Although I expected to immediately disagree with Nader, in the larger sense I think he is right. Obama, while a great progressive symbol, like most Democrats, isn't out to permanently change the system that undercuts the poor and favors the wealthy, instead he is here to tweak the system, at best.
Still, his 'tweaks' are much more palatable than the current presidential regime.

@Kjen,

He would have been right, if he'd just said what you did. ...But he had to bring that which has zero to do with that point into the equation; his ethnic make-up and how he talks.

Seriously, W. T. F.

Nader just pissed years of cool points with me down the drain, with that stupidity.

You mean Obama's half black? Hmm. Didn't notice. I just thought he was a different kinda politician that didn't come from left field or right field. More like that gap between second and shortstop. Anyone who can anger slick Willie by being even MORE slick has got some skillz, yo.

"Come on! He even TALKS like you!"- Carlos Mencia on why whites should vote for Obama

Mr. Nader made a mistake that is common. Mr Obama's father was not "African American", but rather a Kenyan national. Colorlines should in fact explore how the US census and social custom "racialize" rather than historicize identities. Mr. Obama, whom I support, is most properly seen as a Kenyan-American who by marriage and sentiment has desired and adopted the traditional Afro-American identity and largely been accepted by that community--but not completely as a member--but always as a sympathizer.

Also, and just as importantly, those who call him African American are doing this based on a custom of ascription and designation, based on 19th century notions. The Old Afro-Americans, meaning the US Afro-Americans of Middle Passage descent at this moment in time can rightly call themselves a community, a people, who are different from any other African diasporic group--analagous to the Cape Coloured in South Africa who developed a distinct ethnic identity. How can the census assign one to a people--the census reinforces a racist construct--that all black skinned Africans or African descendants are the same.m The census says that it is not scientific or anthropological but it uses the old racial categories as tweaked by Anglo-American social custom. I have no doubt that if Obama does well it will not take long before his distinction with Old Afro-Americans is made--in fact this is done now subtlely, but if he does badly or something certain folk don't like then his identity will be biologicized to generic black in line with the old writings about 'race" that made all "Negroes" irrespective of culture the same. Many do not understand this history.

Afro-Cubans invented samba and rhumba and are not Afro-US Americans--who invented jazz. There are Afro-Argentines, Afro-Peruvians, etc; lumping them all together is a disservice to their individual historical trajectories, trials and tribulations--and achievements and cultures.
Afro-Latinos must fight as Latinos while acknowledging their Africanity. We must avoid being placed into a genericized "black".

Obama could have the same physical appearance based on a variety of different ancestries. Suppose Obama's father had been one of those black Iraqqis of East African origin, or Omani--would we or the census or powers that control be calling him Arab-American or African. The same would be true if his father had been a deep-brown or black-skinned northern African from Egypt, Morocco, Algeria--asmar awwy. Would the son of an Egyptian and a white American call himself African American--if not why not--Egypt is in Africa (I know people like this who do call themselves African American--but I suspect that this is situational. These northern Africans, irrespective of color are Africans--as long as they are descendant of indigenous groups to some degree.)

Suppose he had been Melanesian. Dravidian,or one of those Afro-Pakistanis from the coast or Siddis from India, or Australian aborigine--would we be calling him black Asian, Asian-American or just black, or Pacific Island American. Would he get more traction being an "African American" than a "black" American but not of African descent? Or not.

Why aren't we hearing more about the brown-skin Louisiana governor of Indian descent? Is he an honorary white. The soil of Louisiana is fertilized with the blood of Native Americans and African descendants that made a plant like Gov Bobby be possible.

It is time for a more nuanced discussion of identity and who controls the writing and the perceptions. Obama's is not an "Up from Slavery" story; it is that of a middle American with a Kenyan Luo father. The US will have changed when we have someone in Obama's position who is Clarence Thomas' color, is of US slave descent (not Caribbean exotic), and who went to state school or an HBCU.

Now the issue that Nader brings up about Obama's not bringing to the fore concerns of the Old Afro-American community is not surprising, given the way politics is done. Dukakis could not done too much talking about Greeks, and no Jew could talk too much about Jewishness and run for president. So Obama may be holding his cards--or he may not be--he may be mediocre. I will not get upset precisely because he is not a product of Afro-North America; he was not reared by Afro-US Americans; and he is NOT a descendant of US Afro-Americans. He is only this by ascription, assignation, sentiment, and marriage.

Another thing is that Nader is guilty of the same thing he's accusing Obama of.... He constantly downplays the fact that, as someone with Lebanese racial background, he is not "white" either.