I understand the various Magic Negro memes that flow through our politics, and mostly they remind me of Jimmy the Greek talking about how slave owners bred great football players.  See, they have big thighs....

Considering the history of black skin and electoral politics, this line of thinking is a puzzlement to me.  I think we can agree that historically being black was an impediment to holding high office .  How is it then that when this impediment is overcome is suddenly becomes an advantage?

Would we have said of FDR, "Ther eis no way he would have gottent he nomination if hed been able to walk?"  Would we have said of JFK, "There is no way he would have gotten the nomination if he'd been protestant?"  If Hillary had won, would we have said, "There is no way she would have gotten the nomination if hadn't had a uterus?"  Think about that last one for a moment in the context of who she was running against and the model being proposed.  Does it strike us as at all possible that no matter who the Democratic nominee was in 2008, that some way would be found to dismiss their victory as a mere product of identity politics, and not skill, or superior policies, or a nation sick of eight years of Republican bullshit (I think the only reason he won was because he was a ham sandwich...)?

Where was this "making history" impulse hiding all these years?  Why wasn't Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton the first African American nominee for president?  For that matter, why wasn't Shirley Chisholm?  Were there no downsides to his being black or was it all upside? 

Obama has now twice demonstrated a very high level of skill at electoral politics.  Given our history, are we really going to suggest that it's because he's black?