many of us think it will be. In the same way, we've been disappointed by black politicians in the past, we may be disappointed here. He can't be all things to all people. And it is always useful to be tough on black people even if what you say is what you always say. I don't begrudge him those kinds of speeches, but no one should pretend it doesn't look good in some quarters.
On the other hand, the black kids at my high school didn't sit with the white kids, which proves, um, well, I'm sure it proves something very trenchant, according to David Brooks.
I have wondered myself how Obama could 'Sister Souljah' Jesse if he accepted his apology. I also find how Obama could be ' Sister Souljahing' Black folk, if the Black folk sitting there listening to it, cheer him on. Like, we need WHITE folk to tell us when we're being Sister Souljah'ed? If anyone Sister Souljah'ed Jesse Sr, it was Jesse Jr -that letter was brutal.