Indeed, it would be nice to be able to concentrate upon an cantidate's qualifications for the job, rather than to be bombarded by the media with never-ending reminders of race and gender issues.

We have had "diverse" cantidates at the highest levels during this election's proceedings and there are msny more qualified individuals in the wings, so is it not time to put this "bias" business to rest?

Jesse Helms passed away on July 4th. He was an active voice for racial division until recently.

The major Civil rights legislation was passed in our lifetimes, Mr. Cutler, and bias doesn't float away into the wind like so much dust.

We still have the Electoral College and that is a a remnant of the 3/5 clause and the Slave Power that put Slave States pretty much in charge of the government until the Civil War.

It's one thing to move beyond bias, but we should not forget the lessons of our history.

Obama might become the first black man to be elected President, but... the (first) "Negro President" passed away on July 4th - 50 years after he signed the Declaration of Independence - which he wrote.

Yes, Jefferson was called "the Negro President" by many of his contemporaries because he was elected by the Slave Power. If merely calculated by those eligible to vote, Adams would have been re-elected. Jefferson owned 200 slaves, which, for example, made him count for 121 voters in the Electoral College rather than one.

Our country doesn't know this history very well. We need to learn about our own past in order to understand the laws, biases and systems we now have in place.

It's one thing - and not a bad one necessarily - to be ignorant of race. Children have to learn bias and racism. It's not a natural thing. But it's another to try to sweep real issues under the table.

Bias really does affect people in America and to deny that is to do ourselves a great disservice.

About 10 years ago when I worked at Columbia University, I was part of Local 2110 UAW and within our 706 person unit, there was an average pay discrepancy of over $1,000 between blacks and white when balanced for education and experience. The numbers were accurate and complete since, by law, they had to give us all of the numbers. A 4% salary difference is a big deal - especially for those on the losing side.

Bias is a real issue in America. It will dissolve eventually, but only if we remain vigilant.

Mr Fort's post is extremely elegant and compelling. He makes the brilliant point that the inevitability of the white guy candidate is THE racial issue - rather than only being an issue when that candidate is not a white guy.

When I was being hired at Columbia, my hiring was held up for a week by the EOE panel since there was a woman of color who, on paper, had the same level of qualifications that I had. The department had to justify why I was hired instead of her. The question wasn't "why not a black lady?" but rather "why the white guy?" It was a fair question and, while stressful to me at the time, an effective system. I think it is a great system, and with the statistically significant bias in terms of pay at Columbia, clearly needed.

Far more relevant to the question of Obama's being black and how that affects his being the Democratic nominee is the question of McCain's being white and the role that played in his being the Republican nominee.

I am uncomfortable with Mr. Cutler's statement that this is the time to put this "bias business to rest" - that's the language of those who want to sweep it under the table and pretend it never happened.

As the famous epigraph of the "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" reminds us: Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.

We need to be patiently but insistently vigilant to cultivate a culture of parity and equality. We're getting there but it's still going to take a couple of generations.