In a recent conversation with a visiting lecturer from Tel Aviv, I asked for her perspective on the accuracy of Israel-Palestine relations as presented in the U.S. She in turn, asked me who I was going to vote for president come November 4. Wow, a non-U.S. citizen imploring my mom's GOTV tactics, taking interest in my political decisions, particularly in who I see fit to lead the country for the next four, maybe eight, years. This is an important election.

After sharing my response, her face gleaned, appearing to agree with my selection. "Yes," she responded, "imagine what a powerful message your country would be sending to the rest of the world by electing a black president."

Wait, rewind. Is this what the elections are about? Personally, I was initially drawn to how Obama created a safe space for Democrats to begin talking about faith and politics, and the need to "serve the least of these." I commended his firm opposition to the war in Iraq when taking such a stance was unpopular. I respected his humility and heart to turn down the ludicrous offers of Wall Street and advocate for affordable housing in the Southside of Chicago as a community organizer dependent on a stipend. But, bring about change to Washington because he's black?

The one-drop rule may classify Obama as "black," ignoring the fact that his mom is from Kansas and his father is from Kenya, truly making him "African American" (at least he can trace his African roots). Then there's another argument, a bit more controversial with some truth, that Obama is actually "white": He was raised by his white mother and white grandparents, went to private school for part of his childhood education and then attended the Ivy Leagues for his undergraduate and law school education, and was offered high paying salaries to work for corporate America, but was able to live on a stipend and work with the underserved, without having to worry about the economic repercussions such a decision would have on his family. Yes, all his positive qualities are attributed to his "white" side, while his absent father and mother's reliance on government assistance are associated with his "black" identity (even though single white women comprise the largest percentage of dependents on the welfare system).

But I was more troubled at how the scholar alluded that electing a black president would end racism in America. The fact that Obama's race is even a deciding factor speaks volumes of how race and racism is still an issue in the U.S. Electing a black president will not magically resolve the racial inequalities that exist in our schools, hospitals/healthcare systems, prisons, neighborhoods, even places of worship. Just because a black person holds the highest seat in public office, does not erase the fact that the medical/law professions, and other areas of government, necessarily reflect the demographics of the population they are supposed to serve. As Chris Rock put it, if he were to walk down the street with a hoodie, it is still highly likely that a person would cling tighter to his/her belongings at the sight of Rock's skin color (though he probably makes more money and has accumulated more wealth than that person has).

The Condis, Powells, Thomas (even Winfreys) have not successfully buried racism, but ironically, given more fuel to the other side who believes, "If these people can make it, why can't the rest of you?" I don't see the election of Obama being any different in terms of race. To deal with racism, we must face and honestly talk about racism itself rather than prance around it and hand-pick its survivors who those in power can stomach.