Since you asked...

Buckarooskidoo's got questions...

First, I wonder if it is true, as pundits suggest, that the Clintons have succeeded in defining Obama as the "African-American" candidate in the race and somehow marginalized him?

Since you asked, no. As it turns out, Barack Obama's been an African American candidate all along. The Clinton's had nothing to do with it. They weren't even the first to notice.

Second, maybe basic tribalism kicked in again here. I think you could say women were outraged in New Hampshire by the admittedly misogynist coverage of Hillary Clinton in the media after Iowa...Could it be that we've seen the same reaction among African-Americans re some of the punches the Clintons and their surrogates threw at Barack Obama?

Maybe. I'd say probably, except that it's more likely that those African American folks who noticed Barack was one of 'em are just naturally pretty, ahem, fired up about voting him. Same folks voted for Jesse. Attacks? I figure they figure that's bound to happen. Might make voting for him seem just a bit more righteous, though.

And if the latter interpretation is on the mark, can we now move beyond race and gender and get some serious discussion of where the two leading contenders stand on the key issues, namely the ones Tomcat reiterates all the time on politics plus--the ones that never seem to get asked in the lust for horserace gossip?

Umm, no. I don't suppose so.

Of course, the third candidate talks about 'em all the time.