Friday, March 14, 2008


I find something missing from the public/political perception of Sen. Obama. He is as much White as Black, genetically. Why is he considered a "Black" candidate, with no acknowledgement to half of his ancestry? In fact, there has been some media attention to this, some time ago. There were questions of "is Obama Black enough" at the beginning of the campaign, before his meteoric rise. Interestingly enough, the TIME magazine piece by that title ends with this:

Back in the real world, Obama is married to a black woman. He goes to a black church. He's worked with poor people on the South Side of Chicago, and still lives there. That someone given the escape valve of biraciality would choose to be black, would see some beauty in his darker self and still care more about health care and public education than reparations and Confederate flags is just too much for many small-minded racists, both black and white, to comprehend.

Barack Obama's real problem isn't that he's too white - it's that he's too black.

That was published over a year ago, and I haven't seen any evidence since then of him being identified as "White" by any mainstream media. In fact, his Black wife and his Black church have caused problems for his campaign, and his only well-known connection with "poor people on the South Side of Chicago" has been through his association with Tony Rezko, a White slumlord/political contributor.

I'm still waiting to hear Obama show some pride in his Kansan heritage, unless he's ashamed of it. He is as much a Kansan as a Kenyan, though he never lived in either place. To put it in ethnic terrms, he is as White as he is Black, and I don't think it's fair to call him "the Black candidate." As usual, I'm swimming against the tide of public perception.

No comments: