Here's a litmus test for Barack Obama: where does he stand on racial preferences? If he's for them, then how can he claim to be a national unifier? What country bases its rule of social justice on attempting to figure out whose ancestors did what to whom?
A generation ago, racial preferences were arguably necessary for African Americans, especially in the South, to kick in the closed door of segregation and Jim Crow. But then other groups (women, Hispanics, immigrants, gays) climbed aboard the affirmative action bandwagon, absurdly proclaiming, "We are the new blacks." To which the answer is: are you the descendants of slaves? Can you begin to show a comparable history of suffering and deprivation as African Americans?
Today preferences based on race, gender, national origin and sexual orientation have largely become a scam. In elite colleges, for instance, they are a way for Jesse Jackson's kids to get an unfair advantage over poor white kids with better grades and better test scores. On those same campuses, women with lesser qualifications especially in the sciences are routinely hired as teachers over men who are more deserving. What could be more divisive, and more infuriating, then such policies of official race and gender-based discrimination?
Obama can launch a national debate, and give substance to his pledge to be a uniter, by saying: It's time for America to become a post-racial society. This doesn't mean that racism has ended or that as a social reality "race doesn't matter." But the character and magnitude or racism have dramatically changed. Racism today does not have legal sanction, as it once did. Equally significant, racism today is episodic rather than systematic. This means that the law no longer has to take account of race in order to get beyond race. The best way to get rid of race as a factor in decision-making is quite simply to get rid of race as a factor in decision-making. If racial preferences fall, obviously gender preferences would disappear as well.
If Obama makes this argument, it would astound the country and immediately draw moderate and even Republican support. The Hillary camp would launch its usual attacks, but against Obama they would bounce off. This is one issue on which Obama would have unimpeachable credibility.
Will he do it? Does he have the guts?
Reader Comments ( Page 10 of 10)
136. 133. No. No, Obama does not have the guts.
Joseph at 7:59AM on Mar 11th 2008
------------------------
And Hillary does? Being a royal bitch isn't the same as havong guts, you know. And being stupid enough to vote for the war and to vote with George W. Bush in labelling Iran's guard as terrorists... REALLY stupid.
We need someone with real judgement, not someone that plays the game in Washington better than other people. We need to stop the game altogether, not work within it.
And McCain nas nothing BUT guts, so we'll be at war for the next century if he gets elected...
No, there's only ONE choice this election, and it begins with an "O"...
Godless Heathen Brian at 10:27AM on Mar 11th 2008
137. In his lust for personal wealth has
Barack Obama sold his moral compass?
ObamaTruth.org
GO HILLARY!!!!!!!!!
Tom at 5:09PM on Mar 11th 2008
138. #11
"Also, take into account that a litmus test is NOT a qualifier to be the president of the US."
Funny, how those on both sides spout this line.
Groups on both sides with their own agendas use various litmus tests for supporting an individual. Whether it be to an elected office or to an appointed position. Ask yourself how many times are the acts of an individual "overlooked" because they "share" or support certain beliefs? "Well so and so is a real AH but he/she does support----- and I am in favor of that too".
M2D5 at 8:33AM on Mar 12th 2008
139. I think young people are voting for Obama because they literally do not understand reality in politics and the world today. It is not easy or pretty! The man has an actor's charisma and plays like the Pied Piper to them making vaporous comments with "no beef" and they are buying it. "Change"--what change. Change comes in 2 varieties--good and BAD! All baseless rhetoric.
Also to suggest that the black voters cultish behavior regarding this HALF white man is not based on racism and rather on hard facts appears ludicrous. One year ago CLinton who has a famously and well documented history of TRULY assisting and having high regard for the blacks had a 78% support figure and now in response to that the blacks show their loyalty by voting 90% for Obama who has ACCOMPLISHED NOTHING for them on record.
Maybe the backlash is beginning, for which I hope is truly the case. After splitting the white votes early on in SC and GA, this week in MS he received only 25% of said vote. I think people are catching on to his lies regarding NAFTA, his posture on the Iraq vote OF 6 YEARS AGO (isn't hindsight a wonderful thing when you were in no position at that time to TRULY cast a HONEST vote), lets go militarily into Pakistan whether invited or not, why did I leave Illinois with the basis of the largest deficit in its history, etc, etc. IT IS ABOUT TIME THE REAL INFO STARTS TO COME OUT ABOUT THIS UNQUALIFIED, VAPOROUS, NARCISSISTIC JUNIOR SENATOR!!!?? I WON'T ACCEPT THE VP SPOT!! Talk about a nobody becoming the almighty overnight!!!??? HE is the LAST thing this country needs now.
By the way, I am neither black or white. Wise up or McCain (Bush Junior) will be leading us further downhill.
Budo at 8:36AM on Mar 13th 2008
140. why not write about giving a litmus test on national unity without preference for any group to our previous presidents? all of them being white they naturally favored whites. obama is different, he, at least, gives the impression he sees the "same old" becoming history.
boredwell at 2:33AM on Mar 15th 2008
141. Obama needs to die and go back to Hell, WHERE HE BELONGS to rott and burn for ALL eternity!!!!!!
Art Is Life, Life Is Art at 2:19PM on Oct 19th 2008