I am watching Senator Barack Obama's announcement of his Presidential candidacy on C-Span. He is so smart, so sensible, so easy to listen to ... and so impressive! My kids are bored -- they've had a bit too much politics in their lives lately -- but I want them to see history unfolding.

Yes, today is definitely historic for America and I am happy to witness it.

But, as a Black American, I wanted goose bumps ... and I didn't get them. (I didn't get them in 2004 when Obama spoke at the Democratic Convention, either.) Maybe it was the use of U2 as the introductory music. I have nothing against U2; I like their music and I have incredible admiration for Bono (whom I have had the honor of meeting in person). But a U2 song, while intense, does not often "lift you up" with a transcendant and memorable melody. In 1992, Bill Clinton used Fleetwood Mac's "Don't Stop Thinking About Tomorrow" and we couldn't stop singing it. No one should think that today's generations don't appreciate a strong melody with an inspirational message. (Ever hear of gospel?)

Oh! Now I hear "Ain't No Stoppin' Us Now" -- maybe that should have been the lead song! Is it too Black? (Too tired? Maybe. Next we'll hear "We Are Family" ...) Yes, Obama does not wish to be seen as the Black candidate for President, but as the Presidential candidate who happens to be Black. We all know why that is; race is the ultimate third rail of politics today -- and don't let anyone tell you different. In the end, however, what is good for Black America is good for all of America (I have no problem echoing Tavis Smiley on this point.) And no matter how a campaign spins it, Obama is the first Black candidate in the 2008 Presidential sweepstakes.

Uh, oh! Now "Shout" is playing in the background. Fun song, but permanently associated with rowdy white frat boys from "Animal House." Bad choice, particularly in the aftermath of the Duke debacle. Someone needs to remind political consultants to use common sense sometimes.

Back to the goose bumps ... There has been a lot of media questioning Obama's support in the African American communities. Some Black observers say Obama is popular with whites because he is "safe". They can now point as well to the fact that launching a campaign with Lincolnesque overtones from Springfield sends a mixed message to African American voters. Some Black observers have specifically stated that the Senator's life does not "share" the American Black experience and that Obama is not a "genuine" American of African descent. I guess they didn't feel goose bumps, either.

But they are fools! How can they pretend that this man -- a former urban community organizer turned civil rights lawyer and Constitutional law professor who is now the only Black sitting in the Senate of the United States of America -- wakes up in the morning, looks himself in the mirror, kisses his Black wife and daughters and does not understand what it means to be Black in America today or yesterday? Obama's been in this country almost all his life. Do people chronologically younger than the time he has been in America also not know what it means to be Black in America? Of course not. I know plenty of African Americans -- products of two African American parents from the South -- who are far more sheltered from the full scope of Black America's realities than Barack Obama. Some of them even hold elected office.

In all honesty, I don't question Colin Powell's understanding of what it is to be Black, nor do I question the mind set of Condoleeza Rice. I question -- nay, attack -- their policy choices and their political friends, but they are indeed Black. Life is a normal curve. The Rice portion of the curve is balanced by the Malcolm X portion of the curve. But we're all sharing that unique experience. (Yes, I am biased on this question. For those who do not know, I am the son of a Black father and a white mother -- and I am a Black American with mixed racial heritage. America does not see me any other way.) And no matter what background Barack Obama claims as his own, for most white Americans, voting for Obama as a Presidential candidate will not be a "safe" act. It is far safer for Black Americans to "default" to Obama, than it will be for whites to overcome their own fears -- submerged or articulated.

Whether you like Obama's politics or not -- and I have taken no position on the Presidential contest -- you cannot say that Obama is not Black enough and you cannot say that he is any less qualified to be President of these United States than any other candidate past or present for that office. Check out his record, scrutinize his positions, challenge his vision to ensure that he is the candidate who will treat Black people -- and all people -- in this nation with respect and decency. If he falls short, then find a better alternative. But don't commit moral and political suicide by questioning his identity as a Black American. And, simply put, Barack Obama cannot give ammunition to his Black critics. It is easy to get lost in the headiness of a campaign; he's been there before. But this Presidential campaign cannot afford to lose its way and forget its base of political bases.

Recordings of Martin Luther King's speeches make me cry. Good preachers of all hues can give me goose bumps. Even some preachers-turned-politicians have given me goose bumps. Maybe I'm getting cynical in my old age and applying a more stringent goose bump standard to Obama, but I'm finding that he doesn't do it for me. But there are certainly a lot of white people who get the goose bumps when listening to him; let's see if goose bumps turn into real votes.

But I know this: I don't need goose bumps to support a candidate. (In addition to supporting Rev. Jesse Jackson for President -- twice -- I supported Mike Dukakis, Paul Tsongas, Al Gore and John Kerry. 'Nuff said!) And, looking forward, I don't need goose bumps to acknowledge the need for a calm and worldly leader in the White House as we confront the crises around this planet and at home.

I don't need goose bumps to see that the "groupthink" of our political system -- on all sides -- is the enemy of democracy and certainly of progressive values. You have probably studied groupthink like I have. The power and pressure of a situation, combined with individual insecurities or cowardice, can generate flawed decisions by leaders, due to limited honest or creative input -- input that goes against the consensus or the opinion of the leader.

If there is one thing I am sure of, it's that Obama will not allow groupthink to dominate his Presidential administration. Obama's books and speeches reflect a thoughtful and caring person. He has a thorough grasp of Constitutional issues, of national and international historic matters, and he is known as a compulsive "listener." These are qualities needed at the top of the next Presidential administration.

This is not to say that Clinton or Edwards or others will be more susceptible to the illness of groupthink. Edwards' bloggers will ensure a free flow of ideas -- or chaos. However, the Clinton campaign style does raise questions. According to observers, the Clinton operation is tight, closed and insistent upon "loyalty." Under pressure, the Clinton campaign will undoubtedly be extremely skilled. But fighting groupthink is not defined by following polls and raising gobs of money to make television ads that influence polls. Fighting groupthink requires thinking and acting independently of polls -- and being more dependent upon common sense and human decency.

And that is why, when an unacceptable case was made for giving President Bush authority to invade Iraq, the groupthink of the U.S. Senate -- a powerful and potentially dangerous thing -- needed to be countered. And it was not. Fighting groupthink requires leadership. And at that moment in time, both Senator Hillary Clinton and former Senator John Edwards failed the leadership test. So these particular candidates may have learned from the past in preparing for the future, but they start with a "groupthink deficit." And when Obama says that Washington needs to be changed, he's attacking the Beltway "groupthink" culture and the lack of leadership that goes with it.

But, in the impending Presidential contest, the ultimate expression of groupthink's dangers is posed by the personality of Rudolph Giuliani and others like him. In addition to my personal observations of Giuliani's arrogance and outrageous disregard for civil and human rights (as a New York resident), I was struck by an incident shared in the February 4th New York Times review of "Giuliani", (John Wiley & Sons), a book on the former Mayor. The authors, Deborah and Gerald Strober, talked with Lillian Barrios-Paoli, who was a Commissioner under Giuliani as well as former Mayor Ed Koch, a Democrat.

The reviewer, Sam Roberts, presents this excerpt. According to Ms. Barrios-Paoli, if Ed Koch said to his advisors that he wanted to kill all 12-year-olds, "I can think of 10 people who would say 'Please! Get a life! What, are you crazy? No way!' And there'd be a big argument and at the end of the day, somebody's judgment would prevail. If Rudy [Giuliani] would say 'Let's kill 12-year-olds,' there'd be a deep silence in the room, and then somebody would say, 'That's brilliant!' And then somebody else would say 'Have you thought of 13-year-olds, too?'"

How revealing that Ms. Barrios-Paoli chooses such a horrific example, however fictional? What a statement about the people Giuliani chooses to keep around him as an administrator! (Did someone say Bernard Kerik?) The only more graphic examples of groupthink might be the German high command during World War II, Lyndon Johnson's cabinet discussions during the Vietnam War, or Bush's minions during the Iraq debacle.

Fighting groupthink on our collective journey forward does not require goose bumps. So I am not looking for goose bumps, but knowledge of and faith in the American Constitution. I am not looking for goose bumps, but good judgment. I am not looking for goose bumps, but credibility across the lines of class and race in pursuing a more progressive agenda for our nation. I am not looking for goose bumps, but confidence rooted in enduring humanity and a hatred of injustice -- not a flash of brilliance in the aftermath of unspeakable tragedy.

When it comes to the Presidency, I am no longer looking for Jesse Jackson -- though I thank him for wanting to be President and for continuing his quest for economic rights and opportunities. I am not looking for Al Sharpton -- though I thank him for campaigning for President and for remaining a warrior both for justice and against complacency. And I am not looking for Al Gore -- though we all owe him an incredible debt of gratitude for breaking new ground in American politics and skyrocketing our collective consciousness on global warming, the single most important issue facing every individual and every government on Earth at this time.

I am looking for the person who can incorporate all the wisdom, blend it with a sense of urgency, and focus our action. I am looking for the strategist who does not interpret "a good defense is a good offense" as a military challenge but as a challenge to do good at home and abroad. I am looking for the one who is genuine and fresh, yet who has all the tools and credentials and time to become a great world leader.

If that's Barack Obama, so be it. If it's someone else, let them make their stand now.

We don't have much time.

Chris Owens was raised in Brooklyn and graduated from the Bronx High School of Science, Harvard and Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs. He has worked in the private, public and non-profit sectors and has been a candidate for public elected office (two wins, two losses.) Chris and his wife have two sons. Other than his family, Chris' passions are music and writing. His blog is powerfromtruth.blogspot.com. Click here to contact Mr. Owens.