New York Times Blames Obama for not Eliminating Racism in America

NYT says Obama should have fixed the US already.

How else can you explain this headline:

Poll Finds Obama Candidacy Isn't Closing Divide on Race

Oh, really?

You mean Barack Obama just running for President hasn't been enough to heal the wounds of slavery, of segregation, of Jim Crow? Barack Obama is running for office not already running the country. And speaking of running the country...

Indeed, the poll showed markedly little change in the racial components of people's daily lives since 2000, when The Times examined race relations in an extensive series of articles called "How Race Is Lived in America."

As it was eight years ago, few Americans have regular contact with people of other races, and few say their own workplaces or their own neighborhoods are integrated. In this latest poll, over 40 percent of blacks said they believed they had been stopped by the police because of their race, the same figure as eight years ago; 7 percent of whites said the same thing.

Eight years ago. Hmm. Remind me again what happened in 2000?

Oh, right, we got a Republican in the White House.

So, eight years of a George W. Bush administration that has included an invasion of Iraq, the costs of which have been paid ONLY by the families of the soldiers.

And let's not forget Hurricane Katrina.

But Obama is somehow responsible for this morass? Obama's campaign, the subject of smears, hate, and racism, is responsible for healing the country, before he even gets into office?

I mean, New York Times, seriously, W. T. F.

How is a campaign supposed to not only transcend one of (if not the) most fundamental issues that has plagued America since the first slaves were brought ashore, since the first Indians were massacred, but also fix it by virtue of simple existence?

Wouldn't a "Race remains a challenge for America" or "Bush Administration has done nothing to heal racial divide" be more accurate?