Race relations in the United States is an uncomfortable topic.  Every year, we openly talk about the horrors of the Holocaust, and the global terrors of genocide and poverty that continue to plague the world.  Why can’t we have an open and honest discussion about Race in America?

As a 27 year old African-American woman, Senator Barack Obama’s speech on Race in Philadelphia was the most candid I’ve heard in my lifetime.  The speech included different points-of-views.  In my opinion, the comparisons of sexism and racism are silly. On one occasion I’ve been told how far I’d go if I was a man, and on another I was told that if I wanted a political career in Pennsylvania I better move to Philadelphia.  I currently live in Central PA. These two “isms” are separate but equal. One is not more important than the other as it has been suggested throughout this primary season.    

One line that strikes me, is when Senator Obama discusses the Iraq War. He states he does not just want to end the war but “the mentality that got us into the war.”  Mentality is the key word.  This election is generational in more ways than one. It is encouraging that most young Americans are voting on candidates based on their stances and character and not on race and gender. One aspect of Senator’s Obama’s campaign many pundits and the media seem to ignore is the fact that he did not run a traditional campaign, which is why he was so successful this primary season. Mr. Obama reached out to Americans that would be open to his message of change - not only concerning the Bush policies and the Republican Party, but on divisive categories that we all frequently fill out on application forms.

Some older white Americans will have problems voting for Mr. Obama.  For example, Pennsylvania has the 2nd lagest senior citizen population.  The exit polls showed that almost 20% of voters admitted race played a factor in how they voted, and out of that, over 60% stated they voted for Senator Clinton.  On the other hand, some older African-Americans who lived through the Jim Crow policies of the past are still skeptical of whether or not the United States will elect an African-American President of the United States.

These individuals do not represent all Americans. Those of us born post civil rights have benefited from the struggles and successes of those before us, and therefore have different mentalities.  Senator Obama has consistently stated he is the product of this, and becoming the Democratic nominee or elected President of the United States does not erase these victories or institutional racism present today.  His victory of becoming the first African-American nominee of a major political party shows that a large portion of the county is finally ready to move forward as one in living Dr. King’s dream of judging a person by his character and not by his skin color.

Barack Obama is ahead in pledged delegates, the popular vote, the number of states won, and now the super delegates. If super delegates were to now give the nomination to Senator Clinton, the reason would be because of racial implications and not because of any political position or policy. By the end of the 2008 Presidential election, America will reveal her maturity, or lack, of in racial matters, and with the country becoming increasingly diverse, it is a topic that can no longer be ignored. 
   

What would the media say if Presidential hopeful Barack Obama has lost 11 straight contests in a row? Would they say he is inching his way back to becoming the biggest “comeback kid” in American political history? Would they continue to give him chance after change, state after state, debate after debate to “stop the momentum”?

The answers to these questions answer the trend question of the day, which is “Is Barack Obama getting a free pass from the media?” The answer is no. It is obvious that if Senator Hillary Clinton had won the past 11 contests in a row, Obama would be the Mike Huckabee of the Democratic Party. Everyone would frantically persuade him to back out of the race for the “good of the party”.

To require that politicians transcend both race and ideology is a hard standard, and one that White politicians need not meet at all. Not counting standards change from state to state. So much more is expected of Barack Obama. If African-Americans did not vote for him, then it would be said he could not get support from his own race. If he gets the Black vote, then he is just the “Black Candidate”. No one says white politicians are just the “White candidate” or the “Woman candidate”. At the debate tonight in Ohio, Senator Clinton mentioned that a “woman President would be a different change for America”. Could you imagine the outrage if Barack Obama said the same thing but substituted woman with African-American?

“Signed, Sealed, and Delivered” was the unofficial campaign slogan for Hillary Clinton. She herself stated in an interview with Katie Couric a year ago that she would be a nominee when asked what she would do if she was not. Instead of blaming the media, strategists, etc. she should state her case as to why she should be the nominee instead of attempting to diminish Barack Obama’s candidacy.

The United States motto has always been “a melting pot” of people, cultures, ideas, etc. I agree we must begin acting like a melting pot instead of just talking about it. The candidate able to communicate and visibly bring Americans together for the betterment of all will prevail - not only during this primary season, but in November as well.

The test of this election is not whether or not the United States is finally colorblind, but whether or not Americans can see not only a person’s color and gender but their vision, character, integrity, and qualifications. The words written in history books are finally coming to life, and in the end, it will be the American people who choose the next President of the United States - not the news media.