Look where we are today in America. As we search for our next president we have, on the left, the potential first woman president, the potential first black president and, of course, the potential second-time try as vice president son of a mill worker (a.k.a. cheap shot lawyer). Disregarding the last of the three democratic hopefuls, we’ve come a long way since even 2004.

My sister, a current inhabitant of Brooklyn, New York, told me about how glad she was that our country was finally ready to elect either a woman or black man as president. And I agree-it is great that we are finally to this point, after so many years of racism and sexism in America. However, there is a problem underneath the surface of acceptance.

As Obama and Clinton strive toward the presidency, their identity has been lost and they are merely associated with the socio-political breakthroughs they represent.

The candidates have fought this categorization but have been unsuccessful. Clinton was quoted as saying “Neither race nor gender should be a part of this campaign.” Obama has spoken in similar rhetoric. Despite what I feel is an honest effort to keep race and gender to the side in this election the candidates have been unsuccessful.

As Obama travels the country he is repeatedly hit with the same annoying quip — asking if he thinks Bill Clinton beat him 16 years ago to being the first black president. Recently in South Carolina, a state not noted for its racial acceptance, Bill Clinton told a crowd of voters that he would accept an Obama challenge to a dance-off to see if he was the first black president.

In 2004 we would have heard Kerry saying he would be glad to debate the Dean war policy in South Carolina. We would not have heard a candidate’s husband (I think it’s still Hillary running and not Bill) challenging another candidate to a dance-off.

The same has happened to Hillary as of late too. A couple of weeks ago when she shed tears on national television everybody immediately asked the same question. Does this woman crying show that she doesn’t have the strength to be president? Is this a sexist question? Well, in a word, yes. I’m not a Clinton supporter by any means, but when she cries it shouldn’t be automatically connected to her gender. I guarantee you that many candidates have had emotional breakdowns from the difficulty of the campaign process. Hillary Clinton shouldn’t be antagonized for her tears because she is a woman. She should be analyzed as a candidate-no more, no less.

So let me tell you how I responded to my sister’s statement. I said you’re right, we’ve come a long way in the past couple of decades and it’s wonderful that we can put both a woman and a black man forward as legitimate presidential candidates.

However, let’s remember that being progressive doesn’t mean you search for every minority and build them up regardless; it means you look past race and gender and see everyone on equal playing ground — allowing you to truly see who is best for any job.

Tell Joe what criteria you use to judge political candidates. E-mail him at [email protected]