<p>I am so annoyed with this whole debate. Of course Obama is where he is because of a fairly unique collection of attributes, among which are certainly his charm, his public oratorical ability, his very high intelligence, his establishment credentials (not just Harvard Law Review, PRESIDENT of the Harvard Law Review, which if you know anything about the process is something like winning American Gladiators), his track record, his physical attractiveness, and, yes, his race. </p>
<p>Is race important to his story? Of course it is! If he were white, he would be, at best, John Edwards minus millions of dollars. He certainly wouldn’t have had a safe seat in the Illinois Senate from Chicago’s South Side. He might or might not have angled his way into the U.S. Senate. He would still be smart, attractive, inspiring, and skilled, but he wouldn’t be UNIQUE! enough to capature national attention. Obama was an instant national star when he got the Democratic nomination for the Senate seat from Illinois (and thus the presumptive winner given the Republicans’ effectively ceding that contest). Bobby Casey is a non-wealthy white man of about the same age who was in an equivalent position in Pennsylvania at the same time, except that he had held two statewide offices for over 10 years and had run a close second in the Democratic primary for governor. How much do you non-Pennsylvanians know about Casey? To ignore Obama’s race is to pretend that the elephant in the room isn’t there.</p>
<p>Of course, none of that means much at this point. The fact that Obama’s race got him attention doesn’t mean that he’s not worthy of attention, and that he might not be the best candidate. Race remains a huge part of his appeal: Americans, including many racist Americans, like the image of themselves voting for a black man on the merits, especially a black man whose background and style is so non-threatening to whites. Race is a burden for him, too: obviously, there are racist Americans who simply will not vote for him, including some who might otherwise vote for a Democrat. Race is a constant distraction: He has to calibrate his presentation in a way that John McCain, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton never had to. (But Hillary has the same kind of issue.) </p>
<p>That’s just part of his story, not the basis on which he will get elected or not. But it IS part of his story. Just as her marriage to Bill Clinton is part of Hillary’s story (a much bigger part). She would not very likely be a serious Presidential candidate today without it, but no one who supports her is thinking “I’ll support her because she’s Bill Clinton’s wife.” Few, if any, people are thinking “I’ll support Barack because he’s black” (or “I’ll never support Barack because he’s black”). I do, however, think lots of people – maybe even I – are thinking, among other thoughts “Wow! Isn’t it cool how he’s transcended race? Isn’t that the perfect face for America? Isn’t it great that this day has arrived?” </p>
<p>Barack’s race is pretty obvious. It doesn’t take Geraldine Ferraro to point it out, and I’m sure the die-hard racists have noticed it. Sure, talking about it may be a way of trying to trivialize him, but I can’t imagine anyone thinks that’s going to work. Not talking about it at all is ridiculous. Talking about it the way the Obama camp does – i.e., waiting to pounce on any Clinton supporter who mentions it, and to accuse Clinton of trying to play the race card – is fundamentally dishonest, and pretty much the least attractive thing about his otherwise very attractive campaign.</p>