Assuming Barack Obama captures the Democratic nomination, would a loss by him in the general election exacerbate racial tensions in this country? Unfortunately, this question is likely to come to the fore in the next few months, if not sooner.  The "conventional wisdom" answer I predict will be either possibly or probably, depending on how much the punditocracy and the media choose to influence the voting public.  We are already seeing suggestions by some in the blogosphere that a vote against Obama is evidence of racism.  Both Obama and McCain wish to avoid making this a race about race.  But at some point we are going to hear liberal talking-heads aplenty seek to portray the election in strictly black man vs white man terms.  At that point, of course, there won't be a need to do this as a means of mobilizing the black demographic.  They vote overwhelmingly for whoever is on the Democratic ticket anyway, and if it's Barack Obama they won't need any cajoling to show up on election day.  No, the racial rhetoric then, subtle or not so subtle, will be directed at white Americans.  Almost certainly this will include raising the specter of worsening racial discord, and possibly civil unrest, should Obama loose.  We may even get a sermon or two from Reverend Wright regarding dire consequences should the wrong color man win, complete with more videos to watch.  Polls may be conducted to assess the potential degree of disenchantment in black communities, and duly reported on CNN prior to the election.  It will be seen as  a given that electing Obama the first black president in this country's history will go a long way towards bridging the racial divide.  Rejecting him will be seen as entering uncharted socio-political terrain, thus risky and uncertain.  And if that kind of talk supplants normal political discourse, imagine what will happen if the election is as close as it was in 2000.

What to do about this?  I would suggest both candidates address this issue directly and forcefully when it first starts to surface in the mainstream media.   Like old fashion race-baiting, it should be despised and disavowed.  We should be able to vote our conscience without concern that the results could spark civil unrest.  After all, this is America and our history is notable for the lack of civil strife when we elect our national leader.  That shouldn't change just because one candidate is black.  If McCain is elected, we can be duly proud of having chosen a remarkable individual and a talented politician.  The exact same sentiment pertains if Obama is the winner.  I believe both these candidates would agree that the sanctity of our political process is more important than the skin color of our next president.

I have to admit, Senator Obama continues to fascinate me. Not to worry, though. I won't vote for him or any other Democrat running against John McCain. Still you have to wonder about some facets of this unique individual, his life story, his personal beliefs and how he formed them. For example:

Considering his long and wrong association with Reverend Wright, is he being intellectually dishonest with himself? I think so. Obama almost certainly considers himself an intellectual (with good reason) and I doubt he could easily convince himself to hold such irrational views. Black Liberation Theology? Same thing -- you can almost hear Obama asking himself, "How is it liberating to chain yourself to such contrived, inflexible beliefs?  Do my own experiences in life justify such a perverted view towards white people"? The Wright association is explained in part, no doubt, by political expediency. But there must be something more to explain such intellectual dishonesty.  Searching for a father figure? Doubt it -- he had done pretty well in life without a father. Any shrinks out there want to comment on that one? Searching for his Roots? Doubt it -- Barack Obama by birth trumps Kunte Kinte in your ancestry. Trying to understand where black Americans are coming from and thereby eventually fit in? He could do that without going to Reverend Wright's church and might have a more accurate view of black and white America. Obama does say Wright was a seminal figure in developing his religious faith. I take that at face value to be true. He also seems to have a more religiously inspired outlook on life than any other Democratic presidential hopeful since Jimmy Carter. (As an aside, I wonder what all the effete, I mean elite, Ivy League educated, wear-it-on-my-sleeve agnostic liberals make of that. "Hmm. Columbia, Harvard Law Review and religious. I must be missing something here.") And yet I remain suspicious there's another reason for the unreasonable Wright connection. One that can overcome any lingering worries that you are not being true to yourself. I suspect the real reason is Obama's wife, that it was she who strongly influenced him to go to that church and sit through all those years of Wright's demagoguery. I cannot believe that Barack Obama either believes those lies or somehow finds them useful in improving the black condition in America. Mrs. Obama, on the other hand, strikes me as a true believer in the Wright philosophy. And in their household she may wear the pants on that issue (as well as many others).  Should they wind up moving to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, that may be a problem for them and for us.

I believe we should hold a "conversation on race" in this country.....after John McCain is elected president.  If Obama becomes the Democratic nominee and loses to McCain in the general election, conditions will be perfect to hold just such a conversation.  Imagine what that would be like.  Half of America and most of Europe would initially be reconfirmed in their belief that we are an irredeemably racist society.  Then, on further examination of the election results, it would be shown that tens of millions of white Americans (almost half) actually voted for a black man to be their president.  They based their votes on his ideals, charisma and political beliefs.  For them, race was not a factor.  As expected, ninety percent of black Americans voted for the same candidate, confirming again that his appeal to this demographic is racially motivated.  Both groups of Obama voters, however, realized too late that their candidate's association with a black racist preacher for twenty years made the difference in this close election.  This, despite evidence that few Americans of any political persuasion believed Obama held such racist views himself.  A majority of voters simply could not reconcile his campaign rhetoric of change with the reality on the ground in his home community.  Was his previous attachment to Reverend Wright merely posturing for political acceptance among black voters?   Was that why they voted overwhelmingly for him?  How tragic that such a brilliant natural politician felt compelled years ago to enter public life via the plebian racist political culture of Southside Chicago.  It would seem in retrospect that racial politics, of his own making, cost him the election. 

And in that election, the contrast with McCain could not have been greater.  His supporters voted their conscience, rejecting the notion that doing so was racist, as some had implied.  They were never  concerned their candidate could be accused of racist affiliations, as  affectation was never part of his political persona.  His life was an open book, and they all knew his biography, just as the other side thought they knew their candidate's.  McCain's campaign portrayed him as the product of that most egalitarian of American institutions, the United States military.  He preached a philosophy of unifying the country around our common purpose, and downplayed our divisiveness.  His model for the ideal society:   United States soldiers and sailors.  They come together from all ethnic backgrounds and walks of life, put aside their differences and learn to live, fight and die side by side to protect all Americans.  He reminded us that he was not one of those whose life was scarred by the race and gender battles of the 60's, that he had survived that era politically unfettered and psychologically unscathed.  His only dalliance with Socialist dogma came courtesy of brutal torturers, inuring him for life against its seductive appeal, an appeal still common among academics.  Furthermore, voters for McCain were found to strongly believe that combating racism begins at home.  They could not understand why anyone would expose his young children to the lies of a racist demagogue.  They contrasted this with their candidate's evident pride in his adopted South Asian daughter, the one whose dark skin color led to the vilest of rumors being circulated during his first run for the presidency.  McCain's victory reassured his supporters that America had moved beyond that despicable racist episode in the 2000 primary.  And as a consequence, we now have a president who knows from personal experience the awfully destructive power of race-baiting in our society.    

So after John McCain wins the general election, let's have that conversation on race in America.  Perhaps black Americans will realize just how costly it is to them to have prominent black leaders such as Wright continue to espouse racist ideas about white people being the bane of their existence.  Perhaps they will look across that great racial divide, the one kept alive more than ever in their own communities, and realize the significance of tens of millions of white people from all regions of the country voting for a black man, despite his own past and continuing association with a racist.  Maybe they will start to emulate Mandela more than Mugabe.  And maybe, just maybe, black Americans will realize that chaining themselves to the Democratic Party, with its predilection for identity politics and its penchant for holding do-nothing conversations about race, is a losing proposition in presidential elections.  Even for a candidate as impressive as Barack Obama.     

Bring on that conversation.