In his first major comment on race and race relations in our nation since his “A More Perfect Union Speech” on March 18, 2008, President Barack Obama called for frank discussion about race last week. In both a speech to the National Urban League and on the ABC daytime talk show “The View,” the president talked about race relations in the context of the political controversy over last month’s firing of longtime Agriculture Department employee Shirley Sherrod.

Whether the election and presidency of Barack Obama has brought about lasting political change has yet to be seen. What is visible so far is that by electing Obama our nation has made a major breakthrough by overcoming racial and ethnic prejudice. For some, Obama’s presidency means that we’ve gotten beyond race, and therefore we’ve also gotten beyond racism. After all, we have a president who identified as African-American on the 2010 census. In Obama’s America, negative connotations of race are but a relic of the past. But does this mean that it’s now fair game to play the race card in ways that might have been considered politically incorrect before Obama’s election?

Following is a Dawkins family classic that stresses the importance of being prepared with narratives and coping strategies for families that are Mixed and Happy…

…Sunday school. A time to learn about God and his creations. Also known as a time when parents drop their screaming kids off with some old lady who watches them color pictures of Jesus until the sermon is over. There five year old Elle was, minding her own business and coloring the nativity scene. Her favorite colors were pink and purple so naturally those were the colors of choice for Mary and Joseph. Ah, but what to color baby Jesus?

Driving while Black. Flying while Arab. Walking while Latino (in Arizona). Not everyone has to worry about raising “reasonable suspicion” in all these settings. As someone who does, I’ve come to appreciate the complex natures of race, identity and a sense of belonging in the U.S. From “random” security checks, to unnecessary delays, to getting escorted off planes, to general harassment, I’ve seen it all. No matter how American I might feel inside, these experiences coupled with the questions “Where are you from?” or “What are you?” remind me that I’m not “really American” and that I will always be viewed as a stranger.

In 1958, a newly married couple, Mildred Jeter and Richard Loving were indicted on charges of violating Virginia's ban on interracial marriages. On January 6, 1959 they pleaded guilty to the charge and were sentenced to one year in jail. However, "the trial judge suspended the sentence for a period of 25 years on the condition that the Lovings leave the State and not return to Virginia together for 25 years." The Lovings challenged this sentence by questioning whether the State of Virginia's actions to prevent and outlaw interracial marriage violated the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Dr. Rand Paul, winner of Kentucky’s GOP primary for the U.S. Senate and a tea party favorite, made headlines recently with regard to statements about the impact of federal legislation on individual rights. Paul’s website claims: “The Federal Government must return to its constitutionally enumerated powers and restore our inalienable rights. America can prosper, preserve personal liberty, and repel national security threats without intruding into the personal lives of its citizens.” This statement sounds perfectly legitimate and libertarian. Yet Paul’s comments on the wisdom of Title II, Section 201 (b) (2), of the 1964 Civil Rights Act have made some wonder what this statement really means. Does it mean, as Paul said in a recent interview with the editorial board of the Louisville Courier-Journal, that legislation like the Civil Rights Act represents an idea not worth liking?

“You’ve been randomly selected for a search.” These are the words I heard as I was detained by U.S. Customs and Border Protection upon my return from a recent trip to Canada. The hourlong experience was harrowing—I was asked questions about where I was born, whether English was my first language, whether I had credit cards or cash, what I do for a living, why I was traveling, where I had gone, how my traveling companion and I knew each other, and what I was carrying in my pockets, purse and luggage. I was forbidden to stand, place my hands in my pockets, make phone calls and use the restroom without asking for permission. All of this I took in stride because I figured that it was being done in the interest of national security. Certainly, an hour of my time is well spent in helping to ensure the safety of my fellow citizens.

Professors Ravinder Barn and Vicki Harman from the Centre for Criminology and Sociology at Royal Holloway, University of London are carrying out a groundbreaking research project about white mothers and mixed race children. Theirs is part of a wider study of mixed race children, youth and families that has spanned over twenty years. According to Dr. Harman, “white mothers of mixed-parentage children can find themselves dealing with racism directed at their children as well as facing social disapproval themselves." Such is the case with Nella, the white mother of mixed race protagonist Rachel, in Heidi W. Durrow’s The Girl Who Fell from the Sky (Algonquin Books).

Today's trying times bring to mind the lyrics of "For What It's Worth" by Buffalo Springfield. "There's something happening here / What it is ain't exactly clear." I experienced exactly that sort of feeling when I saw Lloyd Marcus perform the "American Tea Party Anthem," which he wrote, at a recent rally. My lack of clarity about this event didn't come from watching a black man in country gear sing with a twang. After all, years of watching and listening to Eminem and Elvis have conditioned me to not think twice when I see an entertainer playing with racial stereotypes.