The central question is this:

Can he be President?

But this question has three subtexts:

1. Is he legally/constitutionally allowed to be President?

2. Are his past personal and group associations questionable enough in character that they will cause the voting constituency to not vote for him?

3. Does he have the life experiences that will allow him to be an effective Chief Executive of the United States?

As to question number one, the questions of legality are out there. But the question has historically been so audacious that to ask it now causes the questioner’s sanity to be questioned. Regardless of its factual answer, it cannot be asked with a straight face. So it is not a legitimate inquiry, given political realities.

Question number two shares some similarities with question number one. In the current climate of Political Correctness, any inquiries about his past associations, however ideologically disconcerting they may be, are off-limits. Such questions can only be thought of as based in racism. This is the most worrisome of the three subtexts, because there are so many society-wide issues bound up within it. Race and politics should not be joined at the hip. But yet they are.

Regarding question number three: because the first two subtexts are so easily dismissed in the current political reality, questioning his life experiences is the only legitimate means by which BHO can be attacked politically. It *should* be a potent attack (because there is so much substance to it), but it is the least potent attack of the three. It is a question of whether or not the Cult of Personality (symbolism) outweighs “Gravitas” (substance).

GWB was attacked for having no Gravitas (in spite of his business experience and being Texas Governer for more than one term). BHO is not being attacked for having no Gravitas (his only qualifications are minimally-successful two years in the U.S. senate, Illinois senate, law background and the amount of melanin in his skin).

This election will ultimately be all about which is more important to the electorate: symbolism or substance. Secondary to that will be whether or not Socialism is a valid socio-political system for the U.S.