BT, it comes down to this-- Barack had been focusing on loftier subject matter. Things like hope, equality, pulling together, whatnot. To date I can't recall where he previously had gone to a voting block and commiserated with them about a subject which automatically and immediately catagorizes him as a "black" candidate. And that has been his forte-- the fact that he wasn't a black presidential candidate, but rather a charismatic senator running for president who happened to be black. It was an afterthought. It added to his panache that he had risen above the very thing which defines those other so-called black leaders like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Rangel, etc. He was speaking to America as a whole, not to America comprised of African-Americans, Latino-Americans, Asian-Americans, ad nauseum.
While defining themselves in such a way may feel good to these various groups, to white America-- the majority race --it smacks of pandering when a candidate chooses to insert him or herself into their particular beef with society and talk as if this issue is the one which ties them emotionally, psychologically, or politically to the agrieved constituency.
Does that mean we as whites are insensitive or indifferent to these perceived grievences? Not really. We, on the whole, don't even recognise (as Flea said) the bigotry that our society has. But we do want the various races to just assimilate and become "white" in their outlook: no handouts, work hard, pay taxes, stop making excuses for whatever your particular segment of Americana has or does. Does your race have trouble with teenage pregnancy? Stop having kids. Is your race generally poor? Get to work. Clean up your yard. Clean up your neighborhood. Does your race have trouble speaking English? Stop speaking your native tongue and immerse yourself in English.
In other words, stop finding things that separate you from "mainstream" society and get with the program. Look at us whiteys-- it worked for us, make it work for yourselves.
That is the mindset of white America. Right or wrong is not the point. It just is.
Once that happens, we begin to stop seeing you as different, but unique, like what Obama has been up to this point. And from unique you become the new definition of what we see and expect when we look at someone of a different color, accent, or dress. This applies to blacks, Muslims, Koreans, Mexicans, Canadians, whatever.
Obama is in a singularly momentous point in our nation's history. He is being taken seriously as a potential candidate for our country's highest office. But oddly enough, he, like many blacks before him (Colin Powell, Clarence Thomas, John Conyers, etc), aren't acdepted as "being black enough" for the black voting community. So what we get is Hillary (and before her, Bill, our country's first black President) and Obama stooping, yes, stooping to claim a heritage that they have never known or claimed before. It appears to be pandering, plain and simple.
Regardless of his politics, I have been watching him closely to see if he would do this very thing. If he did it because it is what is necessary to get elected-- as many of you have already said --then he is no different than any other run-of-the-mill politician and deserves no more attention than, say, Kucinich. But-- but --if he chooses to rise above the ordinary he could quite possibly have my vote just because he has shown himself brave enough to buck the tide and way things have always been done.
Is Obama unique? Up until now I have been willing to concede that he just may be that person who breaks the mold and becomes the Jackie Robinson of presidential politics. But this last week may portend that he is just another same-old-same-old who happens to be a black.
I ask you, how disappointing would that be?
Totem