Establishment more comfortable with Obama than most other black politicians?

[rob in cal]

I'm wondering if the "establishment" of media, finance, politics, etc. was more comfortable with Obama than they would have been with a more traditional black Democratic politician, like a John Conyers, or a Charlie Rangel, or William Clay, or James Clyburn.  I'm thinking the "establishment" would have been more comfortable with Obama because he is half white, (unlike most black politicians I believe), was raised by his white side of the family and went to very establishment schools.  Also, his multi-ethnic, immigrant father, one-time Indonesian step-father fits the globalization, one interconnected world zeitgeist that is promoted, rightly or wrongly by the powers that be.
   

[memphis]

I think it goes without saying that white people are more comfortable with Obama than other blacks.

[justfollowingtheelections]

I've never even thought of Obama as black.

[Keystone Phil]

In other news, public prefers puppies and rainbows over axe murderers.

[Bono]

It's not because he is half-white, but because he doesn't promote racial tension the way people like Jesse Jackson do.

[paul718]

On the contrary, I think Obama had more to overcome compared to other black candidates.  His time in Indonesia and his middle name being primary obstacles (sadly enough) that Deval Patrick or other slave-descended blacks wouldn't have to deal with.

Overall, however, I'm of the opinion that "the establishment" doesn't put value in a candidate's ethnicity as much as you think it does.

It's not because he is half-white, but because he doesn't promote racial tension the way people like Jesse Jackson do.

Exactly.  Which is why I'd hypothesize that, in a party-neutral election, someone like Deval Patrick would perform better than Jesse Jackson.

Edit:  Inserted Patrick to make it a Dem vs. Dem hypo, which I think serves as a better example.

[Padfoot]

I've never even thought of Obama as black.

I think what most people would say (myself included) is that they never thought of Obama as a black candidate.  He's just a candidate, who happens to be black.  Its not his background that makes "the establishment" feel more comfortable around him; its the fact that he doesn't talk about things like "the establishment."  His rhetoric is not infused with racial divisiveness, overt or implied.  Instead he infuses his speeches with themes of patriotic sacrifice, community service, and inclusiveness.  He doesn't divide people by party, race, or creed he simply talks about Americans.  This is something many black politicians choose not to do.

The "problem" with most black politicians of the last 30 years is that their worldview seems to be stuck in the 60s.  The rhetoric they use sometimes makes me feel like Bull Conner is still patrolling the streets of Birmingham and that its actually been George Wallace sitting in the Oval Office for the past 8 years.  Its as if they refuse to recognize that blacks aren't stuck in poverty because of their race, they're stuck in poverty largely because they're already poor.  Poverty is cyclical and it is blind to race.  It is true that the actions of past generations forced a disproportionate number of black families into poverty but the current generation is not actively striving to keep them there.  If, instead of continuing to collect apologies for slavery and fighting tooth and nail to maintain affirmative action, black leaders would focus their rhetoric on social programs that benefit all Americans in need, they might find themselves with a lot more white supporters.

[dead0man]

What Bono and Padfoot said.  We like him more because he is more likable.

[justfollowingtheelections]

...and because he cares about us just as much as he cares about everyone else.