A respond to "What Really Divides Us" Article

Cal,

I enjoyed the article you contributed under "What Really Divides Us" post. It made me think hard about it's final paragraph/statement of what really makes the case of liberty. To quote, "the true antidote to racism is liberty" which reinforces that, "we should understand that reducing racism requires a shift from group thinking to an emphasis on individualism" clearly drives those nails at the stake. I can't think of a better way to put it than that article. Jumping over to your comments in reference to this article, I found myself with this dilemma: Obama and Hillary's ordeal as proving themselves individuals, while clashing across political grounds of chess playing you-ain't-enough tokenism. A month ago during DPHH socializing, I found myself returning home and stopped by the Eastern Market Metro area in a bar. I ended up getting into a discussion with a group of African-Americans/Blacks (whichever's the appropriate term nowadays) about who they were going to vote. All five of them proclaimed that they were voting for Hillary or Kucinich. I politely asked them why they weren't going to vote for Obama since it would-in my own thinking-reinforce their viewpoint that anyone can run as president despite race, creed, or personal choices. The majority of them stated that they didn't think he would do well with serving the Af-Am/Black community or that he didn't have the right background to represent. I find this statement directly parallelling Hillary's case as well. When I ask females of miscellaneous social areas why they weren't voting for Hillary it was either she's "too radical/feminist" or they simply were not ready to see a woman being able to run this country. However, to make a note of the last sentence: it came from a majority of senior citizen women...I would guess that their conscious and well-being are still based on their thoughts from youth which evidently planted their seeds firmly. Another interesting comment I heard was that this person strongly did not believe that a woman should submit and stay with their partner after an affair. This is solely the ONLY reason why this person wasn't voting for Hillary. Now here's my question and thoughts: why is any of this a matter to be reckoned with??? Why should their status as who they are nowadays (as well as their historical past) be relevant in how they will run this country??? In fact, everything that people talk about is clearly missing out on the very thing that needs to be discussed: are they able to run this country well? If so, can they clearly demonstrate themselves as competent beings that effectively follow suit just as previous great presidents (Kennedy & Clinton) as well as provide reasonable control that showcase directness of role model that puts the bad presidents out of image (Bush & Nixon)? I personally try my best to judge each candidate for 2008 election with these questions in mind. It is indeed sad that collective members associate their bias views and labels of judgement solely on whether these candidate's membership is viewed as acceptable. Kudos to you Cal for bringing up a wonderful article.

-Joshua