Typical story by a conservative paper which reduces a complex man, issues and situation into nice soundbytes its conservative readers can use to buttress their beliefs that only airy-fairy, "elite" liberals are interested in Obama, and then, only as a means of self-gratification. And THEN, only cus he's one of the "good ones." Which is REALLY what the story is about..how HONEST conservatives are being when they trivialization/reject minorities as compared to how dishonest liberals are.

Thought weak on addressing Obama's policy positions (something a lot of campaign coverage fails to do), this is a serious exploration of what Obama's race says about the changing racial dynamic in this country. The piece doesn't pigeon-hole the candidate, allowing a good set of sources to comment on what Obama means to them. Good context.

It's easy to blame the messenger, but this is actually pretty good journalism. I would have liked to hear more about the percentage of people who view Obama this way, versus those who rate him on his record and positions on the issues. I did notice the writer took some liberties with numbers, contrasting the 63% of registered voters who said Americans are prepared to elect a QUALIFIED African-American as president with a 1986 poll that recorded 29% thinking America was ready to elect a black president, no mention of qualified or not. Is this just an editing quirk, or an indication systemic fudging throughout the article?