Being black isn't a skill set

America has long been ready to elect a black president, as long as he is qualified – and in the case of Barack Obama, even if he isn't. Supporting and/or voting for him to be president because he is black is like saying you eat "ratatouille" because you like rats with big ears. (For those unaware, ratatouille is a traditional French dish that was prepared by a large-eared rat in the movie of the same name). Yet, that is what a great many people are doing, and, not altogether surprising, that "great many people" includes no few black Republicans – which brings me to my point.

Calling oneself a Republican while at the same time saying you are going to support a person because he is black is nothing short of dissonance.

Armstrong Williams is one such Republican, who while crediting himself as a major influence in Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas becoming a conservative, recently confessed to being conflicted about whether or not to vote for Obama. On the one hand, he "doesn't like the liberal candidate's politics," while on the other hand he is swept up in "Obamania."

Even more notable is J.C. Watts, the former congressman from Oklahoma, who is now a Washington lobbyist. Watts, as has become his practice, criticizes the party he belongs to as not doing enough to reach out to blacks, while postulating that Democrats do reach out to them.

Said persons and those so persuaded are missing the bigger picture, and more importantly, they are embracing that which should be least important, i.e., the color of Obama's skin.

If Republicans of color jumped ship and supported opposing party candidates because said candidates displayed Jeffersonian or Reaganesque abilities, so be it. But to do so because Obama is a mulatto-Kenyan-American-Muslim-self-identified-Christian and then attempt to veil same in a fabric of "he will help black folks" displays the poorest of judgment. That said, the best descriptive of Obama's presidential ability is ambsace.

Personally, I couldn't care less about the color of a candidate, because the candidate's color is not synonymous with his ability. This isn't the NBA where the "black guy" has the genetic advantage. Before anyone attacks me on that point – if it isn't true, then why is the NBA overwhelming black?

Obama will not be the savior of blacks. Nor do blacks need an earthly savior, and J.C. Watts, of all people, should know that. Blacks need to continue doing what every other population group in this country does or at least should do – that is work hard, focus on education, learn to save more than they spend, invest in their children, and stop blaming others and slavery for the realities of life that beset us all.

People who announce their support for a candidate pursuant to pride based on race are further exacerbating an already debilitating mindset. Support for or condemnation of Obama must be based on his ability to govern and his positions. He must be examined per his understanding of issues such as health care, the economy, immigration, national security, education, taxes, housing, energy, the courts, foreign policy and a host of other issues, including his ability to handle events that arise unexpectedly – such as another terrorist attack on our soil.

I will concede he is adept at reading a written speech or a speech from a teleprompter, but that shouldn't be confused with having presidential qualifications. That said, I will argue to my last breath that to portray his ethnicity as somehow making him worthy of the presidency impacts susceptible black minds adversely.

Obama cannot legislate morality, nor will be able to legislate a constructive model of social modernity that doesn't already exist.

Republicans of color, like all voters, should display a more common-sense approach to supporting a candidate than the color of his/her skin or a feckless rationale that continues to submit blacks need special dispensation to get ahead.

Related special offer:

"NObama" magnetic bumper sticker