Racial Divide Means Barrack Obama Loses in November

Here's the deal. I'm sort of getting tired of all of this pseudo-political discussion regarding Barrack Obama's race. There are very few writers, editorialists, commentators, whatever you want to call them, who actually want to admit that Barrack is black, or more importantly, that his being black will have a decided effect on the outcome of the 2008 Presidential Election. Yes, we all know it. Some of us don't want to believe it but it's there in the back of our minds. Hell, I think about it constantly. Every day. It's like that spider that crawls up your nose in an old episode of Star Trek and starts fooling with your brain. Coming from a stone-cold liberal family, my sister Victoria forbade me to drink Coor's or Coor's Light when I was in high school and college because the Coor's company is pro-life, I dread the fact that, well, Obama's blackness, or lack there-of, will be the reason he, and we, lose in November.

Some of us think about it in harsher, more old-school racial terms. But, truthfully, it doesn't matter how we whink about it because we are definitely thinking about it. MSNBC just came out (okay, it came out about a week or two ago) detailing how Barrack hasn't closed the "racial divide". In other words blacks and whites in this country look at Barack differently.

So, here's the deal.

Now, this article may end all discussion regarding the outcome of the 2008 Presidential Election. Hell, it may start a discussion. I don't know, but the deal is the deal is the deal.

Barrack Obama will not win the 2008 Presidential Election. It has nothing to do with his stand on Iraq. It has nothing to do with his fight amongst the old-school black guard represented by Jesse Jackson, it has nothing to do with speeches on personal responsibility or the fact that he is having such an agonizing time deciding on a running mate.

Nope. It has nothing to do with any of that. Sure, its fun for us pundits to discuss all of those things. It's interesting to see Barrack in Afghanistan or Iraq or in front of the NAACP talking about issues that matter to us. It's flat out exciting to see the guy bark out what needs to be done in this country to get us on the right track. I feel the excitement myself when I turn on my TV and watch Barrack be Barrack. I definitely wouldn't mind finishing a bottle of Woodford Reserve with the guy and I'm too shelfish to share terrifically aged whiskey with just anybody!

Plus, my friend Sarah's mom says Barrack has hands "like a painter" and you know what, he does! That counts for a lot in my book!

But with all of that being written, here's the deal.

The deal is that Barrack Obama will not win the 2008 Presidential Election because he's black. Yes, I know. It's too simple right? In this age of celebrity watching, reality television and get rich quick schemes, could American's be so self-involved, so impossibly backwards, that they would not vote for the best person for the job? That the color of someone's skin would determine how we vote?

I mean, think of how, scientifically, we've gotten so far ahead that we have not one, not two but at least three best-selling erectile dysfunction pills (Viagara, Cialis, Levitra...I know I've missed a few!). Any nation that spends billions of dollars on preventing the stigma that is erectile dysfunction, while so many of its citizens perish to that killer called cancer, can't be stupid enough to not vote for the right guy...right?

But the truth is that being smart or stupid has nothing to do with it. Being stupid leads to the most ridiculous, idiotic social categorizational technique in the world - - racism. Being stupid doesn't lead to not voting for Barrack Obama because he's black or not voting for him because he isn't black enough. Being stupid leads to categorizing in general and that's the deal.

The real deal, the bottom line, is that America is a nation of categorizers. Categorizers and tribalists. Categorizing means separating and noticing differences. How can a nation that categorizes to no end - - black, white, tall, skinny, fat, brown, rich, poor, pretty, ugly, etc. - - possibly objectively look at an individual and decide that he or she is the best person for a job, any job, based on that person's ideas?

We never did it before. How could we possibly do it now? What has changed in our society to where we honestly believe that when we are in that voting booth, when there is nobody watching us, nobody to hear our thoughts, nobody to question us, we will decide between John McCain or Barrack Obama because of either one's ideas on the economy or Iraq or Afghanistan?

We categorize much simpler then that in this country. One is white. One is black. The black guy is going to lose.

The Buddhists believe in thinking of things in relation to other things. They also believe that moments in time exist separate from all other moments. I know, it takes some imagination to agree with them. Think of it this way if you are sweating and the sun is hot you naturally believe that the sun is causing the sweat. A Buddhist would say that the sun is the sweat. Why? Because your understanding of the sun at that specific moment when you are sweating and your understanding of the sweat at that specific moment when the sun is beating down on you from above, are not separate from one another. They are related to each other. One isn't causing the other. One thought is the same as the other because one thought can't exist separately from the other thought. There is no categorization. There is no such thing as the sun and the sweat. The sun is the sweat.

Most of us in this country do not think like a Buddhist. Barrack, for instance, isn't the idea to solve the issues in Iraq. He might have in idea to solve the issues, but he isn't the idea.

We create categories, differences, divisions. Racism is the most difficult division of all and that division is why Barrack Obama will lose the 2008 Presidential Election.

I hope I am wrong, but I've got that feeling that I'm not.